Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, the dynamic response of concrete rectangular liquid storage tanks is investigated. In previous studies, the tank wall has been assumed as rigid in the calculation of hydrodynamic pressures. The effect of flexibility of tank wall is considered in this study. The analytical solutions for both impulsive pressure and convective pressure induced by both horizontal and vertical ground motions are presented. A 2-D coupled analysis model of tank wall is proposed. The hydrodynamic pressures are considered as external forces applied on the tank wall. Through a technique called the sequential method, the two fields of fluid and structure are coupled. The time-history analysis using the mode superposition method and the direct step-by-step integration method are carried out. Two rectangular tanks are analyzed. From the comparison of the results obtained from the proposed model with those proposed by other researchers, such as added mass model based on the rigid wall boundary condition, it shows that the lumped mass approach overestimates the base shear and wall displacement. The effect of wall flexibility on displacements, base shears and base moments are also discussed. A combination of the added mass method and the sequential method is used to study liquid storage tanks subjected to the vertical ground motion. It is found that the effect of the vertical acceleration should be considered in dynamic analysis of rectangular tanks. It is concluded that the total response of the structures should be based on the sum of the response under both horizontal and vertical components of ground motion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".