MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009810328 · doi:10.1142/s179343111250008x

THE NUMERICAL AND EMPIRICAL EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE OF ELEVATED TANKS CONSIDERING SOIL–STRUCTURE INTERACTION EFFECTS

2012· article· en· W2009810328 on OpenAlexaff
Ramazan Livaoğlu, Alper Turan, M. Hesham El Naggar, Adem Doğangün

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Earthquake and Tsunami · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
FundersTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsServiceability (structure)Soil structure interactionStructural engineeringSlosh dynamicsGeotechnical engineeringBending momentShear forceVibrationDuctility (Earth science)EngineeringGeologyShear (geology)Seismic loadingFinite element methodMaterials scienceCreepPetrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water tanks are an essential lifeline whose continuing availability and serviceability immediately after earthquake events are crucial for providing undisrupted emergency services. Their seismic performance is, therefore, of paramount importance. The seismic response of an elevated liquid tank situated on a soft soil deposit was studied by means of field vibration tests and numerical simulations. The ambient and forced vibration tests were conducted to identify the soil–structure interaction (SSI) effects on the small strain dynamic behavior of the structure. A series of time domain numerical analyses were performed to evaluate the seismic performance of these structures from a performance based design point of view. The results showed that consideration of SSI increased the displacement demand significantly. Thus, the calculated maximum displacement demand for supporting frame components of the tank may be underestimated significantly when the SSI effects are neglected. In addition, the seismic induced shear forces considering SSI effects were much smaller than the seismic shear forces for the fixed based case. For some soil types, the effect of this reduction on the overall response may become more prominent than the structural ductility mechanism. This resulted in the failure mechanism being initiated by a coupled compression — bending moment effect, rather than shear failure. Finally, the sloshing response is significantly increased due to the SSI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Earthquake and TsunamiSame topicFluid Dynamics Simulations and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207