MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027668504 · doi:10.1139/t03-014

Performance evaluation of vibration-sensitive equipment foundations under ground-transmitted excitation

2003· article· en· W2027668504 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
M. Hesham El Naggar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrationFoundation (evidence)Ground vibrationsEngineeringStructural engineeringExcitationGas compressorAcousticsMechanical engineeringPhysicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The planning of foundations for equipment that is sensitive to vibrations requires a thorough dynamic investigation of the proposed location of the foundation with regard to the effect of already existing or additional vibration sources. This paper discusses the analyses performed for a number of foundations supporting vibration-sensitive equipment that has been subjected to ground-transmitted excitations. These analyses considered the dynamic response of the foundations resulting from the normal operation of the supported equipment or the ground-transmitted excitations. In one case, the foundation of the Canadian Light Source, a third generation synchrotron that will be capable of generating electromagnetic radiation used in the study of the atomic and subatomic structure of materials, is examined. Another case involves the vibration analysis of a magnetic resonance imaging unit affected by traffic excitation. In the third case, a power plant facility that is subjected to blast-induced vibration from an adjacent quarry is investigated. The last case involves the response analysis of a compressor foundation affected by the ground-transmitted vibration from another compressor situated on a different foundation within the same facility. To assess the level of seismic excitation at the site due to traffic on an adjacent roadway in the first two cases and to blasting activity in the third case, extensive "green field" ground vibration-monitoring programs were carried out. The ground accelerations due to traffic and blasting were measured and recorded for three directions simultaneously: a vertical and two orthogonal horizontal directions. The measurements with the most intense ground accelerations taken at the ground surface in the location of the future equipment foundation were selected as the final design acceleration time-history. A Fourier analysis approach was used to predict the response of the foundation to the ground-induced vibrations in the first three cases, and a frequency domain analysis was used in the last case.Key words: machine foundations, vibration, blasting, kinematic, soil-structure interaction.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207