Energy Absorption and Dissipation Performance in Cycloid Guided Pendulum Absorbers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dynamic energy absorbers are auxiliary systems that are attached to the main structure and widely used as a simple solution for neutralization of vibrations. Among various types of pendulum vibration absorbers are preferable for high-rise buildings, bridges and other civil structures for suppression earthquake-excited vibrations. The problem in dissipating vibration of earthquake is its unknown characteristics such as excitation frequency and magnitude. As a result, designing of an effective self tuning vibration absorber that can adjust its performance according to the excitation frequency will be a challenge. The situation is to have an absorber that can respond at a single frequency for wide range of excitation amplitude so its parameter can be well adjusted for the maximum energy dissipation. It is shown [5] that period in cycloid pendulum is constant for large amplitude. This feature is a major advantage of cycloid pendulum absorbers that could be used in combination with an energy dissipation mechanism to reduce the induced motion in a structure. In this paper, two types of vibration absorbers, i.e., simple and cycloid pendulum are analytically compared. The simulation results demonstrate the superiority of the cycloid damper type in energy absorption/dissipation over a simple pendulum one.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".