MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Practical Formulas for Frequency Domain Analysis of Earthquake-Induced Dam-Reservoir Interaction

2009· article· en· W2079342698 on OpenAlexafffund
Najib Bouaanani, Charles Perrault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Frequency domainCompressibilityGravity damModal analysisFoundation (evidence)Earthquake engineeringModalComputer scienceGeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringFinite element methodMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dam-reservoir dynamic interactions are complex phenomena requiring advanced mathematical and numerical modeling. Although available sophisticated techniques can handle many aspects of these phenomena, simplified procedures are useful and still needed to globally evaluate the dynamic response of dam-reservoir systems. This paper presents and validates an original practical procedure to investigate earthquake induced dam-reservoir interaction in the frequency domain, including the effects of dam flexibility, water compressibility, and reservoir bottom wave absorption. The procedure relates hydrodynamic pressure due to any deflected modal response of a two-dimensional gravity dam on a rigid foundation to hydrodynamic pressure caused by a horizontal rigid body motion. New analytical expressions that can be easily programmed in a spreadsheet package or implemented in a dam structural analysis program are also proposed to conduct simplified fundamental mode earthquake analysis of gravity dams. The techniques presented can be efficiently used to provide valuable insight into the effects and relative importance of the various parameters involved in the dynamic response of dam-reservoir systems. Although the mathematical derivations and closed-form expressions developed were applied to dam-reservoir systems herein, they can be easily adapted to other fluid-structure interaction problems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering MechanicsSame topicDam Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207