Seismic Performance and Storey-Based Stability of Suspended Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buildings designed with floors suspended on mega supporting structures (core tubes/frames) are referred to as suspended buildings. Such buildings can meet some practical requirements such as the gaining of large open spaces. Some aspects, including seismic performance and structural stability, however, are not completely understood by the engineering community. This motivated an investigation into the performance of suspended buildings subjected to gravity and ground earthquake motion. The stability of suspended floors and their mega supporting structures is discussed in relation to P-delta effect. A suspended-floor section is able to gain stiffness from gravity, but the stability of its mega supporting structure may be a problem due to the up-shifted gravity. This leads to a discussion of the storey-based stability method for assessing the critical load multipliers to be applied to the supporting frames. In view of the pros and cons of suspended buildings, a passive control system with three-performance levels is presented using pendulum floors and connection dampers to dissipate energy and avoid pounding. Optimal control system parameters were studied in order to help with the selection of connection stiffnesses and damping coefficients during the design of suspended buildings. Initial results show that, as opposed to a pendulum TMD, the large suspended-floor masses themselves play a key role in reducing the seismic response, and buildings are able to be designed as types of suspended systems which are effective against strong earthquake motion combined with gravity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".