Investigations on the performance of a liquid column damper (LCD) with different orifice diameter ratios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental investigation was carried out of the influence of the orifice in a liquid column damper (LCD) in changing the vibration-suppression characteristics of a structure subjected to earthquake excitations. An analytical solution has been presented for the transfer function of the maximum displacement of the structure, modelled as a single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system, with applied harmonic base motion. A standard equivalent linearization technique has been employed to cater for the nonlinear damping of the orifice in the LCD. The experimental results are validated. The performance of the orifice has been evaluated through the experimental testing of various base displacement amplitudes and frequencies. An SDOF system was built on a platform capable of generating sinusoidal excitations of predefined input frequencies and displacements. An LCD was also built with the ability to change its orifice size. Both theoretical and experimental results are plotted to examine and compare the performance of the LCD. It was observed that structural response may increase at off-resonant frequencies due to inappropriate selection of orifice ratios in some cases.Key words: liquid column damper, head loss, orifice, vibration control, earthquake protection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".