Seismic response of sliding equipment and contents in base‐isolated buildings subjected to broadband ground motions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Base isolation has been established as the seismic design approach of choice when it comes to protecting nonstructural contents. However, while this protection technology has been widely shown to reduce seismic demands on attached oscillatory equipment and contents (EC), its effectiveness in controlling the response of freestanding EC that are prone to sliding has not been investigated. This study examines the seismic behavior of sliding EC inside base‐isolated buildings subjected to broadband ground motions. The effect of isolation system properties on the response of sliding EC with various friction coefficients is examined. Two widely used isolation models are considered: viscously damped linear elastic and bilinear. The study finds isolation to be generally effective in reducing seismic demands on sliding EC, but it also exposes certain situations where isolation in fact increases demands on EC, most notably for low friction coefficients and high earthquake intensities. Damping at the isolation level is effective in controlling the EC sliding displacements, although damping over about 20% is found to be superfluous. The study identifies a physically motivated dimensionless intensity measure and engineering demand parameter for sliding equipment in base‐isolated buildings subjected to broadband ground motions. Finally, the paper presents easy‐to‐use design fragility curves and an example that illustrates how to use them. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".