MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166391151 · doi:10.1002/eqe.2409

Performance of base‐isolated reinforced concrete buildings under bidirectional seismic excitation considering pounding with retaining walls including friction effects

2014· article· en· W2166391151 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak R. Pant, Anil C. Wijeyewickrema

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringBase isolationEngineeringSuperstructureBase (topology)ExcitationNonlinear systemFault (geology)Geotechnical engineeringGeologySeismologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Seismic pounding of base‐isolated buildings has been mostly studied in the past assuming unidirectional excitation. Therefore, in this study, the effects of seismic pounding on the response of base‐isolated reinforced concrete buildings under bidirectional excitation are investigated. For this purpose, a three‐dimensional finite element model of a code‐compliant four‐story building is considered, where a newly developed contact element that accounts for friction and is capable of simulating pounding with retaining walls at the base, is used. Nonlinear behavior of the superstructure as well as the isolation system is considered. The performance of the building is evaluated separately for far‐fault non‐pulse‐like ground motions and near‐fault pulse‐like ground motions, which are weighted scaled to represent two levels of shaking viz. the design earthquake (DE) level and the risk‐targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCE R ) level. Nonlinear time‐history analyses are carried out considering lower bound as well as upper bound properties of isolators. The influence of separation distance between the building and the retaining walls at the base is also investigated. It is found that if pounding is avoided, the performance of the building is satisfactory in terms of limiting structural and nonstructural damage, under DE‐level motions and MCE R ‐level far‐fault motions, whereas unacceptably large demands are imposed by MCE R ‐level near‐fault motions. In the case of seismic pounding, MCE R ‐level near‐fault motions are found to be detrimental, where the effect of pounding is mostly concentrated at the first story. In addition, it is determined that considering unidirectional excitation instead of bidirectional excitation for MCE R ‐level near‐fault motions provides highly unconservative estimates of superstructure demands. 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations51
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarthquake Engineering & Structural DynamicsSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207