Response modification factor of elevated water tanks with reinforced concrete pedestal
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A probabilistic method based on FEMA P695 is employed for validating the response modification factor of reinforced concrete pedestals in elevated water tanks. In the current codes and standards, the response modification factor of elevated water tanks is mainly based on engineering judgement. Ten models of elevated water tanks with different tank sizes and pedestal heights are selected for the investigation. Initially, the prototypes are designed based on the current codes and standards. Next, the finite element models of the prototypes are developed. By performing incremental dynamic analysis, the probability of collapse for each prototype is calculated under different seismic loading conditions and system uncertainties. The results of the study validate and confirm the current response modification factor values and show that the tank size has a significant effect on the nonlinear seismic response behaviour of elevated water tanks. In addition, it is revealed that heavy tank sizes that are designed in accordance with codes and guidelines are more vulnerable under seismic loading compared with light and medium tank sizes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it