Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, building codes evolved to deal with the seismic design requirements of building structures with very little attention given to seismic design of equipment, parts and portions housed inside. While ductility is routinely used for building structures, it is rarely considered for equipment housed in lifeline facilities. Studies dealing with the dynamic interaction between inelastic primary and secondary systems are somewhat limited. The objective of the current investigation is to study the seismic response of Primary-Secondary systems in critical facilities when the frequencies of free vibration of the elastic uncoupled systems coincide. Presented in this paper is a study of the inelastic seismic behavior of tuned Primary-Secondary (P-S) systems. The Primary-Secondary system is represented by a coupled non-linear (elastic-plastic or bilinear) two degree of freedom non-linear system. The response of both the coupled and the uncoupled systems are obtained by solving the governing differential equations numerically. The important parameters considered are the tuned frequency of the system, the mass ratio, damping and the yield levels for the structure and the equipment that reflects ductility incorporated in the design. Based on the numerical results obtained, improvements for code design provisions of equipment seismic design for lifeline facilities are proposed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".