MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Simplified Method for Designing Seismically Isolated Highway Bridges with Massive Piers

2017· article· en· W2619650433 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPierStructural engineeringIsolatorSuperstructureStiffnessVibrationEngineeringMoment (physics)Component (thermodynamics)Geotechnical engineeringGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes two new models for the simplified seismic analysis of seismically isolated highway bridges with massive piers. Both models include two components, one of which includes the superstructure mass, the isolators, and massless pier, and the other one the pier with its distributed mass and stiffness properties. In one model, the isolator stiffness is added at the top of the pier in the second component. The total seismic response is obtained from the square root of the sum of squares (SRSS) of the two individual component results. Applicability and accuracy of the models were assessed by considering bridges with wide ranges of stiffness and mass properties of piers (Mp) and superstructures (Mss). Multimode spectral analysis (MMSA) and nonlinear time-history analysis (NLTHA) were used to define reference solutions for the superstructure displacements, vibration periods, and shears and moments at pier bases. Results from four currently available models, including the model prescribed in American and Canadian bridge codes, were also examined. The study shows that current models for the simplified analysis method yield good estimates of superstructure displacements and vibration periods; however, they generally underestimate the shear and moment demands at pier bases. The errors are more significant for more massive piers or when the stiffness of the piers is high compared to that of the isolators. In contrast, for all bridges studied, the seismic responses from the proposed models show very good agreement with those from the MMSA. Better predictions are obtained when considering the isolator stiffness in the second component of the model. The NLTHA results also show that the proposed models give overall satisfactory predictions for pier base shears and moments. The proposed models extend the range of application of the American and Canadian code simplified method to isolated bridges with massive piers while preserving its simplicity with limited extra computational effort.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.233 · 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