Viscoelastic Coupling Dampers for Enhanced Multiple Seismic Hazard Level Performance of High‐Rise Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Viscoelastic coupling dampers (VCDs) are installed in lieu of traditional reinforced concrete (RC) coupling beams in high‐rise buildings to provide distributed supplemental damping for all dynamic loading conditions without affecting the architectural layout. When distributed effectively over the height of the building, VCDs provide viscous damping in all lateral modes of vibration and an elastic restoring force that enhances the lateral stiffness of the coupled system. In this paper, a first extensive numerical case study is carried out to compare the seismic performance of a conventional coupled shear wall high‐rise building to a high damping alternate of the same design in which VCDs replace all diagonal RC beams in the core to enhance its seismic resilience. The added damping from VCDs is intended to reduce the peak responses under low amplitude earthquakes, but for larger amplitude maximum credible earthquakes, the peak responses are similar; however, structural damage is greatly reduced. Three seismic hazard levels were investigated, and the results indicate that the use of VCDs reduces peak floor accelerations, story drifts, and story shears over all seismic intensities. Nonlinear time‐history analysis results also highlighted the improved resilience of the VCD structure at the maximum credible seismic hazard level where the use of VCDs eliminated all damage to coupling beams that would otherwise require repair over most of the height of the building.
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) | 0.001 | 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".