Shake Table Seismic Performance Assessment of Auxiliary Battery Power Systems Using the FEMA 461 Protocol
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
Auxiliary batteries and battery rack systems are widely used as a risk mitigation strategy in several critical facilities to supply power following loss of external power from the grid. Although these systems might fail during earthquakes, causing cascading catastrophic economic and life losses, they have received little attention in terms of investigating their seismic performance. However, after recent extreme events (e.g., the Fukushima nuclear disaster), such risk mitigation systems have been attracting more attention to ensure their functionality during extreme events. This paper investigates the seismic performance and modes of failure of battery rack systems that are currently used in several critical facilities. Shake table tests were performed at different ground motion levels, following the recommendations of the FEMA 461 guidelines. The results demonstrated that the design guidelines and fragility curves currently assigned to battery rack systems in the FEMA P-58 prestandards do not encompass all possible failure mechanisms. This paper not only enlarges the experimental database of the seismic performance of battery rack systems, but also facilitates the adoption of these systems within the next generation of performance-based seismic design standards.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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