Optimal design of a hanging truss with shape memory alloy wires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we discuss the dynamic problem of a column-type hanging truss structural system with pseudo-elastic shape memory alloy (SMA) bracing wires. In the case where the sectional area values of the bracing SMA wire members are small enough to be negligible, it is close to the situation where there are no braces. In the case where the sectional area values of the bracing SMA wire members are large enough not to be negligible, the vibration amplitude of the peripheral end apparatus is suppressed from the deformation point of view. In addition, energy attenuation efficiency is improved with larger sectional area values because of the hysteretic characteristic of SMA. Small sectional area values of the bracing SMA wire members near the support ceiling or peripheral end are beneficial to vibration transmission reduction. These findings indicate that the placement and sectional area values of SMA wire members are both significant from the viewpoint of suppression of influence of the support ceiling vibration of the hanging truss. In this study, we obtain the optimal sectional area values of the SMA wire bracing members for the objectives of vibration isolation and attenuation. We discuss influences of different vibration conditions on the optimal solutions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".