ANALISIS DESAIN LEAD RUBBER BEARINGS PADA BANGUNAN STRUKTUR BAJA ENAM LANTAI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Base isolation system merupakan salah satu sistem perlindungan seismik yang paling banyak digunakan dalam pembangunan struktur di daerah rawan gempa. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk melihat perbandingan persentase kinerja struktur antara bangunan yang menggunakan base isolation system maupun tanpa base isolation system (tumpuan jepit). Dalam penelitian ini dimodelkan bangunan struktur baja enam lantai dengan base isolation system yang digunakan berupa Lead Rubber Bearing (LRB). Metode penelitian menggunakan analisis non-linear riwayat waktu (NLTHA) El-Centro yang akan diskalakan dengan respon spektrum percepatan gempa Jakarta dengan kondisi tanah lunak (SE). Parameter yang dibandingkan adalah perioda getar struktur bangunan, perpindahan lateral bangunan, dan simpangan antar lantai. Hasil yang diperoleh yaitu terjadi peningkatan perioda getar struktur sebesar 119,26%, peningkatan perpindahan lateral untuk arah X sebesar 61,56% pada lantai satu, sedangkan total perpindahan pada atap terjadi penurunan untuk arah X sebesar 37,91%, dan adanya penurunan simpangan antar lantai arah X sebesar 71,13%. Berdasarkan hasil perbandingan parameter yang diperoleh tersebut, dapat disimpulkan bahwa penggunaan base isolation system dapat bekerja lebih baik dalam mereduksi gaya gempa dibandingkan tanpa LRB.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".