Effect of Air-Shaft Partition Walls’ Arrangement on Structural Behaviour and Construction Technology of Wind Catchers in Iran
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
Four-sided wind catchers are common examples of wind catchers in Yazd. Analysing the physical and structural features of these wind catchers can reveal part of the characteristics of traditional Iranian architecture and the ability of traditional architects to use such renewable energies as wind power. The present study attempts to examine the effect of the arrangement of main and accessory air-shaft partition walls on the structural behaviour and construction technology of four-sided wind catchers through conducting library and field research studies. The study also attempts to simulate the process of constructing a four-sided wind catcher based on an optimal type. The analyses indicate that in addition to the amount of air conditioning, the shape of the partition walls has a direct relationship with the wind catcher’s degree of resistance to the internal and external forces. Moreover, the extension of the partition walls into the entirety of the rack and canal, compared to other similar types with partition walls in the rack, are more resistant against the lateral forces and transfer their resultant pressure more consistently thanks to their connected and consistent structure. The analysis of the construction process of wind catchers revealed part of the characteristics of the traditional Iranian architecture, utilizing vernacular materials and aiming at constructing high structures that are efficient, resistant, and dependent on renewable wind energy.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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