MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tuned Sloshing Dampers in Tall Buildings: A Practical Performance-Based Design Approach

2021· article· en· W3153038551 on OpenAlexaff
J.S. Love, Bujar Morava, J. K. Robinson, T. C. Haskett

Bibliographic record

VenuePractice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsRowan Williams Davies & Irwin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsServiceability (structure)Engineering design processDesign processSlosh dynamicsFunction (biology)Risk analysis (engineering)Process (computing)Computer scienceKey (lock)EngineeringConstruction engineeringReliability engineeringCivil engineeringStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringWork in processOperations managementComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is becoming increasingly common to employ tuned sloshing damper (TSD) systems to reduce the wind-induced motion of tall buildings due to their affordability and apparent simplicity. However, TSD systems are relatively new to the high-rise construction industry, and, due to their unfamiliarity, design and construction teams may perceive these devices as having considerable risk. Since the implementation of these systems requires a performance-based design approach (rather than a prescriptive approach) to ensure serviceability performance objectives are achieved, knowledge of their function and operation is paramount to their efficient design and installation. The goal of this study is to reduce the perceived risks by describing the function of TSDs, as well as the practical aspects of the design and installation process. The process is described in four phases: concept design, detailed design, construction, and tuning and commissioning. The key tasks associated with each phase are defined and common challenges identified. This paper does not present new theory to further advance the TSD research; instead, it summarizes current theory and presents practical guidance accumulated from years of experience with the design, installation, and as-built performance verification of many TSD systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractice Periodical on Structural Design and ConstructionSame topicVibration Control and Rheological FluidsFrench-language works237,207