Shear‐controlling rocking‐isolation podium system for enhanced resilience of high‐rise buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rapid urban growth has been paired with a rapid increase in the demand for high‐rise buildings, and has accelerated the need for developing more resilient high‐rise buildings in earthquake‐prone regions. Current best practices for the seismic design of high‐rise buildings follow a performance‐based design approach that allows the designer to use innovative structural systems, select performance objectives, and verify seismic performances targeted at multiple levels of seismic intensity. As shortcomings in conventional code‐designed high‐rise buildings continue to be revealed by strong earthquakes, the importance of more resilient high‐rise systems is increasingly evident. Several high‐performance systems have been proposed to limit the excessive seismic demands attributed to higher‐mode effects in high‐rise buildings. However, these systems still face design challenges associated with distributed damage and residual deformations. This paper proposes a novel self‐centering base mechanism for high‐rise buildings that independently limits both shear forces and overturning moments at the base to mitigate higher‐mode effects, while eliminating residual deformations and controlling concentrated stresses within the structure that otherwise would need to be designed for. The schematic overview of the proposed system is first introduced, followed by the detailed design of a physical embodiment developed based on a reference 42‐story RC core wall building. Results of a numerical case‐study comparison confirm that an enhanced seismic performance is achieved through the proposed system with minimum damage and negligible residual deformations even following major seismic loading. The proposed system, with further investigations, also has the potential to be applied to a wider range of structural 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".