Structural Response of Tall Buildings under Dynamic Wind Loading (Various Codal Provisions)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapid urbanization leads to the development of tall structures due to less availability of land and higher growth in the population. High rise structures are more vulnerable to wind forces and at higher elevation point’s structure may acts as a dynamic sensitive structure. Various countries has provided a pseudo-static constant for the calculation of dynamic wind forces known as the gust factor. Present study aims to evaluate and compare the structural response of three structure i.e. Braced Frame, Hull-Core and Shear Wall Structures under dynamic wind loading as per five different codal provisions viz. India (IS 875 (III):2015, America (ASCE 07-10), Australia/New Zealand (AZ/NZS 1170.2:2011), Canada (NBCC 2015) and British Standards (BS EN 1991-1-1-4:2005) for different structure heights and analyzed in ETABSv.16. All the structures gives satisfactory results in Open and Rough Exposure categories. Evaluated dynamic lateral forces are compared and conclusions are made. Hull-core structure has outperformed rest of the two structures. Results are evaluated on the basis of maximum storey displacement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".