Structural Response of Tall Buildings under Dynamic Wind Loading (Various Codal Provisions)
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
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.
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