MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248318771 · doi:10.1139/l99-090

A simplified method for seismic analysis of lattice telecommunication towers

2000· article· en· W4248318771 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Mohamed Atta Khedr, Ghyslaine McClure

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStructural engineeringSuperposition principleAccelerationVibrationModal analysisResponse spectrumTowerNormal modeSeismic analysisLattice (music)EngineeringMathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisAcousticsFinite element methodClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A simplified static method for estimating the member forces in self-supporting lattice telecommunication towers due to both horizontal and vertical earthquake excitations is presented in this paper. The method is based on the modal superposition technique and the response spectrum approach, which are widely used for seismic analysis of linear structures. It is assumed that the lowest three flexural modes of vibration are sufficient to correctly estimate the tower's response to horizontal excitation, while only the lowest axial mode is sufficient to capture the response to vertical excitation. An acceleration profile along the height of the tower is defined using estimates of the lowest three flexural modes or the lowest axial mode, as appropriate, together with the spectral acceleration values corresponding to the associated natural periods. After the mass of the tower is calculated and lumped at the leg joints, a set of equivalent static lateral or vertical loads can be determined by simply multiplying the mass profile by the acceleration profile. The tower is then analyzed statically under the effect of these loads to evaluate the member forces. This procedure was developed on the basis of detailed dynamic analysis of ten existing three-legged self-supporting telecommunication towers with height range of 30-120 m. The maximum differences in member forces obtained with the proposed method and the detailed seismic analysis are of the order of ±25% in the extreme cases, with an average difference of ±7%. The results obtained for two towers with heights of 66 and 83 m are presented in this paper to demonstrate the accuracy and practicality of the proposed method.Key words: self-supporting tower, earthquake, vertical excitation, dynamic analysis.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207