Scaled shaking table testing of higher‐mode effects on the seismic response of tall and slender structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As structures are built taller and more slender, their response becomes increasingly sensitive to dynamic loads that are induced by the buildings’ higher‐frequency vibration modes. This leads to a more complex seismic response of high‐rise structures when compared to the seismic response of low‐rise structures that are primarily governed by their fundamental modes of vibration. This paper presents the results of extensive shake table testing and finite element analyses of a small‐scale, 1.5‐meter‐tall shaking table specimen that was designed and scaled to experimentally capture the higher‐mode effects of a 125‐meter‐tall reference tall building. The test specimen is comprised of a simplified superstructure with uniform mass and stiffness representing the main structure of the full‐scale reference tall building, and a base‐rocking mechanism to represent the moment‐limiting effect of the inelastic plastic‐hinging mechanism at the base of the reference building. Using the methodology proposed in this paper, the scaled specimen was shown to exhibit similar seismic response characteristics, including the corresponding higher‐mode effects, along the height of the structure as those predicted numerically on the full‐scale reference building. Results of the shaking table tests experimentally provided further evidence that relying only on a moment‐limiting mechanism at the base of a cantilever structure is insufficient in limiting peak seismic loads due to higher‐mode effects. In addition, by comparing test results with predictions obtained using several previously proposed analytical methods, the paper demonstrated that predicting shear force amplifications due to higher‐mode effects is still challenging. The methodology developed in this study can be used to design other similar small‐scale shaking table tests for the development of new analytical methods to predict higher mode effects and experimentally validate the efficiency of new high‐performance systems developed to mitigate higher‐mode effects on tall and slender structures and more generally to assess the ability of these systems to achieve enhanced seismic resilience.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".