Simplified Method for the Preliminary Design of Shear-Controlling Rocking-Isolation Podium Systems for Tall Buildings
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
Base dual-mechanism systems that limit both shear force and overturning moment demands are being developed as a new class of seismic force–resisting systems to enhance the control of seismic demands at the base and along the height of tall buildings and to control higher-mode effects. Despite an increasing number of numerical studies that demonstrate the enhanced seismic resilience of tall buildings as a result of better-controlled shear force and overturning moment demands and reduced higher-mode effects through a variety of base dual-mechanism configurations, there are limited design methodologies for buildings with this type of seismic-resistant base system. This paper proposes a simplified method for the performance-based seismic design methodology for these base dual-mechanism systems and the structures above, which consists of (1) designing the dual base-mechanism system using a set of design charts, and (2) protecting the rest of the structure for the maximum expected seismic force demands computed using closed-form equations. The proposed method was used in this paper for the preliminary design of four example core-wall tall buildings with heights of 45, 90, 150, and 300 m. The adequacy of the proposed method was demonstrated using three-dimensional finite-element models. The analysis results were in reasonable agreement with the targeted force and displacement demands estimated using the proposed simplified method for the preliminary design of dual base-mechanism 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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