Assessment of Soil-Structure Interaction Effects on Seismic Behavior of Isolator and Mass Damper Equipped Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the impact of Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) on the response of seismic-isolated buildings.Reinforced concrete office buildings with different heights are studied.The High Damping Rubber Bearing (HDRB), Lead Rubber Bearing (LRB) and Double Sliding Pendulum (DSP) isolators are utilized to isolate the buildings base.Also, Tunned Mass Damper (TMD) is implemented at top of buildings to improve building response.Soft, medium and hard soils are modelled using direct and substructure approaches.On the other hand, the influence of foundation type on buildings response is examined.The results indicate that considering SSI in soft soil reduces base shear of 6-storey building by 30%, but increases top storey displacement from 128 mm to 182 mm.It is found that base isolators are more efficient in reducing base shear (41-66%) than TMD (10-25%).Simple equations are suggested to calculate the fundamental period based on building height.The soil layer near the foundation, around 75% of the building height, primarily determines the building's response.Therefore, soil investigation can be restricted to a maximum depth of 75% of the building height.Finally, it is found that using pile foundation in soft soil alters building response to resemble that in hard soil conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".