Isolation and Damping Mitigation Strategies for Bridges in Western and Eastern North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seismic design provisions of the CSA-S6 Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code and the AASHTO LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Specifications have been developed primarily based on historical earthquake events that have occurred along the North American west coast. For the design of seismic isolation systems, the simplified equivalent analysis and design method included in these codes relies on an equivalent effective linearization of the nonlinear isolated structures and a response reduction factor, or damping coefficient, Β which takes into account the effect of the equivalent added damping. The appropriateness of the damping coefficient B for western and eastern North American ground motions is investigated in this paper. Results from a series of time-history analyses performed for a set of linear equivalent and nonlinear structural systems covering a wide range of isolated and damped bridge configurations are presented. It is found that there is a need to adjust existing design guidelines to better capture the expected nonlinear response of isolated bridges, especially for earthquakes expected in eastern North America. © 2012, International Association for Earthquake Engineering. All rights reserved.
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) | 0.002 | 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".