Influence of seismic force reduction factors for wall and outrigger systems on the seismic performance of high-rise outrigger structures
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
The damped outrigger system has emerged as a solution to mitigate seismic demands in slender cores of high-rise buildings, enhancing stiffness and damping within the lateral force-resisting system. Despite its efficiency in controlling seismic response, the lack of a practical design guideline remains a key challenge for the damped outrigger system. An important part of this gap relates to the seismic force reduction factors. This study investigates how the choice of seismic force reduction factors for the core wall ( R w ) and the outrigger system ( R OTG ) affects the seismic performance of high-rise reinforced concrete buildings with outrigger systems. Using a suite of 990 prototype archetypes ranging from 30 to 70 stories, the research evaluates combinations of wall and outrigger R values alongside other design parameters such as outrigger location and relative stiffness through nonlinear time history analyses (NLTHA). The results show that while both R w and R OTG significantly influence deformation and ductility demands, their combined effect and interaction with outrigger stiffness ( α f ) are critical for achieving balanced performance. Optimal ranges for R OTG , generally between 2 and 4, depend strongly on α f and the selected R w . The findings are used to develop guidance for selecting wall and outrigger reduction factors that balance ductility demand distribution, deformation control, and force distribution in the design of outrigger systems. This study provides a valuable contribution for both structural practitioners seeking to design with damped outriggers and researchers aiming to develop comprehensive design guidelines for this system.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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