I would like to further clarify the wall's behavior under seismic loading, explain how my technology eliminates tension and prevents compressive failure, and emphasize that my approach fully complies with the Eurocodes. I hope this analysis will help in understanding my method and enhance our scientific dialogue.

1. Forces on the Wall During Seismic Rotation

When a wall is subjected to seismic loading, the acceleration of the mass causes an overturning moment, resulting in the wall rotating around its base (like a hinge). During this rotation, the faces of the wall experience different forces:

• Compression on One Face: The downward movement of one face (due to rotation) is opposed by the ground, creating compressive stresses.
• Tension on the Other Face: The upward movement of the other face (due to the same rotation) creates upward forces, which are opposed by the downward loads of the beams and slabs supported by the wall. This opposition leads to tensile stresses in the face that is "lifting."

The above description can be likened to the circumference of a wheel: as the wheel rotates, one point on the circumference moves downwards P (in contact with the ground, like the compressive face), while the opposite point W moves upwards (like the tensile face).

2. Causes of Tension

Tension in the lifting face arises from two main causes:

• Upward Force due to Rotation: As explained, the rotation of the wall around its base creates an upward motion in one face. This motion is opposed by the downward loads of the beams and slabs, causing tensile stresses.
• Bending of the Wall: Seismic loading causes bending in the wall, as horizontal forces (from the acceleration of the mass) create a moment. This bending leads to tensile stresses on the outer face (which is "pulled") and compressive stresses on the inner face (which is "pushed").

3. Neutralization of Tension through Pre-stressing and Anchorage

My technology eliminates tension in an innovative way:

• Pre-stressing and Anchorage in the Ground: I use 56 tendons with a force of 349.18 tons, which are anchored in the ground. The pre-stressing applied through the tendons creates a continuous downward force that neutralizes the upward tension of the face during rotation. In other words, the pre-stressing "holds" the face in place, preventing the uplift that would cause tension.
• Elimination of Bending: Once the upward force is neutralized, one of the two main causes of tension (the upward movement) is eliminated. Without tensile stresses, the bending of the wall is drastically reduced, as bending depends on the difference between tension and compression on the faces. This is evidenced by the 97% reduction in overturning moment (8.62 MNm compared to 287.66 MNm in a conventional system).

4. Prevention of Compressive Failure through Pre-stressing

It is important to emphasize that my technology does not lead to compressive failure of the wall, as you might assume. The pre-stressing applied through the tendons not only neutralizes tension but also increases the effective cross-section of the wall that participates in compression. Specifically:

• Increase in Effective Cross-Section: Pre-stressing compresses the wall, increasing the area of the cross-section that can withstand compressive stresses without reaching failure. This enhances the compressive strength of the wall, preventing the exceedance of the compressive capacity of the extreme fiber.
• Results: This is clearly seen in the results of my analysis. The base shear is reduced by 96% (1,385 kN compared to 31,962 kN in a conventional system), and the compressive stress at the base remains well below the shear capacity (43,867 kN). Furthermore, the total seismic energy (32.94 MJ) is effectively distributed: only 10.45 MJ are absorbed by the building, while 7.82 MJ are transferred to the ground, and 13.67 MJ are absorbed by the dampers. This ensures that the compressive forces in the wall remain at safe levels, preventing any possibility of compressive failure.

5. Compliance with Eurocodes

My technology has been designed and tested based on the requirements of the Eurocodes, particularly EC8 (Eurocode 8) for earthquake-resistant design. Specifically:

• The reduction in base shear and overturning moment ensures that the forces reaching the foundation are much lower than the limits set by EC8.
• The Factor of Safety (FS) of 282.789 significantly exceeds the minimum limit of 2.0 required for critical structures.
• The use of pre-stressing and the enhancement of compressive strength through the increase of the effective cross-section are accepted methods according to EC2 (Eurocode 2) for the design of concrete structures, while the energy dissipation through SSI and dampers aligns with the principles of EC8 for reducing seismic loads.

6. Complementary Action of the Technology

Beyond neutralizing tension and preventing compressive failure, my technology utilizes:

• Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI): Transfers part of the seismic energy to the ground, reducing the forces on the building.
• Rubber Dampers: The dampers absorb a significant percentage of the seismic energy, further reducing the forces on the wall.
• Increase in Period and Damping: The building's period increases to 3.18 s (from 0.55 s) and the damping to 13.2%, shifting the response to a region of lower spectral acceleration.

7. Scientific Documentation

My approach has been tested with the Tohoku seismograph (PGA 1.5g = 1440.17 cm/s²), and the results demonstrate its validity because all indicators are consistent.

Experiment Findings seismic analysis plots corrected seismogram(1)(1)