Discrete-continuum analysis of monotonic pile penetration in crushable sands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents numerical results from a two-dimensional discrete element method (DEM) simulation study on the monotonic pile installation in crushable sands. The particle breakage was included in the model by setting a crushable zone around a pile that was filled with parallel-bonded agglomerates. In the other part of the model, rigid, unbreakable particles are used to minimize the computational cost. Parametric studies were carried out to examine the effects of initial in situ vertical stress, soil void ratio, and particle crushability on the penetration resistance behavior. The validity of the DEM model was examined by comparing the simulation data with published results from laboratory centrifuge and calibration chamber tests on model pile installation. A variety of DEM analysis techniques were employed to make a detailed discrete-continuum study on the pile penetration mechanisms, particularly on the particle breakage-related soil mechanics incurred during the penetration process. Simulation results show that the in situ stress and particle breakage are the two competing factors dominating the tip resistance behavior. The underlying mechanism was elucidated through the analysis of stress and strain paths derived from pre-assigned sampling windows and their full-field distributions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".