Cyclic strength of a natural liquefiable sand stabilized with colloidal silica grout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes the experimental results of a series of cyclic simple shear tests on liquefiable silty sand with and without sample improvement with colloidal silica grout. The objective of the paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of colloidal silica grouting in reducing the liquefaction potential of natural silty sand. Colloidal silica was selected as a stabilizing material due to its low viscosity, wide range of gel times, nontoxicity, and low cost. The soil tested in this experimental program is a poorly graded sand with 11.5% of nonplastic silt from the Port of Lázaro Cárdenas, México. Colloidal silica treated and untreated sand specimens show different pore pressure response and deformation behavior under cyclic loading in simple shear tests. The results indicate that, for a given initial relative density and initial effective vertical stress, liquefiable silty sand specimens stabilized with colloidal silica grout generally exhibit significant gain in liquefaction resistance compared with untreated specimens. It was also found that the colloidal silica grout reduces considerably the rates of pore pressure generation and shear strain of the silty sand specimens subjected to cyclic loading.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".