The Golden Ears Bridge Design-Build Project: Foundation Design for Segment 4 Approach Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the foundation design concept for Segment 4 approach structures of the Golden Ears Bridge (GEB) Design-Build project being constructed east of Vancouver, British Columbia as part of infrastructure improvements for the 2010 Winter Olympics. The design concept involves the use of a disconnected spread footing (DSF) to meet settlement limits and seismic loading demands. The DSF foundation concept uses conventional spread footing and columns to support the bridge. The footing transfers loads to a group of long-slender, precast square concrete piles (LSP). The LSPs have a dimension of 0.35 m by 0.35 m and are typically 36 m in length. These piles are not attached to the pile cap and, therefore, are designed to handle minimal tension, shear, and bending. The LSPs are used to transfer axial loads from the bridge to the underlying, more competent material and to reduce long-term settlements of the underlying clay. Short shear drilled shafts (SSDS) are used to increase the shear capacity of the foundation. The resisting forces from the SSDS add to shear resistance developed from the passive soil resistance in front, and the friction along the sides, of the pile cap. These shafts are fixed to the pile cap, and are 0.9 m in diameter and 5 m long. Under extreme seismic loading, the DSF concept has significant advantages relative to a more conventional pile group. This presentation discusses the geotechnical design aspects of the DSF foundation concept and the methodology adopted for modeling and design of this concept.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".