A bounding surface plasticity model for sands exhibiting particle crushing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new bounding surface constitutive model for sands is presented and is suited to a wide range of stresses, including those sufficient to cause particle crushing. The basic concepts of critical state soil mechanics are shown to be valid, and a uniquely shaped critical state line is defined to capture the three modes of plastic deformation observed across a wide range of stresses, including particle rearrangement, particle crushing, and pseudoelastic deformation. A limiting isotropic compression line is separated from the critical state line in the υ In p′ plane by a constant shift along an elastic unloadreload line. In the deviator stress mean effective stress (qp′) plane, the loading and bounding surfaces are homologous about the origin and defined by a simple and versatile function. Isotropic hardening and softening of the loading and bounding surfaces are controlled by plastic volumetric strains. A commonly used non associative flow rule is adopted. Experimental results of monotonically loaded drained and undrained triaxial tests, isotropic compression tests, and oedometric compression tests are presented for a quartz sand and used to calibrate the model. Membrane penetration is accounted for in the model simulations of the test results. A single set of material parameters is introduced enabling rigorous and accurate predictions of stressstrain behaviour in sands.Key words: sand, bounding surface, plasticity, particle crushing.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".