Behaviour of elevated concrete silos filled with saturated solids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A finite-element solution is introduced for simulating the filling process of elevated concrete silos filled with saturated solids. An axisymmetric finite-element model is used to represent both the solids and the structure. The bulk solids are modeled using an elastoplastic model, whereas the structure is modeled using a linear elastic model. The interaction between the two materials is modeled using interface elements to permit relative movement. The filling process is idealized via a multistage numerical technique capable of representing both undrained and drained conditions. The effect of the filling process may be time-dependent. The excess pore-water pressure caused by the filling process may significantly influence the magnitudes of internal forces. Moreover, the design critical sections of the same silo element may correspond to different bulk solid conditions (undrained or drained). Practically, the ring beam stiffness may only influence hoop compressions in the silo elements at the wall–hopper junction. The results presented may be used to design tests to evaluate existing silos.Key words: elevated concrete silos, silo filling, finite-element analysis, elastoplastic model, consolidation, hopper, ring beam stiffness.
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 | 0.001 | 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".