Influence of loading path on cyclic mechanical response of small-scale shallow strip footing on loose sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims at experimentally exploring the behaviour of a small-scale 1g shallow strip footing on loose dry sand, subjected to vertical and horizontal cyclic loads. An experimental apparatus has been developed and calibrated, and some series of monotonic and cyclic tests with different combinations of load direction and cycle amplitudes have been carried out. Results are presented and discussed in terms of evolution of foundation global stiffness, damping properties, and settlement accumulation along both vertical and horizontal directions with increase in the load cycle’s number. The coupling effect between vertical and horizontal loads is highlighted, underlying its important role even at a low number of cycles, when, in the design practice, the behaviour of the system is often considered to be linear elastic and path independent. The observation also allowed the inference that a variation of the inclination of the cyclic loads may induce significant differences (up to one order of magnitude) in the global stiffness and damping properties. Far from having exhaustively investigated the subject and from the aim of proposing a new empirical quantitative relationship to be directly employed in the design practice, this paper was primarily focused on highlighting some aspects of the mechanical behaviour of the system that are still rather unknown. A further in-depth study allowed the analysis of experimental results within the framework of a meaningful physical interpretation, showing the results to be particularly useful in the perspective of a displacement-based design approach, as required by the current design standards.
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) | 0.002 | 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".