Evaluation of the predictive ability of two elastic-viscoplastic constitutive models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two elastic-viscoplastic constitutive formulations are evaluated using laboratory and field data from Sackville, New Brunswick and Gloucester, Ontario. Both constitutive models have been implemented in a finite element program and formulated for undrained analysis and fully coupled analysis based on Biot consolidation theory. A laboratory study of the rate-sensitive behaviour of Sackville clay is described. The response of Sackville clay during consolidated anisotropic undrained (CAU) triaxial creep, CAU triaxial compression, and incremental oedometer consolidation is compared with the calculated behaviour. The comparisons demonstrate the general ability of three-parameter elastic-viscoplastic constitutive models to satisfactorily describe the rate-dependent behaviour of Sackville clay. The measured response of Gloucester clay during long-term Rowe cell consolidation tests is compared with the calculated behaviour, and the predictive ability of both constitutive formulations is evaluated using the field performance of the Gloucester case record. In undertaking the present study, the predictive ability of two elastic-viscoplastic constitutive models is examined for two soft clays. A new method of overstress measurement is introduced for elliptical yield surfaces and the importance of adopting a scalable yield surface for the constitutive modeling of soft clay is demonstrated. A model that is suitable for the study of reinforced and unreinforced embankments on soft rate-sensitive clay foundations is identified.Key words: elastic-viscoplastic, finite element analysis, overstress viscoplasticity, case study, rate-sensitive, coupled analysis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".