Effect of compaction pressure on consolidation behaviour of unsaturated silty soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of compaction pressure on subsequent soil behaviour during isotropic consolidation has been investigated by conducting controlled-suction triaxial tests on samples of an unsaturated compacted silty soil. A comprehensive set of laboratory experiments was carried out in a double-walled triaxial apparatus on samples of unsaturated soil that were prepared using two different compaction pressures. The axis translation technique was used for creating the desired suctions in the samples. In the experiments, the soil samples were subjected to isotropic consolidation under constant suctions. The results show that different compaction pressures produce different fabrics in a soil and therefore affect the behaviour of the soil. The results also show that the value of yield stress and the location of the loadingcollapse (LC) yield curve are functions of soil fabric. Furthermore, it is shown that the slopes of normal consolidation lines for densely and loosely compacted samples differ in unsaturated conditions but are the same in saturated soils. A comparison is made between the behaviour of the dense and loose samples, and the difference in the behaviour is explained.Key words: suction, unsaturated soil, compaction, consolidation, soil fabric.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".