New mixed boundary, true triaxial loading device for testing three-dimensional stress–strain–strength behaviour of geomaterials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a brief review of true triaxial apparatuses (TTAs) developed in the past and their advantages and limitations. Considering the limitations of previous designs, a new true triaxial loading device that provides mixed boundary conditions for a true triaxial apparatus (TTA) is introduced. This loading device consists of four sliding rigid plates and two flexible loading faces. The setup of the loading device together with the whole true triaxial system is described. Frictions between sliding plates and the soil membrane surfaces in the new loading device are examined. A three-dimensional finite element (FE) modelling study is carried out on the stress and strain distribution of a soil specimen subjected to loading from two different loading devices. It is found that stresses and strains of a soil specimen subjected to loading from the new sliding plates are far more uniform than those subjected to loading from nonsliding plates with preset gaps. Finally, the paper presents the applications of the present TTA with the new loading device for testing studies of a completely decomposed granite soil and a geofoam. Typical results are presented and discussed. It is found that the present mixed boundary loading device is very suitable for true triaxial testing on both soils and geofoam, especially under large strains or compression without corner contact problems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".