Drilled Shaft Response in Piedmont Residuum Using Elastic Continuum Analysis and Seismic Piezocone Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The axial load-displacement-capacity response of drilled shaft and bored pile foundations can be evaluated during the analysis and design stage using an elastic continuum framework and results from in-situ testing methods, in particular, the seismic piezocone test (SCPTù). The SCPTù is an optimal and economical means for collection of geotechnical data because the same sounding provides up to five separate measurements with depth: cone tip resistance (qt), sleeve friction (fs), porewater pressure (u2), time rate of consolidation (t50), and shear wave velocity (Vs). Moreover, the SCPTù provides information on soil behavior at both ends of the stress-strain-strength curves, namely the peak strength and geostatic stress state for evaluating axial pile capacity and the small-strain stiffness (Gmax = ρt⋅Vs2) for the initial soil-pile deformations. Using a Randolph-type analytical elastic pile model, the approach can handle either traditional top down compression loading by dead-weight or reaction beam systems, or the more recent Osterberg cell that juxtaposes base and side resistances in opposite directions. A case study involving O-cell tests on a drilled shaft in Piedmont residuum and partially-weathered rock in Atlanta are presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".