MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long-Term Monitoring of Strain in Instrumented Piles

2009· article· en· W2022603494 on OpenAlexaff
Bengt H. Fellenius, Sung‐Ryul Kim, Sung-Gyo Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Properties and Behavior
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileGeotechnical engineeringSwellingCasingVoid (composites)GeologyMaterials scienceComposite materialPetroleum engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of strain in two 31 and 56 m long instrumented postdriving grouted cylinder piles at a site west of Busan, South Korea, were monitored during 200 days after construction, whereupon a static loading test was performed. Initial strain measurements showed unexpected elongation of the pile, probably due to swelling from absorption of water but as the soil reconsolidated, the elongation changed into shortening, probably due to imposed residual load in the pile. The resulting compression of the pile eventually offset the swelling of the pile. To investigate the cause of the strain changes more closely and enhance the evaluation of the field data, two short pile pieces were prepared and placed free-standing above ground in an outside laboratory. One piece was from a cylinder pile of which central void was grouted and one was made up by grouting inside a temporary casing. The monitoring showed that the short pieces appeared first to shorten and then to elongate due to the heating and cooling from the hydration process. When strains and temperature had stabilized 150 days after start of the study, both pieces were submerged to introduce swelling of the concrete. For the first 100 days after submerging, the swelling strains in both short pieces amounted to 100 με. Seven hundred days after submersion, the total swelling strains were 150 and 250 με.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental EngineeringSame topicConcrete Properties and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207