Finite element modeling of hexagonal wire reinforced embankment on soft clay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A full-scale test embankment was constructed on soft Bangkok clay using hexagonal wire mesh as reinforcement. This paper attempts to simulate the behavior of the full-scale test embankment using the finite element program PLAXIS. The agreement between the finite element results and the field data is quite good. The important considerations for simulating the behavior of the reinforced wall embankment were the method of applying the embankment loading during the construction process, the variation of soil permeability during the consolidation process, and the selection of the appropriate model and properties at the interface between the soil and reinforcement. The increased reinforcement stiffness tends to increase the reinforcement tension and increase the embankment forward rotation. The reinforcement tensions increased with the compression of the underlying soft foundation. The appropriate interface properties between the backfill soil and the hexagonal wire mesh reinforcement corresponding to the interaction mechanism at working stress conditions were dominated by the direct shear mechanism. The direct shear interaction coefficient of 0.9 was used.Key words: soil reinforcement, hexagonal wire mesh, finite element analysis, field embankment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".