MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027856419 · doi:10.1139/t02-121

Assessment of self-boring pressuremeter tests in sensitive clay

2003· article· en· W2027856419 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Vincenzo Silvestri

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringPore water pressureMohr–Coulomb theoryStress pathStress (linguistics)Triaxial shear testGeologyPlane stressShear (geology)EngineeringStructural engineeringFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present paper analyzes field test results obtained by means of the Cambridge self-boring pressuremeter (SBPM) in a sensitive Champlain clay of Quebec. It is shown that, although the undrained shear strengths deduced from the SBPM tests are higher than the values obtained with the field vane, the observed discrepancy is reduced by taking into account progressive failure effects. It is not the SBPM test that overestimates the undrained shear strength, but rather the vane test that underestimates it in this sensitive clay. Total and effective field stress paths are inferred from the SBPM tests, and it is shown that the effective stress paths approach the tension zone of the Mohr–Coulomb failure diagram before heading towards the large-strain failure envelope of the clay. The pressuremeter interpretation has been thoroughly worked through for various uncertainties like undrained test conditions, plane-strain conditions, and disturbance, basing the final judgment on a comparison of the effective stress adjacent to the probe with that inferred from laboratory testing. It is also shown that the pore-water pressure, which is generated at the wall of the cavity during the plastic phase of the expansion, is practically equivalent to the increase in total radial pressure. The iterative forward modelling (IFM) technique is used to obtain linearly elastic – perfectly plastic soil parameters by constraining the fit to match the initial horizontal pressure.Key words: self-boring pressuremeter, sensitive clay, stress paths, strain rate, progressive failure, pore pressures, vane tests.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations24
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207