Axial testing and numerical modeling of square shaft helical piles under compressive and tensile loading
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Helical piles are increasingly used to support and rehabilitate structures subjected to both tensile and compressive axial loads. This paper presents a detailed investigation into the axial performance of helical piles. The study encompasses 19 full-scale load tests in different soils and numerical modeling using finite element analysis. The ultimate load criteria and load transfer mechanisms for helical piles were examined. In addition, the relationship between the installation effort (torque) and pile capacity was explored to determine its suitability for predicting pile capacity. The piles tested were made of three circular pitched bearing plates welded at a spacing of three helical diameters to a solid-square, slender steel shaft. It is proposed to determine the ultimate pile capacity as the load corresponding to pile head movement equal to 8% of the largest helix diameter plus the pile elastic deflection. A torque correlation factor, K T = 33 m –1 for compression and K T = 24 m –1 for uplift, was established to relate the ultimate pile capacity to the installation torque. It was found that load transfer to the soil is predominantly through a cylindrical shear failure surface that follows the tapered profile of the interhelices soils and the bearing capacity of the lead helix in the direction of loading.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it