MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040476739 · doi:10.1139/t06-126

The horizontal-moment capacity of embedded foundations in undrained soil

2007· article· en· W2040476739 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gijae Yun, M. F. Bransby

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsEmbedmentGeotechnical engineeringBearing capacityFoundation (evidence)Moment (physics)Horizontal and verticalShallow foundationGeologyPlasticityEnvelope (radar)Eccentricity (behavior)PileStructural engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bearing capacity of embedded foundations subject to combined horizontal and moment loading in undrained soils is of interest particularly to the offshore geotechnical engineer. These loadings can be experienced by monopod foundations and offshore manifolds and often take the form of a horizontal load applied at a lever arm height above the foundation base. Previous design methods using the failure envelope approach have suggested that peak moment capacity of a foundation is mobilized with positive horizontal loads, but that peak horizontal load is mobilized with no additional moment loading. This paper reports numerical work specifically investigating the effects of the embedment ratio on the horizontal-moment foundation capacity under no vertical load in both uniform strength and "normally consolidated" undrained soil. It is shown that the embedment ratio significantly affects the eccentricity of the M–H failure envelope so that the shape varies when normalized by the pure moment (M 0 ) and pure horizontal load (H 0 ) capacity. The reasons for the eccentricity of the failure envelopes are understood by investigating soil deformation mechanisms calculated during FE analysis and by accompanying upper bound plasticity analysis. This mechanistic understanding is used to suggest load reference point translations that ease curve-fitting of the complex failure envelopes for use in design.Key words: bearing capacity, foundations, numerical modelling and analysis, plasticity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations136
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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