Load Test of a Large Bored Pile for the Golden Ears Bridge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using Osterberg cells (O-cells), a load test was conducted on a large bored test pile constructed in 2006 for the Golden Ears Bridge project, east of Vancouver, British Columbia. Unique aspects of the test included depth and diameter of shaft, subsurface conditions, excavation technique, weight and length of rebar cage sections, cleanout of excavation, and positioning of the two O-cells. Using a special spherical grab, a 2.5-m-diameter shaft was excavated to 74.5 m depth using polymer slurry drilling mud. Presence of the O-cells assemblies hampered final cleanout of the excavation, and shaft integrity below the lower O-cell was affected by the presence of chunks of stiff clay, probably scraped from shaft sidewall during installation of the reinforcing cage. Despite this, testing of the shaft mobilized a combined toe and side shear resistance of over 62 MN and demonstrated that, for a top loading of 50 MN, the test pile would displace only 30 mm. From this, it was also concluded that noticeable creep of the shaft would not begin until top loading exceeded 30.5 MN. The test results allowed reducing the length of the main bridge piles and improved confidence in the foundation design.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".