MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076262214 · doi:10.1139/t02-048

Shear modulus and damping of soft Bangkok clays

2002· article· en· W2076262214 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Supot Teachavorasinskun, Pipat Thongchim, Panitan Lukkunaprasit

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersThailand Research Fund
KeywordsShear modulusDamping ratioVoid ratioMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringModulusTriaxial shear testDynamic modulusShear (geology)Shear stressComposite materialBulk modulusDynamic mechanical analysisGeologyPhysicsVibration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shear modulus and damping ratio of undisturbed Bangkok clay samples were measured using a cyclic triaxial apparatus. Although abundant literature on this topic exists, selection of the most suitable empirical correlation for a seismic analysis cannot be done unless site specific data are obtained. The apparatus used in this research can measure the stress–strain relationships from strain levels of about 0.01%. The equivalent shear modulus measured at these strains was about 80% of the value obtained from the shear wave velocity measurements. The degradation curves of the equivalent shear modulus fell into the ranges reported in the literature, for clay having similar plasticity. The damping ratios varied from about 4–5% at small strains (0.01%) to about 25–30% at large strains (10%). The effects of load frequency and cyclic stress history on the shear modulus and damping ratio were also investigated. An increase in load frequency from 0.1 to 1.0 Hz had no influence on the shear modulus characteristic, but it did result in a slight decrease in the damping ratio. The effects of the small amplitude cyclic stress history on the subsequently measured shear modulus and damping ratio were almost negligible when the changes in void ratio were taken into account.Key words: soft clay, shear modulus, damping ratio, cyclic triaxial test, cyclic stress history.

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 score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations54
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207