Post–Soil Interactions on Guardrails near the Crown of a Slope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most highway departments are very concerned with the adequacy of highway guardrails. A common problem is a narrow road shoulder of 1.5 m to 0.5 m, or even less, combined with steep side slopes and a high embankment beside the road. Although numerous studies have measured the strength of different types of guardrail posts in various soils, a theoretical model does not exist that could be used to predict soil resistance to post movement. Such a theoretical model was constructed for level ground as well as close to an embankment slope. A mechanical model of a narrow vertical object moving soil with a level surface was modified to account for a ground slope that lies within the area of influence of soil failure. The model predicts that at any distance from a slope, the resistance of a post can be increased by installing it to a greater depth. Also, when soil adjacent to a post is compacted heavily, it results in approximately a fourfold increase in horizontal resistance compared with a lightly compacted soil. A rough surface post, such as concrete, gives almost double the horizontal resistance of a smooth surface post of the same dimensions. Using a post of 400 mm width rather than 100 mm results in a horizontal soil resistance force of only approximately 20% to 30%, for a post far away from or very close to the crown of a slope of 1 vertical/2 horizontal.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".