Extension of the Griffith's fracture criteria to saturated clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inglis [1] has solved the problem of distribution of stress in an elastic plate around an elliptical hole. His works clarify the role of cracks in the failure of an elastic material. However, his solution cannot be applied to saturated clay because he considers only total stresses, while, in saturated clay, the criterion of rupture should be expressed in terms of effective and not total stresses. The solution of Atkinson and Craster [2] using Biot's poroelasticity theory, shows that there is no high pore pressure in the vicinity of the crack tips for saturated clay. The major difference between this approach and the Biot's theory of is that, in saturated clay, strain is a function of the variation of the effective stress [3], while, in poroelastic media, strain is only a function of the variation of the total stress [4, Equation 2.2]. Also in their solution there is continuity between the pore fluid and the inner fluid in the crack. Their solution is valid for poroelastic media involving a movement of the pore fluid. In our solution there is no movement of the pore fluid (Undrained condition). In this paper we have solved the same problem as Inglis [1], but for the particular case of saturated clay obeying elastic law. By solving this problem we obtained the expressions for pore pressure, effective stress, total stress and displacements. The results show that not only the total stress but also the pore pressure and the effective stress are also high in the vicinity of the crack tips. A new failure criterion, based on Griffith's strain energy principle [5] and maximum tensile stress [6], valid for saturated clay is developed in this paper. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".