Triaxial tests on model sand columns in clay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vibro-stone columns can improve the bearing capacity and reduce the settlement of foundations. Their performance depends on the strength of the column material, reinforcement method of column installation, type of in situ soil, area replacement ratio, and column length. This paper examines the behaviour of small laboratory specimens of soft clay (undrained shear strength ≈ 30 kPa) reinforced with sand columns when tested under known boundary stress conditions. Two series of tests were carried out on kaolin specimens (diameter 100 mm, height 200 mm) in a triaxial cell. In the first series, specimens were reinforced with a 32 mm diameter column of sand, 80, 120, 160, or 200 mm long. Columns were installed by (i) compacting moist sand into a prebored hole or (ii) freezing a column of moist sand before inserting it into a prebored hole. In the second series, columns were reinforced with geo-grids before installation. The specimens were subjected to (i) uniform loading in which the load was applied over the entire surface area of the specimen or (ii) foundation-type loading in which only a small area in the centre of the specimen was loaded. Under uniform loading, the specimens containing a full-depth column were significantly stronger than specimens without columns. Specimens with single, partially penetrating columns installed by wet compaction were weaker than specimens without columns. When frozen columns were installed, strengths increased progressively. Under foundation-type loading, bearing capacities increased with an increase in column length. Geo-grid reinforcement produced significant increases in load-carrying capacity.Key words: ground improvement, undrained shear strength, consolidation, stress path.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".