Suitable Shearing Rate for Triaxial Testing of Intermediate Soils under Vapor Controlled Medium to High Suction Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Triaxial testing of unsaturated geomaterials under suction-controlled conditions can be accomplished via either axis-translation technique, typically for matric suction values up to 1500 kPa; or the vapor-equilibrium technique, which allows for control and measurement of total suction at significantly higher values. In either case, empirical assessment of a suitable shearing rate depends essentially upon the nature of volume change and stress–strain response of the test soil during shearing. The main objective of the present work was to empirically assess the appropriate strain rate for drained triaxial testing of intermediate geomaterials in the higher total suction range. To accomplish this goal, a series of suction-controlled conventional triaxial compression (CTC) tests were conducted on statically compacted specimens of silty sand, at five different shearing rates, under a constant, vapor-induced total suction of 300 MPa (300,000 kPa). Total suction was controlled, prior to and during the shearing stage, via a fully automated relative humidity (RH) chamber assembled to a newly implemented, double-walled triaxial apparatus. The critical state based criteria for assessing the appropriate shearing rate at higher total suction values are compared and discussed over a wider range of induced suction states. In addition, observations pertaining to particle breakage and soil dilatancy phenomenon, associated to triaxial shearing at higher total suctions, are also discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".