Case studies of three-dimensional effects on the behaviour of test embankments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper uses both two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) finite element (FE) analyses to examine three cases involving the construction of full-scale test embankments to failure on soft clay deposits. By comparing the calculated fill thickness at failure from 2D and 3D analyses, it is shown that 3D effects are significant for all test fills, despite the dramatically different locations, fill thicknesses, and underlying clay deposits. In addition, the calculated undrained displacement and extent of failure from 3D analysis agree well with those measured in each case. The risk of neglecting 3D effects is highlighted by the analyses, where it is shown that failure to account for 3D effects while interpreting the response of a test embankment can lead to unsatisfactory performance of the actual long embankment. Finally, by comparing FE analysis results with well-known bearing capacity factors, it is shown that test embankments with a base length to width ratio less than 2 are more strongly influenced by 3D effects than spread footings on similar soil profiles. The analyses presented in this paper provide practical insight into some factors that should be taken into account for the design and construction of embankments and test fills on soft clay deposits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".