Swell–compression behaviour of compacted clays under chemical gradients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examines the effect of inflow of sodium chloride solutions on the swell–compression behaviour of compacted expansive clays under a range of external loads. Inflow of sodium chloride solutions reduced the swell magnitudes and pressures and even caused the compacted clay specimens to experience compressive strains in oedometer tests. The axial strain difference of specimens inundated with sodium chloride solutions and distilled water at a constant effective stress predicted the osmotic consolidation strains of a saturated clay specimen from an increase in osmotic suction in the pore fluid. Specimens exposed to larger osmotic suction gradients (Δπ) are predicted to experience larger osmotic consolidation strains. The predicted osmotic consolidation strains exceeded the experimental osmotic consolidation strains. The free-swell and load method and the swell under load procedure predicted different swell pressures owing to differences in strain contributions at the microstructure and macrostructure levels. The increase in osmotic suction in pore water apparently acts as an equivalent net stress (ρπ) that favours a reduction in swell potential of the compacted clay specimens due to a reduction in reversible swelling strains from an increase in net stress and irreversible macrostructural component that decreases because the distance of the stress point to the load–collapse (LC) curve decreases.Key words: compacted clays, chemical gradients, osmotic consolidation, suction, swell.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".