Behaviour of reinforced embankments on soft rate-sensitive soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The behaviour of reinforced embankments constructed over rate-sensitive soft foundation soils is studied. Factors such as the viscoplastic properties and hydraulic conductivity of the soil, reinforcement stiffness and construction rate are examined. The time-dependent responses of excess pore pressures, reinforcement strains and foundation deformations are investigated. The short-term embankment stability is of particular interest. The construction of reinforced embankments to the height determined based on a limit equilibrium design is simulated to examine the assumptions made in the conventional undrained analysis. It is shown that creep and stress-relaxation of viscoplastic soils after the end of embankment construction may be significant for rate-sensitive soils. The embankment stability is shown to be critical during creep and stress-relaxation of foundation soils after construction. The undrained shear strength measured in laboratory triaxial tests using currently recommended strain rates without an appropriate correction may lead to unsafe design for rate-sensitive soils. For such soils, the increase in reinforcement strain shortly after the completion of construction can be higher than that developed during the construction. Excess pore pressures increase after construction owing to the viscoplastic behaviour of the foundation soil. Reinforcement is shown to have the potential to both increase stability and decrease long-term creep deformations.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".