Effects of sample disturbance and consolidation procedures on measured shear strength of soft marine Norwegian clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After many decades of research, the issue of sample disturbance is still important as regards to determining reliable and representative soil parameters for foundation design in soft clays. Parallel laboratory tests have been carried out on high-quality block samples and ordinary piston tube samples from 12 deposits of soft Norwegian marine clays. Undrained triaxial and direct simple shear (DSS) tests on samples reconsolidated to the in situ effective stresses show that sample disturbance has a significant effect on the measured stress–strain–strength behaviour: the more disturbed the sample, the lower the shear stress at small strains and the higher the shear stress at large strains. Breakdown of the clay structure, including cementation bonds, is the assumed cause of lower shear resistance at small strains, whereas at large strains the shear resistance is governed mainly by the water content, which for soft clay samples, reconsolidated to the in situ effective stresses, will be lower, and the strength thereby higher, the more disturbed the sample. The work described herein also includes the effects of the consolidation procedure; in addition to the reconsolidation technique, both stress history and normalized soil engineering properties (SHANSEP) and delayed consolidation tests have been carried out.Key words: soft clays, sample disturbance, consolidation procedures, stress–strain–strength behaviour, stress–strain–time behaviour.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".