MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147221692 · doi:10.1139/l05-074

Monotonic and cyclic load behaviour of helical pile connectors in the vertical direction

2006· article· en· W2147221692 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Maged A. Youssef, M. Hesham El Naggar, Mahrous Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPileFoundation (evidence)Structural engineeringStiffnessSeismic loadingEngineeringCable glandFinite element methodSeismic analysisGeotechnical engineeringDisplacement (psychology)Mechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The helical pile is a foundation system that is used to support new residential and commercial buildings and to stabilize repairs of existing structures. It represents an attractive option to upgrade the seismic resistance of foundations. This necessitates a good understanding of the seismic performance of the specialized connectors linking the pile shaft to the concrete foundation. An experimental program is initiated at The University of Western Ontario to investigate the seismic performance of these connectors, to develop models that can be used in finite element analysis to describe their behaviour, and to propose modifications to enhance their seismic performance, if necessary. In this program, eight specimens were tested to assess the behaviour of two types of these connectors under different loading modes. It was concluded that connectors with an uplift bracket are required for seismic applications to control uplift displacement due to rocking of the foundation.Key words: helical pile, connector, experimental, model, monotonic load, cyclic load, foundation, stiffness, strength.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.167 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207