Performance of suction caissons in sand and clay
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of suction caissons (suction piles) in marine environments has been increasing in the last decade. A suction caisson is a steel pipe with an open bottom and a closed top that is inserted into the ground by pumping water out of it. Pumping creates a differential pressure across the caisson's top that pushes it into place, thus eliminating the need for pile driving. There are a number of uncertainties in the design of suction caissons. First, the state of stress and soil conditions adjacent to a suction caisson differs from those around typical driven piles or drilled shafts. Second, the axial load capacity of suction caissons depends on the rate of loading, hydraulic conductivity, drainage length, as well as the shearing strength properties of the foundation material. Finally, during pullout, volume change characteristics of the surrounding soils may change the theoretical suction pressures. A review of the existing knowledge relating to the design and construction of suction caissons is presented in this paper along with the results of a laboratory study on model caissons in sand and clay. Test results indicate that the use of suction pressure for installation of caissons is a viable alternative to conventional methods. Suction was also shown to resist some axial tensile loads.Key words: suction, pile, bucket, foundation, anchor, capacity.
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.
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 it