Influence of generalized initial state and principal stress rotation on the undrained response of sands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dependence of the undrained behaviour of sand on the initial stress state and the orientation of principal stresses with respect to the bedding planes is assessed under generalized loading paths using hollow cylinder torsional shear tests. The undrained tests were carried out using displacement-controlled loading to confidently capture the post-peak strain-softening response. Undrained behaviour of sands under identical initial states is shown to be dependent on the direction of principal stresses, during and prior to undrained shear, in relation to the direction of bedding planes. The minimum undrained strength of the strain-softening sand is found to be highly influenced by the initial stress state (confining stress, direction of principal stresses, and static shear), even though the friction angle mobilized at the instant of minimum strength is unique. A mere rotation of principal stresses at constant deviator stress alone can lead to a strain-softening response that may culminate in limited or unlimited flow deformation. The susceptibility of sand to liquefaction due to stress rotation increases as the direction of the major principal stress approaches the orientation of the bedding plane. The potential for flow deformation is strongly dependent on the direction of the major principal stress in relation to the bedding planes, and the steady state strength is not uniquely related to the void ratio alone.Key words: liquefaction, hollow cylinder torsion test, principal stress direction, static shear, steady state strength, minimum undrained 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".