Effects of dead loads on the lateral response of battered pile groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of vertical load on the lateral resistance of single piles were initially reviewed to facilitate the interpretation of the test results of pile groups. Then, 18 different lateral load tests were carried out in the centrifuge on the 3 × 3 and the 4 × 4 fixed-head battered pile groups to investigate the effects of vertical load on the group lateral resistance. Vertical dead loads ranging from approximately 20 to 80% of the vertical ultimate group capacity Puv were applied. Based on these tests, the effects of vertical dead load on the lateral resistance of the battered pile groups are found to depend on pile arrangement, pile inclination, and soil density. The lateral resistances of the 3 × 3 pile groups do not appear to vary considerably with the vertical dead loads in the range of the vertical loads studied. For the 4 × 4 pile groups however, the lateral resistances at vertical loads of approximately 50 and 80% Puv may be 26-29% and even 40% higher than that at the 20% Puv dead load. It may be inferred that designs based on standard lateral load tests with small vertical dead loads would be on the safe side. Three mechanisms for vertical load effects are discussed in terms of axial tension and compression failures, influence of pile inclination, and initial subgrade reaction caused by vertical loading. Preliminary numerical analyses are also performed to simulate the responses of some of the battered pile groups.Key words: pile group, battered pile, lateral resistance, load test, pile-soil interaction, centrifuge test.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".