MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182421138 · doi:10.4231/d3gh9b93p

Load Distribution in Large Pile Groups for Static and Seismic Loading

2014· article· en· W2182421138 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTexas Advanced Computing Center · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileCentrifugeGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringDynamic load testingDynamic loadingSeismic loadingStructural loadShear (geology)Static analysisPile capGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large number of modern structures are founded on piles and often these foundations contain large pile groups. In contrast, most of the research on the action of pile groups in resisting lateral loading is based on analysis and centrifuge tests of small pile groups, mostly 3x3 pile groups. The pile-soil-pile interaction in these groups is modelled by modifying the p-y curves or by using a group factor for the entire group to simulate the same effect. The values for changing the p-y curves and the appropriate group factors are based entirely on static tests and there is no direct verification that these factors are appropriate to handle pile groups under seismic loading. In this paper we investigate the interaction effect between piles under static and seismic loading using the computer program VERSAT-P3D (Wu 2006), which has an equivalent linear constitutive model for the soil. The procedure adopted is to calibrate the model for the static experimental tests of 3×3 pile groups by Christensen (2006). Then we expanded the pile group sizes to 3×3, 5×5, 8×8, 10×10, 10×2 and 15×2 pile groups. The distributions of shear forces in the piles at the pile cap level were developed for these pile groups under both static and seismic loading and the distribution of static and dynamic shear forces at various lateral displacements were evaluated. This study is ongoing and a sample of the results will be discussed in this paper. The soil model was calibrated to replicate the experimental results obtained by Christensen (2006). The pile properties used were taken from Christensen’s single pile test directly. It is demonstrated that VERSAT-P3D can replicate closely the experimental results of Christensen. Of the preliminary results from this study, those which will be of primary interest to the engineering community will be those that show how the distribution of load within a pile group under static loading varies from the distribution under a dynamic loading scenario. This load distribution within a row also varies with the location of each row within the pile group, from the center of the group to the outside edge. Also, the distribution varies with the intensity of shaking but in a manner different to the variation with increasing static load. These preliminary results show that using static load distribution factors needs to be reconsidered. When the study is completed a clearer picture of the implications of relative load distributions should emerge.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.203 · 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