Interpretation of Stress Paths From Pressuremeter Tests in Sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a method to obtain the constitutive relationships of sands from in-situ drained self-boring pressuremeter tests. Plane-strain conditions and Rowe’s stress-dilatancy theory are assumed to hold to determine effective stress paths. The proposed method appears to correctly render the response behavior of loose to dense sands. The two parameters that are needed to interpret the pressuremeter expansion curves are the initial effective horizontal pressure at rest, ho σ′ , and the effective friction angle of the sands at constant volume, cv φ′ . The proposed method allows to draw drained stress paths on a MohrCoulomb diagram, from which both the peak friction angle p φ′ and the peak dilatancy angle p ν′ may be determined. In addition, as Rowe’s dilatancy theory is used in the analyses, it is possible to obtain the variation of the volumetric strain as a function of the shear strain. Finally, for the numerical solution procedure followed in the paper, the original pressuremeter curves used were first discretized and then approximated with a polynomial of degree 4 to 5. This allowed to considerably reduce the scatter in the results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".