Uplift performance of FRP tapered piles in dense sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of taper angle on the uplift performance of FRP tapered piles in dense sand at various embedment ratios is investigated using a large-scale testing facility (pressure chamber). The current study evaluates the uplift performance of tapered piles relative to the uplift performance of straight-sided wall piles. Thirteen pile installations were performed in a pressure chamber using conventional head driving and a novel toe driving technique. Twentysix uplift load tests were performed at different radial and vertical confining pressures in order to simulate pile segments at different depths. The results of uplift loading tests are presented and discussed. The results showed that the uplift capacity of tapered piles is slightly higher than that of cylindrical piles with similar average diameter and length. The taper effect on the pile uplift performance is evaluated using the uplift taper coefficient. A hyberbolic relationship is established between the uplift load and displacement that can be used to determine the soil stiffness for use in nonlinear analysis. A simplified design approach for uplift capacity of tapered piles is discussed and evaluated.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".