Strain-Dependent Creep Behavior of Athabasca Oil Sand in Triaxial Compression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil sand is a dense granular material with interlocking fabric. As a strain-softening material, oil sand exhibits a more complex creep behavior than that of strain-hardening geomaterials. The creep behavior of oil sand could be excessive and detrimental to surface and subsurface facilities in the long term. This paper describes a study on creep behavior of oil sands. A series of triaxial compression creep tests were performed on oil sand to investigate its creep behavior at different stress and strain levels. The creep behavior of oil sand is dependent not only on both time and stress but also on initial inelastic strain, and it is influenced by the growth of shear bands. A strain-dependent creep model was proposed to describe the prepeak creep behavior of the oil sand. With this model, the dependence of creep rate of oil sands on time, stress, and strain is taken into consideration properly. It was argued that the change in the microstructure of oil sand could be uniquely represented by the inelastic strain of oil sand. Therefore, the potential for plastic flow could be used in modeling oil sand creep. Finally, the general creep rate–stress–inelastic strain relations of strain-hardening and strain-softening soils were developed according to the critical state theory of soil and the inelastic strain-dependent creep rate of soils.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".