Seismic deformation analysis of Tuttle Creek Dam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To facilitate the design of seismic remediation for Tuttle Creek Dam in east central Kansas, a seismic finite difference analysis of the dam was performed using the software FLAC and the UBCSAND and UBCTOT soil constitutive models. The FLAC software has a key advantage because it can use calibrated site-specific constitutive models. Earlier deformation analyses using a hyperbolic constitutive model for the foundation fine-grained materials did not properly represent the modulus and strength reduction and predicted extremely large permanent deformations. Cyclic triaxial laboratory tests using high-quality samples and in situ vane shear tests were used to calibrate the FLAC constitutive model herein. The resulting FLAC analysis of the unremediated dam predicted an upstream slope toe deformation of about 0.6 m, a crest settlement of about 0.6 m, and a downstream slope toe deformation of about 1.5 m using the design ground motion. Based on the estimated permanent deformations and other factors, it was decided that the anticipated upstream slope and crest deformations were tolerable and only the downstream slope had to be remediated to protect the downstream seepage control system.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".