Response of Bell and Spigot Joints in Culverts under Vehicle Load
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While a significant number of long-term sewer pipe and culvert failures result from joint leakage and erosion of backfill, there have been very few studies examining the behaviour of pipe joints. There is no established method for the design of bell and spigot or other joint types. Reported here, therefore, are test results on 600-mm diameter reinforced concrete, 900-mm diameter polyvinyl chloride, and 1500-mm diameter high density polyethylene pipes with gasketed bell and spigot joints. Full-scale live load tests on jointed pipe systems were conducted in the test facility at Queen's University, involving two different burial depths and three different surface load locations relative to the joints being evaluated. The experimental results are presented and assessed to determine the key demands generated at the joints and how they are influenced by the loading location, burial depth and pipe material. The different characteristics of soil-structure interaction for joints in rigid and flexible pipes are highlighted. Finally, joint performance in the laboratory is discussed in the context of the development of structural design methods for joints.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".