Drag load on end-bearing piles in collapsible soil due to inundation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collapsible soils may experience sudden and excessive settlement when inundated. The use of pile foundations that penetrate the collapsible soil layer to reach a firm stratum is widely used in practice. However, when the ground is inundated, large and sudden settlement of the surrounding soil may take place, causing negative skin friction on the pile’s shaft, which may lead to catastrophic failure. In the literature, research dealing with negative skin friction for piles in collapsible soil is lagging due to the complexity of modeling collapsible soil analytically. Alternatively, results of sophisticated experimental investigation may produce valuable information to predict the negative skin friction and accordingly the drag load on these piles. This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation on a single end-bearing pile in collapsible soil. The investigation is tailored to measure the soil collapse before and during inundation and the associated drag load on the pile. The theory proposed by Hanna and Sharif in 2006 for predicting negative skin friction on piles due to consolidation of the surrounding soft clay was extended to predict the negative skin friction for these piles in collapsible soils. A proposed design procedure is presented.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".