Rheological properties of loose sands subjected to upward flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the rheological properties of loose sands subjected to upward flow by using a vane-type rheometer that controlled upward flow in the loose sand specimens. Various hydraulic gradients (i.e., i = 0–2.0) were applied to loose sands. The rheological properties of the loose sands, such as yield stress and viscosity, were determined based on the Bingham and Herschel–Bulkley models. The experimental results showed that the flow behavior of loose sand samples exhibited a shear thickening when the Herschel–Bulkley model was applied (i.e., nondimensional flow index n > 1) and exhibited a Bingham-like within a limited shear rate range (i.e., 1∼30 1/s). The latter is clearly shown for a relatively high shear rate. As the hydraulic gradient was increased, the flow characteristics were close to the Bingham fluid. Yield stress showed a tendency to decrease linearly as hydraulic gradient was increased. However, the viscosity of the loose sands maintained a constant value irrespective of hydraulic gradient. The test results indicated that the pore fluid pressure resulting from upward flow in a soil sample affects yield stress, which contributes to the initiation of debris flow mobilization. As a result, it was possible to estimate the rheological properties of soil at the condition of liquefaction (critical hydraulic gradient), or initial occurrence of debris flow.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".