MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2581172018

Seismic performance of geosynthetic-soil retaining wall structures

2011· dissertation· en· W2581172018 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Saman Zarnani

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de la Défense NationaleQueen's UniversityOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringRetaining wallGeologyGeosyntheticsEngineeringStructural engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vertical inclusions of expanded polystyrene (EPS) placed behind rigid retaining walls were investigated as geofoam seismic buffers to reduce earthquake-induced loads.A numerical model was developed using the program FLAC and the model validated against 1-g shaking table test results of EPS geofoam seismic buffer models.Two constitutive models for the component materials were examined: elastic-perfectly plastic with Mohr-Coulomb (M-C) failure criterion and non-linear hysteresis damping model with equivalent linear method (ELM) approach.It was judged that the M-C model was sufficiently accurate for practical purposes.The mechanical property of interest to attenuate dynamic loads using a seismic buffer was the buffer stiffness defined as K = E/t (E = buffer elastic modulus, t = buffer thickness).For the range of parameters investigated in this study, K 50 MN/m 3 was observed to be the practical range for the optimal design of these systems.Parametric numerical analyses were performed to generate design charts that can be used for the preliminary design of these systems.A new high capacity shaking table facility was constructed at RMC that can be used to study the seismic performance of earth structures.Reduced-scale models of geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) walls were built on this shaking table and then subjected to simulated earthquake loading conditions.In some shaking table tests, combined use of EPS geofoam and horizontal geosynthetic reinforcement layers was investigated.Numerical models were developed using program FLAC together with ELM and M-C constitutive models.Physical and numerical results were compared against predicted values using analysis methods found in the journal literature and in current North American design guidelines.The comparison shows that current Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) based analysis methods could not consistently satisfactorily predict measured reinforcement connection load distributions at all elevations under both static and dynamic iii loading conditions.The results from GRS model wall tests with combined EPS geofoam and geosynthetic reinforcement layers show that the inclusion of a EPS geofoam layer behind the GRS wall face can reduce earth loads acting on the wall facing to values well below those recorded for conventional GRS wall model configurations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.152
Teacher spread0.148 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207