The effects of drainage on the behaviour of railway track foundation materials during cyclic loading
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of a series of hollow cylinder tests carried out to investigate the role of drainage conditions on the response of railway track foundation materials during cyclic loading. Three sand–clay mixes were tested. It was found that, below a certain cyclic shear stress threshold, and depending on the drainage conditions, changes in principal stress direction should not adversely affect the cyclic stability of a railway foundation. However, significant stiffness degradation and failure may occur if this cyclic shear stress threshold is exceeded. The cyclic shear stress threshold increased with moderate additions of clay per unit volume of sand, and reduced significantly when specimen drainage was prevented. For the materials tested, the cyclic shear stress threshold in free-to-drain conditions was generally similar to the cyclic shear stress in the soil immediately below a 0·3 m deep ballast bed, but comfortably greater than the cyclic stress at a depth of 1 m below the sleeper base. In undrained conditions, the cyclic shear stress threshold was generally similar to the cyclic shear stress at a depth of 1 m below the sleeper base. This has implications for the suitability of such materials for railway track foundations.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it