Modeling and measurements of triaxial tests for a sandy loam soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The knowledge and understanding of soil mechanical properties is essential for designing agricultural machines. However, little information is available regarding shear properties of agricultural soil. In this study, triaxial compression tests were performed to measure shear properties of a sandy loam soil at three moisture levels: low (10.5±0.5%), medium (19±1.0%), and high (28±1.0%), and three confining pressures of 50, 100, and 150 kPa. A discrete element model was developed to simulate the triaxial compression tests. The test results showed a linear increase in soil shear strength at a decreased soil moisture level and an increased confining pressure. The effect of moisture level on the modulus of elasticity changed with the confining pressure. The highest modulus of elasticity was observed for the low moisture level with 150 kPa confining pressure. The model results showed that the particle friction coefficient was the most influential model micro-parameter to the simulated soil shear strength. This model micro-parameter was calibrated with the triaxial test data. The calibrated particle friction coefficients varied from 0.2 to 1.0, depending on the soil moisture content and confining pressure. As compared to the test data, the simulated soil shear strengths had relative errors ranging from 0 to 6%.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".