Effect of soft soil layer on local dynamic response of floating pile under harmonic lateral loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Full-scale experiments of long floating piles under lateral harmonic excitation at the pile head were conducted to examine local resonant effects caused by the soft soil layer’s dynamic characteristic. Three 0.35 m diameter concrete piles with different lengths — 6, 10, and 15 m — in 19 m thick soft Bangkok clay were studied. Small-amplitude sweep excitations were applied in the frequency range that triggers resonance of the top soft soil layer, but will not reach the first fundamental frequency of the pile–soil system. The experiments show that the top soft soil layer produced local peaks of pile response at frequencies associated with predominant frequencies of the soil layer that agree well with the previous study of the dynamic characteristic of a soil layer in the Bangkok basin area by microtremor measurement. A comparison of experimental results with numerical solutions, i.e., the reduced dimension finite element model (RDFEM) and Winkler’s beam on spring and dashpot foundation (WBSDF), to evaluate their ability to simulate local resonance effects was carried out. Dynamic moduli of soil at different depths, to be used in numerical simulations, were measured by crosshole seismic test. Satisfactory matches between experimental results and numerical simulations by RDFEM were observed whereas WBSDF predictions are not close because the soft soil layer cannot be incorporated in WBSDF.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".