Applicability of Timoshenko, Euler–Bernoulli and rigid beam theories in analysis of laterally loaded monopiles and piles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In various analytical, semi-analytical and numerical studies on laterally loaded piles, the pile is conventionally modelled as an Euler–Bernoulli beam. Modelling large-diameter monopiles and piles using the Euler–Bernoulli beam theory may not be appropriate, because the Euler–Bernoulli beam theory is strictly valid for long, slender piles and does not account for shear deformations, which may have a significant effect on the lateral pile response of large-diameter piles. In order to investigate the effect of shear deformation in the modelling of monopiles and piles, a framework for static analysis of laterally loaded piles is developed, in which the monopile/pile is modelled using the Timoshenko beam theory and the soil as an elastic continuum. A rational soil displacement field is assumed and the differential equations of pile and soil displacements are obtained using calculus of variations. Solutions are obtained analytically and numerically following an iterative scheme. The analysis framework also incorporates the Euler–Bernoulli and rigid beam theories as progressive simplifications of the Timoshenko beam theory. Pile responses obtained using the three beam theories are compared with three-dimensional finite-element analysis to establish the relative accuracies of each beam theory in predicting lateral pile response. Systematic parametric studies are performed to establish which beam theory is most appropriate to model laterally loaded monopiles and piles, particularly the large-diameter piles, and to find out the range of applicability of the different beam theories in predicting lateral pile response. The Timoshenko beam theory can be used for all cases of laterally loaded piles to produce the most accurate results, particularly for piles with hollow cross-sections. The Euler–Bernoulli beam theory produces accurate results for most piles with solid cross-sections. The rigid beam theory can be used for a quick initial estimate of pile head displacement, particularly for piles with high values of relative pile–soil stiffness ratio.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".