MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769023321 · doi:10.1680/jgeot.16.p.244

Applicability of Timoshenko, Euler–Bernoulli and rigid beam theories in analysis of laterally loaded monopiles and piles

2017· article· en· W2769023321 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGéotechnique · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimoshenko beam theoryPileBeam (structure)Parametric statisticsStructural engineeringEuler's formulaBernoulli's principleFinite element methodMechanicsGeotechnical engineeringMathematicsPhysicsGeologyEngineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · 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