MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802514357 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2017-0613

Numerical modeling of progressive failure of rigid piles under embankment load

2018· article· en· W2802514357 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gang Zheng, Xinyu Yang, Haizuo Zhou, Jinchun Chai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WarwickNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringFailure mode and effects analysisLeveeStiffnessUltimate tensile strengthStructural engineeringSlip (aerodynamics)PileBending momentBrittlenessParametric statisticsPile capGeologyEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rigid piles (e.g., concrete piles) have been widely used to improve soft clay for the rapid construction of embankments. In this study, a damage plasticity model that considers the brittle failure behavior of concrete and the frictional properties along cracks is proposed to study the progressive failure of rigid piles under an embankment load. The mechanical characteristics of piles in different locations have been analyzed. The results show that the essential failure mode for rigid piles is tensile failure, which is primarily governed by the distribution of the bending moment and the axial force within the piles. Pile rupture releases stress and causes a significant increase in the tensile stress within neighboring piles, possibly leading to the progressive failure of adjacent piles. Failure in the upper section of piles ultimately leads to the propagation of a slip surface and the global failure of the embankment. The parametric analysis indicates that increases in the pile stiffness and the embankment load result in a higher tensile stress within the piles and a change in the failure mechanism from shear failure to bending failure. In addition, a failure envelope is proposed to determine the failure mode of the piles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207