MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803232681 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2017-0468

Influence of particle size and gradation on shear strength–dilation relation of granular materials

2018· article· en· W2803232681 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Samaneh Amirpour Harehdasht, Mahmoud N. Hussien, Mourad Karray, Varvara Roubtsova

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDilatantGradationShearing (physics)Granular materialMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringGrain sizeShear (geology)Particle sizeDirect shear testDiscrete element methodMechanicsParticle-size distributionMathematicsComposite materialGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Upon close scrutiny of data reported in the literature, taking into account particle-scale characteristics to optimize the precision of the well-known empirical Bolton’s equations and imposing particle-size limits on them is recommended. The present paper examines the potential influence of particle size and grading on the shear strength–dilation relation of granular materials from the results of 276 symmetrical direct shear tests. The applicability of physical symmetrical direct shear tests to interpret the plane strain frictional shearing resistance of granular materials has been widely discussed using the discrete element method (DEM) computer code SiGran. Sixteen different grain-size distribution curves of three different materials were tested at different normal pressures and initial relative densities. It is demonstrated that while the contribution of dilatancy to shear strength is not influenced by the variation in the coefficient of uniformity, C u , in the investigated range, it significantly decreases with increasing mean particle size, D 50 . The coefficients of Bolton’s equations have been, therefore, adjusted to account for D 50 . A comparison of the predictions by the proposed empirical formulas with plane strain friction angle, [Formula: see text], and dilation angle, ψ, data from the literature shows that accounting for the grain size yields more accurate results.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

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 head0.189
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations55
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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