Evaluation of peak side resistance for rock socketed shafts in weak sedimentary rock from an extensive database of published field load tests: a limit state approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents analyses of the measured peak side resistance of rock sockets constructed in weak claystone, shale, limestone, siltstone, and sandstone. The peak side resistance is obtained from in situ axial load tests on drilled shafts, anchors, and plugs. The parameters that affect the development of peak side resistance are determined using in situ load test data. It is found that peak side resistance increases with the unconfined compressive strength and deformation modulus of the weak rock, and decreases with the increase in length of the shear surface along the rock socket sidewalls. The increase in socket diameter also slightly decreases the peak side resistance. Additionally, it is found that the initial normal stresses do not significantly affect the measured peak side resistance in the in situ load tests. The in situ load test data are used to develop an empirical design equation for determination of the peak side resistance. The proposed model for peak side resistance and the reliability analysis are used to determine the corresponding resistance factors for use in the load and resistance factor design framework for assessment of the strength limit state.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".