Behaviour of Disconnected and Connected Piled Raft Foundations Subjected to Compressive Load
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, both connected and disconnected piled raft foundations subjected to compressive load have been analyzed using PLAXIS 3D considering time effects.Pile rafts of size single pile, 3×1, 3×3 and 5×5 have been considered in the analysis.The field study reported by Mattsson et al. (2013) has been considered for the analysis and validation.In PLAXIS 3D, the soil model consists of 10-noded tetrahedral soil elements.The piles are modelled with the use of embedded pile option.The calibrated parameters from the analysis have been taken for the prediction of settlement of raft and pile heads with respect to time for both connected and disconnected pile rafts.The settlement of concrete slab of 3×3 disconnected piled raft foundation obtained by PLAXIS 3D is 22% less as compared to the measured field test values for a period of six months.The settlements of slab of connected piled raft foundations are about 13% to 68% lower as compared to disconnected piled raft foundations irrespective of pile group configurations for a period of one year.The settlements of pile heads of connected piled raft foundations are about 20% to 65% lower as compared to disconnected piled raft foundations irrespective of pile group configurations for a span of one year.The settlement of slab and pile heads of 5×5 connected piled raft foundation has least settlement than other piled raft foundations for a period of one year.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".