A Novel Experimental Technique to Investigate Soil–Pipeline Interaction under Axial Loading in Saturated and Unsaturated Sands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Comprehensive experimental and numerical models are required for reliable investigation of unsaturated soil-structure interaction problems. In this study, a reliable testing technique and a numerical modeling methodology were developed to study the performance of a buried pipeline system in sand subjected to relative soil movement in a direction parallel to its axis under both saturated and unsaturated conditions. A novel testing system was developed using a specially designed test box of 1.5-m length, 1.2-m width, and 1.1-m height. The system utilizes the hanging column technique to achieve different soil matric suction profiles. The experimental results on the tested sand suggest that the measured axial force exerted on a pipe in unsaturated sand is significantly higher compared with the saturated condition. The measured behavior of the prototype pipe was numerically modeled using the commercial software SIGMA/W extending the principles of saturated and unsaturated soil mechanics. The predicted axial force, following the suggested finite element analysis (FEA) methodology, is in good agreement with the measured axial force on the tested prototype pipe. Both the experimental technique and numerical method proposed in this article are useful for the practicing engineers in the rational design of pipelines in sandy soils, taking account of the influence of saturated and unsaturated conditions in sandy soils.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".