Finite element analysis of mixed-in-place (MIP) columns supporting excavations in slopes considering tension-softening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of mixed-in-place (MIP) columns can be considered as an attractive alternative to sheet pile, diaphragm or bored pile walls for supporting deep excavations, even in difficult ground conditions. In this paper, results from a numerical study based on a case history are presented, where MIP columns are used to support an excavation in a slope. The special feature of this project is that tied-back anchors were not feasible as an additional support measure because structural elements were not allowed to be installed within the neighbouring ground. Thus, the MIP columns were placed in such a way that they formed an arch, including buttresses capable of transferring the load acting on the backside of the wall into the ground. In this study, an advanced constitutive model for the MIP columns is applied to capture the development of possible cracking. Variations in geometry have been performed to investigate the potential for optimization. Finally, some analyses have been conducted to show that a design of such structures compatible with Eurocode 7 requirements is perfectly feasible by means of the finite element method.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".