Numerical Simulation of the Mechanical Behavior of Single Piles in Expansive Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A numerical method, PEI (Pile behavior in Expansive soil upon Infiltration) developed at the University of Ottawa can be used as a tool for the prediction and interpretation of the mechanical behavior of piles in expansive soils taking account of the influence of matric suction changes associated with water infiltration. This program is employed in back analyses of the in-situ single pile test results for a case study at the Colorado State University (CSU) field test site, which has expansive soil deposits. Four single piles were drilled into the expansive shale of the Pierre Formation west of Fort Collins, Colorado. The piles were 350 mm in diameter and were installed to a depth of 7.6 m. During installation, slope indicator-type VS embedment strain gauges were embedded on the piers at a depth of 1.8 m, 3.1 m, 4.3 m and 5.5 m below the ground surface. Water content variations of the surrounding soil along the pile depth were measured periodically from 1995 to 2004, in addition to other measurements, which include pile axial force distribution and pile head displacement. Extensive analysis regarding this case study with respect to the mechanical behavior of pile associated with changes in water content is available in the literature. In this paper, this case study is illustrated in an innovative way to understand the influence of matric suction on the mechanical behavior of the pile using the program PEI. In addition, in-situ measurements of both pile head displacements and pile axial force distribution are compared with the results of numerical simulations using the PEI. Analyses of the results show that measured in-situ and numerical results are in good agreement. The results of this study are of significant interest for the practicing engineers who routinely design pile foundations in expansive 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".