Effects of loading obliquity on field performance of rocking shallow foundations in cohesive soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a field study of obliquely loaded rocking shallow foundations resting on cohesive soil. Lateral snap-back and cyclic loading tests at an oblique angle of 45° with respect to the footing axes were carried out. During the snap-back tests, an initial drift ratio was applied to the deck and then the system was released to enable the free vibration. The cyclic loading consisted of five packets containing three to four cycles of similar displacement amplitude. The rocking system consisted of a 1·5 m by 1·0 m concrete footing, steel column and deck. The factors of safety against bearing failure were varied from 4 to 20. It was observed that the system primarily rocked in plane. The moment capacities about footing axes deviated from the calculated values at the orthogonal loading conditions. A method of estimating the rocking moment capacity of a footing subjected to oblique loading was developed and validated by the tests. Natural periods, damping ratio, re-centring ratio, settlement and stiffness degradation during the tests are discussed and compared with the results from previous studies with orthogonal loading. The soil–footing contact area was approximately triangular. A method of calculating the critical contact area was developed based on the bearing capacity theory with two-way eccentricity and then confirmed by observation.
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".