Field Experiment of Rocking Shallow Foundation on Cohesive Soil Subjected to Lateral Cyclic Loads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rocking shallow foundations may act as a good mechanism for base isolation that limits the seismic force to the superstructure during strong seismic events; however, a lack of comprehensive field investigation might have limited the use of rocking foundation. This paper presented a field study of a rocking shallow foundation resting on a natural soil deposits in Alberta, Canada. The foundation system consisted of a 1.5 m by 1.0 m concrete footing, column, and deck to simulate a prototype bridge system. A geotechnical investigation was carried out to determine soil conditions before and after the experiments. The footing was subjected to slow cyclic loading which consists of 4 to 5 packets of which each contain 3 to 4 cycles of similar displacement amplitude. The drift ratio was increased to a maximum of 5%. The estimated factors of safety against bearing failure ranges from 4 to 22. Nonlinear behaviour of the foundations and underlying soil was evident; changes in the physical and mechanical properties of underlying soils were characterized. Energy dissipation, residual settlement, and stiffness degradation observed in the tests were discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".