Pore Pressure and Kσ Evaluation at High Overburden Pressure under Field Drainage Conditions. I: Centrifuge Experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is the first of two companion papers studying the effect of overburden pressure on the liquefaction behavior of saturated Ottawa sand. A series of four centrifuge tests were conducted simulating a 5-m layer of this sand having two different relative densities, and subjected to overburden effective pressures of ~100 and 600 kPa (1 and 6 atm). The objective was to study the pore pressure response of the soil to base acceleration under low and high pressure, including evaluation of the overburden pressure factor Kσ for idealized field drainage conditions. The sand layer had a bottom impervious and a top pervious boundary, approximating a common field situation. A novel experimental technique was developed using a dry lead shot layer to provide the necessary high level of pressure. The performances of the sand layer under low and high confining pressure were compared in terms of times histories and profiles of excess pore pressures, cyclic stress ratios (CSR), and cyclic shear strains γc, with some of the parameters determined using system identification. It was found that pore pressure dissipation started earlier at shallower depths, and that partial drainage was more significant in the 6-atm than in the 1-atm tests. Field overburden pressure correction factors at 6 atm, Kσ, obtained from the centrifuge tests for (ru)max=0.8 in 10 cycles of shaking and including the partial drainage effect, were found to be higher than 1.0 for both Dr=45% and 80% This is different from the usual laboratory undrained Kσ<1 based on cyclic triaxial and simple shear laboratory tests and reflected in the current state of practice. The discrepancy is related to the more significant effect of partial drainage and deviation from the undrained assumption at the higher confining pressure for the field drainage and other conditions of these centrifuge tests.
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".