Numerical Simulation of the Effect of High Confining Pressure on Drainage Behavior of Liquefiable Clean Sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents numerical simulations investigating pore pressure buildup of a sand layer with a free drainage boundary at the top under both low and high overburden pressures and subjected to earthquake base excitation. The numerical runs simulate two centrifuge experiments previously conducted and reported. In these tests, a 5-m layer of clean Ottawa sand with relative density Dr=45% was tested under overburden pressures of ∼100 and ∼600 kPa (1 and 6 atm). The simulations were performed using Dmod2000, a nonlinear effective stress numerical one-dimensional (1D) site response analysis code. The tests revealed that the response was partially drained rather than undrained, with much more partial drainage at ∼600 kPa (6 atm) compared to ∼100 kPa (1 atm). The simulations correctly modeled this behavior, with very good agreement between simulated and measured centrifuge excess pore pressures. A key aspect of this good accord in the simulations was the correct selection in the simulations of the 1D drained volumetric stiffness of the sand, M′=1/mv, because the coefficient of consolidation, cv, is proportional to M′. Both cv and M′ were 2.5–3 times greater at ∼600 kPa (6 atm) than at ∼100 kPa (1 atm) in both centrifuge tests and simulations. Any future simulation of pore pressure response of sand under field drainage conditions needs to consider this large increase in volumetric stiffness at high overburden pressure. Good agreement was found between values of M′ back-calculated from the centrifuge tests and from a consolidometer test on a different sand reported in the literature. The value of M′ seems to increase approximately with the root square of the overburden pressure, and future simulations for high overburden and realistic field drainage conditions should account for this increase. The proper high-pressure correction factor, Kσ, to be used in conjunction with liquefaction charts may be higher than 1 for some realistic field drainage conditions due to this substantial decrease of sand compressibility under high overburden pressure.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".