Vertical and Lateral Bearing Capacity of FRP Composite Sheet Piles in Soft Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fiber‐reinforced polymer (FRP) composite sheet piles are usually favored for slope and river‐retaining structures due to their construction and environmental efficiency. Their applications, however, have been hindered by the lack of understanding of the bearing capacity. This paper studies the vertical and lateral bearing capacity of FRP composite sheet piles through three full‐scale tests conducted in Haiyan, a soft soil site in the Yangtze River Delta of China. In the three tests, we measured the vertical bearing capacity of the FRP composite sheet piles, the bearing capacity of the composite foundation, and the lateral capacity of the FRP composite sheet piles, respectively. The test results show that the Q ‐ S (load on the top of the pile versus settlement) curve of the FRP composite sheet piles exhibits a steep fall while that of the composite foundation is relatively flat. Moreover, the ultimate bearing capacity of the FRP composite sheet piles is measured to reach 23.8 kN while that of the composite foundation increases by 47.1 %, reaching 35.0 kN. It shows that the FRP composite sheet piles under the composite foundation have a favorable bearing performance. Finally, the final horizontal displacement of the FRP composite sheet pile in the reinforced area with anchoring the sheet pile is smaller than the final horizontal displacement in the nonreinforced area, indicating that the horizontal bearing capacity can be significantly improved by anchoring the sheet pile.
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".