Cyclic thermomechanical response of fine-grained soil−concrete interface for energy piles applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the behaviour of soil−structure interfaces is critical for addressing the analysis and design of energy geostructures. In this study, the interface failure mechanism of energy piles (where a shear band is detached from the surrounding soil that behaves under oedometric conditions) is experimentally analysed in the laboratory for saturated conditions. The choice of material (clayey soil and concrete), temperature range, and stress level is based on conditions that are likely to be encountered in practice. Specifically, cyclic thermal tests under constant vertical effective stress in oedometric conditions as well as constant normal stiffness (CNS) interface direct shear tests (in which samples have been subjected to thermal cycles between 10 and 40 °C) are presented. From a practical perspective, the results show very low volumetric strain variations and negligible effects on shear strength. The volumetric aspects do not appear to have significant impact on the shear resistance of the interfaces against cyclic thermal loads. Fundamental insight on the effects of thermal cycles on the concrete−soil interface behaviour that are relevant to energy piles are presented. In addition, the proposed interpretation procedure provides a basis for the standardization of thermomechanical testing in geotechnical engineering.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".