Internal Erosion of a 0–5 mm Crushed Sand in a Rigid Wall-Permeameter: Experimental Methods and Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The article deals with internal erosion in 0–5 mm crushed sand, a material used in urban facilities. Several methods, designed for natural materials, predicted a risk of internal erosion for the crushed sand. The real risk was evaluated in clear-wall, watertight and airtight, rigid-wall permeameters with lateral piezometers. Each test started with a fully saturated specimen, verified by a mass-and-volume method. In their initial condition, the specimens were homogeneous, as directly confirmed by three methods. Each erosion test included successive seepage steps at a constant mean gradient. Migration of fine particles was observed through the clear wall. Dyed water colored three or four preferential seepage paths inside the specimen, not along the wall, confirming that the preparation method was correct. The predictive methods correctly forecast the size of mobile particles but overestimated the gradient that triggered the internal erosion process. The tests were the first ones to include nonreactive tracer tests, which gave the effective porosity value at different gradient steps. This value decreased with internal erosion, a novel result, which quantified the fact that more seepage concentrated in preferential seepage paths. Nonreactive tracer tests can thus be used to quantify the formation of preferential seepage paths.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".