MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169195984

AXIAL AND LATERAL PERFORMANCE OF HELICAL PILE GROUPS

2011· article· en· W3169195984 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zeyad Hany Elsherbiny

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileStructural engineeringGeologyGeometryMathematicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Helical piles represent an efficient deep foundation system that has many applications varying from use as anchors for transmission towers to supporting large compressive loads as well as lateral loads. Helical piles are made of steel shafts with one or multiple helices attached to it, and are installed by rotational force applied through a drive head.\nThe objective of this thesis is to evaluate the performance characteristics of helical pile groups subjected to axial compressive and lateral loads, independently. The effects of pile- soil-pile interaction (group effect) on both the ultimate capacity of the group in terms of group efficiency factors, and on the performance of the group in terms of settlement ratios and interaction factors, are investigated with the aid of three-dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis using the suite, ABAQUS/Standard.\nFive axial compression load tests and three lateral load tests were conducted in northern Alberta site, representing sand, and in northern Ontario site, representing clay, using non­ instrumented full-scale piles. The test results were used exclusively to calibrate and verify the numerical models that were then used to perform a parametric study. The results of the calibrated numerical models were in good agreement with the field test data using representative soil properties and realistic modeling assumptions.\nThe parametric study involved piles installed in two types of soil: dry sand; and saturated clay. The soil strength ranged from loose to very dense sand and soft to very stiff clay. The piles configurations included two-helix piles with inter-helix spacing of 1, 2, and 3 helix diameters. The piles are spaced at five different distances: 2, 3, 4, 5, and 10 helix diameters. The results of the parametric study showed that the group effect for helical pile is relatively less significant than the case of conventional piles. It was also found that for the range of typical helical pile spacing used in industry (around 3 times the helix diameter), the group effect is insignificant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207