Load transfer mechanism of a load distributive compression anchor installed in weathered rock layer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The demand for a load distributive compression anchor (LDCA) in construction sites has been increasing, owing to its high bearing capacity and removable steel strands. As an LDCA comprises multiple anchor bodies and unbonded steel strands, the load applied to the strands generates a distributive compressive stress in the grout, preventing high concentration of grout–ground shear stress. Unlike in the conventional anchors, in an LDCA, independent load transfer of each anchor body induces interference effect between adjacent anchor bodies. Therefore, for an efficient design of an LDCA, it is necessary to investigate the load transfer mechanism considering the effect of multiple anchor bodies. In this study, a series of anchor pull-out field tests was conducted for LDCAs consisting of a single anchor body, and double and triple anchor bodies spaced by 1, 2, and 3 m. According to the test results, the LDCA showed a stiffer load–displacement behavior with an increase in the number and spacing of the anchor bodies. The multiple anchor bodies of the LDCA generated an overlapping of the grout axial load and induced its rapid dissipation, increasing the grout–ground shear stress. This interference effect was more clearly observed with a decrease in the anchor body spacing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".