New Approach to Concurrent <i>VS</i> and <i>VP</i> Measurements Using Bender Elements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Bender elements (BEs) have become a routine geotechnical laboratory tool for seismic wave velocity measurements. Since the 1980s, this testing technique has gained popularity, currently being available in many geotechnical laboratories worldwide in a variety of apparatuses. The advantage of simultaneously measuring small- and large-strain soil stiffnesses in each device and the easiness and low-cost implementation of BE are the main reasons for their common application. Although there is already a standardized procedure for BE testing (ASTM D8295-19, Standard Test Method for Determination of Shear Wave Velocity and Initial Shear Modulus in Soil Specimens Using Bender Elements), the use of high-frequency pulses for the simultaneous measurement of compressional (VP) and shear (VS) wave velocities is not considered. In contrast, the use of high-excitation frequencies is usually discouraged, as they tend to induce spurious participation of high-vibration modes in the BE response. However, this work shows that the use of higher vibration modes can be advantageous to evaluate P-wave velocities from standard BE testing. Thus, this paper presents a new approach for the concurrent measurements of VP and VS using a typical installation of BE. The new approach is first demonstrated by experimental measurements and subsequently validated using high-frequency laser vibrometer measurements of the actual BE deformation (nanometer scale) under different excitation frequencies. The laser vibrometer measurements show the displacements of the transmitter BE as a function of the input frequency in not only the horizontal but also in the vertical directions, demonstrating the generation of P-waves when higher vibration modes are excited. The measured VP values are shown to be in good agreement with the predicted values using Biot’s equations. Thus, the proposed methodology addresses the current knowledge gap in the use of BE for concurrent P-wave and S-wave velocity measurements. The generated wavelengths are large enough to travel through the soil skeleton instead of the pore water only.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".