MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214996195 · doi:10.1520/gtj20210008

New Method for Internal Pore-Water Pressure Measurements

2021· article· en· W3214996195 on OpenAlexafffund
Yawu Liang, Nicholas Beier, David C. Sego

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringPiezometerPore water pressureShearing (physics)Triaxial shear testStress pathMaterials scienceEffective stressSoil testSoil waterLiquefactionInternal erosionGeologyComposite materialShear (geology)LeveeSoil scienceGroundwater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The triaxial test is the most common procedure performed in a geotechnical laboratory to investigate the mechanical behavior of soils. However, often only global pore-water pressure (pwp) is measured at the bottom of specimen during conventional triaxial tests, which cannot detect the variation in internal pwp values to represent the true effective stress path adjacent to the failure surface. Here, a modified triaxial testing apparatus capable of measuring internal pwp within the soil using a filterless rigid piezometer (FRP) is outlined. To validate the effectiveness and capability of this novel test method, a series of consolidated undrained tests were conducted on saturated loose and dense sand. The FRP measurements provide a reliable pwp response, especially at pressures above 400 kPa where the FRPs have a faster response than the base transducer. Moreover, the internal pwp measured by FRPs during the initiation of shearing in loose sand can capture the rapid development of excess pwp before liquefaction or failure. The results also show that there are increases of 25 % in average peak strength of the loose specimen and 8 % in average residual strength of the dense specimen with internal pwp measurement, respectively, compared with only global pwp measurement because of the FRP installation. However, FRP installation appears to have no apparent effect on average peak strength of the dense specimen and average residual strength of the loose specimen. The new triaxial testing method can be applied to study the response and distribution of pwp at specific zones within the soil.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical Testing JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207