Experimental Study on the Minimum Required Specimen Width to Maximum Particle Size Ratio in Direct Shear Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conducting laboratory direct shear tests on granular materials is a common practice in geotechnical engineering. This is usually done by following the ASTM D3080/D3080M-11 (hereafter named ASTM), which stipulates a minimum required value of 10 for specimen width (W) to the maximum particle size (dmax) ratio. Recently, a literature review performed by the authors showed that the minimum required W/dmax ratio given in the ASTM is not large enough to eliminate the specimen size effect (SSE). The minimum required W/dmax ratio of ASTM needs to be revised. In this study, a critical analysis is first made on existing data in order to identify the minimum required W/dmax ratio. The analysis shows that more experimental data obtained on specimens having W/dmax ratios between 10 and 50 are particularly necessary. To complete this need, a series of direct shear tests were performed on specimens having different dmax by using three shear boxes of different dimensions. The results show once again that the minimum required W/dmax ratio of 10, defined in the ASTM, is not large enough to eliminate the SSE. Further analysis on these and existing experimental results indicates that the minimum required W/dmax ratio to remove the SSE of friction angles is about 60. These results along with the limitations of this study are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".