MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226236221 · doi:10.1144/qjegh2021-126

Predicting tunnel-boring machine penetration rate utilizing geomechanical properties

2022· article· en· W4226236221 on OpenAlexaff
Seyed Sajjad Karrari, Mojtaba Heidari, Jafar Khademi Hamidi, Mohammad Khaleghi Esfahani, Ebrahim Sharifi Teshnizi

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTunneling and Rock Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersBu-Ali Sina University
KeywordsRock mass classificationGeotechnical engineeringRock mass ratingCompressive strengthGeologyUltimate tensile strengthModulusPenetration rateRate of penetrationGeological Strength IndexMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite materialMechanical engineeringDrilling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting the penetration rate plays a key role in tunnel projects using a tunnel-boring machine (TBM). Developing accurate prediction models can improve project management, and save budget and time in tunnel projects. In this research, the Gelas water-tunnel project data were used to obtain new statistical models for predicting the TBM penetration rate per revolution (PRev) utilizing the toughness index ( T i ), modulus ratio ( E /UCS) and joint parameters ( J P ). The relationships between various geomechanical properties and rock classification systems, including uniaxial compressive strength, Brazilian tensile strength, Young's modulus, joint parameter, toughness index, rock quality designation, rock mass rating, geological strength index, rock mass quality and rock mass index, were analysed and considered on the TBM performance in sedimentary, igneous and metamorphic rocks. The statistical analysis clearly showed that T i revealed a significant correlation with the actual PRev ( R 2 = 0.75). In addition, the PRev was computed using T i , and J P showed good agreement with the coefficient of determination ( R 2 ): i.e. 0.79. The results indicated that the T i decreased by increasing the modulus ratio, so the PRev increased. This model can be used easily as it provides a straightforward predictive model using a multi-parameter model.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and HydrogeologySame topicTunneling and Rock MechanicsFrench-language works237,207