The effect of anisotropic elasticity on the yielding characteristics of overconsolidated natural clay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative application of elastoplastic theory to the yielding behaviour of natural soils has always been uncertain. Part of the reason is that the theory was developed for reconstituted materials with isotropic structure, in contrast to natural soils that are usually anisotropic. The approach considered in this study assumes that pre-yielding behaviour is governed by the theory of linear anisotropic elasticity and that yield loci in the mean effective stress ( p') deviator stress (q) plane are aligned approximately along the coefficient of earth pressure (K0) line. The assumption of a rotated yield locus associated with anisotropic elastic behaviour within the state boundary surface indicates that the elastic wall within the state boundary surface is inclined. The form of the state boundary surface has been determined mathematically in terms of anisotropic elastic and Cam-Clay soil parameters. Stress path tests were conducted on samples of Belfast Upper Boulder Clay removed from a depth of 28 m below ground surface. Good agreement was found between predicted and measured yield loci. The study also examined the influence of subsequent isotropic compression on the yielding characteristics of the natural clay. The indications are that the anisotropy developed during deposition disappears when the sample is loaded to a stress level at least twice the stress generated during the original deposition process. The methods developed in the paper have also been applied to test results reported previously on Winnipeg clay, and good agreement was obtained.Key words: sampling, anisotropy, elasticity, suction, stiffness, yielding.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".