MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4253068167 · doi:10.22215/etd/2019-13781

Load Transfer and Creep Behaviour of Pile Foundations in Frozen Ground

2019· dissertation· en· W4253068167 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulghader Abdulrahman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileGeotechnical engineeringCreepSoil waterEngineeringStructural engineeringGeologyMaterials scienceSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the load transfer mechanism and creep behavior of concrete piles, openended steel pipe piles, helical piles, and grouted shaft helical piles installed in frozen ice-rich and ice-poor soils in field.Load transfer of these piles under unfrozen condition was also assessed and compared to those obtained in frozen conditions.The evolution of unfrozen water content and the associated thermally induced normal stress and adfreez strength of the pile-soil interfaces following to soil freeze-back after pile driving was also studied using laboratory experiments.The effects of strain rate on load carrying capacity of model steel piles in ice-poor and ice-rich soils were also investigated.Laboratory results showed that the roughness factor "m" may not be considered constant for a given pile material but rather changed as a function of ground temperature.The temperaturedependency of the roughness factor was more pronounced for piles installed in ice-rich frozen soils.In addition, the roughness factor was significantly different for a given pile installed in different soil types.A frictional factor "n" analogous to the roughness factor "m" was introduced to correlate the frictional resistance of frozen soil to the frictional resistance of pile-soil interface.The freezing induced normal stress due to soil freeze-back around the piles was significant in icerich soils and minimal in ice-poor soils.The load carrying capacity of pile foundations in frozen ground was influenced significantly by the loading rate, showing lower values under slower loading conditions.Modified forms of previously proposed theoretical models for predicting load carrying capacity and creep behavior of piles in frozen ground were introduced.The predicted capacity using the modified forms agreed well with the field observations of pile performance reported in iii this study.The creep behavior of the test piles in frozen soils was dependent on the applied stress and frozen ground temperature.The pile creep rates increased when the frozen ground became warmer even under constant creep loading condition.The pile creep rates measured in the current study for conventional smooth-shafted piles compared well with the predicted creep rates from previously published pile creep models.An innovative design approach along with an improved graphical solution are provided in this study for predicting load carrying capacity and creep rate of helical piles in frozen ground at different exposure temperatures.iv

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→