: The determination of the mechanical properties governing the stability of an existing dam is complex, in particular because of the discontinuities present in the foundation and the interface between the dam and the foundation. These properties are the tensile strength, the cohesion and the angle of friction. EDF, IRSTEA, Sherbrooke University, Hydro-Québec, Clermont-Auvergne University and IFSTTAR have initiated research in order to produce data useful for understanding the failure mechanisms and to propose methodologies to assess mechanical properties in an engineering context. The results of the tensile and shear tests on concrete-rock interfaces are published in the present article. The main results can be summarized as follows. The tensile strengths obtained in tests are between 0.2 and 0.5 MPa depending on the rock type whereas a null tensile strength is usually assumed for initial calculations. The cohesion ranges between 1 and 2.5 MPa in large scale tests, as compared to 100 kPa recommended for initial calculations. These results outline the conservatism of default values and the hidden margins generally present in mechanical characteristic estimations. All the test results can be exchanged and shared with the engineers interested in the subject. The article also presents methodologies for determining the characteristics of rock discontinuities in shear and thus the tensile strength characteristics of the concrete-rock interface. Perspectives are proposed such as the characterization of the apparent cohesion of rock discontinuities and the estimation of the geometry of the dam-foundation contact by non-destructive methods.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CIGB 2018, 26è Congrès des Grands Barrages, Vienne, AUTRICHE, 01-/07/2018 - 07/07/2018
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".