Revisiting the Fundamental Concepts of Soil Mechanics Using the General Effective Stress Concept for Saturated Geomaterials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a work to define four fundamental concepts, namely, buoyant force, submerged unit weight, seepage force, and critical hydraulic gradients, for saturated geomaterials including soils, rocks, and concrete under normal and high pressures using the general effective stress (GES) concept along with Terzaghi’s effective stress. In particular, four typical GES expressions are used for this purpose, and their impacts on the definition of the four concepts are compared based on available experimental evidence in the literature. The results suggest that (1) Terzaghi’s effective stress can be physically validated in the context of Archimedes’ principle for soils under normal conditions; (2) the generalized buoyant force on the unit volume of saturated geomaterials is the product of the unit weight of pore fluid and the GES coefficient tensor; and (3) the generalized seepage force theoretically acts in the direction of pore fluid flow only when the GES coefficient tensor is proportional to the permeability coefficient tensor. These four fundamental concepts have a profound significance for geotechnical applications with GES and thus merit further validation with adequate laboratory and in situ observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".