Improved analytical solution of lateral soil restraint for pipes buried in dry sand considering arching effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abrupt transverse ground movements induced by landslide, strike-slip offset, and excavation can exert excessive soil restraints on buried pipes and threaten the pipe safety. The determination of lateral soil restraint is, therefore, a key factor for the evaluation of buried pipes in such areas. However, effective analysis solutions to assess the area of failure zone of surrounding soils and to estimate the soil resistance on pipes are still limited. In this work, an improved implicit limit equilibrium model is proposed to calculate the ultimate lateral soil restraint of buried pipes in dry sand, in which the effect of active soil wedge is considered, and the heights of equal settlement plane in both passive and active wedges can be estimated. Comparisons are made between collected physical modeling results and calculations from different methods. Results show that the proposed method yields a better approximation to the measured data. Parametric studies are subsequently conducted, which illustrate that the ultimate soil lateral restraint is influenced by the pipe diameter, internal friction angle, and constrained modulus of soil. The influence of effective soil unit weight is minimal. The proposed method is beneficial for safety evaluation of buried pipes subject to lateral dragging.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".