Assessment of time effects on capacities of large-scale piles driven in dense sands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the axial resistances of open-ended, highly instrumented, 763 mm diameter steel pipe piles driven in sands for the EURIPIDES (EURopean Initiative on PIles in DEnse Sands) project at a well-characterized research site at Eemshaven, in the northern Netherlands. It offers new analyses of previously unreported dynamic tests and considers their relationship with four heavily instrumented static compression tests. Rigorous signal matching employing two distinct pile–soil interaction models is reported, supported by careful sensitivity analyses, to interpret the recorded driving signals. The back-calculated shaft resistance profiles show good agreement between the models as well as calculations performed with a global wave equation analysis approach. The study highlights the need to account for the internal soil column resistance. The combined interpretation of the dynamic and static test data indicates a 50% gain in shaft resistance over the 10 days after driving and threefold shaft capacity growth over a total period of 533 days after driving. The outcomes have important implications for driven pile design and field quality monitoring; the case history contributes an important benchmark in the study of long-term set-up trends.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".