The Influence of Styrene Butadiene Latex on Sandy Soil Reinforced by Soil Mixed Columns under Raft Foundation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geotechnical engineers seek to improve the engineering performance of soil-cement mixtures by adding non-traditional materials as a supplementary additive.Emulsion polymers are widely used to develop cementitious composites by forming physical bonds.The aim of this study is to estimate the feasibility of utilizing Styrene Butadiene Latex (SBL) to increase the soil-cement mixtures strength.This study involved two parts.In the first one, the Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) tests were carried out on sandy soil blended with 8% cement and 0, 5, 7.5, and 10% SBL after 7 and 28 days of curing.The results of the UCS tests verified that the mixtures of sandy soil with 8% cement and 7.5% SBL were increased by 3% and 5% compared to soil -8% cement after 7 and 28 curing days, respectively.In the second part of the study, Plaxis 3D software was used to evaluate the settlement of the raft foundation constructed above soil mixed columns (SMCs) using only 8% cement and 8% cement plus 7.5% SBL.The SMCs were designed under various compositions, lengths and floating or end bearing conditions depending on the location of rigid layer.The influence of adding 7.5% SBL to the composition of SMCs on the vertical stress was pragmatically increased by 5% and 4% when the SMCs were rested on a rigid layer at 5 and 10 m, respectively.The implications of the finding in design are also discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".