Displacement-based finite element approach on analysing flexible combined pile–raft foundation in layered soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study proposes a new finite element methodology to analyse the behaviour of flexible combined pile–raft foundation (CPRF) situated in layered soil, in a displacement-based framework. The soil medium is idealised as an advanced elastic Pasternak medium and the piles and raft are modelled as bar and plate element, respectively. The two components of CPRF are analysed simultaneously and displacement compatibility is satisfied at the pile–raft junctions. A number of soil–structure interaction factors, which govern the behaviour of CPRF, are suitably subsumed in the analysis scheme. The proposed method is validated with available analytical and experimental studies. Further parametric studies, investigating the effects of soil layering and raft flexibility on the behaviour of CPRF, are explored. It is observed that the load sharing proportion between the components and the raft deformation pattern depend upon the thickness and position of the soft soil layer in a multilayered soil system. The thickness of the flexible raft plays a pivotal role in determining the behaviour of CPRF, founded in a multilayered soil profile. Thus, this research manifests notable advancement in understanding the behaviour of flexible CPRF in layered soil.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".