Field investigation on a pilot energy piled retaining wall
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents the thermal and thermo-mechanical responses of a pilot energy wall located in Melbourne, Australia, which is believed to be one of the first instrumented energy soldier piled walls in the world. The full-scale field thermal and thermo-mechanical conditions of the wall were monitored during the period of a full-cycle thermal response test (TRT) conducted on a single soldier pile over 2 months. The monitored pile and ground temperature responses reveal the significance of the thermal condition in the excavated space on the thermal performance of such energy geostructures, which increases complexities in design and analysis. Furthermore, this study reports the profiles of axial strains and induced thermal stresses in the tested soldier pile, demonstrating how the applied thermal load from the TRT influenced the mechanical performance of the pile and wall and how the restrictive action of the support elements controlled the induced conditions. Here, we show that soldier pile responds differently from energy piles or borehole heat exchangers; however, residual axial strains were minimal and similar to those reported in energy piles foundations due to a thermo-elastic response to the imposed thermal loads and wall rigidity. Finally, the unique experimental dataset is made available for further studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".