A pressure-sensitive rheological origin of high friction angles of granular matter observed in NASA–MGM project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An abnormally high peak friction angle of Ottawa sand was observed in (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) NASA–(Mechanics of Granular Materials) MGM tests in microgravity conditions on the space shuttle. Previous investigations have been unsuccessful in providing a constitutive insight into this behavior of granular materials under extremely low effective stress conditions. Here, a recently proposed unified constitutive model for transient rheological behavior of sand and other granular materials is adopted for the analytical assessment of high peak friction angles. For the first time, this long-eluded behavior of sand is attributed to a hidden rheological transition mechanism, that is not only rate-sensitive, but also pressure-sensitive. The NASA–MGM microgravity conditions show that shear-tests of sand can be performed under abnormally low confining stress conditions. The pressure-sensitive behavior of granular shearing that is previously ignored is studied based on the μ ( I ) rheology and its variations. Comparisons between the model and the NASA microgravity tests demonstrate a high degree of agreement. The research is highly valid for pressure-sensitive and rate-dependent problems that occur during earthquakes, landslides, and space exploration.
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 | 0.001 | 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".