Analytical and experimental evaluation of two-layered unsaturated sand bearing capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pavement design methods based on principles of unsaturated soil mechanics take into account high soil shear strength due to matric suction resulting in more economical design especially in long roads. In this study, the bearing capacity of two-layer unsaturated sand was investigated using both analytical and experimental methods. At first, using the limit equilibrium method an analytical formula was proposed to determine the bearing capacity of two-layer unsaturated sand in which linear suction profile was considered in soil layers. It should be considered that the constant matric suction distribution assumed by the previous researchers does not show the real profile of matric suction within the soil, sometimes resulting in miscalculated unsaturated bearing capacity. Also, the bearing capacity of two-layer unsaturated poorly graded sand was investigated experimentally in different suctions by a special unsaturated chamber apparatus (UCA) designed for this purpose. The results show more than double increase of unsaturated soil bearing capacity with Sr = 25% compared to saturated soil. The formation of failure wedges in all experiments was investigated by image processing. An acceptable agreement was obtained between the theoretical and experimental bearing capacity results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".