Impact of specimen preparation on erosion and post-erosion response of gap-graded soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internal erosion is a major threat to the safety and operation of water management structures. Recent failures of embankment dams reported in Australia, Canada, and the US are fresh reminders of the importance of this ongoing issue. Suffusion, the focus of this paper, is one of the main modes of internal erosion occurring in internally unstable soils. It initiates internally, continues slowly with no visible signs, and leads to complete failure if not detected early. Despite recent advances in understanding the influence of suffusion on the mechanical behaviour of internally unstable soils through laboratory investigations, the impact of sample preparation techniques on the soil response during erosion and afterwards is yet to be fully undrstood. When it comes to laboratory investigation of remoulded soils, it has been understood that soil specimens prepared by different techniques show different characteristics and soil fabrics. This research studied the influence of sample preparation methods on the erosion of non-plastic fine particles in internally unstable soils and their mechanical consequences. Soil samples with two gradations, on the borderline of stable and unstable and one fully unstable, were prepared using moist-tamping and wet pluviation techniques and were subjected to a two-hour downward seepage. The erosion progress and pre- and post-erosion drained mechanical behaviour of samples were investigated. Tests result showed a difference in the erodibility of fine particles for the sample on the borderline of internal stability prepared by different techniques, but similar mechanical behaviours for both gradations.
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".