MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401037476 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-13130

Numerical Parametric Study on Structural Response of Drilled Shaft Footings Subjected to Concentric Axial Force

2024· article· en· W4401037476 on OpenAlexaff
Yousun Yi, Hyun su Kim, Trevor D. Hrynyk, Juan Murcia‐Delso, Oguzhan Bayrak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersTexas Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsConcentricStructural engineeringParametric statisticsGeologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a numerical parametric study to examine the structural response of drilled shaft footings (pile caps) presenting different design characteristics, which have not been studied in depth in previous experimental studies. The numerical analyses were conducted with nonlinear finite element models representing typical designs and details of actual footings. The modeling scheme was validated using experimental data from large-scale drilled shaft footings. Key parameters of the numerical study included footing geometric properties, concrete strength, and reinforcement ratios. The results of the parametric studies were examined to identify key behavioral and design aspects to be considered when using 3D strut-and-tie models for the design of drilled shaft footings. The analysis results show that influences associated with footing and column aspect ratios were essentially negligible. However, it was estimated that an increase of the angle of inclination between the compression strut and the vertical axis led to significant reductions in footing stiffness and load capacity. The effect of shaft diameter was also examined in light of lateral concrete confining effects, and it was found that larger shaft diameters provide increased footing capacities. Analyses performed to estimate the influence of concrete compressive strength showed that splitting of the strut controlled the concrete-governed failure mechanism of footings. Finally, the models developed with different amounts of reinforcement revealed that increasing bottom mat reinforcement leads to increased ultimate loads; however, the rate of strength increase decreases with increasing reinforcement ratio. Providing a minimal amount of top mat and side face reinforcement was estimated to impact the structural responses of the footings positively; however, increasing the ratios of the top mat and side face reinforcing bars beyond this minimum did not significantly impact footing strength.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207