MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401479584 · doi:10.56952/arma-2024-0437

Development of a Methodology for Predicting the Strength of Intact Bentonitic Shale and Gypsiferous Siltstone Using Fragments and Micro-Indentation Modulus Testing

2024· article· en· W4401479584 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Calvin Tohm, Bret N. Lingwall, R. Mitra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiltstoneGeologyOil shaleModulusIndentationMaterials scienceComposite materialFaciesGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: In many geologic and geotechnical investigations, obtaining sufficient intact rock core samples for uniaxial compression or point load testing can be difficult in weak sedimentary rock that spans into the realm of an Intermediate Geo-Material (IGM). These IGM materials have sufficient strength for infrastructure construction, but are difficult to core, sample, and test with sufficient volume to meet conventional ASTM or other test standards. Samples that are obtained, have often been fractured in the rock coring process. Thus, it is needful to develop alternative laboratory test methods to characterize the strength of these IGM soil/rock formations for engineering design. In the case of IGM bentonitic shales and gypsiferous siltstone materials of the Cretaceous Pierre Shale and Jurassic Spearfish formations of Western South Dakota, micro-indentation equipment was herein proposed as an alternative to uniaxial compression or point load testing. Fractured specimens of these materials were immobilized in polymer resin and tested using a micro-indentation apparatus to obtain the micro-indentation modulus. Complimentary intact and remolded specimens were tested in uniaxial compression to obtain parallel data. Coupling of the data from testing of fractured material and intact material and regression analyses show that a strong correlation exists between micro-indentation modulus and intact or remolded IGM strength. The method proposed in this paper is portable and extractable to other formations and validates the work of others around the world who have proposed this alternative approach for characterizing the strength of rock masses that are difficult to sample and test using conventional methods. 1. INTRODUCTION Nearly 80% of the near surface geology west of the Missouri River and east of the Rocky Mountains in the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska and into Canada is composed of weathered residual soil, weathered rock, or weak sedimentary rock that spans from mechanically behaving as soil, Intermediate Geomaterial (IGM) and weak rock. IGM may be defined as cohesive or cohesionless geomaterial with unconfined strength ranging from 0.5 to 5-10 MPa or penetration blowcounts at 60% energy for a standard split-spoon sampler of 50-1501. The transition between soil and IGM may be noted by increased compressive strength at the 0.5 MPa threshold, while the transition between IGM and weak rock may be governed by an uncertain strength range of 5 to 10 MPa but also by a Rock Quality Designation (RQD) of 20 or less2. Highly fractured weak sedimentary rock with RQD < 20 may behave similar to IGM3 in foundation engineering.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDrilling and Well Engineering→French-language works237,207→