A coupled VOF-DEM investigation into contact erosion under the effects of cyclic loading and seepage path
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transportation infrastructure, being exposed to natural environments for a prolonged period, is susceptible to contact erosion between different particle size soil layers due to complex water-force interactions such as cyclical loading and water infiltration. The significant loss of particles leads to uneven deformation and decreased stability of the soil mass, and in severe cases, it can even result in the overall collapse of structures. To reveal the mechanism of contact erosion, a coupled solid–liquid–gas contact erosion model based on the VOF-DEM method was established. The study investigates the particle migration process, macroscopic deformation response, and evolution of contact forces under different particle size ratios (PSR) and seepage path influences. The following conclusions were drawn: (1) Significant particle migration between coarse and fine particles occurs only after being subjected to the effects of seepage. The particle erosion rate reaches its maximum after the soil mass becomes saturated. Cyclic loading intensifies the severity of particle erosion under seepage conditions. (2) Particle erosion mainly occurs at the contact surface, and the squeezing action of coarse particles and stress relaxation during unloading contribute to particle migration and loss. (3) Particle migration induces significant axial deformation in the soil mass and increases energy dissipation during loading and unloading processes. (4) Reducing the PSR effectively suppresses particle loss in the contact erosion process. (5) Seepage perpendicular to the contact surface results in more severe particle loss and soil deformation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".