A sensitivity study and robustness evaluation of the CWFS and DISL approaches for brittle failure continuum modelling around underground excavations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical modelling of tunnels in brittle rock is a challenging endeavour for rock mechanics engineers. Multiple methods have been developed to aid in the design of underground excavations that are prone to brittle failure. For rock mechanics practitioners, the most useful tools are those that adequately and objectively represent the ground reaction, and can be interpreted without excessive qualitative judgement. With these goals in mind, continuum numerical models stand out amongst other methods. Two approaches that make use of continuum numerical modelling are the Cohesion Weakening Friction Strengthening (CWFS) and the Damage Initiation Spalling Limit (DISL) . To test their robustness, a sensitivity analysis of the strength parameters was conducted. The approaches were then applied to multiple fictitious stress scenarios to test their capability of reproducing empirical observations of depth of failure. The present investigation shows that the CWFS approach is a robust approach for modelling brittle failure around tunnels that can be easily applied and interpreted by rock mechanics practitioners. The sensitivity analysis of the CWFS parameters provided a full understanding of the practical impact of input parameter selection, some of which were not previously given in the literature. The DISL approach has been shown to also perform suitably, but requires the user to apply a fundamental understanding of numerical modelling for its effective interpretation.
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 | 0.001 | 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".