Special Construction and Geotechnical Considerations in Deep Foundation of Vaudreuil-Soulanges Hospital Center in Greater Montreal Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vaudreuil-Soulanges Hospital Center in Greater Montreal area is a substantially large construction project with challenging schedule and geological conditions. The foundation consisted of 519 piles with an average overburden of 15 m and 4.5 rock sockets that were constructed in a tight schedule of 9 months. Special Geotechnical considerations were required and adopted for design and construction of this large-scale foundation. In this Design and Build contract, the strong cooperation between the designer and the contractor resulted in a substantial optimization of the quantities through in-situ full-scale vertical static and lateral cyclic pile-load tests, seismic simulations in design of the piles, and orienting the design to fit the planned drilling method. To maintain a challenging schedule in a cost-effective manner, seven drilling rigs fitted with temporary casings were used, operating in two shifts up to seven days a week. For drilling of the piles, cluster drilling was used by contractor due to uncommon abrasiveness and high strength (> 200 MPa) of the encountered sandstone bedrock. To further assist the construction of the piles, a new concrete mix was developed specifically for this project for the purpose of tremie pours. The concrete mix design is based on optimizing its rheology, maintaining its workability up to 6 hours and its durability more than 75 years design life in a particularly aggressive environment in chloride, sulfate, and others aggressive ions. An effective quality control and assurance program made it possible to find optimal solutions during construction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".