Analysis of energy piles under cyclic axial loads and impact of loading amplitudes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a study on model tests of single energy piles subjected to cyclic axial loads in sand and the development and validation of a 3D thermo-mechanical finite element model. The model accurately simulated the behavior of the pile–soil interface under cyclic shear loads. A subsequent parametric analysis examined the effects of the number of loading cycles and the loading amplitude on the vertical dynamic response characteristics of energy piles. The results showed that under heating conditions, the maximum variation in compressive thermal stress in the energy pile gradually decreased, with its location shifting upward along the pile shaft. A critical cyclic amplitude ratio was identified: below this threshold, the rate of increase in pile tip resistance continuously increased while the average pile side resistance weakened progressively. The presence of a static load accelerated the weakening of the average pile side resistance to some extent. As the number of loading cycles increased, the settlement rate of the energy pile gradually degraded. The cumulative settlement rate at the pile top increased with the cyclic amplitude ratio, peaking before slightly declining. In comparison, the static load ratio had a relatively minor influence on cumulative settlement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".