Field evaluation of geocell parameters for enhancing performance of unpaved roads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluates the impact of key geocell parameters on the performance of reinforced pavement sections over problematic soils in Dholera, Gujarat, India. A total of seven test sections were built, comprising one unreinforced and six reinforced (RE) sections with varying geocell heights ( H = 75, 100, and 150 mm) and weld spacings (SW = 330 and 356 mm). Field testing included falling weight deflectometer and full-scale instrumented plate load tests. Results indicate that reinforced sections with lower weld spacings and greater geocell heights (SW330-H150) demonstrated significantly higher bearing capacity compared to those with larger weld spacings and smaller geocell heights. The subgrade stress dispersion angle for reinforced sections ranged from 40.73° to 51.40°, while the maximum modulus improvement factor observed was 2.31. Reinforced sections achieved service life ratio values between 2.07 and 2.38, signifying extended service life over expansive soils. Strain analysis indicated that geocells with greater weld spacing and reduced height experienced higher strain levels. Notably, the RE sections SW330-H100 and SW356-H150 exhibited similar performance, while SW330-H75 showed comparable results to SW356-H100. These findings emphasize the importance of optimizing geocell height and weld spacing for enhanced pavement performance, providing key insights for pavement design in challenging soil conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".