MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410949344 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2024-0454

A macroelement model for predicting load–displacement reponses of suction anchors under combined horizontal–vertical–torsional loading in clay

2025· article· en· W4410949344 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Min‐Hao Zhang, Zhen‐Yu Yin, Yong Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceShenzhen Fundamental Research ProgramNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringSuctionGeologyDisplacement (psychology)Vertical displacementEngineeringGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a plastic-hardening, nonassociated macroelement model for predicting the load–displacement responses and padeye trajectories during the monotonic pullout process of suction anchors under horizontal–vertical–torsional loading ( H–V–T) in clay. The closed-form formula of the three-dimensional H–V–T failure surface is established through comprehensive finite-element analyses, extending from the conventional two-dimensional horizontal–vertical failure envelope and considering the influence of anchor aspect ratio and reduction factor of interface shear strength. Subsequently, appropriate forms of loading surface and hardening rule are selected based on this failure surface. A nonassociated flow rule is adopted with a modified plastic potential that accurately captures the padeye kinematic trajectories. Only one test is required for determining and calibrating model parameters, along with recommended loading conditions provided. Finally, rigorous validation against numerical tests conducted in this study, as well as physical model tests and numerical simulations from other studies, demonstrates satisfactory agreement between the model predictions and experimental results. The proposed macroelement model offers researchers and engineers a straightforward and effective tool, particularly useful in scenarios involving suction anchors subjected to torsional load.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics→French-language works237,207→