MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413150490 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2025-0225

Assessing Hydraulic Fracturing in Earthen-Rockfill Dam Core based on Extended Finite Element (XFEM) Framework

2025· article· en· W4413150490 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. K. Chakraborty, Arindam Dey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic fracturingGeotechnical engineeringExtended finite element methodGeologyFinite element methodCore (optical fiber)EngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydraulic fracturing in clay core of earth-rock fill dams appear when fluid pressure becomes higher than the total stress at a point, developing tensile effective stress conditions within the soil. In this paper, hydraulic fracture in an earth-rockfill dam is modelled using eXtended Finite Element Method (XFEM). The finite element simulation of Hyttejuvet dam is carried out to exhibit the pore pressure developments at various locations of the dam, which are compared with measured in-situ measurement and monitoring data. A prominent arching at the mid-depth of the upstream core face could be noticed at the location of crack appearance in the dam. The fracture occurs in a nearly vertical direction, orthogonal to the maximum effective tensile stress direction within the core. The influence of various characteristic properties of core material on initiation of hydraulic fracture is investigated. It is concluded that increasing the permeability of the core delays the fracture initiation while inducing a smaller crack in the core. Adopting a core material with higher modulus of elasticity can reduce arching phenomenon in the dam to ensure a less severe crack formation. Additionally, increase in the maximum reservoir level is found to induce larger crack in the dam core.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicDam Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207