Experimental and numerical investigation of the unsaturated behavior of conventional and wicking non-woven geotextiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-woven geotextiles play a crucial role in transportation embankments, including roadways and railways, by providing separation, filtration, and drainage. These embankments typically remain unsaturated, with soil voids containing both air and water. Understanding their behavior in unsaturated conditions requires analyzing water retention curves. Conventional non-woven geotextiles effectively drain gravitational water but struggle in unsaturated conditions, leading to moisture accumulation and potential distress. To address this limitation, a novel wicking non-woven geotextile has been developed, featuring hydrophilic and hygroscopic properties achieved through chemical treatment. This study investigates the unsaturated behavior of this wicking non-woven geotextile compared to conventional non-wicking geotextiles using laboratory experiments, including capillary rise, hanging column, and pressure plate tests, to determine geotextile water retention curves (GWRC) across a suction range of 0–1000 kPa. Numerical studies further explore its working mechanism and drainage performance under varying conditions, such as rainfall and groundwater fluctuations. A validated numerical model, based on wetting front propagation tests, simulates the wicking geotextile's behavior in soil. Results confirm its higher drainage capacity under unsaturated conditions, mitigating moisture-induced distress. These findings highlight the potential of wicking geotextiles in mitigating moisture-induced distress in transportation embankments and enhancing geotechnical performance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".