Experimental Study of Shear Zones Formed at Sand/Steel Interfaces in Axial and Torsional Axisymmetric Tests
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The interface shear behavior of granular materials is central to many engineering applications, including the performance of structures like deep foundations, landfills, and retaining walls. Consequently, it is paramount to understand the behavior of construction material-soil interfaces involved in these applications. Furthermore, it has been shown that the study of interface behavior, in the laboratory and in-situ, can provide robust information about the soil's properties and engineering performance. This paper presented laboratory evaluations of micro and meso-scale shear deformation of medium-sized sands aimed at developing an improved fundamental understanding of granular-continuum stress-strain behavior. A comparison of interface testing results from two different shear directions—axial and torsional—demonstrated that the evolution and progression of shear zone formation was affected differently by changes in the interface surface roughness and particle angularity. In particular, it was observed that torsional shear is a more dilative process that induces a larger degree of soil shearing and is greatly affected by particle angularity. Studies of shear-induced volume changes also revealed that the influence zone for torsional shearing is larger than that for axial shearing, with soil dilation occurring inside the shear zone in contact with the material counterface and soil contraction in a surrounding outer zone. Fundamental micromechanical processes that aim to explain the differences between the behavior of axial and torsional tests are proposed.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it