Noncoaxial Response of Sands Influenced by Grain Shape and Anisotropy: Insights from Hollow Cylinder Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive understanding of the noncoaxial behavior of sands, particularly under complex loading conditions, is critical for the safe and efficient design of geotechnical structures. Noncoaxiality refers to the deviation between the orientations of the principal stress and the principal plastic strain rate vectors during plastic deformation. This study investigates the influence of particle morphology, specifically shape and sphericity, on the noncoaxial response of granular soils. A series of hollow torsional cylinder tests were conducted on sands with distinct particle characteristics, including Hamedan, Chamkhale, Firoozkooh, Leighton Buzzard, and Ottawa sands. The specimens were subjected to monotonic loading paths under varying principal stress rotation angles of 15°, 30°, and 60° to evaluate the effect of stress directionality on their deformation behavior. The results reveal that both principal stress orientation and particle sphericity significantly affect the degree of noncoaxiality. Furthermore, a comparative analysis was performed to quantify the relative impact of these factors, providing valuable insights into the micromechanical origins of noncoaxial deformation in sands. These findings contribute to enhancing predictive models for soil behavior under multidirectional shear loading 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".