ArticleScientific reports2023
Estimation of interface frictional anisotropy between sand and snakeskin-inspired surfaces.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interface frictional anisotropy of dilative sand.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The transmission of loads across the soil-structure mobilizes direction-dependent shear resistance, which can be selectively used to design geo-structures. A previous study confirmed the frictional anisotropy induced by the interface between the soil and snakeskin-inspired surfaces. However, it is necessary to estimate the interface friction angle quantitatively. In this study, a conventional direct shear apparatus is modified, and 45 cases are performed in two-way shearing directions between bio-inspired surfaces and Jumunjin standard sand under three vertical stresses (50, 100, and 200 kPa). The results show that: (1) shearing against the scales (cranial shearing) mobilizes larger shear resistance and produces a dilative response than shearing along the scales (caudal shearing) and (2) higher scale height or shorter scale length exhibits dilative tendency and produces higher interface friction angle. Further analysis is conducted to capture the frictional anisotropy as a function of the scale geometry ratio, which reveals that the interface anisotropy response is more pronounced during cranial shearing in all the cases, and the difference in the interface friction angle for the caudal → cranial test is higher than that for the cranial → caudal test at the given scale ratio.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.