## 3 Results
### Analysis of Structural Changes in Loss Soil Samples  
#### 3.2.1 Relationship Between Confining Pressure and Structural Parameter  
Generally, an increase in consolidation pressure leads to a reduction in the variability of loess structure and an enhancement in structural stability when the soil is compacted. However, the asynchronous nature of these effects--faster reduction in variability and slower increase in stability--results in an overall weakening of the soil's structural perfor  
Figure 2: Stress strain curves of remodled loess under different confining pressures. mance as pressure increases. Nevertheless, if the soil initially possesses strong structural strength and low consolidation pressure is insufficient to compromise this strength, the increase in consolidation pressure can have dual effects: it can enhance the soil's structural stability through densification while simultaneously increasing the variability of the soil structure due to particle movement and colloid damage [34; 35; 36; 37]. Shear stresses, however, predominantly reduce structural stability, facilitating the destruction of initial structural strength and the manifestation of variability. According to the triaxial test, the shear strength of undisturbed soil samples with different moisture content and saturated remolded soil was obtained, and then its value was substituted into Formula (1) to obtain the corresponding structural parameter values. The calculation process and results are shown in Table 4, which is plotted as the change trend of the structural parameter with confining pressure, as shown in Figure 3. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \(w\) **(\%)** & **6\%** & **11\%** & **16\%** & **21\%** & **26\%** & **31\%** & **36\%** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{100} & \(\tau_{\text{o}}\) (kPa) & 153.38 & 142.22 & 110.91 & 111.52 & 94.78 & 87.32 & 84.12 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(\tau_{\text{rs}}\) (kPa) & & & 43.58 & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(m_{\tau}\) & 3.52 & 3.26 & 2.87 & 2.56 & 2.17 & 2.00 & 1.93 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{200} & \(\tau_{\text{o}}\) (kPa) & 255.82 & 236.16 & 180.7 & 190.79 & 168.75 & 158.7 & 154.25 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(\tau_{\text{rs}}\)(kPa) & & & & 79.31 & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(m_{\tau}\) & 3.22 & 2.98 & 2.64 & 2.41 & 2.13 & 2.00 & 1.94 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{300} & \(\tau_{\text{o}}\) (kPa) & 354.89 & 324.27 & 245.68 & 268.12 & 239.04 & 229.55 & 223.08 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(\tau_{\text{rs}}\)(kPa) & & & & 116.67 & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(m_{\tau}\) & 3.04 & 2.78 & 2.48 & 2.30 & 2.05 & 1.97 & 1.91 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{400} & \(\tau_{\text{o}}\) (kPa) & 444.61 & 415.37 & 319.22 & 344.5 & 312.57 & 299.03 & 290.36 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(\tau_{\text{rs}}\)(kPa) & & & & 154.38 & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(m_{\tau}\) & 2.88 & 2.69 & 2.44 & 2.23 & 2.02 & 1.94 & 1.88 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Shear Strength Values and Structural Parameter Values of Soil Samples with Different Moisture Contents under Various Confining Pressures. Figure 3: Variation curves of the structural parameter with confining pressure for specimens with different moisture contents. It can be seen from Figure 3 that the structural parameter of the soil samples with different moisture contents gradually decreases with the increase of the perimeter pressure. The reduction in the structural parameter is relatively large at lower boundary pressures, while the reduction in structural parameter is smaller at higher boundary pressures. The reason for this phenomenon is that when the circumferential pressure is small, the squeezing effect of the circumferential pressure on the soil samples is weaker, and the structure of the soil body is looser, so it has stronger structural properties. After the boundary pressure increases, the initial structure of the soil sample is destroyed during consolidation, i.e., the primary structure is rapidly destroyed at low strains.