1 Spread footing: Pole_7 Number: 1
|
|
|
- Horatio Randall
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 1 Spread footing: Pole_7 Number: Basic data Assumptions Geotechnic calculations according to : EN :2008 Concrete calculations according to : EN /BFS 2011:10 EKS8 Shape selection : without limits Geometry: A = 12,800 (m) a = 3,100 (m) B = 7,100 (m) b = 3,100 (m) h1 = 1,500 (m) e x = 0,000 (m) h2 = 2,600 (m) e y = 0,000 (m) h4 = 0,000 (m) Materials Loads: d' = 2600,0 (mm) cnom1 = 60,0 (mm) cnom2 = 60,0 (mm) Cover deviations: Cdev = 10,0(mm), Cdur = 0,0(mm) Concrete : C28/35; Characteristic strength = 28,00 MPa Unit weight = 2501,36 (kg/m3) Rectangular stress distribution [3.1.7(3)] Longitudinal reinforcement : type B500BT Characteristic strength = 500,00 MPa Ductility class: A Horizontal branch of the stress-strain diagram Transversal reinforcement : type B500BT Characteristic strength = 500,00 MPa Additional reinforcement: : type B500BT Characteristic strength = 500,00 MPa Foundation loads: Case Nature Group N Fx Fy Mx My Date : 14/01/15 Page : 1
2 (kn) (kn) (kn) (kn*m) (kn*m) 1.Vind_ice_0 design(structural) ,35-0,57-189, ,35-10,64 2.Vind_ice_0 design(structural) ,64-0,47-120, ,81-8,24 3.High_wind_0 design(structural) ,09-0,42-173, ,14-6,96 4.High_wind_0 design(structural) ,93-0,39-123, ,92-6,31 5.Vind_ice_45 design(structural) ,24-32,25-153, ,40-530,29 6.Vind_ice_45 design(structural) ,59-32,11-95, ,66-526,23 7.High_wind_45 design(structural) ,95-54,30-130, ,19-888,44 8.High_wind_45 design(structural) ,86-54,23-91, ,28-886,28 9.Vind_ice90 design(structural) ,14-47,58-101, ,41-797,52 10.High_wind90 design(structural) ,87-80,21-59, , ,77 11.No_wind_2a design(structural) ,95-0,82-101, ,27-16,87 12.unsymice_l design(structural) ,75-459,81-75, , ,33 13.unsymice_h design(structural) ,98 274,12-77, , ,69 14.Vind_ice90 design(structural) ,14-47,58-101, ,41-797,52 15.Vind_ice90 design(structural) ,87-80,21-59, , ,77 16.lina1 design(structural) ,75 22,96-98, ,69 818,51 17.lina2 design(structural) ,75-23,74-98, ,19-837,62 18.lina3 design(structural) ,75 25,55-98, ,91 758,23 19.lina4 design(structural) ,75-26,32-98, ,88-777,37 20.lina5 design(structural) ,75 25,55-98, ,04 757,04 21.lina6 design(structural) ,75-26,32-98, ,02-776,19 22.lina7 design(structural) ,75 25,55-98, ,40 613,93 23.lina8 design(structural) ,75-26,32-98, ,50-633,18 24.lina9 design(structural) ,75 25,55-98, ,52 612,83 25.lina10 design(structural) ,75-26,32-98, ,64-632,08 26.lina11 design(structural) ,75 25,55-98, ,88 469,83 27.lina12 design(structural) ,75-26,32-98, ,11-489,18 28.lina13 design(structural) ,75 25,55-98, ,98 468,92 29.lina13 design(structural) ,75-26,32-98, ,22-488,28 30.evrdstrs design(structural) ,57-0,62-51, ,29-11,95 31.no_wind design(structural) ,88-0,63-54, ,81-12,42 32.add_arm13 design(structural) ,86 24,90-4,89 197,02 874,60 Backfill loads: Case Nature Q1 (kn/m2) Combination list 1/ ULS : 1.Vind_ice_0 N=309,35 Mx=4465,35 My=-10,64 Fx=-0,57 Fy=-189,59 2/ ULS : 2.Vind_ice_0 N=254,64 Mx=2560,81 My=-8,24 Fx=-0,47 Fy=-120,98 3/ ULS : 3.High_wind_0 N=247,09 Mx=3697,14 My=-6,96 Fx=-0,42 Fy=-173,10 4/ ULS : 4.High_wind_0 N=220,93 Mx=2406,92 My=-6,31 Fx=-0,39 Fy=-123,76 5/ ULS : 5.Vind_ice_45 N=309,24 Mx=3675,40 My=-530,29 Fx=-32,25 Fy=-153,65 6/ ULS : 6.Vind_ice_45 N=254,59 Mx=2030,66 My=-526,23 Fx=-32,11 Fy=-95,86 7/ ULS : 7.High_wind_45 N=246,95 Mx=2833,19 My=-888,44 Fx=-54,30 Fy=-130,54 8/ ULS : 8.High_wind_45 N=220,86 Mx=1797,28 My=-886,28 Fx=-54,23 Fy=-91,80 9/ ULS : 9.Vind_ice90 N=309,14 Mx=2627,41 My=-797,52 Fx=-47,58 Fy=-101,00 10/ ULS : 10.High_wind90 N=246,87 Mx=1532,45 My=-1338,77 Fx=-80,21 Fy=-59,64 11/ ULS : 11.No_wind_2a N=321,95 Mx=2655,27 My=-16,87 Fx=-0,82 Fy=-101,00 12/ ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My=-11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 13/ ULS : 13.unsymice_h N=290,98 Mx=2029,27 My=6865,69 Fx=274,12 Fy=-77,22 14/ ULS : 14.Vind_ice90 N=309,14 Mx=2627,41 My=-797,52 Fx=-47,58 Fy=-101,00 15/ ULS : 15.Vind_ice90 N=246,87 Mx=1532,45 My=-1338,77 Fx=-80,21 Fy=-59,64 16/ ULS : 16.lina1 N=316,75 Mx=2562,69 My=818,51 Fx=22,96 Fy=-98,97 17/ ULS : 17.lina2 N=316,75 Mx=2556,19 My=-837,62 Fx=-23,74 Fy=-98,79 18/ ULS : 18.lina3 N=316,75 Mx=2567,91 My=758,23 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 19/ ULS : 19.lina4 N=316,75 Mx=2561,88 My=-777,37 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 20/ ULS : 20.lina5 N=316,75 Mx=2568,04 My=757,04 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 21/ ULS : 21.lina6 N=316,75 Mx=2562,02 My=-776,19 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 22/ ULS : 22.lina7 N=316,75 Mx=2580,40 My=613,93 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 23/ ULS : 23.lina8 N=316,75 Mx=2575,50 My=-633,18 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 24/ ULS : 24.lina9 N=316,75 Mx=2580,52 My=612,83 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 25/ ULS : 25.lina10 N=316,75 Mx=2575,64 My=-632,08 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 26/ ULS : 26.lina11 N=316,75 Mx=2592,88 My=469,83 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 27/ ULS : 27.lina12 N=316,75 Mx=2589,11 My=-489,18 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 28/ ULS : 28.lina13 N=316,75 Mx=2592,98 My=468,92 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 29/ ULS : 29.lina13 N=316,75 Mx=2589,22 My=-488,28 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 Date : 14/01/15 Page : 2
3 30/ ULS : 30.evrdstrs N=247,57 Mx=1323,29 My=-11,95 Fx=-0,62 Fy=-51,29 31/ ULS : 31.no_wind N=267,88 Mx=1209,81 My=-12,42 Fx=-0,63 Fy=-54,02 32/ ULS : 32.add_arm13 N=206,86 Mx=197,02 My=874,60 Fx=24,90 Fy=-4,89 33/* ULS : 1.Vind_ice_0 N=309,35 Mx=4465,35 My=-10,64 Fx=-0,57 Fy=-189,59 34/* ULS : 2.Vind_ice_0 N=254,64 Mx=2560,81 My=-8,24 Fx=-0,47 Fy=-120,98 35/* ULS : 3.High_wind_0 N=247,09 Mx=3697,14 My=-6,96 Fx=-0,42 Fy=-173,10 36/* ULS : 4.High_wind_0 N=220,93 Mx=2406,92 My=-6,31 Fx=-0,39 Fy=-123,76 37/* ULS : 5.Vind_ice_45 N=309,24 Mx=3675,40 My=-530,29 Fx=-32,25 Fy=-153,65 38/* ULS : 6.Vind_ice_45 N=254,59 Mx=2030,66 My=-526,23 Fx=-32,11 Fy=-95,86 39/* ULS : 7.High_wind_45 N=246,95 Mx=2833,19 My=-888,44 Fx=-54,30 Fy=-130,54 40/* ULS : 8.High_wind_45 N=220,86 Mx=1797,28 My=-886,28 Fx=-54,23 Fy=-91,80 41/* ULS : 9.Vind_ice90 N=309,14 Mx=2627,41 My=-797,52 Fx=-47,58 Fy=-101,00 42/* ULS : 10.High_wind90 N=246,87 Mx=1532,45 My=-1338,77 Fx=-80,21 Fy=-59,64 43/* ULS : 11.No_wind_2a N=321,95 Mx=2655,27 My=-16,87 Fx=-0,82 Fy=-101,00 44/* ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My=-11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 45/* ULS : 13.unsymice_h N=290,98 Mx=2029,27 My=6865,69 Fx=274,12 Fy=-77,22 46/* ULS : 14.Vind_ice90 N=309,14 Mx=2627,41 My=-797,52 Fx=-47,58 Fy=-101,00 47/* ULS : 15.Vind_ice90 N=246,87 Mx=1532,45 My=-1338,77 Fx=-80,21 Fy=-59,64 48/* ULS : 16.lina1 N=316,75 Mx=2562,69 My=818,51 Fx=22,96 Fy=-98,97 49/* ULS : 17.lina2 N=316,75 Mx=2556,19 My=-837,62 Fx=-23,74 Fy=-98,79 50/* ULS : 18.lina3 N=316,75 Mx=2567,91 My=758,23 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 51/* ULS : 19.lina4 N=316,75 Mx=2561,88 My=-777,37 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 52/* ULS : 20.lina5 N=316,75 Mx=2568,04 My=757,04 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 53/* ULS : 21.lina6 N=316,75 Mx=2562,02 My=-776,19 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 54/* ULS : 22.lina7 N=316,75 Mx=2580,40 My=613,93 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 55/* ULS : 23.lina8 N=316,75 Mx=2575,50 My=-633,18 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 56/* ULS : 24.lina9 N=316,75 Mx=2580,52 My=612,83 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 57/* ULS : 25.lina10 N=316,75 Mx=2575,64 My=-632,08 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 58/* ULS : 26.lina11 N=316,75 Mx=2592,88 My=469,83 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 59/* ULS : 27.lina12 N=316,75 Mx=2589,11 My=-489,18 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 60/* ULS : 28.lina13 N=316,75 Mx=2592,98 My=468,92 Fx=25,55 Fy=-98,75 61/* ULS : 29.lina13 N=316,75 Mx=2589,22 My=-488,28 Fx=-26,32 Fy=-98,55 62/* ULS : 30.evrdstrs N=247,57 Mx=1323,29 My=-11,95 Fx=-0,62 Fy=-51,29 63/* ULS : 31.no_wind N=267,88 Mx=1209,81 My=-12,42 Fx=-0,63 Fy=-54,02 64/* ULS : 32.add_arm13 N=206,86 Mx=197,02 My=874,60 Fx=24,90 Fy=-4, Geotechnical design Assumptions Soil: Cohesion reduction coefficient: 0,00 Smooth precast foundation 6.5.3(10) Sliding with soil pressure considered: for X and Y directions Design approach: 3 A1 + M2 + R3 gf' = 1,25 gc' = 1,25 gcu = 1,40 gqu = 1,40 gg = 1,00 gr,v = 1,00 gr,h = 1,00 Soil level: N 1 = 0,000 (m) Column pier level: N a = 1,600 (m) Minimum reference level: N f = -2,500 (m) Water level: N max. = 0,000 (m) N min. = -1,000 (m) Date : 14/01/15 Page : 3
4 Gravel Soil level: (m) Unit weight: (kg/m3) Unit weight of solid: (kg/m3) Internal friction angle: 38.0 (Deg) Cohesion: 0.00 (MPa) Limit states Stress calculations 11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 Soil type under foundation: not layered ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My=- Date : 14/01/15 Page : * Foundation weight 1.35 * Soil weight 1.00 * Archimedes pressure Calculation results: On the foundation level Weight of foundation and soil over it: Gr = 5223,80 (kn) Nr = 5507,55 (kn) Mx = 2275,78 (kn*m) My = ,55 (kn*m) Load eccentricity: eb = -2,398 (m) Equivalent foundation dimensions: B' = B - 2 eb = 6,274 (m) el = -0,413 (m) L' = L - 2 el = 8,004 (m) Foundation depth: Dmin = 2,500 (m) Allowable stress calculation method: Analytical Coefficients of load capacity: Ng = Nc = Nq = Inclination factors: ig = 0.81 ic = 0.88 iq = 0.88 Shape coefficient: sg = 0.76 sc = 1.43 sq = 1.42 Factors of foundation base inclination: bg = 1.00 bc = 1.00 bq = 1.00 Soil profile parameters: C = 0.00 (MPa) f = 0,66 g = (kg/m3) qu = 1,51 (MPa) Design soil pressure:
5 qlim = qu / gf = 1.51 (MPa) gf = 1,00 Stress in soil: qref = 0.15 (MPa) Safety factor: qlim / qref = > 1 Uplift Uplift in ULS 11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 Sliding ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My= * Foundation weight 1.00 * Soil weight 1.35 * Archimedes pressure Contact area: s = 0,33 slim = 0,33 Fx=24,90 Fy=-4,89 ULS : 32.add_arm13 N=206,86 Mx=197,02 My=874, * Foundation weight 1.00 * Soil weight 1.35 * Archimedes pressure Weight of foundation and soil over it: Gr = 2997,58 (kn) Nr = 3204,44 (kn) Mx = 217,07 (kn*m) My = 976,69 (kn*m) Equivalent foundation dimensions: A_ = 12,800 (m) B_ = 7,100 (m) Sliding area: 90,880 (m2) Foundation/soil friction coefficient: tan(dd) = 0,38 Cohesion: cu = 0.00 (MPa) Soil pressure considered: Hx = 24,90 (kn) Hy = -4,89 (kn) Ppx = -468,86 (kn) Ppy = 845,27 (kn) Pax = 26,53 (kn) Pay = -47,83 (kn) Sliding force value Hd = 0,00 (kn) Value of force preventing foundation sliding: - On the foundation level: Rd = 1213,61 (kn) Stabilility for sliding: Rotation Fx=-0,57 Fy=-189,59 About OX axis ULS : 1.Vind_ice_0 N=309,35 Mx=4465,35 My=-10, * Foundation weight 1.00 * Soil weight 1.35 * Archimedes pressure Weight of foundation and soil over it: Gr = 2997,58 (kn) Nr = 3306,93 (kn) Mx = 5242,67 (kn*m) My = -12,98 (kn*m) Stability moment: Mstab = 11739,59 (kn*m) Rotation moment: Mrenv = 5242,67 (kn*m) Date : 14/01/15 Page : 5
6 About OY axis : 11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 Stability for rotation: > 1 ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My= * Foundation weight 1.00 * Soil weight 1.35 * Archimedes pressure Gr = 2997,58 (kn) Weight of foundation and soil over it: Nr = 3281,33 (kn) Mx = 2275,78 (kn*m) My = ,55 (kn*m) Stability moment: Mstab = 21000,50 (kn*m) Rotation moment: Mrenv = 13206,55 (kn*m) Stability for rotation: 1.59 > RC design Assumptions Exposure : XC2 Structure class : S Analysis of punching and shear Punching 459,81 Fy=-75,07 ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My=-11321,33 Fx= * Foundation weight 1.23 * Soil weight 1.00 * Archimedes pressure Nr = 5704,84 (kn) Mx = 2275,78 (kn*m) My = ,55 (kn*m) Length of critical circumference: 23,182 (m) Punching force: 382,46 (kn) Section effective height heff = 1,430 (m) Reinforcement ratio: r = 0.14 % Shear stress: 0,49 (MPa) Admissible shear stress: 0,50 (MPa) Safety factor: > Required reinforcement Spread footing: bottom: ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My=-11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 My = 5926,69 (kn*m) A sx = 20,57 (cm2/m) ULS : 1.Vind_ice_0 N=309,35 Mx=4465,35 My=-10,64 Fx=-0,57 Fy=-189,59 Date : 14/01/15 Page : 6
7 Mx = 1833,62 (kn*m) A s min A sy = 20,57 (cm2/m) = 20,57 (cm2/m) top: ULS : 12.unsymice_l N=283,75 Mx=1967,99 My=-11321,33 Fx=-459,81 Fy=-75,07 My = -3929,68 (kn*m) A' sx = 20,57 (cm2/m) ULS : 1.Vind_ice_0 N=309,35 Mx=4465,35 My=-10,64 Fx=-0,57 Fy=-189,59 Mx = -1080,38 (kn*m) A' sy = 20,57 (cm2/m) A s min = 20,57 (cm2/m) Column pier: Longitudinal reinforcement A = 192,20 (cm2) A min. = 192,20 (cm2) A = 2 * (Asx + Asy) Asx = 59,83 (cm2) Asy = 36,27 (cm2) Provided reinforcement Spread footing: Bottom: Along X axis: 47 B500BT 20 l = 12,680 (m) e = 1*-3, *0,140 Along Y axis: 84 B500BT 20 l = 6,980 (m) e = 1*-6, *0,150 Top: Along X axis: 47 B500BT 20 l = 12,680 (m) e = 1*-3, *0,140 Along Y axis: 84 B500BT 20 l = 6,980 (m) e = 1*-6, *0,150 Pier Longitudinal reinforcement Along X axis: 14 B500BT 25 l = 4,276 (m) e = 1*-1, *0,366 Along Y axis: 28 B500BT 25 l = 4,276 (m) e = 1*-1, *0,225 Transversal reinforcement 13 B500BT 12 l = 12,155 (m) e = 1*1, *0,200 2 Material survey: Concrete volume = 161,306 (m3) Formwork = 91,940 (m2) Steel B500BT Total weight = 6665,95 (kg) Density = 41,33 (kg/m3) Date : 14/01/15 Page : 7
8 Average diameter = 19,9 (mm) Survey according to diameters: Diameter Length Number: (m) 12 12, , , , Date : 14/01/15 Page : 8
DESIGN AND DETAILING OF COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALL
DESIGN AND DETAILING OF COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALL When the height of the retaining wall exceeds about 6 m, the thickness of the stem and heel slab works out to be sufficiently large and the design becomes
3-BEARING CAPACITY OF SOILS
3-BEARING CAPACITY OF SOILS INTRODUCTION The soil must be capable of carrying the loads from any engineered structure placed upon it without a shear failure and with the resulting settlements being tolerable
Analysis of the horizontal bearing capacity of a single pile
Engineering manual No. 16 Updated: 07/2018 Analysis of the horizontal bearing capacity of a single pile Program: Soubor: Pile Demo_manual_16.gpi The objective of this engineering manual is to explain how
RETAINING WALL LOADS: Horizontal Equivalent Fluid Pressure = pcf. (Load Case = Soil)
QuickWall 8.0 - RETAINING WALL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ================================================================================ Job ID : Job Description : Designed By : ================================================================================
Foundation Engineering Prof. Dr N.K. Samadhiya Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
Foundation Engineering Prof. Dr N.K. Samadhiya Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Module 01 Lecture - 03 Shallow Foundation So, in the last lecture, we discussed the
Tower Cranes & Foundations The Interface & CIRIA C654 Stuart Marchand C.Eng. FICE FIStructE Director Wentworth House Partnership
Tower Cranes & Foundations The Interface & CIRIA C654 Stuart Marchand C.Eng. FICE FIStructE Director Wentworth House Partnership EXAMPLES OF TOWER CRANE FOUNDATION TYPES Rail mounted Pad Base Piled Base
The Bearing Capacity of Soils. Dr Omar Al Hattamleh
The Bearing Capacity of Soils Dr Omar Al Hattamleh Example of Bearing Capacity Failure Omar Play the move of bearing Capacity failure The Philippine one Transcona Grain Silos Failure - Canada The Bearing
Ch 4a Stress, Strain and Shearing
Ch. 4a - Stress, Strain, Shearing Page 1 Ch 4a Stress, Strain and Shearing Reading Assignment Ch. 4a Lecture Notes Sections 4.1-4.3 (Salgado) Other Materials Handout 4 Homework Assignment 3 Problems 4-13,
National Exams May 2015
National Exams May 2015 04-BS-6: Mechanics of Materials 3 hours duration Notes: If doubt exists as to the interpretation of any question, the candidate is urged to submit with the answer paper a clear
UNIT II SHALLOW FOUNDATION
Introduction UNIT II SHALLOW FOUNDATION A foundation is a integral part of the structure which transfer the load of the superstructure to the soil. A foundation is that member which provides support for
Civil Engineering Design (1) Design of Reinforced Concrete Columns 2006/7
Civil Engineering Design (1) Design of Reinforced Concrete Columns 2006/7 Dr. Colin Caprani, Chartered Engineer 1 Contents 1. Introduction... 3 1.1 Background... 3 1.2 Failure Modes... 5 1.3 Design Aspects...
NAGY GYÖRGY Tamás Assoc. Prof, PhD
NAGY GYÖRGY Tamás Assoc. Prof, PhD E mail: tamas.nagy gyorgy@upt.ro Tel: +40 256 403 935 Web: http://www.ct.upt.ro/users/tamasnagygyorgy/index.htm Office: A219 SIMPLE SUPORTED BEAM b = 15 cm h = 30 cm
EN Eurocode 7. Section 3 Geotechnical Data Section 6 Spread Foundations. Trevor L.L. Orr Trinity College Dublin Ireland.
EN 1997 1: Sections 3 and 6 Your logo Brussels, 18-20 February 2008 Dissemination of information workshop 1 EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7 Section 3 Geotechnical Data Section 6 Spread Foundations Trevor L.L. Orr
CONSULTING Engineering Calculation Sheet. Job Title Member Design - Reinforced Concrete Column BS8110
E N G I N E E R S Consulting Engineers jxxx 1 Job Title Member Design - Reinforced Concrete Column Effects From Structural Analysis Axial force, N (tension-ve and comp +ve) (ensure >= 0) 8000kN OK Major
R.C. FOUNDATION ANALYSIS, DETAILS & DETAILING
1 R.C. FOUNDATION ANALYSIS, DETAILS & DETAILING By 0 Dec 016 PAD FOOTING ANALYSIS & DESIGN (BS8110) FOR PROPOSED PIGS BUILDING FOR PAD FOOTING ANALYSIS AND DESIGN (BS8110-1:1997) 100 450 450 Pad footing
Prof. B V S Viswanadham, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Bombay
51 Module 4: Lecture 2 on Stress-strain relationship and Shear strength of soils Contents Stress state, Mohr s circle analysis and Pole, Principal stressspace, Stress pathsin p-q space; Mohr-coulomb failure
Associate Professor. Tel:
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING IIT DELHI Dr. Suresh Bhalla Associate Professor Tel: 2659-1040 Email: Sbhalla@civil.iitd.ac.in FOUNDATIONS Geotechnical Engineer Structural Engineer Location and depth criteria
Sabah Shawkat Cabinet of Structural Engineering Walls carrying vertical loads should be designed as columns. Basically walls are designed in
Sabah Shawkat Cabinet of Structural Engineering 17 3.6 Shear walls Walls carrying vertical loads should be designed as columns. Basically walls are designed in the same manner as columns, but there are
Soil-Structure Interaction in Nonlinear Pushover Analysis of Frame RC Structures: Nonhomogeneous Soil Condition
ABSTRACT: Soil-Structure Interaction in Nonlinear Pushover Analysis of Frame RC Structures: Nonhomogeneous Soil Condition G. Dok ve O. Kırtel Res. Assist., Department of Civil Engineering, Sakarya University,
both an analytical approach and the pole method, determine: (a) the direction of the
Quantitative Problems Problem 4-3 Figure 4-45 shows the state of stress at a point within a soil deposit. Using both an analytical approach and the pole method, determine: (a) the direction of the principal
Design of AAC wall panel according to EN 12602
Design of wall panel according to EN 160 Example 3: Wall panel with wind load 1.1 Issue Design of a wall panel at an industrial building Materials with a compressive strength 3,5, density class 500, welded
This document downloaded from vulcanhammer.net vulcanhammer.info Chet Aero Marine
This document downloaded from vulcanhammer.net vulcanhammer.info Chet Aero Marine Don t forget to visit our companion site http://www.vulcanhammer.org Use subject to the terms and conditions of the respective
MECHANICS OF MATERIALS. Prepared by Engr. John Paul Timola
MECHANICS OF MATERIALS Prepared by Engr. John Paul Timola Mechanics of materials branch of mechanics that studies the internal effects of stress and strain in a solid body. stress is associated with the
Clayey sand (SC)
Pile Bearing Capacity Analysis / Verification Input data Project Task : PROJECT: "NEW STEAM BOILER U-5190 Part : A-1 Descript. : The objective of this Analysis is the Pile allowable bearing Capacity Analysis
Job No. Sheet No. Rev. CONSULTING Engineering Calculation Sheet. Member Design - RC Two Way Spanning Slab XX
CONSULTING Engineering Calculation Sheet E N G I N E E R S Consulting Engineers jxxx 1 Material Properties Characteristic strength of concrete, f cu ( 60N/mm 2 ; HSC N/A) 35 N/mm 2 OK Yield strength of
Fayoum University. Dr.: Youssef Gomaa Youssef
Fayoum University Faculty o Engineering Department o Civil Engineering CE 40: Part Shallow Foundation Design Lecture No. (6): Eccentric Footing Dr.: Yousse Gomaa Yousse Eccentric Footing Eccentric ooting:
TABLE OF CONTANINET 1. Design criteria. 2. Lateral loads. 3. 3D finite element model (SAP2000, Ver.16). 4. Design of vertical elements (CSI, Ver.9).
TABLE OF CONTANINET 1. Design criteria. 2. Lateral loads. 2-1. Wind loads calculation 2-2. Seismic loads 3. 3D finite element model (SAP2000, Ver.16). 4. Design of vertical elements (CSI, Ver.9). 4-1.
Visit Abqconsultants.com. This program Designs and Optimises RCC Chimney and Foundation. Written and programmed
Prepared by : Date : Verified by : Date : Project : Ref Calculation Output Design of RCC Chimney :- 1) Dimensions of Chimney and Forces 200 Unit weight of Fire Brick Lining 19000 N/m3 100 Height of Fire
CHAPTER 8 CALCULATION THEORY
CHAPTER 8 CALCULATION THEORY. Volume 2 CHAPTER 8 CALCULATION THEORY Detailed in this chapter: the theories behind the program the equations and methods that are use to perform the analyses. CONTENTS CHAPTER
HKIE-GD Workshop on Foundation Engineering 7 May Shallow Foundations. Dr Limin Zhang Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
HKIE-GD Workshop on Foundation Engineering 7 May 2011 Shallow Foundations Dr Limin Zhang Hong Kong University of Science and Technology 1 Outline Summary of design requirements Load eccentricity Bearing
Objectives. In this section you will learn the following. Development of Bearing Capacity Theory. Terzaghi's Bearing Capacity Theory
Objectives In this section you will learn the following Development of Bearing Capacity Theory Terzaghi's Bearing Capacity Theory Assumptions in Terzaghi s Bearing Capacity Theory. Meyerhof's Bearing Capacity
INTRODUCTION TO STATIC ANALYSIS PDPI 2013
INTRODUCTION TO STATIC ANALYSIS PDPI 2013 What is Pile Capacity? When we load a pile until IT Fails what is IT Strength Considerations Two Failure Modes 1. Pile structural failure controlled by allowable
Practical Design to Eurocode 2. The webinar will start at 12.30
Practical Design to Eurocode 2 The webinar will start at 12.30 Course Outline Lecture Date Speaker Title 1 21 Sep Jenny Burridge Introduction, Background and Codes 2 28 Sep Charles Goodchild EC2 Background,
RETAINING WALL ANALYSIS
GEODOMISI Ltd. Dr. Costas Sachpazis Consulting Company for Tel.: (+30) 20 523827, 20 57263 Fax.:+30 20 5746 Retaining wall Analysis & Design (EN997:2004 App'd by RETAINING WALL ANALYSIS In accordance with
D : SOLID MECHANICS. Q. 1 Q. 9 carry one mark each.
GTE 2016 Q. 1 Q. 9 carry one mark each. D : SOLID MECHNICS Q.1 single degree of freedom vibrating system has mass of 5 kg, stiffness of 500 N/m and damping coefficient of 100 N-s/m. To make the system
DEFORMATION CAPACITY OF OLDER RC SHEAR WALLS: EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND COMPARISON WITH EUROCODE 8 - PART 3 PROVISIONS
DEFORMATION CAPACITY OF OLDER RC SHEAR WALLS: EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND COMPARISON WITH EUROCODE 8 - PART 3 PROVISIONS Konstantinos CHRISTIDIS 1, Emmanouil VOUGIOUKAS 2 and Konstantinos TREZOS 3 ABSTRACT
Bending and Shear in Beams
Bending and Shear in Beams Lecture 3 5 th October 017 Contents Lecture 3 What reinforcement is needed to resist M Ed? Bending/ Flexure Section analysis, singly and doubly reinforced Tension reinforcement,
EAS 664/4 Principle Structural Design
UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA 1 st. Semester Examination 2004/2005 Academic Session October 2004 EAS 664/4 Principle Structural Design Time : 3 hours Instruction to candidates: 1. Ensure that this paper contains
INTI COLLEGE MALAYSIA
EGC373 (F) / Page 1 of 5 INTI COLLEGE MALAYSIA UK DEGREE TRANSFER PROGRAMME INTI ADELAIDE TRANSFER PROGRAMME EGC 373: FOUNDATION ENGINEERING FINAL EXAMINATION : AUGUST 00 SESSION This paper consists of
Chapter (4) Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations (Special Cases)
Chapter (4) Ultimate earing Capacity of Shallow Foundations (Special Cases) Ultimate.C. of Shallow Foundations (Special Cases) Introduction The ultimate bearing capacity theories discussed in Chapter 3
7.2 Design of minaret: Geometry:
7. Design of minaret: Geometry: The figure below shows the longitudinal section in the minaret and the cross section will be shown when start calculate the self-weight of each section. Figure 7..1 Longitudinal
D : SOLID MECHANICS. Q. 1 Q. 9 carry one mark each. Q.1 Find the force (in kn) in the member BH of the truss shown.
D : SOLID MECHANICS Q. 1 Q. 9 carry one mark each. Q.1 Find the force (in kn) in the member BH of the truss shown. Q.2 Consider the forces of magnitude F acting on the sides of the regular hexagon having
Annex - R C Design Formulae and Data
The design formulae and data provided in this Annex are for education, training and assessment purposes only. They are based on the Hong Kong Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2013 (HKCP-2013).
Foundation Analysis LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE
Foundation Analysis LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE INTRODUCTION Vertical or near-vertical slopes of soil are supported by retaining walls, cantilever sheet-pile walls, sheet-pile bulkheads, braced cuts, and other
Reinforced Soil Structures Reinforced Soil Walls. Prof K. Rajagopal Department of Civil Engineering IIT Madras, Chennai
Geosynthetics and Reinforced Soil Structures Reinforced Soil Walls continued Prof K. Rajagopal Department of Civil Engineering IIT Madras, Chennai e-mail: gopalkr@iitm.ac.inac in Outline of the Lecture
Seismic Pushover Analysis Using AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design
Seismic Pushover Analysis Using AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Elmer E. Marx, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Michael Keever, California Department
BACKFILL AND INTERFACE CHARACTERISTICS
Chapter 5 BACKFILL AND INTERFACE CHARACTERISTICS This chapter introduces the properties of backfill and the distribution of soil density in the soil bin. The interface characteristics between the backfill
Chapter 5 CENTRIC TENSION OR COMPRESSION ( AXIAL LOADING )
Chapter 5 CENTRIC TENSION OR COMPRESSION ( AXIAL LOADING ) 5.1 DEFINITION A construction member is subjected to centric (axial) tension or compression if in any cross section the single distinct stress
Chapter. Materials. 1.1 Notations Used in This Chapter
Chapter 1 Materials 1.1 Notations Used in This Chapter A Area of concrete cross-section C s Constant depending on the type of curing C t Creep coefficient (C t = ε sp /ε i ) C u Ultimate creep coefficient
Chapter (3) Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations
Chapter (3) Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations Introduction To perform satisfactorily, shallow foundations must have two main characteristics: 1. They have to be safe against overall shear
Assignment 1 - actions
Assignment 1 - actions b = 1,5 m a = 1 q kn/m 2 Determine action on the beam for verification of the ultimate limit state. Axial distance of the beams is 1 to 2 m, cross section dimensions 0,45 0,20 m
Design of a Multi-Storied RC Building
Design of a Multi-Storied RC Building 16 14 14 3 C 1 B 1 C 2 B 2 C 3 B 3 C 4 13 B 15 (S 1 ) B 16 (S 2 ) B 17 (S 3 ) B 18 7 B 4 B 5 B 6 B 7 C 5 C 6 C 7 C 8 C 9 7 B 20 B 22 14 B 19 (S 4 ) C 10 C 11 B 23
Strengthening of columns with FRP
with FRP Professor Dr. Björn Täljsten Luleå University of Technology Sto Scandinavia AB 9/12/2013 Agenda Case study Restrained transverse expansion (confinement) Circular and rectangular cross sections
RETAINING WALL ANALYSIS
Retaining Wall Analysis Example (EN997:2004) GEODOMISI Ltd. Dr. Costas Sachpazis Consulting Company for Tel.: (+30) 20 523827, 20 57263 Fax.:+30 20 5746 App'd by RETAINING WALL ANALYSIS In accordance with
Chapter 4. Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations. Omitted parts: Sections 4.7, 4.8, 4.13 Examples 4.8, 4.9, 4.
Chapter 4 Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations Omitted parts: Sections 4.7, 4.8, 4.13 Examples 4.8, 4.9, 4.12 Pages 191-194 Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations To perform satisfactorily,
Theory of Shear Strength
SKAA 1713 SOIL MECHANICS Theory of Shear Strength Prepared by, Dr. Hetty 1 SOIL STRENGTH DEFINITION Shear strength of a soil is the maximum internal resistance to applied shearing forces The maximum or
spslab v3.11. Licensed to: STRUCTUREPOINT, LLC. License ID: D2DE-2175C File: C:\Data\CSA A Kt Revised.slb
X Z Y spslab v3.11. Licensed to: STRUCTUREPOINT, LLC. License ID: 00000-0000000-4-2D2DE-2175C File: C:\Data\CSA A23.3 - Kt Revised.slb Project: CSA A23.3 - Kt Torsional Stiffness Illustration Frame: Engineer:
Engineeringmanuals. Part2
Engineeringmanuals Part2 Engineering manuals for GEO5 programs Part 2 Chapter 1-12, refer to Engineering Manual Part 1 Chapter 13. Pile Foundations Introduction... 2 Chapter 14. Analysis of vertical load-bearing
RAMWALL DESIGN METHODOLOGY
RAMWALL DESIGN METHODOLOGY Submitted by:. June 005 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Page. REFERENCED DOCUMENTS & ABBREVIATIONS 1 3 DESIGN METHODOLOGY / THEORY 3.1 General 3. Internal Analysis 4 3.3 External
Chapter Objectives. Design a beam to resist both bendingand shear loads
Chapter Objectives Design a beam to resist both bendingand shear loads A Bridge Deck under Bending Action Castellated Beams Post-tensioned Concrete Beam Lateral Distortion of a Beam Due to Lateral Load
Problem 7.1 Determine the soil pressure distribution under the footing. Elevation. Plan. M 180 e 1.5 ft P 120. (a) B= L= 8 ft L e 1.5 ft 1.
Problem 7.1 Determine the soil pressure distribution under the footing. Elevation Plan M 180 e 1.5 ft P 10 (a) B= L= 8 ft L e 1.5 ft 1.33 ft 6 1 q q P 6 (P e) 180 6 (180) 4.9 kip/ft B L B L 8(8) 8 3 P
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION This chapter is devoted to describe the assigned project which is the Korean Industrial School at Jenin district.it concentrates also at investigation and understanding of the
Job No. Sheet No. Rev. CONSULTING Engineering Calculation Sheet. Structure, Member Design - Geotechnics Pad, Strip and Raft XX
CONSULTING Engineering Calculation Sheet E N G I N E E R S Consulting Engineers jxxx 1 Material Properties Characteristic strength of concrete, f cu ( 60N/mm 2 ; HSC ) 35 N/mm 2 OK Yield strength of longitudinal
vulcanhammer.net This document downloaded from
This document downloaded from vulcanhammer.net since 1997, your source for engineering information for the deep foundation and marine construction industries, and the historical site for Vulcan Iron Works
Displacement-based methods EDCE: Civil and Environmental Engineering CIVIL Advanced Earthquake Engineering
Displacement-based methods EDCE: Civil and Environmental Engineering CIVIL 706 - Advanced Earthquake Engineering EDCE-EPFL-ENAC-SGC 2016-1- Content! Link to force-based methods! Assumptions! Reinforced
Standardisation of UHPC in Germany
Standardisation of UHPC in Germany Part II: Development of Design Rules, University of Siegen Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ekkehard Fehling, University of Kassel 1 Overvie Introduction: Work of the Task Group Design
Pullout Tests of Geogrids Embedded in Non-cohesive Soil
Archives of Hydro-Engineering and Environmental Mechanics Vol. 51 (2004), No. 2, pp. 135 147 Pullout Tests of Geogrids Embedded in Non-cohesive Soil Angelika Duszyńska, Adam F. Bolt Gdansk University of
CIVIL DEPARTMENT MECHANICS OF STRUCTURES- ASSIGNMENT NO 1. Brach: CE YEAR:
MECHANICS OF STRUCTURES- ASSIGNMENT NO 1 SEMESTER: V 1) Find the least moment of Inertia about the centroidal axes X-X and Y-Y of an unequal angle section 125 mm 75 mm 10 mm as shown in figure 2) Determine
Delhi Noida Bhopal Hyderabad Jaipur Lucknow Indore Pune Bhubaneswar Kolkata Patna Web: Ph:
Serial : IG1_CE_G_Concrete Structures_100818 Delhi Noida Bhopal Hyderabad Jaipur Lucknow Indore Pune Bhubaneswar Kolkata Patna Web: E-mail: info@madeeasy.in Ph: 011-451461 CLASS TEST 018-19 CIVIL ENGINEERING
Seismic Design of New R.C. Structures
Seismic Design Philosophy Main Concepts Seismic Design of New R.C. Structures Prof. Stephanos E. Dritsos University of Patras, Greece. Energy dissipation Ductility Capacity design Learning from Earthquakes
REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN 1. Design of Column (Examples and Tutorials)
For updated version, please click on http://ocw.ump.edu.my REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN 1 Design of Column (Examples and Tutorials) by Dr. Sharifah Maszura Syed Mohsin Faculty of Civil Engineering and Earth
DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF RETAINING WALLS
CHAPTER 8 DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF RETAINING WALLS 8. INTRODUCTION Retaining walls are structures used to provide stability for earth or other materials at their natural slopes. In general, they are used
Concise Eurocode 2 25 February 2010
Concise Eurocode 2 25 February 2010 Revisions required to Concise Eurocode 2 (Oct 06 edition) due to revisions in standards, notably Amendment 1 to NA to BS EN 1992-1-1:2004 dated Dec 2009, and interpretations.
Bridge deck modelling and design process for bridges
EU-Russia Regulatory Dialogue Construction Sector Subgroup 1 Bridge deck modelling and design process for bridges Application to a composite twin-girder bridge according to Eurocode 4 Laurence Davaine
EUROCODE EN SEISMIC DESIGN OF BRIDGES
Brussels, 18-20 February 2008 Dissemination of information workshop 1 EUROCODE EN1998-2 SEISMIC DESIGN OF BRIDGES Basil Kolias Basic Requirements Brussels, 18-20 February 2008 Dissemination of information
Evolution Group 7 - Pile Design
Evolution Group 7 - Pile Design Summary of UK Design for Pile Groups - Chris Raison In the UK there are no specific requirements given in the National Annex covering design of pile groups. Particular issues
K Design Graphs and Charts for Raft Foundations Spanning Local Depressions
K Design Graphs and Charts for Raft Foundations Spanning Local Depressions The reader is advised to read the text in Chapter 13 before using these charts. The charts and figures are repeated here for quick
Compute the lateral force per linear foot with sloping backfill and inclined wall. Use Equation No. 51, page 93. Press ENTER.
Sample Problems Problem 5.1 A gravity retaining wall is supporting a cohesionless soil. The active lateral force per linear foot of the retaining wall is most nearly (A) 5,000 lb/ft (B) 6,000 lb/ft (C)
[8] Bending and Shear Loading of Beams
![[8] Bending and Shear Loading of Beams](/thumbs/92/110949676.jpg "[8] Bending and Shear Loading of Beams")
[8] Bending and Shear Loading of Beams Page 1 of 28 [8] Bending and Shear Loading of Beams [8.1] Bending of Beams (will not be covered in class) [8.2] Bending Strain and Stress [8.3] Shear in Straight
Appraisal of Soil Nailing Design
Indian Geotechnical Journal, 39(1), 2009, 81-95 Appraisal of Soil Nailing Design G. L. Sivakumar Babu * and Vikas Pratap Singh ** Introduction Geotechnical engineers largely prefer soil nailing as an efficient
Entrance exam Master Course
- 1 - Guidelines for completion of test: On each page, fill in your name and your application code Each question has four answers while only one answer is correct. o Marked correct answer means 4 points
Mechanics of Solids I. Transverse Loading
Mechanics of Solids I Transverse Loading Introduction o Transverse loading applied to a beam results in normal and shearing stresses in transverse sections. o Distribution of normal and shearing stresses
Job No. Sheet No. Rev. CONSULTING Engineering Calculation Sheet
E N G I N E E R S Consulting Engineers jxxx 1 Material Properties Characteristic strength of concrete, f cu ( 60N/mm 2 ; HSC N/A) 35 N/mm 2 OK Yield strength of longitudinal steel, f y 460 N/mm 2 Yield
BEARING CAPACITY SHALLOW AND DEEP FOUNDATIONS
BEARING CAPACITY SHALLOW AND DEEP FOUNDATIONS CONTENTS: 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS 2.1 Design criteria 2.2 Spreading load 2.3 Types of foundations 2.4 Ground failure modes 2.5 Definitions
ANCHORED PILED RETAINING WALL
10 8 5 0 35.0 25.0 15.0 Soil Profiles -3.0-5 -7.0-10 End of excavation -10-1 -15 Ground Water -15.0-15.0-20 -18.0-25 -30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Soil Profile Layer S.E. (m) c (kn/m³)
Dr. Mohammed E. Haque, P.E. Lecture Notes
nalysis of Selected Determinate Structural Systems Planar Trusses Method of Joints Planar Trusses Method of Sections Pinned Frames with Multi-force Members Retaining Walls OS321Haque 1 Planar Trusses Method
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ECG 503 LECTURE NOTE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF RETAINING STRUCTURES
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ECG 503 LECTURE NOTE 07 3.0 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF RETAINING STRUCTURES LEARNING OUTCOMES Learning outcomes: At the end of this lecture/week the students would be able to: Understand
THE SHEAR BEHAVIOR OBTAINED FROM THE DIRECT SHEAR AND PULLOUT TESTS FOR DIFFERENT POOR GRADED SOIL-GEOSYNTHETIC SYSTEMS
Journal of Hsieh GeoEngineering, and Ham: The Vol. Shear 6, No. Behavior 1, pp. Obtained 15-26, April from 211 the Direct Shear and Pullout Tests for Different Poor Graded Soil-Geosynthetic Systems 15
Support Reactions: a + M C = 0; 800(10) F DE(4) F DE(2) = 0. F DE = 2000 lb. + c F y = 0; (2000) - C y = 0 C y = 400 lb
06 Solutions 46060_Part1 5/27/10 3:51 P Page 334 6 11. The overhanging beam has been fabricated with a projected arm D on it. Draw the shear and moment diagrams for the beam C if it supports a load of
Bending Stress. Sign convention. Centroid of an area
Bending Stress Sign convention The positive shear force and bending moments are as shown in the figure. Centroid of an area Figure 40: Sign convention followed. If the area can be divided into n parts
PURE BENDING. If a simply supported beam carries two point loads of 10 kn as shown in the following figure, pure bending occurs at segment BC.
BENDING STRESS The effect of a bending moment applied to a cross-section of a beam is to induce a state of stress across that section. These stresses are known as bending stresses and they act normally
SN QUESTION YEAR MARK 1. State and prove the relationship between shearing stress and rate of change of bending moment at a section in a loaded beam.
ALPHA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING MECHANICS OF SOLIDS (21000) ASSIGNMENT 1 SIMPLE STRESSES AND STRAINS SN QUESTION YEAR MARK 1 State and prove the relationship
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE TITLE PAGE DECLARATION DEDIDATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT ABSTRAK
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE PAGE TITLE PAGE DECLARATION DEDIDATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLE LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF SYMBOLS LIST OF APENDICES i ii iii iv v
ASSOCIATE DEGREE IN ENGINEERING EXAMINATIONS. SEMESTER 2 May 2013
ASSOCIATE DEGREE IN ENGINEERING EXAMINATIONS SEMESTER 2 May 2013 COURSE NAME: CODE: Mechanical Engineering Science [8 CHARACTER COURSE CODE] GROUP: AD-ENG 1 DATE: TIME: DURATION: "[EXAM DATE]" "[TIME OF
Design of a Balanced-Cantilever Bridge
Design of a Balanced-Cantilever Bridge CL (Bridge is symmetric about CL) 0.8 L 0.2 L 0.6 L 0.2 L 0.8 L L = 80 ft Bridge Span = 2.6 L = 2.6 80 = 208 Bridge Width = 30 No. of girders = 6, Width of each girder
SHEET PILE WALLS. Mehdi Mokhberi Islamic Azad University
SHEET PILE WALLS Mehdi Mokhberi Islamic Azad University Lateral Support In geotechnical engineering, it is often necessary to prevent lateral soil movements. Tie rod Anchor Sheet pile Cantilever retaining
Bearing Capacity, Comparison of Results from FEM and DS/EN DK NA 2013
NGM 2016 Reykjavik Proceedings of the 17 th Nordic Geotechnical Meeting Challenges in Nordic Geotechnic 25 th 28 th of May Bearing Capacity, Comparison of Results from FEM and DS/EN 1997-1 DK NA 2013 Bjørn
Sub. Code:
Important Instructions to examiners: ) The answers should be examined by key words and not as word-to-word as given in the model answer scheme. ) The model answer and the answer written by candidate may
Tension, Compression, and Shear
01Ch01.qxd 2/10/09 7:32 PM Page 1 1 ension, Compression, and Shear Normal Stress and Strain Problem 1.2-1 A hollow circular post ABC (see figure) supports a load P 1 7.5 kn acting at the top. A second
MARKS DISTRIBUTION AS PER CHAPTER (QUESTION ASKED IN GTU EXAM) Name Of Chapter. Applications of. Friction. Centroid & Moment.
Introduction Fundamentals of statics Applications of fundamentals of statics Friction Centroid & Moment of inertia Simple Stresses & Strain Stresses in Beam Torsion Principle Stresses DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL