CIVE.4850 CAPSTONE DESIGN Module 3 Geotechnical Engineering 2016 F.E. EXAM. Slide 1 of 59. Revised 02/2016
|
|
- Cody Morris
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 2016 F.E. EXAM Slide 1 of 59
2 2016 F.E. EXAM 8-13% GEOL.3250 (optional) CIVE.3300 & CIVE.3330 CIVE.4310 Slide 2 of 59
3 CIVE.4850 CAPSTONE DESIGN 2016 FUNDAMENTALS OF ENGINEERING (FE) EXAM CALCULATOR POLICY (as of 02/10/16) Casio: All fx-115 models. Examples of acceptable Casio fx-115 models include (but are not limited to): fx-115 MS fx-115 MS Plus fx-115 MS SR fx-115 ES Hewlett Packard: The HP 33s and HP 35s models, but no others. Texas Instruments: All TI-30X and TI-36X models. Examples of acceptable TI-30X and TI-36X models include (but are not limited to): TI-30Xa TI-30Xa SOLAR TI-30X IIB TI-30X IIS TI-36X II TI-36X SOLAR Casio FX-115ES TI TI-30Xa SOLAR Casio FX-115MSPlus TI TI-36X SOLAR HP HP 33s Slide 3 of 59
4 Soil Borings. CIVE.4850 CAPSTONE DESIGN OVERVIEW REVIEW OF CIVE.4310 FOUNDATIONS & SOILS ENG. Geotechnical Report (not covered). Bearing Pressure Calculations. Settlement Calculations. Lateral Earth Pressure Calculations. Retaining Wall Design Review. Slide 4 of 59
5 OVERVIEW: BORINGS Slide 5 of 59
6 OVERVIEW: BORINGS Slide 6 of 59
7 OVERVIEW: BORINGS Shows the following: Soil Profile (determined from sampling and boring information) with respect to depth and/or elevation. Groundwater Table (GWT). SPT N Values. Laboratory Test Results (if available). ASTM D Standard Guide for Field Logging of Subsurface Explorations of Soil and Rock Slide 7 of 59
8 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) (ASTM D ) Marking of 6 inch Increments for SPT Test Photograph courtesy of physics.uwstout.edu Very common test worldwide Colonel Gow of Raymond Pile Co. Split-barrel sample driven in borehole. Conducted on 2½ to 5 ft depth intervals ASTM D1586 guidelines Drop Hammer (140 lbs falling 30 inches) 3 or 4 increments of 6 inches each Three (3) Increments: Sum of last two increments = SPT N value" (blows/ft) Four (4) Increments: Sum of last two increments = SPT N value" (blows/ft) Correlations available with all types of soil engineering properties Disturbed Soil Samples Collected Text modified from FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 8 of 59
9 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) (ASTM D ) Split Spoon Dimensions (after ASTM D1586) Typical Setup Figures courtesy of J. David Rogers, Ph.D., P.E., University of Missouri-Rolla & FHWA NHI Course Slide 9 of 59
10 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) (ASTM D ) Figure courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 10 of 59
11 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) (ASTM D ) Figure courtesy of Slide 11 of 59
12 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) Factors Affecting SPT (after Kulhawy & Mayne, 1990 & Table 8. FHWA IF ) Cause Inadequate Cleaning of Borehole Effects SPT not made in insitu soil, soil trapped, recovery reduced Influence on N Value Increases Failure to Maintain Adequate Head in Borehole Bottom of borehole may become quick Decreases Careless Measure of Drop Hammer Energy varies Increases Hammer Weight Inaccurate Hammer Energy varies Inc. or Dec. Hammer Strikes Drill Rod Collar Eccentrically Hammer Energy reduced Increases Lack of Hammer Free (ungreased sleeves, stiff rope, more than 2 turns on cathead, incomplete release of drop, etc.) Hammer Energy reduced Increases Sampler Driven Above Bottom of Casing Sampler driven in disturbed soil Inc. Greatly Careless Blow Count Recording Inaccurate Results Inc. or Dec. Use of Non-Standard Sampler Correlations with Std. Sampler Invalid Inc. or Dec. Coarse Gravel or Cobbles in soil Sampler becomes clogged or impeded Increases Use of Bent Drill Rods Inhibited transfer of energy to sampler Increases Slide 12 of 59
13 CARE & PRESERVATION OF SOIL SAMPLES Mark and Log samples upon retrieval (ID, type, number, depth, recovery, soil, moisture). Place jar samples in wood or cardboard box. Should be protected from extreme conditions (heat, freezing, drying). Sealed to minimize moisture loss. Packed and protected against excessive vibrations and shock. Text and Figures courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 13 of 59
14 c u = undrained strength T = unit weight I R = rigidity index ' = friction angle OCR = overconsolidation K 0 = lateral stress state e o = void ratio V s = shear wave E' = Young's modulus C c = compression index q b = pile end bearing f s = pile skin friction k = permeability q a = bearing stress CIVE.4850 CAPSTONE DESIGN STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) CLAY N SAND D R = relative density T = unit weight LI = liquefaction index ' = friction angle c' = cohesion intercept e o = void ratio q a = bearing capacity p ' = preconsolidation V s = shear wave E' = Young's modulus = dilatancy angle q b = pile end bearing f s = pile skin friction What Do We Need? How Do We Get It? Courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 14 of 59
15 CIVE.4850 CAPSTONE DESIGN CORRECTIONS TO SPT N VALUE N measured = Raw SPT Value from Field Test (ASTM D ) N 60 = Corrected N values corresponding to 60% Energy Efficiency (i.e. The Energy Ratio (ER) = 60% (ASTM D ) SPT Corrections (From Table 9, FHWA IF ) Note: 30% < ER < 100% with average ER = 60% in the U.S. N 60 = C E C B C S C R N measured Factor Term Equipment Variable Correction Energy Ratio C E = ER/60 Donut Hammer Safety Hammer Automatic Hammer Borehole Diameter C B 150 mm mm 200 mm Standard Sampler Sampling Method C S Non-Standard Sampler Rod Length C R 3 4 m 4 6 m 6 10 m > 10 m For Guidance Only. Actual ER values should be measured per ASTM D to to to to Slide 15 of 59
16 CORRECTIONS TO SPT N VALUE TWO BORINGS/ONE SITE EXAMPLE: Measured N-values Corrected N Depth (meters) ER = 34 (energy ratio) Donut Saf ety 69 Sequence Depth (meters) Donut 6 Safety Trend Data from Robertson, et al. (1983), Courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 16 of 59
17 NORMALIZED SPT N VALUE (N 1 ) 60 (N 1 ) 60 = N 60 values normalized to 1 atmosphere overburden stress. (N 1 ) 60 = C N N 60 Where: C N = (P a /' vo ) n P a = Atmospheric Pressure (1 atm = 14.7 psi = 2116 psf) ' vo = Insitu Vertical Effective Stress n = 1 (clays) and 0.5 to 0.6 (sands) Slide 17 of 59
18 EFFECTIVE FRICTION ANGLE (') FOR SANDS - SPT 55 Triaxial Database from Frozen Sand Samples Friction Angle, ' (deg) ' = [15.4(N 1 ) 60 ] Sand (SP and SP-SM) Sand Fill (SP to SM) SM (Piedmont) H&T (1996) Normalized (N 1 ) 60 Figure FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 18 of 59
19 SOIL SHEAR STRENGTH CORRELATIONS FROM IN-SITU TESTING Shear Strength Parameter Insitu Testing Method SPT CPT DMT Effective Soil Friction Angle ( ) See Slide 20 arctan[ log(q t / vo )] log(k D )-2.1 log 2 K D See Slide 20 Robertson and Campanella (1983) Marchetti et al. (2001) ISSMGE TC 16 Report Undrained Shear Strength (S u ) NO ACCEPTABLE CORRELATIONS (q t - vo )/N kt (N kt = 15 for CHS) Aas et al. (1986) 0.22 vo (0.5K D ) 1.25 Marchetti et al. (2001) ISSMGE TC 16 Report NOTES: 1. (N 1 ) 60 = N 60 (P a / vo ) 0.5 for sands. P a = Atmospheric Pressure = 1 bar 1 tsf. 2. vo = Insitu Effective Overburden Pressure = Insitu Vertical Effective Stress. 3. vo = Total Overburden Pressure = Insitu Vertical Total Stress. Slide 19 of 59
20 SOIL SHEAR STRENGTH CORRELATIONS FROM IN-SITU TESTING Effective Soil Friction Angle ( ) Summary from NCHRP Report 651 (2010) Equation ' = *exp( (N 1 ) 60 ) Reference Peck, Hanson, & Thorton (1974) from Kulhawy & Mayne (1990) ' = [20*(N 1 ) 60 ] for 3.5 (N 1 ) ' = *(N 1 ) (N 1 ) 2 60 ' = [15.4(N 1 ) 60 ] ' = [15(N 1 ) 60 ] for (N 1 ) 60 > 5 and 45 Hatanaka & Uchida (1996) Peck, Hanson, & Thorton (1974) from Wolff (1989) Mayne et a. (2001) based on Hatanaka & Uchida (1996) JRA (1996) Slide 20 of 59
21 SOIL ENGINEERING PROPERTY CORRELATIONS FROM IN-SITU TESTING Soil Density/Consistency N q t (MPa) t (pcf) V. Loose <30 Loose ( ) SANDS Medium Dense Dense Very Dense >50 > Very Soft COHESIVE SOILS Firm Stiff Very Stiff Hard >30 > after Fang et al. (1991) and EM NOTE: 1 MPa = tsf NA Slide 21 of 59
22 NORMALIZED SPT N VALUE N1 60 (AASHTO 2012) N1 60 = C N N 60 Where: C N = [0.77log 10 (40/' vo )] (C N < 2.0) ' vo = Insitu Vertical Effective Stress (ksf) N 60 = Corrected SPT Blow Count = (ER/60%)N Table N1 60 vs. f (after Bowles, 1977). N1 60 f ( ) < * Assume ER = 60% (Cathead) & 80% (Automatic) Slide 22 of 59
23 AASHTO (2012) 10.6 SPREAD FOOTINGS Effective Footing Dimensions B = B 2e b L = L 2e L Where: e b = Eccentricity parallel to Dimension B. e L = Eccentricity parallel to Dimension L. Figure C Reduced Footing Dimensions. Slide 23 of 59
24 AASHTO (2012) 10.6 SPREAD FOOTINGS Bearing Resistance of Soil q R = φ b q n Where: q R = Factored Resistance φ b = Resistance Factor (see Article ) q n = Nominal Bearing Resistance = q ult in CIVE.4310 Slide 24 of 59
25 REVIEW BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION (after Meyerhof, 1963) q u = c'n c F cs F cd F ci + qn q F qs F qd F qi + 0.5BN F s F d F i Cohesion Component Where: c' = Soil Cohesion N c = Bearing Capacity Factor - Cohesion q = Surcharge = D f N q = Bearing Capacity Factor - Surcharge = Soil Unit Weight N = Bearing Capacity Factor Soil F cs, F qs, F s = Shape Factors F cd, F qd, F d = Depth Factors F ci, F qi, F i = Inclination Factors Soil Component Soil Below Footing Surcharge Component Soil Above Footing B = Footing Width Slide 25 of 59
26 BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS (Dimensionless, based on ') N q N c N q N tan cot N 1tan 2 q e 2 tan Bearing Capacity Factor (Nc, Nq, N) N q N c N c N q N Also see Table 12.1, Das FGE (2006) for Tabular Data 1 N Effective Friction Angle (') ( ) 1 Slide 26 of 59
27 BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS (Table 12.1 Das FGE 2006) Slide 27 of 59
28 BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS (Table a-1, AASHTO 2012) Slide 28 of 59
29 BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS Factor Cohesion Surcharge Unit Weight Shape (De Beer, 1970) Depth (D f /B 1) (Hanson, 1970) Depth (D f /B >1) (Hanson, 1970) Inclination Hanna & Meyerhof (1981) F F q B cs 1 B N B F qs 1 tan F L N s c L L F cd 1 0. cd 4 F ci tan 1 D f B 1 90 D f B 2 F F qd qd 1 2 tan 1 sin 1 2 tan F qi D 1 f 1 sin 2 tan B D f B F d F d F i = Inclination of Load with respect to vertical The factor tan -1 (D f /B) is in radians Slide 29 of 59
30 BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION (Sec , AASHTO LRFD Design Specifications, 2012) q n = cn cm + D f N qm C wq + 0.5BN m C w Cohesion Component Where: c = Undrained Shear Strength N cm = N c s c i c N c = Cohesion BCF for undrained loading (see Table a-1) s c = Footing Shape Correction Factor (see Table a-3) i c = Load Inclination Factor (Eq a-5 or 6) This is Munfakh et al. (2001) for determining q n Surcharge Component Soil Above Footing = Moist Unit Weight of soil above footing D f = Footing Embedment Depth N qm = N q s q d q i q N q = Surcharge BCF (see Table a-1) s q = Footing Shape Correction Factor (see Table a-3) d q = Depth Correction Factor (see Table a-4) i q = Load Inclination Factor (Eq a-7) C wq = Groundwater CF (Table a-2) Soil Component Soil Below Footing = Moist Unit Weight of soil below footing B = Footing Width N m = N s i N = Unit Weight BCF (see Table a-1) s = Footing Shape Correction Factor (see Table a-3) i = Load Inclination Factor (Eq a-8) C w = Groundwater CF (Table a-2) Slide 30 of 59
31 PRESUMPTIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURES (from Table , IBC 2012) Material USCS q all (ksf) Crystalline Bedrock 12 Sedimentary and Foliated Rock 4 Sandy Gravel and/or Gravel GW & GP 3 Sand, Silty Sand, Clayey Sand, Silty Gravel, & Clayey Gravel Clay, Sandy Clay, Silty Clay, Clayey Silt, Silt, and Sandy Silt SW, SP, SM, SC, GM, GC CL, CH, ML, MH See also Table 1 NAVFAC DM7.02 (p. 142) and Table C AASHTO (2012). Slide 31 of 59
32 PRESUMPTIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURES (Table C AASHTO (2012) based on Table 1 NAVFAC DM7.02 (p. 142)) Slide 32 of 59
33 AASHTO (2012) 10.6 SPREAD FOOTINGS Other Bearing Capacity Considerations Figure C b-1. Punching Failure (Reduction in Shear Strength) Figure C c-1 (& c-2). Footing on Slopes (Reduction in Bearing Factors) Figure C e-2. Footing on Two Layer Soil Systems (Dependent). Slide 33 of 59
34 AASHTO (2012) 10.6 SPREAD FOOTINGS Settlement Analysis S S S S t e c s Where: S t = Total Settlement S e = Elastic Settlement S p = Primary Consolidation Settlement S s = Secondary Consolidation Settlement Slide 34 of 59
35 AASHTO (2012) 10.6 SPREAD FOOTINGS Settlement (Cohesionless Soils) Elastic Half-Space Method: Where: S e q o (1 144E 2 s ) z A S e = Elastic Settlement q o = Applied Vertical Stress (ksf) A = Effective Area of Footing (ft 2 ) E s = Young s Modulus of Soil (ksi) (See Article if direct measurements are not available) = Soil Poisson s Ratio (See Article if direct measurements are not available) z = Shape Factor (dimensionless) (As specified in Table ) Unless E s varies significantly with depth, E s should be determined at a depth of about ½ to 2/3 of B below the footing. If the soil modulus varies significantly with depth, a weighted average value of E s should be used. Slide 35 of 59
36 ELASTIC SETTLEMENT OF SOIL (DMT) Uses Direct Measurement of Soil to Calculate Settlement Figure courtesy of Marchetti (1999) - The Flat Dilatometer (DMT) and It's Applications to Geotechnical Design Slide 36 of 59
37 FLAT PLATE DILATOMETER (DMT) (ASTM D ) Direct push of stainless steel plate at 20-cm intervals; No borings; no cuttings. Introduced by Marchetti (1980). 18 o angled blade Pneumatic inflation of flexible steel membrane using nitrogen gas Two pressure readings taken (A and B) within about 1 minute. A B Figures and Text courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 37 of 59
38 FLAT PLATE DILATOMETER (DMT) (ASTM D ) Figure courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 38 of 59
39 FLAT PLATE DILATOMETER (DMT) (ASTM D (2007)) Manual Reading System (Standard) Marchetti Device (ASCE JGE, March 1980; ASTM Geot. Testing J., June 1986) Figures courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 39 of 59
40 FLAT PLATE DILATOMETER (DMT) (ASTM D (2007)) Computerized System (Standard) Figure courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 40 of 59
41 FLAT PLATE DILATOMETER (DMT) (ASTM D ) Calibrations: A, B (positive values) Readings: contact pressure "A" and expansion pressure "B" with depth Corrections for membrane stiffness in air: p 0 = 1.05(A + A) (B - DB) p 1 =B -B DMT INDICES: I D = material index = (p 1 -p o )/(p o -u o ) E D = dilatometer modulus = 34.7(p 1 -p o ) K D = horizontal stress index = (p o -u o )/s vo A B Text courtesy of FHWA NHI Course Subsurface Investigations Slide 41 of 59
42 FLAT PLATE DILATOMETER (DMT) (ASTM D (2007)) Results Charleston, SC Project Soil Behavior Classification E D with Depth Raw Data & Calibrations DMT Results courtesy of WPC Engineering Inc. Slide 42 of 59
43 SPT-CPT-DMT COMPARISON From Local Project in Charleston, SC Area (2000) Also see Hajduk, E.L., Meng, J., Wright, W.B., and Zur, K.J. (2006). Dilatometer Experience in the Charleston, South Carolina Region, 2nd International Conference on the Flat Dilatometer, Washington, D.C. Slide 43 of 59
44 ELASTIC SETTLEMENT OF SOIL (DMT) S e M DMT Z Stress Distribution Where: S e = Elastic Settlement = Change in Stress M DMT = Constrained Modulus Z = Depth Figure courtesy of Marchetti (1999) - The Flat Dilatometer (DMT) and It's Applications to Geotechnical Design Slide 44 of 59
45 ELASTIC SETTLEMENT OF SOIL (DMT) Figure from Hayes (1990) Slide 45 of 59
46 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES COULOMB OR RANKINE REVIEW Coulomb Wedge Theory: Accounts for wall friction. Unique failure angle for each design. Used by National Masonry Concrete Association (NCMA) & USACE. Inaccurate passive earth pressures w/large wall angles or friction angle (particularly for ' > ' /2). Decreased accuracy w/ depth. Calculates lower active earth pressure than Rankine for level backslope. Rankine State of Stress Theory: Does not account for wall friction. Requires vertical wall. Conservative relative to other methods. Fixed plane of failure. Favored by the transportation agencies (AASHTO and FHWA). See AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. Slide 46 of 59
47 CIVE.4850 CAPSTONE DESIGN LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES COULOMB OR RANKINE REVIEW Coulomb Rankine 1 sin Ka 1 sin K K K K a p p p tan tan 1 K a 2 2 (45 / 1 sin 1 sin (45 / 2) 2) Slide 47 of 59
48 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES COULOMB OR RANKINE? Figure C Application of (a) Rankine and (b) Coulumb Earth Pressure Theories in Retaining Wall Design (AASHTO 2012). Slide 48 of 59
49 REVIEW: RETAINING WALL DESIGN ANALYSES Overturning Sliding (Strength) Bearing Capacity (Strength) Overall Stability (Service) Figure Das FGE (2005) and Figure C (AASHTO 2012). Slide 49 of 59
50 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS Service Limit States Abutments, piers, and wall shall be investigated for: Excessive vertical and lateral displacements Vertical: Dependent on wall Lateral: < 1.5 inches (C11.5.2) Overall Stability Can use Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, and Spencer Analysis Methods ( ) Slide 50 of 59
51 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS Strength Limit States Abutments and walls shall be investigated at the strength limit states using Eq for: Bearing Resistance Failure (i.e. bearing capacity) Lateral Sliding Excessive Loss of Base Contact Pullout Failure of anchors and soils reinforcements Structural Failure Slide 51 of 59
52 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS Load Combinations & Load Factors Where: DC = Dead Load of Structural Components DW = Dead Load of Wearing Surfaces and Utilities EH = Horizontal Earth Pressure Load ES = Earth Surcharge Load EV = Vertical Pressure from Dead Load of Earth Fill WA = Water Load and Stream Pressure Figure C Typical Application of Load Factors for Sliding and Eccentricity. Slide 52 of 59
53 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS Load Combinations & Load Factors Where: DC = Dead Load of Structural Components DW = Dead Load of Wearing Surfaces and Utilities EH = Horizontal Earth Pressure Load ES = Earth Surcharge Load EV = Vertical Pressure from Dead Load of Earth Fill WA = Water Load and Stream Pressure Figure C Typical Application of Load Factors for Sliding and Eccentricity. Slide 53 of 59
54 AASHTO (2012) 11 ABUTMENTS Load Combinations & Load Factors Where: LS = Live Load Surcharge Figure C Typical Application of Live Load Surcharge. Slide 54 of 59
55 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS BEARING RESISTANCE (SOIL) v V B 2e Where: V = Sum of Vertical Forces B = Footing Width e = Eccentricity Figure Bearing Stress Criteria for Conventional Wall Foundations on Soil. Slide 55 of 59
56 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS Sliding (refer to Failure by Sliding) R R = φr n = φ R + φ ep R ep Where: R R = Factored Resistance against Failure by Sliding R n = Nominal Sliding Resistance φ = Shear Resistance Factor (see Table ) R = Nominal Shear Resistance (=V*tan) φ ep = Passive Resistance Factor (see Table ) R ep = Nominal Passive Resistance Slide 56 of 59
57 AASHTO (2012) SECTION 11 ABUTMENTS Passive Resistance Neglected in Stability Calculations Unless base of the wall extends below the depth of maximum scour, freeze-thaw, or other disturbances Neglected is soil providing passive resistance is, or is likely to become, soft, loose, or disturbed, or if contact between the soil and wall is not tight. Slide 57 of 59
58 INTERFACIAL FRICTION ANGLES (NAVFAC DM7.02) NOTE: ⅓' ' < ⅔' Section : Concrete Cast against Soil: tan = tan f Precast Concrete Footing: tan = 0.8*tan f Slide 58 of 59
59 MODULE 3 TASKS (REFER TO MODULE HANDOUT) Using Boring B-2 (and assuming that elevations begin at the ground surface for the existing bridge), you will do the following: Determine factored bearing capacity (q R ) Compute applied vertical stress (q o ) based on 1 inch of settlement. Slide 59 of 59
OVERVIEW REVIEW OF FOUNDATIONS & SOILS ENG.
Soil Borings. 14.485 CAPSTONE DESIGN OVERVIEW REVIEW OF 14.431 FOUNDATIONS & SOILS ENG. Geotechnical Report (not covered). Bearing Pressure Calculations. Settlement Calculations. Lateral Earth Pressure
More informationSHEET 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
More informationBoreholes. Implementation. Boring. Boreholes may be excavated by one of these methods: 1. Auger Boring 2. Wash Boring 3.
Implementation Boreholes 1. Auger Boring 2. Wash Boring 3. Rotary Drilling Boring Boreholes may be excavated by one of these methods: 4. Percussion Drilling The right choice of method depends on: Ground
More informationReinforced 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
More informationChapter 7 GEOMECHANICS
Chapter 7 Final SCDOT GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN MANUAL August 2008 Table of Contents Section Page 7.1 Introduction...7-1 7.2 Geotechnical Design Approach...7-1 7.3 Geotechnical Engineering Quality Assurance...7-2
More informationIn-class Exercise. Problem: Select load factors for the Strength I and Service I Limit States for the. Loading Diagram for Student Exercise
In-class Exercise Problem: Select load factors for the Strength I and Service I Limit States for the problem illustrated below. Loading Diagram for Student Exercise For this exercise, complete the following
More informationIN SITU TESTING TECHNOLOGY FOR FOUNDATION & EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING. Wesley Spang, Ph.D., P.E. AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc.
IN SITU TESTING TECHNOLOGY FOR FOUNDATION & EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING Wesley Spang, Ph.D., P.E. AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc. Portland, Oregon In situ testing of soil, which essentially consists of evaluating
More informationProf. Samuel G. Paikowsky
14.528 Drilled Deep Foundations Spring 2014 Lecture 2 - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND SOIL PARAMETERS Prof. Samuel G. Paikowsky Geotechnical Engineering Research Laboratory University of Massachusetts Lowell
More informationCPT Data Interpretation Theory Manual
CPT Data Interpretation Theory Manual 2016 Rocscience Inc. Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 3 2 Soil Parameter Interpretation... 5 3 Soil Profiling... 11 3.1 Non-Normalized SBT Charts... 11 3.2 Normalized
More informationCone Penetration Test (CPT) Interpretation
Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Interpretation Gregg uses a proprietary CPT interpretation and plotting software. The software takes the CPT data and performs basic interpretation in terms of soil behavior
More informationAPPENDIX F CORRELATION EQUATIONS. F 1 In-Situ Tests
APPENDIX F 1 APPENDIX F CORRELATION EQUATIONS F 1 In-Situ Tests 1. SPT (1) Sand (Hatanaka and Uchida, 1996), = effective vertical stress = effective friction angle = atmosphere pressure (Shmertmann, 1975)
More informationShear Strength of Soils
Shear Strength of Soils STRESSES IN A SOIL ELEMENT t s v Analyze Effective Stresses (s ) Load carried by Soil t Where: s H t t s H s = t f = s v = s H = t = s v Stresses in a Soil Element after Figure
More informationChapter 12 Subsurface Exploration
Page 12 1 Chapter 12 Subsurface Exploration 1. The process of identifying the layers of deposits that underlie a proposed structure and their physical characteristics is generally referred to as (a) subsurface
More informationDeep Foundations 2. Load Capacity of a Single Pile
Deep Foundations 2 Load Capacity of a Single Pile All calculations of pile capacity are approximate because it is almost impossible to account for the variability of soil types and the differences in the
More informationConventional Field Testing & Issues (SPT, CPT, DCPT, Geophysical methods)
Conventional Field Testing & Issues (SPT, CPT, DCPT, Geophysical methods) Ajanta Sachan Assistant Professor Civil Engineering IIT Gandhinagar Conventional Field Testing 1 Field Test: In-situ shear strength
More informationCivil Engineering, Surveying and Environmental Consulting WASP0059.ltr.JLS.Mich Ave Bridge Geotech.docx
2365 Haggerty Road South * Canton, Michigan 48188 P: 734-397-3100 * F: 734-397-3131 * www.manniksmithgroup.com August 29, 2012 Mr. Richard Kent Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission 2330 Platt
More informationTechnical Supplement 14Q. Abutment Design for Small Bridges. (210 VI NEH, August 2007)
Technical Supplement 14Q (10 VI NEH, August 007) Issued August 007 Cover photo: Design of abutments for small bridges reuires geotechnical analysis. Advisory Note Techniues and approaches contained in
More informationPhoto 1 - Southerly view across 2700 parking lot toward existing building. Multi-residential building borders western side of property in upper right of view. Photo 2 - Southerly view across 2750 parking
More informationClass Principles of Foundation Engineering CEE430/530
Class Principles of Foundation Engineering CEE430/530 1-1 General Information Lecturer: Scott A. Barnhill, P.E. Lecture Time: Thursday, 7:10 pm to 9:50 pm Classroom: Kaufmann, Room 224 Office Hour: I have
More informationManual on Subsurface Investigations National Highway Institute Publication No. FHWA NHI Federal Highway Administration Washington, DC
Manual on Subsurface Investigations National Highway Institute Publication No. FHWA NHI-01-031 Federal Highway Administration Washington, DC Geotechnical Site Characterization July 2001 by Paul W. Mayne,
More informationSHEAR STRENGTH OF SOIL
Soil Failure Criteria SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOIL Knowledge about the shear strength of soil important for the analysis of: Bearing capacity of foundations, Slope stability, Lateral pressure on retaining structures,
More informationINTRODUCTION 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
More informationTable 3. Empirical Coefficients for BS 8002 equation. A (degrees) Rounded Sub-angular. 2 Angular. B (degrees) Uniform Moderate grading.
Hatanaka and Uchida (1996); ' 20N 20 12N 20 ' 45 A lower bound for the above equation is given as; 12N 15 ' 45 Table 3. Empirical Coefficients for BS 8002 equation A Angularity 1) A (degrees) Rounded 0
More informationB-1 BORE LOCATION PLAN. EXHIBIT Drawn By: 115G BROOKS VETERINARY CLINIC CITY BASE LANDING AND GOLIAD ROAD SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
N B-1 SYMBOLS: Exploratory Boring Location Project Mngr: BORE LOCATION PLAN Project No. GK EXHIBIT Drawn By: 115G1063.02 GK Scale: Checked By: 1045 Central Parkway North, Suite 103 San Antonio, Texas 78232
More informationCHAPTER 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
More informationHKIE-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
More informationB-1 SURFACE ELEVATION
5A 5B LOGGED BY El. S. Bhangoo DRILLING CONTRACTOR Pitcher Drilling DRILLING METHOD Rotary Wash BEGIN DATE 12-14-12 SAMPLER TYPE(S) AND SIZE(S) (ID) SPT, MC BOREHOLE BACKFILL AND COMPLETION COMPLETION
More informationSOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART COARSE-GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON NO.200 SIEVE FINE-GRAINED SOILS 50% OR MORE PASSES THE NO.200 SIEVE PRIMARY DIVISIONS GRAVELS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED
More informationEnhanced In-Situ Testing for Geotechnical Site Characterization. Graduate Course CEE 6423
Enhanced In-Situ Testing for Geotechnical Site Characterization SPT, VST, DMT, PMT, CHT, DHT, CPT Graduate Course CEE 6423 Paul W. Mayne, PhD, P.E. Professor, Geosystems Program Civil & Environmental Engineering
More information8.1. What is meant by the shear strength of soils? Solution 8.1 Shear strength of a soil is its internal resistance to shearing stresses.
8.1. What is meant by the shear strength of soils? Solution 8.1 Shear strength of a soil is its internal resistance to shearing stresses. 8.2. Some soils show a peak shear strength. Why and what type(s)
More informationProject: ITHACA-TOMPKINS REGIONAL AIRPORT EXPANSION Project Location: ITHACA, NY Project Number: 218-34 Key to Soil Symbols and Terms TERMS DESCRIBING CONSISTENCY OR CONDITION COARSE-GRAINED SOILS (major
More informationReliability of Settlement Analysis for Shallow Foundations
Geotechnical Engineering Research Laboratory University of Massachusetts Lowell, MA USA Reliability of Settlement Analysis for Shallow Foundations 14.533 ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING Fall 2013 Samuel
More informationIN SITU SPECIFIC GRAVITY VS GRAIN SIZE: A BETTER METHOD TO ESTIMATE NEW WORK DREDGING PRODUCTION
IN SITU SPECIFIC GRAVITY VS GRAIN SIZE: A BETTER METHOD TO ESTIMATE NEW WORK DREDGING PRODUCTION Nancy Case O Bourke, PE 1, Gregory L. Hartman, PE 2 and Paul Fuglevand, PE 3 ABSTRACT In-situ specific gravity
More informationEngineeringmanuals. 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
More informationEarth Pressure Theory
Lateral Earth Pressure Page 1 Earth Pressure Theory Examples of Retaining Walls Lateral Earth Pressure Page 2 At-Rest, Active and Passive Earth Pressure Wednesday, August 17, 2011 12:45 PM At-rest condition
More informationSoils. Technical English - I 10 th week
Technical English - I 10 th week Soils Soil Mechanics is defined as the branch of engineering science which enables an engineer to know theoretically or experimentally the behavior of soil under the action
More informationPredicting Settlement and Stability of Wet Coal Ash Impoundments using Dilatometer Tests
Predicting Settlement and Stability of Wet Coal Ash Impoundments using Dilatometer Tests Chris Hardin, P.E. CH2M Hill, Charlotte, North Carolina, E-mail: Chris.Hardin@ch2m.com Roger Failmezger, P.E., F.
More informationThis 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
More informationDepth (ft) USCS Soil Description TOPSOIL & FOREST DUFF
Test Pit No. TP-6 Location: Latitude 47.543003, Longitude -121.980441 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 1,132 feet Depth (ft) USCS Soil Description 0 1.5 1.5 5.0 SM 5.0 8.0 SM Loose to medium dense,
More informationBEARING 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
More informationOBJECTIVES OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
OBJECTIVES OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Three (3) General Objectives for Subsurface Exploration: 1. Define Soil and Rock Stratigraphy and Structure within Proposed Construction Zone of Influence. 2. Obtain
More informationCompute 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)
More informationSoil Mechanics Brief Review. Presented by: Gary L. Seider, P.E.
Soil Mechanics Brief Review Presented by: Gary L. Seider, P.E. 1 BASIC ROCK TYPES Igneous Rock (e.g. granite, basalt) Rock formed in place by cooling from magma Generally very stiff/strong and often abrasive
More informationREQUIREMENTS FOR ALL SUCCESSFUL DEEP FOUNDATION PROJECTS
REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL SUCCESSFUL DEEP FOUNDATION PROJECTS 1 st Leg: Design 3 rd Leg: Inspection 2 nd Leg: Construction Slide 1 of 125 SELECTED REFERENCES YOU SHOULD HAVE IN YOUR LIBRARY Naval Facilities
More informationGEOTECHNICAL 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
More informationwww.novotechsoftware.com The standard penetration test (SPT) is an in-situ dynamic penetration test designed to provide information on the geotechnical engineering properties of soil. The test procedure
More informationLateral Strength and Stiffness of Post and Pier Foundations
An ASABE Meeting Presentation Paper Number: 152190408 Lateral Strength and Stiffness of Post and Pier Foundations David Roy Bohnhoff Professor, Biological Systems Engineering Department University of Wisconsin-Madison,
More informationNEW DOWN-HOLE PENETROMETER (DHP-CIGMAT) FOR CONSTRUCTION APPLICATIONS
NEW DOWN-HOLE PENETROMETER (DHP-CIGMAT) FOR CONSTRUCTION APPLICATIONS 1 2 C. Vipulanandan 1, Ph.D., M. ASCE and Omer F. Usluogullari 2 Chairman, Professor, Director of Center for Innovative Grouting Materials
More informationCIVE.5370 EXPERIMENTAL SOIL MECHANICS Soil Sampling, Testing, & Classification Review
DATA COLLECTION, INTERPRETATION, & ANALYSIS TO GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FLOW CHART PRIOR INFORMATION Reconnaissance Topography Geology Hydrology Environment SITE EXPLORATION Geophysics Drilling and Coring
More informationSITE INVESTIGATION 1
SITE INVESTIGATION 1 Definition The process of determining the layers of natural soil deposits that will underlie a proposed structure and their physical properties is generally referred to as site investigation.
More informationDrilled Shaft Foundations in Limestone. Dan Brown, P.E., Ph.D. Dan Brown and Associates
Drilled Shaft Foundations in Limestone Dan Brown, P.E., Ph.D. Dan Brown and Associates Foundation Engineering How we teach our students Fundamental understanding of soil and rock behavior (good!) Focus
More informationUse of RMR to Improve Determination of the Bearing Resistance of Rock
Creating Value Delivering Solutions Use of RMR to Improve Determination of the Bearing Resistance of Rock Scott Zang, P.E. Michael Baker Jr., Inc. ASD Design Q v allowable is a presumptive allowable bearing
More informationLATERAL EARTH PRESSURE AND RETAINING STRUCTURES
Topic Outline LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE AND RETAINING STRUCTURES Types of retaining structures Lateral earth pressure Earth pressure at rest Rankine s Theory Coulomb s Theory Cullman s graphic solution Braced
More informationThe 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
More informationUNIT I SITE INVESTIGATION AND SELECTION OF FOUNDATION Types of boring 1.Displacement borings It is combined method of sampling & boring operation. Closed bottom sampler, slit cup, or piston type is forced
More informationPierce County Department of Planning and Land Services Development Engineering Section
Page 1 of 7 Pierce County Department of Planning and Land Services Development Engineering Section PROJECT NAME: DATE: APPLICATION NO.: PCDE NO.: LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA (LHA) GEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
More informationGeotechnical Engineering Report
Geotechnical Engineering Report Turner Turnpike Widening Bridge B Bridge Crossing: South 257 th West Avenue Creek County, Oklahoma June 1, 2016 Terracon Project No. 04155197 Prepared for: Garver, LLC Tulsa,
More informationPRINCIPLES OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
PRINCIPLES OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING Fourth Edition BRAJA M. DAS California State University, Sacramento I(T)P Boston Albany Bonn Cincinnati London Madrid Melbourne Mexico City New York Paris San Francisco
More informationCone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice
Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice Table Of Contents: LIST OF CONTENTS v (4) PREFACE ix (2) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xi (1) SYMBOL LIST xii (4) CONVERSION FACTORS xvi (6) GLOSSARY xxii 1. INTRODUCTION
More informationChapter 17 EMBANKMENTS
Chapter 17 EMBANKMENTS Final SCDOT GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN MANUAL June 2010 Table of Contents Section Page 17.1 Introduction...17-1 17.2 Failure Mechanisms...17-1 17.2.1 Creep...17-2 17.2.2 Slide...17-3 17.2.3
More informationNCHRP LRFD DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS. Final Report September 2009 APPENDIX G BIAS CALCULATION EXAMPLES
NCHRP 4-3 LRFD DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Final Report September 009 APPENDIX G BIAS CALCULATION EXAMPLES Prepared for National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research
More information(THIS IS ONLY A SAMPLE REPORT OR APPENDIX OFFERED TO THE USERS OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM
C A U T I O N!! (THIS IS ONLY A SAMPLE REPORT OR APPENDIX OFFERED TO THE USERS OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM EQLique&Settle2. THE AUTHOR IS HEREBY RELEASED OF ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY INCORRECT USE OF THIS SAMPLE
More informationChapter 6 Bearing Capacity
Chapter 6 Bearing Capacity 6-1. Scope This chapter provides guidance for the determination of the ultimate and allowable bearing stress values for foundations on rock. The chapter is subdivided into four
More informationEN 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
More informationKDOT Geotechnical Manual Edition. Table of Contents
KDOT Geotechnical Manual 2007 Edition The KDOT Geotechnical Manual is available two volumes. Both volumes are very large electronic (pdf) files which may take several minutes to download. The table of
More informationThe process of determining the layers of natural soil deposits that will underlie a proposed structure and their physical properties is generally
The process of determining the layers of natural soil deposits that will underlie a proposed structure and their physical properties is generally referred to as sub surface investigation 2 1 For proper
More informationLesson 25. Static Pile Load Testing, O-cell, and Statnamic. Reference Manual Chapter 18
Lesson 25 Static Pile Load Testing, O-cell, and Statnamic Reference Manual Chapter 18 STATIC LOAD TESTING Most accurate method to determine static pile capacity Perform at design or construction stage
More informationD1. A normally consolidated clay has the following void ratio e versus effective stress σ relationship obtained in an oedometer test.
(d) COMPRESSIBILITY AND CONSOLIDATION D1. A normally consolidated clay has the following void ratio e versus effective stress σ relationship obtained in an oedometer test. (a) Plot the e - σ curve. (b)
More informationH.1 SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE STRATIGRAPHY AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES (DATA PACKAGE)
DRAFT ONONDAGA LAKE CAPPING AND DREDGE AREA AND DEPTH INITIAL DESIGN SUBMITTAL H.1 SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE STRATIGRAPHY AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES (DATA PACKAGE) Parsons P:\Honeywell -SYR\444576 2008 Capping\09
More informationAxially Loaded Piles
Axially Loaded Piles 1 t- Curve Method using Finite Element Analysis The stress-strain relationship for an axially loaded pile can be described through three loading mechanisms: axial deformation in the
More informationINTI 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
More informationCPT: Geopractica Contracting (Pty) Ltd Total depth: m, Date:
The plot below presents the cross correlation coeficient between the raw qc and fs values (as measured on the field). X axes presents the lag distance (one lag is the distance between two sucessive CPT
More informationFoundation 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
More informationSafe bearing capacity evaluation of the bridge site along Syafrubesi-Rasuwagadhi road, Central Nepal
Bulletin of the Department of Geology Bulletin of the Department of Geology, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal, Vol. 12, 2009, pp. 95 100 Safe bearing capacity evaluation of the bridge site along
More informationChapter 5 Shear Strength of Soil
Page 5 Chapter 5 Shear Strength of Soil. The internal resistance per unit area that the soil mass can offer to resist failure and sliding along any plane inside it is called (a) strength (b) shear strength
More information3-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
More informationOP-13. PROCEDURES FOR DESIGN OF EMBANKMENT
Page 1 of 8 WORK INSTRUCTIONS FOR ENGINEERS TYC Compiled by : LSS Checked by : GSS Approved by : OP-13. PROCEDURES FOR DESIGN OF EMBANKMENT Page of 8 13.0 13.1. OVERALL PROCEDURES This section will briefly
More informationABSTRACT. Use and Application of Piezocone Penetration Testing in Presumpscot Formation
ABSTRACT Use and Application of Piezocone Penetration Testing in Presumpscot Formation Presumpscot Formation is commonly referred to as glacial marine clay found along the coastline of eastern New England.
More informationGeotechnical Subsoil Investigation for the Design of Water Tank Foundation
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 4, Issue 3, March 2014 1 Geotechnical Subsoil Investigation for the Design of Water Tank Foundation * Ngerebara Owajiokiche Dago, **
More informationGeotechnical Aspects of the Seismic Update to the ODOT Bridge Design Manual. Stuart Edwards, P.E Geotechnical Consultant Workshop
Geotechnical Aspects of the Seismic Update to the ODOT Bridge Design Manual Stuart Edwards, P.E. 2017 Geotechnical Consultant Workshop Changes Role of Geotechnical Engineer Background Methodology Worked
More informationCone Penetration Test Design Guide for State Geotechnical Engineers
Cone Penetration Test Design Guide for State Geotechnical Engineers Author: David Saftner Report Number: 2018-32 Date Published: November 2018 Minnesota Department of Transportation Research Services &
More informationA Comparative Study on Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations in Sand from N and /
DOI 10.1007/s40030-017-0246-7 ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION A Comparative Study on Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations in Sand from N and / V. A. Sakleshpur 1 C. N. V. Satyanarayana Reddy 1 Received: 9 January
More informationCalibration of Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts for the 2010 FHWA Design Method
Calibration of Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts for the 21 FHWA Design Method Murad Y. Abu-Farsakh, Ph.D., P.E. Qiming Chen, Ph.D., P.E. Md Nafiul Haque, MS Feb 2, 213 213 Louisiana Transportation
More informationFUNDAMENTALS OF CONSOLIDATION
FUNDAMENTALS OF CONSOLIDATION σ (Vertical Stress Increase) SAND CLAY CONSOLIDATION: Volume change in saturated soils caused by the expulsion of pore water from loading. Saturated Soils: σ causes u to increase
More informationSOIL MECHANICS AND APPLIED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING FUNDAMENTAL FACTS OF SOIL BEHAVIOR
SOIL MECHANICS AND APPLIED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING The Subsurface is Unknown to many and Blind Guesswork cannot be used to Determine the Character and Behavior of the Underlying Soil Conditions. FUNDAMENTAL
More informationLiquefaction and Foundations
Liquefaction and Foundations Amit Prashant Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar Short Course on Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings 26 30 November, 2012 What is Liquefaction? Liquefaction
More informationGeotechnical Indications Of Eastern Bypass Area In Port Harcourt, Niger Delta
Geotechnical Indications Of Eastern Bypass Area In Port Harcourt, Niger Delta Warmate Tamunonengiyeofori Geostrat International Services Limited, Rivers State, Nigeria www.geostratinternational.com info@geostratinternational.com,
More informationReliability Analysis of Anchored and Cantilevered Flexible Retaining Structures
LSD2003: International Workshop on Limit State Design in Geotechnical Engineering Practice Phoon, Honjo & Gilbert (eds) 2003 World Scientific Publishing Company Reliability Analysis of Anchored and Cantilevered
More informationSoil and Rock Strength. Chapter 8 Shear Strength. Steel Strength. Concrete Strength. Dr. Talat Bader May Steel. Concrete.
Chapter 8 Shear Strength Dr. Talat Bader May 2006 Soil and Rock Strength Unconfined compressive strength (MPa) Steel Concrete 20 100 250 750 0.001 0.01 Soil 0.1 1.0 10 Rock 100 250 F y = 250 to 750 MPa
More informationSoil Dynamics Prof. Deepankar Choudhury Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay
Soil Dynamics Prof. Deepankar Choudhury Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Module - 4 Dynamic Soil Properties Lecture - 23 Cyclic Stress Ratio, Evaluation of CRR, Correction
More informationChapter (11) Pile Foundations
Chapter (11) Introduction Piles are structural members that are made of steel, concrete, or timber. They are used to build pile foundations (classified as deep foundations) which cost more than shallow
More informationCPT Guide 5 th Edition. CPT Applications - Deep Foundations. Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. Dr. Peter K. Robertson Webinar # /2/2013
Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. Site Investigation Experts CPT Applications - Deep Foundations Dr. Peter K. Robertson Webinar #6 2013 CPT Guide 5 th Edition Robertson & Cabal (Robertson) 5 th Edition 2012
More informationSHEAR STRENGTH OF SOIL
SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOIL Necessity of studying Shear Strength of soils : Soil failure usually occurs in the form of shearing along internal surface within the soil. Shear Strength: Thus, structural strength
More informationTable of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering 1.1 Geotechnical Engineering 1.2 The Unique Nature of Soil and Rock Materials
Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering 1.1 Geotechnical Engineering 1.2 The Unique Nature of Soil and Rock Materials 1.3 Scope of This Book 1.4 Historical Development of Geotechnical
More informationGEOTECHNICAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION
GEOTECHNICAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION Neil Anderson, Ph.D. Professor of Geology and Geophysics Richard W. Stephenson, P.E., Ph.D. Professor of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering University
More informationIntroduction to Soil Mechanics
Introduction to Soil Mechanics Sela Sode and Colin Jones WILEY Blackwell Contents Preface Dedication and Acknowledgments List of Symbols Soil Structure 1.1 Volume relationships 1.1.1 Voids ratio (e) 1.1.2
More informationSoil type identification and fines content estimation using the Screw Driving Sounding (SDS) data
Mirjafari, S.Y. & Orense, R.P. & Suemasa, N. () Proc. th NZGS Geotechnical Symposium. Eds. GJ Alexander & CY Chin, Napier Soil type identification and fines content estimation using the Screw Driving Sounding
More informationS E C T I O N 1 2 P R O D U C T S E L E C T I O N G U I D E - H E L I C A L S C R E W P I L E F O U N D A T I O N S
1. P R O D U C T S E L E C T I O N G U I D E - H E L I C A L S C R E W P I L E F O U N D A T I O N S Helical foundation pile includes a lead and extension(s). The lead section is made of a central steel
More informationLandslide FE Stability Analysis
Landslide FE Stability Analysis L. Kellezi Dept. of Geotechnical Engineering, GEO-Danish Geotechnical Institute, Denmark S. Allkja Altea & Geostudio 2000, Albania P. B. Hansen Dept. of Geotechnical Engineering,
More informationSoil Behaviour Type from the CPT: an update
Soil Behaviour Type from the CPT: an update P.K. Robertson Gregg Drilling & Testing Inc., Signal Hill, California, USA ABSTRACT: One of the most common applications of CPT results is to evaluate soil type
More information