0 Stimmen dafür0 Stimmen dagegen

44 Aufrufe5 SeitenReinforced Soil Technical Note

Jan 12, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

Reinforced Soil Technical Note

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

44 Aufrufe

Reinforced Soil Technical Note

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- Preliminary GER Piscataway Drive Slope Failure
- Design Of Stone Column
- The Design of Vibro Replacement (Priebe Teory)
- DESIGN OF PILES USING EURO CODE-7
- Exp and Analytical Study Soil Nailing 2016
- M60 Ashton Moss Plot 2000 Enabling Works (TerraConsult Data Sheets, 2011)
- bs 8006.pdf
- Retaining Walls and Geotechnical Design to Eurocode 7
- Chapter 19/19 of Rock Engineering
- BS+8006+over+piles+
- BS 8006-1 2010 chapter 1 to 7 NOT FOR EXTERNAL USE.pdf
- Eurocode 7 (NF P94-262) (EN).docx
- Meehan_CGPR_report_2006.pdf
- IScotlandEurogeo 5.2
- Archingewewe
- Cut in London Clay (3)
- 8 - Basements
- Behaviour of Single Pile in Reinforced Slope Subjected to Inclined Load
- ADA405009.pdf
- CCE2010 I.olteanu M.anechitei I.O.toma M.budescu.doc

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

reinforced soil what do

these mean for the industry?

By Stephen P Corbet, Aecom, (Chairman BSi B526/4 Reinforced

and Strengthened Soils), Chris Jenner, Tensar International UK,

Graham Horgan, Huesker UK.

Presented at the Ground Engineering Slopes Conference on 16 November 2010.

of reinforced soil structures has

evolved from the principles set

out in the first edition of BS8006,

published in 1995. The introduction

of Eurocodes made a revision to

BS8006:1995, essential as EN19971 specifically excludes the design of

reinforced soil structures and slopes.

The BSi has completed the revision of BS8006 and Part 1, which

covers the design of reinforced fills

was published at the end of 2010,

while Part 2, which covers the

design of reinforced insitu soils, is

due to be published this year.

Introduction

1995 after 10 years of drafting in

committee, the design of reinforced

soil structures has evolved as the

results from research have improved

the understanding of the behaviour

reinforcement in soil.

The publication of the Eurocodes

for design has resulted in the need

to withdraw or revise all existing

design codes in the UK and Europe.

The Eurocode EN1997-1 Geotechnical Design does not include any

provision for the design of reinforced soil structures and the UK

NAD makes a clear statement to

this effect.

In particular, the factors to be

applied to the strength of the reinforcing elements cannot be determined from the Eurocode.

two parts: Part 1: Reinforced Fills

Retaining walls, slopes, basal reinforcement and transfer platforms;

and Part 2: Strengthened Insitu

Soils Soil nails.

The two parts recognise that the

design of insitu soils reinforced with

soil nails is completely different to

the reinforcement of soils placed

26

CIRIA C637 Soil Nailing Best

Practice Guidance, but with more

emphasis on the design of reinforced soil slopes

The changes

reviewed the whole document and

the following changes have been

made. The changes were made public in a draft for public comment,

published in July 2009, and the

comments received were incorporated into the final document.

n Clauses and information which

conflicted with BSEN1997-1, BSEN

14475 & BSEN 14490 have been

removed, but we have not revised

all terminology to agree with BSEN

1997-1.

n The correction of some outstanding errors found in text (at least two

found in the last published version).

n The partial factors were reviewed.

The review was to look at the possibility that the partial factors in

BS8006 could be the same or very

close to the partial factors used in

EN1997-1. The current situation is

that the partial factors in BS8006

will remain unchanged.

n A new section on reinforced modular block walls has been added to

cover this new technology.

n The design of facings for slopes

and walls has been reviewed.

n All text previously included by

the Highways Agency in BD70, has

been moved to BS8006-1 for bridge

abutments and bank-seats.

n The construction details have

been revised, with more information included for information.

n Advice on the use of vegetation on

steep slopes is included. The advice

includes information about the best

methods for getting grass and other

vegetation to grow and survive.

n The problems associated with lateral forces at the edges of embank-

and with piles or other foundation

improvements have been addressed.

n In Annex A the derivation of partial factors for polymeric reinforcement has been updated to follow the

principles described in PD ISO CR

20432: 2007.

n A new Annex has been added

with seismic effects on reinforced

soil structures, based on experiences

form Japan and US, with cross reference to BSEN 1998.

n Other Annexes giving test procedures have been reviewed and

removed where now described in

testing standards.

n New features include: The use

of recycled materials is encouraged

using the Highways Agency document HD35/04 as a basis; cohesive

fills can benefit from inclusions

of drains within the soil layers to

reduce the drainage paths for excess

pore water pressure; new reinforcements can be considered, such as

electro-kinetic geosynthetics, used

to set up an electro osmosis system

for rapid drainage; low strain/high

strength geogrids.

soil walls and steep slopes

concepts and fundamental

principles (Jenner)

limit state code, partial load factors

are applied to the actions and material factors are applied to the material properties.

Once the factors have been

applied, the requirement for stability is that the design restoring forces

and moments should be greater

than the design disturbing forces

and moments. In a particular application, the load factors applied to

dead loads and live loads can vary

depending on the load combination

under consideration; in some circumstances, the partial load factors

produce a worst-case combination

for the design load.

The loads, both dead and live, are

calculated in their unfactored form

as characteristic values, which then

have the appropriate partial factor

applied to give the design load.

The resisting forces in any application are generated from the available shear strength of the soil and

the tensile strength of the reinforcing elements.

The shear strength of the soil,

allowing for any pore pressure,

should be a characteristic value

determined as a cautious estimate

of the value recognising the limit

state under consideration. For walls

and slopes, the peak friction angle

is used. In all applications, the consideration of external, internal and

compound stability is required. For

internal and compound stability,

the resistance provided by the soil is

supplemented by the strength of the

reinforcement.

The reinforcement strength is

derived following a procedure

described in an Annex of the document.

Reinforcement is defined as being

extensible if the design strength is

sustained at a total axial strain value

>1%, and inextensible if the design

strength is sustained at a total axial

strain <1%. This definition can

determine the actual design method

adopted for a particular application.

The Code of Practice is applicable to all types of geosynthetic and

steel soil reinforcement.

abutments

previous section apply to both

reinforced soil walls and bridge

abutments, which are designed as

vertical structures.

Other structures with facing

ground engineering

April 2011

Effects

Reinforced slopes

Combinations

A

ffs = 1.5

ffs = 1.0

ffs = 1.0

ffs = 1.5

ffss = 1.0

fs = 1.0

ff = 1.2

ff = 1.0

ff = 1.0

ffs = 1.5

ffs = 1.5

ffs = 1.0

ffs = 1.5

ffs = 1.5

ffs = 1.0

ff = 1.2

ff = 1.2

ff = 1.0

Traffic loading

Over the

entire

structure,

fq = 1.5

zone, fq = 1.5

HA

fq = 1.5

fq = 1.5

HA and HB

fq = 1.3

fq= 1.3

HA

fq = 1.25

fq = 1.25

HA and HB

fq = 1.1

fq = 1.1

fq = 1.3

fq = 1.3

Braking dynamic load

Temperature effects

Soil material

factors

fms = 1.0

fms = 1.6

fms = 1.0

To be applied to c

To be applied to cu

Soil/

reinforcement

interaction

factors

fms = 1.0

fms = 1.0

Sliding across

surface of

reinforcement

fs = 1.3

fs = 1.0

Pull-out resistance

of reinforcement

fp = 1.3

fp = 1.0

of safety

capacity: to be

applied to qult

Sliding along base

of structure or any

horizontal surface

where there is

soil-to-soil contact

fs = 1.2

n/a

n/a

angles within 20 of the vertical can

also be designed as vertical structures to the Code. Table 17 (Table 1

above) of the Code gives the partial

load factors for load combinations

associated with walls and Table 18

(Table 2 above) gives the same information relating to bridge abutments.

Soil material factors can be

extracted from Table 16 (Table 3

overleaf) with a number of partial

factors of safety relating to soil/

reinforcement interaction, foundation bearing capacity and sliding

along the base of the structure.

The most adverse loads likely to

occur should be considered.

ground engineering

April 2011

based on the classification of the

reinforcement materials, whether

the reinforcement is extensible or

inextensible.

Extensible

reinforcement

is

designed using the Tie-Back Wedge

method where the stress condition

within the reinforced soil block is

taken to be an active stress state and

wall friction on the back of the block

is zero (see Figure 1).

When inextensible reinforcement

is used, the Coherent Gravity design

method is used with a stress condition within the reinforced soil block

condition in the upper zone reducing to active conditions deeper in

the structure with wall friction calculated (see Figure 2).

applied to the loads and materials

depending on the Load Case under

consideration. Load Case A, with

maximum factors applied throughout, is normally the critical condition for reinforcement capacity and

foundation bearing pressure and

sometimes governs reinforcement

anchorage.

Load case B, with minimum mass

of the structure but maximum overturning forces, is normally critical

for sliding along the base of the reinforced soil block and reinforcement

anchorage.

and partial factors of unity, is used

to determine the serviceability limit

states of foundation settlement and

reinforcement tension for internal

strains. The limit value of reinforcement tension in the serviceability check is defined by a theoretical

post-construction strain value.

For a wall, the limit is 1% and

therefore the SLS allowable loadcarrying capacity is the value at

which the reinforcement would

strain 1% between the end of construction and the end of the design

life (Figure 3, overleaf). For an abutment, the limiting post-construction

strain is 0.5%.

slopes, generally defined as those

slopes with face angles greater than

20 to the vertical, are all derived

from limit equilibrium methods,

originally derived for unreinforced

slopes. The Code does not limit the

methods that can be used for design,

provided that they can be adapted

to a limit state format. However,

it does describe the most common

methods in some detail.

The partial factors are defined

in Table 4 (overleaf). with only

two load cases, ULS and SLS. The

friction angle of the fill should be

defined as the peak value and, as

with the wall design, there are partial factors of safety applied to soil/

reinforcement interaction and sliding along the base.

The requirement for the inclusion

of the Moment Correction Factor c

has been removed in the revised version of the BS. Any potential failure

surface that passes around the reinforced soil zone without cutting a

layer of reinforcement is now analysed using the approach defined in

Eurocode 7.

For reinforced slopes where the

face angle is 45 or less the need for

a formal facing may not be required.

In those situations the reinforcement capacity close to the front face

may be limited because of bond,

although higher shear strengths may

be mobilised because of the low

confining stress. A check of superficial stability can be carried out to

assess the stability of a free face in

resistance to sliding on a plane that

is very close, and parallel, to the

slope surface.

It is noted in the code that compound

stability

considerations

where a slip surface passes partially

through the reinforced fill and partially through the unreinforced fill

may well be the critical situation.

Section 8 basal

reinforcement and load

transfer platforms (Horgan)

reinforcement and basal reinforcement over piles (aka load transfer

platforms), updates the previous

guidance and attempts to expand/

clarify guidance considered ambiguous in the previous draft and to

reflect changes in best practice since

BS8006 was first published in 1996.

The main additional issues

addressed in the updates relate to:

n Consideration of pile cap

geometry;

n Consideration of alternative

arching mechanisms;

n More emphasis on assessing/controlling the settlements

between piles;

n Greater emphasis on collabo27

TECHNICAL NOTE

ration between geosynthetics

and pile designers;

n Time dependant consolidation of

soil between piles and consideration

of partial support between piles;

n Additional guidance on anchorage details etc.

and partial factors

between soils/fills used in slopes

and walls and those used in embankments. Since the strains induced in

walls and slopes are deemed small,

the frictional strength is represented

by tanp, the peak effective angle of

internal shearing resistance. Larger

strains are allowed in other scenarios, for example an embankment

subject to differential settlement.

In these cases, the frictional

strength is represented by large

strain values. For cohesionless soils

this is the value when the soil shears

at constant volume.

Consideration of foundation

0

Ko

Ka

Kj

J

H

Arc tan 0.3

6m

Ws2

Ws1

z

Soil 1:

c1 1 1 1

Soil 2:

c2 2 2 2

hj

Tpj

H

wedge method.

b = (1.2 L/H) f2

for coherent gravity

method

L-2e

Soil material

factors

Reinforcement

material factor

Soil

reinforcement

interaction

factors

Partial factors

of safety

Partial Factors

Serviceability limit

state

ffs = 1.5

fs = 1.0

or point loads

ff= 1.2

ff = 1.0

loading

fq = 1.3

fq= 1.0

To be applied tan fr

fms = 1.0

fms = 1.0

To be applied to c

fms = 1.6

fms = 1.0

To be applied to the

reinforcement base strength

with the type of reinforcement to be

used and the design life over which the

reinforcement is required (see 5.3 and

Annex A)

reinforcement

fs = 1.3

fs = 1.0

reinforcement

fp = 1.3

fp = 1.0

structure where there is

soil-to-soil contact

fs= 1.2

NA

28

Isochrone for end of design life

Prescribed post-construction strain limit

Load factors

Tcs

the embankment loading will be

transferred through the piles down

to a firm stratum either by direct

arching on the pile caps or by the

load carried to the piles by the geosynthetic reinforcement.

Consequently, the characteristics

of the soft foundation soil is considered only with regard to the type

of piles used and their installation.

However, the time dependant consolidation of soil between piles is

subsequently discussed.

BS 8006:1996 was one of the first

national codes to adopt limit state

principles and these are maintained

in the updated code.

Consideration of pile

cap geometry

pile caps of equal dimension yet the

area ratio of the square pile cap (a2)

is different to that of a circular cap

(D2/4). Yet this dimension is used

subsequently used to determine the

amount of arching (Marstons ratio)

or stress redistribution that occurs

within the piled embankment. The

new guidance recommends reducing the design dimensions of cir-

ground engineering

April 2011

Surcharge Ws

Embankment

Outward

shear stress

Lo

Reinforcement

Fill: ,cv

Pfill

Lb

(dependant on embankment fill material)

Minimum cover

500mm to

reinforcement

(varies)

BRP layer

depth can vary

Lds

Lp

Pile

caps

Soft foundation

Edge trench

option detail

Piles

Partial factor

Ultimate limit

state

(pre-cast driven, vibro concrete columns

driven/cast insitu, continuous flight auger)

Serviceability

limit state

Load factors

Soil unit mass,

eg embankment fill

ffs = 1.3

ffs = 1.0

Pile arrangement

Arching coefficient

e.g. line or point loads

ff = 1.2

ff = 1.0

End-bearing piles

(unyielding)

Cc = 1.95H/ a -0.18

traffic loading

fq = 1.3

fq = 1.0

Cc = 1.5H/ a -0.07

To be applied to tan

fms = 1.0

fms = 1.0

To be applied to c

fms = 1.6

fms = 1.0

To be applied to cu

fms = 1.0

fms = 1.0

Sliding across surface

of reinforcement

fs = 1.3

fs = 1.0

Pull-out resistance of

reinforcement

fp = 1.3

fp = 1.0

cular pile caps to consider a square

pile of an equivalent area. Where

circular pile caps are to be used,

the diameter of the pile should be

reduced to produce an effective pile

cap width aequ,

aequ = (D2/4)0.5 hence aequ = 0.886D

where:

a is the size of the pile caps

(assuming full support can be generated at the edges of the caps);

D is the diameter of the pile cap

across the reinforcement

in deformation characteristics that

exist between the piles and the surrounding soft foundation soil, the

vertical stress distribution across the

base of the embankment is assumed

to be non-uniform. Soil arching

between adjacent pile caps induces

greater vertical stresses on the pile

caps than on the surrounding adja-

ground engineering

April 2011

cent soil.

BS8006-1 identifies a minimum

height whereby partial arching

begins to develop but additional

loads placed at the surface of the

embankment still influence the load

carried by the reinforcement. This

minimum height is :

H 0.7(s a)

where:

a is the size of the pile caps (or aequ

considering circular pile caps)

s is the spacing between adjacent

piles

BS8006-1 also identifies a critical height concept above which any

additional embankment weight or

surcharge loading placed at the surface of the embankment is deemed

to pass directly to the pile caps and

not influence the reinforcement.

The ratio of the vertical stress

exerted on top of the pile caps to

the average vertical stress at the base

of the embankment may be deter-

[ ]

Pc = Cca

sv

H

where:

Pc is the vertical stress on the

pile caps;

sv = (ffsH + fqws) and is the factored average vertical stress at the

base of the embankment;

is unit weight of the embankment fill;

H is the height of the embankment;

ws is the uniformly distributed

surcharge loading;

a is the size (or diameter) of the

pile caps;

Cc is the arching coefficient.

Where the value of the arching coefficient will vary depending on the

type of piles.

Several authors have studied and

compared the phenomena of soil

arching using a variety of physical,

analytical and numerical models to

try to gain a better understanding

and quantify the load acting across

the reinforcement and distributing

directly to the pile caps (Alexiew

2002, Eekelen 2008, Kempton et al

1998, Love and Milligan 2003, Rogbeck 1998, Stewart and Filz, 2005).

One criticism of the original code

is that the distributed load acting

across the reinforcement was very

sensitive to embankment heights

around the critical height

H 1.4(s a)

Embankment heights just under

the reinforcement than embankment heights just above this level.

Additional criticism related to the

fact the ratio of the vertical stress

exerted on top of the pile caps to

the average vertical stress at the base

of the embankment was dependant

solely on pile type and independent

of the type of fill used within the

embankment.

Finally a criticism that vertical

equilibrium is not satisfied (Eekelen,

2008). However, neither the load acting across the reinforcement nor the

increased load acting on the pile caps

are calculated directly, but rather

indirectly from the ratio of increase

in stress concentration on the pile

caps to the average vertical stress at

the base of the embankment.

BS8006-1 2009 Section 8 allows

for an alternative theoretical solution which may be used to determine the vertical load acting across

the reinforcement based on work

presented by Hewlett and Randolph, 1998, which was based on

the observed failure mechanism

from model tests and considers a

series of hemispherical domes. The

theory determines the efficacy E as

the proportion of the embankment

weight carried by the piles, hence

the proportion of the embankment

weight carried by the geosynthetic

reinforcement may be determined

(1 E).

The original guidance utilises

Marstons formula to determine the

distributed load acting across the

reinforcement

29

TECHNICAL NOTE

WT =

1.4 sffsg (s a) 2 2

s a (p/sv)

s2 a2

where:

WT is the distributed vertical load

acting on the reinforcement between

adjacent pile caps;

ffs is the partial load factor for soil

unit weight (see Table 1);

fq is the partial load factor for

external applied loads (see Table 1).

To satisfy vertical equilibrium

then the remaining load must be

carried directly by the pile caps, WP

WP= (f fsgH + fqws ) s2 WT (s2 a2)

(although this formulation is not

provided in BS8006 -1 2009). Once

the distributed load WT acting across

the reinforcement is determined,

then for an extensible reinforcement the tensile load Trp per metre

run, generated in the reinforcement

resulting from the distributed load

WT is determined by

1

Trp = WT (s a) 1 + 6

2a

where:

Trp is the tensile load in the reinforcement;

is the strain in the reinforcement.

The above equation has two

unknowns Trp and , and may be

solved for Trp by assuming a maximum allowable strain in the reinforcement and by an understanding

of the load/strain characteristics of

the reinforcement at different load

levels. Initial tensile strain in the

reinforcement is needed to generate a tensile load; BS8006 stipulates

that a practical upper limit of 6%

strain should be imposed to ensure

all embankment loads are transferred to the piles.

In addition to the load on the

reinforcement generated by the

redistributed vertical embankment

load, the reinforcement needs to

resist the outward thrust from the

embankment. The reinforcement

tensile load Tds needed to resist the

outward thrust of the embankment

may be taken as

Tds = 0.5Ka (ffsH + 2fqws)H

where:

Tds is the tensile load in the reinforcement per metre run needed

to resist the lateral thrust of the

embankment fill;

Ka is the active earth pressure

coefficient [ = tan2(45 fcv/2)];

H is the height of the embankment;

is the unit weight of the embankment fill;

ws is the surcharge intensity on

top of the embankment;

30

unit weight (see Table 1);

fq is the partial load factor for

external applied loads (see Table 1).

Reinforcement details

determines the requirement for two

orthogonal layers of geosynthetic

reinforcement at the base of the

piled embankment, one longitudinal

layer parallel along the centre line of

the embankment and one transverse

layer perpendicular across the line

of the embankment.

The longitudinal reinforcement is

designed to resist the redistributed

vertical load Trp.

The transverse reinforcement is

designed to resist both redistributed

vertical load Trp and to resist the lateral thrust of the embankment Tds.

To mobilise these loads the reinforcement should achieve an adequate bond with the adjacent soil

at the extremities of the piled area

to ensure that the maximum limit

state tensile loads can be generated

between the outer two rows of piles.

Across the width of the embankment the reinforcement should

extend a minimum distance (Lb)

beyond the outer row of piles, (see

Figure 4).

The reinforcement may be

extended around the row of gabions

and returned into the embankment

fill to develop the necessary bond

length (see Figure 5).

Depending on the geometry of

the embankment, it may be difficult

to achieve an adequate bond length

at the extremity of the piles by

maintaining the reinforcement in a

horizontal alignment as depicted in

Figure 4. One solution that may be

considered is to use a row of gabions, as a thrust block along the top

of the outer row of piles.

Another detail that may be considered is the inclusion of a small

periphery trench just beyond the

edge piles, running parallel to the

centreline of the embankment; the

trench is typically only as deep as

the piling mat or pile cap depth. The

reinforcement can be extended into

the trench and when backfilled, will

return into the embankment fill to

develop the necessary bond.

of soil between piles

embankment loading will be transferred through the piles down to a

firm stratum either by direct arching on the pile caps or by the load

carried to the piles by the geosynthetic reinforcement. In reality, the

soil between the piles will need to

undergo some initial degree of consolidation to enable tensile forces in

the geosynthetic to be mobilised.

an increase in stress from the installation of the temporary working

platform or as a result of initial fill

placement or by external factors

such seasonal fluctuations in the

ground water level increasing the

effective stress on the insitu soil.

Hence the time dependant consolidation of soil between piles is

important in reaching the assumed

end design condition of no partial

support between piles.

Consideration can also be given

to the introduction of a compressible layer between the pile caps to

ensure deflection of the geosynthetic during the initial placement of the

overlying fill.

The maximum mid-span deflection y of extensible reinforcement,

spanning between pile caps, may be

determined from the formulation

below (after Giroud)

y = (s a)

3

8

where:

a is the size of the pile caps;

s is the spacing between adjacent

piles;

is the strain in the reinforcement.

The thickness of the compressible

layer can be such that it can accommodate the deflection of the geosynthetic during the early stages of

embankment construction, ensuring

that the assumed design deflections

are achieved.

Conclusions

Section 8 of the code has been used

to successfully design a vast number

of piled supported embankments

worldwide.

BS8006-1 2009 updates the previous guidance to reflect better industry understanding of the behaviour

of such complex earthworks and to

reflect changes in best practice.

Currently there is a variety of different design approaches, which differ mainly in the amount of arching

considered and the degree of support offered by the existing sub soil.

The BS8006-1 assumption that

all of the embankment loading will

be transferred through the piles or

by the geosynthetic reinforcement

onto the piles can be considered

conservative.

However, the potential use

of compressible layers beneath

the geosynthetic reinforcement

between pile caps can ensure that

the end design condition of no

partial support between piles can

be achieved during construction.

This would make consideration

of the time dependant consolidation of soil largely academic.

References

Strengthened/reinforced soils and fills,

BSi London 2010.

BS EN 1997-1:2005 Geotechnical

Design, BSi London 2005

CIRIA C637 Soil Nailing best practice guidance CIRIA 2005.

PD ISO CR 20432 Guidelines for the

derivation of the longterm strength of

geosynthetics for soil reinforcement

HD 35/04 Conservation and the Use

of Secondary and Recycled Materials

AASHTO (1998), Interim Standard

Specifications for Highway Bridges,

AASHTO, Washington DC, 16th

Ed

Alexiew, D., Piled embankment

design: Methods and case studies, Proc.

XV Italian Conference on Geosynthetics, Bologna,October 2002. In:

Lingegnere e larchitetto, Special Issue

1-12/2002. pp. 32-39. 2002.

DIN 1054:2005-01 Baugrund; Sicherheitsnachweise im Erdund Grundbau.

Eekelen, van SJM, Van, MA, Bezuijen, A. Design of piled embankments

considering the basic starting point of

the British Standard BS8006. Proceedings of the Fourth European Geosynthetics conference. Edinburgh,

FHWA(1996) Mechanically Stabilized

Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes

Design and Construction Guidelines

(FHWA-SA-96-071).

Giroud, JP, (1995). Technical Note:

Determination of geosynthetic strain

due to deflection, Geosynthetics International, Vol. 2, No.3, pp.635-641

Hewlett, WJ, Randolph, MA.

Analysis of Piled Embankments.

Ground Engineering. April pp.12-18.

1988

Kempton, G.T., Russell, D., Pierpoint, N.D., Jones, C.J.F.P. Two and

three-dimensional numerical analysis of

the performance of piled embankments.

Sixth international conference on

geosynthetics, Atlanta, Georgia.

pp.767-772. 1998.

Love J, Milligan G. Design methods for basally reinforced pile-supported

embankments over soft ground, Ground

Engineering, Vol. 36, No. 3. 2003.

Rogbeck, Y, Gustavsson, S,

Sdergren, I Lindquist, D. Embankment support over piles using geogrids.

Sixth international conference on

geosynthetics, Atlanta, Georgia.

pp.755-762. 1998.

Stewart, ME, Filz, GM. Influence

of Clay compressibility on Geosynthetic

Loads in Bridging Layers for ColumnSupported Embankments, GSP 131

Contemporary Issues in Foundation

Engineering, Geofrontiers 2005,

Austin

ground engineering

April 2011

- Preliminary GER Piscataway Drive Slope FailureHochgeladen vonSayantan Chakraborty
- Design Of Stone ColumnHochgeladen vonabmisra1
- The Design of Vibro Replacement (Priebe Teory)Hochgeladen vonpaduco
- DESIGN OF PILES USING EURO CODE-7Hochgeladen vonGEOMAHESH
- Exp and Analytical Study Soil Nailing 2016Hochgeladen vonHari Ram
- M60 Ashton Moss Plot 2000 Enabling Works (TerraConsult Data Sheets, 2011)Hochgeladen vonsandycastle
- bs 8006.pdfHochgeladen vonNaresh Sharma
- Retaining Walls and Geotechnical Design to Eurocode 7Hochgeladen vonjosif
- Chapter 19/19 of Rock EngineeringHochgeladen vonHakan_KURU
- BS+8006+over+piles+Hochgeladen vonHesbon Moriasi
- BS 8006-1 2010 chapter 1 to 7 NOT FOR EXTERNAL USE.pdfHochgeladen vonOana
- Eurocode 7 (NF P94-262) (EN).docxHochgeladen vonvolkan
- Meehan_CGPR_report_2006.pdfHochgeladen vonSelçuk Çelik
- IScotlandEurogeo 5.2Hochgeladen vonDaniel
- ArchingeweweHochgeladen vonfnii4
- Cut in London Clay (3)Hochgeladen vonAnonymous D5s00DdU
- 8 - BasementsHochgeladen vonclearcasting
- Behaviour of Single Pile in Reinforced Slope Subjected to Inclined LoadHochgeladen vonAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- ADA405009.pdfHochgeladen vonKristi Gonzales
- CCE2010 I.olteanu M.anechitei I.O.toma M.budescu.docHochgeladen vonIoana Ioana
- BishopHochgeladen vonMegan Keith
- Landslide Susceptibility Mapping of the Slopes in the Residual SoilsHochgeladen vonLuisRodrigoPerezPinto
- Is.14680.1999 Landslide Control GuidelinesHochgeladen vonroshanrsv
- Manual 07 en Sheeting-checkHochgeladen vonmatei_bgn529
- Topic PresentationHochgeladen vonRenee Alcantara
- Newmark Deformation AnalysisHochgeladen vonCarl Alfons
- Slope StabilityHochgeladen vonerwinandy
- Shear Beauty of the Franschhoek PassHochgeladen vonFrans van der Merwe
- [FEM] Geotechnical Analysis by the Finite Element Method.ok!!!Hochgeladen vongzapas

- Strap-Footing.pdfHochgeladen vonMohammed Sumer
- Carl T. Herakovich-A Concise Introduction to Elastic Solids_ an Overview of the Mechanics of Elastic Materials and Structures-Springer (2017)Hochgeladen vonManuelPérez
- Geomatics Engineering_A Practical Guide to Project Design 2010Hochgeladen vonTan
- Engineering Classification of Rock MaterialsHochgeladen vonTan
- Staad Pro v8i Manual 2016Hochgeladen vonLarry
- 09 Stabilization of SlopeHochgeladen vonNurali Mamen
- SikaWrap Composite Fabrics for Structural and Seismic StrengtheningHochgeladen vonTan
- Anchor BlockHochgeladen vonSteven Curtis
- Flat SlabHochgeladen vonTan
- Design as Per BS 8110Hochgeladen vonCibin Britto Antony
- IEM Bored Pile Supervision_19112015Hochgeladen vonTan
- RC Beam Strengthened With CFRPHochgeladen vonTan
- Stability of Reinforcement Cages Prior to Concreting.pdfHochgeladen vonTan
- Green Building_Environment_Energy and Civil Engineering 2017Hochgeladen vonTan
- Investigation_Cracking in RC Water Retaining Structure _2013Hochgeladen vonTan
- CPC Panel FacadeInfoHochgeladen vonTan
- Footing_subject_to_torsion.pdfHochgeladen vonTan
- Report-Soil & GunitingHochgeladen vonmaznah
- Guidance Notes on Current Procedures on Supervision of Soil Nailing WorksHochgeladen vonTan
- Draft-Design Methodologies for Soil-Nailed Walls.pdfHochgeladen vonTan
- Designing for Fire Safety NotesHochgeladen vonTan
- Southern Steel Bar ProductHochgeladen vonTan
- BS4190-2001 ISO metric black hexagon bolts_screws_nuts Specification.pdfHochgeladen vonTan
- Metnutst1cl810Hochgeladen vonengrmech2009
- Stability Analysis of Nonlinear Systems 2016Hochgeladen vonTan
- Principles of Rock Mechanics E-Book 2011Hochgeladen voncunha,jc@superig.com.br
- Concrete - Part 15 - Hot Weather Concreting.pdfHochgeladen vonshareyhou
- EC8 Seismic Hazard Zoning Maps for the UKHochgeladen voncsjanjua

- CollisionsHochgeladen vonSafdar Sana
- andhra pradesh ug physics syllabusHochgeladen vontvmk
- Factor of SafetyHochgeladen vonRaj Patel
- Stat Mech NotesHochgeladen vonVinayak Kamble
- Jacket and coils of agitated vessels.pdfHochgeladen vonlolofm25
- Albert Einstein - Relativity：the Special and General TheoryHochgeladen vonMin-Chun Wu
- Geotech 2 Midterm ppts.pdfHochgeladen vonJoanna Nicholson
- 3D Numerical Modeling of a Landslide in SwitzerlandHochgeladen vonadela2012
- UG Gas Properties ActivityHochgeladen vonardianti widorini
- physics 101 pdfHochgeladen vonapi-279026508
- Exp 2 - ReportHochgeladen vonKhairil Ikram
- 4 SolutionHochgeladen vonDÈènvêËr 빛 사랑
- Lecture 4 Compressible Flow.pptxHochgeladen vonAllyssa Mae Firmalan
- Relativity QsHochgeladen vonJessica Martin
- 1732Hochgeladen vonrikech
- Guide-Rubric Step 2Hochgeladen vonDeivy Vanegas
- Types AttenuationHochgeladen vonarsalanhanif80
- Sag-Tension Calculation IEEE Std 605 2008Hochgeladen vonvishnuvyas
- Analysis of Truss-cable StructuresHochgeladen vonKtk Zad
- Droplet CombustionHochgeladen vontomotomotomo2
- stepup-neet-22.pdfHochgeladen vonGurpreet Singh
- Rotor DynamicsHochgeladen vonVahid Rezaei
- microelectronics solution manual by bahzad RazaviHochgeladen vonBilal Shafique
- module 1 notesHochgeladen vonkrbauto
- 9HE.08.Samplefinal.withanswersHochgeladen vonNo-No-No
- ASCEHochgeladen vonRonnie1478
- !!!!!!!-dft.pdfHochgeladen vonduca
- Torsion 90Hochgeladen vonbagmass
- Lab 2-Force in a Statically Determined Cantilever TrussHochgeladen vonAlif Bukhari Imran Naim
- Equivalence PrincipleHochgeladen vonrr1819

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.