339 views

Uploaded by api-3709579

- Van Der Meer_Design of Concrete Armour Layers
- @ Breakwat Readme
- breakwat
- Van Der Meer_Geometrical Design of Coastal Structures
- Coastal Protection) Structures
- Subgroup D Report
- Rubble Mound Design
- PIANC Life Cycle Management of Port Structures
- Van Der Meer_Application and Stability Criteria for Rock and Artificial Units
- Harbour and Coastal Assignment
- Cem Part Vi Chap 2
- WMO702
- Port Management
- The First Core-Loc Breakwater
- @_Ports & Harbors Terminology
- Floating Breakwater
- @ Selecting Fenders
- Design Vertical Breakwater
- Coastal Engineering Design
- PIANCwg28Main

You are on page 1of 9

Coastal Engineering Handbook, J.B. Herbich, 1991

Soil Mechanics, Pile Buck, 1992

Shore Protection Manual, USACE, 1984

EM 1110-1-1905, Bearing Capacity of Soils, USACE, 1992

Topics:

Procedure for Evaluating Foundation Stability in Breakwater Design

Primary Consolidation Settlement Summary

Bearing Capacity Summary

Slope Stability and Circular Failure

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Evaluate the ultimate bearing capacity pressure qu

2. Determine a reasonable factor of safety (FS) based on available subsurface surface

information, variability of the soil, soil layering and strengths, type and importance of the

structure and past experience. FS will typically be between 2 and 4. (marine applications

1.5-2.5)

3. Evaluate allowable bearing capacity qa by dividing qu by FS; i.e., qa = qu /FS

4. Perform settlement analysis when possible and adjust the bearing pressure until

settlements are within tolerable limits. The resulting design bearing pressure qd may be

less than qa . Settlement analysis is particularly needed when compressible layers are

present beneath the depth of the zone of a potential bearing failure. Settlement analysis

must be performed on important structures and those sensitive to settlement.

Settlement is restricted to primary consolidation settlement. Generally, secondary

compression is insignificant and immediate settlement is negated by the

construction process and the nature of cohesive soils.

∆ei

basic equation: S = ∑ Hi

1 + eo ( i )

Cc H i po (i ) + ∆p(i )

Normally consolidated soil (pc = po + ∆p): S =∑ log

1 + eo p

o ( i )

CH po (i ) + ∆p(i )

Overconsolidated soil (pc ≥ po + ∆p): S = ∑ s i log

1 + eo p

o ( i )

Underconsolidated soil (pc ≤ po + ∆p) is rare in marine applications

Compression index:

e1 − e2 ∆e

Cc = slope of the e-log p curve: Cc = =

p + ∆p

log 2 log o

p

p 1 po

2.38

1 + eo

Empirically: Rendon-Herrero (1983) C c = 0.141G

1.2

s

Gs

Terzaghi & Peck (1967) Cc = 0.009(LL% − 10)

LL(% )

Nagaraj and Murty (1985)C c = 0.2343 Gs

100

Swell index: CS is the slope of the rebound curve: C S ≅ 101 CC to 15 CC

Bearing Capacity: the ability of the soil to safely carry the pressure placed on it by any

engineered structure without undergoing a shear failure with accompanying large

settlements. A safe bearing pressure with respect to failure does not ensure that

settlement will be within acceptable limits. Must conduct settlement analysis.

1. Initial Phase - classical equations are used to judge the approximate safety

factor to confirm the feasibility of the sediments providing sufficient bearing

resistance

2. Detailed Analysis - perform using sophisticated methods based on upper

bound analysis or finite difference or finite element analyses

For saturated, submerged soils

qu = qc + qq + q γ = cN c ζ c + γ ′D f N q ζ q + 0.5γ ′BN γ ζ γ (1)

qc, qq, qγ = load contributions from cohesion, surcharge and the soil

Nc, Nq, Nγ = bearing capacity or soil strength factors for cohesion, soil weight in

the failure wedge and surcharge

c = cohesion strength of soil

G −1

γ ' = effective bulk density of soil (recall γ ′ = γ − γ w = γw)

1+ e

B = width of the foundation

Df = is the depth of penetration of the foundation (Df = 0 for rubble mound)

ζc, ζq, ζγ = dimensionless correction factors consider

foundation shape with eccentricity, inclined loading,

foundation depth, foundation base on a slope, and a tilted

Df foundation base.

NOTE: γ ' is used only for the portion of the soil that is

W + Ww

submerged, otherwise the bulk density ( γ = s ) is used

Vtotal

(neither is a dry weight!)

Bearing Capacity Factors

From Handbook of Coastal Engineering, vol 2, ch 7 (A. G. Young), 1991

For shallow foundations (Vesic, A.S., "Bearing Capacity of Shallow

Foundations", Foundation Engineering Handbook, 1975)

N γ = 2(N q + 1)tan φ

N c = (N q − 1)cot φ , φ > 0

N c = π + 2 = 5.14 , φ = 0, clay, strip foundation, N c = 6 for circular

for deep foundations Nc ≈ 9

q

q a = u , essentially the allowable load of the structure

FS

FS = safety factor, 1.5 - 2.0

1

qu = cN c sc + qN q s q + γ ′BN γ s γ

2

Rectangular -

B′ N q B′ B′

sc = 1 + ; s q = 1 + tan φ ; s γ = 1 − 0.4

L′ N c L′ L′

Circular -

Nq

sc = 1 + ; s q = 1 + tan φ ; s γ = 0.6

Nc

• Compression will increase strength of clay soil Æ may decide to build structure in

stages, pausing to allow settlement between stages

• Depth of Analysis. The maximum depth of the soil profile analyzed need not be much

greater than the depth to the failure surface, which is approximately 2B for uniform

soil. A deeper depth may be required for settlement analyses (i.e. 4B for strip

foundations). If the soil immediately beneath the foundation is weaker than deeper

soil, the critical failure surface may be at a depth less than 2B. If the soil is weaker at

depths greater than 2B, then the critical failure surface may extend to depths greater

than 2B.

• Soil strength: Normally consolidated clay: cu po = 0.11 + 0.0037(LL − PL )

Special Cases (assumes both foundation base and seafloor are horizontal):

Cohesive Soils, φ = 0 is assumed Æ qu = cN c ζ c + γ ′D f Nγ = 0, Nq = 1

1

All sand, c = 0 Æ qu = γ ′BN γ , for strip foundations

2

qu = 0.3γ ′BN γ , for circular or square foundations

(note: assumes Df = 0)

Correction for Large Footings and Mats. Bearing capacity, obtained using Equation (1)

and the bearing capacity factors, gives capacities that are too large for widths B > 6 ft

(1.8 m). This is apparently because the 0.5γ ′BN γ ζ γ term becomes too large (DeBeer

1965; Vesic 1969).

(1) Settlement usually controls the design and loading of large dimensioned

structures because the foundation soil is stressed by the applied loads to deep

depths.

(2) Bearing capacity may be corrected for large footings or mats by multiplying

the surcharge term 0.5γ ′BN γ ζ γ by a reduction factor (Bowles 1988)

B

rγ = 1 − 0.25 log10 for B in feet and B > 6 ft

6

B

rγ = 1 − 0.25 log10 for B in meters and B > 1.8 m

1.8

Non-Concentric Loading - corrections to account for inclined and eccentric loading

Load eccentricity (e) decreases the ultimate bearing capacity

Compute e by dividing the overturning moment, M, by the vertical load, Q, then

calculate the effective dimensions, B' and L'.

e

M

M e=

Q Q Q

2

B

M1

e1 =

Q

M2

e2 =

Q

L

e1

L' 1

e

e2

B'

Rectangular Foundations:

B' = B - 2e1, effective width

L' = L - 2e2, effective length

A' = B'L' , effective area

Q 1

qu = u = cN c ζ c + γ ′D f N q ζ q + γ ′B′N γ ζ γ

A′ 2

for adequate safety against uplifting from the seafloor, e ≤ B/6

Circular Foundations:

A' = 2S = B'L'

0.5

R + e 0.5

L ′ = 2 S , where R = radius

R − e

0.5

R−e

B ′ = L′

R+e

πR 2 2 2 e

S=

2

(

− e R − e )0.5

+ R 2 sin −1

R

layer soils. Multiple soil layers influence the depth of the failure

surface and the calculated bearing capacity. The use of more Df

than two soil layers to model the subsurface soils is usually not

necessary.

(1) Layered Sand - Dense over Loose, H φ1

c1

(2) Layered Sand - Loose over Dense and

(3) Layered Clay -Stronger over Weaker.

(4) Granular Stratum (Sand/Gravel) over Soft Clay

γ2

φ2

c2

(1) Layered Sand, Dense over Loose (Das, 1994)

1

qu ( t ) = c1 N c (1) + γ1′ D f N q (1) + γ 1′ BN γ (1)

2

qu ( b ) = c2 N c (2 ) + γ1′ (D f + H )N q ( 2 ) + γ ′2 BN γ ( 2)

1

2

γ′ H 2D f

2

qu = qu ( b ) + 1 1 + K s tan φ − γ 1′ H or qu ≤ qu (t )

B H

(2) Layered Sand, Loose over Dense (from Das, 1994)

1

qu ( b′) = c2 N c ( 2 ) + γ ′2 D f N q ( 2) + γ ′2 BN γ ( 2 )

2

2

[

qu = qu (t ) + qu (b′) − qu ( t ) ]

1 − H

H

,

Hf = depth of failure surface ~ 2B

f

(3) Layered Clay - Stronger over Weaker (φ = 0), (Das, 1994)

2c H

qu = cu ( 2) N c + a + γ 1′ D f or qu ≤ qu (t )

B

qu ( t '') = cu (1) N c + γ 1′ D f

(4) Granular Stratum over Soft Clay (Herbich, 1991)

2 γ 1′ H 2 2 D f

q u = cu ( 2 ) N c + 1 + K s tan φ1 + γ 1′ D f or qu ≤ qu (t )

B H

Note: Eqn. (1) reduces to (4) when φ2 = 0 Æ Nq(2) = 1.

Slope Stability and Circular Failure

Sliding failure of rubble mound structures is usually referred to as "macro-stability" to

differentiate it from armor layer failure which include armor layer sliding failure. Macro-

instability can also involve foundation failure. Slope instability is usually a cumulative

effect, but may be triggered by a critical event such as heavy rain fall or storm waves.

Symptoms prior to a major failure include:

• Sudden structural settlement

• Foundation bulging at the toe

• Large lateral deformation

• Propagating longitudinal cracks on the slope followed by lateral cracks

• Excessive local seepage

R

wi

αi

τ

li

Mr

Stability coefficient K =

Ms

Use strip theory to calculate values for a series of finite elements for each R Æ sum strips

Moment of shear resistance M r = (∑ ci li + ∑ Wi cos α i tan φ i )R

Moment of sliding force M s = (∑ Wi sin α i )R

l = arc length

W = net weight

c = soil cohesion strength

φ = soil internal friction angle

α = angle between tangent of arc and horizontal

R = arc radius

• Construct contour lines of constant stability coefficient (K) (calculated K for

multiple R Æ K1, K2, K3 …)

• Extrapolate to obtain the critical failure surface

• Ensure all K are within safety limits (i.e. K ~ 1.0 - 1.2)

** Generally, commercial computer programs are used to perform the critical failure

surface calculations.

Additional considerations:

1. Surcharge on top of breakwater

fH

2. Earthquake and Dynamic Motion. Cyclic or repeated motion caused by seismic forces

or earthquakes, vibrating machinery, and other disturbances such as vehicular traffic,

blasting and pile driving may cause pore pressures to increase in foundation soil. As a

result, bearing capacity will be reduced from the decreased soil strength. The

foundation soil can liquify when pore pressures equal or exceed the soil confining

stress reducing effective stress to zero and causes gross differential settlement of

structures and loss of bearing capacity. Structures supported by shallow foundations

can tilt and exhibit large differential movement and structural damage. Deep

foundations lose lateral support as a result of liquefaction and horizontal shear forces

lead to buckling and failure. The potential for soil liquefaction and structural damage

may be reduced by various soil improvement methods.

Corps of Engineer Method. Methods of estimating bearing capacity of soil subject to

dynamic action depend on methods of correcting for the change in soil shear strength

caused by changes in pore pressure. Differential movements increase with increasing

vibration and can cause substantial damage to structures. Department of the Navy

(1983), "Soil Dynamics, Deep Stabilization, and Special Geotechnical Construction",

describes evaluation of vibration induced settlement.

3. Subsurface Voids. A subsurface void influences and decreases bearing capacity when

located within a critical depth Dc beneath the foundation. The critical depth is that

depth below which the influence of pressure in the soil from the foundation is

negligible.

a. Voids. Voids located beneath strip foundations at depth ratios Dc /B >4 cause little

influence on bearing capacity for strip footings. B is the foundation width. The

critical depth ratio for square footings is about 2.

b. Bearing Capacity. The bearing capacity of a strip footing underlain by a centrally

located void at ratios Dc /B < 4 decreases with increasing load eccentricity similar

to that for footings without voids, but the void reduces the effect of load

eccentricity. Although voids may not influence bearing capacity initially, these

voids can gradually migrate upward with time in karst regions.

c. Complication of Calculation. Load eccentricity and load inclination complicate

calculation of bearing capacity when the void is close to the footing. Refer to

Wang, Yoo and Hsieh (1987) for further information.

- Van Der Meer_Design of Concrete Armour LayersUploaded byapi-3709579
- @ Breakwat ReadmeUploaded byapi-3709579
- breakwatUploaded byberroug
- Van Der Meer_Geometrical Design of Coastal StructuresUploaded byapi-3709579
- Coastal Protection) StructuresUploaded byMuhammadCaturNugraha
- Subgroup D ReportUploaded byapi-3709579
- Rubble Mound DesignUploaded byyanu13
- PIANC Life Cycle Management of Port StructuresUploaded byMMexp
- Van Der Meer_Application and Stability Criteria for Rock and Artificial UnitsUploaded byapi-3709579
- Harbour and Coastal AssignmentUploaded byEoghan O'Driscoll Collins
- Cem Part Vi Chap 2Uploaded bysean_dibartolo3668
- WMO702Uploaded bybepewe
- Port ManagementUploaded bybastoca
- The First Core-Loc BreakwaterUploaded byFelipe Fernandes
- @_Ports & Harbors TerminologyUploaded byapi-3709579
- Floating BreakwaterUploaded bypizzaria
- @ Selecting FendersUploaded byapi-3709579
- Design Vertical BreakwaterUploaded bylamkinpark3373
- Coastal Engineering DesignUploaded byWillie Cabauatan
- PIANCwg28MainUploaded byapi-3709579
- Wave Hydrodynamics (Strukpan 1)Uploaded byAhmad Riza Fahluzi
- @_Design and Construction of RBWUploaded byapi-3709579
- Marine WorksUploaded byIgnatius Samraj
- BreakwaterUploaded bySayan Pal
- Rubble Mound Breakwater Design -ExampleUploaded byhhshiyam
- Characteristics of BreakwatersUploaded bySakinah Shakur
- Construction of BreakwatersUploaded bymanu_696
- @_Summary of Rubble Mound Breakwater Design EquationsUploaded byapi-3709579
- PIANC N°88 1995 Movments of Ships in HarbourUploaded bykbenjika
- Dictionary of Coastal EngineeringUploaded byArif Samoon

- Subgroup a ReportUploaded byapi-3709579
- @_Morphological Modelling ProcedureUploaded byapi-3709579
- @_Design and Construction of RBWUploaded byapi-3709579
- Subgroup D ReportUploaded byapi-3709579
- Subgroup C ReportUploaded byapi-3709579
- @_Design Low-Crested StructuresUploaded byapi-3709579
- Cem Part Vi Chap 2Uploaded bysean_dibartolo3668
- @ Over Topping ManualUploaded byapi-3709579
- @_marine and Coastal EngineeringUploaded byapi-3709579
- @_Modelling Wave-Induced Pressure on BWUploaded byapi-3709579
- @ Case Study Mekong Delta Salt IntrusionUploaded byapi-3709579
- Subgroup a - Appendix BUploaded byapi-3709579
- Subgroup a - Appendix AUploaded byapi-3709579
- @_Damping of Horizontal and Uplift ForcesUploaded byapi-3709579
- WG 28 Case Studies for PROVERBS Parameter Map InputUploaded byapi-3709579
- Van Der Meer_Spectral Changes Due to Wave Transmission and Affects of Bi-modal Wave Spectra on Over ToppingUploaded byapi-3709579
- Van Der Meer_Integral ion Design Techniques and Neural NetworksUploaded byapi-3709579
- PIANCwg28MainUploaded byapi-3709579
- Van Der Meer_Oblique Wave Transmission Over Low-crested StructuresUploaded byapi-3709579
- @ ICZM GlossaryUploaded byapi-3709579
- @ Presentation Dos and DonotsUploaded byapi-3709579
- Van Der Meer_Wave Over Topping at Coastal StructuresUploaded byapi-3709579
- Van Der Meer_Application and Stability Criteria for Rock and Artificial UnitsUploaded byapi-3709579
- (eBook) a Complete Illustrated Guide to the Pc HardwareUploaded byJim Hosein
- @ Presentation Skills for ScientistsUploaded byapi-3709579
- oral presentaion skillsUploaded byDr. Wael El-Said
- Van Der Meer_Code for Dike Height Design & Examination Based on Wave Run-up and Wave Over ToppingUploaded byapi-3709579
- Van Der Meer_Wave Boundary Conditions and Over Topping in Complex AreasUploaded byapi-3709579

- EcgUploaded byMarlon Joya
- blaber 2002Uploaded byFlávio Messias Oliveira
- ugc-finalUploaded byShital Aherkar
- Mobile App Security ChecklistUploaded byVikas Sharma
- Text Hydraulics BasicUploaded byGrigoris Mpalitas
- BUS 302 Study MaterialUploaded byCadyMyers
- DE10-Nano User ManualUploaded byDaniel VD
- toni rodriguez final resumeUploaded byapi-381813847
- Guia Tivoli Admin AixUploaded byhenrypena
- Company Profile of Ban FireUploaded byravifact
- Theory of Automata - Lecture 2Uploaded byabc
- budzsackUploaded by97wood
- Pollution ArticleUploaded byshahmie120
- Tc505 ManualUploaded bymfah00
- Web Progress Bar WhitepaperUploaded bySantu Smile
- Calibration InfoUploaded byRunudel Joseph Gomez
- L beamsUploaded byrameshbabu_1979
- Computer Networking Short Questions and AnswersUploaded byJohny Jillala
- Tdbank Soa TestUploaded byBikram Panda
- Chief Information Officer CIO in Southeast USA Resume Joseph WoodUploaded byJosephWood
- Types of Packaging MaterialsUploaded byAmrisha Bakshi
- User Guide for E-recUploaded byKarthi Mrvk
- Autobiography of Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh JiUploaded bySikh Texts
- FDP BrochureUploaded byshrutdev
- A Study on Mechanical Properties of Hemp-Bagasse Fibers Reinforced with Epoxy Hybrid CompositeUploaded byIRJET Journal
- QA-01-001-2013-Rev0-Quality-Manual.pdfUploaded byMau Atenas Perez
- 2009Morphosyntax-skriptaUploaded byIgnacio Moreira
- Research QuestionsUploaded byRony Rahman
- Answers Part 1Uploaded byRamiro Cruz
- shoshana sprague letter of recommendation kitty bolesUploaded byapi-250802000