AASHTO LRFD:

Fundaciones Estructurales y
Estructuras de Retencin
Bases de Especificaciones
ahora!

Que est suciendo

Estados Lmites, Propiedades de los

Suelos y Rocas
Fundaciones Profundas
Fundaciones Superficiales
Estructuras de Retencin de Tierras
Jerry DiMaggio, P. E., Principal Bridge Engineer (Geotechnical)
Federal Highway Administration
Office of Bridge Technology
Washington D.C.

Nuevas Cargas
segn Ley

Bases para las Especificaciones AASHTO :

Presencia de la Ingeniera Geotcnica
* Actividades TRB/ NCHRP (EXAHUSTIVA!)
* Geotechnical Engineering does NOT have a
broad based presence on AASHTO
SubCommittees and Task Forces as do other
technical specialties.
* SubCommittee on Construction (guide
construction specs)
* SubCommittee on Materials (specs on materials
and testing standards)
* SubCommittee on Bridges and Structures
(specs on materials/ systems, design, and
construction)

History of AASHTO: Design &

Construction Specifications for
Bridges and Structures
* First structural Guideline Specification early 1930s
(A code yet NOT A code!).
* First significant Geotechnical content 1989.
* First LRFD specification 1994 (Current 2004, 3 rd
edition).
* First REAL Geotechnical involvement in Bridge
SubCommittee activities @ 1996. (Focus on mse
walls).
* Technical advances to Standard Specifications
STOPPED in 1998 to encourage LRFD use
(secret).
* Major rewrites needed to walls and foundations
sections (NOW COMPLETE).

Geotechnical Scope: AASHTO

Design & Construction Specifications
for Bridges and Structures
* Topics Included: Subsurface Investigations,
soil and rock properties, shallow
foundations, driven piles, drilled shafts,
rigid and flexible culverts, abutments,
WALLS (cantilever, mse, crib, bin, anchor).
* Topics NOT addressed: integral abutments,
micropiles, augercast piles, soil nails,
reinforced slopes, and ALL SOIL and ROCK
EARTHWORK FEATURES.

Standard and LRFD AASHTO

Specifications
* Currently AASHTO has 2 separate
specifications: Standard specs 17th
edition and LRFD, 2004 3rd edition.
* Standard Specifications use a
combination of working stress and load
factor design platform.
* LRFD uses a limit states design platform
with different load and resistance factors
(than LFD).

LRFD IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

Geotechnically, most States still use a
working stress approach for earthworks,
structural foundations, and earth retaining
structures. Several States have totally
adopted LRFD.
Many State Geo/Structural personnel and
consultants ARE NOT FAMILAR with the
content of LRFD 3rd edition.

AASHTO and FHWA have agreed that

all state DOTs will use LRFD for NEW
structure design by 10/07.

What are UNIQUE Geotechnical issues

related to LRFD?
* Strong influence of construction on design.
* GEOTECHs strong bias toward performance
based specifications.
* Natural variability of GEO materials.
* Variability in the type, and frequency of tests,
and method to determine design property
values of soil and rock.
* Differences between earthwork and structural
foundation design model approaches.
* Influence of regional and local factors.
* General lack of data on limit state conditions.

What Happening Now?

* FHWA sponsored a complete rewrite of Section 10
during 2004. The rewrite was prepared by National
subject matter experts and had broad input from a
number of Key State Dots, (including T-15 member
States), and the Geotechnical community (ASCE GI, DFI, ADSC, PDCA).
* During the Proposed spec development @ 2000
comments were addressed. The Proposed spec was
then distributed to all States for review. An
additional @ 1000 comments were addressed.
* The revised Proposed Specification was advanced
and approved by the AASHTOs Bridge and
Structures Sub-Committeee in June 2005.
The revised Proposed Specification is used in the
NHI LRFD Substructure course which currently
available.

Fundamentals of LRFD

Principles of Limit State Designs

* Define the term Limit State

* Define the term Resistance
* Identify the applicability of each of the
four primary limit states.
* Understand the components of the
fundamental LRFD equation.

A Limit State is a defined condition

beyond which a structural component,
ceases to satisfy the provisions for which
it is designed.
Resistance is a quantifiable value that
defines the point beyond which the
particular limit state under investigation
for a particular component will be
exceeded.

Resistance can be defined in

terms of:
* Load/Force (static/ dynamic, dead/
live)
* Stress (normal, shear, torsional)
* Number of cycles
* Temperature
* Strain

Limit States
L
I
S
T

* Strength Limit State

* Extreme Event Limit
State
* Service Limit State
* Fatigue Limit State

Strength
Limit
State

Extreme Event Limit

State

Service Limit State

Service Limit
State

Rn / FS Q
i iQi Rr = Rn
i = Load modifier (eta)
i = Load factor (gamma)
Qi = Force effect
Rr = Factored resistance
= Resistance factor (phi)
Rn = Nominal resistance

 i iQi Rr = Rn
Qn
Probability of
Occurrence

f( , )

Rn

Qn

Rn

Q or R

Subsurface Materials
*
*
*
*

Soil
Rock
Water
Organics

10.4SOIL AND ROCK PROPERTIES

10.4.1Informational Needs
10.4.2Subsurface Exploration
10.4.3Laboratory Tests
10.4.3.1Soil Tests
10.4.3.2Rock Tests
10.4.4In-situ Tests
10.4.5Geophysical Tests
10.4.6Selection of Design Properties
10.4.6.1Soil Strength
10.4.6.1.1Undrained
strength of Cohesive Soils
10.4.6.1.2Drained Strength of Cohesive Soils
10.4.6.1.3Drained strength of Granular Soils
10.4.6.2Soil Deformation
10.4.6.3Rock Mass Strength
10.4.6.4Rock Mass Deformation
10.4.6.5erodibility of rock

Soil Characteristics
* Composed of individual grains of
rock
* Relatively low strength
* Coarse grained (+ #200)
* High permeability

* Fine grained (- #200)

* Low permeability
* Time dependant effects

Rock Characteristics
* Strength
* Intermediate
geomaterials,
qu = 50-1500
psi
* Hard rock,
qu > 1500 psi

* Rock mass
properties

Undrained Strength of
Cohesive Soils, su
Vane Shear Test

=0

su

Unconfined Compression
su = qu/2

qu
Typical Values
su = 250 - 4000 psf

Drained Strength of
Cohesive Soils, c and f

Triaxial
Compression
CU Test

Typical Values
c = 100 - 500 psf
f = 20o - 35o

(modified after Bowles, 1977)

N160
<4

f
25-30

27-32

10

30-35

30

35-40

50

38-43

For N160 = 10, select f = 30o

Settlement (in)

Soil Deformation
0
-2

Initial elastic settlement (all soils)

-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
1

10

100

1000

10000

Time (days)

Primary consolidation

Secondary consolidatio

Fine-grained (cohesive) soils

Void Ratio (e)

Consolidation Properties
eo
1

p =
Preconsolidation
Stress

Cr

Cc
Cs
0.5
0.1

10
Log10 v

100

Stress Range, 40 80 kPa

2.65
2.6

Void ratio (e)

2.55

One log cycle

e=C=0.06

2.5
2.45
2.4
2.35
2.3

tp

2.25
0.1

10

100

1000

Elapsed Time (min)

10000

Elastic Properties of Soil

Youngs Modulus, Es

Typical values, 20 2000 tsf

Poissons Ratio,

Typical values, 0.2 0.5

Shear Modulus, G

Typical values, Es / [2 (1 + )]

Determination by correlation to
N160 or su, or in-situ tests

Rock Properties
Laboratory testing is for small intact
rock specimens
Rock mass is too large to be tested
in lab or field
Rock mass properties are obtained
by correlating intact rock to largescale rock mass behavior failures
in tunnels and mine slopes
Requires geologic expertise

Intact Rock Strength

Unconfined Compression, q
Point Load Test

Typical Values
qu = 1500 - 50000 psi

Length, L

Rock Quality
0.8 ft

Sound

0.7 ft

Not sound, highly weathered

0.8 ft

Not sound, centerline pieces < 4

inches, highly weathered

0.6 ft

Sound

0.2 ft

Not sound

0.7 ft

Sound

CR = 95%

Core Run
Total = 4
ft

RQD = 53%

CSIR Rock Mass Rating

System
This system is based on qu, RQD,
joint spacing, joint condition and
water condition.

Shear stress,

Rock Mass Strength

C1
tm

Effective Normal Stress,

i = tan-1(4 h cos2[30+0.33sin-1(h-3/2)]-1)-1/2
= (cot i cos i)mqu/8
h = 1 + 16(m n+squ)/(3m2qu)

Intact Rock Deformation, Ei

Typical values range from 1000 to
13000 ksi

Poissons Ratio,
Typical values range from 0.1 to 0.3

In situ modulus of deformation, EM (GPa)

Rock Mass Deformation

(psi x 106)

RMR10

90

EM 145,000 10

40

12

70

10
8

50
30

E = 2 RMR - 100

4
2

10
10

30

50

70

Rock mass rating RMR

90

GEC 5
FHWA-IF-02-034

Jerry A. DiMaggio P. E.
Principal Bridge Engineer
TEL: (202) 366-1569
FAX: (202) 366-3077
The best Geotechnical web
site in town!
www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge

WOW! FREE STUFF FROM

THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT!