G MS THESIS_final version_Maxim Prokudin.pdf - Digital Repository ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

119Settlement (mm)0246810Applied stress at bottom of the footing (kPa)0 2000 4000 6000 8000Single PierUnit CellGroup of 2Group of 4Group of 5Group of 6Loess121416(a)02Applied stress at bottom of the footing (kPa)0 2000 4000 6000 80000.0054Settlement (mm)6810121416Figure 80: Overall stress-settlement test results for all (a) 305 mm and (b) 610 mm longaggregate piers(b)
120Aggregate Piers - Group EfficiencyThe group efficiency parameter was calculated for all the groups of aggregate piers and thecomparison between stiffness values of a single pier and multiple piers was made. The stress,stiffness and settlement results were summarized in Table 27 and calculated per Equation 15.Sample calculations can be found in the appendix. Table 27 shows group efficiency values interms of a single pier and Table 29 in terms of unit cell.Table 27: Stress, stiffness and deflection comparison measurements for aggregate piergroup load test results and group efficiency in comparison to a single pierService loadPier type 1Aggregate PierSingle PierLength(mm)k at δ top =2 mm(kPa/mm)σ at δ top= 2 mm(kPa)σ at δ top= 5 mm(kPa)σ at δ top= 10mm(kPa)δ tell-tale atδ top = 10mm(mm)Ratioδ tell-tale /δ top atδ top = 10(mm)GroupEfficiencyat 2mmGroupEfficiencyat 5mmUltimateGroupEfficiencyat 10mm305 64 129 247 406 0.44 0.04 1.0 1.0 1.0610 176 352 704 949 3.80 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Loess - 22 67 158 285 - - - - -Aggregate PierUnit Cell305 174 348 588 908 1.30 0.13 2.7 2.4 2.2610 441 894 1,330 1,533 2.80 0.3 2.5 1.9 1.6Loess - 139 278 685 1101 - - - - -Aggregate PierGroup of 2305 241 483 1,345 2,146 3.90 0.4 1.9 2.7 2.6610 630 1,260 2,521 3,017 0.40 0.04 1.8 1.8 1.6Loess - 321 642 1055 1609 - - - - -Aggregate PierGroup of 4305 433 867 2,254 3,406 4.80 0.5 1.7 2.3 2.1610 798 1,596 3,105 3,947 1.5 0.2 1.1 1.1 1.0Loess - 514 1028 1891 2719 - - - - -Aggregate PierGroup of 5305 765 1,529 3,233 4,150 3.50 0.4 2.4 2.6 2.0610 1,755 3,511 4,375 4,825 1.00 0.1 2.0 1.2 1.0Loess - 514 1028 1891 2719 - - - - -Aggregate PierGroup of 6305 1,537 3,073 4,100 4,898 7.00 0.7 4.0 2.8 2.0610 1,567 3,134 5,361 7,068 0.10 0.01 1.5 1.3 1.2Loess - 509 1018 1486 1886 - - - - -Legend:1 all scaled piers were constructed using cone beveledtamper headk – stiffness modulus (kPa/mm)δ top - deflection at the top of the pier (kPa)δ tell-tale - deflection at the bottom of the pier (mm)σ – stiffness of the pier (kPa)Ratio δ tell-tale / δ top = δ tell-tale /10mmCon<strong>version</strong>s:1 m = 3.3 ft1 mm = 0.0394 in1 kPa = 0.145 psi1 kg/m 3 = 0.0624 pcf
Page 1:
Engineering behavior of small-scale
Page 6 and 7:
viLIST OF FIGURESFigure 1: Concept
Page 8 and 9:
viiiFigure 62: Stress-settlement te
Page 10 and 11:
xLIST OF TABLESTable 1: Stiffness m
Page 12 and 13:
xiiLIST OF EQUATIONSEquation 1: Ult
Page 14 and 15:
xivSymbol Description Unitsγ dry l
Page 16 and 17:
1CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTIONIndustry Pr
Page 22 and 23:
7MAKECAVITYPLACESTONE ATBOTTOM OFCA
Page 24 and 25:
9Normal Stress, kPaShear Stress. kP
Page 26 and 27:
11pier element for a maximum of 25
Page 28 and 29:
13savings provided by the system (A
Page 30 and 31:
15The bearing capacity accredited t
Page 32 and 33:
17Equation 12: Load resistance prov
Page 34 and 35:
19Soil conditions at the site were
Page 36 and 37:
Settlement (mm)Settlement (mm)10202
Page 38 and 39:
23Site soil conditions were describ
Page 40 and 41:
25Article#ReferenceTable 2: Case st
Page 42 and 43:
27Article#7ReferenceHughes andWithe
Page 44 and 45:
29replaced with method of freezing
Page 46 and 47:
UNREINFORCED COLUMNNO COLUMNREINFOR
Page 48 and 49:
33The load carrying capacity was fo
Page 50 and 51:
35Case 5 - Bachus and Barksdale, 19
Page 52 and 53:
37full depth of the consolidated la
Page 54 and 55:
39CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGYCr
Page 56 and 57:
41itself was designed to be support
Page 58 and 59:
43While it is obvious that the chan
Page 60 and 61:
45To perform all the required testi
Page 62 and 63:
47In the areas where access was lim
Page 64 and 65:
49CBR from DCPThe California Bearin
Page 66 and 67:
305 mm610 mm305 mm610 mm305 mm610 m
Page 68 and 69:
53The process of using the Shelby t
Page 70 and 71:
15881556144815591597154915271586158
Page 72 and 73:
57Table 14: Top and bottom UC loess
Page 74 and 75:
59Data Collection and SensorsHaving
Page 76 and 77:
61Micro Epsilon displacement transd
Page 78 and 79:
63plate down the cavity through man
Page 80 and 81:
65Beveled Tamper HeadsThe other asp
Page 82 and 83:
67All, aggregate, cementitious and
Page 84 and 85: 69DAQ Data CollectionWhile performi
Page 86 and 87: 71space in the test bed (See Figure
Page 88 and 89: 73(a)(b)(c)Figure 42: Test bed grou
Page 90 and 91: 75CHAPTER 4: MATERIALSThe materials
Page 92 and 93: 7710080LL = 31PI = 7Pass. #200 = 98
Page 94 and 95: 79the second stage of testing. Mois
Page 96 and 97: 81Knowing the gradation characteris
Page 98 and 99: 83More importantly, the performed d
Page 100 and 101: 85Figure 49: Cement type I compound
Page 102 and 103: 87As the expansive and contractive
Page 104 and 105: 89Figure 55: 19 mm polypropylene fi
Page 106 and 107: 91CHAPTER 5: TEST RESULTS AND ANALY
Page 108 and 109: 93Applied stress at top of pier (kP
Page 110 and 111: 95Figure 60: Stress-settlement test
Page 116 and 117: 101Figure 66: Stress-settlement tes
Page 120 and 121: 105Settlement (mm)024681012Applied
Page 122 and 123: 107to the maximum displacement of 1
Page 124 and 125: 109The failure mechanism of other p
Page 126 and 127: 1113000Measured Bearing Capacity (k
Page 128 and 129: 113Applied stress at bottom of the
Page 136 and 137: 121The group efficiency results wer
Page 138 and 139: 123Pier typeAggregate PierUnit Cell
Page 146 and 147: 131Applied stress at bottom of the
Page 148 and 149: 133Table 33: Group efficiency compa
Page 150 and 151: 135Having a limited amount of exper
Page 152 and 153: 137Stiffness, kPa/mm600500400300200
Page 154 and 155: 139In case with the piers consistin
Page 156 and 157: 141Table 36: Stiffness ratio calcul
Page 158 and 159: 143Some of the loess composition pi
Page 160 and 161: 145Pier typeAggregatePierSingle Pie
Page 162 and 163: 147Another observation was made, wh
Page 164 and 165: 149As previously outlined, the stif
Page 166 and 167: 151pier group efficiency values wer
Page 168 and 169: Stiffness Ratio1538Figure 91: Stiff
Page 170 and 171: 155CHAPTER 7: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIO
Page 172 and 173: 157MaterialsLoess-CementVery intrig
Page 174 and 175: 159Groups of PiersGroup of Aggregat
Page 176 and 177: 161CHAPTER 8: FUTURE RESEARCHThe fu
Page 178 and 179: 163Black, J.A., Sivakumar, V., Madh
Page 180 and 181: 165Hanlong, L., An, D., and Yang, S
Page 182 and 183: 167Randrup T.B., and Lichter, J.M.
Page 184 and 185:
169Yeh, Y.K., and Mo, Y.L. (2005).
Page 186 and 187:
171Group EfficiencyAggregate Pier G
Page 188 and 189:
173Aggregate Pier305mm Wedge HeadDC
Page 190 and 191:
175Loess + Fibers305mm Single PierD
Page 192 and 193:
177Sand305mm Single PierDCPI, mm/bl
Page 194 and 195:
179Aggregate Pier305mm Group of 4DC
Page 196 and 197:
181C(I) + C(K)305mm Group of 4DCPI,
Page 198 and 199:
183Aggregate Pier305mm Wedge HeadCB
Page 200 and 201:
185Loess + Fibers305mm Single PierC
Page 202 and 203:
187Sand305mm Single PierCBR, %0 2 4
Page 204 and 205:
189Aggregate Pier305mm Group of 4CB
Page 206 and 207:
191C(I) + C(K)305mm Group of 4CBR,
show all

G MS THESIS_final version_Maxim Prokudin.pdf - Digital Repository ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?