Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Subgroup a - Appendix A

Subgroup a - Appendix A

Ratings:

4.0

(1)
|Views: 42 |Likes:
Published by api-3709579

More info:

Published by: api-3709579 on Oct 19, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/18/2014

pdf

text

original

Appendix A of the PIANC PTCII WG28 Subgroup A report
Static bearing capacity limit state equations for monolithic caissons
and rubble mound breakwater parapet walls.
J. Dalsgaard S\u00f8rensen and H. F. Burcharth
Aalborg University, Denmark
(1) Introduction

This annex provides the limit state equations for 10 important foundation rupture constellations related to monolithic caissons and rubble mound breakwater parapet walls. The limit state equa- tions are formulated as0

\u2265
\u2212
=
d
s
W
W
g
(A1)

whereWs is the work of the stabilizing forces andWd is the work of the destabilizing forces. In general for a specific design the minimum value of g must be larger than 0 in order to obtain sta- bility. If this is not the case, the design must be changed. The limit state equations are represent- ing static load situations and do not cover earthquake loadings involving inertia forces. The dy- namic effect \u2013 if any \u2013 of wave loadings might be taken into account by applying a dynamic load factor to the maximum load to obtain an equivalent static load.

Possible soil strength degradation due to cyclic loadings has to be taken into account.
The wave induced loadings on the front and the base plate of the structures are determined either
from formulae or from model tests.

The waves generate pore pressure gradients in the rubble foundation and in the subsoil. The re- sulting horizontal component of the pore pressure acting on the rupture boundary has to be taken into account and included in the limit state equations. An approximate model for the resulting horizontal pore pressureFHUis shown in Fig. A1.

\ue00b\ue00a\ue009
\ue005\ue004\ue003
\u03b8
\u2212
=
II
u
II
z
HU
h
p
B
h
B
F
tan
/
2
2
1
min.
(A2)
where
B
is the width of caisson
Bz
is the effective width of the caisson base plate
pu
is the wave induced uplift pressure at the edge of the caisson
\u03b8
is the angle between the caisson base and the rupture plane
In the model for estimation of the resulting horizontal pore pressureFHU it is assumed that the
uplift pressure on the base plate is varying linearly frompu at the front to zero at the back of the
A1

structure. Moreover, it is assumed that the pressure is identical at all levels in the rubble founda- tion vertically beneath the base plate. Further, it is assumed that the horizontal pore pressure gra- dients are negligible in subsoils consisting of sand or clay due to the very significant pore pres- sure attenuation with depth related to windgenerated waves.

Figure A1: Illustration of simple model for estimation of wave induced horizontal pore pressure
along rupture boundaries.

The same model eq A2, might be used also in the case of breakwater parapet wall superstructures if the wave induced pore pressure acts on the base plate. This will be the case if high water and/or wave induced internal set-up raise the phreatic surface in the rubble to levels higher than the un- derside of the base plate.

The limit state equations are restricted to the two-dimensional case and is based on the upper bound theorem of classical plasticity theory where an associated flow rule is assumed. However, this rule is not satisfied for friction materials like sand and quarry stones for which the friction angle and the dilation angle are different. In order to overcome the problem, the following re- duced effective friction angle\u03c6d is used, see Hansen (1979),

\u03c8
\u03d5
\u2212
\u03c8
\u03d5
=
\u03d5
sin
'
sin
1
cos
'
sin
tand
(A3)
where
A2
\u03c6\u2019 is the effective friction angle
\u03c8is the dilation angle

In the bearing capacity calculations the rubble mound quarry rock can be regarded fully drained due to the large permeability. The soil strength is then characterized by\u03c6d, defined in eq A3 . The sea bed soil is normally either clay, silt or sand. In the case of clay, silt and fine sand the soil should be considered undrained during wave loadings. Coarse sand might either be drained, par- tially drained or non-drained dependent on the actual soil and loading conditions. For undrained conditions the soil strength is characterized by the undrained shear strength,cu. For drained sub- soils\u03c6d is used as strength parameter. In the following distingtion is made between undrained and drained subsoil conditions as one set of limit state equation is given for each condition.

2) Failure modes
Fig. A2 provides an overview of the failure modes for which limit state equations are presented.
A3

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
YongSun Cho liked this
ads6 liked this
ads6 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->