© All Rights Reserved

3 views

© All Rights Reserved

- Concrete Basements the New Design Guide
- PY-COM624
- API RP 2A-WSD Errata and Suppl
- ARMA-91-1115_Comparison of Direct Shear and Hollow Cylinder Tests on Rock Joints
- Stress Analysis Report Initial Rizky Rahmaddy
- Direct Shear Lab9[1]
- Pressuremeters Web
- calculate the drilled shaft.xlsx
- 1.0 BEAM DESIGN
- 2.2
- Roc Plane Tutorial
- T10_09
- ascife.27510.fm
- Normalized Shear Modulus Reduction and Damping Ratio Curves of Quartz Sand and Rhyolitic Crushed Rock
- Behaviour of Single Piles Under Axial Loading GOOD
- Engineering for Embankement Dams
- ART Mayne 2008
- 01 CPT DOT Presentation
- 1950_the Measurement of the Shear Strength of Soils_bishop_1950
- DirectshearTest

You are on page 1of 24

December 2013

(US Customary Unit)

The Bridge software Institute disclaims any warranty, expressed or implied, including but not

limited to, any implied warranty of accuracy for a particular purpose or accuracy of the Florida

Pier software. The BSI shall not be liable for any damages incurred through the use of the

provided information. Thus, All parameters for soil models available in the FB-MultiPier

program must be used for preliminary design purpose only.

Department of Civil & Coastal Engineering

College of Engineering

University of Florida

Gainesville, Florida 32611

Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station

Cohesionless Soil

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Cohesionless Soil Properties

Total Unit Weight

Symbol Units

pcf

Loose

Medium

Dense

References :

90

115

110

130

110

140

Ref.[1]

10

10

30

30

50

Ref.[2]

N 60

Relative Density

Dr

15

35

35

65

65

85

Ref.[3]

deg

29

30

30

36

36

41

Ref.[4]

(From Eqn. (1) using )

K0

0.51

0.5

0.5

0.41

0.41

0.34

K 0 = 1 sin ( )

kbw

pci

20

30

30

100

100

160

Ref.[6]

kaw

pci

20

50

50

165

165

275

Ref.[6]

Poisson's Ratio

0.20 - 0.40

0.25 - 0.40

0.30 - 0.45

(1) Ref.[5]

Ref.[7]

Young's Modulus

(From Eqn. (2) using =5, pa =2000psf

Eem

psf

Eem

psf

psf

66360

psf

Eem = pa * * N 60

(2) Ref.[8]

E = k * B *(1 2 )

(3) Ref.[9]

and N 60 )

Young's Modulus

(From Eqn. (2) using =10, pa =2000psf

and N 60 )

Young's Modulus

( From Eqn. (3) using B = 24in,

99530

Young's Modulus

( From Eqn. (3) using B = 24in,

Notation:

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Cohesionless Soil Properties

Symbol Units

Loose

Medium

Dense

References :

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with Eem of =5, and

Gem

ksi

0.12

0.29

0.28

0.83

0.80

1.33

Gem

ksi

0.23

0.58

0.55

1.67

1.6

2.67

ksi

0.19

0.29

0.27

0.9

0.84

1.34

ksi

0.19

0.48

0.45

1.48

1.38

2.31

Gmax

ksi

0.62

1.16

1.16

2.45

2.45

3.47

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) )

(4) Ref.[10]

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with Eem of =10, and

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with E of kbw , and

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with E of kaw , and

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (5) using N 60 )

Ultimate Unit End Bearing

ksi

kips

psf

Fig.4 (For Drilled Shafts) on pp. 10

0.68

(5) Ref.[11]

Cohesive Soil

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Cohesive Soil Properties

Total Unit Weight

Symbol Units

pcf

Soft

Medium

110

130

100

120

Stiff

120

140

References :

Ref.[12]

15

Ref. [13]

N 60

qu

tsf

0.25

0.5

0.5

Ref. [13]

Cu

psf

250

500

500

1000

1000

2000

Ref. [14]

Major Principal Strain @ 50%

Major Principal Strain @ 100%

psf

375

750

1500

0.02

0.01

0.005

Ref. [15]

0.06

0.03

0.015

Ref. [16]

pci

NA

NA

500

Ref. [17]

pci

NA

NA

200

Ref. [17]

0.4

0.45

0.5

Ref. [18]

50

100

k

k

Poisson's Ratio

Elastic Modulus

psi

415

1735

1735

4860

4860

>13890

ksi

0.15

0.62

0.60

1.68

1.62

4.63

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) using E , and )

Ultimate Unit End Bearing

ksi

kips

psf

Ref. [19]

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) )

(4) Ref.[10]

Note: For the input values of vertical failure shear stress and torsional shear stress, the ultimate unit skin friction for a pile or drilled shaft can be

used.

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Rock Type

Symbol Units

pcf

RQD

Modulus Ratio

Em Ei

Elastic Modulus

Ei

ksi

Em

ksi

Unit Weight

Mass Modulus

(From Eqn. (6) using Em Ei and Ei )

Poisson's Ratio

Shear Modulus

Limestone

Sandstone

130 - 175

145- 170

References :

Ref. [20], Ref.[21]

20

50

100

20

50

100

Ref. [22]

0.05

0.15

0.05

0.15

Ref. [22]

5700

285

855

2130

5700

106.5

0.23

319.5

Ref. [22]

2130

0.2

Em = ( Em Ei ) * Ei

Ref. [22]

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) )

ksi

deg

34 40

27 34

Ref. [22]

qu

psf

500000 6000000

1400000 3600000

Ref. [23]

qt

psf

50000 600000

140000 360000

Ref. [24]

Granite

Quartzite

160 - 190

130 - 170

Rock Type

Symbol Units

RQD

Modulus Ratio

Em Ei

Elastic Modulus

Ei

ksi

Em

ksi

Unit Weight

Mass Modulus

(From Eqn. (6) using Em Ei and Ei )

Poisson's Ratio

115.85

pcf

%

347.56 2317.07

44.37

133.12

887.5

50

100

20

50

100

Ref. [22]

0.05

0.15

0.02

0.15

Ref. [22]

382

1146

9590

7640

191.8

0.2

1438.5

9590

0.14

Em = ( Em Ei ) * Ei

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) )

ksi

deg

34 40

NA

Ref. [22]

qu

psf

300000 7000000

1300000 8000000

Ref. [23]

qt

psf

30000 700000

130000 800000

Ref. [24]

477.5

3183.33

84.12

630.92

(6)

Ref. [22]

159.17

Ref. [10]

Ref. [22]

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) using Em , and )

(4)

20

7640

(6)

4206.14

(4)

Ref. [10]

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Geotechnical Description

Symbol Units

Low

Strength

Medium

Strength

High Strength

Very High

Strength

References :

qu

psf

qt

psf

<20900

2090041750

41750125250

>125250

fs

psf

<19800

1980028000

2800048500

>48500

qb

ksf

fs

psf

f s = 20.877* ( 2.8* + 10 )

Ref. [25]

qb

ksf

qb = 0.0209*180*

Ref. [25]

kips

(From Eqn. (7) using qu )

Ultimate Unit End Bearing (Drilled shaft)

(From Eqn. (8) using qu )

Ref. [24]

Florida Limestone

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Average

Bridges (See the map

for locations)

Test RQD

Shaft ( % )

Units

Reference:

qu

fs

Ei

qt

Em Ei

Em

(From Eqn.(9)

using qu and qt )

using Ei and

using Ei and

= 0.33)

= 0.12)

[26]

0.127

ksi

[26]

59.23

psf

[26]

10240.54

pcf

[26] [22]

[22]

NA 34-40 0.12-0.33

ksi

[10]

175.33

ksi

[10]

208.2

Acosta

Test 1 34.2 170600 36800 579.04

46-11A 78 24300 2000 98.61

0.123

0.1

0.535

77.06

57.90

52.75

26195.37

19112.59

2692.55

NA 34-40 0.12-0.33

NA 34-40 0.12-0.33

130 34-40 0.12-0.33

235.54

217.68

37.07

279.7

258.5

44.02

Apalachicola

62-5

43.01

0.37

15.91

1471.38

16.17

19.20

Fuller Warren

Gandy

Victory

LTSO 3

psf

psf

ksi

[26] [26]

[26]

[26]

43 61400 19200 466.38

69-7

LT-3a

54

31

10200 800

41.39

86000 19200 258.78

0.26

0.09

10.76

23.29

985.97

8752.16

130 34-40 0.12-0.33

15.56

97.29

18.48

115.53

LT4

52-6

33

78

73200 27800 322.86

0.096 43.83

0.78 251.83

14729.79

17423.04

110 34-40 0.12-0.33

171.66

121.37

203.85

144.13

52

8600 2200 274.14

29.8 314000 50200 2880.5

0.21 57.57

0.083 239.08

1471.77

25729.76

110 34-40 0.12-0.33

103.06

1082.9

122.38

1285.9

91-4

10-2

Properties

Symbol Units

Florida Limestone

fs

psf

qb

psf

kips

f s = 1 * qu * qt * ( Adjusted % RQD )

2

E

G=

2* (1 + )

(9)

Ref. [26]

(4)

Ref. [10]

For Driven Piles - The Ultimate End bearing of any pile can be calculated from

the below graph if the SPT blow count are available

n := 60

i := 1 .. n + 1

N := ( i 1)

i

Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile) := 3.2 N

Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile) := 0.7 N

Limestone(Conc/HPile) := 3.6 N

i 144

Limestone(Steel) :=

i 144

i 144

3.6 N 2 if N 30

i 144

i

(N 30) 23 otherwise

36 + 7 i

30 144

Limestone

3

2.5

Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile)

Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile)

Limestone(Conc/HPile) 1.5

Limestone(Steel)

1

0.5

10

20

30

N

Figure 2

40

50

60

For Driven Piles - The Ultimate Skin Friction of any pile can be calculated

from the below graph if the SPT blow count are available

n := 60

i := 1 .. n + 1

N := ( i 1)

i

Sand(Conc) := 0.019 N 2000

i

Sand(Steel) := 0.026 + 0.023 N 1.435 10

i

( i)

6.527 10

( i) 2000

Clay(Conc) :=

i

2 Ni ( 110 Ni)

2000

4006.6

Clay(Steel) := 8.081 10

i

+ 0.058 N 1.202 10

i

( i)

+ 8.785 10

( i) 2000

Ultimate Skin Friction for Concrete and Steel Piles in Florida Limestone...

i

3500

3000

Sand(Conc)

2500

Sand(Steel)

2000

Clay(Conc)

Clay(Steel)

1500

Limestone(Conc/Steel)

1000

500

10

20

30

N

Figure 3

40

50

60

For Drilled shafts - The Ultimate Unit Skin Friction for Sand with respect to

the depth can be found out from the graph below

start := 0

n :=

:=

i

( end start )

h

end := 180

h := 5

i := 1 .. ( n )

Depth := start + ( i 1 ) h

1.2 if Depth 5

i

i

(1.5 0.135

Depth

otherwise

:= 110 pcf

Density of Water...

i

i

'NoWater := ( ) Depth

i

i

No Water Table

SFwWT := 'Water

i

SFw/oWT := 'NoWater

0

20

40

Depth (ft)

60

Depth(Water Table at Surface) 80

Depth(No Water Table)

100

120

140

160

1000

2000

3000

SFwWT, SFw/oWT

Figure 4

4000

5000

References:

1. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp 163.

2. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck, Gholamreza Mesri , 1996, Table

12.1, pp. 60.

3. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.3.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure B7 (Source: "Research on Determining the

Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing", H.J.Gibbs, W.G.Holtz, 1957, Proc. 4th International Conference

on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 35-39).

4. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.3.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure B7 (Source: American Petroleum Institute (API),

1987, Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing xed offshore platforms, API

Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).

5. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation 2-18a, pp.41.

6. FB MultiPier Help Manual ->11.3.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure B8 (Source: American Petroleum Institute (API),

1987, Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing xed offshore platforms, API

Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).

7. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Table 5.8, pp. 240.

8. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 5.43, pp. 240.

9. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 6.5, pp. 294.

10. "Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation (a), pp. 121.

11. Seismic Response Analysis of a Highway Overcrossing Equipped with Elastomeric Bearings and Fluid

Dampers, Nicos Makris & Jian Zhang, Equation (1), Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 6, June 2004,

pp. 830-845 (Source: Correlations among seismic motion, ground conditions, and damage: Data on the

Miyagiken-oki earthquake of 1978, Imai T. and Tonouchi K., 1982, Proc. 3rd Int. Earthquake Miscorzonation Conf.,

Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Vol. 2, pp. 649660.).

12. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 2nd Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp. 86.

13. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck, Gholamreza Mesri, 1996,

Table 12.2, pp. 63.

14. Soil Mechanics, 1st Edition, T. W. Lambe, R. V. Whitman, 1969, Section 29.8, pp.451.

15. Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay, Matlock, H., 1970, Proceedings, Offshore

Technology Conference, Vol. I, Paper No. 1204, Houston, Texas, pp. 577-594.

16. Single Piles and Pile Groups under Lateral Loading, Lymon C. Reese, William F. Van Impe, Figure 3.11, pp.

71.

17. Laterally Loaded Piles and Computer Program COM624G, Reese L.C., Cooley L.A., Radhakrishnan N., 1984,

Technical Report K-84-2, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Table 4, pp. 60.

18. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 2-7, pp. 123.

19. Engineering and Design Settlement Analysis, EM1110-1-1904, Appendix D, Table D-3, pp. D-5.

20. A Treatise on the Principles and Practice of Harbour Engineering, Brysson Cunningham, pp. 86.

21. Bulletin, Issue 2, Utah Engineering Experiment Station, pp. 16.

22. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification, 5th Edition, Section 10(Foundations), pp. (10-25) (10-27).

23. AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges, 16th Edition, 1996, Table 4.4.1.2B, pp. 64.

24. Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design Tables, Burt Look, pp. 65.

25. Geophysical testing for rock assessment and pile design, Lani Cheenikal, Harry Poulos, Robert Whiteley,

Coffey Geotechnics, Australia. (Internet link:

http://www.coffey.com/Uploads/Documents/Geophysical%20testing%20for%20rock%20assessment%20and%20

pile%20design_20100625141417.pdf)

26. Static and Dynamic Field Testing of Drilled Shafts: Suggested Guidelines on their use for FDOT Structures,

Michael McVay, Ralph D. Ellis Jr., Final Report, FDOT No. 99052794.

December 2013

(SI Unit)

The Bridge software Institute disclaims any warranty, expressed or implied, including but not

limited to, any implied warranty of accuracy for a particular purpose or accuracy of the Florida

Pier software. The BSI shall not be liable for any damages incurred through the use of the

provided information. Thus, All parameters for soil models available in the FB-MultiPier

program must be used for preliminary design purpose only.

Department of Civil & Coastal Engineering

College of Engineering

University of Florida

Gainesville, Florida 32611

Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station

Cohesionless Soil

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Cohesionless Soil Properties

Total Unit Weight

Symbol Units

kN m3

Loose

Medium

Dense

References :

14

18

17

20

17

22

Ref.[1]

10

10

30

30

50

Ref.[2]

N 60

Relative Density

Dr

15

35

35

65

65

85

Ref.[3]

deg

29

30

30

36

36

41

Ref.[4]

(From Eqn. (1) using )

K0

0.51

0.5

0.5

0.41

0.41

0.34

kbw

kN m3

5430

8140

8140

27145

27145

43430

Ref.[6]

kaw

kN m3

5430

13570

13570

44790

44790

74650

Ref.[6]

Poisson's Ratio

0.20 - 0.40

0.25 - 0.40

0.30 - 0.45

K 0 = 1 sin ( )

(1) Ref.[5]

Ref.[7]

Young's Modulus

(From Eqn. (2) using =5, pa =100kPa,

Eem

kPa

2000

5000

5000

15000

15000

25000

Eem

kPa

4000

10000

10000

30000

30000

50000

kPa

3180

4765

4655

15525

15070

24110

kPa

3180

7945

7760

25615

24865

41440

Eem = pa * * N 60

(2) Ref.[8]

E = k * B *(1 2 )

(3) Ref.[9]

and N 60 )

Young's Modulus

(From Eqn. (2) using =10, pa =100kPa,

and N 60 )

Young's Modulus

( From Eqn. (3) using B = 0.61m,

Young's Modulus

( From Eqn. (3) using B = 0.61m,

Notation:

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Cohesionless Soil Properties

Symbol Units

Loose

Medium

Dense

References :

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with Eem of =5, and

Gem

kPa

833

2083

2000

6000

5769

9615

Gem

kPa

1667

4167

4000

12000

11538

19231

kPa

1325

1986

1862

6209

5795

9272

kPa

1325

3311

3104

10246

9563

15938

Gmax

kPa

4302

8021

8021

16930

16930

23962

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) )

(4) Ref.[10]

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with Eem of =10, and

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with E of kbw , and

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) with E of kaw , and

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (5) using N 60 )

Ultimate Unit End Bearing

kPa

kN

kPa

Fig.4(For Drilled Shafts) on pp. 10

0.68

(5) Ref.[11]

Cohesive Soil

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Cohesive Soil Properties

Total Unit Weight

Symbol Units

Soft

kN m3

Medium

Stiff

References

16

19

17

20

19

22

Ref.[12]

15

Ref. [13]

N 60

qu

kPa

23.95

47.9

47.9

95.8

95.8

191.6

Ref. [13]

Cu

kPa

11.97

23.95

23.95

47.9

47.9

95.8

Ref. [14]

Major Principal Strain @ 50%

Major Principal Strain @ 100%

Subgrade Modulus (Static Loading)

kPa

50

100

k

Poisson's Ratio

Elastic Modulus

Shear Modulus

(From Eqn. (4) using E , and )

Ultimate Unit End Bearing

17.96

35.92

71.85

0.02

0.01

0.005

Ref. [15]

0.06

0.03

0.015

Ref. [16]

kN m

NA

NA

135725

Ref. [17]

kN m

NA

NA

54290

Ref. [17]

0.4

0.5

33510 >95770

Ref. [18]

Ref. [19]

11170

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) )

kPa

2860

11960

0.45

11960 33510

kPa

1021

4271

4124

11555

kPa

kN

kPa

31923

(4) Ref.[10]

Note: For the input values of vertical failure shear stress and torsional shear stress, the ultimate unit skin friction for a pile or drilled shaft can be

used.

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Rock Type

Symbol

Units

k m

RQD

Modulus Ratio

Em Ei

Elastic Modulus

Ei

kPa

Em

kPa

Unit Weight

Mass Modulus

(From Eqn. (6) using Em Ei and Ei )

Poisson's Ratio

Shear Modulus

Limestone

Sandstone

20.42 27.49

22.78 26.7

References :

Ref. [20], Ref.[21]

20

50

100

20

50

100

Ref. [22]

0.05

0.15

0.05

0.15

Ref. [22]

39300000

14686000

Ref. [22]

0.23

0.2

Em = ( Em Ei ) * Ei (6)

Ref. [22]

kPa

deg

34 40

27 34

Ref. [22]

qu

kPa

24000 290000

67000 172000

Ref. [23]

qt

kPa

2400 29000

6700 17200

Ref. [24]

Granite

Quartzite

25.13 29.85

20.42 26.7

Rock Type

Units

k m

RQD

Modulus Ratio

Em Ei

Elastic Modulus

Ei

kPa

Em

kPa

Unit Weight

Mass Modulus

(From Eqn. (6) using Em Ei and Ei )

Poisson's Ratio

20

50

100

20

50

100

Ref. [22]

0.05

0.15

0.02

0.15

Ref. [22]

52676000

66121000

0.2

0.14

Shear Modulus

Ref. [22]

Em = ( Em Ei ) * Ei (6)

Ref. [22]

G = E ( 2 (1 + ) ) (4)Ref. [10]

kPa

deg

34 40

NA

Ref. [22]

qu

kPa

14000 335000

62000 383000

Ref. [23]

qt

kPa

1400 33500

6200 38300

Ref. [24]

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Geotechnical Description

Symbol Units

Low

Strength

Medium

Strength

High Strength

Very High

Strength

References

qu

kPa

<10000

qt

kPa

<1000

10002000

fs

kPa

<950

950 1340

qb

kPa

<15180

fs

kPa

f s = 2.8* + 10

Ref. [25]

qb

kPa

qb = 180*

Ref. [25]

kN

(From Eqn. (7) using qu )

Ultimate Unit End Bearing (Drilled shaft)

(From Eqn. (8) using qu )

1000020000 2000060000

>60000

20006000

>6000

Ref. [24]

1340 2320

>2320

Ref. [25]

>37180

Ref. [25]

Florida Limestone

Soil properties for preliminary design only.

Average

Bridges (See the map

for locations)

Test RQD

Shaft ( % )

Units

Reference

qu

fs

Ei

qt

kPa

[26]

2940

Em Ei

Em

(From Eqn.(9)

using qu and qt )

kPa

kPa

kPa

[26]

[26]

[26]

[26]

920 3215600 0.127 408400

[26]

17th Street Causeway LTSO 3 43

LTSO 4 41.9 13280 1390 4319800 0.123 531300

Acosta

Test 1 34.2 8170 1760 3992400 0.1 399200

46-11A 78 1160 95

679900 0.535 363700

Apalachicola

62-5

58.2 510

80

296600 0.37 109700

kPa

[26]

490.52

kPa

[26] [22]

[22]

NA 34-40 0.12-0.33

(From Eqn.(4)

using Ei and

(From Eqn.(4)

using Ei and

= 0.33)

= 0.12)

kPa

[10]

1208900

kPa

[10]

1435500

1254.76

915.5

129

70.48

NA 34-40

NA 34-40

20.42 34-40

20.42 34-40

0.12-0.33

0.12-0.33

0.12-0.33

0.12-0.33

1624000

1500900

255600

111500

1928500

1782300

303500

132400

Fuller Warren

69-7

LT-3a

LT4

54

31

33

490

40

285400 0.26 74200

4100 920 1784200 0.09 160600

8480 1090 3148300 0.096 302200

47.23

419.23

705.56

20.42 34-40 0.12-0.33

20.42 34-40 0.12-0.33

107300

670800

1183600

127400

796500

1405500

Gandy

52-6

78

0.78 1736300

834.56

836850

993800

Victory

91-4

10-2

52

410 105 1890100 0.21 396900

29.8 15040 2400 20000000 0.083 1648400

70.5

1232.46

17.28 34-40 0.12-0.33

710600

7466300

843800

8866200

Properties

Symbol Units

Florida Limestone

fs

kPa

qb

kPa

kN

f s = 1 * qu * qt * ( Adjusted % RQD )

2

E

G=

2* (1 + )

(9)

Ref. [26]

(4)

Ref. [10]

For Driven Piles - The Ultimate End bearing of any pile can be calculated from

the below graph if the SPT blow count are available

n := 60

i := 1 .. n + 1

N := ( i 1)

i

Limestone(Steel) :=

i

(3.6Ni95.76) if Ni 30

(N 30) 287.28

36 + 7 i

30

Limestone

otherwise

4

2.5 10

2 10

Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile)

1.5 10

Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile)

Limestone(Conc/HPile)

Limestone(Steel)

1 10

5 10

10

20

30

N

Figure 2

40

50

60

For Driven Piles - The Ultimate Skin Friction of any pile can be calculated

from the below graph if the SPT blow count are available

n := 60

i := 1 .. n + 1

N := ( i 1)

i

Sand(Conc) := 0.019 N 95.8

i

Sand(Steel) := 0.026 + 0.023 N 1.435 10

i

( i)

6.527 10

( i) 95.8

Clay(Conc) :=

i

2 Ni ( 110 Ni)

95.8

4006.6

Clay(Steel) := 8.081 10

i

+ 0.058 N 1.202 10

i

( i)

+ 8.785 10

( i) 95.8

Ultimate Skin Friction for Concrete and Steel Piles in Florida Limestone...

i

150

125

Sand(Conc)

100

Sand(Steel)

Clay(Conc)

75

Clay(Steel)

Limestone(Conc/Steel)

50

25

10

20

30

N

Figure 3

40

50

60

For Drilled shafts - The Ultimate Unit Skin Friction for Sand with respect to

the depth can be found out from the graph below

start := 0

n :=

:=

i

( end start )

h

end := 50

h := 0.5

i := 1 .. ( n )

Depth := start + ( i 1 ) h

i

i

:= 17 kN m

Density of Water...

water := 9.81 kN m

i

i

'NoWater := ( ) Depth

i

i

No Water Table

SFwWT := 'Water

i

SFw/oWT := 'NoWater

0

Depth (m)

10

20

Depth(Water Table at Surface)

Depth(No Water Table)

30

40

50

100

150

SFwWT, SFw/oWT

Figure 4

200

250

References:

1. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp 163.

2. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck, Gholamreza Mesri , 1996, Table

12.1, pp. 60.

3. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.3.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure B7 (Source: "Research on Determining the

Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing", H.J.Gibbs, W.G.Holtz, 1957, Proc. 4th International Conference

on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 35-39).

4. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.3.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure B7 (Source: American Petroleum Institute (API),

1987, Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing xed offshore platforms, API

Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).

5. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation 2-18a, pp.41.

6. FB MultiPier Help Manual ->11.3.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure B8 (Source: American Petroleum Institute (API),

1987, Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing xed offshore platforms, API

Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).

7. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Table 5.8, pp. 240.

8. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 5.43, pp. 240.

9. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 6.5, pp. 294.

10. "Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation (a), pp. 121.

11. Seismic Response Analysis of a Highway Overcrossing Equipped with Elastomeric Bearings and Fluid

Dampers, Nicos Makris & Jian Zhang, Equation (1), Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 6, June 2004,

pp. 830-845 (Source: Correlations among seismic motion, ground conditions, and damage: Data on the

Miyagiken-oki earthquake of 1978, Imai T. and Tonouchi K., 1982, Proc. 3rd Int. Earthquake Miscorzonation Conf.,

Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Vol. 2, pp. 649660.).

12. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 2nd Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp. 86.

13. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck, Gholamreza Mesri, 1996,

Table 12.2, pp. 63.

14. Soil Mechanics, 1st Edition, T. W. Lambe, R. V. Whitman, 1969, Section 29.8, pp.451.

15. Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay, Matlock, H., 1970, Proceedings, Offshore

Technology Conference, Vol. I, Paper No. 1204, Houston, Texas, pp. 577-594.

16. Single Piles and Pile Groups under Lateral Loading, Lymon C. Reese, William F. Van Impe, Figure 3.11, pp.

71.

17. Laterally Loaded Piles and Computer Program COM624G, Reese L.C., Cooley L.A., Radhakrishnan N., 1984,

Technical Report K-84-2, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Table 4, pp. 60.

18. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 2-7, pp. 123.

19. Engineering and Design Settlement Analysis, EM1110-1-1904, Appendix D, Table D-3, pp. D-5.

20. A Treatise on the Principles and Practice of Harbour Engineering, Brysson Cunningham, pp. 86.

21. Bulletin, Issue 2, Utah Engineering Experiment Station, pp. 16.

22. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification, 5th Edition, Section 10(Foundations), pp. (10-25) (10-27).

23. AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges, 16th Edition, 1996, Table 4.4.1.2B, pp. 64.

24. Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design Tables, Burt Look, pp. 65.

25. Geophysical testing for rock assessment and pile design, Lani Cheenikal, Harry Poulos, Robert Whiteley,

Coffey Geotechnics, Australia. (Internet link:

http://www.coffey.com/Uploads/Documents/Geophysical%20testing%20for%20rock%20assessment%20and%20

pile%20design_20100625141417.pdf)

26. Static and Dynamic Field Testing of Drilled Shafts: Suggested Guidelines on their use for FDOT Structures,

Michael McVay, Ralph D. Ellis Jr., Final Report, FDOT No. 99052794.

- Concrete Basements the New Design GuideUploaded byletuananhb
- PY-COM624Uploaded byMagdy Bakry
- API RP 2A-WSD Errata and SupplUploaded byMuhamad Farif
- ARMA-91-1115_Comparison of Direct Shear and Hollow Cylinder Tests on Rock JointsUploaded bycastille1956
- Stress Analysis Report Initial Rizky RahmaddyUploaded byRizky Rahmaddy
- Direct Shear Lab9[1]Uploaded byMohammed Abu-sheikhah
- Pressuremeters WebUploaded byDr. Yuri Zhivago
- calculate the drilled shaft.xlsxUploaded byPhát Lữ Xuân
- 1.0 BEAM DESIGNUploaded byklynchelle
- 2.2Uploaded byMarina Davidovic
- Roc Plane TutorialUploaded byMarco Domichelli Mercedes Tello
- T10_09Uploaded byNAUTILUS99
- ascife.27510.fmUploaded bySérgio Bernardes
- Normalized Shear Modulus Reduction and Damping Ratio Curves of Quartz Sand and Rhyolitic Crushed RockUploaded bygavisita123
- Behaviour of Single Piles Under Axial Loading GOODUploaded byJPachas
- Engineering for Embankement DamsUploaded byGiancarlo Marcari
- ART Mayne 2008Uploaded byEstefanio Hirsch
- 01 CPT DOT PresentationUploaded bydangtuan27
- 1950_the Measurement of the Shear Strength of Soils_bishop_1950Uploaded byEdgar Castro Vallejo
- DirectshearTestUploaded byNani Tirumalasetti
- Influence_of_reaction_piles_on_the_behaviour_of_te.pdfUploaded byNarayanan Jayachandran
- t63-003Uploaded bySaraswati Noor
- Ciprotec - PIB - 1. Auflage - Engl.Uploaded byStelian Constantinescu
- S2 Cyclic BehaviourUploaded byTorpir
- 543-chapter3Uploaded byWilder Ocampo Ochoa
- Direct Shear TestUploaded byJazib Ayaz
- plmsspresentation-160125183502Uploaded byRajdeep Singh
- Informe Lab 2 EstructurasUploaded byAndrés Toala
- Foundation WorksUploaded byDean Samuel
- 55555.pdfUploaded byelvedin sijercic

- Copy of Gas Pipeline Blowdown TimeUploaded by3370_234234
- Self Intorduction BehnazUploaded byPGP
- eheV2-USBplusUploaded byPGP
- HOW TO FIND PROPER MANUAL.pdfUploaded byPGP
- Pipe Line Emergency Repair SystemUploaded byemadaz
- Two Phase TransientsUploaded byPGP
- crude oil pipeline optimizationUploaded byPGP
- 30 Day Content Planner EmbeddedUploaded byPGP
- Strategy Gas TransmUploaded byPGP
- eheV3-USBPLUploaded byPGP
- eheV3-AV500Uploaded byPGP
- eheV3-USB300Uploaded byPGP
- 2009-03-19Uploaded byPGP
- Необходимость Учета Плато Людерса в Расчетах Трубопровода На Тектонических РазломахUploaded byPGP
- Сейсмический Анализ Старого ГазопроводаUploaded byPGP
- IPOS Spring2014 Overview DocUploaded byPGP
- 031702_1Uploaded byPGP
- 859605_ch10Uploaded byPGP
- Eurogas Statistical Report 2013Uploaded byLauri Myllyvirta
- D211-10_skaugen_lngsummit_20111005Uploaded byPGP
- 233189020 M a Haque S M Richardson G Saville Blowdown of Pressure Vessels I Computer ModelUploaded byPGP
- KPI газопроводUploaded byPGP
- Направления Исследований По ГазопроводамUploaded byPGP
- Transient effects of compressor outageUploaded byPGP
- Modeling 10Uploaded byPGP
- Unwritten Laws of EngineeringUploaded bybswamina
- 1166564 C12A3 Nelson w How to Analyze Reliability DataUploaded byPGP

- Chapt 05Uploaded byJesse McClure
- Complete Denture TechniquesUploaded byJohn Hyunuk Cho
- WRC_541Uploaded byGanesh Patil
- viability of the proposed solutionUploaded byapi-242778836
- Syllabus for Civil EngineeringUploaded bysanderz178
- Prestressed Steel BeamUploaded byVaibhav Gaikar
- US MaxLife InchUploaded byJuan Carlos Flores
- 10.1007%2FBF02905899.pdfUploaded bydnavsirima
- B10 Life of an Axle ShaftUploaded byGaddipati Mohankrishna
- Finite Element AnalysisUploaded byTesisTraduccionesRuzel
- RIN_PartB_2014-11.pdfUploaded byJuniorJavier Olivo Farrera
- Beam Design for Moment, Shear & TorsionUploaded bygerrydimayuga
- ME6503 Design of Machine Elements Important QuestionsUploaded byCva Raj
- Datasheet Sandvik Saf 2205 EnUploaded byoctavio
- DISEÑOS DE CANDELEROS INGLES.pdfUploaded byingetabasco
- syllabusUploaded byHamza Fayyaz
- Gas CylindersUploaded byTravis Wood
- Blade System Design StudyUploaded byDmitry Grenishen
- Springer Journal Paper on Bacterial ConcreteUploaded byvempadareddy
- 1 HSS 590 Strain Life FatigueUploaded byAdisa Tutusic
- Experimental Study of Beam–Column Behaviour of Steel Single Angles_Yi LiuUploaded bycici
- Strength of Material Experiment 3 (Torsion Test)Uploaded byAtikah Mohd
- IRJET-V3I5104.pdfUploaded byIR Dimas Alamsyah
- Design of Reinforced Concrete Shear wall.docxUploaded byklynchelle
- brick dust as pozzolanUploaded byRolan Sean Magaway
- PARAMETRIC DESIGN ANALYSIS AND FEA SIMULATION OF A CHISEL PLOW FOR AN AGRICULTURE USEUploaded byAnonymous pKuPK3zU
- Prokon -Uploaded bynavaneethan.nkl
- RRB Junior Engineer Civil Solved Model Question PaperUploaded byVishal Ranganathan
- Unit II - Limit State Design for FlexureUploaded byManikandan
- 53214400-A-Fatigue-Primer-for-Structural-Engineers.pdfUploaded bySandro De Carvalho