5 views

Uploaded by Sinagol

Influence of the Rotation of Principal Stress Directions

Influence of the Rotation of Principal Stress Directions

© All Rights Reserved

- geotechnics_01
- Unconfined Compression Test
- Uae Ground Improvement
- Advance Foundation Engineering Design Principles
- Kuat Geser
- Ground Improvement - Alexandria_20070206014923
- Technical Manual Designing Facilities to Resist Nuclear Weapon Effects Structures
- 2015_Effective stress strength testing of peat_ICE Environmental Geotechnics.pdf
- IADOT Hr99 Factors Influencing Stability Granular Base Crs Mix 1965
- A Nonlinear Finite Element Code for Analyzing the Blast Response of Underground Structures CR-N-70-1
- Clay Tests
- The Single Bore Multiple Anchor System a d Barley Paper Presented at the Ice Conference Ground Anchorages and Anchored Structures 1997
- Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Broken Ore
- Map3D Help
- FE Solved QP Nov-Dec 2009
- Marsh Ellen Soil Lab Report
- CE_SET_1_GATE_2015.pdf
- dffhghdf
- Profiling of Overconsolidation Ratio in Clays by Field Vane
- Recent Development in the Vacuum Preloading Method and Its Application for Soft Soil Improvement

You are on page 1of 10

(Ann. Warsaw Univ. of Life Sci. SGGW, Land Reclam. 45 (2), 2013)

shear strength

GRZEGORZ WRZESISKI, ZBIGNIEW LECHOWICZ

Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences SGGW

stress directions on undrained shear strength. The during the soil structure failure.

paper presents the results of research on natural

cohesive soil carried out in the Hollow Cylinder

The simplification generally is adopt-

Apparatus (HCA). The main goal of this study ed that along the potential slip surface

was to determine the values of undrained shear the same undrained shear strength is mo-

strength at different angle of the rotation of prin- bilized. In reality it does not reflect the

cipal stress directions. The research were carried facts. During determination of the geo-

out with anisotropic consolidation and shearing

technical parameters, it should be aware

in undrained conditions (CAU) on cohesive soil

with overconsolidation ratio (OCR) equals 4 and that subsoil characterizes anisotropic

plasticity index (Ip) about 77%. The results of mechanical properties. The use of und-

laboratory tests allow to assess the influence of rained shear strength values determined

the rotation of principal stress directions on un- at a specific angle of rotation of principal

drained shear strength. stress directions may lead to overesti-

Key words: undrained shear strength, Hollow Cyl- mation or underestimation of undrained

inder Apparatus, cohesive soils, rotation of princi- shear strength, and thus may lead to fail-

pal stress directions ure.

One way to determine the change

in the undrained shear strength due to

INTRODUCTION changes in the load surface is numerical

The rotation of principal stress directions analysis (Neher et al. 2002, Wrzesiski

is a common phenomenon that occurs in and Lechowicz 2012) with the use of fi-

the subsoil as a result of the construc- nite element method. The practical sig-

tion of structures such as embankments, nificance of anisotropy is illustrated in

excavations, tunnels or pad foundations. Figure 1 by considering an embankment

This occurs when the growth of principal constructed on soft subsoil (Jardine and

stress directions 1, 2, 3 do not co- Menkiti 1999).

incide with the directions of the principal Although, the importance of the me-

stresses incurred during consolidation chanical anisotropy of subsoils has long

1, 2, 3 (Hight et al. 1983). The effect been recognized in geotechnical en-

of this phenomenon in the subsoil is the gineering (Bjerrum 1973, Jardine and

development of zones with different val- Smith 1991, Lin and Penumadu 2005,

ues of undrained shear strength, which Nishimura et al. 2007, Kiziewicz and Le-

are assigned different values of the angle chowicz 2013), influence of the rotation

184 G. Wrzesiski, Z. Lechowicz

FIGURE 1. Contours of particular values of the rotation of principal stress directions under an embank-

ment on soft clay from non-linear analysis (Jardine and Menkiti 1999)

strength is not sufficiently recognized. mulas describing the undrained shear

The main reason is the lack of clearly de- strength distribution take into account

fined methods that take into account the three zones in subsoil (TC, DSS, TE).

change in the strength due to the change Based on these zones Ladd (1985) pro-

in the angle . Solution to this problem posed equation describing the relation-

would be to use the right combination of ship between the normalized undrained

undrained shear strength values obtained shear strength and overconsolidation

from the tests for different zones of the ratio:

slip surface i.e. triaxial compression W fu

(TC), direct simple shear test (DSS), tri- S (OCR) m

axial extension (TE) Figure 2. V v

FIGURE 2. Subsoil failure mechanisms in different zones of potential failure surface under embank-

ment (Zdravkovi et al. 2002)

Influence of the rotation of principal stress directions... 185

S normalized undrained shear strength In a general case, the stresses will not be

for normally consolidated soil, uniform across the wall and to consider

v vertical effective stress, the hollow cylinder specimen as an ele-

OCR overconsolidation ratio, ment it is necessary to work in terms of

m empirical coefficient expressing the average stresses: W z , V z , V r , V .

slope of correlation between log (fu/v) The Hollow Cylinder Apparatus

and log (OCR). through the applied torsion mechanism

One of the laboratory devices that al- maintains constant values of the angle of

lows to determine the undrained shear the rotation of principal stress directions

strength at the specific value of the angle and the intermediate principal stress

of rotation of principal stress directions is parameter b according to the equation:

the Hollow Cylinder Apparatus (HCA). V2 V3

In HCA soil samples in the shape of b

a hollow cylinder are tested. Forces and V1 V 3

pressures applied to the hollow cylindri- where:

cal sample induced in its elements are 1 major principal stress,

illustrated in Figure 3. The sample is ex- 2 intermediate principal stress,

posed to axial load (F) and torque (MT) as 3 minor principal stress.

well as internal pressure (pi) and external

pressure (po). These four stress compo- Engineering works cause the ground

nents induce in the sample vertical stress to experience stress conditions where

(z), circumferential stress (), radial can vary continously between 0 and 90

while parameter b can range between 0

FIGURE 3. Diagram of the soil sample tested in the Hollow Cylinder Apparatus (www.wfi.co.uk)

186 G. Wrzesiski, Z. Lechowicz

configuration allows such conditions to sive soil with overconsolidation ratio

be studied. (OCR) equals 4 and plasticity index (Ip)

The Hollow Cylinder Apparatus is about 77%. The soil samples were taken

a definite advantage over the traditional from the excavation of Copernicus Sci-

triaxial apparatus used to determine the ence Centre station of the II underground

strength parameters of soil. The ability to line in Warsaw. The research of physical

vary continuously between 0 and 90, properties has shown that tested soil is

and b between 0 and 1, allowed a wide firm clay. Index properties of tested soil

range of engineering problems to be are presented in Table 1.

considered that could not be simulated in

TABLE 1. Index properties of tested soil

Type Overcon- Effective

Water Liquid Plastic Plasticity Liquidity

of soil solidation vertical

content limit limit index index

EN ISO ratio stress

wn [%] wL [%] wp [%] Ip [%] IL [-]

14688-1 OCR [-] v [kPa]

Cl 4 310 30.4 112.9 35.3 77.6 0.06

triaxial or plain strain apparatus. More- Tests were performed on the soil sam-

over, the only possibility of dependence ples in the Hollow Cylinder Apparatus.

of undrained shear strength on the angle Particular samples were tested at a dif-

of the rotation of principal stress direc- ferent angle of the rotation of principal

tions in the triaxial apparatus is to prepare stress directions : 0, 30, 45, 60 and

the samples that have been cut at an an- 90. The studies were performed in the

gle to the direction of the grain and soil following stages: flushing, saturation,

particles. However, in this case, it would consolidation, change of intermediate

be impossible to consolidate the sample principal stress parameter b, change of

in conditions equivalent to in situ ones, the angle between the major principal

because the axis of consolidation in situ stress direction and the vertical one and

does not coincide with the directions con- finally shearing in undrained conditions.

trolled in triaxial apparatus. Moreover, The study started from the flushing

the slope of the anisotropic properties of i.e. removed the air and gases having the

the sample relative to the directions of de- largest size from the sample and hoses.

formation controlled in triaxial apparatus The saturation using back pressure meth-

causes that on rigid elements are gener- od was the next stage. This stage lasted

ated bending moments, which are neither until the value of the Skemptons para-

controlled nor measurable (Molenkamp meter B was more than 0.95 (Lipiski

1998, Nishimura 2005). and Wdowska 2010). After that the ani-

sotropic consolidation was performed.

The value of K0 during consolidation

MATERIAL AND METHODS process was equal to 1.06, so the effec-

The research were carried out with ani- tive horizontal stress h was equal to

sotropic consolidation and shearing in 329 kPa, and the effective vertical stress

Influence of the rotation of principal stress directions... 187

v was equal to 310 kPa. After dissi- deviator stress versus angle of the ro-

pation of excess pore water pressure it tation of principal stress directions,

started to change the intermediate prin- deviator stress versus axial strain,

cipal stress parameter b to value equals principal effective stress ratio versus

0.5, because this value of this parameter axial strain,

allows to keep plane strain conditions pore pressure change versus axial

(Zdravkovi and Jardine 2001). The next strain,

step was to change the angle of the rota- effective stress paths in relation to the

tion of principal stress directions . For axes qp.

particular samples the values of the angle In order to determine the undrained

of rotation of principal stress directions shear strength three criteria of the sam-

were changed to 0, 30, 45, 60 or 90. ple failure were used (Figs. 58):

Then followed the process of shearing maximum deviator stress, q,

the sample, which was carried out at the maximum effective principal stress

stress path involving the increase in de- ratio, 1/3,

viator stress (q) and constant value of ef- maximum increase in pore water

fective mean stress (p). During shearing pressure, u.

constant values of the intermediate prin- The research allowed to determine

cipal stress parameter b and the angle of the values of undrained shear strength

the rotation of principal stress directions and the normalized values of undrained

were kept. shear strength as well as the correspond-

ing axial strains based on the three crite-

ria of the sample failure (Table 2).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The test results in the Hollow Cyl-

Based on the research performed in the inder Apparatus show that the maxi-

Hollow Cylinder Apparatus basic char- mum values of the effective principal

acteristics were as follows (Figs. 48): stress ratio in each test were near the

FIGURE 4. Deviator stress versus angle of the rotation of principal stress directions

188 G. Wrzesiski, Z. Lechowicz

FIGURE 5. Deviator

stress versus axial strain

fective stress ratio versus

axial strain

change versus axial strain

Influence of the rotation of principal stress directions... 189

Angle Normalized

of rotation Undrained shear undrained shear Axial strain

of principal Failure criterion strength strength at failure

stress directions fu [kPa] fu/vo [-] [%]

[] vo = 310 kPa

Max q 228.5 0.74 2.2

0 Max 1/3 226.1 0.73 1.9

Max u 223.3 0.72 1.3

Max q 201.8 0.65 3.1

30 Max 1/3 195.3 0.63 1.8

Max u 189.8 0.61 1.2

Max q 178.5 0.58 3.5

45 Max 1/3 177.4 0.57 3.2

Max u 169.9 0.55 1.8

Max q 172.4 0.56 4.3

60 Max 1/3 170.2 0.55 3.5

Max u 145.4 0.47 1.5

Max q 160.1 0.52 5.4

90 Max 1/3 151.2 0.49 3.4

Max u 118.1 0.38 1.5

maximum values of the deviator stress, than the maximum deviator stress. Axial

and the maximum values of pore pres- strains corresponding to the maximum

sure change followed much earlier. Dur- values of particular failure criteria are in

ing each test the maximum effective the range 1.25.4%, so they can be con-

principal stress ratio occurred earlier sidered as safe. Head (1986) proved that

190 G. Wrzesiski, Z. Lechowicz

20% is the maximum value of the axial For angles above 45 the decrease in un-

strain beyond which the reliability of the drained shear strength is higher than for

results decreases. other criteria (Fig. 9).

The highest values of undrained Assuming the maximum deviator

shear strength were obtained by taking stress as a failure criterion, the normal-

as a failure criterion maximum devia- ized undrained shear strength is about

tor stress, and the lowest ones were ob- 22% less for the test at angle = 45 and

tained assuming maximum pore pressure about 30% less at angle = 90 than for

change as a failure criterion. The differ- the test at angle = 0. Based on the per-

ence in determined values of undrained formed tests it can be seen that the high-

shear strength is the smallest at = 0 er decrease in undrained shear strength

and is equal to 5.2 kPa, while at = 90 occurs for angles between 0 and 45,

is the largest and is equal to 42 kPa. while for angles above 45 the decrease

Results of the research show that in undrained shear strength is less.

the values of the normalized undrained The values of undrained shear strength

shear strength of cohesive soil with OCR at various angles of the rotation of prin-

equals 4 and Ip about 77% decrease with cipal stress directions obtained from tests

increasing the angle of the rotation of in HCA allow to determine the values

principal stress directions. Taking as of empirical coefficients used in Ladds

a failure criterion maximum deviator equation. For the angle = 0 (TC) value

stress and maximum principal effective of parameter S is equal to 0.30 and par-

stress ratio the decrease in normalized ameter m is equal to 0.65 while for the

undrained shear strength is similar. Us- angle = 45 (DSS) value of S is equal to

ing as a failure criterion the maximum 0.25 and m is equal to 0.61. For the angle

pore pressure change the decrease in un- = 90 (TE) value of parameter S is

drained shear strength is similar to other equal to 0.26 and parameter m is equal

criteria for angle between 0 and 45. to 0.50.

FIGURE 9. Change in normalized undrained shear strength depending on the angle of the rotation of

principal stress directions

Influence of the rotation of principal stress directions... 191

testing. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

The problem of the rotation of principal HIGHT D.W., GENS A., SYMES M.J. 1983:

stress directions, although very impor- The development of a new hollow cylin-

der apparatus for investigating the effects

tant, is most often left out during deter- of principal stress rotation in soils. Go-

mination of the undrained shear strength technique 33 (4): 335383.

of subsoil. The influence of the rotation JARDINE R.J., MENKITI C.O. 1999: The

of principal stress directions on strength undrained anisotropy of K0 consolidated

parameters is often discussed in litera- sediments. In: Geotechnical Engineering

ture, but it is not still clearly shown the for Transportation Infrastructure. Balke-

way how to take into account its influ- ma, Rotterdam: 11011108.

JARDINE R.J., SMITH P.R. 1991: Evaluating

ence on the capacity of the subsoil.

design parameters for multi-stage construc-

The research in the Hollow Cylinder tion. Proc. of International Conference on

Apparatus on natural clay with overcon- Geotechnical Engineering for Coastal De-

solidation ratio (OCR) equals 4 and plas- velopment, Yokosuka: 197202.

ticity index (Ip) about 77% showed that KIZIEWICZ D., LECHOWICZ Z. 2013:

the value of the normalized undrained Anizotropia wytrzymaoci na cinanie

shear strength decreases with increasing bez odpywu gruntw spoistych w cy-

angle of rotation of principal stress direc- lindrycznym aparacie skrtnym [Testing

of undrained shear strength in Hollow

tions. For tested soil, assuming the maxi- Cylinder Apparatus]. Civil and Environ-

mum deviator stress as a failure criterion, mental Engineering 4 (2): 119126 [in

the normalized undrained shear strength Polish].

is about 22% less for the test at angle LADD C.C. 1985: Stability evaluation for

= 45 and about 30% less at angle staged construction. Proc. for MIT Spe-

= 90 than for the test at angle = 0. cial Summer Course 1.60s. Lecture 15.

Performed tests in HCA allow to deter- LIN H., PENUMADU D. 2005: Experi-

mental Investigation on Principal Stress

mine the values of empirical coefficients Rotation in Kaolin Clay. Journal of Geo-

used in Ladds equation describing the technical and Geoenvironmental Engi-

undrained shear strength distribution. neering. ASCE 131 (5): 633642.

In order to determine the influence LIPISKI M.J., WDOWSKA M. 2010: Satu-

of overconsolidation ratio (OCR) and ration criteria for heavy overconsolidated

plasticity index (Ip) on the normalized cohesive soils. Annals of Warsaw Uni-

undrained shear strength further investi- versity of Life Sciences SGGW. Land

Reclamation 42(2): 295302.

gations should be done.

MOLENKAMP F. 1998: Principle of axial

shear apparatus. Gotechnique 48 (3):

427431.

REFERENCES NEHER H.P., CUDNY M., WILTAF-

BJERRUM L. 1973: Problems of soil me- SKY C., SCHWEIGER H.F. 2002: Mod-

chanics and construction on soft clays elling principal stress rotation effects with

and structurally unstable soils (collaps- multilaminate type constitutive models

ible, expansive and others. Proc. of 8th for clay. Proc. of 8th International Sym-

International Conference Soil Mechan- posium on Numerical Models in Geome-

ics Foundation Engineering, Moscow: chanics, Rome: 4147.

111159.

192 G. Wrzesiski, Z. Lechowicz

NISHIMURA S. 2005: Laboratory study on turze. Celem bada byo wyznaczenie wartoci

anisotropy of natural London Clay. Ph.D. wytrzymaoci na cinanie bez odpywu przy r-

Thesis. Imperial College London. nych wartociach kta obrotu kierunkw napre

NISHIMURA S., MINH N.A., JARDINE R.J. gwnych. Badania przeprowadzono na prbkach

2007: Shear strength anisotropy of natu- gruntu pochodzcych z terenu budowy stacji Cen-

ral London Clay. Gotechnique 57 (1): trum Nauki Kopernik II linii metra w Warszawie

4962. o wspczynniku prekonsolidacji (OCR) rw-

WRZESISKI G., LECHOWICZ Z. 2012: nym 4 i wskaniku plastycznoci (Ip) okoo 77%.

Badania wykonano z konsolidacj anizotropow

Analiza zachowania si podoa orga-

oraz cinaniem w warunkach bez odpywu. Uzy-

nicznego obcionego etapowo budowa-

skane wyniki pozwoliy oceni wpyw zmiany

nym nasypem [Analysis of the behaviour kierunkw napre gwnych na warto wy-

of organic subsoil loaded by stage-con- trzymaoci na cinanie bez odpywu.

structed embankment]. Inynieria Morska

i Geotechnika 4: 487491 [in Polish].

ZDRAVKOVI L., JARDINE R.J. 2001: Sowa kluczowe: wytrzymao na cinanie bez

The effects on anisotropy of rotating the odpywu, cylindryczny aparat skrtny, grunty

principal stress axes during consolida- spoiste, kierunki napre gwnych

tion. Gotechnique 51 (1): 6983.

ZDRAVKOVI L., POTTS D.M., HIGHT MS. received in December 2013

D.W. 2002: The effect of strength anisot-

ropy on the behavior of embankments

on soft ground. Gotechnique 52 (6):

447457.

Authors address:

Wydzia Budownictwa i Inynierii rodowiska

Streszczenie: Wpyw zmiany kierunkw napre SGGW

gwnych na wytrzymao na cinanie bez od- Katedra Geoinynierii

pywu. W artykule przedstawiono wyniki bada ul. Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776 Warszawa

przeprowadzonych w cylindrycznym aparacie Poland

skrtnym HCA (Hollow Cylinder Apparatus) na e-mail: grzegorz_wrzesinski@sggw.pl

prbkach gruntu spoistego o nienaruszonej struk- zbigniew_lechowicz@sggw.pl

- geotechnics_01Uploaded bysharath1199
- Unconfined Compression TestUploaded byAbigail Lorico
- Uae Ground ImprovementUploaded byMuhanad Salem
- Advance Foundation Engineering Design PrinciplesUploaded bySam Dorian
- Kuat GeserUploaded byDiah Meirawati
- Ground Improvement - Alexandria_20070206014923Uploaded byMohammed Tajuddin
- Technical Manual Designing Facilities to Resist Nuclear Weapon Effects StructuresUploaded bytt3340
- 2015_Effective stress strength testing of peat_ICE Environmental Geotechnics.pdfUploaded byAnonymous D5s00DdU
- IADOT Hr99 Factors Influencing Stability Granular Base Crs Mix 1965Uploaded bySallam Mohammed
- A Nonlinear Finite Element Code for Analyzing the Blast Response of Underground Structures CR-N-70-1Uploaded byHenry Abraham
- Clay TestsUploaded byFrank Stephens
- The Single Bore Multiple Anchor System a d Barley Paper Presented at the Ice Conference Ground Anchorages and Anchored Structures 1997Uploaded byKenny Casilla
- Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Broken OreUploaded byjsotofmet4918
- Map3D HelpUploaded byNikola Boskovic
- FE Solved QP Nov-Dec 2009Uploaded byAnonymous SEDun6PW
- Marsh Ellen Soil Lab ReportUploaded byEllie Marsh
- CE_SET_1_GATE_2015.pdfUploaded bySandeep Joshi
- dffhghdfUploaded byBrandon Nova Andler
- Profiling of Overconsolidation Ratio in Clays by Field VaneUploaded byHamza Nadeem
- Recent Development in the Vacuum Preloading Method and Its Application for Soft Soil ImprovementUploaded byTony Chan
- CPT Interpretation Summary 2007Uploaded byPTchong
- Shear Box Experiment ResultUploaded byBgee Lee
- NOE0415380416%2Ech051Uploaded byUmed Abd-alsatar
- Geo-Quebec 04 PresentationUploaded byLTE002
- Chapter 2(a) - DrRAUploaded byFareez Sedaka
- CE Test 15 Objective SolutionUploaded bySUDHAKAR KUMAR
- Chapt 5 Shear Strength in Soil upload.pdfUploaded byabdirahman
- Tutorial 10 SSR Search AreaUploaded byryithan
- Criteria For Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Program Package.pdfUploaded byArief Muhammad Ar-rackhedhani
- Appendixes 8 to 10Uploaded byMaharAl-hasan

- HeidiUploaded byBianca Florina
- Zarghami2016 Article ReservoirOperationUsingSystemDUploaded bySinagol
- 3Uploaded bySinagol
- 2Uploaded bySinagol
- New Mark 1965Uploaded bySinagol
- Yildirim-Kinetics of Calcium Carbonate Precipitation From a Icel Yavca Dolomite Leach Solution by a Gas (Carbon Dioxide)Liquid Reaction-2009Uploaded bySinagol
- 21MitcptUploaded bySinagol
- muynck2010.pdfUploaded bySinagol
- 8.Bio-mediated Soil ImprovementUploaded bySinagol
- OJSS_2013062116545322Uploaded bySinagol
- geot63-0331Uploaded bySinagol
- 441Uploaded bySinagol
- 451-Y013.pdfUploaded bySinagol
- Loading2- Civil Engineering in PersianUploaded bySinagol
- Loading- Civil Engineering in PersianUploaded bySinagol
- ETABS 1 Amoozesh PersianUploaded bySinagol
- Statics of Soil MediaUploaded bySinagol
- [] Practical Problems in Soil Mechanics and FoundationUploaded byMuhammad Ali
- Losas de PisoUploaded bypuretone711

- Chap 4 Physical Properties of SoilUploaded byDiirock
- TJ Marshall, Mechanical Composition of Soil in Relation to Field Descriptions of TextureUploaded byScary Creatures
- 152203588 Craig s Soil Mechanics Split46Uploaded byEdwin Torres Rojas
- CE242 Soil Classaification civil engUploaded bySureshKuthadi
- PowerPomint ,PresentationUploaded byla
- 05 Atterberg Limits TestUploaded byMuniswamaiah Mohan
- atterberg limit.pdfUploaded bysanduni
- Inference of Geotechnical Property ValuesUploaded byriz2010
- CE 564_HW-I_09_SPRING(1)Uploaded byNiyazi Ertugrul
- Grain SizeUploaded byBuddin A. Hakim
- FDTUploaded byrjqamar
- soil mechanics jh academy question.pdfUploaded bylokesh pg
- ITP Clearing and GrubbingUploaded byaglosa
- The Engineering Properties of Soft Soils at Northern Region of MalaysiaUploaded byEmanuel Roca
- 1 BORE PILE DESIGN D=800-57M_HK12Uploaded bymdalgamouni
- soil reportUploaded byapi-106074229
- Percolation test procedure.pdfUploaded byMohamed Yasin
- LiquefactionUploaded byR.a. Niar Nauri Ningsih
- Soil MecnaicsUploaded bymickymat
- ASTM TerminologyUploaded byEyanil Sanchez
- GypsumUploaded byfergus
- EJGE PaperUploaded bygayatri_vyas1
- Soil Plasticity vs Strength ParametersUploaded byConcisely
- Consolidation Properties of Soft Clay Treated With Different Additives Using Surcharge Loading in the Curing PeriodUploaded byaezenkwu
- Behavior of Expansive Clays of Ngawi Region, East JavaUploaded byRizal Ahmad
- Historical development of key concepts in pedologyUploaded byLílian Coeli
- CE_468-Shallow-Foundation-on-Compressible-Clay.pdfUploaded byErgin Acar
- Steel FoundationUploaded bywidad alamri
- Bab 9-Kuat Geser Tanah-class 2Uploaded byKhoirul Ikhwan
- BR_Handbuch_Bodenbehandlung_EN_0413.pdfUploaded bykedagaal