5 views

Uploaded by Chowdhury Priodeep

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMN

- Ada 265707
- Liquefaction Potential of Cohesion Less Soils
- (1976 Casagrande) Liquefaction and Cyclic Deformation of Sands - A Critical Review
- Procedure for Bridge Foundations PILE PEER805
- Examen PE Geotecnia
- Rollins-Comparison of DMT, CPT, SPT, And vs Based Liquefaction Assesment
- 24 India Code
- 2010-12
- Imp Critical State Framework m Th
- Stewart PEER Meeting 091015
- Seattle mayor makes case for seawall replacement
- Slope Stability Analysis
- Engineering Geology and Earthwork Problem Associat
- Bridge-Design of Shallow Foundations
- tech_271_311.pdf
- Peat Foundation
- user_Content-drilled_shafts-WSDOT-3-04-A.pps
- Geotech Fall Project
- Dynamic Analysis-Heap Leach Pad Under High Phreatic Levels(FLAC)
- IJCSIRD

You are on page 1of 15

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Preferred Design Procedure

There is no standard FHWA design procedure for the use of Geotextile Encases Columns

(GECs). Currently, three existing design procedures are used in practice: a unit cell analytical

model, a numerical method, and a method based on bearing capacity and predicted settlement.

See the Design Guidance document for column supported embankments for recommended

design procedures for the arching/load transfer mechanism from the embankment to the

columns.

Table 1 at the end of this document lists typical inputs and outputs for design and analysis

procedures.

Raithel et al. (2005)

Wu et al. (2009)

This design procedure uses the stresses on a single column (unit cell) and surrounding soil to

design the entire grid. The stresses in the model are based on stresses developed in models for

granular piles. Figure 1 from Raithel et al. (2005) shows the different stresses (or loads) acting

on the column and soil.

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Figure 1. Unit cell or calculation model for GECs (Raithel et al. 2005; With permission

from ASCE).

The total additional load applied onto the unit cell is shared by the column and the surrounding

soil, which can be expressed in the following equation:

where,

= additional stress in the column

= additional stress in the surrounding soil

= cross-sectional area of the column

= cross-sectional area of the unit cell

These vertical stresses (pressures) cause horizontal stresses given by the following equations:

where,

= horizontal stress in the column

= horizontal stress in the soil

= lateral active earth pressure coefficient

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

= lateral at-rest earth pressure coefficient (excavation method)

= enlarged lateral at-rest earth pressure coefficient (displacement

method)

= initial vertical stresses in the column and the soil if the excavation

method is used

To determine the horizontal stress (σh,geo) in the geotextile casing, the following equations can be

used:

where,

= the ring tensile force

= radius of the geotextile casing

= stiffness of the geotextile

Finally, to determine the differential horizontal stress (σh,diff) due to the geotextile encased

column, the following equation is used:

This differential stress causes an expansion and settlement of the column. The magnitude of the

column expansion can be determined from the following iterative equation:

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

where,

Δrc = horizontal deformation

νs = Poisson’s ratio of the soil

Eoed,s = oedometric modulus of the soil

This horizontal deformation is then used to determine the settlement of the column.

Preliminary design charts shown in Alexiew et al. (2003) provide settlement estimates for

embankments constructed over geotextile encased columns based the embankment height, the

oedometric modulus of the soil, the percentage of the embankment foundation taken up by

columns and the tensile stiffness of the geotextile. For these calculations, Ringtrac™ with a

tensile stiffness ranging from 1,000 kN/m to 4,000 kN/m was used as the geotextile. These

charts also compare estimates using both a simplified unit cell analysis and a more complex

numerical model.

Settlements were calculated for embankment heights of 4, 8, and 12 meters and for area

replacement ratios of 10, 15, and 20%. With an embankment height of 12 meters and a soil

oedometric modulus of 0.5 MPa, the settlement can be reduced from 4.5 to 0.5 meters by using

columns totaling 20% of the embankment foundation and a geotextile casing with a tensile

stiffness of 4,000 kN/m. If an area replacement ratio of 10% is used with a Ringtrac™ tensile

stiffness of 1,000 kN/m, the settlement can be reduced from 4.5 meters to just over 2 meters.

Other settlements in a 12-meter high embankment with an oedometric modulus of 0.5 MPa range

between these values. For a 12-meter high embankment with an oedometric modulus of 1.5

MPa, the settlement can be reduced from 1.5 meters to between 0.5 and 0.9 meters. For an

8-meter high embankment with an oedometric modulus of 0.5 MPa, the settlement can be

reduced from 3.0 meters to between just over 0.2 and 1.4 meters. For an 8-meter high

November 2012 Page 4 of 15

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

embankment with an oedometric modulus of 1.5 MPa, the settlement can be reduced from 1.0

meter to between just under 0.2 and 0.6 meters. For a 4-meter high embankment with an

oedometric modulus of 0.5 MPa, the settlement can be reduced from 1.5 meters to between 0.05

and 0.5 meters. For a 12-meter high embankment with an oedometric modulus of 1.5 MPa, the

settlement can be reduced from 0.5 meters to 0.25 meters.

Design of a GEC can be performed with finite element modeling. This can be completed with

PLAXIS or other numerical modeling programs. This modeling program is well suited for GECs

because a number of different soil models can be used. The Soft Soil Model, which is a model

based on the Cam-Clay type, is used for the softest soils. For the column material which is made

up of sands and gravels, the Hard Soil Model is used. This model is based on the Duncan/Chang

model.

In PLAXIS, the columns are modeled in a plane model. Using this model, the columns are

replaced by shear walls of the same size. These walls have a coating based on a substitute shear

parameter that is used to model the geotextile material. This coating is modeled using substitute

shear parameters derived based on the following figure:

Figure 2. Mohr’s circles of stress for the coated column and the column with substitute

parameter a) substitute cohesion b) substitute angle of friction (Raithel and Henne 2000).

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

where,

σ3,C and σ1,C = horizontal and vertical stresses in the column

Δσ3,geo = horizontal stress in the geotextile

σ3,S,tot = horizontal stress in the soft soil layer

cSub = substitute cohesion

’Sub = substitute friction angle

The following equations can also be used to calculate the substitute cohesion and friction angle:

When using a substitute coating to model the geotextile casing, either the substitute cohesion or

the substitute friction angle should be used but not both. Using the substitute friction angle

generally provides better results and the substitute cohesion should only be used in cases where

only slight changes to the ring tensile forces are expected.

(1) Determine the collapse potential of the soil based on the following equation:

where,

CP = collapse potential

ΔH = settlement of the foundation, with and without a stone column

H0 = thickness of the collapsible layer

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

(2) Determine soil unit weight, γ, angle of shearing resistance, , cohesion, c’, and coefficient of

earth pressure at rest, k0. k0 can be determined using the equation k0 =1- sin because the

soil is normally consolidated after collapse. These parameters are used to estimate the

settlement and bearing capacity of the soil using the following equations:

where,

σ’vmax = bearing capacity of the soil

σ’h0 = effective lateral stress of the soil before installing the column

α = reduction factor that ranges from 0 to 1

τa = tensile strength of the geotextile

t = thickness of the geotextile

r0 =initial radius of the column

[ ( )]

where

Δ = settlement of the soil

Pa = applied axial load

L = length of the column

Ep = modulus of elasticity of the column

Ap = cross-sectional area of the column

q = surcharge applied at the ground surface

d = diameter of the column

QR = correction factor used when full pile-soil slip does not occur

QT = correction factor for the effects of delayed installation

ΔP = internal pressure on the column due to the strain in the geotextile

E = modulus of elasticity of the geotextile

(3) Determine the applied load, Pa, on the stone column and the surcharge, q, applied to the

surrounding soil. The effective diameter of the column, de, can be approximated by 1.05

times the spacing of the columns for a triangular arrangement and 1.13 times the spacing for

a square arrangement.

November 2012 Page 7 of 15

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

(4) Specify that columns of approximately 0.75 to 1.5 meters in diameter should be placed over

the entire depth of the collapsible layer. The strength of the geotextile should be determined

based on the expected loads and the tolerable settlement using the above settlement equation.

Slip between the column and the soil should also be considered.

(5) Using the above bearing capacity equation, verify that the column will hold the required

applied loads.

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Geotextile encased columns may be used (but have not been to date) at sites with in-situ soils

that may be susceptible to liquefaction during earthquakes. Saturated sands, silty sands, sandy

silts, and silts are likely to be in this category. When GECs are used for the support of

embankments and structures or to reduce settlements, it is also necessary to confirm that there

will not be a risk of liquefaction or other ground disturbance that could lead to loss of support

and lateral spreading. The initial assessment of whether the soil at a site will liquefy in an

earthquake is made in terms of whether the in-situ shear strength under cyclic loading,

represented as a Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR), is less than the cyclic shear stress that will cause

liquefaction, termed the Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR).

Combinations of CSR and strength of the soil layer, usually determined in-situ by means of

penetration tests and shear wave velocity1 measurements, have been found that define the

boundary between liquefaction and no liquefaction over a range of peak ground motion

accelerations. This boundary has been determined through extensive analyses of case history

data from many earthquakes. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT), Cone Penetration Tests (CPT),

and Becker Penetration Tests for soils containing gravel and cobbles (BPT) are used to determine

the CRR. Values of CRR are defined by the points on the boundary curve that separates

liquefaction and no liquefaction zones on a plot of CSR vs. penetration resistance or shear wave

velocity corresponding to the measured and corrected in-situ property. An example of such a plot

for liquefaction analysis using the SPT is shown in Figure 3.

1

Owing to the lack of precision and uncertainties associated with shear wave velocity - liquefaction correlations,

this method is not considered further herein.

November 2012 Page 9 of 15

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Figure 3. SPT liquefaction chart for magnitude 7.5 earthquakes (Youd et al. 2001; with

permission from ASCE).

Thus, if a site underlain by saturated clean sand has a corrected blow count (N1)60 of 10 blows

per foot and the anticipated cyclic stress ratio under the design earthquake is 0.25, the soil will

liquefy unless the normalized penetration resistance (N1)60 is increased to greater than 22 blows

per foot by densification, or the cyclic stress ratio is reduced by transferring some or all of the

dynamic shear stress to reinforcing elements. Similar plots are available in terms of normalized

CPT tip resistance qc1N. In each case the penetration resistance is normalized to an effective

overburden stress of 1 atmosphere.

Although straightforward in concept, the liquefaction potential analysis is complex in

application, because (1) the CSR depends on the input motions within the soil layer which, in

turn, depend on such factors as earthquake magnitude and intensity, distance from the epicenter,

geologic setting, rock conditions, and soil profile characteristics, (2) the CRR depends on such

factors as overburden stress, fines content of the soil, and static shear stress, and (3)

determination of normalized values of the penetration resistance involves several corrections to

the measured values, especially in the case of the SPT.

November 2012 Page 10 of 15

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Information about input ground motions can be obtained from local experience and recorded

ground motions near the site, if available, or from seismicity information obtainable from the

United States Geological Survey Ground Motion Calculator at:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/javacalc.php

which can be used to obtain peak rock accelerations for the site, and the USGS Interactive

deaggregation website:

http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/deaggint/

which enables determination of the magnitude and site-to-source distance earthquake scenario

that contributes the most to the seismic hazard at the site; i.e., it enables estimation of what

magnitude to use to obtain the appropriate magnitude scaling factor needed to adjust the actual

ground accelerations to a magnitude of 7.5, which is the value assumed for the available chart

correlations.

Widely used liquefaction correlation diagrams for SPT and CPT, along with discussions of how

to make the necessary computations to obtain the CSR, (N1)60, qc1N, and the CRR are given in

Youd et al. (2001) and Idriss and Boulanger (2008).

If GECs are used in potentially liquefiable soils in a seismic area for support of embankments or

structures, or for stabilization of slopes, the cyclic stresses caused by ground shaking will be

shared between the columns and the untreated matrix soil. By virtue of their greater stiffness, the

columns will attract a greater proportion of the cyclic shear stresses than given simply by the

replacement ratio (the ratio of the treated area in plan to the total plan area). To maintain

structural integrity and ensure satisfactory performance requires a design that prevents horizontal

shear failure in aggregate columns or combined shear and bending failures in cemented columns

and walls. Analysis of this complex soil-structure problem is usually site and project specific and

requires input from someone with prior knowledge and experience.

Whether the matrix soil will liquefy with the supporting elements in place can be assessed in

terms of the reduced shear stress and strain that it is subjected to after accounting for that carried

by the columns. A very approximate, but conservative, means for estimating the reduced shear

stress is as follows.

If the simplifying assumption is made that the shear strains in the columns are the same as the

shear strains in the soil, then the ratio of the shear stress in the soil to the average stress can be

expressed as:

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

⁄

where,

= Area replacement ratio

= Shear modulus of the column

= Shear modulus of the soil

The equal strain assumption means that the stress concentration ratio, n = col/soil, will be given

by Gc/Gs. Owing to various types of compliance in the system, however, the actual stress

concentration ratio would be less than Gc/Gs for most situations. One source of guidance is the

stress concentration that occurs in a column-soil system subjected to vertical compressive

loading. For aggregate columns in soft soil this ratio is typically in the range of about 2 to 5 or 6,

and the ratio can be higher for cemented columns. When isolated columns are used to resist

shear deformations, the values of n can be smaller than for axial loading because there are more

potential sources of compliance, including column rotation and bending, than for axial loading.

Nevertheless, the values for axial loading can serve as a useful guide. If continuous panels are

used, the stress concentration for shear deformations can be higher than for isolated columns

because the rotation and bending deformation modes are inhibited.

Substituting n for Gc/Gs in the above expression gives:

which represents a 38% reduction in the seismic shear stress applied to the soil. A reduction of

this magnitude could provide a significant decrease in the liquefaction potential.

The appropriate value of n in any case depends on the relative stiffness of the column and soil,

the slenderness ratio of the columns for unconnected column arrangements, the use of grids

formed of continuous shear panels instead of isolated columns, and the overall height-to-width

and height-to-length ratios of the treated zone, among other factors. As mentioned above, if the

columns are arranged in a grid of overlapping continuous panels it would be expected that n

would be higher than if isolated columns are used.

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Table 1. Typical inputs and outputs for design and analysis procedures.

Minimum factor of safety values

Load and resistance factor values

Allowable settlements

Performance Criteria/Indicators Allowable lateral deformations

Reliability

Drainage

Time

Stratigraphy

Ground water level

Particle size distribution

Plasticity

Unit weight

Relative density

Subsurface Conditions

Water content

Strength

Compressibility

Chemistry

Organic content

Variability

Traffic load

Embankment pressure

Loading Conditions Structure loads

Earthquake acceleration and duration

Water pressure

Unit weight

Water content

Particle size distribution

Internal friction angle

Shear strength

Inclusion dimensions

Compressive strength

Material Characteristics GEC tensile strength

Compressibility

Modulus

Stiffness

Interface friction angle

Permeability - soil

Permittivity - GEC

Equivalent opening size

Vibration densification

Construction Techniques

Impact densification

November 2012 Page 13 of 15

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

Table 1. Typical inputs and outputs for design and analysis procedures.

Column diameter

Spacing

Depth

Geometry

Thickness

Length

Slope

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

GEOTEXTILE ENCASED COLUMNS

DESIGN GUIDANCE

References

Alexiew, D., Horgan, G.J. and Brokemper, D. (2003). “Geotextile encased columns (GEC): Load

capacity & geotextile selection.” BGA International Conference on Foundations; Innovations,

Observations, Design and Practice, 81-90.

Idriss, I.M. and Boulanger, R.W. (2008). Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Earthquake

Engineering Research Institute Monograph MNO-12, 235 pp.

Raithel, M., Kirchner, A., Schade, C., and Leusink, E. (2005). “Foundation of constructions on

very soft soils with geotextile encased columns- State of the art.” Geotechnical Special

Publication, Innovations in Grouting and Soil Improvement, 136, 1867-1877.

http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/40783%28162%2920

Raithel, M. and Henne, J. (2000). “Design and numerical calculation of a dam foundation

withgeotextile coated sand columns.” Paper no. G11. Proc. 4th International Conference on

Ground Improvement Geosystems, Helsinki, Finland, Building Information Ltd.,

www.rakennustieto.fi

Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango. I., Castro, G., Christian, J.T., Dobry, R., Finn,

W.D.L., Harder, L.F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J.P., Liao, S.S.C., Marcuson, W.F.,

Martin, G.R., Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R.B., and

Stokoe, K.H. (2001). “Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996

NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils”, J. of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127, No. 10, pp.

817 - 833. http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%291090-

0241%282001%29127%3A10%28817%29

G02 GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT,

RAPID EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION,

AND STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT WORKING PLATFORM

- Ada 265707Uploaded byElena Bruma
- Liquefaction Potential of Cohesion Less SoilsUploaded byBrice Durand
- (1976 Casagrande) Liquefaction and Cyclic Deformation of Sands - A Critical ReviewUploaded bysanpaz75
- Procedure for Bridge Foundations PILE PEER805Uploaded byDemçe Florjan
- Examen PE GeotecniaUploaded byMario Berti
- Rollins-Comparison of DMT, CPT, SPT, And vs Based Liquefaction AssesmentUploaded byRonald Macazana
- 24 India CodeUploaded byAnonymous b9fkTYfEoR
- 2010-12Uploaded byAfshin Khazaie
- Imp Critical State Framework m ThUploaded byhassen27H
- Seattle mayor makes case for seawall replacementUploaded byseattlepi
- Slope Stability AnalysisUploaded bylelu8210
- tech_271_311.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Junaid
- Stewart PEER Meeting 091015Uploaded bykir
- Engineering Geology and Earthwork Problem AssociatUploaded byThashnee Bala
- Peat FoundationUploaded byRajesh Khadka
- Geotech Fall ProjectUploaded bysribajaj
- Bridge-Design of Shallow FoundationsUploaded byDiana Cristina
- user_Content-drilled_shafts-WSDOT-3-04-A.ppsUploaded byHüseyin Ekici
- Dynamic Analysis-Heap Leach Pad Under High Phreatic Levels(FLAC)Uploaded byRelu Mititelu
- IJCSIRDUploaded bySeif Eddine
- (ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120_3(581).pdfUploaded bySurender Singh
- t057Uploaded byvinodykr
- SEAsia201010bUploaded bytamlb0507
- MocciaUploaded byTruong Phuoc Tri
- 311587989 Diseno Por Desempeno PDFUploaded byMA Ney
- 2_jetgroutingexperienceUploaded byRicardo Ocampo Muñoz
- Geotechnical Modelling on Mining IndustryUploaded byGilang
- Simpson 2007Uploaded bySâu Heo
- 172 Course Offering March 2017 01Uploaded byTousif Mahmood
- BDADUploaded byk_suganthivasu

- Sand DrainsUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Sand DensityUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- LandslideRepair.xlsxUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Effect of Soil Thermal Resistivity on Underground Cable InstallationUploaded byRamesh Vr
- Good Slipway DesignUploaded bybeddows_s
- Moisture Content Dry Density -NuclearUploaded byhectox08
- Appendix-E-Marine-Operations-Plan-R1.pdfUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Q116_Issue9.pdfUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- fema499_3_2.pdfUploaded byOscar Chappilliquén
- Mehedi-Hasan-Emon ADB 23072017 ConsUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Cpt-geomilUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- astm-d1556Uploaded byuygarkoprucu
- Geomil Cpt and SeismicUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- 115.docxUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- 115Uploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- slipways-1Uploaded byNabeh Wildan
- CV-Eng-N.pdfUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- SeismicPro9.1_newfeaturesUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- IC Abstract of Bids Template 8531 UpdatedUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- trb-sustainability-analysis-1-7-13.xlsxUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- IC-Construction-Documentation-Tracker-Template-8531-Updated-v2.xlsxUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- IC Abstract of Bids Template 8531 UpdatedUploaded byStephen David Gozun
- GPUFP-247Uploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Settlement Analysis Jrob Re Wall Abutment 02 30.10.2018Uploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- PIER DESIGNUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Lateral CapacityUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- Pull out TP-24Uploaded byChowdhury Priodeep
- PILE CAPACITY-47.pdfUploaded byChowdhury Priodeep

- Hora (D-2) chartUploaded byVisti Larsen
- Dulal_M.tech(Pharm)_thesis_Development & Validation_of_HPLC_methodUploaded byDulal Mahato
- Ani Caroline Grigion Potrich (2016)Uploaded byMochammad Ridwan
- 5questionsabouttheiotinternetofthings-150814145126-lva1-app6892.pdfUploaded byvinodbala
- ASIC Interview Question & Answer_ ASIC VerificationUploaded byprodip7
- National Programme on School Standards and Evaluation_NEUPA_2015Uploaded byayushi bhatt
- Criminology QuestionsUploaded byAlysha Lil'Oprah Harvey
- Test Retest ReliabilityUploaded byIrina Franghiu
- ARITMATIC_ALUUploaded byMaya Kinanty
- Primitive GraphicsUploaded bySharvari Kapdi
- Nanopdf.com Cdnlive2012etsencounter Timing System MultiUploaded bymayur
- Robotics Sample Questions-Uploaded bySidhu Suresh
- Comparative Study on Physical Fitness of Volleyball and Football Players in University LevelUploaded byIOSRjournal
- mytopic.docxUploaded byJo Stream
- teamb aet560 organizationalchangeprocessUploaded byapi-282145460
- Brukhin & Morozova MMNP Paper 2011-09-01Uploaded byAlex Necula
- [A-3&4]Lampiran A RPP-04 Math 5 Semester 1 20172018 07092017Uploaded byWeng Fei Yong
- ASCE-7-10 changes.pdfUploaded byManoj Jaiswal
- Sabre Tutorial CantUploaded byBollocks Eater
- As ISO IEC 15444.2-2004 Information Technology - JPEG 2000 Image Coding System ExtensionsUploaded bySAI Global - APAC
- 10.1080@17442222.2017.1325099Uploaded bybercer7787
- PISCICIDAL PLANTS USED BY MALAI PANDARAM TRIBES IN ACHANKOVIL RIVER BASIN, KERALA: AN ETHNOBIOLOGICAL APPROACH.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- Module 4 the Integral EquationUploaded bySAURABH JAISWAL 4-Yr B. Tech. Mechanical Engg., IIT (BHU)
- Plain Truth 1964 (Vol XXIX No 04) Apr_wUploaded byTheTruthRestored
- 2.EIA STEPSUploaded bypushpraj
- Tribon M3 BrochureUploaded byIlze Garda
- hsc dance programUploaded byapi-203667098
- Akticon CM 2045 PDS - I-ChemUploaded byChanBoonChew
- 286549922-Bernard-Tschumi-Architecture-and-Disjunction.pdfUploaded byJorge Luis Nuñez
- Final-Output-ReportUploaded byLarry Cubillas