jurnal penelitian

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

jurnal penelitian

© All Rights Reserved

- Determination of Shear Strength Parameters of the Soil by Triaxial Compression Test
- 667150900
- Lab Report #3- Consolidation
- One Dimensional Consolidation
- 10 Rate of Settlement
- CVE Research
- Consolidation.ppt
- UU
- Triaxial Testing
- Settlement Foot
- Buggy & Curran (2011)
- 11. Analyses of Embankments With Partial Consolidation of Weak Foundations
- a277852-Rock Testing Handbook-us Army
- ppp3_gloglogloglo
- NOE0415380416%2Ech051
- Collection Soil Question
- sm-lab.pdf
- Peat Stabilization Using Gypsum and Fly Ash
- Soil Mechanics and Foundations 3rd ed. - M. Budhu (Wiley, 2010) BBS.pdf
- cv631108091.pdf

You are on page 1of 7

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237299756

with prefabricated vertical drain

CITATIONS READS

6 96

2 authors, including:

Jinchun Chai

Saga University

147 PUBLICATIONS 2,024 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

All content following this page was uploaded by Jinchun Chai on 01 April 2015.

A design method for soft subsoil improvement with prefabricated vertical drain

J. C. Chai & N. Miura

Saga University, 1 Honjo, Saga, Japan

ABSTRACT: A method for designing the soft subsoil improvement using prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) is presented.

It mainly consists of two parts: (1) the way of determining the design parameters and (2) the method of determining the

spacing and suitable improvement depth. Methods proposed by Chai and Miura (1999) for determining the design

parameters are recommended and discussed. Normally, the natural soft deposit is layered and there is no hand-calculable

close-form solution for determining the spacing and suitable installation depth of PVD improvement. A multi-layer

one-dimensional (1D) finite element program has been developed to aid the design. The application of the proposed design

method to two case histories is presented.

1 INTRODUCTION Chai and Miura (1999). Followings are the brief summary

of the methods.

Installing the prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) into soft

subsoil combined with preloading provides an efficient

2 .1 Horizontal coefficient of consolidation of subsoil

and economic way of improving the soft subsoil. It has

been used for highway, airport and port construction on At present, there is no satisfactory laboratory test method

soft clay deposit. For designing a PVD improvement, the to determine the field coefficient of consolidation in

first thing is to determine the values of parameters horizontal direction of subsoil (C h ). Normally, laboratory

affecting the behavior of PVD. The next thing is to decide test under-estimates the field C h value. Back-analysis from

the spacing between PVDs and improvement depth. The field measurements or field test has been recommended for

parameters affecting the behavior of PVD include (1) evaluating the design C h value. Some reported ratios of

coefficient of consolidation in horizontal direction of field coefficient of consolidation in vertical direction (C v ) f

subsoil, (2) discharge capacity of PVD and (3) smear zone over the laboratory values (C v ) l are listed in Table 1.

parameters (diameter, d s , and horizontal hydraulic

conductivity ratio, k h /k s ). There are still uncertainties on

determining these parameters, which make a precise Table 1. Ratio of field over laboratory coefficient of

design difficult. Chai and Miura (1999) discussed the consolidation

effect of these parameters on the behavior of PVD Site (C v ) f /(C v )l Reference

improved subsoil and the methods for determining the Oxford (1) 4-57 Lewis et al. (1975)

parameters have been proposed. The methods are briefly Oxford (2) 3-36 Lewis et al. (1975)

described and discussed. Donnington 4-7 Lewis et al. (1975)

Determining the spacing and suitable installation Avonmouth 6-47 Lewis et al. (1975)

depth of PVD improvement, unit cell (a single PVD Tickton 7-47 Lewis et al. (1975)

surrounded by a soil cylinder) solutions by Barron (1948) Over Causeway 3-12 Lewis et al. (1975)

or Hansbo (1981) are widely used. The solutions assumed Melbourne 200 Walker and Morgan

a uniform subsoil condition. However, most natural clay (1977)

deposit is not uniform, and normally has a crust at surface Penang 70 Adachi and Todo (1979)

and sometimes sandwiches thin sand layers. For

multi-layer subsoil condition, there is no hand-calculable

solution available. Using the uniform subsoil assumption 2 .2 Discharge Capacity of PVD

does not represent the actual case. An easy-to-use design The most reported data on discharge capacity of PVD were

tool considering multi-layer subsoil condition design tool from the test of confining PVD by rubber membrane.

is desirable. A multi-layer one-dimensional (1D) finite However, in field, the PVD is confined by clay. Based on

element program for PVD improved subsoil (PVD-CON) the laboratory test results of 4 types commercially used

is developed. The features of the program as well as the PVDs, Chai and Miura (1999) and Miura and Chai (2000)

theoretical background are described. Application of the found that confined in-clay discharge capacity (Q C ) was

proposed design method is demonstrated by analyzing two lower than corresponding confined in-rubber membrane

case histories of embankment on PVD improved subsoil, value (Q R ), and Q C reduced significantly with elapsed time.

one in Saga, Japan and one in Zhejiang, China. The main reasons for the reduction are (a) clogging caused

by soil particles entered the drainage channel and some

bio-films formed during the test, and (b) the creep

2 DETERMINING THE DESIGN PARAMETERS deformation of the filter of PVD. It is recommended to use

the long-term confined in-clay value (Q C ) for design.

Based on laboratory test data and back-calculated results Considering the long-term confined in-clay test is not a

from field measurements, the methods for determining the routine test, an empirical equation has been proposed to

design parameters of PVD improvement are suggested by estimate the long-term Q C value from Q R value (Miura and

Chai, 2000). deposit improved by PVDs. The program is developed

under Windows environment and has well-designed pre-

and post- analysis processes. The program can consider

i

QC = QR (1) followings.

0.01t / t o + i (1) Multi-layer improved subsoil.

(2) The effects of both vertical hydraulic

conductivity of natural subsoil and horizontal drainage of

where i is hydraulic gradient within PVD, t is elapsed time, PVDs.

and t o is a time constant of 1 day to make the unit balance. (3) Both full and partial penetration condition of

It is suggested to use i=0.1 in Eq. (1) for determining the PVDs.

design Q C value. Also, in the case that there are no test (4) Effect of surface vacuum pressure.

data (Q R ) available, as a rough estimation, a design (5) Either one-way or two-way drainage.

discharge capacity of 100 m3 /year is recommended. The program has following main options.

(1) Find spacing (S) for a given time and required

2.3 Smear Effect average degree of consolidation.

(2) Find time (t) for reaching a required average

Installing PVDs into the ground creates a completely degree of consolidation for fixed spacing.

disturbed zone around PVDs, which is called smear zone. (3) Check the effect of penetration depth by repeated

The hydraulic conductivity in the smear zone will be analyses.

reduced significantly. Two parameters are needed to (4) For given (or designed) condition calculate: (a)

characterize the smear effect, namely, the diameter of settlement variation with time at different depth, and (b)

smear zone (d s ) and horizontal hydraulic conductivity ratio undrained shear strength profile and its variation.

(k h /k s ), i.e. the value in undisturbed zone (k h ) over that in

smear zone (k s ). It has been proposed that, d s can be

estimated as follows (Chai and Miura, 1999). 3 .2 Theoretical background

Hansbo’s unit cell solution (Hansbo, 1981) is used to

ds = 3⋅ dm (2) model the consolidation due to PVD. In finite element

formulation, the effect of PVDs is considered by

modifying 1D continuity equation of consolidation as

where d m is the equivalent diameter of the cross-sectional follows.

area of mandrel for installing PVD. Considering the factor

that the laboratory test may properly estimate the k s value kv ∂ 2u 8k h u ∂ε

but under-estimate field k h value, field (k h /k s ) f value can be − + v =0 (4)

calculated as (Chai and Miura, 1999): γ w ∂z 2

γ w D μ ∂t

2

kh k kh 2l 2 k h

( ) f = C f ⋅ ( h )l (3) μ = ln +

n 3

ln s − + π (5)

ks ks s ks 4 3q w

where (k h /k s ) l is the ratio determined by laboratory test, where: γ w is the unit weight of water, z is depth, t is time,

and C f is the ratio of field horizontal hydraulic ε v is volumetric strain, u is excess pore pressure, k v is

conductivity over corresponding laboratory value. The C f hydraulic conductivities in vertical directions, l is drainage

values for few natural clay deposits are given in Table 2. length, D is the diameter of unit cell, q w is discharge

capacity of PVD, n=D/d w (d w is the equivalent diameter of

Table 2. C f values for few clay deposits PVD), and s=d s /d w . k h , k s and d s are defined previously.

Site C f Method for Reference Two ways have been incorporated in the program for

evaluating (k)f calculating the undrained shear strength (S u ) of subsoil.

Bangkok clay at 25 Back-analysis Chai et al. One is using Modified Cam clay theory (Roscoe and

AIT campus (1995) Burland, 1968), in which S u can be expressed as:

Bangkok clay at 4 Back-analysis Chai et al.

Nong Ngu Hao (1996)

p' M 2 +η2 Λ

Malaysia Muar 2 Back-analysis Chai and Su = M( ) (6)

clay deposit Bergado (1993) 21+ Λ M2

Ariake clay 4 Back-analysis Chai and Miura

(Japan) (1999) where p’ is mean effective stress, M is the slope of critical

Louiseville 1 Self-boring Tavenas et al. state line in p’-q plot (q is deviator stress), η =q/p’, and

(Canada) permeameter (1986) Λ =1- κ/ λ ( κ and λ are slopes of unloading-reloading and

St-Alban 3 Self-boring Tavenas et al. virgin loading curves in void ratio, e, versus ln(p’) plot).

(Canada) permeameter (1986) In the program, κ is fixed as λ/10.

Soft mucky clay 6 Back-analysis Shen et al. Another way is to use an empirical equation (Ladd,

(eastern China) (2000) 1991), which relates the S u with effective vertical stress

σ’ v and overconsolidation ratio (OCR).

3 A 1D FEM PROGRAM

S u = S ⋅ σ ' v ⋅(OCR ) m (7)

3.1 Features of the program

A 1D finite element program named PVD-CON has been where S and m are constants. In the program, m is fixed as

developed for calculating the consolidation of soft clay 1.0.

T.P 71.0 (U nit:m)

2.0 2.0

5.0 21.0 25.0 21.0

Sand M at

1 :7 .0

3.0

Em bankm ent

(t=0.5)

± 0.0 Top crust

A riake clay (A c1)

-5.0 A s1

-10.0

PV D

-15.0

A riake clay (A c2)

Piezom eter

-20.0

A s2 Inclinom eter casing

A riake clay (A c3)

-25.0

Length of PV D :L=25.5m

D ense sand £ Sub-surface settlem ent system

-30.0

Soil Layer Thickness Ch Cv γt Cc eo M OCR

(m) (m 2 /day) (m 2 /day) (kN/m 3 )

1(clay) 1.0 0.1 0.067 15.0 0.58 2.0 1.3 5

2(clay) 3.0 0.08 0.053 14.5 1.0 2.0 1.2 2

3(sand) 1.5 54 54.0 15.5 0.1 1.8 1.5 1.2

4(clay) 5.0 0.045 0.03 14.5 2.0 2.5 1.2 1.2

5(clay) 5.0 0.065 0.043 14.5 2.0 2.5 1.2 1.2

6(clay) 5.5 0.087 0.058 14.5 2.0 2.5 1.2 1.2

7(sand) 2.5 178 178.0 16.0 0.1 1.7 1.5 1.2

8(clay) 1.5 0.26 0.173 16.0 0.7 1.75 1.3 1.2

Item Symbol Unit Values

4 .1 Test Embankment in Saga Airport (Case 1) Case 1 Case 2

Saga Airport is located 13 km south of Saga city on a Drain diameter dw mm 48.3 53.0

reclamation land close to Ariake Sea. The deposit mainly Unit cell diameter De m 1.7 1.58

D e /d w n - 35.2 29.7

consists of soft and highly compressible Ariake clay. For

Smear zone ds mm 300 355

verifying the effect of vertical drain improvement, 3 test

diameter

embankments were constructed on natural, PVD improved d s /d w S - 6.2 6.7

and sand drain (SD) improved subsoil (Bergado et al., Hydraulic k h /k s - 10 15

1996). At the test site, the soft layer is about 25 m deep conductivity ratio

consisting of 3 clay layers (Ac1, Ac2, and Ac3) and 2 thin Discharge capacity qw m3 /yr 85 100

sand layers (As1 and As2) underlying a thick dense sand

layer. The embankments had the same geometry with a fill

thickness of 3.5 m, base width of 71 m by 71 m, and top The calculated surface settlements on embankment

width of 25 m by 25 m. The PVDs were installed to centerline with different PVD penetration depth are

around 25 m deep with an improved area of 45 m by 45 m. compared in Fig. 2. The measured data are included in the

figure also. It can be seen that reducing the PVD length

PVDs were installed in a square pattern with a spacing

from 25 m to 21 m (just penetrate through the second clay

S=1.5 m. Fig. 1 shows the geometry of the embankments

layer, Ac2) not influences the consolidation rate much.

and main instrumentation points. However, if reducing the PVD length to 15.5 m, it reduces

The soil parameters needed for performing the consolidation rate of the deposit considerably.

PVD-CON analysis are listed in Table 3 and the drain The further calculations were conducted on finding

properties are given in Table 4. These parameters are the spacing and time for given condition. At 1 year after

same as those reported by Chai and Miura (1999) for plane starting construction, the corresponding spacings for

strain finite element analysis. The coefficient of average degree of consolidation of 90%, 95% and 99% are

consolidation was calculated from the values of hydraulic 2.0 m, 1.6 m, and 1.22 m, respectively. With actual

conductivity, stress state and corresponding deformation designed condition (S=1.5 m), the calculation showed that

parameters. Other necessary data are the groundwater the average degree of consolidation at the end of

level of 1.0 m below ground surface and the embankment construction was about 80%. The time for reaching 90%

construction time of about 200 days. Surcharge load was degree of consolidation was about 265 days and 340 days

70 kPa (3.5 m fill thickness). for 95% degree of consolidation.

Fill height (m) 0

3

Field

Analysis

Depth (m)

End of construction

10

1 Initial

0

PVD length 25 m (actual) 20

PVD length 21 m

Settlement (m)

1 Measured

0 20 40 60 80

Undrained shear strength (kPa)

2

Fig. 3 Undrained shear strength variation (case 1)

0 200 400 600 (case 2)

Elapsed time (days) Hongzhou-Ningbo expressway passed the eastern coastal

region of China, where soft clay (mucky clay in China) is

widely deposited. To find an efficient subsoil improvement

Fig. 2 Comparing the surface settlement (case 1)

method, serious test embankments were constructed with a

total length of 3.15 km. One of the test embankments was

For actual designed case, the predicted undrained constructed on PVD improved subsoil. At the test site, the

shear strength variation of subsoil is given in Fig. 3, which thickness of soft layer is about 23 m. The soil profile

can be used for checking the stability of the embankment consists a thin top crust underlying soft to very soft clay

and in return to adjust the construction speed of the layers. Below the soft layers, there is a thin clay sand

embankment. layer followed by bedrock. The embankment cross-section

These calculations demonstrated that with the aid of together with subsoil profile is shown in Fig. 4. The soil

PVD-CON program, an efficient and economical design of parameters for PVD-CON analysis are listed in Table 5

PVD improvement could be easily achieved. (Shen et al., 2000).

10

26m Surface settlement

.5 gauges

1:1 Embankment

H

0

TC Sand mat t=0.5m

SC1 PVD Drain Inclinometers

-10 MC Piezometers

Sub-surface

MSC settlement gauges

-20 SC2

CS

Cross section

PVD spacing

TC:top crust,SC:silty clay

1.5m

MC:mucky clay

1.5m

Soil Layer Thickness C h Cv γt Cc eo M OCR

(m) (m 2 /day) (m 2 /day) (kN/m 3 )

1(clay) 1.2 0.079 0.079 19.3 0.19 0.81 1.0 5

2(silty clay) 3.6 0.028 0.011 18.5 0.37 1.07 1.0 1.5

3(mucky clay) 4.5 0.14 0.093 14.3 0.69 1.36 0.8 1.0

4(mucky clay) 5.0 0.227 0.152 14.3 0.64 1.36 0.8 1.0

5(soft silty clay) 4.0 0.324 0.169 17.9 0.42 1.1 0.8 1.0

6(silty clay) 4.7 0.132 0.061 19.3 0.23 0.81 1.0 1.0

Parameters related to PVD behavior are given in Above two cases demonstrated that PVD-CON is a

Table 4 also. The groundwater level is about 1.5 m below useful and powerful design tool for soft subsoil

ground surface. The total construction time was about 260 improvement with PVDs. The figures of settlement curves

days. The surcharge load was 117 kPa (5.88 m fill and undrained shear strength distributions can be

thickness). automatically plotted by PVD-CON. Good agreement

The calculated surface settlements on embankment between calculated and measured data shows that the

centerline are compared with measured data in Fig. 5. The recommended methods for determining the design

1D analysis predicted the surface settlement reasonably parameters are adequate.

well. The analysis results by assuming PVD length of 10

m and 14.3 m are also indicated in Fig. 5. For the subsoil

condition considered, it seems that using an improved 5 CONCLUSIONS

depth of 14.3 m (penetrate the soft mucky clay layer only)

is an economic option. The analyses were also conducted (1) Based on the laboratory and field evidences, the

to find spacing and time for given condition. At 1 year methods for determining the design parameters of soft

after starting the construction, the spacings for resulting in subsoil improvement with prefabricated vertical drain

average degree of consolidations of 90%, 95%, and 99% (PVD) are recommended and discussed.

are 2.0 m, 1.58 m, and 1.29 m respectively. Under actual (2) The theoretical background and the features of a 1D

designed condition (S=1.5 m), the average degree of finite element program (PVD-CON) for consolidation

consolidation at the end of construction was about 83%. analysis of PVD improved subsoil are described. The

The time for 90% average degree of consolidation was 290 program can consider the multi-layer subsoil

days and 338 days for 95% degree of consolidation. condition and it has well defined pre- and post-

The calculated undrained shear strength distributions analysis processes.

corresponding to initial and at the end of construction (3) Two case histories of embankment on PVD improved

conditions, respectively, are plotted in Fig. 6. Within the subsoil were analyzed by the procedures described in

very soft mucky clay layer (around 5 to 15 m depth), the this paper. It has been demonstrated that the proposed

undrained shear strength increase is more than 50% during method is a powerful tool for designing soft subsoil

the construction period. improvement with PVD.

6 REFERENCES

6

Height (m)

4 of soft clay in Penang. Proc. 6 th Asian Regional Conf.

Analyzed On Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg, 1: 117-120.

Measured Barron, R. A. 1948. Consolidation of fine-grained soils by

2

drain wells. Trans. ASCE, No. 113:. 718- 742.

0 Bergado, D.T., Anderson, L.R., Miura, N., and

Balasubramaniam, A.S. 1996. Soft ground improvement,

Measured in lowland and other environments. ASCE Press, New

0.5 PVD length 18.3 m (actual)

Settlement (cm)

1 PVD length 10.0 m Chai, J. C. and Bergado, D. T. 1993. Performance of

reinforced embankment on Muar clay deposit. Soils and

1.5 Foundations, 33(4): 1-17.

Chai, J.C., Miura, N., Sakajo, S., and Bergado, D. T. 1995.

2 Behavior of vertical drain improved subsoil under

2.5 embankment loading. Soils and Foundations, 35(4):

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 49-61.

Chai, J.C., Bergado, D.T., Miura, N., and Sakajo, S. 1996.

Elapsed time (day) Back calculated field effect of vertical drain. Proc.

Second Int. Conf. Soft Soil Engrg., Nanjing, China, 1:

Fig. 5 Comparing the surface settlement (Case 2) 270-275.

Chai, J. C. and Miura, N. 1999. Investigation of factors

affecting vertical drain behavior. J. of Geotechnical and

Geoenvironmental Engrg., ASCE, 125(3): 216-226.

0 Hansbo, S. 1981. Consolidation of fine-grained soils by

prefabricated drains. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech.

End of construction and Found. Engrg., Stockholm, 3: 677-682.

Ladd, C. C. 1991. Stability evaluation during staged

Depth (m)

Initial 541-615.

Lewis, W. A., Murray, R. T. and Symons, I. F. 1975.

Settlement and stability of embankments constructed on

soft alluvial soils. Proc. the Institute of Civil Engineers,

20 59: 571-593.

Miura, N. and Chai, J. C. 2000. Discharge capacity of

prefabricated vertical drain confined in-clay.

0 20 40 60 80 Geosynthetics International, International,

Undrained shear strength (kPa) Geosynthetics Society, 7(3).

Roscoe, K. H. and Burland, J. B. 1968. On the generalized

stress-strain behavior of wet clays. Proc. of Engrg.

Fig. 6 Predicted undrained shear strength (Case 2) Plasticity, Cambridge Univ. Press, 535-609.

Shen, S. L. Yang, C. W., Miura, N. and Chai, J. C. 2000. ASCE Special Conf. on Use of in Situ Tests in Geotech.

Field performance of PVD improved soft clay under Engrg., Blacksburg, 1034-1048.

embankment. Proc. of Inter. Symp. on Coastal Geotech. Walker, L. K. and Morgan, J. R. 1977. Field performance

Engrg. in Practice, IS-Yokohama 2000. of a firm silty clay. 9 th Inter. Conf. on Soil Meh. and

Tavenas, F., Tremblay, M., Larouche, G., and Leroueil, S. Found. Engrg, Tokyo, 1: 341-346.

1986. In situ measurement of permeability in soft clays.

- Determination of Shear Strength Parameters of the Soil by Triaxial Compression TestUploaded byNida Shahid
- 667150900Uploaded byCharilyn Echeverre
- Lab Report #3- ConsolidationUploaded bythulf
- One Dimensional ConsolidationUploaded bymperelmuter
- 10 Rate of SettlementUploaded byangie_leo5374
- CVE ResearchUploaded byjoshua humirang
- Consolidation.pptUploaded bythak49
- UUUploaded byJude Anthony
- Triaxial TestingUploaded byPrabhat Kumar Singh
- Settlement FootUploaded byJeny Sazeda
- Buggy & Curran (2011)Uploaded bytuomeyp
- 11. Analyses of Embankments With Partial Consolidation of Weak FoundationsUploaded byararrati
- a277852-Rock Testing Handbook-us ArmyUploaded byekaamf
- ppp3_glogloglogloUploaded bysekbgfjksdbgbsjkbgsjk
- NOE0415380416%2Ech051Uploaded byUmed Abd-alsatar
- Collection Soil QuestionUploaded byElizabeth Santiago
- sm-lab.pdfUploaded bymm
- Peat Stabilization Using Gypsum and Fly AshUploaded bymm
- Soil Mechanics and Foundations 3rd ed. - M. Budhu (Wiley, 2010) BBS.pdfUploaded byKamukwema john
- cv631108091.pdfUploaded bylim kang hai
- Article PVDUploaded byAlep Aziz
- Consolidation LectureUploaded byRehan Hakro
- CH8-Consolidation-SoilMech_Sett.pptxUploaded byAko
- Consolidation.docxUploaded byAko
- Primary Soil Types.pdfUploaded bymanish
- orca_share_media1566177926905.pdfUploaded byJonah Orozco
- Mayne2007ISSingapore-In-SituTestCalibrations.pdfUploaded byMayoo Laxman
- Soil mechanics correlations.pdfUploaded byMayoo Laxman
- EM 1110-1-1905 c-3.pdfUploaded byAlex Rots
- 09Uploaded bylorenza

- IS 2825Uploaded byShaik Nizam Uddin
- Comparison of Analysis Procedures for Two-way slabsUploaded bysocmaster
- sssUploaded byStanley Sibanda
- Hydrodynamic Analysis of TLPUploaded byychodneker
- Shimano Deore-XT Front Drive SystemUploaded byjohnpiccone
- 3.0 - Calculation Omis Profex- 2 SideUploaded byMuhammad Zuhayr
- Pressure LoadUploaded by105034412
- Introduction to Coiled Tubing Unit Final TouchUploaded byOvaid Avoid
- Gear Box EffUploaded byNakkolop
- Motion of Charged Particles in a Magnetic FieldUploaded byjerome
- Mcq-thermodynamics Second Law of ThermodynamicsUploaded byTochi Krishna Abhishek
- 405446Uploaded bypramudiyanto
- 06 Travel Drive 2plus2Uploaded byMACHINERY101GEAR
- Flange Torque Recommendations GF.pdfUploaded byTulioLopezJ
- Chapter 12_Heat ExchangersUploaded byhaqjmi
- Short Term Course on Advances in FatigueUploaded byDaniel Rodgers
- Introduction to control systemUploaded byNorkarlina Binti Khairul Ariffin
- Losses in PSCUploaded bySandeep Reddy
- 1261483449_2731__6Uploaded byAlex Kascut
- Whirlpool Art 666 gUploaded byÓnodi Szilárd
- cUploaded bySuriyan Arif
- Rock bolts 2009.pptUploaded byMarkusMakuAldo
- Tainter Gate DesignUploaded byIrsa Jawad
- On the Fatigue Crack Growth Behaviour of Two Ferrite-pearlite Micro Alloyed SteelsUploaded byHyunjung Lee
- Thomson Roundrail 2DA Modular SpecsheetUploaded byElectromate
- Soil Sampling in Geotechnical EngineeringUploaded bySana Ansari
- Tool Engineering Jigs and FixturesUploaded byMike
- Pipe ScheduleUploaded byaap1
- IGS Piping GuideUploaded bymvrengarajan
- Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Blog - LEAP Australia & New Zealand _ Tips & Tricks_ Calculating the Mean Age of Air for HVAC Simulations in ANSYS CFDUploaded byArun Mali

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.