201 FIGURES202 [BLANK PAGE]Figure No. oe 2.1 203 LIST OF FIGURES Idealized Weathering Profile in Granitic Rocks Geological Map and Aerial Photograph that Identify Some Major Structural and Lithological Features Sheet One of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.2 to 2.14 Sheet Two of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.2 to 2.14 Sheet Three of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates ee Sheet One of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates ee Sheet Two of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates rag a ra) Sheet Three of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.15 to 2.26 Definition of Sampler Proportions Core Recovery and Fracture Indices Example of Description Sheet for Rock Mass Survey Example of Data Sheet for Discontinuity Survey Example of a Stereoplot Legend for Use on Logs Trial Pit Log - Example 1 Trial Pit Log - Example 2 Trial Pit Log - Example 3 Example of Sheet One of Drillhole Log Example of Sheet Two of Drillhole Log Example of Field Sheet for Water Absorption Test Example of Calculation Sheet for Water Absorption Test Example of Results and Calculation Sheet for Falling- head Test Page No. 207 208 209 210 ait 212 ea 214 215 215 216 rate 218 oe 220 ry 222 reed 224 225 226 227Figure No. 204 Typical Stress Paths and Strength Envelope for Undrained (CU) Triaxial Tests Example of Triaxial Test Soil Properties Data Example of Triaxial Test Graphical Data Example of Triaxial Test p'-q/Stress Path Plot Simplified Representation of the Hydrological Cycle ® Index for Hong Kong Catchments Typical Changes in Water Table, Degree of Saturation (s) and Pore Water Pressure (u) Due to Rainfall Typical Piezometer Responses Effect of Permeability and Degree of Saturation on Wetting Band Thickness for a Ten-year Return Period Rainfall Event Double-ring, Constant-head Field Infiltration Test Apparatus Typical Results from Field Infiltration Test Cut-off Drain Grading of a Sand Filter Suitable for All Silts and Finer Soils Typical Failure Profiles in Weathered Rocks and Soils in Hong Kong Probability of Failure Versus Reliability Index Effect of Benches in Adversely Jointed Rock Various Methods of Stabilising Rock Slopes Rockfall Control Measures Bearing Capacity Data Drainage Details for Retaining Walls Nomogram for the Rapid Solution of the Bransby-Williams Equation Curves Showing Duration and Intensity of Rainfall in Hong Kong for Various Return Periods Distribution of Raingauges in Hong Kong Page No. 228 229 230 231 232, 233 234 oa 236 Ae 238 239 240 241 242 242 243, 244 245 246 247 248 249Figure 10. 10. 10 10 10 10. 11. a. ql. No. 4 5 +10 a We 205 Typical Sand Trap Arrangement Typical Rock Trap Detail Plan Showing Junction of Tributary Channels with Main Channels Chart for the Rapid Design of Channels Typical Details of Stepped Channel Typical Details of Junction of Stepped Channel and U-channel at Toe of Slope Typical Details of Catchpits Typical U-channel Details Planting Season in Hong Kong Typical Detail of General Fill Area Employing Dual Compaction Standards Typical Compaction Trial Results Record Sheet for Density Tests in Compacted Fill Field Sheet for the Hilf Method of Rapid Compaction Control Seedling Shrub or Tree Planting Detail of Tree Rings on Impervious Slope Surface Example of a Piezometer Record Sheet Example of a Telltale Record Sheet Example of an Anchor Load Record Sheet Open Hydraulic (Casagrande) Piezoneter Telltale Example of an Inclinometer Record Sheet Example of a Slope Maintenance Record Sheet for Piezometer Readings Example of Sheet One of a Maintenance Inspection Record Example of Sheet Two of a Maintenance Inspection Record Page 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 259 260 261 262 262 263 264 265 266 266 267 268 269 270Figure Page No. No. 11.4 Example of Sheet Three of a Maintenance Inspection 27 Record207 Zones of Weathering (based on Ruxton & Berry, 1957) Structureless sand, silt and clay] May have boulder concentration at the surface Residual material with corestones. Rock percentage is less than 50%, and corestones are rounded and not interlocked Corestones with residual material Rock percentage is 50 to 90% and corestones are rectangular and interlocked More than 90% rock. Minor residual material along major structural discontinuities which may be considerably iron stained Figure 1.1 - Idealized Weathering Profile in Granitic Rocks208 gical Map and Aerial Photograph that Identify Some Major Structural and Lithological Features Figure 2.1 - Geolo209 Plates 2.2 to 2.14 Figure 2.2 - Sheet One of Log of Drillcore Shown i210 Tae on gra tard smely out Figure 2.3 - Sheet Two of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.2 to 2.14rae Figure 2.4 - Sheet Three of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.2 to 2.14212 ster table Teed» See 5 coeeo8 GR hy decaponed CARTE, Figure 2.5 - Sheet One of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.15 to 2.26213 Figure 2.6 - Sheet Two of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.15 to 2.26214 ster table Tv! ‘ 3 f_Serrape cofetat® eaten Figure 2.7 - Sheet Three of Log of Drillcore Shown in Plates 2.15 to 2.26215 =(Net_projected area of. (Projected area of sample core) Area ratio Inside clearance -(0D of shoe)- Outside clearance= ‘OD of sample tube) Ow = De Of Figure 2.8 - Definition of Sampler Proportions RQo (Core lengths greater Fracture than 100 mm measured Core index ‘on centreline) recovery 1 ee Figure 2.9 - Core Recovery and Fracture Indices216 KAAANS SSW AD0Y JOS 3BaYS UOLYdLuDSaq yo atduexz - OT"Z aunBry ww 95 z wg) meneu Kon [wu oge = 08) 9m POH > (291 9pm "ag "| Burseds Ayinulyuo9sig DCU ee ot ones — TEET ETT TT Zabis Jo 'aseg gi" Jo's" foTt™ foo): 2a Seuey ~Bulsedg sainyaeiy (Saou) aun dun jo BUN 70 oon yoluibuat ‘plait abunig ISONIOVES ALINNILNOOSIG SNIWYSLAd OL SASAYNS SNIT eto 2 owe SLINVES 22h x20 anfbebsdliog 2 79 sn0}e9 OILWWHOSN! TVINSLVW fanine 30115 wet weit duai-s 2 Pauiio50 BAey Sainjle} aBpam” auui0s | TUIGESU 40 SUBIS -YBIG Wi ZE ee 1 [O"Vporesado OT tow [BTM'STHINA'N'Y] os [6'8"7Z] 4. Tae Teak GOW FRG NOILWWYOSN| TWYSN39217 Kanang Ay{nuyquorsig sos ays eyeG 4o aiduexy - TT°z aanbiy ain yeas § mS 2 ot (step bunts od ven 1 pastes) wy pata) Jaye ssouinem Jur yo. fou2}S/8009 ju jo aunien mouaisisiag —uonj2911p dia‘dia 0'8 z'9 8 ze 0'6 ort ono! st! ors! TT arg © cial al — eo! oro; so! oz" 1 4 ao! TZ] at oT E| ©) 2) | | judiuanos Wulgs smous sro! T ata] al -lalal al al = | =) | o[ [ao] alof—-[ alas T oo] 0) wo] ©] o] ls] =] |! | c}-jole] <] = v |] a] = Palala oyu Poe an aE ar eo di a6eur PSF 5 eo we IANILNODSIG_3O NOILVINSINO GNV SYNn1VN al oN y22us aT UT STHTMT ATNTV 5 ere] 2] oy evep Aununuaosig bas. NOILVWHOSNI WYSN39 TERR TWO218 Joint planes or joint set concentrations Te 50°/118° 2 70°/212° je 29°/075° Unstable zone 4e 85°/314° Daylight envelope Friction * circle {p= 35°) 4 Toppling Slope great circle / envelope — Slope : Dip direction Dip angle Interpretation : UNSTABLE Plane 1 daylights and dips at more than 35° Plane 4 may result in toppling Planes 1 and 2 combine to form a daylighting wedge that dips at more than 35° STABLE Plane 2 does not daylight - Intersections 1/4, 1/3, 2/4, 3/4 do not daylight QUESTIONABLE - Plane 3 and intersection 2/3 daylight but dip at less than 35°. Would be unstable if friction angle less or water pressure reduces strength. If pole 3 represents concentration of set, check that individual points do not daylight or form wedges. Legend : el Pole of plane (plane 1) x1/2 Pole of line of intersection (planes 1 and 2) Water is not taken into account. ) Cohesion and characteristics of individual joints are not taken into account Wedges may not actually be developed in the field Results should be checked by a site visit Figure 2.12 - Example of a Stereoplotval) SEDIMENTARY ROCKS Boulders, Cobbles Breccia Gravel E3223] Conglomerate Sand Sandstone silt Siltstone Clay Mudstone Peat Shale METAL ROCKS Slate, Phyllite z Quartzite Schist IGNEOUS ROCKS (a) For general use 2 Weathered granite 7 Weathered volcanic Granite v Volcanic ) For detailed use Granite Rhyolite Granodiorite Andesite, Trachyte Diorite, Syenite Li] Agglomerate uartz_monzonite ‘Ademe1 ite) Volcanic breccia Microgranite . 5 Tuff (Granite porphyry, Felsite) Microdiorite - Syenite &¥¥] Microgabbro (Porphyrite, Porphyry) (Dolerite) Figure 2.13 - Legend for Use on Logs220 TaIAL PIF Yo, Tye of excavator an ‘ Study area Type of pane (Uf used) =i Date aug Ground level romaering pate beckfsMee : _2qae Cocrdinate Depth ater Con ons fecsces Description Bead gel ah bron 7d GrayTaN bra 2st edian shoe see aha Tapas brown texturelens war SILT with yellimeshite sub-roundod copper fare gravel at mcorately ana ng ‘icowposee granite with fron 228i 9 ors ehroughou™ (SLOPES) Top 109 ms greyseh Broun huate sandy iT ary dense vel oulsh browrashive SND (TORY DECHWSSED URaKIT#) with corestones 0° very ah nighy fo rocerdtey eecrsed Gales Triai pie cowlete a8 20m deoeh a Sas)? diszurbed sarsle {Sige diaturoed saree bra'sturbed carpe, vertics) beposed adjacent ta Face 9 Temes by 1 Undistargee sampler herszenta Saustter plattorn sdjtcent to] heed by Steud race & Date 18378 Hater Simple Trsicu aermity test Figure 2.14 - Trial Pit Log - Example 1221 TRIAL FIT WO. = TPHS FACE @ and 0 Snect 2 of 2 Type of excavator contractor Type oF puny (I used} = vate 49 8 ee Tindertog I bate vacktiTted __ Ceorcinate waser | T reduces | epeh conditions | (samote | “evel” | netresy aa semis Gaver oT send J Eerpncted ght brow five To cae SRD see See ape gre! of Sah cavers rare eyes strewn ‘ee Uvek: done anguTar cabeles of granite staining slightly decomsosed grant bouloers ara in gevre contact with voids Between STILL) sTigheiy. decorpaned gromte trea aaeetx of Jretiue dense Tight brawn fine’ ta casrse SAND PRESSURE f 5.2 47.86 GAUGE ABOVE 22 7 / 35.26 GL. 1.32 m(3 4 al | = e q (litres/minute) h (metres) Th 2.06 __ lugeon units by where 1 = length of test section in metres ee le FROM GRAPH : agn 34/54 Tested by | Calculated Note : If groundwater level unknown or below test section use depth to centre of test section. Figure 2.20 - Example of Calculation Sheet for Water Absorption Test227 FALLING: FIELD DATA : Borehole .eeeeeseceee Date Depth 07 Time | Time | of water a on | elapsed |betow top| clock of casing Use only CLEAN water for the test min _sec| = Hes water been added during boring? —_yes/No a ABC Drillhole Observer Interna] dianeter of casing = 127 aa Depth of casing = 1,07 m above G.L. Gt Depth of water at tine of test 11.66 m below 6.L. 5 i Depth of casing = 10,67 m below Cn Depth of hole = 12.9 m below | 6. Dianeter of hol below casing, D= 160 am 2 4 6 & 1012 18 16 28 20 22 Time (min) (CALCULATIONS, A F z 5 (based on case (d) in Figure 7 in B.S, 5930 : 1981) 12 min x 60 = 720 sec 8 0: therefore : kK = FT ra = 0.01839 m? F 8.5 x 10-6 m/s Figure 2.21 - Example of Results and Calculation Sheet for Falling-head Test228 53881 LPLXeLUL (9) pauLeupun 405 adojeaug yySuadys pue syyed SseuIS aunssaad Leoig La Bussauduoo . Lelvay ey yeoidAy - T-e aunBiy Butyeitp Let4ay ey ae “4 ae \ ado[aaua yaoueas/ Lepou- tg229 Project TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST - SUMMARY OF SOIL PROPERTIES Consolidated undrained with p.p.m. Single stage Sample No., Type & Nominal Dia. B.H.No. A Depth 5.7-6.3 m Ref. 2/M/76 SPECIMEN NO. 2 3 Effective cell pressure, cs kPa] 70 li Before] After Before] After Before After Diameter of specimen mm] 76.0 76.0 76.0 | Length of specimen mm] 152.0 "152.0 152.0! VOLUME OF SPECIMEN cm?|689. 54 | 664,71. 689.54 667.04 689.54, 670.94 mass of specimen {1302.1 1308.171313.7.1 1318.7. 131 gfi0z4. 1 "1031.9 g| 278.0 | 284.0 281.8 28 Ble 3 27978 273 273 MET DENSITY Mg/n3] 1.89. | 1.91 DRY DENSITY 1.54" 1.50 "1.55 | Specific gravity 2.69) «© 2.68” NOID) RATION Sgt ty 0.811 0.746 0.791 0.732 | 0.769 x] 90. 92.5 i SATURATED MOISTURE CONTENT | 30.2 os Sketch of failed specimen Soil Description Red, yellowisi Red, brown & Red, borwn & | Sreyn”s rack black very black very clayey SILT/ |clayey very | sraverty. tee SAND silty SAND | Gaayey STIR COHESION LIQUID LIMIT (2) PLASTIC LIMIT ( 2-60 0.06-2 0.002-0.06 <0.002 Figure 3.2 - Example of ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION#'deg] Triaxial Test Soil Properties Data230 TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST - GRAPHS Deviator Stress/Zi1/Pore Pressure versus Axial Strain (%) Project : BH.No. A (Sample 2) Depth 5.7-6.3 m = & e £ a 2 £ a g & (ca-oa) (kPa) Deviator Stress i Wis ee Axial Strain (%) Figure 3.3 - Example of Triaxial Test Graphical Data231 2 2 = = 3B = a 6 - S b a B = z 2 B = = Ss 8 a gE = ee fe Single stage A (Sampte 2) Depth 5.7-6.3 m Consolidated undrained with P.P.M. B.H.No. (ed4) 2/(, £94, 79) ooz = =08t_=— (OST. oot = 08 edt seasbap 9°9¢ =8 ued ,_UIS =,6 rrrtC~—~—rs—Ss—SsCSCS @ uez | saeabap o! (egy) x (egy) 2/(F9-T9) 66°0 [S62 |€ "2 05" 1 €6°8 zez | 9 891 aad fe ft | 6-0 bee E: wlost] seat T coz 68 (lz ss “6st 6b ort 3.4 - Example of Triaxial Test p'-g/Stress Path Plot Figure232 ee) é - = OE FF PRainfar © ft Evapotranspiration » Evaporation Weathered rock f &Stream Bedrock Legend : —™— Mater table —Iwi— Perched water table ZZZZZ Impermeable stratum (aquiclude or aquitard) Figure 4.1 - Simplified Representation of the Hydrological Cycle233 squauyoze) Buoy Buoy 405 xapul e - 2°p aunbyy (sanoy) [LeJutey so uoLzeang pausaau0a quauyoze> ayy voy usaqzed pevauab 3Y3 MOL [OF OU saop 3[Nnsad sluy seeue yuaUYyo7eD 4YBLa UL BuLuNoD0 suu03s €b JoJ Xaput @ Jo tL, saddn pagewsysy (4y/uu) xepul ¢234 Ground Pore Water Pressure surface Degree of Saturation (Atmospheric pressure=0 O25 50 75 100) =u 0 tu Zone of negative pore water pressures | pore water pressures Ory season water table 7 a 2 > 2 5 = 8 8 & S 5 2 B 8 Zone of positive Legend : —Conditions at time t, (Before the rainfall) —Conditions at time t; (Immediately after the start of rainfall) — Conditions at time t, (After a long period of rainfall =» Rise in water table or increasing saturation and pore water pressure due to rainfall Figure 4.3 - Typical Changes in Water Table, Degree of Saturation (s) and Pore Water Pressure (u) Due to RainfallSEASONAL RESPONSE) STORM RESPONSE 1 - Little or None | 2 - Multiple Peaks 3 - Single Peak A - Multiple Peaks B - Single Symmetrical C - Single Asymmetrical Peak D - Slight Seasonal response P Piezometric level $ Storm event Storm response T Time Figure 4.4 - Typical Piezometer Responses236 B 2 o 3 3B : Lk il ie ee a 3.9465 678910 Depth of Wetting Band (h) (m) Note : (1) This chart has been prepared assuming runoff is 50% and porosity (n) is 40%. (2) Curves have been plotted for the various degrees of saturation (S¢ - So) shown. Figure 4.5 - Effect of Permeability and Degree of Saturation on Wetting Band Thickness for a Ten-year Return Period Rainfall Event237 snqeueddy 4581 Uolgeua [Ju] platy peay-zueysuoy “Buls-a,qnog - 9*y aunbLy uu Qo€ vezoweLp ‘BuL4 [903s sauUT y— PaLLana, pue pazearoxa ueYy adeyuns 4sa. lu Q09 4aqaueLp Pury soesins 359) “Bua [aazs 493g aqem 6uLéiddns, _ pray saz qUeysU0Q Buin uoLu gs tas — suo lq enpes6 pazeugt [eo UILM $a1330q otaseid 5419s auatL OL SMOPULM Y2LM auesS uapoom Bulquoddns [arey uossteo 4o aid asey yaew youag238 3S91 UOLZBIZ|LJUT PLaL4 wous S2LMNSaY LeoLdAL - (soynuim) payers 3s, aouts 08 1025 09 ; ov Lp eanbly i | utw/w OT X O€°2 aye UoLzeI| adejuns 3sa} aroge Ww S/T { LguL o1303duAsy “0 LaAaL papuog 2 6 = 2 g 3 = & a 2239 ureag Jyo-3n9 - g*p eunBL4 aoey.ns GELS Leo1gLag aueaquat aiqeauwaduy- a weuny9 . LLLpDeG aygez vazey— ai qeawsadu240 SLLOS 4aULy PUB SIL1S LLY 4OJ aLGRIENS JaaLL4 PRs e Jo BuLpedD - 6*y aunbL4 ‘anand Gulpesb yoea uo juLod aqetudoudde ayz 3e weubeLp ayz uo wmoys si pas a{n4 yovo 40 uogunu S4L “I-y BLgeL Jo saim Jar LL} oun pue (y) 4a3[ td pues 243 YILM pazelo0sse [el4ozeW abeuULeup aYz SaqlAdSep adojaaus SLuL ~ g 4azL14 ~pues a2a49u09 susaulbug Jo Sduop sazeig paitun ayy 07 4eLLWLS aan SL pues Leunzeu z auoz 2gg SQ JO GuLpesG ay] “S{LOS 4AULJ pue SILLS [Le 4OJ wag[Ly e Se 3de LLEM YOLUM pues a3a49u09 suaausbuz Jo Sdiog $2ze9S parlun ay7 Saqluosap adojadua SLY - y 492114 ‘ante 8a "awvonvie Wi 238/'m9 MI AL241 Building platform Cut slope failure Building platform Footpath Natural slope failures Legend : Pre failure geometry 7 Post failure geometry eee Note : The sketch sections shown in this Figure are of failures that occurred in 1982. Figure 5.1 - Typical Failure Profiles in Weathered Rocks and Soils in Hong Kong242 2 2 2 & . 6 a 4 2 10) 203010 Reliability Index Figure 5.2 - Probability of Failure Versus Reliability Index Potentially unstable wedge failures on benches due to daylighting joints — Standard slope profile Potentially unstable slope aggravated by cutting benches into rock with parallel sheet jointing. Modified slope profile Standard slope 7 profile 7, More stable slope is formed by laying back at the angle at which the sheet joint is dipping. For a reasonable range of orientations of the sheet joints, there may be little extra volume of excavation required. Figure 5.3 - Effect of Benches in Adversely Jointed RockReinforcing bars or mesh lapped to dowels bars - Weepholes at intervals for 243 Weak material trimmed back and replaced with i. reinforced concrete Filter layer formed of sandbags or graded filter intermittent seepage — —~-— Longitudinal drain LF for steady seepage £ keyed or dowelled © structural facing (ree concrete, at base DETAIL OF DENTITION Weepholes ~ ~p-doint or Sener ow shear Dowels Sp strength Rock anchors Inclined drainhole Formation level Figure 5.4 - Various Methods of Stabilising Rock Slopes244 Free hanging mesh nets Hanging nets \ suspended from above — or chains for \ blocks tumbling from above \ Bench as _ Supports \ rockfall \ : stayed by \ collector f rock anchors or deadmen Move structure to safe distance “Loose blocks to be scaled from any - face without nets A 1 i 1 1 i Warning B sign . Rock trap ditch Gravel bed Figure 5.5 - Rockfall Control Measures245 Effective area Ar INCLINATION FACTORS where 8° = 8 - 2ep es 1s tq ig- = 97 Ng tan 3 H provided the inclination of load is jin the direction of B + Haase = V tan 9" + Ae TILT FACTORS L- tq “47 Ne tan = ge[ etm 4] where :c is in radians Values of Nic, GROUND SLOPE FACTORS 1-99 Se = 9q - Wy tan" 8 = 9q = [1 - tan a] : 10 18 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Angle of Shearing Resistance ¢" (degrees) BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS where : a < 45°, u < 45° and (1) Data applies to shatTow founcations only 0 = 8 (2) For ee ‘a check should be made for overall slope stability (3) For the effects of nonhomogeneous soil and soil compressibility and scale effects reference should be to Vesic (1975) (4) where the foundation is set back from the crest of the slope, refer to GCO (1982b). Figure 6.1 - Bearing Capacity Data246 Protected surface 5 / Drainage channels Origine! foal ground Filter - Drainage material ayer de- [ placed in hessian nite Chapter Construction batter ‘rainage material — Impervious base to erain Zsunsoir pive laid to gulley Blinding layer (a) CANTILEVER/COUNTERFOR breirane Saeed | Filter layer designed in accordance with Chapter a Drainage material (e) GRAVITY TYPE Back#iT1 t rainage / material } placed in Filter layer cesigned in accordance Chaper 4 Drainage material Lelinding layer (b) CANTILEVER/COUNTERFORT Usec when (a) is not possible Filter layer designed in accordance with Chapter 4 Drainage material placed in hessian bags Csninding layer (a) RavITY TWPE used when (c) fs not possible Note : (1] For ease of construction, where filter material nay be placed in hessian bags. Water pressure should be considered in d Figure 7.1 - Drainage Deta ayers are constructed at a steep incline, filter lesign for types (>) and (4) ils for Retaining Walls247 Solution : A, H>R, Lot Example 1 x 108 m2 1 m/100 m 1 000 m therefore Time of concentration (min) Slope (m/100 m) Catchment area (m2) Distance from catchment boundary to the design section (m), for which t is a maximum Figure 8.1 - Nomogram for the Rapid Solution of the Bransby-Williams Equation248 spotiad WAnqay snoluep 4oj Buoy HuoH UL [LesuLeY Jo AzLSUazU] pue UOLZeUNG BULMOYS sarang ~ 27g aunBLy “(44rd S,6uLx) O86T-256T spuovau [[BJuLed-Jo-azeA snoauequeysu! pue (AUozeA4aSqO [PXOY) OBET-LP6T SPu0re. UOYdES BULIL12 wouy e2eq “Buoy BUCH *AaoqeAUaSGO LeKOY “BG “ON DION LeOLUyI) ‘Buoy BuOH 404 a[tsoud Ww4ozsuyer uBLsap y - (Tg6T) SUOMY 9 UOSdazaq Wouj a4e SAAUND [[BJULeL UO!zeUNp-Az1SUaqUL ay] + BION (ulu)2 Suorgeaquaoueg Jo au ‘uoLaeang OzT 0010608 OZ 09 0S Ov ST olé8i9 SG ft a or 02 og 00T 002 005 0001 (suzaf) potsag wanqay) = = £ 2 £ = 2 Ey g a € > 5249 6uoy 6uoy UL sa6neSurey so uolangiuasig - ¢°g aunbLy (vin 02 0 $80 62 toy +22 02 ToH_“soU) s26neD 391440 [0.13U0) 1eDFu4r0300% >aydesboane pue Aseulpap © Stydess : {691 93 1 “sou) eb AoyeR4aSUD [eAOy pusta7250 Cover slabs if required Fall og h in 408 me s5 50 thick perforated face slab Graded stone filter lower layer size 180 mm, upper layer size €0-75 am SECTIONAL ELEVATION 750 min poems 25 x 16 ms. flat bar 16 dia. m.5. bar at 100 c/e 150 dia. holes SECTION A-A AIT dimensions in wiT1imetres Normally for drains of 900 mm dia. and below, For bigger drains and steep terrain, sand ‘trap should be specially desianed. size Depth : 0 ¢ 750 width FW > 3B Length : L = 4,80 9-67 0-5 5-9-5 5 ap Graded Stone FiTter shall be crusher run granite ageregate. Capacity DAL to be according to size and nature of catchment, providing detention time not Jess than 5 minutes for max. design flow of inlet. Figure 8.4 - Typical Sand Trap ArrangementTo suit natural channel> [To suit outlet, channel SECTION A-A Natural stream course 4 " ! —P “sized to suit design flow t Grill spaced to catch boulders in natural stream bed Figure 8.5 - Typical Rock Trap Detail252 s[euUeyD UIeW YIM sjauUeYD AveinqUi] Jo UooUNP BuIMoYg Uelg - 9°8 aNBly NIVY0 NOYASHO NV1d (6g ein6i4 8es) lem ayyeg VW NOILO3S jeuueyo my pue paddaig un} pu sieuueyo paul jos doy 8009 snipes me jeuueyo-n wus s2z -—adols umop 0/9 wu 90g 11 sureJp UOJA3UQ aul| edolg253 sleuuey) Jo uBisag pidey ayy soy queyg - 2° o4nbLy juaipesp fT UL T= quatpeds passndas peay ard aas/at yp) “295/272 = £4420194 peoy ’ ’ oog = #245 (suuey> paugnbas peay “E i00e 40 n 2z = paainbs lauuey> peoy ¢ | 000 02 = 440uny 40903 -Z oy UE T = quatpeag soqua “2 ee ae 7 ‘paoume *2 suuw/a.g4t 090 p= 4souny 42qua 1 + aidueeg wor antos 2a uorantos towuey> paddoas (4) teuueu> [eon (2) L8H ONTSN OOMLIN N91S30 (uues/asuat) quaipess 6 (3) tauueus ‘unos L8H ase < wyooe sce 00 wos WHEE gre wioos 809 nse wn006 nosy ses ‘noa9 sca ose (a) tauueyo i 006: 000 08 aus, aus P4108 9330p] fq, wnoys ca 00 aot auwey> suoisuswep 2uueyg 30 zis, 000 002254 Concrete apron SECTION A-A This dimension varies to suit the slope but not to exceed 1m — Design channel depth, d = s + H/2——~ Gradient from Figure 8.7 « LONGITUDINAL SECTION Dimensions of Stepped Channel Nominal size of Thickness channel H(mm) (nm 225 to 300 100 100 200 Thigkness ‘Splash allowance {mn} Brash tam) 375 to 675 100 150 350 : 750 to 900 125 200 400 Figure 8.8 - Typical Details of Stepped Channel255 Min.d_+ 450 mm measured from lowest invert of the stepped channel Varies but > h/2 ~d= s+ H/2 (See Figure 8.8) SECTION A-A Concrete apron Concrete apron Baffle wall fos ett Figure 8.9 - Typical Details of Junction of Stepped Channel and U-channel at Toe of Slope256 Step irons to be provided if] height of catchpit 125 / exceeds 1500 Varies oC slab suitably | reinforced KR Ey 125 thick wall and _ | | Arrangement Pe of openings Res i to suit site conditions Concrete blinding _____ SECTION A-A U-channel ~ Step channel _ 7 7 Concrete benching Channel Arrangement of J openings to suit 125 site conditions Note : All dimensions in millimetres Figure 8.10 - Typical Details of Catchpits257 Impervious This dimension varies to suit fall on channel Dimensions of U - channel T Nominal size of { channel H (mm) Thickness t (mm) Thickness b (mm) 225 to 600 150 150 675 175 cas) Figure 8.11 - Typical U-channel Details258 Planting Season for Grass aaquerdas o¢ 5 5 & 8 & 2 2 Shrubs and Trees Aaenagad 1 Optimum time Good time Fair time eal 3 ca (wut) TWWANTWY (90) SYNLvHadWaL NWAW NW3W Figure 8.12 - Planting Season in Hong Kong§ = e & a 2 6 259 General fill compacted to 90% max. x y— compacted to 95% max. x to reduce infiltration through surface -—-——— Layer 1.5 m thick may be Face zone compacted fe 95% max. x4 Width of face zone and angle of slope to depend upon VE gaterial used Drainage to be provided in all abandoned water courses. Min. 300 mm drainage layer to comply with filter criteria for fill Figure 9.1 - Typical Detail of General Fill Area Employing Dual Compaction Standards Compaction Trial - Site B 1 ton vibrating roller - No.731 150 mm uncompacted layer 225 mm uncompacted layer of standard density 300 mm uncompacted 4 6 8 10 Number of Passes of Roller Figure 9.2 - Typical Compaction Trial Results260 LL4 pazoeduiog ut sqsal AyLsuag 40J yaayg p4ooay - E*6 aunBLy ayByon 24e95 491 Lou AyLDads yoogsdaaus - (A) 8 uunap yaeis = (A)IS pauka oyazuneud - Nd (E) Susaeagin 34 (A) { uopaea}s4sse19 LhOs posssun (2) Sa 4 in |. 4800H |-ado lng sur ey oak frassea} (am) “crouse eal ss0uSH 4040 | ao4nos | 2) Lueaoe “oA Se 3ede9 quouaoe|dou s2qeM ~ UM woo{ [eq vaqany ~ gy uaupoe dos pues - Ys (1) | @20N pourenl ron “gay agen |i) wo} 32¢du0 Tey wary 2am 10H wor2edua> pidey (g) Leuorquanuos (2) £ to11u02 40 pouran wou soyasqaenoesey9 LLL + (2M = °n) quaques aanasion (a) Uo}29edWoD aArreLay (2) squaupiqnbos uoy3eatss 394s ‘@¥0938 NOLLD¥EHOD TILA faores0qey 3501 Aaisueg misut uo}38901 aoaroug261 FATT butk density Wax. converted bulk density ity (Mg/m*) Degree of compaction Fil] moisture content Optimum roisture content FAIT dry density Tab mai ary density (derived From a i145 method) Bulk Density and Converted Bulk Dei Description of Soit/Renarks Aaded Yater (2) Percentage of Fill Wet Neicht Determination of Converted Bulk Density Determination of F411 Moisture Added water (2) Wet soil + container Mass mould + base + sample Dry soil + container Mass mould + base Container nunber Mass of sample Moisture loss Vorune of mould Dry soil Bulk density ™, Moisture content Mp Converted bulk density pul a+ el . ‘wu tig + Zp (OO 700 Converted bulk density Optimum moisture content Figure 9.4 - Field Sheet for the Hilf Method of Rapid Compaction Control262 -Shrub or tree Grass slope — seedling, 150 to 600 mm height Enriched backfill Pit type excavation (300 x 300 x 300 mm) —— Figure 9.5 - Seedling Shrub or Tree Planting Impervious surface —— Plain concrete \ class 20/20 | > iy g + cast in place NK’. Concrete ~~ tree ring a Impervious surface 600 mm min. dia. + dia. of tree if the tree is estab] ished Note : Precast concrete tree rings may also be used. Figure 9.6 - Detail of Tree Rings on Impervious Slope Surface263 Ground level above P1 & P2 7 AX || Installed 2/4/83 tae dry ee ee es Metres P.D. ee 77 August = 7 = = = 7 Legend : ooo. Observed piezometric response () Piezometer tip level Figure 10.1 - Example of a Piezometer Record SheetCrack Movement - Vertical (mm) Movement (mm) 264 Street Telltale No. 3 Wall : 75 m long, 3.2 to 6.4 m high Crack : 25.4 m from left hand end, 2.7 m above ground level v 0° 4 Installed 1/12/80 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Crack Movement - Horizontal (mm) Total movement. /-— Novenent normal to crack = Movement parallel to crack af eg Vg ee a a ee a NDJIFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASOND 1981 1982 Figure 10.2 - Example of a Telltale Record Sheet265 Site : Blank Road Anchor : No. C4 Load cell : Vibrating wire Free length 22.5 m Deakin No. 738241 Fixed length 6.0 m Capacity 1 000 kN Strands : 7 No., 12,5 om — 5/9/81 ‘Lock off' load = z z 8 3s 5 2 $ £ <= Working load September ONDIFMAMJJASONDJIFMAMJ J 1981 1982 1983 Temperature (°c) September ONDJFMAMJJASONDUFMAMJJ 1981 1982 1983 Figure 10.3 - Example of an Anchor Load Record Sheet266, _-—— Lockable cover —— Ca _—— Concrete cover box Drain Standpipe Cement - bentonite grout Bentonite seal Sand }-——— Piezometer tip Figure 10.4 - Open Hydraulic (Casagrande) Piezoneter Non corroding metal cover strip Offset dated = scribed line —— Recording base plate —————_| Crack in structure Figure 10.5 - Telltale267 ‘Normal to wall Q Job: Movement Profile on Axis f Parallel to wall O Site : Retaining Wall A Inclinometer No. : AL Base Level of Inclinometer Tube : ee Date of First Observation : Observer : -90 -80 -70 ~60 -50 -40 -30-20 -10 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Upslope i Downs ope Cumulative Displacement (mm) Depth (m) Legénd : --——-- 40211 —— 40221 > — —~ 40231 — 40241 (1) For orientation of inclinometer guide axes, see monitoring key plan (2) The displacement profile is measured relative to the initial profile (3) The file code is formed as follows : digit 1 for inclinometer number, digit 2, 3&4 for visit no. and digit 5 for axis notation (1 is axis AB, 2 is axis CD). Figure 10.6 - Example of an Inclinometer Record Sheet268 Piezometer Readings Development at : a Depth of critical Critical : below top of water level 13 Blank Street Siandpipe Ie 269.55 m P.D. 0.75 m Piezometer No. P3. Level of top Ee (m) Tip level : Ground level : Depth of tip below top of standpipe (m: 254.8 mP.D. | 270.36 m P.D. 5.50 Tbepth from top Date of standpipe to| Weather Comments water surface(m) Cover box clear of water + drain free. Cover box flooded - drain rain| blocked. Cleared before removing cap. Figure 11.1 - Example of a Slope Maintenance Record Sheet for Piezometer Readings269 Slope Maintenance Inspection SI Locati ope Location Slope Number Weather Inspecting Officer Position Date Risk Category Low/Medium/Hi gh Last Inspection Date Is interval between inspections 0K? Yes/No Previous Risk Category Low/Medium/Hi gh Have past recommendations been carried out? Yes/No ‘Summary Major works required Yes/No Minor works required Yes/No investigation needed Yes/No Slope satisfactory Yes/No ACCESS Is there good maintenance access? Yes/No Is it difficult for the public to gain access? Yes/No Has the inspecting officer gained access to the crest, the toe, and all berms? Yes/No Comments INSTRUMENTATION Have all instrumentation systems been checked? Yes/No Have all instrumentation results been plotted? Yes/No Are all readings acceptable? Yes/No Is there a need for new instrumentation? Yes/No Comments P.S. This inspection sheet is to be read together with the slope data sheet/file. Figure 11.2 - Example of Sheet One of a Maintenance Inspection Record270 Slope Maintenance Inspection Slope Location Page 2 of 3 CONDITION OF SLOPE Status of Feature Works Needed satis- factory | minor | Major None | Good Condition of impermeable surface Extent of impermeable surface Condition of weepholes Capacity of weepholes Condition of vegetated surface Capacity of surface drainage Condition of U-channels & step channels Condition of catchpits & sandtraps Condition of raking drains Condition of associated culverts & nullahs Condition of artificial support Condition of toe fence/toe barrier Comments Has there been a recent slope failure? Yes/No Has there been any recent erosion? Yes/No Has there been any recent movement? Yes/No Are there any tension cracks at the crest? Yes/No Is there adequate protection against infiltration above the crest? Yes/No Has there been any recent seepage? Yes/No If seepage give details If movements give details :~ Comments Figure 11.3 - Example of Sheet Two of a Maintenance Inspection Recordae Slope Maintenance Inspection Slope Location P. 3 of 3 age ASSOCIATED RETAINING WALLS Moneeaasreseat Minor | Major Have there ever been wall movements? Yes/No Has there been recent wall settlement? Yes/No Has there been recent wall cracking? Yes/No Has there been recent wall titling? Yes/No. Has there been recent wall bulging? Yes/No Is the capacity of the weepholes adequate? Yes/No Are the weepholes clear? Yes/No Are the mortar joints/pointing satisfactory? Yes/No Is vegetation adversely affecting the wall? Yes/No Comments SERVICES & DRAINAGE Are services adversely affecting the slope? Do any services need testing? Have the appropriate authority been informed? GENERAL & COMMENTS Does the slope need upgrading to meet the present risk category? Yes/No] RECOMMENDATIONS Signature : Figure 11.4 - Example of Sheet Three of a Maintenance Inspection Record272 [BLANK PAGE]