Chapter 6 - Geotechnical Table of Contents
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Modeling of Clay Liner Desiccation
Modeling of Clay Liner Desiccation Yafei Zhou1 and R. Kerry Rowe2 Abstract: The potential for the desiccation of clay liner component of composite liners due to temperature field generated by breakdown of organic matter in municipal solid waste landfills is examined using a model proposed by Zhou and Rowe. In these analyses, a set of fully coupled governing equations expressed in terms of displacement, capillary pressure, air pressure, and temperature increase are used, and numerical results are solved by using finite element method with a mass-conservative numerical scheme. The model results are shown to be in encouraging agreement with experimental data for a problem involving heating of a landfill liner. The fully coupled transient fields ͑temperature, horizontal stress change, suction head, and volumetric water content͒ are then examined for two types of composite liner system, one involving a geomembrane over a compacted clay liner ͑CCL͒ and the other involving a geomembrane over a geosynthetic clay liner ͑GCL͒. It is shown that there can be significant water loss and horizontal stress change in both the CCL and GCL liner even with a temperature increase as small as 20°C. The time to reach steady state decreases as boundary temperature increases. Under a 30°C temperature increase, it takes 5 years to reach the steady state water content with a GCL liner but 50 years with a CCL liner. The effects of various parameters, such as hydraulic conductivity and thickness of the liner, on the performance of the liner are discussed. DOI: 10.1061/͑ASCE͒1532-3641͑2005͒5:1͑1͒ CE Database subject headings: Clay liners; Desiccation; Numerical models; Temperature; Unsaturated flow. -
Environmental Geotechnics
ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICS Edited by International Technical Committee No. 5 (ITC5) on Environmental Geotechnics of the International Society of Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE) First Edition: September 2005 Second Edition: June 2006 TC5 Report, June 2006 CONTENTS PREFACE Chapter 1. DESIGN BASICS AND PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Task Force Leader: R. CLARK (United Kingdom) 1.1 Terminology, definitions and units 1.2 Multidisciplinary interactions 1.2.1 General 1.2.2 Terminology 1.2.3 Input of other disciplines into environmental geotechnics 1.2.4 Interaction with regulators 1.2.5 Interaction with non-technical people 1.2.6 Education 1.2.7 Concluding remarks 1.3 Classification and characterization 1.3.1 General 1.3.2 Soil and soil properties 1.3.3 Chemicals and chemical properties 1.3.4 Contaminated land 1.3.5 Geosynthetics 1.3.6 Waste materials 1.4 Risk assessment 1.4.1 Principles and application to environmental geotechnics 1.4.2 Groundwater pollution 1.4.3 Gas migration 1.4.4 Reliability 1.4.5 Further work 1.5 Monitoring 1.5.1 Introduction 1.5.2 Non-intrusive methods 1.5.3 Intrusive Methods 1.5.4 Guidelines for monitoring design 1.5.5 Monitoring performance criteria 1.5.6 Monitoring of landfills 1.5.7 Monitoring of contaminated land (as part of investigations) 1.5.8 Monitoring of Remediation (during treatment and post treatment) 1.5.9 Monitoring of containment barriers 1.5.10 Quality assurance 1.5.11 Concluding remarks i TC5 Report, June 2006 1.6 Lifetime of components 1.6.1 Introduction 1.6.2 Compacted Clay Liners 1.6.3 Bentonite Enhanced Soils 1.6.4 Geosynthetic Clay Liners 1.6.5 Geomembrane Liners 1.6.6 In Ground Cut-off Barriers 1.6.7 Landfill Drainage Layers 1.7 Quality assurance and control 1.7.1 Principles 1.7.2 Quality Assurance Plan(s) 1.7.3 QA Personnel 1.7.4 QC Personnel 1.7.5 QA for Landfill Containment 1.7.6 QA for Contamination Remediation 1.7.7 Final Certificate and Validation Report Chapter 2. -
Division 2 Earthwork
Division 2 Earthwork 2-01 Clearing, Grubbing, and Roadside Cleanup 2-01.1 Description The Contractor shall clear, grub, and clean up those areas staked or described in the Special Provisions. This Work includes protecting from harm all trees, bushes, shrubs, or other objects selected to remain. “Clearing” means removing and disposing of all unwanted material from the surface, such as trees, brush, down timber, or other natural material. “Grubbing” means removing and disposing of all unwanted vegetative matter from underground, such as sod, stumps, roots, buried logs, or other debris. “Roadside cleanup”, whether inside or outside the staked area, means Work done to give the roadside an attractive, finished appearance. “Debris” means all unusable natural material produced by clearing, grubbing, or roadside cleanup. 2-01.2 Disposal of Usable Material and Debris The Contractor shall meet all requirements of state, county, and municipal regulations regarding health, safety, and public welfare in the disposal of all usable material and debris. The Contractor shall dispose of all debris by one or more of the disposal methods described below. 2-01.2(1) Disposal Method No. 1 – Open Burning The open burning of residue resulting from land clearing is restricted by Chapter 173-425 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). No commercial open burning shall be conducted without authorization from the Washington State Department of Ecology or the appropriate local air pollution control authority. All burning operations shall be strictly in accordance with these authorizations. 2-01.2(2) Disposal Method No. 2 – Waste Site Debris shall be hauled to a waste site obtained and provided by the Contractor in accordance with Section 2-03.3(7)C. -
Promoting Geosynthetics Use on Federal Lands Highway Projects
Promoting Geosynthetics Use on Federal Lands Highway Projects Publication No. FHWA-CFL/TD-06-009 December 2006 Central Federal Lands Highway Division 12300 West Dakota Avenue Lakewood, CO 80228 FOREWORD The Federal Lands Highway (FLH) of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) promotes development and deployment of applied research and technology applicable to solving transportation related issues on Federal Lands. The FLH provides technology delivery, innovative solutions, recommended best practices, and related information and knowledge sharing to Federal agencies, Tribal governments, and other offices within the FHWA. The objective of this study was to provide guidance and recommendations on the potential of systematically including geosynthetics in highway construction projects by the FLH and their client agencies. The study included a literature search of existing· design guidelines and published work on a range of applications that use geosynthetics. These included mechanically stabilized earth walls, reinforced soil slopes, base reinforcement, pavements, and various road applications. A survey of personnel from the FLH and its client agencies was performed to determine the current level of geosynthetic use in their practice. Based on the literature review and survey results, recommendations for possible wider use of geosynthetics in the FLH projects are made and prioritized. These include updates to current geosynthetic specifications, the offering of training programs, development of analysis tools that focus on applications of interest to the FLH, and further studies to promote the improvement of nascent or existin esign methods. Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. -
Green Terramesh Rock Fall Protection Bund
Double Twist Mesh Project: 112 Bridle Path Road Date: May 2016 Client: Private Residence, Heathcote Valley Designer: Engeo Consulting Ltd Contractor: Higgins Contractors Location: Christchurch Green Terramesh Rock Fall Protection Bund The 22 February 2010 Christchurch earthquake triggered numerous rock falls causing damage to homes built close to cliffs. Many of those that survived were red zoned by the Government due of the risk of further rock fall or cliff collapse. The area around Heathcote Valley and in particular Bridle Path road was identified as an area of high risk requiring some form of rock fall protection structure to be constructed in order to protect dwellings from rock fall in the event of any further earthquakes. Geofabrics offers a range of solutions that includes certified catch fences and Green Terramesh rockfall embankments. A rockfall embankment was the preferred solution for this site which has the potential to experience multiple rock fall events. The use of Green Site Preparation Terramesh allows the embankment slopes to be steepened and the footprint reduced to form a stable and robust bund having high energy absorption characteristics. The structure is typically filled with compacted granular material or engineered soil fill with horizontal soil reinforcement (geogrid or DT mesh) inclusions. The front face can either be vegetated or finished with a rock veneer. Rockfall embankments have undergone extensive full scale testing in Europe. Actual rock impacts in excess of 5000kJ into Green Terramesh rockfall embankments located in Northern Italy have been back-analysed and the design methodology verified using numerical modelling (FEM) techniques. This research has resulted in the development of design charts to provide designers with a Bund Design simplified design method based on rock penetration depth. -
Design and Construction of Lining System for a Coke
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF LINING SYSTEM FOR A COKE LANDFILL Jimmy Thomas and Sam Bhat, Titan Environmental Containment Limited, Manitoba, Canada. ABSTRACT This paper presents the salient features of the design and construction of the lining system for a coke landfill, with a maximum height of 30 m, which was to be constructed on foundation strata which comprised a 5.0 – 9.0 m thick layer coke fill underlain by clay with thickness of up to 30 m. The bottom lining system comprises a geosynthetic clay liner, an HDPE geomembrane and a geocomposite leachate collection system. The effects of ground conditions on the integrity of the bottom lining system were evaluated and excessive localized differential settlements was identified as the significant risk. Hence it was decided to provide a reinforced soil pad below the lining system, to smoothen any abrupt changes in settlement profile. The final design for the reinforced soil pad included three reinforcement layers – a polypropylene biaxial geogrid- nonwoven composite at the bottom and two layers of polypropylene biaxial geogrid. 1. INTRODUCTION The project comprised the design and construction of the bottom lining system for a coke storage/disposal facility. The coke is a predominantly carbonaceous granular material which is a byproduct of the process of upgrading bitumen recovered from oil sands. In order to prevent any contamination of the soil and ground water, it was required to provide a lining system comprising an impervious barrier and a leachate collection system at the base of the landfill. The ground at the site comprised a layer of coke fill with variable thickness and a deep deposit of clay. -
Section 31 22 13 ‐ Site Grading
University of Houston Master Construction Specifications Insert Project Name SECTION 31 22 13 ‐ SITE GRADING PART 1 ‐ GENERAL 1.1 SCOPE OF WORK A. This Section pertains to the earthwork generally consisting of excavation, filling, backfilling and subgrade preparation as required for construction of site retaining walls/structures, slab on grade walks, pavement surfaces, landscaped areas and the general shaping of the site as shown, described or reasonably inferred on the drawings. B. Subsurface data is available from the *Owner. Contractor is urged to carefully analyze the site conditions. C. This section excludes work necessary for building pad preparations. Work within the building footprint and surrounding 5 feet shall be accomplished under technical specification 31 23 00 Excavation and Fill prepared by *STRUCTURAL ENGINEER]. D. Construction Means, Methods, Techniques, Sequences and Procedures: 1. The Contractor is solely responsible for, and has sole control over, construction means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures, and for coordinating all portions of the Work. 2. Shoring that is required to complete the Work, is considered a method or technique and is the sole responsibility of the Contractor. If a regulatory agency requires a licensed engineer to design, approve or provide drawings for shoring, then it is the sole responsibility of the Contractor to engage the services of a qualified Engineer for shoring design services. 1.2 RELATED WORK SPECIFIED ELSEWHERE A. Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including A‐procurement and Contracting Requirements, Division 00 and Division 01 apply to this section. B. Section 31 11 00 Clearing and Grubbing C. Section 31 23 33 Trenching, Backfilling and Compaction D. -
Design of Riprap Revetment HEC 11 Metric Version
Design of Riprap Revetment HEC 11 Metric Version Welcome to HEC 11-Design of Riprap Revetment. Table of Contents Preface Tech Doc U.S. - SI Conversions DISCLAIMER: During the editing of this manual for conversion to an electronic format, the intent has been to convert the publication to the metric system while keeping the document as close to the original as possible. The document has undergone editorial update during the conversion process. Archived Table of Contents for HEC 11-Design of Riprap Revetment (Metric) List of Figures List of Tables List of Charts & Forms List of Equations Cover Page : HEC 11-Design of Riprap Revetment (Metric) Chapter 1 : HEC 11 Introduction 1.1 Scope 1.2 Recognition of Erosion Potential 1.3 Erosion Mechanisms and Riprap Failure Modes Chapter 2 : HEC 11 Revetment Types 2.1 Riprap 2.1.1 Rock Riprap 2.1.2 Rubble Riprap 2.2 Wire-Enclosed Rock 2.3 Pre-Cast Concrete Block 2.4 Grouted Rock 2.5 Paved Lining Chapter 3 : HEC 11 Design Concepts 3.1 Design Discharge 3.2 Flow Types 3.3 Section Geometry 3.4 Flow in Channel Bends 3.5 Flow Resistance 3.6 Extent of Protection 3.6.1 Longitudinal Extent 3.6.2 Vertical Extent 3.6.2.1 Design Height 3.6.2.2 Toe Depth Chapter 4 : HEC 11 Design Guidelines for Rock Riprap 4.1 Rock Size Archived 4.1.1 Particle Erosion 4.1.1.1 Design Relationship 4.1.1.2 Application 4.1.2 Wave Erosion 4.1.3 Ice Damage 4.2 Rock Gradation 4.3 Layer Thickness 4.4 Filter Design 4.4.1 Granular Filters 4.4.2 Fabric Filters 4.5 Material Quality 4.6 Edge Treatment 4.7 Construction Chapter 5 : HEC 11 Rock -
EPA's Guide for Industrial Waste Management
Guide for Industrial Waste Management Protecting Land Ground Water Surface Water Air Building Partnerships Introduction EPA’s Guide for Industrial Waste Management Introduction Welcome to EPA’s Guide for Industrial Waste Management. The pur- pose of the Guide is to provide facility managers, state and tribal regulators, and the interested public with recommendations and tools to better address the management of land-disposed, non-haz- ardous industrial wastes. The Guide can help facility managers make environmentally responsible decisions while working in partnership with state and tribal regulators and the public. It can serve as a handy implementation reference tool for regulators to complement existing programs and help address any gaps. The Guide can also help the public become more informed and more knowledgeable in addressing waste management issues in the community. In the Guide, you will find: • Considerations for siting industrial waste management units • Methods for characterizing waste constituents • Fact sheets and Web sites with information about individual waste constituents • Tools to assess risks that might be posed by the wastes • Principles for building stakeholder partnerships • Opportunities for waste minimization • Guidelines for safe unit design • Procedures for monitoring surface water, air, and ground water • Recommendations for closure and post-closure care Each year, approximately 7.6 billion tons of industrial solid waste are generated and disposed of at a broad spectrum of American industrial facilities. State, tribal, and some local governments have regulatory responsibility for ensuring proper management of these wastes, and their pro- grams vary considerably. In an effort to establish a common set of industrial waste management guidelines, EPA and state and tribal representatives came together in a partnership and developed the framework for this voluntary Guide. -
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Geotechnical Engineering Report Subgrade Evaluation and Pavement Thickness Design Eagle Meadow Filing 2A SE of Eagle Meadow Drive and Golden Eagle Drive City of Dacono, Colorado February 26, 2016 Terracon Project No. 22165009 Prepared for: CivilArts 1500 Kansas Avenue, Suite 2-E Longmont, Colorado 80501 Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. 1242 Bramwood Place Longmont, Colorado 80501 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. i INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 1 Project Description .................................................................................................. 1 Site Location and Description ................................................................................. 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 3 Typical Profile ......................................................................................................... 3 Laboratory Testing .................................................................................................. 3 Groundwater ........................................................................................................... 5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ..................................... -
Erosion & Sediment: ES-23
ACTIVITY: Riprap ES – 23 Targeted Constituents Significant Benefit Partial Benefit Low or Unknown Benefit Sediment Heavy Metals Floatable Materials Oxygen Demanding Substances Nutrients Toxic Materials Oil & Grease Bacteria & Viruses Construction Wastes Description Riprap is the controlled placement of large rock material that will resist movement and erosion. Riprap is used to protect culvert inlets and outlets, streambanks, drainage channels, slopes, or other areas subject to erosion by stormwater erosion. This practice will significantly reduce erosion and sediment movement. Suitable Along a stream or within drainage channels, as a stable lining resistant to erosion. Applications On shorefronts and riverfronts, or other areas subject to wave action. Around culvert outlets and inlets to prevent scour and undercutting. In channels where infiltration is desirable, but velocities are too excessive for vegetative or geotextile lining. On slopes and areas where conditions may not allow vegetation to grow. Approach Riprap may be used in many different locations and many different ways. It is very resistant to erosion and has relatively few drawbacks when installed correctly. Riprap does not prevent erosion or sedimentation from occurring, but it can help to create a stable channel lining and to reduce velocities. In the Knoxville area, limestone rock is readily available and relatively inexpensive. Other types of riprap material can also include cement bags (with sand/aggregate added) or concrete blocks, as described in TDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (reference 172) Stone riprap can either be placed as graded machine riprap (layers that can be placed by machine and then compacted) or as rubble (large pieces of rock are placed by hand). -
Landslide Study
Department of Planning and Development Seattle Landslide Study TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PREFACE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose 1.2 Scope of Services 1.3 Report Organization 1.4 Authorization 1.5 Limitations PART 1. LANDSLIDE INVENTORY AND ANALYSES 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 2.1 Topography 2.2 Stratigraphy 2.2.1 Tertiary Bedrock 2.2.2 Pre-Vashon Deposits 2.2.3 Vashon Glacial Deposits 2.2.4 Holocene Deposits 2.3 Groundwater and Wet Weather 3.0 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Data Sources 3.2 Data Description 3.2.1 Landslide Identification 3.2.2 Landslide Characteristics 3.2.3 Stratigraphy (Geology) 3.2.4 Landslide Trigger Mechanisms 3.2.5 Roads and Public Utility Impact 3.2.6 Damage and Repair (Mitigation) 3.3 Data Processing 4.0 LANDSLIDES 4.1 Landslide Types 4.1.1 High Bluff Peeloff 4.1.2 Groundwater Blowout 4.1.3 Deep-Seated Landslides 4.1.4 Shallow Colluvial (Skin Slide) 4.2 Timing of Landslides 4.3 Landslide Areas 4.4 Causes of Landslides 4.5 Potential Slide and Steep Slope Areas PART 2. GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATIONS 5.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 5.1 Purpose of Geotechnical Evaluations 5.2 Scope of Geotechnical Evaluations 6.0 TYPICAL IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO LANDSLIDE TYPE 6.1 Geologic Conditions that Contribute to Landsliding and Instability 6.2 Typical Approaches to Improve Stability 6.3 High Bluff Peeloff Landslides 6.4 Groundwater Blowout Landslides 6.5 Deep-Seated Landslides 6.6 Shallow Colluvial Landslides 7.0 DETAILS REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS 7.1 Surface Water Improvements 7.1.1 Tightlines 7.1.2 Surface Water Systems - Maintenance