DOCSLIB.ORG

Barge Impact Testing of the St. George Island Causeway Bridge Phase III : Physical Testing and Data Interpretation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Barge Impact Testing of the St. George Island Causeway Bridge Phase III : Physical Testing and Data Interpretation University of Florida Civil and Coastal Engineering Structures Research Report 2006/26868 Final Report March 2006 Barge Impact Testing of the St. George Island Causeway Bridge Phase III : Physical Testing and Data Interpretation Principal investigators: Gary R. Consolazio, Ph.D. Ronald A. Cook, Ph.D., P.E. Michael C. McVay, Ph.D. Graduate research assistants: David Cowan Alex Biggs Long Bui Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering University of Florida P.O. Box 116580 Gainesville, Florida 32611 Sponsor: Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Henry T. Bollmann, P.E. – Project manager University of Florida University of Florida Civil and Coastal Engineering Contract: UF Project No. 00026868 (4504961) FDOT Contract No. BC-354 RPWO 76 DISCLAIMER The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the State of Florida Department of Transportation. ii Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. BC-354 RPWO-76 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date March 2006 Barge Impact Testing of the St. George Island Causeway Bridge 6. Performing Organization Code Phase III : Physical Testing and Data Interpretation 8. Performing Organization Report No. 7. Author(s) G. R. Consolazio, R. A. Cook, M.C. McVay 2006/26868 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) University of Florida Department of Civil & Coastal Engineering 11. Contract or Grant No. P.O. Box 116580 BC-354 RPWO-76 Gainesville, FL 32611-6580 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Florida Department of Transportation Final Report Research Management Center 605 Suwannee Street, MS 30 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Tallahassee, FL 32301-8064 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract This report describes a research study undertaken to quantify and characterize impact loads that are imparted to bridge piers during barge- pier collision events. Because bridges that span over navigable waterways are at risk for such collisions, they must be designed to successfully resist potential barge impact loads. However, few experimental studies have ever been conducted to quantify the magnitude or dynamic nature of such loads. Barge-impact provisions included in the current AASHTO bridge design specifications are based on limited experimental data that were generated using reduced scale (~1:5) pendulum hammer impact tests. The study described in this report utilized a combination of full-scale experimental barge impact testing and state-of-the-art numerical analysis to quantify impact loads, pier responses, and soil responses during barge-pier collisions. Specifically, in April 2004, a series of fifteen full-scale experimental barge impact tests were conducted on the old—now replaced and demolished—St. George Island Causeway Bridge (Bryant Patton Bridge). During each impact test, instrumentation (sensor arrays) and high-speed data acquisition systems were used to directly quantify dynamic impact loads and the resulting structure, soil, and barge responses. This report describes in detail the experimental test procedures that were employed and presents the resultant collected data. To compliment the physical testing, numerical finite element analysis (FEA) techniques were also employed to aid in interpretation of experimental test data. Comparisons of measured experimental data to FEA results substantiated the validity of the experimental data, and furthermore, provided additional insights into the nature of pier response to barge impact loading. Comparisons between experimentally measured data, analytically predicted data, and the AASHTO bridge design provisions are also presented in this report and recommendations are given with regard to the development of improved barge impact design provisions. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Vessel, barge, impact, collision, bridge pier, experimental testing, finite element analysis, soil-structure interaction, bridge design No restrictions. specifications 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 240 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72). Reproduction of completed page authorized iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for providing the funding that made this research project possible. The authors are also pleased to acknowledge and thank a significant number of individuals, agencies, and companies that contributed suggestions, assistance, and materials toward the successful execution of this project. FDOT Structures Research Laboratory personnel (Marc Ansley, David Allen, Frank Cobb, Steve Eudy, Tony Johnston, Paul Tighe) provided expertise and suggestions regarding instrumentation and data acquisition systems; fabricated, tested, and transported load- measurement impact blocks; provided a snooper truck to facilitate field installation of sensors; performed field extraction of concrete core samples; and made numerous additional contributions. Boh Bros. Construction Co. (in particular, Al Flettrich, Sonny Henley, and Scott Gros) of Baton Rouge, Louisiana provided logistical expertise, insight, and advice as well as a host of physical services (push-boat operation, crane operation, barge rental, etc.) that were critically important to the successful execution of this project. The contributions of both the FDOT Structures Research Laboratory and Boh Bros. Construction are gratefully acknowledged. The authors wish to thank Henry Bollmann (FDOT) for initiating—jointly with Marc Ansley—the concept that became this project; providing valuable insights and suggestions, particularly from the point of view of an experienced bridge designer; and carefully reviewing the research findings. The authors thank Benjamin Lehr for important contributions made during an earlier research project that eventually led to the present project. The authors thank the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for contributing valuable suggestions regarding instrumentation strategies for full-scale barge impact testing (Robert Patev and Bruce Barker) and discussions of barge impact analysis and design practices (Dr. Robert Ebeling). Donations of welded wire fabric sheets by Ivy Steel and Wire of Jacksonville, Florida, are gratefully acknowledged. Finally, the authors thank Chris Ferraro (University of Florida) for conducting material tests on concrete core samples. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Motivation and research need ....................................................................................................1 1.3 Objectives ..................................................................................................................................4 1.4 Scope of work ............................................................................................................................6 CHAPTER 2 : BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................7 2.1 Vessel-bridge collision incidents ...............................................................................................7 2.2 Review of experimental vessel impact tests ..............................................................................9 2.3 Design of bridges according to the AASHTO barge impact provisions..................................13 CHAPTER 3 : TEST SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................17 3.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................17 3.2 Descriptions of instrumented piers ..........................................................................................21 3.3 Description of bridge superstructure........................................................................................24 3.4 Structural material properties...................................................................................................25 3.5 Soil conditions at Pier-1 and Pier-3 .........................................................................................25 CHAPTER 4 : BARGE AND PUSH BOAT DESCRIPTIONS....................................................28 4.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................28 4.2 Description of the test barge ....................................................................................................28 4.3 Descriptions of pushboats........................................................................................................29 4.4 Barge payload conditions.........................................................................................................29 4.5 Barge draft conditions and weight determination....................................................................33 4.6 Measurement of inelastic barge deformation (pre- and post-test) ...........................................35 CHAPTER 5 : TEST PROGRAM OVERVIEW...........................................................................38 5.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................38
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fen Causeway
    Fen Causeway An important vehicular route which crosses the attractive rural spaces of Coe Fen and Sheep’s Green with views back towards the city. Fen Causeway was built in as one of the main routes the 1920s to link Newnham around Cambridge, but the village with Trumpington negative effect of this traffic Road and to provide access is mitigated by the pastural to the south of the city. Its setting and the views of the construction was the subject River Cam with the historic of fierce local opposition city centre beyond. at the time. The road was built on the line of Coe Fen Lane, which joined the footpaths that crossed Coe Fen and Sheep’s Green. Today the road is very busy Fen Causeway SIGNIFICANCE - SIGNIFICANT General Overview At its eastern end Fen Causeway passes between the large properties of the Leys School to the south and the Royal Cambridge Hotel and University Department of Engineering to the north. Although the hotel is built up against the pavement, the car parks to the rear provide a large open space, whilst the school and engineering department stand back from the road behind high walls. The setback makes the street a light space, although the high buildings to either side channel views along the street in both directions. The grounds on either side provide greenery that softens the streetscene. The Royal Cambridge Hotel North House of the Leys School provides architectural interest as part of the late Victorian Methodist School complex, built in red brick with exuberant stone and brick detailing which provides a strong vertical emphasis.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Green Colored Bicycle Lanes in Florida
    Florida Department of Transportation Evaluation of Green Colored Bicycle Lanes in Florida FDOT Office State Materials Office Report Number FL/DOT/SMO 17-581 Authors Edward Offei Guangming Wang Charles Holzschuher Date of Publication April 2017 Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ii List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1 OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................... 3 TEST EQUIPMENT ....................................................................................................................... 4 DYNAMIC FRICTION TESTER (DFT) ................................................................................... 4 CIRCULAR TRACK METER (CTM) ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • South Palo Alto Tunnel with At-Grade Freight
    RAIL FACT SHEETS South Palo Alto Tunnel with At-Grade Freight About the Tunnel with At-Grade Freight For the tunnel alternative, the railroad tracks will be lowered in a trench south of Oregon Expressway to approximately Loma Verde Avenue. The twin bore tunnel will begin near Loma Verde Avenue and extend to just south of Charleston Road. The railroad tracks will then be raised in trench to approximately Ferne Avenue. The new electrified southbound railroad tracks will be built at the same horizontal location as the existing railroad track, however, the northbound track will be moved to the east within the limits of the tunnel to accommodate the spacing required between the twin bores. The railroad tracks in the trench and tunnel will carry only passenger trains. The freight trains will remain at-grade. The roadways at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road remain at their existing grade and will have a similar configuration that exists today with the addition of Class II buffered bike lanes on Charleston Road. This will require expanding the width of the road to maintain bike lanes through the overpass of the railroad. By the numbers Neighborhood Considerations • Diameter of twin bores is 30 feet. • Alma Street will permanently be reduced to one lane • Railroad track is designed for 110 mph. in each direction from south of Oregon Expressway to Ventura Avenue and from Charleston Road to Ferne • Meadow Drive and Charleston Road are Avenue. designed for 25 mph. • The train tracks will be approximately 70 feet below the Proposed Ground Level View - Looking Southwest • Maximum grade on railroad is 2%.
    [Show full text]
  • Harvesting Peat from the Bog to Your Operation
    MEDIA & FERTILIZER Harvesting Peat from the Bog to your Operation Figure 1. A virgin sphagnum bog in Quebec, Canada. Learn what’s involved in harvesting, packaging and shipping peat for horticulture production. The Canadian Peat Moss Industry By Neil Mattson, Bill Miller and Jeff Bishop • In 1999, 1.2 million metric tons of peat (10 million cubic meters) was harvested in Canada. n the 1960s, professors at Cornell University Harvesting and Processing were among the fi rst to advocate the use of peat When a company wants to open a new peat • It is estimated that 70 million metric tons in their soilless Peat-Lite mixes for greenhouse bog for harvesting, surveys are conducted to of peat accumulates annually in Canada, so production. Several properties of peat moss determine if a site contains horticulture grade current harvesting represents 1.7 percent Ihave led to its widespread adoption by the industry sphagnum. Th e peat should have a depth of at of annual accumulation. Thus, peat is over the intervening decades; these include: high least 2 meters, as it is desirable that a bog be able accumulating some 60 times faster than water holding and cation exchange capacity, lack to be harvested for many years (Figure 2). Ditches it is being harvested. of residual herbicides and weed seeds compared are built to drain surface water and access roads • Canada is estimated to contain 280 mil- to soil and composts, and low incidence of root- lion acres of peat land. In contrast, the peat borne pathogens. industry harvests on ca. 42,000 acres.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 9. SITE DEVELOPMENT Article 1. Grading, Excavation and Filling Sec
    Walnut Creek Municipal Code TITLE 9. BUILDING REGULATIONS CHAPTER 9. SITE DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 9. SITE DEVELOPMENT Article 1. Grading, Excavation and Filling Sec. 9-9.01. Purpose. It is the declared intent of the City of Walnut Creek to promote the conservation of natural resources, including the natural beauties of the land, streams and water sheds, hills and vegetation, and as described in Sec. 10-2.1301 of the Walnut Creek Municipal Code and Government Code §65560(b) (1) to protect the health and safety, including the reduction or elimination of the hazards of earth slides, mud flows, rock falls, undue settlement, erosion, siltation and flooding, or other special conditions as described in Government Code §65560(b) (4) by minimizing the adverse effects of grading, cut and fill operations, water runoff and soil erosion. Therefore, the following regulatory provisions of this chapter are hereby adopted for the purpose of stringent control of all aspects of grading operations. (§1, Ord. 1193, eff. December 26, 1973) Sec. 9-9.02. Permits Required. No person shall do any grading without first having obtained a grading permit from the City except for the following: a. An excavation below finished grade for basements and footings of a building, retaining wall, swimming pool or other structure authorized by a valid building permit. This statement shall not exempt from permit requirements any fill made with the material from such excavation nor exempt any excavation having an unsupported height greater than five feet after the completion of such structure; b. Cemetery graves; c. Refuse disposal sites controlled by other regulations; d.
    [Show full text]
  • Slope Stabilization and Repair Solutions for Local Government Engineers
    Slope Stabilization and Repair Solutions for Local Government Engineers David Saftner, Principal Investigator Department of Civil Engineering University of Minnesota Duluth June 2017 Research Project Final Report 2017-17 • mndot.gov/research To request this document in an alternative format, such as braille or large print, call 651-366-4718 or 1- 800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota) or email your request to [email protected]. Please request at least one week in advance. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipients Accession No. MN/RC 2017-17 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Slope Stabilization and Repair Solutions for Local Government June 2017 Engineers 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. David Saftner, Carlos Carranza-Torres, and Mitchell Nelson 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. Department of Civil Engineering CTS #2016011 University of Minnesota Duluth 11. Contract (C) or Grant (G) No. 1405 University Dr. (c) 99008 (wo) 190 Duluth, MN 55812 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Minnesota Local Road Research Board Final Report Minnesota Department of Transportation Research Services & Library 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 330 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899 15. Supplementary Notes http:// mndot.gov/research/reports/2017/201717.pdf 16. Abstract (Limit: 250 words) The purpose of this project is to create a user-friendly guide focusing on locally maintained slopes requiring reoccurring maintenance in Minnesota. This study addresses the need to provide a consistent, logical approach to slope stabilization that is founded in geotechnical research and experience and applies to common slope failures.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Steep Slopes
    FACT SHEET : 12 FACT SHEET: 12 Steep Slopes iTRaC is the Nashua Regional Steep slopes are legally defined as hillsides Figure 1: Example of a 15% slope Planning having a 15 foot, or greater, vertical rise Commission’s over 100 feet of horizontal run, or 15% slope 15% slope new approach 75’ to community (Figure 1). They are often undesirable ar- planning that eas for development due to the difficulty focuses on 500’ integrating of building on steep grades. On the other transportation, hand, these slopes can provide wildlife land use and environmental habitat, recreational opportunities, and Steep slopes have a ≥15 ft vertical rise over a planning. The scenic views, preserving the unique and 100 ft horizontal run, or a 15% slope. program was developed to culturally valuable environmental qualities assist that people treasure in New Hampshire. communities in dealing with the challenges of growth in a Difficulties Developing Steep Slopes coordinated Strategies for Developing Steep Slopes way that sustains Erosion ~ The loss of vegetation and Vegetation can stabilize soil and prevent erosion community disruption of natural drainage patterns on steep slopes by binding loose soil with roots character and brought about by development on a sense of and slowing the passage of water down the place. steep slopes can cause erosion problems slope. Replanting disturbed locations after con- leading to potential flooding, stream struction with a combination of trees, shrubs, sedimentation, and slope instability. and groundcover is key. Infrastructure ~ Providing infrastructure to hillside development can be expensive Berms are long earthen mounds running per- to engineer and construct.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Runoff from Bridges Final Report to Joint Legislation Transportation Oversight Committee in Fulfillment of Session Law 2008‐107
    Stormwater Runoff from Bridges Final Report to Joint Legislation Transportation Oversight Committee In Fulfillment of Session Law 2008‐107 Prepared by: URS Corporation – North Carolina 1600 Perimeter Park Drive Suite 400 Morrisville, NC 27560 Prepared for: NC Department of Transportation Hydraulics Unit 1590 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699‐1590 919.707.6700 July 2010 (May 2012) Cover Photos: C. dubia photo provided by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy of University of California Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program. All other photos by authors. This page intentionally left blank Stormwater Runoff from Bridges Final Report Revision History Date Description May 9, 2012 Errors in the calculation of unit event loads, annual loading rates, and runoff volumes were corrected. The following updates associated with the corrections were incorporated: Pages 4‐9 through 4‐16 in section 4 were updated, including all text and tables: o Table 4.2‐2 on pages 4‐10 through 4‐13 was updated with corrected median unit event loads and average unit annual loading rates. o Table 4.2‐3 on page 4‐14 was updated with corrected annual loading rate values. o Table 4.2‐4 on page 4‐16 was updated with corrected annual loading rate values. All tables in Appendix 3‐G (Tables 3‐G.1 to 3‐G.15) were updated with corrected runoff volume values. This page intentionally left blank Stormwater Runoff from Bridges Final Report Table of Contents Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................................ES-1
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Overview and History of the Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate
    Chapter 1 Overview and History of the Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate Industry April 2007 Expanded Shale, Clay & Slate Institute (ESCSI) 2225 E. Murray Holladay Rd, Suite 102 Salt Lake City, Utah 84117 (801) 272-7070 Fax: (801) 272-3377 [email protected] www.escsi.org CHAPTER 1 1.1 Introduction 1.2 How it started 1.3 Beginnings of the Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate (ESCS) Industry 1.4 What is Rotary Kiln Produced ESCS Lightweight Aggregate? 1.5 What is Lightweight Concrete? 1.6 Marine Structures The Story of the Selma Powell River Concrete Ships Concrete Ships of World War II (1940-1947) Braddock Gated Dam Off Shore Platforms 1.7 First Building Using Structural Lightweight Concrete 1.8 Growth of the ESCS Industry 1.9 Lightweight Concrete Masonry Units Advantages of Lightweight Concrete Masonry Units 1.10 High Rise Building Parking Structures 1.11 Precast-Prestressed Lightweight Concrete 1.12 Thin Shell Construction 1.13 Resistance to Nuclear Blast 1.14 Design Flexibility 1.15 Floor and Roof Fill 1.16 Bridges 1.17 Horticulture Applications 1.18 Asphalt Surface Treatment and Hotmix Applications 1.19 A World of Uses – Detailed List of Applications SmartWall® High Performance Concrete Masonry Asphalt Pavement (Rural, City and Freeway) Structural Concrete (Including high performance) Geotechnical Horticulture Applications Specialty Concrete Miscellaneous Appendix 1A ESCSI Information Sheet #7600 “Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate- A World of Applications…Worldwide 1-1 1.1 Introduction The purpose of this reference manual (RM) is to provide information on the practical application of expanded shale, clay and slate (ESCS) lightweight aggregates.
    [Show full text]
  • Emergency Operations Plan Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness January 2019 Review and Updated January 2019
    St. Tammany Parish Emergency Operations Plan Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness January 2019 Review and Updated January 2019 ST. TAMMANY PARISH TABLE OF CONTENTS EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Table of Contents Promulgation Statement ....................................................................................................... viii Concurrence ............................................................................................................................ x Foreword ............................................................................................................................... xix Record of Changes ................................................................................................................. xxi Record of Distribution .......................................................................................................... xxiii Basic Plan ................................................................................................................................ 1 I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE .......................................................................................................... 1 II. SITUATION AND ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................... 2 III. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS ................................................................................................... 4 IV. ORGANIZATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES .................................................... 5 V. DIRECTION AND CONTROL
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamentals of Site Grading Design
    188.pdf A SunCam online continuing education course Fundamentals of Site Grading Design by Joshua A. Tiner, P.E. 188.pdf Fundamentals of Site Grading A SunCam online continuing education course Table of Contents A. Introduction B. Basics • Background: • Existing Conditions: • Contour Lines: • Spot Elevations / Spot Grades: • Other Standard Annotations: • Slope • Plan Setup • Limit of Disturbance / Transition between Existing and New Grades • The Inverse Slope/Contour Calculation Method C. Design Parameters and Other Limitations • Design Parameters • Positive Drainage • Rules of Thumb o Maximum Access Drive Slope: 8% o Maximum Parking Lot Slope: 5% o Maximum Slope in Maintainable Grassed Landscaped Areas 3:1 o Maximum Slope in Stabilized Landscaped Areas 2:1 o Slopes exceeding 2:1 o Minimum Slope of Asphalt: 1.5% o Minimum Slope of Concrete: 0.75% o Minimum Slope of Concrete Curb: 0.75% o Loading Dock grading: 2.0% for 60’ • ADA Requirements • Cut-Fill Analysis • Rock Ledge walls D. Other Grading Features • Berms • Swales • Ridge Lines • Retaining Walls E. Problem Areas and Other Locations of Importance • Landscaped Islands and Peninsulas • ADA Parking Spaces • Longitudinal Islands with Sidewalks • Flush Ramps • Drainage Outfall Location • Setting the Finished Floor • Property Line grading F. Summary and Conclusion www.SunCam.com Copyright 2014 Joshua A. Tiner, P.E. Page 2 of 24 188.pdf Fundamentals of Site Grading A SunCam online continuing education course A. Introduction This course is developed to identify the fundamentals of site grading design to those who are not experienced with site grading design, as well as a refresher to anyone who has worked in Civil Engineering and/or Land Development.
    [Show full text]