Small Dams and Weirs in Earth and Gabion Materials Agl/Misc/32/2001
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Sloping and Benching Systems
Trenching and Excavation Operations SLOPING AND BENCHING SYSTEMS OBJECTIVES Upon the completion of this section, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the difference between maximum allowable slope and actual slope. 2. Observe how the angle of various sloped systems varies with soil type. 3. Evaluate layered systems to determine the proper trench slope. 4. Illustrate how shield systems and sloping systems interface in combination systems. ©HMTRI 2000 Page 42 Trenching REV1 Trenching and Excavation Operations SLOPING SYSTEMS If enough surface room is available, sloping or benching the trench walls will offer excellent protection without any additional equipment. Cutting the slope of the excavation back to its prescribed angle will allow the forces of cohesion (if present) and internal friction to hold the soil together and keep it from flowing downs the face of the trench. The soil type primarily determines the excavation angle. Sloping a method of protecting employees from caveins by excavating to form sides of an excavation that are inclined away from the excavations so as to prevent caveins. In practice, it may be difficult to accurately determine these sloping angles. Most of the time, the depth of the trench is known or can easily be determined. Based on the vertical depth, the amount of cutback on each side of the trench can be calculated. A formula to calculate these cutback distances will be included with each slope diagram. NOTE: Remember, the beginning of the cutback distance begins at the toe of the slope, not the center of the trench. Accordingly, the cutback distance will be the same regardless of how wide the trench is at the bottom. -
Division 31: Earthworks
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT – DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION EDITION: APRIL 29, 2020 4202 E. FOWLER AVENUE, OPM 100 | TAMPA, FLORIDA 33620-7550 PHONE: (813) 974-2845 | WEBSITE: usf.edu/fm-dc DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES DIVISION 31 EARTHWORKS DIVISION 31 EARTHWORK SECTION 31 05 00 EARTHWORK ............................................................................................................ 2 SECTION 31 10 00 SITE CLEARING ........................................................................................................ 5 SECTION 31 60 00 FOUNDATION ............................................................................................................ 6 DIVISION 31 EARTHWORKS PAGE 1 OF 7 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES SECTION 31 05 00 EARTHWORK 1.1 SITE GRADING A. Rough Grading: Slopes shall not be steeper than one (1) vertical to five (5) horizontal in general open lawn and other grassed areas. Steeper slopes will be permitted only on a case-by-case basis where special need warrants. Tops and bottoms of banks and other break points shall be rounded to provide smooth and graceful transitions. In areas of walks without ramps, slopes shall not be steeper than one (1) vertical to twenty (20) horizontal. Ensure ramped areas comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) and Florida Accessibility Code, and meet the intent of the FBC, Chapter 468. B. Finish Grading: This operation shall consist of the final dressing to provide a uniform layer of the topsoil and/or nutrients required -
Water Well Drilling for the Prospective Owner
WATER WELL DRILLING FOR THE PROSPECTIVE WELL OWNER (INDIVIDUAL, DOMESTIC USE) WATER WELL DRILLING FOR THE PROSPECTIVE WELL OWNER (INDIVIDUAL, DOMESTIC USE) This pamphlet was compiled by the Board of Water Well Contractors primarily to assist prospective owners of non-public wells. While much of the information is also useful for community, multi-family, or public water supply wells; there are additional considerations, not discussed in this publication, that need to be addressed. If you are the current or prospective owner of a community, multi- family, or public water supply well; please contact the Dept. of Environmental Quality, Public Water Supply Division for assistance. Contact information can be found at the end of this publication. Revised 2007 How Much Water Do I Need? You will need a dependable water supply for your present and future uses. An average household uses approximately 200-400 gallons of water per day. For a family of four, this means that a domestic well should provide a dependable yield of 10 to 25 gallons per minute (gpm) to adequately supply all needs, including lawn and garden watering. Much smaller yields may be acceptable, if adequate storage tanks are used. Most mortgage companies require a well yield of at least 5 gpm. More specific information is available from county sanitarians, engineering firms, water well contractors, or pump installers. Before you have your well drilled, find out from a local drilling contractor, the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC), or the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (MBMG) how much water can be produced from the aquifers in your area, the chemical quality of that water, and the depth to the water supply. -
Item Unit of Specification Description Number
ITEM UNIT OF SPECIFICATION DESCRIPTION NUMBER MEASURE YEAR REFERENCE ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.00 CAL DAY 08 SURVEILLANCE OF TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.04 DAY 08 ENDANGERED SPECIES DAILY SURVEYOR ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.06 BARR DAY 08 VERTICAL PANELS ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.08 BARR DAY 08 422.00 BARRICADE, TYPE II ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.10 BARR DAY 08 422.00 BARRICADE, TYPE III ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.20 EACH 08 BARRICADE, TYPE III ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.30 LIGHT DAY 08 422.00 TYPE B HIGH INTENSITY WARNING LIGHT ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.45 BARR DAY 08 REFLECTORIZED PLASTIC DRUM ------- -
Well Foundation Is the Most Commonly Adopted Foundation for Major Bridges in India
Well foundation is the most commonly adopted foundation for major bridges in India. Since then many major bridges across wide rivers have been founded on wells. Well foundation is preferable to pile foundation when foundation has to resist large lateral forces. The construction principles of well foundation are similar to the conventional wells sunk for underground water. But relatively rigid and engineering behaviour. Well foundations have been used in India for centuries. The famous Taj Mahal at Agra stands on well foundation. To know the construction of well foundation. To know the different types and shapes of well foundations. To know which type of well foundation is suitable for different types of soil strata. Wells have different shapes and accordingly they are named as:- 1. Circular well, 2. Double D well, 3. Twin circular well, 4. Double octagonal well, 5. Rectangular well. . Open caisson or well Well Box Caisson Pneumatic Caisson Open caisson or well: The top and bottom of the caisson is open during construction. It may have any shape in plan. Box caisson: It is open at the top but closed at the bottom. Pneumatic caisson: It has a working chamber at the bottom of the caisson which is kept dry by forcing out water under pressure, thus permitting excavation under dry conditions. . Well foundation construction in bouldery bed strata Pasighat Bridge Andhra Pradesh The Important Factors of the bridge were as follows.. Length of the bridge - 704 mts. Foundation:- i. Type -Circular Well. ii. Outer Diameter -11.7 mtrs. iii. Inner Dia. -6.64 mtrs iv. Steining thickness -2.53 mtrs. -
SECTION A-A NTS 2" Grade Board Notches
Figure 4.1 – Alternative Flow Dispersal Trench NOTES: 1. This trench shall be constructed to prevent point discharge 1' - 6" min galvanized bolts and /or erosion. *20% max 2. Trenches may be placed no closer than 50 feet to one *20% max 2" x 12" another (100 feet along flowline). pressure 3. Trench and grade board must be treated grade level. Align to follow contours of board site. 4" x 4" support 4. Support post spacing as post required by soil conditions to 2" x 2" notches ensure grade board remains 18" O.C. 36" max 12" min. clean (< 5% fines) level. 3 1 4" - 1 2" washed rock filter fabric *15% max for flow control/water quality 18" O.C. treatment in rural areas 2" SECTION A-A NTS 2" grade board notches Figure 4.2 – Pipe Compaction Design and Backfill O.D. O.D. limits of pipe W (see note 4) 3' max. 3' max. compaction limit of pipe zone 1' - 0" bedding material for flexible 1' - 0" pipe (see 0.15 O.D. min. note 6) B O.D. limits of pipe compaction 0.65 O.D. min. foundation level A* gravel backfill gravel backfill for for pipe bedding foundations when specified * A = 4" min., 27" I.D. and under 6" min., over 27" I.D. A. Metal and Concrete Pipe Bedding for Flexible Pipe span span span 3' max Flexible Pipe NOTES: 3' max 3' max 1. Provide uniform support under barrels. 1'-0" 2. Hand tamp under haunches. 3. Compact bedding material to 95% max. -
GEOTEXTILE TUBE and GABION ARMOURED SEAWALL for COASTAL PROTECTION an ALTERNATIVE by S Sherlin Prem Nishold1, Ranganathan Sundaravadivelu 2*, Nilanjan Saha3
PIANC-World Congress Panama City, Panama 2018 GEOTEXTILE TUBE AND GABION ARMOURED SEAWALL FOR COASTAL PROTECTION AN ALTERNATIVE by S Sherlin Prem Nishold1, Ranganathan Sundaravadivelu 2*, Nilanjan Saha3 ABSTRACT The present study deals with a site-specific innovative solution executed in the northeast coastline of Odisha in India. The retarded embankment which had been maintained yearly by traditional means of ‘bullah piling’ and sandbags, proved ineffective and got washed away for a stretch of 350 meters in 2011. About the site condition, it is required to design an efficient coastal protection system prevailing to a low soil bearing capacity and continuously exposed to tides and waves. The erosion of existing embankment at Pentha ( Odisha ) has necessitated the construction of a retarded embankment. Conventional hard engineered materials for coastal protection are more expensive since they are not readily available near to the site. Moreover, they have not been found suitable for prevailing in in-situ marine environment and soil condition. Geosynthetics are innovative solutions for coastal erosion and protection are cheap, quickly installable when compared to other materials and methods. Therefore, a geotextile tube seawall was designed and built for a length of 505 m as soft coastal protection structure. A scaled model (1:10) study of geotextile tube configurations with and without gabion box structure is examined for the better understanding of hydrodynamic characteristics for such configurations. The scaled model in the mentioned configuration was constructed using woven geotextile fabric as geo tubes. The gabion box was made up of eco-friendly polypropylene tar-coated rope and consists of small rubble stones which increase the porosity when compared to the conventional monolithic rubble mound. -
Mechanically Stabilized Embankments
Part 8 MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EMBANKMENTS First Reinforced Earth wall in USA -1969 Mechanically Stabilized Embankments (MSEs) utilize tensile reinforcement in many different forms: from galvanized metal strips or ribbons, to HDPE geotextile mats, like that shown above. This reinforcement increases the shear strength and bearing capacity of the backfill. Reinforced Earth wall on US 50 Geotextiles can be layered in compacted fill embankments to engender additional shear strength. Face wrapping allows slopes steeper than 1:1 to be constructed with relative ease A variety of facing elements may be used with MSEs. The above photo illustrates the use of hay bales while that at left uses galvanized welded wire mesh HDPE geotextiles can be used as wrapping elements, as shown at left above, or attached to conventional gravity retention elements, such as rock-filled gabion baskets, sketched at right. Welded wire mesh walls are constructed using the same design methodology for MSE structures, but use galvanized wire mesh as the geotextile 45 degree embankment slope along San Pedro Boulevard in San Rafael, CA Geotextile soil reinforcement allows almost unlimited latitude in designing earth support systems with minimal corridor disturbance and right-of-way impact MSEs also allow roads to be constructed in steep terrain with a minimal corridor of disturbance as compared to using conventional 2:1 cut and fill slopes • Geotextile grids can be combined with low strength soils to engender additional shear strength; greatly enhancing repair options when space is tight Geotextile tensile soil reinforcement can also be applied to landslide repairs, allowing selective reinforcement of limited zones, as sketch below left • Short strips, or “false layers” of geotextiles can be incorporated between reinforcement layers of mechanically stabilized embankments (MSE) to restrict slope raveling and erosion • Section through a MSE embankment with a 1:1 (45 degree) finish face inclination. -
Corrosion Evaluation of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls
Research Report KTC-05-28/SPR 239-02-1F KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CENTER College of Engineering CORROSION EVALUATION OF MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALLS Our Mission We provide services to the transportation community through research, technology transfer and education. We create and participate in partnerships to promote safe and effective transportation systems. We Value... Teamwork -- Listening and Communicating, Along with Courtesy and Respect for Others Honesty and Ethical Behavior Delivering the Highest Quality Products and Services Continuous Improvement in All That We Do For more information or a complete publication list, contact us KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CENTER 176 Raymond Building University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky 40506-0281 (859) 257-4513 (859) 257-1815 (FAX) 1-800-432-0719 www.ktc.uky.edu [email protected] The University of Kentucky is an Equal Opportunity Organization Research Report KTC-05-28/SPR – 239-02-1F Corrosion Evaluation of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Research Report KTC-05-28/SPR – 239-02-1F Corrosion Evaluation of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls By Tony L. Beckham Leicheng Sun Tommy C. Hopkins Research Geologist Research Engineer Program Manager Kentucky Transportation Center College of Engineering University of Kentucky in cooperation with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet The Commonwealth of Kentucky and Federal Highway Administration The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, nor the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. -
Porosity and Permeability Lab
Mrs. Keadle JH Science Porosity and Permeability Lab The terms porosity and permeability are related. porosity – the amount of empty space in a rock or other earth substance; this empty space is known as pore space. Porosity is how much water a substance can hold. Porosity is usually stated as a percentage of the material’s total volume. permeability – is how well water flows through rock or other earth substance. Factors that affect permeability are how large the pores in the substance are and how well the particles fit together. Water flows between the spaces in the material. If the spaces are close together such as in clay based soils, the water will tend to cling to the material and not pass through it easily or quickly. If the spaces are large, such as in the gravel, the water passes through quickly. There are two other terms that are used with water: percolation and infiltration. percolation – the downward movement of water from the land surface into soil or porous rock. infiltration – when the water enters the soil surface after falling from the atmosphere. In this lab, we will test the permeability and porosity of sand, gravel, and soil. Hypothesis Which material do you think will have the highest permeability (fastest time)? ______________ Which material do you think will have the lowest permeability (slowest time)? _____________ Which material do you think will have the highest porosity (largest spaces)? _______________ Which material do you think will have the lowest porosity (smallest spaces)? _______________ 1 Porosity and Permeability Lab Mrs. Keadle JH Science Materials 2 large cups (one with hole in bottom) water marker pea gravel timer yard soil (not potting soil) calculator sand spoon or scraper Procedure for measuring porosity 1. -
Linktm Gabions and Mattresses Design Booklet
LinkTM Gabions and Mattresses Design Booklet www.globalsynthetics.com.au Australian Company - Global Expertise Contents 1. Introduction to Link Gabions and Mattresses ................................................... 1 1.1 Brief history ...............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Applications ..............................................................................................................................1 1.3 Features of woven mesh Link Gabion and Mattress structures ...............................................2 1.4 Product characteristics of Link Gabions and Mattresses .........................................................2 2. Link Gabions and Mattresses .............................................................................. 4 2.1 Types of Link Gabions and Mattresses .....................................................................................4 2.2 General specification for Link Gabions, Link Mattresses and Link netting...............................4 2.3 Standard sizes of Link Gabions, Mattresses and Netting ........................................................6 2.4 Durability of Link Gabions, Link Mattresses and Link Netting ..................................................7 2.5 Geotextile filter specification ....................................................................................................7 2.6 Rock infill specification .............................................................................................................8 -
CPCCST3003A Split Stone Manually
CPCCST3003A Split stone manually Release: 1 CPCCST3003A Split stone manually Date this document was generated: 26 May 2012 CPCCST3003A Split stone manually Modification History Not Applicable Unit Descriptor Unit descriptor This unit specifies the outcomes required to split stone using a range of methods for both hard and soft stone. Application of the Unit Application of the unit This unit of competency supports the achievement of skills and knowledge to split stone manually, which may include working with others and as a member of a team. Licensing/Regulatory Information Not Applicable Pre-Requisites Prerequisite units CPCCOHS2001A Apply OHS requirements, policies and procedures in the construction industry Approved Page 2 of 11 © Commonwealth of Australia, 2012 Construction & Property Services Industry Skills Council CPCCST3003A Split stone manually Date this document was generated: 26 May 2012 Employability Skills Information Employability skills This unit contains employability skills. Elements and Performance Criteria Pre-Content Elements describe the Performance criteria describe the performance needed to essential outcomes of a demonstrate achievement of the element. Where bold unit of competency. italicised text is used, further information is detailed in the required skills and knowledge section and the range statement. Assessment of performance is to be consistent with the evidence guide. Approved Page 3 of 11 © Commonwealth of Australia, 2012 Construction & Property Services Industry Skills Council CPCCST3003A Split stone manually Date this document was generated: 26 May 2012 Elements and Performance Criteria ELEMENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA 1. Plan and prepare. 1.1. Work instructions and operational details are obtained using relevant information, confirmed and applied for planning and preparation purposes.