DOCSLIB.ORG

GUIDE to Cement-Stabilized Subgrade Soils

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

GUIDE TO Cement-Stabilized Subgrade Soils MAY 2020 About the CP Tech Center About this Guide The mission of the National Concrete Pavement This document, Guide to Cement-Stabilized Subgrade Soils, Technology Center (CP Tech Center) at Iowa State is a product of the CP Tech Center with funding from University is to unite key transportation stakeholders the PCA. It provides guidance for engineers, producers, around the central goal of advancing concrete pavement contractors, and owners to improve soil properties for technology through research, tech transfer, and construction of various types of infrastructure. The focus technology implementation. of this guide is roadway applications. About the PCA Reference Information for this Guide The Portland Cement Association (PCA) is a nonprofit Gross, J. and W. Adaska. 2020. Guide to Cement- organization founded in 1916 that serves America’s Stabilized Subgrade Soils. Portland Cement Association, cement manufacturers through policy, research, education, Washington, DC, and National Concrete Pavement and market intelligence. PCA members represent 91 Technology Center, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. percent of US cement production capacity with facilities in all 50 states. PCA promotes safety, sustainability, © 2020 Portland Cement Association and innovation in all aspects of construction, fosters continuous improvement in cement manufacturing and Front Cover Image Credits distribution, and generally promotes economic growth Jeff Wykoff, California Nevada Cement Association and sound infrastructure investment. For More Information Disclaimers For technical assistance regarding cement-based concrete Neither Iowa State University nor the Portland Cement paving, contact the Portland Cement Association or the Association nor this document’s authors, editors, CP Tech Center: designers, illustrators, distributors, or technical advisors make any representations or warranties, expressed or Wayne Adaska, Director implied, as to the accuracy of information herein and Pavements and Geotechnical Markets disclaim liability for any inaccuracies. Portland Cement Association 200 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 200 This publication is provided solely for the continuing Washington, DC 20001 education of qualified professionals. This publication 847-972-9056 should only be used by qualified professionals who [email protected] possess all required licenses, who are competent www.cement.org to evaluate the significance and limitations of the information provided herein, and who accept total Peter Taylor, Director responsibility for the application of this information. National Concrete Pavement Technology Center Iowa State University Iowa State University does not discriminate on the basis 2711 S. Loop Drive, Suite 4700 of race, color, age, ethnicity, religion, national origin, Ames, IA 50010-8664 pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic 515-294-5798 information, sex, marital status, disability, or status as [email protected] a US Veteran. Inquiries regarding nondiscrimination https://cptechcenter.org policies may be directed to the Office of Equal Opportunity, 3410 Beardshear Hall, 515 Morrill Road, Ames, Iowa 50011, telephone: 515-294-7612, hotline: 515-294-1222, email: [email protected]. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. PCA Special Report SR1007P 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Guide to Cement-Stabilized Subgrade Soils May 2020 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Jerod Gross and Wayne Adaska 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. National Concrete Pavement Technology Center Iowa State University 11. Contract or Grant No. 2711 South Loop Drive, Suite 4700 Ames, IA 50010-8664 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Portland Cement Association Guide 200 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 200 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20001 15. Supplementary Notes Visit https://cptechcenter.org for color pdfs of this and other research reports. 16. Abstract The primary purpose of this guide is to describe the characteristics, uses, and benefits of cement-stabilized subgrade (CSS) and present methods for geotechnical evaluation, mix design, construction, and field testing that will produce a satisfactory project. The material in this guide updates and expands on the information presented in the Portland Cement Association’s 2008 publication Guide to Cement-Modified Soil (CMS). To clarify the scope of this guide, CSS is distinguished from CMS as follows. CMS describes otherwise untreated soils, particularly clayey soils, that have been treated with a relatively small proportion of portland cement to provide improved characteristics, including reduced plasticity and volume change potential and increased bearing capacity. CSS not only provides the benefits of CMS but also substantially increases soil stiffness and strength to the point where the treatment can provide structural benefits to pavement and building foundations. Unless stated otherwise, this guide primarily discusses CSS. This guide discusses several critical aspects of CSS. The first two chapters describe the key terminology related to cement-treated soil, the effects of cement on the various material properties of the treated soil, the benefits that CSS provides, and the soil properties and classifications relevant to cement treatment. The third chapter provides a systematic procedure for conducting a geotechnical evaluation and a field sampling and testing program. The fourth chapter outlines a step-by-step mix design process for determining the proper cement content for a desired application and treated soil characteristics. The fifth chapter summarizes construction, field inspection, and testing methods, and the final chapter presents several case studies to illustrate the information provided in the guide. Design engineers, testing laboratory personnel, contractors, and owners will find this document useful for determining whether CSS is appropriate for a particular application and the proper steps to follow to produce a satisfactory project. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement cement-stabilized subgrade soils—cement-modified soil—soil-cement— No restrictions. subgrade stabilization 19. Security Classification 20. Security Classification 21. No. of Pages 22. Price (of this report) (of this page) 59 NA Unclassified. Unclassified. Guide to Cement-Stabilized Subgrade Soils May 2020 Authors Jerod Gross, Snyder & Associates, Inc. Wayne Adaska, Portland Cement Association Contributing Technical Authors James Bertsch, Certified Testing Services Sybil Ferrier, Construction Materials Testing Andrea Marsh, Snyder & Associates, Inc. Technical Contributors Jason Havel, City of Iowa City Dave Panos, City of Iowa City (formerly) Dave Schnickel, Manatt’s, Inc. Technical Editing, Graphics Support, Layout, and Production Pete Hunsinger, Alicia Hoermann, Sue Stokke, and Oksana Gieseman, National Concrete Pavement Technology Center Publications Sponsored by © 2020 Portland Cement Association A guide from National Concrete Pavement Technology Center Iowa State University 2711 South Loop Drive, Suite 4700 Ames, IA 50010-8664 Phone: 515-294-5798 / Fax: 515-294-0467 https://cptechcenter.org Acknowledgments The authors, the National Concrete Pavement Technology Center, and the Portland Cement Association gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the technical contributors and the technical advisory committee (TAC) members, who helped establish the technical direction for the guide and reviewed several drafts. Their feedback and suggestions were invaluable. • Stan Bland, Southeast Cement Promotion Association • Garth Benjamin Reese, Raba Kistner, Inc. • Brendan Daly, LafargeHolcim • Matthew Singel, Cement Council of Texas • Marco Estrada, Pavement Recycling Systems Inc. • Kimbel Stokes, The Miller Group, Inc. • Gregory Halsted, Portland Cement Association • David Stowell, New Field Inc. • Andrew Johnson, Southeast Cement Promotion • Matt Wood, Ash Grove Cement Company (formerly) Association • Blake Wright, Raba Kistner, Inc. • David Meyer, Continental Cement Company • Jeff Wykoff, California Nevada Cement Association • Brady Pryor, Ash Grove Resources • Corey Zollinger, CEMEX • Dane Redinger, Resource International, Inc. iv Guide to Cement-Stabilized Subgrade Soils Contents Acknowledgments iv Resilient Modulus (Mr) 13 Executive Summary ix California Bearing Ratio (CBR) 13 Chapter 1. Introduction 1 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) 14 Terminology 1 Expansive Characteristics 14 Soil-Cement 1 Stability 15 Cement-Modified Soil (CMS) 1 Sulfate Content 15 Cement-Stabilized Subgrade (CSS) 1 Soil pH 15 CSS and CMS 2 Organic Content 16 Cement-Treated Base (CTB) 2 Chapter 3. Geotechnical Evaluation and Field Full-Depth Reclamation (FDR) 2 Sampling 17 Comparison of CMS, CSS, CTB, and FDR 2 Geotechnical Evaluation 17 CSS and CMS 2 Field Sampling 19 CSS and CTB 3 Types of Field Sampling 19 FDR 3 Common Field Sampling and Testing Methods 19 Summary 3 Test Pits 19 Modification Mechanisms 4 Coring and Sampling through Existing Pavement 20 Cation Exchange 4 Auger Sampling 20 Particle Restructuring 5 Tube Sampling 21 Cementitious Hydration 5 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) 21 Pozzolanic Reactions 5 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) 21 Benefits of CSS 6 Other Field Testing Methods 22 Time and Cost Savings 6 Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) 22 Environmental Benefits 6 Automated
Recommended publications
  • Assessment of Pavement Foundation Stiffness Using Cyclic Plate Load Test

    Assessment of Pavement Foundation Stiffness Using Cyclic Plate Load Test

    Assessment of Pavement Foundation Stiffness using Cyclic Plate Load Test Mark H. Wayne & Jayhyun Kwon Tensar International Corporation, Alpharetta, U.S.A. David J. White R.L. Handy Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa ABSTRACT: The quality of the pavement foundation layer is critical in performance and sustainability of the pavement. Over the years, various soil modification or stabilization methods were developed to achieve sufficient bearing performance of soft subgrade. Geogrid, through its openings, confine aggre- gates and forms a stabilized composite layer of aggregate fill and geogrid. This mechanically stabilized layer is used to provide a stable foundation layer for roadways. Traditional density-based QC plans and associated QA test methods such as nuclear density gauge are limited in their ability to assess stiffness of stabilized composite layers. In North America, non-destructive testing methods, such as falling weight de- flectometer (FWD) and light weight deflectometer (LWD) are used as stiffness- or strength-based QA test methods. In Germany and some other European countries, a static strain modulus (Ev2) is more commonly used to verify bearing performance of paving layers. Ev2 is a modulus measured on second load stage of the static plate load test. In general, modulus determined from first load cycle is not reliable because there is too much re-arrangement of the gravel particles. However, a small number of load cycles may not be sufficiently dependable or reliable to be used as a design parameter. Experiments were conducted to study the influence of load cycles in bearing performance.
  • Division 2 Earthwork

    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.
  • Soil Stabilization | Lime Treated Soils Save Time & Money

    Soil Stabilization | Lime Treated Soils Save Time & Money

    QUALITY LIME & STONE PRODUCTS THAT IMPROVE YOUR WORLD QUALITY LIME & STONE PRODUCTS About Graymont THAT IMPROVE YOUR WORLD Graymont is a family owned company whose management team and employees are dedicated to meeting or exceeding customer needs. The company is focused on high calcium and dolomitic lime, value added lime based products such as specialty hydrates and precipitated calcium carbonates, and the aggre- gate and pulverized stone business. Graymont takes a long term view of its business and the lime industry. Graymont has been in the lime business for over 50 years and operates facilities on sites that have been in operation for up to 200 years. Graymont is among the leaders in the industry in adding new efficient plants and equipment and operates some of the most modern facilities on the continent. Since 1989 Graymont has built close to 2 million tons of new state of the art capacity and will continue to add new capacity to meet market demand. Graymont is the third largest producer of lime in North America. In Canada, Graymont subsidiaries have operations from New Brunswick to British Columbia. In the United States, subsidiary companies operate in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Utah and Nevada while serving markets in a much wider geographic area. In addition to Graymont's lime interests, Graymont Materials, located in upstate New York and the province of Quebec, provides construction stone, sand and gravel, asphalt products and ready mix concrete for the infrastructure and general construction needs of the area. In 2003, Graymont became a part owner of Grupo Calidra.
  • Guidelines for the Stabilization of Subgrade Soils in California Authors: David Jones, Ashraf Rahim, Shadi Saadeh, and John T

    Guidelines for the Stabilization of Subgrade Soils in California Authors: David Jones, Ashraf Rahim, Shadi Saadeh, and John T

    July 2010 Guideline: UCPRC-GL-2010-01 GGGuuuiiidddeeellliiinnneeesss fffooorrr ttthhheee SSStttaaabbbiiillliiizzzaaatttiiiooonnn ooofff SSSuuubbbgggrrraaadddeee SSSoooiiilllsss IIInnn CCCaaallliiifffooorrrnnniiiaaa Authors: D. Jones, A. Rahim, S. Saadeh, and J.T. Harvey Partnered Pavement Research Center (PPRC) Contract Strategic Plan Element 3.14: Subgrade Soil Stabilization Guide PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: California Department of Transportation University of California Division of Research and Innovation Pavement Research Center Office of Roadway Research UC Davis, UC Berkeley DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL PAGE Guideline: UCPRC-GL-2010-01 Title: Guidelines for the Stabilization of Subgrade Soils in California Authors: David Jones, Ashraf Rahim, Shadi Saadeh, and John T. Harvey Prepared for: FHWA No: Work submitted: Date: Caltrans CA122201A 05/23/2011 July 2011 Strategic Plan Element No.: Status: Version No.: 3.14 Stage 6, Final 1 Abstract: This document provides guidelines on subgrade soil stabilization and covers mechanical, cementitious, and asphalt methods. The following aspects are discussed: An overview of subgrade stabilization methods Project investigation Mechanical stabilization Cementitious stabilization Asphalt stabilization Construction considerations A list of further reading is provided. Keywords: Subgrade soil stabilization Proposals for implementation: Related documents: None Signatures: D. Jones J.T. Harvey D. Spinner J.T. Harvey T.J. Holland 1st Author Technical Review Editor Principal Investigator Caltrans Contract Manager UCPRC-GL-2010-01 i DISCLAIMER The contents of this guideline reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This guideline does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
  • Engineering Geological Characterisation and Slope Stability

    Engineering Geological Characterisation and Slope Stability

    Engineering Geological Characterisation and Slope Stability Assessment of Whitehall Quarry, Waikato. A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science in Engineering Geology at the University of Canterbury by Daniel Rodney Strang UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY 2010 I Frontispiece Whitehall Quarry “Over 4,000 tonnes of aggregate goes into every 1 km of a two lane road” II Abstract Whitehall Quarry is located 4 km east of Karapiro, near Cambridge within the Waikato District. Current quarrying operations produce between 150,000 and 300,000 tonnes of aggregate for use in the surrounding region. This study is an investigation into the engineering geological model for the quarry and pit slope stability assessment. Pit slope stability is an integral aspect of quarrying and open-pit mining since slopes should be as steep as possible to minimise waste material which needs to be removed, yet shallow enough to minimise potential hazards to personnel and equipment below pit slopes. This study also assesses the stability of complex wedge located within the north western corner of the quarry. Initial estimates approximate a wedge mass volume of 500,000 m3; failure was triggered during the late 80‟s due a stripping programme at the head of the mass. Field and laboratory investigations were carried out to identify and quantify engineering geological parameters. Photogrammetric and conventional scanline analytical techniques identified two domains within the quarry divided by the Main Quarry Shear Zone (MQSZ). Discontinuity orientations are the key differences between the two domains. Bedding planes appear to have slightly different orientations and each domain has very different joint sets identified.
  • Green Terramesh Rock Fall Protection Bund

    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.
  • Accelerated Load Testing of Pavements HVS-Nordic Tests at VTI Sweden 2003–2004

    Accelerated Load Testing of Pavements HVS-Nordic Tests at VTI Sweden 2003–2004

    VTI rapport 544A www.vti.se/publications Published 2006 Accelerated load testing of pavements HVS-Nordic tests at VTI Sweden 2003–2004 Leif G Wiman Publisher: Publication: VTI rapport 544A Published: Project code: 2006 60813 SE-581 95 Linköping Sweden Project: Accelerated load testing of pavement using Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS) Author: Sponsor: Leif G Wiman Swedish Road Administration Title: Accelerated load testing of pavements – HVS-Nordic tests at VTI Sweden 2003–2004 Abstract (background, aim, method, result) max 200 words: During 2003 and 2004 two accelerated load tests were performed at the VTI test facility in Sweden (SE05 and SE06). The objective of SE05 was to investigate the deformation behaviour of two different unbound base materials. Half of the test area was constructed with a base layer of natural granular material and the other half with a base layer of crushed rock aggregate. This means that the two structures were tested simultaneously. The objective of SE06 was to be the third test in a series of structural design tests with stepwise higher bearing capacity. The previous two tests in this series are SE01 and SE02. In the unbound base material test, SE05, the surface rut depth propagation during the accelerated load testing was greater on the crushed rock aggregate structure especially in wet condition. This was not expected and more than half of the difference in surface rut depth was found in the difference in the base layer deformations. One main reason for this unexpected behaviour is believed to be unsatisfactory compaction of the crushed rock aggregate. The performance of the pavement structures SE01, SE02 and SE06 during the accelerated load testing will be analysed in more detail in the future.
  • Section 31 22 13 ‐ Site Grading

    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

    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
  • Reinforced Earth: Principles and Applications in Engineering Construction

    Reinforced Earth: Principles and Applications in Engineering Construction

    International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Sciences, Technology & Engineering | ISSN: 2488-9849 Vol. 2, Issue 6 (June 2016) REINFORCED EARTH: PRINCIPLES AND APPLICATIONS IN ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION Okechukwu, S.I; Okeke, O. C; Akaolisa, C. C. Z; Jack, L. And Akinola, A. O. Department of Geology, Federal University of Technology, Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria Abstract Reinforced earth is a material formed by combining earth and reinforcement material. The reinforced soil is obtained by placing extensible or inextensible materials such as metallic strips or polymeric reinforcement within the soil to obtain the requisite properties. The reinforcement enables the soil mass to resist tension in a way which the earth alone could not. The source of this resistance to tension is the internal friction of soil, because the stresses that are created within the mass are transferred from soil to the reinforcement strips by friction. Reinforcement of soil is practiced to improve the mechanical properties of the soil being reinforced by the inclusion of structural elements. The reinforcement improves the earth by increasing the bearing capacity of the soil. It also reduces the liquefaction behavior of the soil. Reinforced earth is not complex to achieve. The components of reinforced earth are soil, skin and reinforcing material. The reinforcing material may include steel, concrete, glass, planks etc. Reinforced earth has so many applications in construction work. Some of the applications include its use in stabilization of soil, construction of retaining walls, bridge abutments for highways, industrial and mining structures. Keywords: Reinforcement, Reinforced earth. 1.0 Introduction An internally stabilized system such as reinforced earth involves reinforcements installed within and extending beyond the potential failure mass.
  • Scheduling SS-1

    Scheduling SS-1

    Scheduling SS-1 BMP Objectives ● Soil Stabilization ● Sediment Control ● Tracking Control ● Wind Erosion Control ● Non-Storm Water Management ● Materials and Waste Management Definition and Purpose This BMP involves developing a schedule for every project that includes sequencing of construction activities with the implementation of construction site BMPs such as temporary soil stabilization (erosion control) and temporary sediment controls measures. The purpose is to reduce the amount and duration of soil exposed to erosion by wind, rain, runoff, and vehicle tracking. Appropriate Applications Any construction project where soils will be disturbed will benefit from a BMP sequencing schedule that is generated in conjunction with the construction-sequencing schedule. BMP sequencing can help minimize land disturbance during construction. Limitations The BMP sequencing schedule must be agreed upon between MDT and the construction contractor. BMP scheduling is only effective if the scheduled is followed closely and modified as required throughout the construction project. Design Guidelines and Considerations n Plan the project and develop an implementation schedule of construction site BMPs. The schedule is designed to clearly show how the BMPs relate to soil-disturbing and re- stabilization activities. The construction schedule is typically incorporated into the SWPPP. n A BMP schedule includes details on the implementation and deployment of: - temporary soil stabilization BMPs, - temporary sediment control BMPs, 10 - tracking control BMPs, - wind erosion control BMPs, - non-storm water BMPs, and - waste management and materials pollution control BMPs. n Also included in the BMP schedule are dates for significant long-term operations or activities that may have planned non-storm water discharges such as dewatering, saw cutting, grinding, drilling, boring, crushing, blasting, painting, hydro-demolition, mortar mixing, bridge cleaning, etc.
  • Final Addendum Geotechnical Report No.2 Ground Anchor Design White Point Landslide W.O

    Final Addendum Geotechnical Report No.2 Ground Anchor Design White Point Landslide W.O

    Final Addendum Geotechnical Report No.2 Ground Anchor Design White Point Landslide W.O. E1907483 Task Order Solicitation 11-087 San Pedro District Los Angeles, California April 17, 2013 Submitted to: Mr. Christopher F. Johnson, P.E., G.E. Geotechnical Engineering Group 1149 S. Broadway, Suite 120 Los Angeles, CA 90015 By: Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 664 West Broadway Glendale, California 91204 51-1-10052-031 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .........................................................................................................1 3.0 PROJECT DOCUMENTATAION ........................................................................................2 3.1 Shannon & Wilson Reports ........................................................................................2 3.2 Final Report: ...............................................................................................................2 3.3 Addendum-1 Report: ..................................................................................................2 3.4 Plans and Specifications .............................................................................................3 3.5 Existing County of Los Angeles Storm Drains ..........................................................3 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .............................................................................................4 4.1 General .......................................................................................................................4