52 views

Uploaded by Angel Lisette Lao

- Basic Study on the Behavior of Landslides During Earthquakes
- Application of soil nail method for slope stability purpose
- Project Design Considerations
- Slope Stability
- Module I - Intro and Field Work
- Evaluation of Shear Strength Characteristics
- Slide VerificationManual Part2
- Slope Getting Started
- Chapter 10- WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual
- lec14
- nchrp_rpt_611
- Chapter 2-Soil Strength Behaviour Part 1
- Seismic Slope Stability
- 01.Civil
- hoek and diederich
- Insight into the seismic response of earth dams with an emphasis on seismic coefficient estimation.pdf
- Evolution of Force Distribution in Three-dimensional Granular Media
- Lesson5
- Earthquake
- H Rock Strength

You are on page 1of 29

Fall 2004

Office: KH #203

Ph: x4046

1

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

2

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

1

Soil Strength

Shear Strength of Soil (τ):

Internal resistance of soil / unit area.

Æ any stress state that combined effect reaches the failure plane

Along the failure plane τf = f(σ)

Failure envelope is a curved line Æ approximated by linear relationship

τ

τf = c + σ tanφ Mohr’s failure

envelope

In terms of effective parameters: φ: internal friction angle

τf = c’ + σ’ tanφ’ Cohesion Mohr-Coulomb

failure criteria

c

σ

3

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

Inclination of the Plane of Failure Caused by Shear:

Failure Æ when shear stress on a plane reaches τf (line)

Æ determine inclination (θ) of failure plane with major & minor

principal plane

τ h

σ1

A B τf = c + σ tanφ

d

σ3 σ3 g

F

θ c

C f φ e 2θ b

D E

O σ3 a σ1 σ

σ1 σ1 > σ3

ab Æ major principal plane

ad Æ failure plane Æ θ to 2θ angled Similarly for effective parameters.

Angle bad = 2θ = 90 + φ Shear failure for saturated soils:

τf’ = c’ + σ’ tanφ’

Î θ = 45 + φ/2

4

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

2

Soil Strength

Shear Strength Parameters in Laboratory:

Æ A type of unconsolidated-undrained triaxial test

Æ For clayey samples (Cohesive)

Æ σ3 = 0 (confining pressure)

Æ Axial load (σ1) applied to fail the sample (relatively rapid)

Æ At failure σ3f = 0 and σ1f = major principal stress

Æ Therefore undrained shear strength is independent of confining pressure

τf = σ1 / 2 = qu / 2 = Cu or Su

σ1

τ

qu: unconfined compressive strength,

cu (Su): undrained shear strength

σ1

φ=0

Cu

or

Total stress Mohr’s

Su Circle at failure

σ3 σ1 = qu σ

5

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

Direct Shear Test (stress or strain controlled):

Specimen is square or circular

Box splits horizontally in halves

Normal force is applied on top shear box

Shear forces is applied to move one half of the box relative to the other (to fail specimen)

Stress Controlled: Shear force applied in equal increments until failure

Failure plane is predetermined (horizontal)

Horizontal deformation & ∆H is measured under each load.

Strain Controlled: Constant rate of shear displacement

Restraining shear force is measured

Volume change (∆H)

(Advantage: gives ultimate & residual shear strength) Peak shear

strength

Normal force Dense Ultimate shear

Shear Stress

sand strength

Loading

plate τf τf

Loose

Porous sand Shear Displacement

Stone

Sample Expansion Dense

Shear τ sand

Force τ ∆H

Shear Displacement

Compression 6

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

3

Soil Strength

Direct Shear Test (continued):

Plot the normal stress vs. shear stress values.

τf

τf = σ tan φ

Dry sand

φ = tan-1(τf / σ)

φ

σ

7

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

Drained Direct Shear Test on Saturated Sand & Clay:

Test conducted on saturated sample at slow rate of loading Æ allowing excess pore water to

dissipate.

For sand (k is high Æ pwp dissipates quickly) Therefore φ under drained conditions ~ same

For clay (k is low Æ under load consolidation takes time, therefore load needs to be applied

very slow).

OC clay τf = c’ + σ’ tan φ’ (forced at horizontal plane)

Represents angle of friction between soil

and foundation material:

φ’ NC clay,

c=0

τf = σ’ tan φ’ τf = ca + σ’ tan δ

c’

Ca: adhesion

φ’

δ: angle of friction between soil and

σ foundation material

8

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

4

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test:

Reliable method for determination of shear strength parameters.

Axial stress (deviator stress) is applied to cause failure (shear) by

σ1 vertical loading.

cap

membrane Load vs. deformation readings are recorded.

Three general types of triaxial test are:

σ3 σ3

1. Consolidated – drained test (CD)

2. Consolidated – undrained test (CU)

Porous

stone 3. Unconsolidated – undrained test (UU)

σ1

applied all around sample

(air/water/glycerine)

σ3

σ3 σ3

Porous

stone

σ3

σ = σ3 + ∆σd

∆σd 1

9

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test: Consolidated-drained test:

Specimen is subjected to confining stress σ3 all around.

As a result the pwp of the sample increases by uc.

If the valve is opened at this point the uc will dissipate and sample will consolidate

(∆V decreases under σ3)

σ3

uc

B= Skempton’s pwp parameter (B~1.0 for saturated soils)

σ3 σ3 σ3

σ3

End of consolidation stage uc = 0.

∆σd

σ3 Application of deviator stress (∆σd):

For drained test ∆σd is increased slowly, while the drainage valve

σ3 σ3 is kept open, & any excess pwp generated by ∆σd is allowed to

ud = 0 dissipate.

(∆V can be measured by measuring amount outflow-water, since S=100%)

σ3

∆σd CD test Æ excess pwp completely dissipated Æ σ3 = σ3’

10

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

5

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test: Consolidated-drained test (Continued):

At failure (Axial stress) Æ σ1 = σ1’ = σ3 + (∆σd)f

σ1’ Æ major principal stress at failure

σ3’ Æ minor principal stress at failure

Conduct other triaxial (CD) tests under different σ3 (confining) pressure and obtain the

corresponding σ1’ at failure and plot the Mohr’s circle for each test. φ

’

σ1 anφ

τ σ’ t Total and

θ = 45 + φ / 2 τf = Effective Stress

Failure Envelope

σ3 σ3 B

for OC

clays A

σ1

φ1

c σ

2θ 2θ

O σ3 = σ3’ σ1 = σ1’

(∆σd)f

(∆σd)f

11

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test: Consolidated-undrained test (CU):

Consolidation of S=100% sample under σ3 (confining stress) & allow uc to dissipate.

Drainage valve is closed after complete consolidation (uc = 0)

Deviator stress (∆σd) is applied and increased to failure.

∆ud is developed (due to no drainage).

σ3

σ3 σ3

σ3

End of consolidation stage uc = 0 (and close valves).

∆σd

σ3 ∆ud

A= Skempton’s pwp parameter

σ3 σ3

∆σ d

∆ud ≠ 0

Loose sand & NC clay Æ ∆ud increases with strain

σ3 Dense sand & OC clay Æ ∆ud increases with strain up to a certain

∆σd point and drops & becomes negative

(due to dilatation of soil)

12

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

6

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test: Consolidated-undrained test (Continued):

Total and Effective principal stresses are not the same.

At failure measure (∆σd)f and (∆ud)f

Major principal stress at failure is obtained as:

Total: σ3 + (∆σd)f = σ1

Effective: σ1 - (∆ud)f = σ1’ Mohr’s Circle for CU Test:

Minor principal stress at failure is obtained as: φ’ Effective Stress

n

Total: σ3 ta Failure Envelope

σ’ φcu

Effective: σ3 - (∆ud)f = σ3’ τf

=

φ’ nφ c u

τ σ ta Total Stress

τf = Failure Envelope

Note:

σ1 - σ3 = σ1’ - σ3'

B

A

σ

O σ3’ σ3 σ1’ σ1

(∆ud)f (∆ud)f

13

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test: Consolidated-undrained test (Continued):

For OC Clay:

φcu

nφ c u

τ σ ta

τf =

for OC n φ 1cu

clays + σ ta

τ f = c cu

φ1cu

B

ccu A

σ

O σ3’ σ3 σ1’ σ1

A = Af = -0.5 Æ 0 for OC clay

(∆σ d ) f

14

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

7

Soil Strength

Triaxial Shear Test: Unonsolidated-undrained test (UU):

Drainage in both stages is not allowed.

Therefore application of σ3 Æ uc = B σ3

And application of ∆σd Æ ∆ud = Ặ ∆σd

u = uc + ∆ud Æ u = B σ3 + Ặ ∆σd = B σ3 + Ặ (σ1 - σ3)

It can be seen that tests conducted with different σ3 results in the same (∆σd)f, resulting in

mohr’s circle with same radius.

τ φ

Effective

φ = 0 Failure envelope

Cu

σ3 σ1

σ3’ σ3 σ1’ σ1 σ

σ3’ = σ3 - (∆ud)f

Example: σ3 ↑ by ∆σ3 ⇒ ∆uc = ∆σ3

σ3’ = σ 3 + ∆σ3 - ∆uc = σ3 Æ (∆σd)f will be the same.

15

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Soil Strength

General Comments on Triaxial Tests:

Field strength Æ function of rate of application of load and drainage

Granular soil Æ drained shear strength parameters

NC Clay Æ Under footing Æ Undrained conditions

Excavation in OC Clay Æ Drained case (more critical)

Control of stress states are possible in Triaxial test

16

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

8

Soil Strength

overburden pressure

17

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

z

εx = µ εz 0.0 ≤ µ ≤ 0.5

h x

σv = γt h

K Æ Ratio of lateral to vertical stress: K = σh / σv

σh

Kf Æ Maximum strength failure line

K0 < 1 NC soils

18

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

9

General Comments

(slopes in earth dams after rapid drawdown)

UU Æ End of construction stability of saturated clays, load rapidly & no

19

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

20

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

10

Slope Stability

Of the stability of natural and man-made

Slopes as influenced by natural or induced

Changes to their environment.

Studied by analytical (closed-form) or

numerical (approximate) methods.

Both methods are simplification of actual

Geological, mechanical and other aspects.

its ability to sustain the effects of

load increases or environmental

changes.

Pre-failure analysis: to assess

safety of slope and its intended

performance.

Post-failure analysis: study of

failure and processes causing it.

21

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

most likely rupture surface and comparing to shear strength of soil.

Likely rupture surface: is the critical surface with minimum factor of safety.

To increase space

22

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

11

Slope Stability

modes)

23

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Landslide Components

24

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

12

Landslide Components

25

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Rotational Slides

26

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

13

Slope Stability

Components of Slopes

Facing

Crest

Toe

Slope angle

Foundation

Reinforcement

Reinforced

fill Retained

Fill

Foundation

27

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Possible Failure Modes of Slopes

Local

failure

Slope

Surficial failure failure

Global failure

28

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

14

Slope Stability

Typical Surfical Failure:

• Shallow failure surface up to 1.2 m (4ft)

• Failure mechanisms:

– Poor compaction

– Low overburden stress

– Loss of cohesion

– Saturation Original ground

Slip Surface

– Seepage forces surface

Slide Mass

29

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Analytical Solutions – Limit Equilibrium:

conditions are determined based on statics.

• The analyses is based on material strength, rather than stress-strain

relationships.

• A “Factor of Safety”, is defined as a tool of evaluating the slope stability with

limit equilibrium approach.

FS = =

driving forces shear stress required for equilibrium

Where FS > 1.0 represents a stable slope and FS < 1.0 stands for failure.

Required values:

Limit Equilibrium: FS = 1.0

Under Static Loads: FS ≥ 1.3 – 1.5

Under Seismic Loads: FS ≥ 1.1

30

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

15

Slope Stability

Limit Equilibrium:

Overall measure of the amount by which the strength of the soil would have to fall short

of the values described by c and φ in order for the slope to fail.

FS = =

driving forces shear stress required for equilibrium

c + σ tan φ τf

FS = =

τ eq τd

τd : Shear stress developed on

potential surface

31

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Limit Equilibrium (continued):

• Resisting forces required to equilibriate disturbing mechanisms are found

from static solution

• The shear resistance required for equilibrium is compared with available

shear strength in terms of Factor of Safety

•The mechanism corresponding to the lowest FS is found by iteration

32

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

16

Slope Stability

Stability of Infinite Slopes without Seepage (Surficial slope stability):

Soil Shear Strength: τf = c’ + σ’ tanφ’ Forces:

Pore water pressure: u=0 Na = γ L H cosβ

Failing along AB at a depth H Ta = γ L H sinβ

Static equilibrium of forces on the block. σ‘ = γ L H cos β / (L/cosβ) = γ H cos2β

Assume F on ab and cd are equal. τ= γ L H sinβ / (L/cosβ) = γ H cosβsinβ

Along line AB: Nr = γ L H cosβ

Tr = γ L H sinβ

Developed resistance:

τf = cd’ + σ’ tanφd’

= cd’ + γ H cos2β tanφd’ L d

Driving force due to weight:

a

τd = γ H cosβsinβ

F

β W

Factor of Safety: Na

β

2c tan φ B

FS = + F Ta

γ H sin 2β tan β c

H

For c = 0:

tan φ Tr

FS = b

tan β β

A β Nr

FS = 1 Æ H = Hcr R

33

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Stability of Infinite Slopes with Seepage (Surficial slope stability):

Soil Shear Strength: τf = c’ + σ’ tanφ’ Forces:

GWT at surface, pore pressure u=γwh= γwHcos2β Na = γsat L H cosβ

Failing along AB at a depth H Ta = γsat L H sinβ

Static equilibrium of forces on the block. σ = γsat L H cos β / (L/cosβ) = γsat H cos2β

Assume F on ab and cd are equal. τ= γsat L H sinβ / (L/cosβ) = γsat H cosβsinβ

Along line AB: Nr = γsat L H cosβ

Tr = γsat L H sinβ

Developed resistance:

h= Hcos2β

τf = cd’ + σ’ tanφd’ = cd’ + (σ-u) tanφd’

= cd’ + (γsat - γw) H cos2β tanφd’ L d

Driving force due to weight: E

a PAG

τd = γ H cosβsinβ SEE

Factor of Safety: β W F

2 c' γ ' tan φ ' Na

β

FS = + B

γ sat H sin 2β γ sat tan β

F Ta

c Equipotential

For c = 0: H line

γ ' tan φ '

FS = b Tr

γ sat tan β β

A β Nr

FS = 1 Æ H = Hcr R

34

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

17

Slope Stability

Slope Stability with Plane Surface:

AC Æ Trial failure place

B C

W

θ Ta

Na

H

Tr

A β θ

tan φ

2 c sin β + H γ sin (β − θ ) cos θ tan φ FS =

FS = tan β

Hγ sin (β − θ )sin θ

35

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Modes of Failure of Finite Slopes:

Shallow slope

failure

Base failure

Slope failure

36

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

18

Slope Stability

Circular surface – Slip circle analysis (φ = 0):

Circular slip surfaces are found to be the most critical in slopes with homogeneous soil.

There are two analytical, statically determinate, methods used for FS: the circular arc

(φ=0) and the friction circle method.

M r cu LR resisting moment

FS = = =

Md Wx driving moment

Circular failure surface in φ=0

soil is defined by its undrained

strength, cu.

Mr cu R 2θ

FS = =

M d W1l1 − W2l2 W1

W2 l2 l1

37

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Circular surface – Friction circle (φ, c soil):

Trial circle through toe.

The friction circle method attempts to satisfy the requirement of complete equilibrium by

assuming that the direction of the resultant of the normal and frictional component of

strength mobilized along the failure surface corresponds to a line that forms a tangent to

the friction circle with radius:

Procedure (Abramson et al 1996 more detailed)

C parallel to ab

Rf = R sinφm

P passes through intersection W-C

P makes φm with line through center

of friction circle, & tangent to FC

U often taken 0

Force polygon Æ determine C

Critical circle Æ developed cohesion is

maximum

For FS = 1, the critical height:

C’ / (γ Hcr) = f(α, β, θ, φ’) = m (stability No.)

β

φ > 3 deg Æ critical circles all toe circles

P φm

38

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

19

Slope Stability

Method of Slices (limit equilibrium):

Soil divided to vertical slices, width of each can vary.

The previous methods do not depend on the distribution of the effective normal stresses

along the failure surface. The contribution is accounted for by dividing the failing slope

mass into smaller slices and treating each individual slice as a unique sliding block.

Non-circular: Circular:

force components acting on each: Normal and Shear forces. The

other unknown is the location of line of action of the normal force

for each element.

However the equilibrium conditions:

ΣFx=0, ΣFy=0, ΣM=0

No. of unknowns = No. of slices * 3

Therefore assumptions should

be made.

39

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Circular surface (Bishop method):

Soil divided to vertical slices, width of each can vary.

Can be applied to layered soil, with different properties.

Find minimum FS by several trials. ΣM0 = 0

n

FS = i =1

n

∑ (W sin α )

i =1

i i

40

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

20

Slope Stability

Search for Minimum Factor of Safety:

Minimum FS values for the failure surface for every center is obtained, and recorded by

the center of rotation, the contours indicate the location of the center with minimum overall

FS.

41

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Slope Stability

Slope Stability with Seepage (u ≠ 0):

Obtain the average pwp at the bottom of the slice using the phreatic line.

Total pwp for the slice is un ∆Ln

Phreatic

surface

h z

Seepage

H

n

∑ [c' ∆l + (W − u ∆l )cos α

i i i i i tan φ ']

FS = i =1

n

∑ (W sin α )

i =1

i i

42

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

21

Lateral Earth Pressure

43

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Lateral Earth Pressure Coefficient:

σz’

H

σx’

P=(1/2)K γ H2

1/3 H

K=σx’/σz’

σx’ = Kσz’= KγH

44

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

22

Lateral Earth Pressure

Lateral Earth Pressure Coefficient at Rest:

Relationship between σz’ and σx’ at a given depth (at rest means no shear).

Ko : Coefficient of earth pressure at rest, Ko = σx’ / σz’

Rigid Wall

No movement For coarse-grained soils:

Ko = 1 - sinφ’ (ok for loose sand)

σz’ For fine grained NC soils:

H

σx’ Ko = m - sinφ’

P=(1/2)K γ H2

m: 1 for NC cohesionless or cohesive

1/3 H

m: 0.95 OCR > 2

K=σx’/σz’ σx’ = Kσz’= KγH Massarch (1979)

Ko = 0.44 + 0.42 (PI% / 100)

For OC clays:

Ko = Ko(NC) (OCR)(1/2)

Or

Ko = (1 - sinφ’) OCRsinφ’

45

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Coefficient of Active Lateral Earth Pressure:

Wall moves away from the soil (pushed out).

Movement

σz’

H

σx’

Ka=σx’/σz’

46

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

23

Lateral Earth Pressure

47

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Coefficient of Passive Lateral Earth Pressure:

Wall moves towards the soil (pressed in).

Movement

σz’

H

σx’

Kp=σx’/σz’

48

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

24

Lateral Earth Pressure

49

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

In Summary:

1. If the wall moves away from the fill (soil) pressure will decrease and reach to

active state. (σh = Ka σv)

2. If the wall moves towards the fill (soil) pressure will increase and reach to passive

case. (σh = Kp σv)

3. More deformation is generally required to achieve passive case than the active

case.

Kp

Ko

Ka

From backfill

50

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

25

Lateral Earth Pressure

51

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Rankine’s Earth Pressure Theory:

Assumptions:

• The soil is homogeneous and isotropic

• Frictionless wall

• Failure surfaces are planar

• The ground surface is planar

• The wall is infinitely long (plane strain condition)

• At the active or passive state (plastic equilibrium, every point in soil about to fail)

• The resultant on the back of the wall is at angle parallel to ground surface

52

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

26

Lateral Earth Pressure

Rankine’s Earth Pressure Theory:

53

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Rankine’s Earth Pressure Theory – Force Diagram:

C β

P Force Equilibrium

T N

A θ

P

N

β

T

W

θ

54

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

27

Lateral Earth Pressure

Rankine’s Theory – Critical Angle of Failure Plane:

The angle (θ) when the thrust (P) reaches the maximum value for the

condition or the minimum value for the passive condition

At the active state:

θcritical = 45o + φ / 2

At the passive state:

θcritical = 45o - φ / 2

55

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

Rankine’s Theory – Earth Pressure Distribution (c’=0):

H P = (1/2) K γ H2

β

PH = P cosβ = (1/2) K γ H2 cosβ

H/3

σ = K σz = K γ H

β

56

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

28

Lateral Earth Pressure

For β ≤ φ’: Ka =

cos β + cos 2 β − cos 2 φ '

2

For β ≤ φ’: Kp =

cos β − cos 2 β − cos 2 φ '

2

57

Dr. Mesut Pervizpour ENGR-627 Fall 2004

29

- Basic Study on the Behavior of Landslides During EarthquakesUploaded byBarry Ocay
- Application of soil nail method for slope stability purposeUploaded byvictoryeung
- Project Design ConsiderationsUploaded byHRNERR
- Slope StabilityUploaded byZadeh Norman
- Module I - Intro and Field WorkUploaded byShishir_Kadam_2138
- Evaluation of Shear Strength CharacteristicsUploaded byImran Sabbir
- Slide VerificationManual Part2Uploaded byJaen Paúl Onofre V
- Slope Getting StartedUploaded byDini Kumala Putri
- Chapter 10- WSDOT Geotechnical Design ManualUploaded bytryabcdef
- lec14Uploaded byRamesh Selvaraj
- nchrp_rpt_611Uploaded bytigredealica
- Chapter 2-Soil Strength Behaviour Part 1Uploaded byAsyraf Fadzil
- Seismic Slope StabilityUploaded byMUHAMMAD ALI
- 01.CivilUploaded bySriram
- hoek and diederichUploaded byNicoGonzalez
- Insight into the seismic response of earth dams with an emphasis on seismic coefficient estimation.pdfUploaded byIonut Patras
- Evolution of Force Distribution in Three-dimensional Granular MediaUploaded bysaikatistotoi
- Lesson5Uploaded byapi-19878202
- EarthquakeUploaded byShreya Bhargava
- H Rock StrengthUploaded byJosue Segama
- Slipforming in Vertical ConcreteUploaded bySantanu Ghosh
- Module 6 Earth Pressure(1)Uploaded byJake Harb
- Tutorial 1.pdfUploaded bymostafa
- Geotechnical Design MannulUploaded byJie Zhou
- Tutorial 01 Quick StartUploaded byMauricio Santisteban Campos Robles
- Normalized Shear Modulus Reduction and Damping Ratio Curves of Quartz Sand and Rhyolitic Crushed RockUploaded bygavisita123
- Mark - FrictionUploaded byGökhan Özmen
- Lab Report - FinalUploaded byStephen McCann
- CHAPTER 2Uploaded byaxe123anish
- Lit. Rev. - Cetin & Soylemez (2004) - Soil-particle and Pore Orientations During Drained and Undrained Shear of a Cohesive Sandy Silt-clay SoilUploaded byJun Kang

- ACI - Crack CalculationsUploaded byLuis Ariel B. Morillo
- AaaUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- 014-wiryanto-2007Uploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Native Plants - Green Building AllianceUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- RC Lecture 14 Design of ColumnsUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- _GE2230 Peer Review Form (2018)Uploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Leris Online Step by StepUploaded byPRC Board
- 26 Time Management HacksUploaded byRajeev K Nair
- 26 Time Management HacksUploaded byRajeev K Nair
- Bps ModulesUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- information and pool_etabs_manuals_english_E-TN-CBD-AISC-ASD89-012 (1).pdfUploaded byJose Luis Soto Petralanda
- Shells and Domes Sec 201Uploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- FAQUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- che-checklist.xlsUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- NUS Graduate Scholarship for ASEAN NationalsUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Home the Steps of Building a HomeUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Stage Setup.pdfUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- enroll_ugUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Certificate Template.docxUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- AE ReviewUploaded bymrfidley
- Design and Analysis of Shell structuresUploaded byShivareddy Kondakindi
- PitoUploaded byPorki Velazques
- IdsUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Shells and Domes Sec 201 (1)Uploaded bydplpthk1502
- Dx 7 BrochureUploaded byPorki Velazques
- PPT - MAINUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Construction Schedule Template 05Uploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- MatrimonyUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- Ng Uhms ManualUploaded byAngel Lisette Lao
- water-08-00467-v2Uploaded byAngel Lisette Lao

- Inventory and Prediction of Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle EmissionsUploaded byAshish Chaudhari
- (794006897) motor de induccion.docxUploaded byJose
- Research Areas for Mechatronics EngineeringUploaded byRohithGiridharan
- tofuyoUploaded byDavindar Singh
- Introduction to LeanPPD.pdfUploaded byFábio Baixia
- Weight of Piping MaterialUploaded byraobabar21
- CP Intestinal Obstruction PathoPhysiologyUploaded byKatherine 'Chingboo' Leonico Laud
- Charter Preference SheetUploaded bygabriellacta
- [LCT-0001] EEE 101 IntroductionUploaded byAnonymous EnggrUsm
- Reinforcing an aluminum/GFRP co-cured single lap joint using inter-adherend ﬁberUploaded byimudjdnk
- Bechem AutomotiveUploaded byRajib Dutta
- TesUploaded byAuza
- Applications of Discrete Event Simulation to Reliability and Availability Assessment in Civil Engineering StructuresUploaded bylvielma
- Serial Communication Protocol Conversion and Circular Buffer Implementation in FPGA using VerilogUploaded byIOSRjournal
- Part_7_e-Sept14_013Uploaded byrishabhk28995
- Union Station Intermodal Transportation Center Feasibility StudyUploaded byDistrict Department of Transportation
- Ansys Polyflow BrochureUploaded byCesar Ap Barbosa
- Diesel Power PlantUploaded byArudhra Nerella
- Fresenius 4008 HDF Hemodialysis System - Technical ManualUploaded bychanlal
- DonaldUploaded byEmilio Emi
- Toshiba HayabusaUploaded bySaurabh
- Sample exam 2 phys 1Uploaded byJoshua DiCamillo
- Dental SUPPLIES PRICE SHEETUploaded byasasupplies
- Dragon Fire AdeptUploaded byMaard Vyll
- RESERVES RE-ESTIMATION USING SCAL TO VALIDATE Sw MODEL FROM NEURAL NET PROCESSED OLD LOGS.Uploaded byari_si
- Performance Evaluation of Geometric Active Contour (GAC) and Enhanced Geometric Active Contour Segmentation Model (ENGAC) for Medical Image SegmentationUploaded byAlexander Decker
- Annexure-XIIIUploaded byArnab_Purkait_4708
- Montana Modeling Guideline For Air Quality PermitsUploaded byfranny73p
- SIGNAL STRENGTH AND ENERGY AWARE RELIABLE ROUTE DISCOVERY IN MANETUploaded bynitin_manj
- Consolidated Vendor List - FIT OUT - HUL ProjectUploaded byPremPujari