TRB Pubsindex
Text Size:

Title:

Improvement of the Geotechnical Axial Design Methodology for Colorado’s Drilled Shafts Socketed in Weak Rocks
Cover of Improvement of the Geotechnical Axial Design Methodology for Colorado’s Drilled Shafts Socketed in Weak Rocks

Accession Number:

01023523

Record Type:

Component

Availability:

Transportation Research Board Business Office

500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001 United States
Order URL: http://www.trb.org/Main/Public/Blurbs/156938.aspx

Find a library where document is available


Order URL: http://worldcat.org/isbn/0309094100

Abstract:

Drilled shaft foundations embedded in weak rock formations support a large percentage of bridges in Colorado. Since the 1960s, empirical methods that entirely deviate from the AASHTO design methods have been used for the axial geotechnical design of these shafts. The margin of safety and expected shaft settlement are unknown in these empirical methods. Load tests on drilled shafts provide the most accurate design and research data for improvement of the design methods. Four Osterberg axial load tests were performed in Denver on drilled shafts embedded in soil-like claystone, very hard sandy claystone, and extremely hard clayey sandstone. An extensive program of simple geotechnical tests was performed at the load test sites, including standard penetration tests (SPT), unconfined compressive strength tests (UCT), and pressuremeter tests (PMT). Information on the construction and materials of the test shafts was documented, followed by thorough analysis of all test results. Conservative equations were suggested to predict the unconfined compressive strength and mass stiffness of weak rocks from SPT and PMT data. Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and AASHTO–FHWA design methods for drilled shafts were thoroughly assessed. Design equations to predict the shaft ultimate unit base resistance (q sub max), side resistance (f sub max), and an approximate load–settlement curve as a function of the results of simple geotechnical tests were developed. The qualifications and limitations for using these design methods are presented (e.g., construction procedure, field conditions). Finally, a detailed strategic plan to identify the most appropriate design methods per LRFD for Colorado’s drilled shafts was developed.

Monograph Title:

Soil Mechanics 2005

Monograph Accession #:

01023507

Language:

English

Authors:

Abu-Hejleh, Naser M
O'Neill, Michael W
Hanneman, Dennis
Attwooll, William J

Pagination:

pp 100-107

Publication Date:

2005

Serial:

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

Issue Number: 1936
Publisher: Transportation Research Board
ISSN: 0361-1981

ISBN:

0309094100

Media Type:

Print

Features:

References (10) ; Tables (3)

Geographic Terms:

Subject Areas:

Bridges and other structures; Data and Information Technology; Design; Geotechnology; Highways; I24: Design of Bridges and Retaining Walls; I43: Rock Mechanics

Files:

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Created Date:

Apr 26 2006 9:59AM

More Articles from this Serial Issue: