Shrimpfriedrice529
Geotechnical
A mat was placed on a cut/fill transition including decomposed granitics and up to about 10' of CLSM. Construction testing (using C31) revealed 1/2 the specified compressive strength for CLSM. In evaluating the impact of this result, settlement calculations are proposed to examine the performance of the low CLSM (100 psi). From our experience, 200 psi is not needed to achieve good performance.
1. I'm considering Poulous and Davis 1974, but the boundary is difficult to model. Has someone evaluated this model? Mat is 20x60'.
2. Otherwise, it is proposed that results of the simple 1D analysis be folded into Poulous and Davis Eq. 7.34 to approximate a rigid result. The 1D analysis uses consolidation index parameters from later testing of CLSM, but assumes flexible mat, which overestimates differential settlement, and unfortunately has to simply estimate compression index of DG as 1/10 of CLSM.
1. I'm considering Poulous and Davis 1974, but the boundary is difficult to model. Has someone evaluated this model? Mat is 20x60'.
2. Otherwise, it is proposed that results of the simple 1D analysis be folded into Poulous and Davis Eq. 7.34 to approximate a rigid result. The 1D analysis uses consolidation index parameters from later testing of CLSM, but assumes flexible mat, which overestimates differential settlement, and unfortunately has to simply estimate compression index of DG as 1/10 of CLSM.