ICC SoilsEarthworkandFoundations 2015.pdf
$30.85
Soils, Earthwork and Foundations: A Practical Approach Based 2015 IRC and IBC
| Published By | Publication Date | Number of Pages |
| ICC | 2015 | 295 |
2020 City of Los Angeles amendment pages for integration with the 2019 California Building Code
PDF Catalog
| PDF Pages | PDF Title |
|---|---|
| 1 | SOILS, EARTHWORK, AND FOUNDATIONS |
| 2 | SOILS, EARTHWORK, AND FOUNDATIONS A PRACTICAL APPROACH BASED ON THE 2015 IRC® AND IBC® TITLE PAGE |
| 3 | COPYRIGHT |
| 4 | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| 6 | PREFACE to the 3rd EDITION |
| 7 | ABOUT THE AUTHORS |
| 8 | ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
| 10 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 11 | IMAGE: FAILURE OF THE TRANSCONA GRAIN ELEVATOR |
| 12 | CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 WHY THIS BOOK? 1.2 WHAT THE BOOK IS AND WHAT IT’S NOT 1.3 GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 1.4 GEO-HAZARDS |
| 13 | 1.5 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 16 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 17 | FIGURE: LEANING TOWN OF PISA |
| 18 | CHAPTER 2 THE PURPOSE OF FOUNDATIONS AND A FOUNDATION’S RELATIONSHIP TO SOIL 2.1 PURPOSE OF FOUNDATIONS FIGURE 2.1 BEARING PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 2.2 BEARING CAPACITY FAILURE 2.1.1 FAILURE OF EARTH |
| 19 | 2.1.2 DISTORTION OF FOUNDATION FIGURE 2.3 SETTLEMENT WITHOUT SHEAR FAILURE OF SOIL FIGURE 2.4 EXAMPLE OF FOUNDATION MOVEMENT DUE TO SHRINKING AND SWELLING |
| 20 | FIGURE 2.5 EXAMPLE OF EXPANSION AND SETTLEMENT OCCURING ON SAME SIT 2.2 RELATIONSHIPS AMONG SOIL, ROCK AND FOUNDATIONS FIGURE 2.6 RELATIONSHIP OF FOOTING SIZE AND LOAD MAGNITUDE |
| 21 | FIGURE 2.7 RELATIONSHIP OF FOOTING SIZE AND BEARING CAPACITY FIGURE 2.8 SELECTION OF FOUNDATION ELEMENT BASED ON EARTH PRESENT 2.3 FOUNDATION LOADS |
| 23 | TABLE 2.1 MINIMUM UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LIVE LOADS, L0, AND MINIMUM CONCENTRATED LIVE LOADSg (2015 IBC Table 1607.1) |
| 24 | TABLE 2.1—continued MINIMUM UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LIVE LOADS, L0, AND MINIMUM CONCENTRATED LIVE LOADSg (2015 IBC Table 1607.1) TABLE 2.1—continued MINIMUM UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LIVE LOADS, L0, AND MINIMUM CONCENTRATED LIVE LOADSg (2015 IBC Table 1607.1) |
| 25 | TABLE 1607.1—continued MINIMUM UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LIVE LOADS, Lo, AND MINIMUM CONCENTRATED LIVE LOADSg (2015 IBC Table 1607.1) 2.4 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 26 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 27 | FIGURE: GEOLOGIC OUTCROP MAP OF AUSTIN, TEXAS |
| 28 | CHAPTER 3 GEOLOGY 3.1 GEOLOGY TABLE 3.1 GENERALIZED GEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE (oldest at bottom) 3.2 FORMATIONS FIGURE 3.1 GEOLOGIC OUTCROP MAP WITH RECENT DEPOSITS (Qt AND Qal) OVER CRETACEOUS AGE MATERIAL (Knm and Kwc) |
| 29 | 3.3 FAULTS FIGURE 3.2 TYPES OF FAULTS |
| 30 | 3.4 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 32 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 33 | IMAGE: LIMESTONE OF THE GLEN ROSE FORMATION |
| 34 | CHAPTER 4 ROCK 4.1 ORIGINS TABLE 4.1 PRESUMPTIVE LOAD-BEARING VALUES (2015 IBC Table 1802.2) 4.2 IDENTIFYING ROCK 4.3 ROCK AS A FOUNDATION SUPPORT |
| 35 | 4.4 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 36 | CHAPTER 5 SOIL CHAPTER TOC |
| 37 | IMAGE: SHRINKAGE CRACKS INDICATE A CLAY SOIL THAT HAS A HIGH CAPABILITY TO SHRINK OR SWELL WHEN MOISTURE CONTENT IS CHANGED |
| 38 | 5.1 ORIGIN FIGURE 5.1 TYPICAL SOIL PROFILES OVER ROCK |
| 39 | 5.2 CLASSIFICATION FIGURE 5.2 PLASTICITY CHART |
| 40 | FIGURE 5.3 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURE |
| 41 | TABLE 5.1 PROPERTIES OF SOILS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO THE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (2015 IRC Table R405.1) 5.3 BEARING AND STRENGTH |
| 42 | 5.4 COMPRESSIBILITY FIGURE 5.4 DEPTHS OF SIGNIFICANT PRESSURE INCREASE |
| 43 | 5.5 EXPANSIVE SOILS (SHRINK AND SWELL) FIGURE 5.5 DISTRIBUTION OF EXPANSIVE SOILS IN THE UNITED STATES |
| 44 | FIGURE 5.6 DRYING FROM TREE ROOTS CAUSING SOIL SHRINKAGE FORMING A SURFACE “BASIN” FIGURE 5.7 VEGETATION EFFECTS ON FOUNDATIONS – TREE ROOTS EXTENDING UNDER FOUNDATION. THE SHRINKAGE OF CLAY SOILS WILL CAUSE THE FOUNDATION TO LOSE SUPPORT. FIGURE 5.8 ROOT BARRIER |
| 45 | 5.6 LATERAL STABILITY FIGURE 5.9 EVIDENCE OF DOWNHILL CREEP |
| 46 | FIGURE 5.10 “J” TREE – AN INDICATOR OF DOWNHILL CREEP FIGURE 5.11 PAVEMENT JOINT SEPARATION DUE TO LATERAL MOVEMENT CAUSED BY DOWNHILL CREEP FIGURE 5.12 DOWNHILL CREEP AND PIER-SHAFT FAILURE 5.7 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL 5.8 FROST HEAVE |
| 47 | 5.9 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 48 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 49 | IMAGE: MAJOR WATER PROBLEM DUE TO SEEPING GROUNDWATER |
| 50 | CHAPTER 6 GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER 6.1 GROUNDWATER 6.1.1 AQUIFERS 6.1.2 PERCHED WATER 6.1.3 SEASONAL OR INTERMITTENT WATER 6.2 NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF UNCONTROLLED GROUNDWATER |
| 51 | 6.3 SITE WATER PROBLEMS 6.3.1 EVIDENCE OF PROBLEMS 6.3.2 SURFACE DRAINAGE TECHNIQUES 6.3.3 SUB-SURFACE DRAINAGE TECHNIQUES |
| 52 | FIGURE 6.1 EXAMPLE OF TYPICAL DRAINAGE PROVISIONS FOR A RESIDENCE |
| 53 | FIGURE 6.2 SUBDRAIN DETAIL FIGURE 6.3 BARRIER AND SUBDRAIN |
| 54 | FIGURE 6.4 PROTECTION FROM WATER PENETRATION OF HABITABLE AREAS BELOW GRADE 6.4 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 56 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 57 | FIGURE: A BORINGS PLAN |
| 58 | CHAPTER 7 SITE INVESTIGATIONS CHAPTER 7 SITE INVESTIGATIONS 7.1 PURPOSE 7.2 PRELIMINARY STUDIES 7.3 PLANNING THE INVESTIGATION |
| 59 | 7.4 FIELD PROCEDURES FIGURE 7.1 PORTABLE DRILL RIG FIGURE 7.2 TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILL RIG FOR SITE INVESTIGATION |
| 60 | FIGURE 7.3 BACKHOE AND TEST PIT FIGURE 7.4 SOLID AND HOLLOW-STEM CONTINUOUS AUGERS FIGURE 7.5 TUNGSTEN CARBIDE ROCK BIT SOLID-STEM AUGER FIGURE 7.6 ROTARY WASH BIT FIGURE 7.7 DOUBLE-TUBE CORE BARREL DISASSEMBLED FIGURE 7.8 ROCK CORES OBTAINED WITH CORE BARREL |
| 61 | 7.5 SAMPLING FIGURE 7.9 SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER USED FOR FINE-GRAIN SOILS FIGURE 7.10 SPLIT-SPOON SAMPLER USED FOR SANDY SOILS 7.6 LOGGING |
| 62 | FIGURE 7.11 KEEPING THE FIELD LOG 7.7 FIELD TESTS FOR GROUNDWATER 7.8 FIELD TESTS FOR CONSTRUCTABILITY 7.9 OTHER SITE OBSERVATIONS |
| 63 | FIGURE 7.12 FIELD LOG |
| 64 | FIGURE 7.13 REPORT-READY BORING LOG |
| 65 | 7.10 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 66 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 67 | QUOTE “ONE TEST IS WORTH A THOUSAND EXPERT OPINIONS.” |
| 68 | CHAPTER 8 TESTING ROCK AND SOIL 8.1 PURPOSE 8.2 LABORATORY TESTING OF ROCK 8.2.1 STRENGTH 8.2.2 ROCK QUALITY 8.3 LABORATORY TESTING OF SOIL 8.3.1 INDEX PROPERTIES 8.3.1.1 MOISTURE CONTENT 8.3.1.2 GRAIN SIZE |
| 69 | FIGURE 8.1 VARIOUS SIEVES FOR SEPARATING GRAIN SIZES FIGURE 8.2 GRAIN-SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE |
| 70 | FIGURE 8.3 HYDROMETER TEST IN PROGRESS 8.3.1.3 PLASTICITY FIGURE 8.4 LIQUID LIMIT AND PLASTIC LIMIT TESTS 8.3.1.4 SOIL SUCTION |
| 71 | FIGURE 8.5 EXAMPLE OF ATTERBERG LIMITS RELATED TO WATER CONTENTS FIGURE 8.6 SOIL SUCTION IN PF APPROXIMATELY RELATED TO VARIOUS SOIL CONDITIONS 8.3.1.5 EXPANSION INDEX TABLE 8.1 CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL |
| 72 | 8.3.2 ENGINEERING PROPERTIES 8.3.2.1 STRENGTH FIGURE 8.7 TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST DEVICE 8.3.2.2 COMPRESSIBILITY |
| 73 | FIGURE 8.8 CONSOLIDOMETER TEST DEVICE 8.3.2.3 EXPANSION TABLE 8.2 CLASSIFICATION OF SWELLING SOIL BASED ON PLASTICITY INDEX |
| 74 | FIGURE 8.9 SOIL CONSOLIDATION CURVE SHOWING EFFECT OF PRE-CONSOLIDATION PRESSURE ON SETTLEMENT FIGURE 8.10 RELATION OF CONFINING VERTICAL PRESSURE TO EXPANSION 8.3.2.4 PERMEABILITY |
| 75 | 8.3.3 OTHER TESTS 8.3.3.1 SULPHATES 8.3.3.2 ACIDITY 8.3.3.3 ORGANICS 8.4 LOW-TECH OR EXPEDIENT ESTIMATES 8.4.1 SHAKE TEST FOR SILTS AND SANDS FIGURE 8.11 WET SHAKING TEST 8.4.2 BALL AND RIBBON TEST FOR PLASTICITY FIGURE 8.12 RIBBON TEST |
| 76 | 8.4.3 STRENGTH ESTIMATE BY FINGERS, POCKET PENETROMETER OR TORVAN TABLE 8.3 SOIL CONSISTENCY FIGURE 8.13 POCKET PENETROMETER AND TORVANE 8.4.4 ESTIMATE OF GRAIN SIZES BY VISUAL METHODS FIGURE 8.14 VISUAL EXAMINATION OF COARSE-GRAIN SOILS 8.4.5 ESTIMATE OF EXPANSION POTENTIAL 8.4.6 FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION |
| 77 | 8.5 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 80 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 81 | IMAGE: SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTS |
| 82 | CHAPTER 9 ANALYSIS OF SITE INFORMATION AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 9.1 SOILS REPORT CONTENTS 9.2 DETERMINING TYPE OF FOUNDATION 9.3 ALLOWABLE BEARING VALUES |
| 83 | FIGURE 9.1 SETTLEMENT OF FOOTING ON SAND FROM STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE TABLE 9.1 COMPARISON OF ROCK SFAE-BEARING VALUES IN PSF 9.4 SETTLEMENT ESTIMATES 9.5 SHRINK AND SWELL ESTIMATES 9.6 SKIN FRICTION ON PIERS OR PILES |
| 84 | 9.7 LATERAL LOADS ON WALLS, PIERS, OR PILES |
| 85 | TABLE 9.2 TYPES OF BACKFILL FOR RETAINING WALLS TABLE 9.3 FIGURE 9.2 LATERAL FORCES ON PIERS OR PILES 9.8 CONSTRUCTION APPROACHES 9.9 SPECIAL SPECIFICATIONS |
| 86 | FIGURE 9.3 EXAMPLE OF SELECT UNDERSLAB FILL SPECIFICATION 9.10 AGGRESSIVE SOILS 9.11 GOOD REPORTS/BAD REPORTS 9.12 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A FORMAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT |
| 87 | 9.13 GOOD FOUNDATION PLANS 9.13.1 IDENTIFICATION 9.13.2 SOIL DATA AND DESIGN CRITERIA REFERENCES 9.13.3 RESPONSIBILITY 9.13.4 PLAN FEATURES 9.13.5 PLAN NOTES AND SPECIFICATIONS |
| 88 | 9.13.6 DOES THE DESIGN FOLLOW GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS 9.13.7 FOUNDATIONS NOT DESIGNED BY AN ENGINEER 9.14 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 89 | FIGURE 9.4 TYPICAL FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES AND SHORT SPECIFICATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL OR LIGHT COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION |
| 92 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 93 | IMAGE: SITE EARTHWORK |
| 94 | CHAPTER 10 EXCAVATION AND GRADING 10.1 WHAT ARE EXCAVATION AND GRADING 10.2 DEFINITIONS RELATING TO EXCAVATIONG AND GRADING |
| 95 | 10.3 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS |
| 96 | FIGURE 10.1 TYPICAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN |
| 97 | 10.4 EXCAVATION 10.5 FILL 10.5.1 DEFINITION OF FILL 10.5.2 ENGINEERED FILL FIGURE 10.2 MOTORIZED COMPACTOR ROLLING FILL IN A CONTROLLED SETTING TO PRODUCE“ENGINEERED FILL” FIGURE 10.3 FIELD DENSITY TEST USING NUCLEAR DENSITY METER |
| 98 | 10.5.3 COMPACTION CONTROL FIGURE 10.4 TECHNICIAN PERFORMING THE PROCTOR TEST TO OBTAIN MAXIMUM LABORATORY DENSITY OF A SOIL MATERIAL FIGURE 10.5 EXAMPLE OF A PROCTOR CURVE |
| 99 | 10.5.4 FORMING FILL 10.5.5 UNCONTROLLED FILL 10.5.6 FILL PLACEMENT |
| 100 | 10.5.7 FOUNDATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR FILL 10.5.7.1 SETTLEMENT |
| 101 | FIGURE 10.6 PROOF ROLLING TO ASSIST IN ACCEPTANCE OF UNCONTROLLED FILL AND VERIFICATION OF OVERALL STABILITY IN NEW WORK. A FULLY LOADED DUMP TRUCK OR WATER TRUCK MAY BE USED. THE INSPECTOR WALKS NEAR THE LOAD VEHICLE TO NOTE SOFT OR YIELDING AREAS. OVERLAPPING WHEEL PATHS ARE USED. 10.5.7.2 BEARING 10.5.7.3 HEAVE 10.5.7.4 CONSTRUCTABILITY |
| 102 | FIGURE 10.7 REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT TECHNIQUE WITH SUBDRAIN 10.6 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL |
| 103 | 10.7 RETAINING WALL BACKFILL 10.8 VALLEY FILL 10.9 COMPACTION CONTROL TO REDUCE SWELLING 10.10 HYDROCONSOLIDATION AND HYDROCOLLAPSE 10.11 APPENDIX J OF THE 2015 IBC |
| 104 | 10.12 EARTHWORK EQUIPMENT FIGURE 10.8 LARGE BACKHOE. THESE ARE USED FOR UTILITY TRENCHES OR LOCALIZED EXCAVATION AND LOADING HAUL TRUCKS FIGURE 10.9 SMALL BACKHOE. THESE ARE USEDIN SITUATIONS SIMILAR TO THE LARGE BACKHOE BUT FOR SMALLER WORK. FIGURE 10.10 BULLDOZER. THESE ARE USED TO PERFORM SURFACE EXCAVATION OR LOCAL DEEP EXCAVATIONS AS WELL AS SPREADING SOIL OR SELECT FILL IN LIFTS. BULLDOZERS CAN ALSO BE USED TO ASSIST OTHER EQUIPMENT SUCH AS WHEELED SCRAPERS BY PUSHING OR PULLING FIGURE 10.11 WHEEL TRACTOR-SCRAPER. THIS IS A CATERPILLAR 627H, A TWIN-ENGINE OPEN-BOWL SCRAPER WITH ACAPACITY OF 24 CU. YDS. AND A LOADED TOP SPEED OF 33 MPH. IT CAN CUT (EXCAVATE) A 10-FOOT-WIDE BY 12-INCH-THICK LAYER OF SOIL, MOVE IT TO ANOTHER AREA, AND DISCHARGE THE SOIL IN A CONTROLLED LAYER OF FILL. OTHER METHODS OF EXCAVATING, FILLING, AND MOVING EARTH INCLUDE BULLDOZERS, EXCAVATORS, AND HAUL TRUCKS ANDMOTOR GRADERS. HOWEVER, THE WHEEL TRACTOR SCRAPER IS MORE EFFICIENT ON LARGE JOBS. |
| 105 | FIGURE 10.12 WATER TRUCK USED TO ADJUST SOIL MOISTURE TO APPROXIMATELY OPTIMUM FOR EFFECTIVE COMPACTION OR CONTROL DUST ON A JOB SITE. FIGURE 10.13 VIBRATORY PAD-FOOT ROLLER. THIS IS ACATERPILLAR CP64 USED TO COMPACT CLAY ORGRANULAR SOILS. IT IS MOST EFFECTIVE FOR GRANULAR OR SANDY SOILS. PADS CAN BE ROUNDOR SQUARE. THE TAPER OF THE PADS REDUCES SOILFLUFFING DURING PAD UP-LIFT. THE DRUM WIDTH IS 84 INCHES AND RATE OF PRODUCTION OFCOMPACTED ROAD BASE OR SOIL IS ABOUT 500 CU.YDS. / HR. VIBRATION FREQUENCY AND ROLLER WEIGHT CAN BE ADJUSTED TO PROVIDE OPTIMUM RESULTS. VIBRATION FREQUENCY IS STANDARD AT 1914 VPM, UP TO 1800 VPM FOR LARGE MODELS.VIBRATION AMPLITUDE CAN BE EITHER 0.070 INCHESOR 0.035 INCHES PRODUCING CENTRIFUGAL FORCE OF 63,300 LBS. OR 31, 600 LBS. FOR HEAVY CLAY, THE TAPERED-FOOT, 4-WHEEL COMPACTOR ORTHE OLDER SHEEPS FOOT ROLLERS ARE MOST EFFECTIVE. FIGURE 10.14 VIBRATORY DRUM ROLLER. THIS CATERPILLAR CS64IS SIMILAR TO THE PAD-FOOT ROLLER, BUT USES ASMOOTH ROLLER DRUM. IT IS OFTEN USED TO SMOOTH AND FINISH A SUBGRADE, THE SURFACE OFPAVEMENT BASE COURSES, OR TOP OFF BUILDING FOUNDATION PADS. FIGURE 10.15 FOUR-WHEEL SOIL COMPACTOR. THIS IS A CATERPILLAR 815F SERIES 2 SOIL COMPACTOR. IT IS PRIMARILY USED FOR COMPACTION AND IS VERY USEFUL FOR HEAVY CLAY. THE TAMPING WHEEL TIP CONFIGURATION HAS A “CHEVRON” SHAPE TO INCREASE MAXIMUM GROUND PRESSURE. SIMILARTO THE TAPERED-PAD MACHINES, COMPACTION IS FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE LIFT, AND THE TIPS WALKOUT WHEN COMPACTION IS ACHIEVED. THE BLADEALSO PERMITS SPREADING FILL. DEPENDING ON SLOPE, BLADE LOAD, AND GEAR SELECTION, THE COMPACTOR CAN OPERATE AT 4 TO 12 MPH.OPERATING WEIGHT IS ABOUT 46,000 LBS. |
| 106 | FIGURE 10.16 PNEUMATIC ROLLER. THE TOTAL WEIGHT OF THIS MACHINE RANGES FROM 19,000 LBS. EMPTY TO 55,000 LBS.WITH MAXIMUM BALLAST LOAD. BALLAST CONSISTS OF WATER, STEEL BOLT-ON WEIGHTS, STEEL WEIGHTS PLUS WATER, AND STEEL PLUS WET SAND. THE PNEUMATIC TIRES PRODUCE AN ECCENTRIC OR WOBBLE MOTION THAT SERVES TO KNEAD THE SOIL. TIRE AIR PRESSURE CAN RANGE FROM 35 TO 110 PSI. THE RUBBER TIRES CAN HAVE THE CONTACT PRESSURE ADJUSTED BY AIR PRESSURE AND CHANGE OF BALLAST. GROUND CONTACT PRESSURES CAN BE VARIED FROM 71 TO 83 PSI AVERAGE. MAXIMUM CONTACT PRESSURES CANRANGE FROM 130 TO 140 PSI SINCE THE CONTACT PRESSURE IS NOT UNIFORM. ROLLING SPEED IS ABOUT 5MPH, AND COMPACTION WIDTH IS 90 INCHES. THE BEST USE OF THIS MACHINE IS TO COMPACT SANDY CLAY AND CRU FIGURE 10.17 MOTOR GRADER. THIS CATERPILLAR 14M MOTOR GRADER WEIGHS 47,000 LBS. AND HAS A 14-FOOT BLADE,WHICH CAN BE ANGLED UP TO 65°. IT IS EQUIPPED WITH A RIPPER ON THE REAR THAT CAN RIP TO A DEPTH UPTO 16 INCHES. DURING HEAVY GRADING THE MACHINE MOVES AT UP TO 6 MPH. FOR FINISH GRADING, LOWER GEARS ARE USED FOR MAXIMUM PRECISION, AND SPEEDS ARE ABOUT 3 MPH. THIS MACHINE IS USED FOR MOVING EARTH FOR PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION, GENERAL AREA GRADING, AND FINISH GRADING OF BASES. THE RIPPER IS USED TO BREAK UP HARD EARTH OR ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT PRIOR TO BLADING. MOTORGRADERS ARE USED FOR BUILDING-SITE PREPARATION, ROAD CONSTRUCTION, DITCH CONSTRUCTION, AND SNOW REMOVAL. BLADING ON SIDE BANKS UP TO 2H:1V CAN BE DONE |
| 107 | FIGURE 10.18 RECLAIMER/STABILIZER. THIS MACHINE MAY BE USEDTO CUT OUT OLD ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT AND BASE MATERIAL, MIX IT WITH LIME OR CEMENT, AND LEAVEA LIFT OF STABILIZED MATERIAL FOR COMPACTION. ITIS NORMALLY USED IN PAVEMENT WORK TO PRODUCE SUB-BASE OR BASE LAYERS FIGURE 10.19 DISC PLOW. THIS IS AGRICULTURE-BASED EQUIPMENT USED IN CONSTRUCTION FOR SCARIFYING SOIL FOR MOISTURE CONDITIONING,BLADING, AND COMPACTION. DIFFERENT MODELSARE AVAILABLE WITH 10-FOOT OR 16-FOOT CUTTING WIDTHS AND WEIGHTS OF 15,000 TO 21,000 LBS. THEPLOW IS PULLED BY A TRACTOR OR BULLDOZER. THE HORSEPOWER REQUIRED VARIES WITH THE TYPE OFSOIL AND WORKING DEPTH. 10.13 GRADING CONTROL |
| 108 | 10.14 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 110 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 111 | IMAGE: EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE |
| 112 | CHAPTER 11 SOIL AND SEISMICS 11.1 WHY CLASSIFY SITE SOILS FOR SEISMIC CONDITIONS? 11.2 SITE CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURE (2015 IBC Section 1613.3.2) TABLE 11.1 SITE CLASS DEFINITIONS (2006 IBC Table 1613.5.2) |
| 113 | 11.3 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 116 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 117 | IMAGE: A FOOTING FOUNDATION |
| 118 | CHAPTER 12 SPREAD OR STRIP FOOTINGS (SECTION R403 OF THE 2015 IRC AND SECTIONS 1808 AND 1809 OF THE 2015 IBC) 12.1 BEARING CAPACITY CHECK 12.2 SETTLEMENT CHECK 12.3 FOOTING DESIGN FIGURE 12.1 USE OF SPREAD AND STRIP FOOTINGS ON A ROCK SITE 12.4 INSTALLATION |
| 119 | FIGURE 12.2 FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES (TAKEN FROM 2015 IBC FIGURE 1808.7.1) 12.5 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 122 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 123 | IMAGE: A PIER DRILLING RIG SETTING A CASING AT THE LEANING TOWER OF PISA |
| 124 | CHAPTER 13 PIER FOUNDATIONS (SECTION 1810 OF THE 2015 IBC) 13.1 WHEN TO USE PIER FOUNDATIONS FIGURE 13.1 PIER DRILL RIG 13.2 ESTABLISHMENT DEPTHS 13.3 END BEARING AND SKIN FRICTION |
| 125 | FIGURE 13.2 CONSIDERATION FOR PIER DEPTH ESTABLISHMENT FIGURE 13.3 ELEMENTS IN DESIGN OF PIERS CONSIDERING END BEARING AND SKIN FRICTION |
| 126 | 13.3.1 BELLS OR STRAIGH SHAFTS 13.3.2 PIERS AND EXPANSIVE SOIL FIGURE 13.4 INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PIERS AND SOIL-SUPPORTED SLAB IN SWELLING CLAY 13.4 REINFORCEMENT |
| 127 | FIGURE 13.5 TYPICAL HEAVILY REINFORCED UNDER REAMED PIERUSED IN EXPANSIVE CLAY 13.5 INSTALLATION 13.5.1 IN ROCK 13.5.2 IN STIFF CLAY 13.5.3 BOULDER DEPOSITS 13.5.4 WATER AND CAVING HOLES |
| 128 | 13.6 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 130 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 131 | IMAGE: A VILLAGE BUILT ON PILE OIN A SWISS LAKE |
| 132 | CHAPTER 14 PILE FOUNDATIONS (SECTION 1810 OF THE 2015 IBC) 14.1 WHEN TO USE PILE FOUNDATIONS 14.2 TYPES OF DRIVEN PILES 14.3 DRIVEN PIL CAPACITY 14.3.1 DESIGN 14.3.2 TEST PILES (SECTION 1810.3.3.1.2 of the 2015 IBC) |
| 133 | FIGURE 14.1 TEST PILE LOAD AND SETTLEMENT 14.4 DRIVEN PILE INSTALLATION FIGURE 14.2 TIMBER PILE FIGURE 14.3 PRE-CAST CONCRETE PILE |
| 134 | FIGURE 14.4 PRE-CAST CONCRETE PILING OVER WATER FIGURE 14.5 STEEL PIPE PILE |
| 135 | 14.5 HELICAL PILES FIGURE 14.6 HELICAL PILES 14.6 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 138 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 139 | IMAGE: HEAVY MAT FOUNDATION WITH MULTIPLE BASEMENTS |
| 140 | CHAPTER 15 RAFT OR MAT FOUNDATION 15.1 WHEN TO USE RAFT FOUNDATIONS 15.2 TYPES 15.2.1 STIFFENED MATS FIGURE 15.1 LARGE MAT UNDER A HEAVY BUILDING 15.2.2 UNIFORM THICKNESS MATS |
| 141 | FIGURE 15.2 TYPICAL PLAN AND CROSS SECTION OF A STIFFENED MAT FIGURE 15.3 CROSS SECTION OF A LIGHT UNIFORM THICKNESS MAT 15.3 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 15.3.1 SOIL STRESS DISTRIBUTION |
| 142 | 15.3.2 LOW STRENGTH SOILS 15.3.3 COMPRESSIBLE SOILS 15.3.4 EXPANSIVE SOILS FIGURE 15.4 RIGID MAT ON SAND FIGURE 15.5 RIGID MAT ON CLAY |
| 143 | FIGURE 15.6 TYPICAL SOIL SUPPORT CONDITIONS ON EXPANSIVE CLAY FOR A SHALLOW FOUNDATION |
| 144 | 15.4 MILD STEEL REINFORCED MATS FIGURE 15.7 CROSS SECTION OF A MILD STEEL REINFORCED MAT FOR A TYPICAL RIBBED (STIFFENED) SLAB 15.5 POST TENSIONED REINFORCED MATS |
| 145 | FIGURE 15.8 PLAN AND CROSS SECTION OF A POST-TENSIONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL FOUNDATION 15.6 LIGHT STRUCTURES ON GOOD SOILS FIGURE 15.9 RANGE OF TYPICAL SLAB FOUNDATION CONFIGURATION DEPENDING ON SOIL TYPE. COST DIFFERENCE IS OBVIOUS 15.7 INSTALLATION |
| 146 | FIGURE 15.10 POST-TENSIONED RIBBED MAT SET-UP AND CONCRETE PLACEMENT 15.8 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 148 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 149 | IMAGE: TYPICAL INTERIOR OF WAREHOUSE WITH SOIL SUPPORTED SLAB FLOOR AND STRUCTURAL FOOTINGS |
| 150 | CHAPTER 16 SOIL-SUPPORTED SLAB FLOOR WITH STRUCTURAL FOOTINGS 16.1 DESCRIPTION 16.2 WHEN TO USE A SOIL SUPPORTED SLAB FLOOR WITH STRUCTURAL FOOTINGS FIGURE 16.1 TYPICAL HYBRID FOUNDATION 16.3 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS |
| 151 | FIGURE 16.2 TYPICAL COLUMN BLOCK-OUT DETAIL WITH EXPANSION JOINTS SEPARATING THE SLAB FROM PIER OR FOOTING.DIAMOND POINTS CONNECT WITH SLAB CONTROL JOINTS FIGURE 16.3 DIAMOND BLOCKOUT AT COLUMN FOOTING |
| 152 | 16.4 INSTALLATION FIGURE 16.4 TYPICAL CONTROL / CONSTRUCTION JOINTS. A CONSTRUCTION JOINT WILL ALSO ACT AS A CONTROL JOINT |
| 153 | 16.5 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 154 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 155 | IMAGE: WATER INJECTION TO STABILIZE EXPANSIVE CLAY SITE |
| 156 | CHAPTER 17 SITE-STABILIZATION TECHNIQUES 17.1 REASONS FOR SITE STABILIZATION 17.2 REMOVE AND REPLACE SOIL 17.2.1 USE OF MOISTURE CONDITIONED SOIL 17.2.2 REPLACEMENT WITH SELECT FILL 17.3 CHEMICAL AND WATER INJECTION |
| 157 | FIGURE 17.1 LIME INJECTION FOR EXPANSIVE SITE STABILIZATION 17.4 VERTICAL FOUNDATION MOISTURE BARRIERS FIGURE 17.2 TYPICAL VERTICAL FOUNDATION MOISTURE BARRIER FOR USE IN EXPANSIVE CLAY 17.5 HORIZONTAL FOUNDATION MOISTURE BARRIERS |
| 158 | FIGURE 17.3 TYPICAL FOUNDATION HORIZONTAL BARRIER FOR USE IN EXPANSIVE CLAYS 17.6 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 160 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 161 | IMAGE: FAILURE OF RETAINING WALL |
| 162 | CHAPTER 18 RETAINING STRUCTURES (SECTION R404 OF THE 2015 IRC AND SECTIONS 1610, 1806, AND 1807.2 OF THE 2015 IBC) 18.1 WHEN RETAINING STRUCTURES ARE NEEDED 18.2 TYPES OF RETAINING STRUCTURES FIGURE 18.1 CRIB GRAVITY WALL 18.3 VARIOUS LIMITATIONS |
| 163 | FIGURE 18.2 STACKED-ROCK GRAVITY WALL FIGURE 18.3 CANTILEVER CONCRETE WALL |
| 164 | FIGURE 18.4 ANCHORED BULKHEAD (OFTEN USED AT WATERFRONT) FIGURE 18.5 SEGMENTAL BLOCK WALL WITH TENSILE ANCHORAGE. THESE WALLS ARE ALSO KNOWN AS MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH STRUCTURES (MSE). |
| 165 | FIGURE 18.6 BASEMENT WALL 18.4 GENERAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES 18.4.1 EARTH PRESSURES |
| 166 | FIGURE 18.7 TRIANGULAR FORCE DISTRIBUTION AGAINST A RETAINING WALL. ASSUMPTION TYPICALLY USED IN DESIGN TABLE 18.1 SOIL LATERAL LOAD (TAKEN FROM 2015 IBC, Table 1610.1) |
| 167 | 18.4.2 BEARING AND SLIDING RESISTANCE FIGURE 18.8 INCREASED FOOTING TOE PRESSURE DUE TO OVERTURNING LATERAL FORCE AND SLIDING RESISTANCE OF WALL FOOTING 18.4.3 ACTIVE AND AT-REST PRESSURES 18.4.4 REINFORCEMENT STEEL IN CONCRETE WALLS |
| 168 | FIGURE 18.9 TYPICAL RETAINING WALL REINFORCEMENT |
| 169 | 18.5 WATER AND RETAINING STRUCTURES 18.6 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 172 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 173 | IMAGE: TYPICAL SMALL LAND SLIP |
| 174 | CHAPTER 19 SLOPE STABILITY 19.1 TYPES OF SLOPE INSTABILITY 19.2 DANGERS OF SLOPE INSTABILITY 19.3 STABILIZATION TECHNIQUES 19.3.1 SUB DRAINAGE 19.3.2 SLOPE REDUCTION 19.3.3 STRUCTURAL SOLUTIONS |
| 175 | FIGURE 19.1 EFFECT OF SLOPE REDUCTION FIGURE 19.2 USE OF PIERS IN SLOPE STABILIZATION 19.3.4 CHEMICAL STABILIZATION |
| 176 | 19.4 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 178 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 179 | IMAGE: FOUNDATION “RED LIGHT” |
| 180 | CHAPTER 20 RECAP OF SITE AND FOUNDATION “RED LIGHTS” 20.1 SITE RED LIGHTS 20.1.1 LOW BEARING CAPACITY 20.1.2 SETTLEMENT 20.1.3 EXISTING UNCONTROLLED FILL 20.1.4 SLOPE STABILITY 20.1.5 DANGEROUS SEISMIC CONDITIONS 20.1.6 FROST HEAVE 20.1.7 CONSTRUCTABILITY PIERS OR PILES 20.1.8 PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT CUT OR FILL 20.1.9 GROUNDWATER PROBLEMS |
| 181 | 20.2 FOUNDATION RED LIGHTS 20.3 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 182 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 183 | IMAGE: FOUNDATION INSPECTION |
| 184 | CHAPTER 21 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION 21.1 ELEMENTS OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION 21.2 APPROVED DRAWINGS 21.3 CRITICAL POINTS 21.3.1 SITE PREPARATION 21.3.2 PIER INSPECTION |
| 185 | 21.3.3 PILING INSPECTION 21.3.4 SPREAD OR STRIP FOOTING BEARING 21.3.5 STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION 21.3.6 REINFORCEMENT INSPECTION 21.3.6.1 REBAR FIGURE 21.1 A POORLY SET-UP REBAR FOUNDATION NOT READY FOR CONCRETE PLACEMENT 21.3.6.2 POST TENSIONING REINFORCEMENT |
| 186 | FIGURE 21.2 BADLY “HONEYCOMBED” CONCRETE APPARENT AFTER FORM REMOVAL DUE TO INADEQUATE VIBRATION DURING PLACEMENT FIGURE 21.3 POST-TENSIONING CABLES SET UP IN FORM. LIVE OR STRESSING END ANCHORS ARE ON THE RIGHT. DEAD END ANCHORS ARE ON THE LEFT. MISSING CABLE SHEATH IS REPLACED WITH TAPE. |
| 187 | FIGURE 21.4 STRESSING POST-TENSIONING CABLES AFTER FORM REMOVAL, USING HYDRAULIC RAM. INSPECTOR IS RECORDING MAXIMUM RAM HYDRAULIC PRESSURE. FIGURE 21.5 PAINT MARK ON CABLE AND ORIGINAL MARKING BLOCK TO PERMIT MEASURING CABLE ELONGATION AFTER STRESSING FIGURE 21.6 UNCONTROLLED MOISTURE MEMBRANE WRAPPED AROUND PRE-STRESS CABLES AND CUTTING THROUGH STIFFENER BEAM CONCRETE FIGURE 21.7 CONCRETE WAS PLACED IN A 2-INCH LAYER AND THE PLANT BROKE DOWN. THE CONCRETEIS DRYING, AND A MAJOR HORIZONTAL COLD JOINTIS BEING FORMED. 21.3.7 CONCRETE QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS |
| 188 | FIGURE 21.8 INSPECTOR OBSERVING THE TYPE OF CONCRETE IN READY-MIX TRUCK. BATCH TICKETS SHOULD ALSOBE OBTAINED TO VERIFY THE CORRECT MIX IS DELIVERED AND TO COMPLETE THE RECORD. FIGURE 21.9 SLUMP TEST ON FRESH CONCRETE. SLUMP IS SPECIFIED ON PLANS OR IN THE JOB SPECIFICATIONS FIGURE 21.10 STRENGTH-TEST CONCRETE CYLINDERS BEING CAST ON JOB SITE 21.3.8 FINISHED GRADES AND DRAINAGE 21.4 EARTHWORK INSPECTIONS 21.4.1 SITE PREPARATION |
| 189 | 21.4.2 ELEVATION CONTROL 21.4.3 SLOPE MEASUREMENT |
| 190 | FIGURE 21.11 PORTION OF SITE GRADING PLAN |
| 191 | 21.4.4 SOIL MATERIAL CONTROL 21.4.5 COMPACTION CONTROL 21.4.6 IDENTIFICATION OF CUTS OR FILLS ON A SITE |
| 192 | FIGURE 21.12 CROSS-SECTIONS OF A CUT-FILL SITE AND A FILL-ONLY SITE 21.5 INSPECTIONS OF SMALL ROADWAYS AND PARKING LOTS 21.5.1 SMALL ROADWAYS 21.5.1.1 GEOMETRY |
| 193 | FIGURE 21.13 FILL FOUND ON SITE BY OBSERVATION 21.5.1.2 DRAINAGE 21.5.1.3 GRADING 21.5.1.4 PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL SECTIONS |
| 194 | 21.5.1.5 INSPECTIONS |
| 195 | 21.5.2 PARKING LOTS 21.5.2.1 GRADING 21.5.2.2 DRAINAGE 21.5.2.3 PAVEMENT SECTIONS 21.6 INSPECTION REPORTING |
| 196 | 21.7 INSPECTIONS BY BUILDING OFFICIALS OR SPECIAL INSPECTORS (SECTION R104.4 and R109 of the 2015 IRC and SECTIONS 104.4, 110, 1704, and 1705 of the 2015 IBC) 21.7.1 INSPECTIONS 21.7.2 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR 21.7.3 QUALIFICATIONS FOR SPECIAL INSPECTORS |
| 197 | TABLE 21.1 SPECIAL INSPECTOR CERTIFICATION EXAMS (TABLE C-1 OF THE SPECIAL INSPECTION MANUAL) 21.7.4 SPECIAL INSPECTIONS OF FOUNDATIONS AND EARTHWORK |
| 198 | TABLE 21.2 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR SPECIAL INSPECTORS (TABLE C-2 OF THE SPECIAL INSPECTION MANUAL) |
| 199 | TABLE 21.2–continued MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR SPECIAL INSPECTORS (TABLE C-2 OF THE SPECIAL INSPECTION MANUAL) |
| 200 | TABLE 21.3 REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION (TAKEN FROM TABLE 1705.3 OF THE 2015 IBC) |
| 201 | TABLE 21.4 REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF SOILS (TAKEN FROM TABLE 1705.6 OF THE 2015 IBC) TABLE 21.5 REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF PILE FOUNDATIONS (TAKEN FROM TABLE 1705.7 OF THE 2015 IBC) TABLE 21.6 REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION OF PIER FOUNDATIONS (TAKEN FROM TABLE 1705.8 OF THE 2015 IBC) |
| 202 | 21.8 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 204 | CHAPTER TOC |
| 205 | IMAGE: FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE |
| 206 | CHAPTER 22 FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE 22.1 FOUNDATION NON PERFORMANCE 22.2 EVIDENCE OF NON PERFORMANCE FIGURE 22.1 OVERALL TILT OF FOUNDATION FIGURE 22.2 DISTORTION OF FOUNDATION – EDGE-LIFT MODE FIGURE 22.3 DISTORTION OF FOUNDATION – EDGE-DROP OR CENTER-LIFT MODE 22.3 REMEDIATION DESIGN |
| 207 | FIGURE 22.4 FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE – BRICK CRACKING FIGURE 22.5 FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE – DISPLACED BRICK VENEER. THIS IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION DUETO FALLING BRICK FIGURE 22.6 FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE – WALL CRACK AND DOOR FRAME OUT OF SQUARE.IF DOORS CANNOT BE OPENED OR LOCKED,THEY ARE SAFETY HAZARDS |
| 208 | FIGURE 22.7 FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE – FOUNDATION DISTORTING. SEE ROOF LINE. CAUSE IS EXPANSIVECLAY AND LEAKING PLUMBING WHERE GRASS IS GREENER. FIGURE 22.8 INSTALLING REMEDIAL PIERS AROUND EXTERIOR OF BUILDING FIGURE 22.9 INSTALLING INTERIOR REMEDIAL PIER BY OPENING FOUNDATION. BECAUSE OF THE INTERIOR DESTRUCTION, INTERIOR PIERS ARE OFTEN INSTALLED BY TUNNELING ACCESS BELOW THE FOUNDATION. 22.4 REMEDIATION CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION |
| 209 | 22.5 TEST QUESTIONS |
| 210 | GLOSSARY |
| 220 | TEST QUESTION ANSWERS CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION CHAPTER TWO THE PURPOSE OF FOUNDATIONS AND A FOUNDATION’S RELATIONSHIP TO SOIL |
| 221 | CHAPTER THREE GEOLOGY CHAPTER FOUR ROCK CHAPTER FIVE SOIL |
| 222 | CHAPTER SIX GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER CHAPTER SEVEN SITE INVESTIGATIONS |
| 223 | CHAPTER EIGHT TESTING SOIL AND ROCK CHAPTER NINE ANALYSIS OF SITE INFORMATION AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS |
| 224 | CHAPTER TEN EXCAVATION AND GRADING CHAPTER ELEVEN SOIL AND SEISMICS |
| 225 | CHAPTER TWELVE SPREAD OR STRIP FOOTINGS CHAPTER THIRTEEN PIER FOUNDATIONS |
| 226 | CHAPTER FOURTEEN PILE FOUNDATIONS CHAPTER FIFTEEN RAFT OR MAT FOUNDATIONS |
| 227 | CHAPTER SIXTEEN SOIL-SUPPORTED SLAB FLOOR WITH STRUCTURAL FOOTINGS CHAPTER SEVENTEEN SITE-STABILIZATION TECHNIQUES |
| 228 | CHAPTER EIGHTEEN RETAINING STRUCTURES CHAPTER NINETEEN SLOPE STABILITY |
| 229 | CHAPTER TWENTY RECAP OF SITE AND FOUNDATION “RED LIGHTS” CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION |
| 230 | CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO FOUNDATION NON-PERFORMANCE |
| 232 | APPENDIX EXAMPLE OF SOILS REPORT |
| 234 | EXAMPLE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOUNDATION AND PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS |
| 256 | APPENDIX A GEOTECHNICAL DATA |
| 271 | APPENDIX B STANDARD FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES |
| 278 | METRIC UNITS, SYSTEM INTERNATIONAL (SI) UNIT CONVERSION TABLES SI SYMBOLS AND PREFIXES |
| 284 | INDEX |
| 292 | ICC MEMBER BENEFITS |
| 293 | ICC PLAN REVIEW SERVICES |
| 294 | GET IMMEDIATE DOWNLOADS OF THE STANDARDS |
| 295 | ICC CODE CERTIFICATION |
