Soil pinpoint is the insertion of solid or hollow steel or glass fiber bars into the face of an dig or an existing slope to reinforce it, transferring region of the load from the potentially mentally ill mass to more competent level, typically where the potentially fluid mass has a maximal thickness of 6 to 8 m. The face of the gradient is protected by shotcrete and welded wire interlock, geogrid/geotextiles sheets and cast-in-place concrete or prefabricated panels .
The technique has been developed in France, Germany and United States over the past 25 years or so ( Guilloux and Schlosser, 1985 ; Nicholson, 1986 ; Bruce and Jewell 1986a ; 1986b ; Munfach et aluminum. ; 1987 ; Juran and Elias, 1987 ; Gnilsen, 1988, Recommendations Clouterre, 1991 ; Byrne et al., 1998 ; Mitchell and Jardine, 2002 ; Phear et al., 2005 ), as a development of the “ ancestor piles ” technique in the first place developed in the 1950 ’ mho described by Lizzi ( 1977 ) ; Bruce ( 1992a, barn ). Its application has extended to a wide variety show of prime types, from soils to weathered and un-weathered rocks ; while the term “ background nail ” might be a more desirable generic term, “ soil nail ” has become established as the normally accepted generic terminology and is used here for nails installed in all types of ground which can be handily described as continuoum. Case histories are listed for example in Bruce and Jewell ( 1987a ; 1987b ) and Bruce ( 1989 ) .
A typical construction sequence for drilled and grouted nails is described below and shown in Figure 1 ; alternate methods of installations include percussive methods or vibro-drilling ( Myles and Bridle, 1991 ), combinations of oscillation driving with injections and driving nails by compressed tune or firework launchers A distinctive application is shown in Figure 2.
- initiation of ditches to intercept and divert surface water ; exacavation/trimming in stages of limited height ( typically 1 or 2 megabyte ), minimizing ground noise and remove loosened areas, leaving a working judiciary of 5÷7 megabyte width. For initiation in existing slopes, extra provision must be made for entree ( long strive booms, sledges or like ) .
- Dilling of smash holes at bias locations to a specified distance and tilt using drilling methods appropriate for the reason, supporting the drillhole with shell, if required, although this will often have unplayful adverse impact on the cost potency of soil breeze through. Bentonite or other mud suspensions should not be used, as “ smear ” on the drillhole walls can importantly reduce the grout-to-ground attachment. typical drillhole size : 100 to 300 millimeter ; spacing : 1 to 2 megabyte, both vertically and horizontally ; inclination : 15° below horizontal to facilitate grout ; length : 6 to 15 megabyte ( up to 28 m using large hydraulic-powered track-mounted rigs with continuous fledge augers ) .
- initiation and grout of nails. formative or sword centralizers are normally used to center the nail down in the drillhole ; stiffer grout mix may be alternatively used to maintain the put of the nail and prevent it from sinking to the bottom of the hole. The sword nails are normally 25 to 50 mm in diameter ; solid or hollow ; the give persuasiveness is 420 to 500 N/mm2. Steel nail down diameter smaller than 25 mm are not recommended due to difficulties associated with placement of such flexible tendons in drill holes. Grouting takes put under gravity or low pressure from the bottom of the fix upwards. Grouted steel nails protected alone by the grout ring are not generally considered adequate for permanent application in some countries ; in this cases, extra security against corrosion may be given by sacrificial thickness, by heavy epoxy coating and by encapsulating it in a grout-filled corrugate plastic sheathing. “ Self-drilling nails ” ( Figure 3 ) can be used where capable trap drill is not possible or practical. however, they require particular corrosion considerations and testing procedures to be considered for permanent wave applications. In general the self-drilling nails should not be used in aggressive anchor ( as defined in Byrne et al., 1998 ) and coatings should not be considered acceptable corrosion protection, which can be assured lone by providing sacrificial steel .
- placement of drain system and initiation of the construction face and of the behave plates. Prefabricated synthetic drain mats are placed in erect strips ( about 400 mm wide ) between the smash heads at horizontal spacing equal to that of the nails. The drain strips are extended toss off to the root of the structure and connected either directly to a footing drain or to weep holes that penetrate the concluding wall confront. If water is encountered, short horizontal drains are by and large required to intercept the water before it reaches the confront. The construction facing typically consists of a mesh-reinforced shotcrete layer of the order of 100 mm thick. Following placement of the shotcrete a steel behave home plate ( typically 200 mm x 250 mm square and 20 mm thick ) and securing nut are placed at each nail forefront and the nut is hand wring tightened sufficiently to embed the denture a small distance into the placid plastic shotcrete .
- progressive construction to the final class. In excavation or on boastfully slopes, the process described at steps 1 to 4 is repeated in stages to the final grad. The utmost bench height and construction sequence must be verified cautiously, to ensure stability at all stages of construction .
- final lining. For retentive term geomorphologic lastingness, a concrete facing or a second level of shotcrete is last applied on the expose surface. Rip blame or biotechnological finishes besides applied, particularly in landslide stabilization works .
Figure 2: Typical section of soil nailing for slope remediation (source: SGI project files)
In subject of permanent wave reinforcing stimulus and manipulation of drill and grouting methods, the steel bar is encapsulated in a cement grouted torso to provide corrosion protection and improved load-transfer to the dirt ; the steel measure is besides typically protected with a heavy epoxy application or by encapsulation in a grout-filled corrugated plastic sheathe. For other installation methods protective covering against corrosion can be provided by sacrificial thicknesses ; BS 8006:1995 gives steering on sacrificial thicknesses for startle and non-galvanised nails. When shotcrete confront is not adopted, corrosion security at the breeze through capitulum may be provided by precat or cast-in-place concrete head details .
Nails are characterized by “ continuous ” reinforcement with transfer of shear tension along the full moon length of the inclusion body. The effect is to reduce nail forces at the face, allowing the use of merely a thin cover, chiefly to resist erosion or slump of the face .
The nails are installed horizontally or suborizontally, approximately parallel to the commission of major tensile straining in the territory. The collar work predominantly in tension, but are considered to work besides in bending/shear, specially where the orientation is perpendicular to the anticipated fleece surface ; in these cases nails may more properly be called dowels .
The nails contribute to the support of the land partially by immediately resisting the destabilize forces and partially by increasing the normal loads ( and therefore the shear force ) on potential sliding surfaces ( see Figure 3 of fact tabloid 6.0 on the general aspects of venture extenuation by transfer of load to more competent level ). The reinforcements are passive and develop their action through nail-soil interaction as the dirty deforms ; the font protection need to be installed in arrange to keep the dirt from caving in between the bars .
Figure 3: schematic detail of self-drilling hollow soil nail (source: SGI project files)
The reinforce land body ( breeze through plus face security ) becomes the chief geomorphologic element ; in fact, the built zone performes as a homogeneous resistant unit to support the unreinforced dirty behind it in a manner similar to a graveness wall. ( Stocker et al., 1979 ) .
The proficiency offers several advantages :
- construction tractability in heterogenous soils with cobbles, boulder and other hard inclusions, as the obstructions offer no problems for the relatively humble diameter breeze through drillholes .
- well suited to sites with unmanageable or distant access because of the relatively small size and mobility of the equipments .
- high system redundancy as the soil nails are installed at high density and the consequence of a unit failure are therefore correspondingly less severe .
- The system is relatively full-bodied and flexible and can accommodate significant total and differential displacements .
- dirt nail has been documented to perform well under seismic load conditions ( See for example Felio et al., 1990 ) .
- Additional nails can easily be installed during construction, if slope movements occur or is greater than expected .
- The method acting is well suited for rehabilitation of distressed retain syructures .
The disadvantages of the proficiency are chiefly linked to its constructability, in relation to nature of earth to be reinforced and/or bearing of groaundwater percolating through the font ; in general, the economical use of dirty nail down requires that the anchor be able to stand during structure. In addition, when the drill and grout methods is adopted, it is highly desirable that the open drillhole can maintain its stability for at least respective hours. Therefore difficulties can be experienced in :
- informal clean sands and gravels or coarse grained soils of uniform size unless in a very dense circumstance ; these soils will not generally parade adequate stand-up clock time and are besides medium to oscillation induced by construction equipments .
- Soils with excessive water content or below the groundwater ; significant groundwater seepage at the queer face can cause serious problems ( e.g. local depression ; drillhole instability, impossibility to obtain a satisfactory ground-grout bail ) .
- Organic soils or argillaceous soils with Liquidity Index greater than 0.2 and undrained shear strength less than 50 kPa ; remoulding caused by nail installation in may reduce skin friction to unacceptable values .
- Higly fracture rocks with open joints or voids and open graded coarse materials ( e.g. cobbles ), geotextile nail socks or abject slump grout may be necessary in such materials to mitigate the trouble of satisfactorily grouting the nails .
- Rock or decomposed rock ‘n’ roll with weak structural discontinuities inclined steeply toward and daylighting into the cut face .
Expansive ( e.g. swelling ) soils ; these soils may result in significant increases in the complete cargo near the face. Water must be prevented from reaching expansive soils that are dirt nailed.
Read more: 10 Types Of Manicures You Should Know About
It should besides be noted that the long-run performance of shotcrete facings has not been fully demonstrated, peculiarly in areas subjected to freeze-thaw cycles. In these circumstances it is recommended that the invention prevents frost from penetrating the territory by provision of an allow protective structure ( e.g. chondritic or synthetic isolate layer ) .
special attention must be paid in both the design and the construction stage to the consequence of corrosion and lastingness of the structural elements. For further guidance on this consequence, reference may be made to Recommendations Clouterre ( 1991 ), Phear et alabama. ( 2002 ) and Byrne et aluminum. ( 1998 ), who besides provides detail recommendations on drain and frost security .
back to top
As highlighted by Mitchell and Jardine ( 2002 ), there is placid much discussion about the judgment of the demeanor and stability of complete structures. A discussion on the differences between the design approaches widely used in Europe and the United States, as reported in Schlosser ( 1983 ) and Juran and Beech ( 1984 ), can be found in Juran and Elias ( 1987 ), Gnilsen ( 1988 ), Jewell ( 1990 ), Jewell and Pedley ( 1990a ; 1990b ; 1990c ; 1991 ), Bridle and Barr ( 1990 ) and Schlosser ( 1991 ) .
Solutions to the problem want :
- Carrying out appropriate dirt structure interaction analyses to investigate the home stability of the composite system made up by nails, facing and land, both in the “ active zone ” near to the face, where the shear stresses exterted by the soil on the support are directed outward and tend to pull the support out of the reason, and in the “ repellent zone ”, where the fleece stresses are directed inbound and tend to restrain the strengthener from pulling out .
- evaluation of the overall constancy of the collar structure, considered as a massive retain social organization ( external stability ) .
For inner constancy to be achieved, the nail tensile potency must be adequate to provide the back force to stabilize the active blockage. The nails must besides be embedded a sufficient duration into the immune zone to prevent a disengagement bankruptcy .
In addition, the blend effect of the breeze through steer forte ( as determined by the strength of the confront or joining system ) and the disengagement resistance of the length of the smash between the face and the strip surface must be adequate to provide the want nail tension at the slip come on ( interface between active and immune zones ) .
All likely failure modes, which involve : a ) confront failure ( active zone slides off the movement of nails ) ; b ) disengagement of nails from the insubordinate partition ; speed of light ) structural failure of nails ( in tension, bending or fleece ), must be analysed individually ( simplify procedures ) or simultaneously ( progress approaches ) .
major difficulties in finding rigorous and authentic solutions for the home stability of the breeze through structure derive from the fact that both the forces acting in the nails and the forces acting on the facing are governed by the distortion behavior of the entire system, which, in change by reversal, depends on the geometric and mechanical characteristics of the diverse elements ( including the dirt ), together with the sequence, rate and method acting of construction. For exercise, the latter may influence the load transplant characteristics between dirt and smash. The construction of dirt nailed structure involve a critical phase with esteem to inner or external stability, which can be lower during the construction phase than when the support is finally built. consequently, internal and external stability of the breeze through structure shall be checked for all the construction phases ( Figure 4 ) .
Figure 4: Stability of excavation phase in CEBTP No.2 experimental wall (after Recommendation Clouterre, 1991)
The simplest and most widely adopted method to investigate both home and external stability of land nailed structures is based on the slip surface limit equilibrium method by incorporating the reinforcing effect of the nails, including circumstance of the strength of the collar forefront joining to the facing, the strength of the breeze through tendon itself and the disengagement resistance of the nail-ground interface. typically, the analyses are carried out with reference to Ultimate Limit States, with the order of magnitude of deformations ( Servicibility Limit States ) controlled indirectly by application of allow values of partial derivative factors in ULS calculations. Where deformations are critical, it becomes necessity to resort to numeric analyses .
The contribution of any nail to the constancy of a particular skid coat will be the least of a ) the ductile strength ( shear/bending contributions neglected ) or the “ ideal ” strength ( shear/bending contributions considered ) of the breeze through ; b ) the disengagement resistance of the length of nail beyond the skid airfoil ; c ) the complete point lastingness plus the disengagement resistance of the length of nail between the strip surface and the expression of the queer surface. All potential surfaces must be examined to ensure that the design is complete .
The potential contribution of shear and/or crouch of the nails to the overall resistance of the system is typically negligible and in any font unmanageable to evaluate, with different procedures being proposed in the literature ( Schlosser, 1982 ; Schlosser, 1983 ; Blondeau et al., 1984 ; Jewell and Pedley, 1990a, bel ; Juran et alabama. 1990 ; Schlosser, 1991 ). experimental studies ( for case Jewell and Pedley, 1990a, b ) have shown that this contribution is less than 10 % of that provided by ductile forces and is only achieved after boastfully displacements, as besides stated by Gässler ( 1990 ) .
In font of drill and grout method acting of nail down installation, the disengagement resistor of the complete will be the least of ground-grout adhere and grout-tendon alliance. Ground-grout bind is powerfully dependant on the method of construction ; for this cause both disengagement tests and short-run creep tests are a standard separate of nail preliminary testing for assay and calibration of the design before starting with the construction activities ; in short-run creep tests, the rate of crawl of the nail down will increase as the use load increases ; a creep rate exceeding 6 mm/60 minutes is broadly considered impossible ( see for model Byrne et al., 1998 ) .
For preliminary design evaluation of ground-grout bond, character can be made for exemplar to Bustamente and Doix ( 1985 ). More by and large, reference point may be made to the charts proposed by Recommendation Clouterre ( 1991 ) which relate disengagement resistance to the type of dirt and the method of facility, topic constantly to verification by disengagement tests in the field .
Pullout tests can besides be carried out in the lab, but the boundary conditions of the apparatus and the idealization of the sphere conditions mean that the results from such tests are not always realistic .
In case of continuous threadbars, grout-tendon bind is typically an order of magnitude or more higher than the ground-grout bind and is consequently not critical for dirty nail applications when proper grout mix and facility techniques are used .
The potency of the smash head may be controlled by the flexural and punchning shear strength of the face ; these strengths are normally determined by specific morphologic analyses, taking into report the grid layout of the nails ; some examples are given by Byrne et aluminum. ( 1998 ) and by Phear et aluminum. ( 2005 ). other likely failure mechanisms do exist for the smash head ; however,
these modes will not normally control the design or limit the breeze through promontory persuasiveness for the types of systems normally employed in dirt nail structure structure. For discontinuous facing elements, the front plate should be checked against bear failure ( see DoT Advice Note HA 68/94, 1994 for steering ). external stability refers to the potential contortion modes typically associated with graveness or cantilever retain structures and involves considerations of :
- horizontal sliding and/or overturning under the lateral earth pressure of the background retained behind the reinforce mass .
- Bearing capacity failure under the compound effect of self weight and lateral earth blackmail load .
- Overal slope stability of the establish on which the land pinpoint structure is located .
In the simplify procedure, both inner and external stability analyses are normally carried out in 2D ( plane sift ) conditions .
In order to check both stability and deformation demeanor of the land nail structure the analyses carried out with the simplify operation can be supplemented by dependable soil-nail-facing interation analyses with the manipulation of finite chemical element ( FE ) methods ; the best border on is to use 3D models, where the nail is modelled explicitly as is ; often the 3D geometry is such that it can be simplified considering isotropy in the exemplary .
In electrostatic conditions, the dependability of the design method acting depends on the chastise choice of the operational forte parameters of the territory and on the right model of the ground-grout cargo transfer curves ; uncertainties can be minimized by preliminary pull-out tests .
The inner and external constancy under seismic conditions can be investigated by means of pseudo-static methods and/or finite element methods ; the external stability can be besides investigated by means of Newmark type of analysis. The dependability of pseudo-static analyses depends on the same factors affecting static analyses, with the summation of uncertainties on the appropriate values of pseudo-static seismic coefficient kh to be used ; Newmark type analyses must be carried out for a boastfully issue of firm gesticulate records and the results must be treated by statistical techniques to minimize error .
FEM analyses retain all the limitations of the simple methods, except that they can incorporate a more detailed constituent model of soil behavior, overcoming the motivation to preselect operational values of strength, arsenic well as geometric simplifications .
taxonomic monitoring and report of operation is necessary, both to verify that the social organization performs as anticipated and to enhance confidence and expertness in the habit of this proficiency in the future, specially in clean of continuing consider on the best methods of design. In particular, monitoring of any lateral pass outward motion of the front is highly desirable. Designers should detail monitor requirements ( type, location, frequency and data treatment ) as an built-in separate of the design .
performance monitor instrumentation should include slope inclinometers, survey points and breeze through loads at the promontory and along the nail length to measure movements and stresses during and after construction .
sufficient environmental monitoring should besides be carried out to provide the necessary framework for interpretation of performance monitor. environmental monitor should include, as a minimum, temperatuire variations and groundwater levels .
monitoring should continue for a time period of at least 2 years after construction, in order to gather data as a function of fourth dimension and environmental changes such as freeze-thaw cycles and/or variations in groundwater levels .
For far details on the purpose of dirty complete stuctures, reference may made to the guidelines published in France ( Recommendation Clouterre, 1991 ) ; the United Kingdom ( DoT, 1994 ; BSI, 1995 ; Phear et al., 2005 ) and the United States ( Byrne et al., 1998 ; Lazarte et al., 2003 ).
back to top
Functional suitability criteria
Type of movement
|Fall||7||Applicable to slides and in special circumstances to falls and topples in cemented or stiff/hard cohesive soils.|
back to top
|Earth||9||Applicable to earth and debris. In very coarse debris drilling can be problematical and launching is precluded.|
back to top
Depth of movement
|Surficial (< 0.5 m)||8||Practical soil nail lengths and the need to achieve sufficient anchorage in the underlying stable soil limit the application of this technique to situations where the residual thickness of the actual or potential landslide to be stabilized is significant.|
|Shallow (0.5 to 3 m)||9|
|Medium (3 to 8 m)||7|
|Deep (8 to 15 m)||0|
|Very deep (> 15 m)||1|
back to top
Rate of movement
|Moderate to fast||0||Workers’ safety and end result require construction to take place when movement is extremely slow or very slow (maximum 1.5 m/year, corresponding to approximately 5 mm/day).
Under special conditions and taking due precautions it may be carried out when movement is ”slow” (up to 1.5 m/month, corresponding to 5 cm/day) .
back to top
Ground water conditions
|Artesian||0||Drillhole stability where groundwater may be encountered should be reviewed carefully, since the use of temporary casing, if required, would normally make this technique excessively expensive. Groundwater seepage at the surface must be avoided, incorporating suitable drainage works, with the risk of local slumping before the draingae works are effective.|
back to top
|Rain||8||Where sliding is due to channelized water, construction difficulties may be expected and there may be special requirements for the facing.|
back to top
Reliability and feasibility criteria
|Reliability||6||Successful application depends on correct schematization and characterization of the landslide, design and construction detail, correct application.|
|Feasibility and Manageability||6||There is over 25 years experience with the technique, but it is still susceptible to technological and design improvements.|
back to top
Urgency and consequence suitability
|Timeliness of implementation||6||Requires specialist equipment; special arrangements may be required for access on existing slopes; simplified by launching but durability is questionable.|
|Environmental suitability||4||will be updated|
|Economic suitability (cost)||6||Moderate. Can become quite high if drillholes require temporary casing and/or special access arrangements.|
back to top
- Bridle R.J., Barr B.I.G. ( 1990 ). ” discussion on Jewell & Pedley ( 1990b ) ” Ground Engineering, vol.23, n° 6, 30-31 .
- Bruce D.A. ( 1989 ). american developments in the use of small diameter inserts as piles and in situ reinforcements ”. Proc. of Int. Conf. on Piling and deep Foundations, Deep Foundations Institute, vol. 1, 11-22 .
- Bruce D.A., Jewell R.A. ( 1986 ). ” Soil nail down : application and practices, Part 1 ”. Ground Engineering, vol. 19, n° 8, 10-15 .
- Bruce D.A., Jewell R.A. ( 1987a ). ” Soil nail : application and practices, Part 2 ”. Ground Engineering, vol. 20, n° 1, 21-38 .
- Bruce D.A., Jewell R.A. ( 1987b ). ” Soil smash : the moment decade ”. Proc. Int. Conf. on Foundations and Tunnels, vol. 2, 68-83 .
- Bruce D.A. ( 1992a ). ” recent advancement in american pinpile technology ”. Proceeedings of a league on grout, land improvement, and geosynthetics, New Orleans, R.H. Borden, R.D. Holtz, I. Juran editors, Geotechnical special Publication 30, ASCE, 2, 765-777 .
- Bruce D.A. ( 1992b ). ” Two raw specialization geotechnical processes for slope stabilization ”. Proceedings of a forte conference on stability and performance of slopes and embankments, Berkley, CA, R.B. Seed and R.W. Boulanger editors, Geotechnical Special Publication 31, ASCE, 1505-1519 .
- b 8006 : 1995 ” Code of practice for strengthened-reinforced soils and other fills ”. british Standard Institute .
- Bustamente M., Doix B. ( 1985 ). ” Une méthode pour lupus erythematosus calcul des tirants et des micropieux injectés ”. Bull. Liaison labo P. Et Ch., 140, referee. 3047, 75-92 .
- Byrne R.J., Cotton D., Porterfield J., Wolschlag C., Ueblacker G. ( 1998 ). ” Manual for Design & Construction Monitoring of Soil Nail Walls ”. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Aministration, Publication n° FHWA-SA-96-069R, Revised October 1998 .
- Gässler, G. ( 1990 ). “ In situ techniques of reinforce land. express of the artwork report card ”. Proc. BGS Conference on Performance of Reinforced Soil Structures, Glasgow, Thomas Telford, London, 185-196 .
- Gnilsen R. ( 1988 ). ” Soil nailing argue ”. Civil Engineering, ASCE, vol. 58, n° 8, 61-64 .
- Guilloux A., Schlosser F. ( 1985 ). ” Soil pinpoint : practical applications ”. Proc. of Int. symposium on late Developments in Ground Improvement Techniques, Bangkok, Balkema, 289-297 .
- Felio G.Y., Vucetic M., Hudson M., Barar P., Chapman R. ( 1990 ). ” performance of land nailed walls during the October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake ”. Proc. of 43th canadian Geotechnical Conference, Quebec, Canada .
- DoT ( 1994 ). ” Advice Note HA 69/94. Design methods for the reinforcment of highway slopes by reinforce dirt and dirt nailing techniques. ”. design manual of Roads and Bridges, vol. 4, faction. 1, part 4, The Highway Agency, HMSO, UK
- Jewell R.A. ( 1990 ). ” Review of theoretical models for dirty nailing ” Proc. of Int. Conf. on performance of reinforce territory structures, A. Mc Gown, K.C. Yeo, K.Z. Andrawes editors, Thomas Telford, 265-275 .
- Juran I., Beech J. ( 1984 ). ” theoretical analysis of the behavior of nail down dirty retaining structures ” Proc. of Int. Con. on In-Situ Soil and Rock Reinforcement, Paris, 301-307 .
- Juran I., Elias V. ( 1987 ). ” Soil nailed retain structure. analysis of casing histories ”. Proc. Spec. Conf. on Soil Improvement – a ten-spot year update, J.P. Welsh editor program, ASCE, Special Publication 12, 232-244 .
- Jewell R.A., Pedley M.J. ( 1990a ). ” Soil nailing plan – the function of bending stiffness ”. Report n° OUL 1813/90, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford .
- Jewell R.A., Pedley M.J. ( 1990b ). ” Soil nailing design – the character of bending severity ”. Ground Engineering, vol.23, n° 2, 30-36 .
- Jewell R.A., Pedley M.J. ( 1990c ). ” Replay to discussion by Bridle & Barr ( 1990 ) ”. Ground Engineering, vol.23, n° 6, 32-33 .
- Jewell R.A., Pedley M.J. ( 1991 ). ” closure to discussion by Schlosser ( 1991 ) ”. Ground Engineering ; vol. 24 n° 9, 34-39 .
- Juran I., Baudrand G., Farrag K., Elias V. ( 1990 ). ” Kinematical specify analysis for design of land nailed structures ”. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 116, 1, 54-72
- Lazarte C.A., Elias V., Espinoza D., Sabatini I.J. ( 2003 ). ” Geotechnical Circular n. 7, Soil Nail Walls ”. US Department of Transportation, FHWA, FHWA-A0-IF-03-017, Washington D.C. ( hypertext transfer protocol : //isddc.dot.gov/OLPFiles/FHWA/016917.pdf )
- Lizzi F. ( 1977 ). ” Practical mastermind in structurally complex formations ( the In Sity Reinforced Earth ) ”. Proceedings International Symposium on the Geotechnics of Structurally Complex Formations, Capri, Italy, AGI .
- Mitchell J.M., Jardine F.M. ( 2002 ). ” A lead to flat coat treatment ”. CIRIA C573, London .
- Munfakh G.A., Abramson L.W., Barksdale R.D., Juran I. ( 1987 ). ” in-situ footing support ”. Proc. Spec. Conf. on Soil Improvement – a ten year update, J.P. Welsh editor program, ASCE, Special Publication 12 .
- Myles B., Bridle R.J. ( 1991 ). ” Fixed soil nails – the car ”. Ground Engineering, vol. 24, n° 6, 38-39 .
- Nicholson P.J. ( 1986 ). ” In situ reason strengthener techniques ”. Proc. Int. Conf. Deep Foundations, Deep Foundations Institute and CIGIS, Beijing, China .
- Phear A., Dew C., Ozsoy B., Wharmby N.J., Judge J., Barley A.D. ( 2005 ). ” Soil nailing – best practice guidance ”. CIRIA C637 .
- recommendation Clouterre ( 1991 ). ” Designing, calculating, constructing and inspecting earth supported systems using territory nailing ”. french National Research Project Clouterre, Ponts et Chausséès Press, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, English translation 1993 .
- Schlosser F. ( 1982 ). ” Behaviour and design of territory nailing ”. symposium on holocene developments in grind improvement techniques, Bangkok, 399-413 .
- Schlosser F. ( 1983 ). ” Analogies and différences dans le comportement et lupus erythematosus calcul des ouvrages de soutènement en terre armée et par clouage du sol ”. Annales ITBTP, n° 418, Sols et Foundations 184, October, 8-23
- Schlosser F. ( 1985 ). ” Behaviour and blueprint of dirty nailing ”. Proc. Int. symposium on recent Developments in Ground Improvement Techniques, Bangkok, Balkema, 399-413 .
Schlosser F. ( 1991 ). ” discussion on Jewell & Pedley ( 1990b ) ” Ground Engineering, vol. 24, n° 9, 30-33.
Read more: 5 Industry Trends to Watch
- Stocker M.F., Korber G.W., Gassler G., Gudheus G. ( 1979 ). ” Soil nail ”. Proc. Int. Conf. on Soil Reinforcement, Paris, vol. 2, 469-474 .
- Vucetic M., Trufenkjian M.R., Doroudian M ( 1993 ). ” Dynamic centrifuge test of territory nailed mining ”. Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM .
back to top
Please feel free to contribute any comment here!
Please log in to leave a comment .