Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Silas Nichols Principal Bridge Engineer-Geotechnical U.S. Federal Highway Administration Office of Infrastructure Washington, DC
Uncertainty in Data
Condition
Action A1 at time t1 Action A2 at time t1 Action A2 at time t2 Uncertain Costs associated with applied actions
Uncertain Action Effectiveness 1. different actions at a given application time (t1) 2. same action at different application time (t1 vs. t2) Uncertain Time of Applying/Delaying Actions t1
t2
Why and when should Transportation owners be interested in evaluating Geotechnical Features?
During installation as part of quality control and assurance As part of periodic evaluations and inspections When some distress is visually observed When rehabilitation or reconstruction, load rating, and widening is being considered After the feature has experienced an extreme event
Differential Settlement
Soft Layer
Foundation Layer
BACKGROUND: Little if any thought has traditionally given to the short and long-term condition of Geofeatures. This situation is largely based on ignorance, a false sense of security that Transportation Assets are grossly over designed, will last FOREVER and a frustration regarding the means and methods of such evaluation (reliable, accurate, rapid and cost effective).
Historical Perspective
Small design loads, very conservative designs Geotechnical Designers had little knowledge of loads and performance requirements. Primitive specifications and construction control methods No real consideration of long-term behavior No discussion of design life and life cycle cost modeling
Historical Perspective
Lack of practical, reliable and cost effective tools to evaluate existing geofeatures Minimal consideration of deterioration models Relatively small effort devoted to determining long term behavior Perhaps most complex and difficult component to evaluate Rehabilitation and reconstruction a huge expense for transportation owners
Load magnitude and general demand per element is greatly increasing Many more choices Nominal dimensions are greatly increasing (length and crosssection). Smaller number of elements per support Demand on geotechnical and structural materials increasing (in general, lower safety factors) Better appreciation and concern of geofeatures by the structural community Designs become more deformation based sensitive and complex Much better Site Investigation and Construction Monitoring tools
EVALUATING STRUCTURAL FOUNDATIONS: What aspects of the foundation are needed for an analysis?
Foundation Types: shallow and deep (driven, drilled shafts, micropiles, auger cast) Foundation Dimensions (length, geometry) Foundation material Integrity (short/long) Load Carrying Capability Load Displacement Behavior (vertical and lateral) Knowledge of loads and desired performance
TESTING CHALLENGES
Thank You!
Silas Nichols, P.E. Principal Bridge Engineer Geotechnical FHWA Office of Bridge Technology 1-202-366-1554 Silas.Nichols@dot.gov