0 Голоса «за»0 Голоса «против»

Просмотров: 1116 стр.Apr 04, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 11

© All Rights Reserved

- Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future
- The Day the World Came to Town: 9/11 in Gander, Newfoundland
- Seveneves: A Novel
- The Right Stuff
- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...And Others Don't
- The Path Between the Seas: The Creation of the Panama Canal, 1870-1914
- The Wright Brothers
- The Wright Brothers
- The Last Second
- Fault Lines
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- Furniture Makeovers: Simple Techniques for Transforming Furniture with Paint, Stains, Paper, Stencils, and More
- Woolbuddies: 20 Irresistibly Simple Needle Felting Projects
- State of Fear
- State of Fear
- Autonomous: A Novel

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 16

Modules 4, 5, 6 / Topic 4

EARTH PRESSURES

4.1 Introduction

A retaining structure, such s a retaining wall, retains (holds in place) soil on one side

(Fig. 4.1). The lateral pressure exerted by the retained soil on the wall is called earth

pressure. It is necessary for us to quantitatively determine these pressures as they

constitute the loading on the wall for which it must be designed both geotechnically and

structurally, the former ensuring the various aspects of stability of the wall (stability

analysis) and the latter, catering to the structural action induced in the wall by the forces

(Kurian, 2005: Sec.1.1.2). Since we deal with the limiting values of these pressures, earth

pressures are ultimate problems in Soil Mechanics. This means, at this stage the soil is

no longer in a state of elastic equilibrium, but has reached the stage of plastic equilibrium.

In situations such as the one shown in Fig. 4.2, which involves grading (removal) and

filling, the in-situ soil itself may be used as the fill. The soil which thus stays in contact

with the wall is called backfill in the sense of being the fill at the back of the wall or a fill

which is put back. However, where we have the choice for a fresh backfill material, we

would go in for cohesionless soils of high internal friction (), and permeability (k) to aid

fast drainage (Kurian, 2005: Sec.6.1).

A retaining wall permits a backfill with a vertical face. The alternative to a retaining wall

to secure the sides is to provide a wide slope (Fig. 4.3) as, for example, in road

embankments, but this needs the availability of adequate land to ensure the desired level

of stability of slopes, which may not be available in all instances. It may be noted in this

connection that sometimes backfills may themselves be laid in slopes to reduce the

heights of the wall (Fig. 4.4).

It is ideal that the water table (free water level in soil) stays below the base of the wall

without allowing it to rise into the backfill, adding to the load on the wall with water

pressure adding to the earth pressure from the submerged soil below the water table

for which it may not have been designed, rendering the design inadequate in such

eventualities. However, in situations such as water-front structures (Fig. 4.5), we have to

reckon with water, since water table will eventually rise in the backfill and attain the same

level as the free water in the front.

We shall first consider earth pressure due to dry backfills.

2

Earth pressures attain their ultimate or limiting values depending on the relative

movement of the wall with respect to the backfill.

Thus from a stationary position, if the wall starts moving away from the soil, the

pressure exerted by the soil on the wall starts decreasing until a stage is reached when

the pressure reaches its lowest value (Fig.4.6). This means that there will be no further

reduction in the pressure, if the wall moves further away from the soil. This limiting

pressure is called active earth pressure.

On the other hand, if the wall is made to move towards the soil, i.e. the wall pushes

the soil, the pressure exerted by the soil on the wall starts increasing until a stage is

reached when the pressure attains its maximum value (Fig.4.6) and as before, there will

be no further increase in the pressure if the wall moves further towards the soil. This

limiting pressure is called the passive earth pressure. In the initial at-rest state, the soil

is in a state of elastic equilibrium. From this state it reaches the states of plastic

equilibrium at the limiting active and passive states. The initial value of the earth pressure

may be called neutral earth pressure or earth pressure at-rest.

Fig. 4.7 shows quantitatively typical at-rest, active and passive earth pressure

distributions on the retaining wall. While the active pressure is about 2/3 of the at-rest

value, the passive pressure is nearly 6 times the at-rest value, or 9 times the active value

in a cohesionless soil with = 300 . Further, in a similar manner, the passive state is

mobilised at a much higher value of wall movement than the active state. Quantitatively,

the lateral wall movements are typically 0.25 % and 3.5 % of the wall height for the active

and passive pressure conditions to get fully mobilised, respectively (Venkatramaiah,

2006: Sec. 13.3).

A word of explanation is due with regard to the names active and passive. In the active

case, soil is the actuating element the movement of which leading to the active condition.

In the passive case, the actuating element is the wall leading the soil to a passive state

of resistance against the approaching wall (Venkatramaiah, 2006: Sec. 13.3).

Earth pressures are determined by earth pressure theories. The two basic theories

available for this purpose are the Rankines theory and the Coulombs theory. Of the two,

the Coulombs theory is the older one; we shall, however, take up the Rankines theory

first because of its theoretical form.

However, before setting out on the above theories of limiting earth pressures, it is

necessary for us to look at earth pressure at-rest which should be treated as a starting

case. The soil being in elastic equilibrium at this stage, we should be able to proceed

with it based on theory of elasticity considerations.

Fig. 4.8 shows an element of soil at a depth z in a semi-infinite soil mass. (Semiinfinite means the mass extends in the +x, -x, +y, -y directions, but only in the +z

(downward) directions, all to infinity. If it extends equally also in the z direction (upwards)

it would have made a fully infinite space.) The vertical and horizontal stresses in the

element are shown. The element can deform (undergo strain) in the vertical direction

only since the soil extends to infinity in the horizontal directions. Let the modulus of

elasticity and Poissons ratio of the soil be and respectively. Setting the lateral strain,

obtained from theory of elasticity to 0,

-(

)=0

(4.1)

Multiplying by

- ( + ) = 0

(1- ) =

= 1

(4.2)

= .

Therefore

If (

= (

) is denoted as

) .

set

= 0 .

(4.3)

0 being a constant, it is noted that also increases linearly with depth as itself,

starting with 0 at the surface (z = 0)

If we now revert to Topic 1, it is seen that the 0 - relationship is of the same form as

the e-n relationship. Hence 0 will plot against as in Fig. 1.3.

4

We note that 0 = 0 when = 0, a condition giving rise to 0 horizontal pressure.

Further setting 0 = 1,

=1

= 1-

2 = 1

1

2

At this value of , = = .

or in other words, and will plot identically with depth. When varies from 0 to 0.5,

will vary as increasing fractions of , as can be noted from Fig. 4.9.

Because of the difficulty in determining of a soil reliably, various empirical formulae

have been suggested among which the one attributed to Jaky (1944) is an early favourite.

It states:

0 = 1

(4.4)

Fig 4.10 plots 0 against . It bears comparison with Fig. 16 (Kurian, 2005: Sec. 6.4.1)

for which it is plotted till = 900 . It is noted from Figs. 4.9 and 4.10 that 0 increases with

, but decreases with . At = 0, applying to water, 0 = 1, following which = .

On the other hand, at = 900 , applying to rock, 0 = = 0

4.5 Rankines theory for active and passive earth pressures (1857)

Before we take up Rankines theory of earth pressure, we shall try to establish

analytically the relationship between 1 3 , the principal stresses, based on the

Mohr-Coulomb failure theory (Fig.4.11).

In the figure,

CA = CD =

1 3

2

OC = OA+AC = 3

EO = c cot

CD = EC sin

1

2

3

2

3 +1

2

5

1 3

i.e.,

=(

1 +3

2

+ )

Multiplying by 2

1 3 = (1 + 3 + 2 )

= (1 + 3 + 2

1 (1 ) = 3 (1 + ) + 2

1 = 3 (

Similarly,

3 = 1 (

Trignometrically

1

1+

1+

1

1+

1

1+

) + 2

1

1

1+

) 2

= 2 (45

1

1+

= 2 (45 + )

2

= (45 + )

2

= (45 + )

2

3 = 1 2 (45 ) 2 (45 )

2

2

1 = 3 2 (45 + ) + 2 (45 + )

2

2

(4.5)

(4.6)

Referring to Fig. 4.11, one may look upon the c- case as the -case with the origin

shifting from E to O.

In Fig. 4.12 let OA represent the vertical (principal) stress. Mohrs circles I and II are

drawn on either side of A without gap. In case I the soil is laterally relieved leading to

reduction in reaching the limiting active value at failure. In case II the soil is

pushed into itself and reaches the limiting passive value of at failure.

6

Using Eqs. (4.5) and (4.6) we can now state:

= 2 (45 ) 2 (45 )

2

2

= 2 (45 + ) + 2 (45 + )

2

2

(4.7)

(4.8)

2

2

and further = , and, therefore, =

we can further state,

= .

= . + 2

(4.9)

(4.10)

(4.11)

(4.12)

On the other hand, in the case of an ideally cohesive soil for which is 0,

= = 1, we have

= 2

(4.13)

= + 2

(4.14)

Note further that, since the plane of failure is inclined at = (45 + ), it follows

2

that = , =

The above results pertaining to and c-soils can be directly obtained from the respective

Mohrs circles as shown in Figs. 4.13 and 4.14.

The failure plane in the active state is inclined at = (45 + ) to the horizontal. If the

2

full Mohrs circle is drawn, the potential failure planes are as shown in Fig. 4.15

(Venkatramaiah, 2006: Sec.13.6.1). In the passive case, like in the active case, the failure

plane should be reckoned from the point . It can be identified that the failure planes at

passive failure are inclined at (45 ) to the horizontal. (The arcs of the Mohrs circles

2

subtending these angles are highlighted in Fig. 4.12.) The picture is the same for -soil.

In the case of the c-soil, these planes are inclined at 450 to the horizontal.

It follows from the Rankines theory that the higher the , the higher the shear strength,

the lesser the active pressure and the higher the passive pressure.

It is interesting to note that the Rankines theory for earth pressure developed for soil

can be extended to water ( = 0) on the one hand and rock ( =900 ), on the other.

When

Therefore,

= 0, = = = 1

= = 0 = = =

If increases, decreases and increases. The latter increases much faster than the

former decreases, until we reach = 900 at which = 0 and =

. As a result, =

, = 0 and = .The variations of and , and also their square roots, with are

shown in Fig. 4.16.

c- case

8

Since c and are constants, the first part of and , as per Eqs. (4.9) and (4.10)

plot linearly like , but the second parts are constants. Fig 4.17 shows the sum of these

effects. (Note that when two plots are to be added they should be drawn on opposite

sides, whereas if one is to be subtracted from the other they should be drawn on the same

side.)

It is observed from Eqs. (4.9) and (4.10) that is decreased and is increased on

account of the contribution of c. As a result of the subtraction, Fig 4.16a shows a tensile

zone to a depth z which can be determined by setting,

. Therefore =

(4.15)

Since soil cannot exist in a state of tension, it is likely that it breaks contact with the

support over this depth (Kurian, 2005: Sec. 8.8).

c-case

Fig. 4.18 shows the active and passive pressure variations in the c-case.

To obtain the depth z at which the net pressure is 0,

Setting

There are instances such as in port and harbour structures where the backfill is

subjected to heavy surcharges such as due to supporting roads, railway tracks and heavy

stationary equipments. Like any other vertical load such as the self weight of the backfill,

these surcharges add to the lateral pressure on the wall the effect of which must be taken

into account in its design.

In order to consider the influence of the surcharge, its effect is reduced to an equivalent

downward pressure, q per unit area, Fig. 4.19.

The lateral active pressure due to surcharge is q which is uniform with depth, q and

being constants. To this will be added the active earth pressure as shown in the figure.

The same figure can be obtained by converting the surcharge pressure q as an

equivalent additional height (h) of the backfill which is obtained by setting

h = q, from which h = ( )

(4.16)

9

The pressure diagram on the wall alone for the full height of the backfill including the

additional height is the same as the earlier pressure diagram as shown in the figure.

Rankines theory can easily accommodate layered backfills, if the layers concerned

are horizontal.

Let us consider the example shown in Fig. 4.20.

= 1 1

B

(4.17)

B

at +

= 1 1

1

2

at C = (1 1 + 2 2 )

(4.18)

2

1

(4.19)

The above means that there is an immediate transition at B thanks to the difference in the

shear strength parameters of layers I and II. As a result it is seen that at + undergoes

a sudden decrease thanks to the presence of c, being the same in the present case.

Theoretically speaking, at B

B

point B, whereas at point + applies to a point in layer II lying infinitesimally below point

B. If one asks what is its value exactly at point B, the theoretical answer is, it is not the

average of B

+

If the backfill is submerged fully or partially, i.e. to full height or partial height, there is

a continuous body of water running through the pore space in the soil below the water

table. The water over this height will exert full hydrostatic pressure on the wall. To this

will be added the pressure due to submerged soil over this depth and the dry soil above

(Fig. 4.21).

While submergence causes a reduction in the unit weight of the soil, the shear strength

parameters c and remain unchanged.

Submerged unit weight (Kurian, 2005: Sec.2.7.1)

The submerged weight of a continuous (i.e. non-porous) body is its weight in air

subtracted by the weight of water displaced by the body. In other words,

10

submerged weight of an object = weight in air of the object - weight of a body of water

having the same volume as the object.

That is to say, ws = w v.

(4.20)

Unit weight is the weight per unit volume. In submerged unit weight sub of the soil we

are concerned with is the weight of the solid particles in the soil in a unit volume which

are in a state of submergence.

Fig. 4.22 represents a unit volume in which

In order to simplify calculation, we add to both the parts on the R.H.S. a constant which

is the water to fill the pore space. The constant being the same, the result is, we have

saturated unit weight as the first term and unit weight of water as the second term on the

R.H.S. The final result is the familiar result,

= - .

(4.21)

representing the whole body.

What follows is an important matter which every student/geotechnical engineer should

clearly understand, appreciate and assimilate.

If we take the unit weight of dry soil as 15 kN/m3 and = 300 (c = 0), Ka =

1

3

and

therefore the active earth pressure at any depth h m = 5h kN/m2 . being 10 kN/m3 ,

the water pressure at the same depth = 10 h kN/m2 , which is twice the value of the active

earth pressure. (This is important since many, at least among the lay public, may tend to

assume that water being thinner, the corresponding pressure is also lower!)

When the backfill is saturated,

= + = ( + ) = .

but ( ). ,

but = ( ) + .

11

The importance of the above result is illustrated in Fig. 4.23. For a case where =

and = 300 , it is seen that, while the active pressure intensity is only 1/3 of the water

pressure, the passive pressure intensity is 3 times the water pressure or 9 times the active

soil pressure. (The first of the above statements means that water pressure is three times

the active pressure due to submerged soil, which we noted above as twice the active

pressure due to dry soil. Further if = , it follows that the active pressure due to dry

2

soil is twice the same due to submerged soil.) It is obvious from the figure that walls

designed for active soil pressure are unsafe if the soil is allowed to get saturated!!

Fig. 4.24 draws attention to the need for retention in water, soil and intact rock.

Since water has no shear strength, its surface must always remain horizontal;

therefore water must be fully retained.

On the other extreme, if we treat intact rock as a medium with = 900 , its sides can

remain vertical, calling for no support since Ka = 0.

Because of its shear strength, soil can remain in a slope. This means that only the fill

placed over this slope, which is needed to maintain a horizontal surface, requires support,

which therefore may be described as partial. This is, however, a qualitative statement as

the next section will show that the active pressure on the retaining wall is not exactly due

to such a wedge.

The earth pressure theory propounded by Coulomb involves the consideration of a

critical wedge in the backfill adjoining the retaining wall the failure of which by shear at

the interface with the intact backfill and the wall gives rise to the active and passive failure

conditions. It involves the mechanical analysis of trial wedges for equilibrium at the stage

of incipient or imminent failure by shear in the above manner (Fig4.25). It involves a

geometrical trial and error approach and therefore more tedious than the theoretical

approach followed by Rankine.

Let us take the general case of a retaining structure with an inclined back face,

supporting and inclined backfill in a c - soil (Fig. 4.26a). At the wall-soil interface we

assume an angle of wall friction . The analysis is per unit length of the wall which makes

it a purely 2D_case.

12

Let us start with a trial wedge of the soil ABC defined by the angle at which rises

the soil face of the wedge. The wedge slides downwards because of the lateral yield of

the retaining wall away from the backfill. We will now examine the forces keeping this

wedge in equilibrium at the time failure just starts, or what we call the stage of incipient

failure. For this we need the forces acting on the wedge at this stage which include its

own weight and the reactive forces from the wall and the intact backfill.

First let us take the self weight of the wedge W acting through its centre of gravity. (W

= ABC x 1 x , where is the unit weight of the backfill soil. (Note that weight is an

external force, being the force with which earth attracts the mass of the wedge.) On the

face AC let us take a small elemental width. This elemental width multiplied by the unit

length is the elemental area we are considering. Since the wedge has failed in shear

along AC, shear strength is fully mobilised given by s = c+ tan, acting on the wedge

in the direction AC. C acting on the elemental area will add up as C over the full width

AC and unit length as C = c x AC x 1. The same applies to which adds up as N =

x AC x 1. The component of shear strength contributed by N is N tan . Thus on AC we

have three forces acting on the wedge which are C, N and N tan. We have to find their

resultant for which we keep C separately and find the resultant of N and N tan . If we

examine the resolution of forces, we can easily identify that the resultant of N and N tan,

which we shall call R, will be inclined at to N. (Note that c and are pressures

(intensity terms acting per unit area) which do not resolve. Only forces resolve and hence

we have to necessarily multiply the pressures by areas to obtain the forces.)

On the face AB, since the wedge moves downwards, we have over the length AB

reactive forces with a normal component N and tangential component N tan, where

is the angle of wall friction. (It is typically taken as

2

3

to N. P is our unknown of which we want to determine the value by drawing the polygon

of forces.

Of the forces mentioned above, we know the magnitude and direction of W and C.

However, the values of N and N and hence also their shear components N tan and

N tan are not known. But we know the direction of their resultants R and P, which is

sufficient for us to proceed with the force polygon. (Note that for drawing the force

polygon we do not have to know the point of application of the forces.)

To draw the force polygon, we start with W (ab in Fig. 4.26b). At b we draw lines

parallel to AC and mark C at bc. At c we draw a line parallel to R and at a, a line parallel

to P. They intersect at d. ad gives the value of P which is our unknown. (Note that in the

same way cd gives the value of R, which we, however, do not need.) All the forces we

dealt with in the above are forces acting on the wedge. Our concern is essentially the

13

action of the wedge on the wall and this is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction

to P obtained as above.

Now for different values of , we have to repeat the above work and determine the

corresponding values of P. We now make a plot of the values of P so obtained against

(Fig. 4.26c). Join the points so obtained by a smooth curve and by drawing a horizontal

line (i.e. parallel to the - axis) touching the curve tangentially we determine the highest

value of P which is the active thrust . We can note the corresponding value of which

gives us the critical wedge causing the active thrust . (Note that we cannot go by the

highest value of P from among the individual results obtained. A curve must necessarily

be drawn because the peak may generally lie between two values and need not coincide

with any single value.). The Pa that we have determined is the reaction of the wall on the

wedge. The action of the wedge on the wall which we are investigating is a force of the

same magnitude of Pa, acting exactly in the opposite direction. It is this action on the wall

that we need for the design of the wall.

Reverting to the trial wedges, we can look upon the picture as the weight of the wedge

acting downwards, which we have noted as the force with which earth attracts the mass

of the wedge, being held back by the forces C, R and P.

If we want to make the picture more general by adding an adhesion component a at

the wall-backfill interface, a total tangential force A is generated in the direction AB, which

must be entered at point c at the end of which is to be drawn the line parallel to R. (Note

that adhesion at the wall-soil interface is similar to c at the backfill-backfill interface, i.e.

within the soil. In other words, a and at the wall-soil interface correspond to c and

within the soil. And just like in the case of c and , shear strength at the interface can be

written as,

s = a + tan

(4.22)

In the case of the -soil (c = 0) the only difference is that C (and A) do not appear. In

the c-case ( = 0), on the other hand, we have to deal with only W, C (and A), N and P.

As regards the influence of the parameters, the higher the values of c, , a and ,

the lesser the value of Pa as can be identified from the force polygon. This picture will

reverse sign when we come to the passive case.

The point of departure in the passive case is, since the wall pushes the soil, the wedge

moves upwards causing shear failure along AB and AC. This causes reversal in the

direction of the forces C, N tan and P tan (Fig. 4.27a).

14

The polygon of forces (Fig. 4.27b) starts with W marked as ab. bc represents C. At c

a line is drawn parallel to R and at a, a line parallel to P. They intersect at d; ad gives the

value of P corresponding to this trial wedge. The P values so obtained from several trial

wedges are plotted against (Fig 4.27c) and the minimum value so obtained by drawing

a horizontal line (i.e. parallel to the - axis) tangential to the curve, gives Pp.

It is important to note that Ka which gives the minimum value of earth pressure is

obtained as a maximum in Fig. 4.26c, and Kp which gives the maximum value of earth

pressure is obtained as the minimum value in Fig.4.27c, both being optimum values.

pressure

A fundamental difference between the two theories is that, while Rankines theory

gives pressure distribution, Coulombs theory gives only total thrust. One can of course

obtain distribution from the latter, by assuming the nature of variation, such as lineartriangular.

Rankines theory, though theoretically elegant, has several limitations as it goes by the

concept of principal stresses, without even recognising the presence of the wall. Hence

it cannot take adhesion and wall friction into account, leading to conservative values of

the active earth pressure. It can be extended to backfills with single slopes, but an

inclined wall-backfill interface is difficult to accommodate.

Coulombs theory, on the other hand, is more versatile as it can accommodate wall

with inclined interface, sloped backfills with even more slopes than one, with practically

the same ease as vertical wall with horizontal backfill. It can also account for wall friction

and adhesion leading to more realistic results. However, being a geometrical trial and

error approach, it is certainly more tedious and time consuming unlike Rankines theory,

the expressions from which can be programmed and put on computer to yield fast results.

(While on this issue, it may be added that, trial wedge approach can also be programmed

on the computer for obtaining faster results.)

It is now time to show that both Rankines theory and Coulombs theory give the same

results for the basic case, as shown below.

Let us consider the basic active case of a retaining structure with a vertical face and

no wall friction, supporting a -soil with a horizontal surface. Consider a trial wedge which

makes an angle with the horizontal (Fig.4.28). Angle BAC is therefore (90-) =, say.

The force polygon (triangle of forces) consists of P, W and R.

From the triangle of forces,

15

= 90 ( + )

Therefore,

(+)

W = . . = 2

Rewriting,

For P to a maximum,

i.e.,

i.e.,

i.e.,

P=

1 2

2

(4.23)

(+)

=0

tan( + ) x 2 . 2 ( + ) = 0

(+)

(+)x 2

.2 (+)

(+) (+)

2 (+)2

=0

=0

2 ( + ) 2 = 0

sin2( + ) = 2

2 = 90

= 45

Therefore

= 45 + ,

2

(4.24)

which defines the critical failure plane. It is noted that the result is the same as obtained

from the Rankines theory.

Substituting so obtained in the expression for P (Eq.4.23), we get,

1

= 2

2

=

2

(+)

(45 2 )

(45+ 2 )

16

=

2

=

=

(45 2 )

(90(45+ 2 ))

2

2

2

2 (45 ) x (45 )

2

2

2

1

= 2 2 (45 )

2

2

1

1+

= 2 (

(4.25)

which is the same result as obtained from Rankines theory, as per Eq. (4.11).

It is indeed interesting to observe how both the theories converge to the same result

in this case which establishes the soundness of both the approaches.

4.8 Conclusion

We may close with a significant question in relation to active earth pressure which has

a bearing on design. The question pertains to the assumption of active pressure which

has the potential of making the design based on it unsafe!

Active pressure being the lowest value of pressure, it is logical to ask, have we taken

any steps in the design to ensure active conditions to develop? The significance of the

question is that, if active conditions are not developing, the pressures are higher, and the

retaining wall designed for active pressure will be inadequate, and in the limit, even

unsafe!

The answer to this question is in fact simple. The design of the wall implies an

assumption that if the wall is designed for active pressure, the same being the lowest

pressure, the design of the wall will be the thinnest, and since it is thin, it will deflect

enough (Fig. 4.29) resulting in active conditions and the corresponding active pressures

to develop, considering especially the low value of deformation needed to mobilise the

active condition (Kurian, 2005: Sec.12.1).

- Every day ExamplesЗагружено:Syeda Rida Batool
- pavement Analysis and design by yang H. HuangЗагружено:Alpana Kumari
- Newtons Laws of Motion NumericalsЗагружено:dayanandan1
- Retaining Wall designЗагружено:Punya Suresh
- Cantilever WallЗагружено:Saurav Bhattacharjee
- Fall 2012 Textbooks Civil EngineeringЗагружено:Sidney Musonda
- Aircraft Classification NumberЗагружено:Aviationaddict
- Selection of Retaining Walls in Hill Areas_Indian StandardsЗагружено:nimm1962
- Physics As Totally pointless you know....Загружено:batman_007619
- On-line Voltage Stability Based Contingency Ranking Using Fast Voltage Stability Index (FVSI)Загружено:Md. Arifur Kabir
- AP Physics Mid Term ReviewЗагружено:recapgoods
- 7KЗагружено:micjen
- Structural 02 - Retaining Wall DetailЗагружено:Joseph Cloyd Lamberte
- Failures PresentationЗагружено:Chris Naveen
- Chap8 Mechanical FailureЗагружено:Kiran Babu Satuluri
- D04-09 PCN and Strength RatingЗагружено:tannu
- 14764Загружено:bekmen
- Journal of the IRC Oct-Dec14Загружено:Sony Jsd
- Retaining WallsЗагружено:sunleon31
- How to Build a Mortarless Block WallЗагружено:Hector Chavez
- Cantilever WallЗагружено:Anonymous kBl0u3n
- Truline Engineering Wall Design Methods and ExamplesЗагружено:Abed Soliman
- Geo TechnicsЗагружено:Muhammad Aimi
- Module 2Загружено:robejr2013
- 2 1 key terms materials and structuresЗагружено:api-305968165
- foundationЗагружено:Abdullah
- Mee2002 Engineering Dynamics - Lecture 3Загружено:Sherifa
- 2D and 3D Numerical Simulations of Reinforced Embankments on Soft GroundЗагружено:Raúl Contreras
- Lec4 ForceЗагружено:deepak_dce_me

- Comprehensive Design Example for Prestressed Concrete (Psc) Girder Superstructure BridgeЗагружено:aleitaosilva
- SYPHON DESIGNЗагружено:miesty
- 4000Загружено:Nilesh Jayant Mahajan
- Seismic Design and Construction of Retaining WallЗагружено:Manojit Samanta
- NPTEL.pdfЗагружено:miesty
- 8 Reinforced Concrete Structure - Park Paulay.pdfЗагружено:Percy Abel Mamani Lipa
- Copy of Book1 (4)Загружено:miesty
- Modulus of Subgrade ReactionЗагружено:miesty
- CCIP_Properties_of_ConcreteЗагружено:mgrubisic
- Chapter_9.pdfЗагружено:Dr. MOHAMED ALZAIN
- Copy of List of Bypass RealignmentЗагружено:miesty
- Course Sem IVЗагружено:miesty
- PROJECT TOPIC.xlsxЗагружено:miesty
- Sem IIIЗагружено:miesty
- NH No new and oldЗагружено:miesty
- Calander 2017Загружено:miesty
- 9. Pavement InvestigationЗагружено:miesty
- 37000 CVPDЗагружено:miesty
- pavement design ch 242+200 to 255+300Загружено:miesty
- Design TrafficЗагружено:miesty
- MSA CalculationЗагружено:miesty
- Marshall MethodЗагружено:miesty
- Tree Inventory DataЗагружено:miesty
- COMMENT (2)Загружено:miesty
- 6. Engineering Designs and Alternatives_r1 Pkg1Загружено:miesty

- Incandescent LampЗагружено:Pahi Saharia
- Mesh Intro 18.0 WS5.4 CFD Workshop Instructions Auto Ext Aero PolyЗагружено:rodrigoq1
- Internal Model Control. a Comprehensive View - RIVERAЗагружено:jricardo01976
- Statistic Senior High SchoolЗагружено:27maul92
- SERAD SBL3-0250Загружено:MarcosLux
- Hajimiri_MOTCЗагружено:Kowshik Murali
- WCEE2012_4079Загружено:uhu_plus6482
- You²Загружено:shyam
- Laws of LogarithmsЗагружено:bonifacio gianga jr
- ZACE.pdfЗагружено:Putri Dewi
- Edexcel GCSE (9-1) Physics SP5 Light and the Electromagnetic Spectrum Test With Mark Scheme 16_17Загружено:Paul Burgess
- Aibag LandingЗагружено:legoon1
- Seismic Multi-Storey RC Diff Floor Diaphragms - IndiaЗагружено:mongkol_1001
- Astrophotography CookbookЗагружено:Parag Mahajani
- 11. Centrifugal Compressor System InteractionЗагружено:shivajireturns
- 07791774.pdfЗагружено:Andres Ponce
- Physical Science, AP SSC New syllabus PDF BooksЗагружено:kodatic
- petЗагружено:Cosmin Pfcs
- Grashof LawЗагружено:Prashant Raturi
- Laplace TransformЗагружено:AliKings
- Techniques and Technologies for Monitoring Nitrate in Potable Water - A ReviewЗагружено:International Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- 45.2 Journalofindustrialsafetyengineeringvol3issue3 170217053257Загружено:Sumon Ahmed
- Grass Jelly GuilinggaoЗагружено:Anonymous xoGB3NP
- 101.4 Mass Balance 2Загружено:Melchi Damgo
- Heavy WaterЗагружено:Anant Madhav
- Alcoholysis of PET to Produce Dioctyl Terephthalate by Isooctyl AlcoholЗагружено:ChaiwatTippuwanan
- Lesson Plan Em IIЗагружено:Anonymous LXHlHv2RW
- IPCRF 2018-2019Загружено:Maricel Gonzales
- Hasan Ziauddin CV RAЗагружено:Meezan Chand
- distributed generationЗагружено:Phani Kumar Mallela

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.