AASHTO LRFD: Structural Foundations and Earth Retaining Structures Specification Background Whats Happening Now!

! Limit States, Soil and Rock Properties Deep Foundations Shallow Foundations Earth Retaining Structures
Jerry DiMaggio, P. E., Principal Bridge Engineer (Geotechnical) Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology Washington D.C.

New Legal Load

AASHTO Specification Background: Geotechnical Engineering Presence * TRB/ NCHRP Activities (A LOT!) * Geotechnical Engineering does NOT have a broad based presence on AASHTO SubCommittees and Task Forces as do other technical specialties. * SubCommittee on Construction (guide construction specs) * SubCommittee on Materials (specs on materials and testing standards) * SubCommittee on Bridges and Structures (specs on materials/ systems, design, and construction)

History of AASHTO: Design & Construction Specifications for Bridges and Structures
* First structural Guideline Specification early 1930s (A code yet NOT A code!). * First significant Geotechnical content 1989. * First LRFD specification 1994 (Current 2004, 3rd edition). * First REAL Geotechnical involvement in Bridge SubCommittee activities @ 1996. (Focus on mse walls). * Technical advances to Standard Specifications STOPPED in 1998 to encourage LRFD use (secret). * Major rewrites needed to walls and foundations sections (NOW COMPLETE).

Geotechnical Scope: AASHTO Design & Construction Specifications for Bridges and Structures
* Topics Included: Subsurface Investigations, soil and rock properties, shallow foundations, driven piles, drilled shafts, rigid and flexible culverts, abutments, WALLS (cantilever, mse, crib, bin, anchor).
* Topics NOT addressed: integral abutments, micropiles, augercast piles, soil nails, reinforced slopes, and ALL SOIL and ROCK EARTHWORK FEATURES.

Standard and LRFD AASHTO Specifications * Currently AASHTO has 2 separate specifications: Standard specs 17th edition and LRFD, 2004 3rd edition. * Standard Specifications use a combination of working stress and load factor design platform.

* LRFD uses a limit states design platform with different load and resistance factors (than LFD).

LRFD IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

Geotechnically, most States still use a working stress approach for earthworks, structural foundations, and earth retaining structures. Several States have totally adopted LRFD. Many State Geo/Structural personnel and consultants ARE NOT FAMILAR with the content of LRFD 3rd edition.

AASHTO and FHWA have agreed that all state DOTs will use LRFD for NEW structure design by 10/07.

What are UNIQUE Geotechnical issues related to LRFD?

* Strong influence of construction on design. * GEOTECHs strong bias toward performance based specifications. * Natural variability of GEO materials. * Variability in the type, and frequency of tests, and method to determine design property values of soil and rock. * Differences between earthwork and structural foundation design model approaches. * Influence of regional and local factors. * General lack of data on limit state conditions.

What Happening Now?

* FHWA sponsored a complete rewrite of Section 10 during 2004. The rewrite was prepared by National subject matter experts and had broad input from a number of Key State Dots, (including T-15 member States), and the Geotechnical community (ASCE - GI, DFI, ADSC, PDCA). * During the Proposed spec development @ 2000 comments were addressed. The Proposed spec was then distributed to all States for review. An additional @ 1000 comments were addressed. * The revised Proposed Specification was advanced and approved by the AASHTOs Bridge and Structures SubCommitteee in June 2005. The revised Proposed Specification is used in the NHI LRFD Substructure course which currently available.

Principles of Limit State Designs

Fundamentals of LRFD

* Define the term Limit State * Define the term Resistance * Identify the applicability of each of the four primary limit states. * Understand the components of the fundamental LRFD equation.

A Limit State is a defined condition beyond which a structural component, ceases to satisfy the provisions for which it is designed.
Resistance is a quantifiable value that defines the point beyond which the particular limit state under investigation for a particular component will be exceeded.

Resistance can be defined in terms of:

* Load/Force (static/ dynamic, dead/ live) * Stress (normal, shear, torsional) * Number of cycles * Temperature * Strain

Limit States
* Strength Limit State * Extreme Event Limit State * Service Limit State * Fatigue Limit State

L I S T

Strength Limit State

Extreme Event Limit State

Service Limit State

Service Limit State

Rn / FS Q
higiQi Rr = fRn
hi gi Qi Rr f Rn = = = = = = Load modifier (eta) Load factor (gamma) Force effect Factored resistance Resistance factor (phi) Nominal resistance

higiQi Rr = fRn
Qn
f(g ,f )

Rn

Probability of Occurrence

h g Qn

f Rn

Q or R

Subsurface Materials
* Soil * Rock * Water * Organics

10.4 SOIL AND ROCK PROPERTIES 10.4.1 Informational Needs 10.4.2 Subsurface Exploration 10.4.3 Laboratory Tests 10.4.3.1 Soil Tests 10.4.3.2 Rock Tests 10.4.4 In-situ Tests 10.4.5 Geophysical Tests 10.4.6 Selection of Design Properties 10.4.6.1 Soil Strength 10.4.6.1.1 Undrained strength of Cohesive Soils 10.4.6.1.2 Drained Strength of Cohesive Soils 10.4.6.1.3 Drained strength of Granular Soils 10.4.6.2 Soil Deformation 10.4.6.3 Rock Mass Strength 10.4.6.4 Rock Mass Deformation 10.4.6.5 erodibility of rock

Soil Characteristics
* Composed of individual grains of rock * Relatively low strength * Coarse grained (+ #200)
* High permeability

* Fine grained (- #200)

* Low permeability * Time dependant effects

Rock Characteristics
* Strength
* Intermediate geomaterials, qu = 50-1500 psi * Hard rock, qu > 1500 psi

* Rock mass properties

Undrained Strength of Cohesive Soils, su

Vane Shear Test

su

f=0 qu
Typical Values su = 250 - 4000 psf

s
Unconfined Compression su = qu/2

Drained Strength of Cohesive Soils, c and ff

Triaxial Compression CU Test

Typical Values c = 100 - 500 psf ff = 20o - 35o

(modified after Bowles, 1977)

N160
<4 4 10 30 50

ff
25-30 27-32 30-35 35-40 38-43

For N160 = 10, select ff = 30o

Soil Deformation
0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12

Initial elastic settlement (all soils)

Settlement (in)

10

Time (days)

100

1000

10000

Primary consolidation

Secondary consolidation

Fine-grained (cohesive) soils

Consolidation Properties
eo 1 sp = Preconsolidation Stress

Void Ratio (e)

Cr

Cc Cs

0.5
0.1 1 Log10 sv 10 100

Stress Range, 40 80 kPa

2.65 2.6

2.55

Void ratio (e)

2.5 2.45 2.4 2.35

One log cycle De=Ca=0.06

2.3
2.25 0.1 1 10

tp
100 1000 10000

Elapsed Time (min)

Elastic Properties of Soil

Youngs Modulus, Es

Poissons Ratio, u

Typical values, 20 2000 tsf

Shear Modulus, G

Typical values, 0.2 0.5

Typical values, Es / [2 (1 + u)]

Determination by correlation to N160 or su, or in-situ tests

Rock Properties
Laboratory testing is for small intact rock specimens Rock mass is too large to be tested in lab or field Rock mass properties are obtained by correlating intact rock to large-scale rock mass behavior failures in tunnels and mine slopes Requires geologic expertise

Intact Rock Strength

Unconfined Compression, qu Point Load Test Typical Values qu = 1500 - 50000 psi

Rock Quality
0.8 ft Sound
Not sound, highly weathered Not sound, centerline pieces < 4 inches, highly weathered Sound Not sound

Length, L

0.7 ft 0.8 ft

0.6 ft 0.2 ft 0.7 ft

Sound

Core Run Total = 4 ft

CR = 95%

RQD = 53%

CSIR Rock Mass Rating System

This system is based on qu, RQD, joint spacing, joint condition and water condition.

Rock Mass Strength

Shear stress, t fi t s3 s s1

C1 stm

Effective Normal Stress, s fi = tan-1(4 h cos2[30+0.33sin-1(h-3/2)]-1)-1/2 t = (cot fi cos fi)mqu/8

h = 1 + 16(msn+squ)/(3m2qu)

Intact Rock Deformation, Ei

Typical values range from 1000 to 13000 ksi

Poissons Ratio, u
Typical values range from 0.1 to 0.3

Rock Mass Deformation

In situ modulus of deformation, EM (GPa)
90 70 50 30 10 10 30 50 70 90

EM 145,000 10

RMR 10
40

(psi x 106) 12 10

8
6

Ea = 2 RMR - 100

Rock mass rating RMR

GEC 5 FHWA-IF-02-034

Jerry A. DiMaggio P. E. Principal Bridge Engineer TEL: (202) 366-1569 FAX: (202) 366-3077
The best Geotechnical web site in town! www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge

WOW! FREE STUFF FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!