Geofoam Applications in the Design and Construction of Highway Embankments (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 617-667
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 617... ...
11-1 CHAPTER 11 CASE HISTORIES Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................11-2 Hawaii: Highway H-3 (Likelike Highway) Emergency Escape Ramp for the Kaneohe Interchange, Island of Oahu........................................................................................................11-2 Indiana: State Route 109, Noble County ....................................................................................11-5 New York: State Route 23a, Town of Jewett, Greene County ...................................................11-7 Utah: I-15 Reconstruction.........................................................................................................11-10 Washington: State Route 516 - Lake Meridian Settlement Repair, King County ....................11-13 Wisconsin: Bayfield County Trunk Highway A.......................................................................11-15 Wyoming: Moorcraft Bridge, Crook County............................................................................11-16 Wyoming: Bridge Rehabilitation, N.F.
|
From page 618... ...
11-2 INTRODUCTION The following case histories are presented to provide examples of cost-effective and successful EPS-block geofoam projects completed in the United States (U.S.)
|
From page 619... ...
11-3 they descend from the tunnel exit at an elevation of about 213.4 m (700 ft) to an elevation of 39.6 m (130 ft)
|
From page 620... ...
11-4 consisted of 0.6 to 1.5 m (2 to 5 ft) of clean gravel which served as a stabilizing layer for construction activities and as a drainage blanket for surface water and water discharged by the vertical strip drains installed to accelerate consolidation of the foundation soils.
|
From page 621... ...
11-5 the granular stabilization layer, reinforced basalt rock, and gravel drainage blanket layer that were placed below the geofoam. These granular layers contributed to approximately 1.2 m (3.9 ft)
|
From page 622... ...
11-6 of 1.22 m (4 ft) below the pavement surface on both sides of the embankment.
|
From page 623... ...
11-7 these tangible benefits, e.g., reduced construction time, because EPS was selected over TRR and the total cost is 28 percent less than the TRR option. Settlements measured forty-three months after pavement placement were between 0.05 and 0.09 m (0.18 and 0.29 ft)
|
From page 624... ...
11-8 was about 11 to 12.2 m (36 to 40 ft) below the roadway surface which corresponds to the clayey silt layer.
|
From page 625... ...
11-9 The EPS blocks were placed in mid-November 1995 and all construction was completed in January 1996. The blocks, which had dimensions of 0.61 by 1.22 by 2.44 m (2 by 4 by 8 ft)
|
From page 626... ...
11-10 pressure buildup that may indicate that the drainage blanket is clogged and thus serve as an early warning of rising water table which may cause uplift of the geofoam. No differential icing during the winter nor pavement deterioration, due to slight temperature increases that have been recorded by thermistors in the subbase during the summers, have been observed between the end of construction and December 1998.
|
From page 627... ...
11-11 geometry constraints (5)
|
From page 628... ...
11-12 installation depth of 25 m (82 ft) , rectangular drain spacing of 2 m (6.6 ft)
|
From page 629... ...
11-13 experienced for MSE walls placed on untreated soil, has been reported for the LLC support system (5)
|
From page 630... ...
11-14 constructing a structural boardwalk for the sidewalk, and constructing a half bridge on the north side of the roadway. The monitoring approach was selected in the anticipation that movements would decrease to acceptable levels with time.
|
From page 631... ...
11-15 The wood facing was placed before the EPS blocks and the EPS blocks were subsequently placed against the wood facing. Pea gravel meeting the gradation requirements of AASHTO No.
|
From page 632... ...
11-16 In addition to the lightweight fill alternative, excavation of the soils within the slide mass and replacement with granular fill was also considered. However, the total excavation alternative was not selected because it would require excavation below the groundwater level and temporarily closing the highway.
|
From page 633... ...
11-17 from the abutment, about 3 m (10 ft) beyond the approach slab.
|
From page 634... ...
11-18 Table 11.3. Cost Comparison Between EPS and MSE Approaches for the Moorcraft Bridge Structure.
|
From page 635... ...
11-19 m³ ($154 and $76 per yd3) of wall.
|
From page 636... ...
11-20 costs associated with providing temporary dewatering during construction to minimize the potential for uplift re-occurring was greater than anticipated. Figure 11.17 presents a cross-section of the EPS-block geofoam roadway and Figures 11.18 and 11.19 present details of the storm drain pipe and guardrail used with the EPS-block geofoam roadway embankment.
|
From page 637... ...
11-21 constructed within one construction season as opposed two construction seasons for the surcharge option. The cost of the EPS block was $59 per m3 ($45 per yd3)
|
From page 638... ...
11-22 Table 11.6. Summary of Placement Rates of EPS-Block Geofoam in Embankment and Slope Repair Projects.
|
From page 639... ...
11-23 16. "Report Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Services Area G-SR 516 Roadway Improvements King County, Washington, For Washington State Department of Transportation." GeoEngineers, Inc., Redmond, WA (1993)
|
From page 640... ...
FIGURE 11.1 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-24
|
From page 641... ...
FIGURE 11.2 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-25
|
From page 642... ...
FIGURE 11.3 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-26
|
From page 643... ...
FIGURE 11.4 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-27
|
From page 644... ...
FIGURE 11.5 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-28
|
From page 645... ...
FIGURE 11.6 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-29
|
From page 646... ...
FIGURE 11.7 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-30
|
From page 647... ...
FIGURE 11.8 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-31
|
From page 648... ...
FIGURE 11.9 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-32
|
From page 649... ...
FIGURE 11.10 PROJ 24-11m.doc (a) Elevation view.
|
From page 650... ...
FIGURE 11.11 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-34
|
From page 651... ...
FIGURE 11.12 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-35
|
From page 652... ...
FIGURE 11.13 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-36
|
From page 653... ...
FIGURE 11.14 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-37
|
From page 654... ...
FIGURE 11.15 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-38
|
From page 655... ...
FIGURE 11.16 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-39
|
From page 656... ...
FIGURE 11.17 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-40
|
From page 657... ...
FIGURE 11.18 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-41
|
From page 658... ...
FIGURE 11.19 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-42
|
From page 659... ...
FIGURE 11.20 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-43
|
From page 660... ...
FIGURE 11.21 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-44
|
From page 661... ...
FIGURE 11.22 PROJ 24-11m.doc 11-45
|
From page 662... ...
TABLE 11.1 PROJ 24-11m.doc Activities Dates Excavation 10/11/95 to 10/26/95 EPS Placement 10/11/95 to 10/26/95 Concrete Slab Placement 10/23/95 to 10/27/95 No. 8 Aggregate Placement 11/2/95 to 11/8/95 Asphalt Base, Binder & Surface 11/22/95 to 11/29/95 Road Opened to Traffic 12/15/95 11-46
|
From page 663... ...
TABLE 11.2 PROJ 24-11m.doc Items EPS Embankment (Plan) Total Removal & Replacement (Option)
|
From page 664... ...
TABLE 11.3 PROJ 24-11m.doc ITEM UNIT UNIT COST QUANTITIES for MSE Wall QUANTITIES for EPS Wall MSE COST EPS COST Misc.Force Account Work - - - - $15,000 $37,000 Dry Excavation m³ (yd³)
|
From page 665... ...
TABLE 11.4 PROJ 24-11m.doc EPS Block Approach Costs MSE Approach Costs Item Quantity Unit Cost Cost Quantity Unit Cost Cost Dry Excavation 210 m³ (275 yd3)
|
From page 666... ...
TABLE 11.5 PROJ 24-11m.doc Project Quantity of EPS m3(yd3) Bid A Unit Price $/m3($/yd3)
|
From page 667... ...
TABLE 11.6 PROJ 24-11m.doc Project Application Placement Rate of EPS-Block Geofoam per Day Hawaii Embankment 175 – 250 m³ (229 – 327 yd³) Indiana Embankment 428 m³ (560 yd³)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.