Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • GT7R4A - Choice of Geotechnical Parameters

    Uploaded by

    fededa
    24 views17 pages
    Choice of Geotechnical Parameters

    Original Title

    GT7R4A_Choice of Geotechnical Parameters

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Choice of Geotechnical Parameters

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    24 views17 pages

    GT7R4A - Choice of Geotechnical Parameters

    Uploaded by

    fededa
    Choice of Geotechnical Parameters

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 17
    Published in french version in 1994. AFT TEXT OF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CHOICE OF GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS AND TESTS USEFUL TO THE DESIGN, DIMENSIONING AND CONSTRUCTION OF UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES Paper presented by Mr Jean GUILLAUME working group chairman with the collaboration of Mrs A. BOUVARD-LECOANET MM. D. ANDRE, P. BRIGLIA, C. CHAPEAU, Y. LEBLAIS, E. LECA, J.J. NIQUET, J. PIRAUD, P. RAUZY, B. TAQUET FOREWORD "The estimate of the ground conditions of underground structures takes place at each project phase, rom preliminary feasibility design up to when consiruc- tion ends, It must be a permanent worry for all participants while itis not. for example, for structures including a superstructure. ‘To assess properly initial conditions along the routes, it is required to carry ‘out preliminary geological, geotechni- cal and hydrogeological studies that must be afterwards checked or correc ted by observations undertaken at all work stages. We remind here, for that matter, a few aspects specific to urder- ground structures: - most of underground structures are linear 30 that preliminary geological, gootectnical “and hydrogeological investigations may be hampered by access conditions from the surface and by the dopiha required I wil therefore be nacestary, in cata cases to inter- polate but it may turn out to be hazar~ ous = with reference to the mechanical behaviour of the rock mass and the ‘materials mvoved, the inal state prior to the excavation of an underground structure is replaced by a orice of states that first result from a void within the rock mass (muck removal, overall unloading, disappearance of the nor- ‘mal streaa at the tunnel face, redistribu- tion of loads,..), secondly from the ins- tallation, acoording to time, of supports and linings and lastly from the possible inner service pressure. The constraint path mherent in this situation is diffe- rent, for example, from that correspon- dling to foundations (overall loading) so that, in practice, specific parameters are used in the implementation of ebaviour lawe ; « the time notion is a dominating para- meter during excavation phases and support installation. It is often referred to immediate stability, primary support and final lining ~ the choice of the excavation and sup- port methods, the duration and sequence of associated tasks influence the design and dimensioning of the structure and vice versa ; ‘even more than for other structures, hhydrogeciogic conditions and disrup- tions caused by the structure are domi- nating factors in the organisation of works and safety; the risks induced may be very serious ; « the saloty of workers is a major worry at worksites and narrowly depends on the notion of stability of the excavation ‘at very short term (tunnel face, excava- tion sequence, etc) ; the impact ofthe structure on environ- ment mainly involves construction phases (deformation, settlements changes of fows,..) and can generally bbe overlocked at final phase - lastly, the advanced mechanisation of tumelling and confinement methods (Closed-face shields) may improve the worksite performances and the safety of structures only if is well adapted to the ground conditions; this makes pre- liminary investigation even more necessary, especially because access to the working face during tunnelling is oaly possible at intervals and requires to stop the machine, ‘The above-mentioned. considerations justify the writing of particular recom- ‘mendations for the choice of geotech- nical parameters and tests useful for the design, dimensioning and construction, of underground structures, "They also stress the importance of geo- logical, geotectnical and hydrogeolo- ‘gical investigations that must be under- taken as part of any underground pro- ject. Such investigations are often cost- ly or certain projects, they may repre- ‘Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 Recommandations de 'AFTES ¢ 29 ‘sent 5% of the total cost) and may end up to be difficuk on certain sites (in articular mountainous or highly urba- nisad sites) Most of the time, the significant ime they requite for intervention onthe ste and for a posteriori analysis mist be taken into account in the general sche ddule of projects. They pay an important rolein the reduction of hazards. 1. PURPOSE OF RECOM- MENDATIONS ‘Those recommendations area guide to the choice (1) of parameters to be determined and (2) o the correspon- ding geotechnical tests suitable forthe specific problems posed by the desi- gh, dimensioning and construction of lnderground structures, ‘They follow the recommendations ‘published earlier by AFTES, more par- ticularly those of worlang groups: = n°l: "Recommendations for a des- ciption of 1ock masses useful for the study of the stability of underground structures’, = °3: "Recommendations on the study of seismic effects of blasting’, ~ n°4: "Recommendations concerning the measurements and tests to be undertaken as part of a mechanised ‘tunnelling worksite”, -n°7;"Recommendations on the choice ‘of a support type for galleries and ‘Thinking on ordinary calculation ‘methods of support for undergound structures’ that actress and even deve- lop a few specific aspects of the “chot- ce of parameters and geotechnical tests.” ‘The recommendations given here are more general and concise and try to deal both with soils and rocks as com- Prehensively as possible. In certain fields, they update the previous above- ‘mentioned recommendations. ‘These recommendations are designed. {or the several participants imolved in ‘tunnelling ie, clients, engineers, design consultancies, contractors, makers of specific equipment, who are facing, during project planning, problems dea- ling with general design (integration of 4 project within its environment) or detailed design (design and dimensio- 30 * Recommandations de lAFTES ning of the structures), structure calcu lation and construction of underground structures. They must enable to elabo- rate a goolocical. geotecinical and hydrogeological model. The funda- mental notions of | Continuous Environment Mechanics, Rock and Soll Mechanics are assumed to be acqui- red ‘These recommendations do not deal with the ype and general content ofthe sol investigations that must be carried out as part of any construction project. The choice of the appropriate invest- gations (types, number, location, depth, ),that aim at spectying, according to the stages of the study or the project, the nature, characteristics and geome- try of the geological formations encountered above the site, the hetero- geneities and obstacles, the prosence of the water table, the seismicity degree... must be carried out under the supervision of competent specia- lists in geology, geotechnics and hydro geslogy who also have a large expe- Fence in underground works. In the following text of these recom mendations, a distinction is made bet- ween the various parameters (chapter 2) that must absolutely be assessed during the different stages of an under- ground project and the different tests (Chapter 3) that enable 1o estimate the value of each of the parameters, It is obvious that the choice of the paramo- ters and, therefore, that of the suitable tests depend on the planning of tunnel projects and on the methodology ‘selected for the corresponding studies mn particular: + the design purpose must be taken into consideration (long-term calculation and shortterm stability, taking ito account the calculation methods selec- ted, the excavation conditions, the tun- neling methods...) as well asthe parpo- se of the structures ; - the design stages (feasibility detailed design...) will determine the range of parameters that must be searched for and the accuracy degree required ~ in any case, in view of the peculiarity of underground works and the corres- ponding hazards, parallel anc comple- mentary approaches will have 1o be considered (cross-checking principle) ‘These recommendations show the diversity of factors to be considered to choose parameters and geotechnical teste, Consequently, competences in different fields such as geology, geo- technics (distinguishing, ‘for example, ‘Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 soils and rocks), hydrogeology, soiVstructure interaction, construction processes, material techniques....will bbe necessary to finalise this choice. 2. CHOICE OF PARAMETERS 2.1 THE FIVE FAMILIES OF ‘PARAMETERS ‘The parameters to set inthe planning of 4 tunnel project are classified into Sve families: the parameters associated with natural constraints, the physical, mechanical and hydrogeological cha- acteristics and lastly several construc- tblity parameters, ‘The list ofthe main useful parameters is given in the enclosed tables. Other Parameters not listed but more specific ‘may be necessary for particular design aspects. The comments that follow only insist on particular aspects that are important but often overlocked as well as on recent advances. 2.1.1. PARAMETERS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURAL STRESSES ‘Asa result ofthe tock mass history, the existing state of stress encountered at the place of the structure prior to tun- naling (history, orientation and intonsi- ty ofthe main constraints) wil conition the behaviour of the structure right fom the excavation stage and throu- = Scams tat ty) X_ | bein my quae Sal ees x * Cor amperes ort eee (R) X | sansizalamas 232 | Neer of fay 05 test vey X_|overpeoraasigion erie 233 | Ovnion of dscns OR} ORG tes sey Bessy meted) x 234 | Agere an uty of ingen) Oncor sane rest Sib ron wg) X ousive di Test ns Cole X_| aa of apie of ta shat en ing aie x 240 |Weaberng 261 | Seastvay wae ese npeon Mineo ap (in de, dicot) on Seige = Cia uniietondeneaton ns Soi tt stb rcs gypsy, ny.) ‘Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 Recommandations de 'AFTES « 37 TABLE OF TESTS PARAMETERS i taal sane crests uo | COMMENTS. TT Seaiiay wiypnere dane Wise mars ¥ is inpetion 8 x 243 | Seiya changes gh peat os Mate (,3) X_ | Ustegrema songs poten chang essen un eal = |X cestP eet 250 | Gonder hemisry 25:1 | Wer apgeees ea ey) = Chemie wate ays 8.) x 252 [rebuie se - Such plane x 3. | MeceANtcaL ARaMETERS 310 | Seng aut | Stoesem shar eg = Quek bo shears) x |x | vata oations Doin aia eB) x Tetsu unnd contin So ae woh east ial on eka whee pence vines epi) x | Ge capting na cy Payee) x 312 | Langer ser sgt Slow tox ser et) x | x | momar: cate oustoas Inte tt erpaion Sear ws on ot) x|x Tas ess (3) x rine codont 113 |Singlecomprason wat a - Sing epesion at.) x + Frenne X | x | mics mesuenes (eten) 314 | tne mesma oye Brin et) x Prins) x Simpl el sess tt Habis) x 215 | min twas Resse, abet cin bg etrmaions | xX | x 316 [oven ent edn Login ing oie X | Boring pune mis 320 |Defoumaion 321 | anoweic asic ut maybe iid io Smal eas) X | nde quate nee! Sh tS) X |inaatorsaees Dera at cots te rcs X |e te Th osprey won| x May abe tenis ie i sin sett pecs ie fet recone S) tes dort meswenen: ones, inst alr enple east teen son mae TS) ete pessoa (8) x. | Deing iting 322 | ieee ery 523, | Deere deemsinn = (0,5 = Cg tet ig inl erie) x Coors essence insane ng (S.R) x Langa Si eH (,) x Deere atom sto ec SR) x 324 | swaieg= 05 Cy Soptog wf HUDER -AMBERG)X 230 | Dymmic chances of. he sock mas (pens, dig, -) X [oman cowntae a x | Ape tigation x 4 |pvonockocootcaL raRaMerERs 410 | Permeably Fy ky -beeraioe rg brse X | varios Peres ws Les, Lape. | Ding ing commen he pene tet cons erate, adn de’ recone ele ibrar) 420 orange nao emesiny Pacing or ejeston X | owing ing rw | betas es, ties aes permet Lito ts x. | Tessin tees 4650 | Hysatcion orpteia at Opened emer x es denne pedi 0) Chied pee pre pres sees cl) x 440 [Rong seamen tees x *Seae une x | oven paRaMerens 510 | Aras CERCHAR sree 8) x ated esi be wear cs "LCRC sistent 3) x Sted weston he wear oes 320 | ines CERCHAR reas et x 10S ANGELES (-%) x Canta Spec cnergy at eg bing uy) x. sD ac peat ad cts) 520 | Apunde wsocing =i nas edo x Pye penmee 8) 540 | Gmentiectsie ister “Tre (8.F) x Lond X_| Reinrenen win iopios 38 * Recommandations de VAFTES “Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 b) Deformability parameters Deformabilty parameters may be eat mated using several types of tests that produce a stess-deformation curve. In general, in-situ tests prove t0 be the best suited. Special attention must be paid to the adapiation of the testo the ground conditions, It must be bare in mind as well that for an underground structure, stresses around the excava- tion follow a complex course that ABOUT 1 MPA) We saw that the discontinuities in the rock mass introduce a scale elfect that ‘weakens the characteristics of the rock ‘mass all the more so as cracking is, ‘important and as several cracking pat- tems are entangled, It is therefore necessary to specify both the local (Joints, matrix) and overall (tock mass) characteristics. In particular, the lkel- hood to mest a wealmess zone or a big Giscontinaity improperly criented in relation to the structure always increases with the volume of rock considered. a) Strength For rocks, strength in uniaxial compres- sion oc measured in laboratory is the basic parameter. However, tha life-size strength of the rock mass with its joints is noticeably inferior to that measured on samples It is possibie to refer, on the matter, to ‘he works of Hoek, Brown and Priest who suggest several formulas to deter- mine the characteristics of a terrain from strength in uniaxial compression and the RMR value (Rock Mass Rating established from the classification of Bieniawsia). According to these formu Jas, the strength of a good quality rock ‘mass equals at the most to half of that measured on test samples and the srength of a poor quality rock mass ‘may chi be the hundredth of that mea- sured on samples. Nevertheless, these formulas must be used with caution, in particular for soft rocks which are near- 'y outside the method's application field, ‘The strength oc is also very useful in preliminary phases 10 assess the Importance of piasticization phenome- na on the walls as wellas the quantity of suppor's, im particular for scft rocks, Let's remind that for anisotropic mate- rials, strength oc has a sense only if the test orientation in relation te the mate- ‘ial atructure is specified, with accurate description of the rupture mode, Moreover, in materials with heteroge- neous beds, it must he associated with the measurement of the elasticity modulus. 1b) Deformability ‘The scale effect due to discontinuities also affects the deformabiity measure- ‘monte but sharply lese than the streng- th ones, This is why in-situ measured ‘moduli (with a dilatometer or slab tes- ting) are, in general, 2 10 5 times smal- ler than those measured in laboratory. ‘Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 ‘Recommandations de ’AFTES + 39 ‘The analysis of the stress/detormation curves obtained during slab testing or a dilatometer enables in all cases to distinguish properiy the following moduli + the overall modulus (G), obtained on the loading curve, ~ the elastic deformation modulus (E) obtained from the unloading-reloading curve, which is more closely related to the real ground behaviour during ‘excavation, In sof rocks (6c ftom 1 to 10 MPa), it must be borne in mind that the use of a classical pressuremeter leads to syste- matic underestimations of the modul's values. The values of pressuremetering moduli are offen 3 to 10 times smaller than the elastic deformation moduli, according to the rock alteration condi- tion. The points developed in § 2.4.1) about the pressuremeter's operating precautions remain valid ‘The dilatometer, now applied to hard rock, gives more satisiactory results because it actualy measures pressure and radial deformation on a same dia- meter of the bore, or a pressure ard deformability range adapted to the stiffness of rocks Itis however necessa- ry to be careful to adapting the device to the expected dofcrmations (vavel of testing spikes), in particular in the case: of soft rocks. [t must be noted that in ‘more or less altered soft rocks, the joint utlistion of a classical pressuremeter (igh number of tests) and a datome- ter (more costly tess) may give interes- ting results in so far as satisfactory cor- relations may be established between tho moduli obtained with these tests Inmust be underlined that seismicmea- surements (at the surface, during driling or "small seismics” in the galle- Ty) quickly give a proper estimate of the dilference between the mechanical Properties on a sample and those inthe rock mass. In-situ tests quickly show their limit in the case of heterogeneous and fractu- red rock masses so that it is quite free to resort to estimates of the daformabi- ity characteristics trom geotechnical classifications. itis possible, in particu- lar, to refer to the works of Bieniawski, Serafim and Pereira on the estimate of the deformation modulus from RMR, 3.4.3. DYNAMIC CHARACTERIS- A certain number of tests allow to esti ‘mate the dynamic characteristics ofthe rock mass (velocities, damping...) necessary 10 the study of a tunnel's behaviour in case of earthquake or a dynamic loading: classical seismic tess (cross hole, small selsmics ,..), triaxial cyclical tests, Standard Penetration Test (liquefaction), etc. 3.4.4 GALLERY AUSCULTATION Lastly, direct auscultation, in a recon- naissance gallery or during tunnelling (convergences, extensometers...) also allows to estimate the mechanical para- meters, by doing a back analysis cali- bbrating the calculation models with in- situ observations instantaneous and delerred deformability, extension of acompressed zones...) 3,8 HYDROGEOLOGICAL TESTS. ‘The Imowledge of hydrogeslogical ‘parameters of the several ground units requires, inthe first stage, a geological approach to the structures supplemen- ted with the datermination of the inital state of the water table(s) ‘This later aspect must not be underes- timated, especially when the structures to be excavated modify the preexisting ‘equitibriums (incidence on the levels ‘and quality of the water table, the flow of sources...). It necessitates, in gene- ral, cross-seasonal pluriannual measu- rement cycles and must, if possible, be based on the inventory of existing data reoulting from the construction or management of nearby facilities (local and total water flow in reconnaissance galleries, excavations, draining inverts...) Piezometry is the most important para- meter of tis initial state, the knowledge cof which generally requires the installa- tion of piezometers, right from the first phase of investigation, ‘The reliability and interpretation of measurements nead the fuffiment of certain rules, the main of which are as follows «the instalation ofa ique piezometric port per dri, = the previous identification of the 2one in which the tener is intlled the core boring ofthe pocket is then advised, Investigation drills are very valuable because, along with the geological Jowiedge of terrains and the possibili- ty of piezometer equipment, they enable + to analyse certain boring parameters such as groundwater levels, uid losses (which, qualitatvely, permit to estimate the relative permeabilities of the cros- sed layers). to undertake test (ocal groundwater fests, micro current meter) and deferred deta logging (in particular electric geo- physics) Generally speaking, the determination of permeabilities is obtained by means of insta test, whother it ia in rocks {Lugeon-typelocal tests) or sof grouncis {Lefranc or Nasberg-type local tess, overall pumping test) Jn fractured rock masees, local Lageon- ‘ype cote dril testing rust permit to quantify the permeability of geological discontinuities. The measurements taken are meaningf oly ifthe length of the test chamber widaly exceeds the cracking mesh. It must be remembered, that the classical Lugeon test must be normally undertaken under a pressure of | MPa. Tests of the same type, under- taken under smaller pressures, may be planned, in particular ifthe water load is ow ‘The tests will bo proforably undertaken as he tunnel is progressively excavated, ‘wth a plug big encugh (length of more than 1m) to avoid by-passes during preesurzation. ‘must be noted that the multiplication of local tests enables to obtain a curve of permeabilities inthe ground, in view of ansescing homogeneity. ‘The determination of the ground's ove- rall hydraulic characteristics can be exvisaged but with pumping tests in a ‘shaft lowering the qroundiwater level in the viointy. The achievement of such ‘ests is necessary. in particular, when the water flows must be assessed as well as the feasibility and incidence of the 40 © Recommandations de PAFTES ‘Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 ‘groundwater lowering in the erviron- ‘ment One must remain very carefil as to the operating mode of this type of test by detecting: = with the help of provisional and per- ‘manent analyses, the pocket clogging phenomena, ~ the surcharge loads on the water table that cause turbulent regimes, bboth generating an underestimation of permeability In all cases, is cautious not to be clai- ming to measure permeabilities with an accuracy of less than a power of 10. ‘The permeability value to be taken into account in the water flow calculations of large rock cavities must integrate the notion of representativeness of irregu- lar tests at the rock mass scale so that it will end up possible to include in the calculation values very superior to the values measured so as to integrate an implicit safety factor. It must also be noted that, in conjunc- ‘ion with the lining dasign of high pres- sure galleries, large scale water tests fare sometimes undertaken in under- ground caverns. 3.6 OTHER PARAMETERS (CON- STRUCTIBILITY PARAMETERS) ‘The interaction between the ground and either the methed of excavation or the support may be quantified with some other in-sit tests undertaken in laboratory ‘The other main tests commonly used are as fllows, + abrasivity and hardiness tests. Their results bear witness to the agressive hess of the rock on materials and, as such, heavily condition the drive per- formance, the tool rate replacement and so the worksite cost, ~ the clay sticking aptitude under she tools also influences the drive elficien- cy Itis quantified from tests mndertaken ‘im laboratory, among which identfica- tion tests, methylene blue value’ testing Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 and bonding tests on stee! plates, - in-situ blasting teste enable to optimi- se the blasting performance or to adapt the biasting parameters to limit the inci- dences of vibrations on the surroun- ding environment to acceptable thre- sholds (see Recommendations of AFTES, working group n°3), + in-situ tensile or torsion bolting testa enable to check the expected efficien- cy of a rockbott support transport and processing tests of muc- king-out products must be subject to a specific approach suitable for each case under stacy, ~ support mud qualification tests (case of dosed: face slurry shields) Lastly it may prove interesting to mnder- take specific in-situ tests in some stretches thet may permit to test the validity of 2 tunnelling method, for example when this method is innovati- ‘ve and when it deserves to be confir- ‘med in the envisaged operating condi- tions. ‘Recommandations de ’AFTES « 41 ANNEXE N°1: REFERENCES LIST GENERAL PUBLICATIONS 1 -M, CASSAN : Les essais in situ en mécanique des sols. Eyrolles, tomes | et 2 2-G FILLIAT: La pratique des sols et des fondations. Edit. Du Moniteur, 131 3 Symposium international “reconnaissance des sols et des roches en place’. Paris, 18-20 mai 1983 Bulletin de Association Internationale de Géologie de Iingénieur, ‘nY 26/27, décembre 1982/Juin 1983 (vol. | themes 1-2-3), (vol 2 thames 4 a 6). 4-RD LAMA - VS VUTUKURI : Handbook on mechanical properties of rocks - testing techniques and results. ‘Trans Tech Publications, vol. IV, 1978 §-J} RODIER : Lanalyse de l'eau - eaux naturelles, eaux ‘résiduaires, eau de mer. Dunod technique, 1978. 6 KOVARI : Field measurements in geomechanics - Ist International Symposium, Zurich, sept. 1983 Balkema, 1984, vol Let 2. 1T- SAKURAI : Field measurements in geomechanics - 2st International Symposium, Kove, avril 1987, Balkema, 1988, vol let 2 ‘8 - Field measurements in: Symposium, Osio, septembre 1991 9- |. COLLAS, M HAVARD : Guide de géotechnique - Lexi- ‘que et essais. Eyrolles, 1963. 10-6* Congres international de YAIGI - Amsterdam, aodt 1990, Théme 1-2 échantilonnage et essai dans les trous de soudés, Théme 1-3 expérimentation et instrumenta- tion en labo et sure terrain. ~ Sensing systems for measuring mechanical properties in ground masses US Depart of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, vol 1 4 §- Rapport FHWA/RD- 81/106 & 113, 1981 et 1982 ~ ASTM : Field testing and instrumentation of rock ‘Symposium - ASTM - Philadelphia juin 1973 ASTMSpe- ‘cal Technical publication 554. Le calcaire de Beauce - études géotechniques des informations de Beauce. E WASCHKOWSKI Bull Liaison Labo P, & C. - Spécial U - Juin 1973 = Blude géotechnique at reconnaissance des sols (projet de DTU). Revue Francaise de Géotechnique, n° 22, {evrier 1963, 151 p. 2st International ANNEXE N°2; NOTATIONS ST OF SYMBOLS peer! 1 aE ; ae eR er i lai? volumetric Nim? volumetric weight of dry soll ‘Rim’ volumetre wengt of dewatered so /m volumetric weight of solid particles KNin* volumetric weight of saturated soil kai? volumetricweight of wator index of voids porosity saturation degres veto contents liquidity plasticity limit shrinkage limit plasticity index density ndex chameter at n per cent (granulometry) PIS EES Lee oxy PTA SPPLLOPS op+rameraa, “EPS i compressibility coefficient oedometric module compression index swelling index ‘secondary rate of consolidation consolidation coefficient time factor consolidation degree ‘preconsolidation pressure ‘arth pressure prior to tunnelling ‘fictive pressure coetfcient csarth thrust coefficient passive pressure coefficient MTS kPa total normal stress MT? kPa total effective sess ML'T? kPa shear sess ML'T? kPa pore pressure ML"? Pa linear deformation modulus MT? kPa shear modulus ML'T? kPa compressibility modulus Poisson's coeficient ML'T* kPa undrained cohesion ML'T? kPa apparent ‘cohosion’ apparent ‘friction angle" ML'T? kPa elective cohesion effective friction angle ML"T* kPa simple shear strenath LT ms permeability SPT sxokee Mb‘ kPa pressuremetering limit pressure ML'Ts yPa_pressuremetering moduius ML'T? kPa cone strength Mb'T? kPa unitary side friction ML'T! kPa dynamic toe resistance ANNEXE N°3: LIST OF NORMATIVE DOCUMENTS: STANDARDS AND OPERATING MODES Volumetic mass NF P.1€-854 (granulats) ; ISRMOS ; NF P 94.083; NF PO4-054 ; NFP 94-059 Water contents ‘AP LPCO8 ; AP LPOO9 | NF P 10-554 (Granulats)'ISRMOG ; NF P 94.050 Atterberg mits LOPC MEI9 ;NFP 94-061 : NFP 94.052 Gramuiometric analysis LCPC_ME18 ‘sédimentométrie) ; NF 918-560 (ranulats, tamisage) : NF P 94-088 ; NF'P 94-057 Petrographic analysis ISRMO1 Abraswity ISRMD4 ‘Organic material contents NFP 94.085 Meuiyiene biue NFP 16-592 (granulats) ; AP LPCO2 ; AP LPOOS : AP LPCOS Quality index AFTES GT Discontimities APTES G4; ISRM 07 ;ISRM 14 Groundwater chemical analyss Série NFT 90 essais des eaux Stength NFP 94-070 NFP 94.074, NF P9407 NFP 94-110; NFP 94-111 ;NFP 94-112 ; NF P 96-113 ; NF P 94-116 ; ISRM 02 ISRMOS ; ISRMO8 ; ISRMO1S ; [CPC ME 21 | LOPC ME 22’; LCPC MSL 4; LCPC MS IS 2. LCPC CT 2; LCPC PME 6 LOPC PME 18 ; LOPC PME 33. 42 © Recommandations de !AFTES ‘Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains - Octobre 1999 mat Rateraces Deformabilty NEP 94074 ; NFP £0.090 ; NF P 94-110; NEP 94-111: NEP 94-117 : ISRMO8 | |SRMI0 ISRMIS ; ISRM2O ; LPC ME 13 | UCPC MSL 4; LCPCMSIS2;10PCCT 2; LEPC PME 15 CPC PME 33 Pormeabiity [NF P 94-090 ; NF P 94-002 ; NF P 94-190 ; NEP 94-131 | NFP 04-132 | NF P 94-133; APLPCI2: APLPC 13 Creep NFP 94-090 Swelling NF P 94-080 Cracking by trost NFP 18-589 (grants) Loaging [AP LPCOS ; AP LPCOT ; AP LPCO9 ; DTU SRM 12 Gravimetric method AP LPCOT ; DTU ;ISRM 12 Seismicmethod _APLPCOT; DTU; ISRM 12; 1SRM 22 ‘Tonographic method APLPCO6 ; AP LPCOT DTU: ISRM 12 Radar AP LPOOT ; DTU ; SRM 12 Anchoring od NFP 94-183 ;1SRM17 Displacement NE P 94-156 NFP 94-158 ; NFP 94-189; measurements ISRM06 Pressure NEP 94-187 ;ISRM L1 ;ISRM 19; measurements APLPCII STANDARDS {2rWOX standards NF P 94-060 199] Determination de la teneur en eau par atuvage. NF P9051 Proj, Détermination des limites d'Atterberg limite de liquidité a la coupelle; limite de lasticité au rouleau. NF P9062 Proj, Détermination des limites dAtterberg limite de liquidité au céne, NF P94053 1991 Masse volumique des sols fins. NF P94054 199] Masse volumique des grains. NFP 94085 1991 Détermination dela teneur enmatiéres organiques. NF P94086 Proj, Détermination de la granulométrie des sols par tamisage. NFP 94.087 Proj. Détermination de la granulométrie des sols fins par sédimentation. NF P.94059 Proj, Détermination de la masse volumique ‘maximale et minimale, NF P9070 Proj. Essai de cisaillement & la botte. NFPOLOTL Proj. Essai de cisaillement alterné. NF P94072 Proj, Essai scissométrique en laboratoire. NFP 94073 Proj, Essai de cisalement annulair. NF P 940741. Proj. Essai a lappareil triaxial non consolidé non drainé (UU). NF P940742 Proj Essai a lappareil triaxial consolidé non rainé avec mesure de pression intersttielle (Cust) NF P940743 Proj. Essai & Tappareil triaxial consolidé

    You might also like