几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-16, 12:41 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 all reinforced concrete retaining wall

tall reinforced concrete retaining wall.
i have a situation where we are designing retaining walls that are 25-30 feet high that are being used as dividers for a 4 bay fuseplug spillway on a dam. the walls act as retaining walls in the scenario that if one of the bays actually fails (in a large spill event) leaving one side to retain soil. so that compaction of clay cutoffs in the fuse plug can be achieved, we are being required by our state dam safety division to put a 1:10 taper on both sides of the walls. this makes the wall rather wide at the base (up to 6 feet). instead of using concrete for the full 6-foot base and tapering as we go up, has anyone used inexpensive and easy to place filler materials to reduce the amount of concrete in the circumstance?
any help would be appreciated.
hmmm,
i understand the cost issue. but let's think about this a bit. you have three four issues to consider:
constructibility.
strength.
cost.
liability.
by inserting "filler" into a tapered section, you have a real construction headache. the use of a filler will reduce the strength of the section - strength that may be needed in a catastrophic event. the reduction in material cost may well be consumed by additional labor and schedule costs. and where will the liability rest for weakening the strength of critical elements that may be needed during a dam failure? re
i definitely want the walls to be strong and will not sacrifice durability and strength for cost savings. the main reason for considering this is that the walls do not need to be 6 feet wide at the base structurally. this is only based on the 1:10 taper for compaction against the walls.
i really didn't have a feel for whether this is done (using a filler such as geofoam) regularly or if it is silly and you end up replacing cost in labor over material.
i appreciate your input.
concur with foch3.
for many projects, concrete is considered by many to be "the" material of choice for the following reasons:
1. made for relatively low cost, common materials.
2. good availability many places.
3. familiar to construction work forces (and regulators as mentioned).
4. material properties are well understood.
5. proven environmental longevity.
try to keep things simple when possible. anyway much of your cost would be for formwork that would probably be indentical whether you use monolithic concrete or a concrete - (something else) composite.
best wishes
we recently looked at geofoam to replace flowable fill in a decidedly "low tech" fill problem. it turns out the geofoam is nearly $50/cy in place after labor, shipping, etc. we didn't see a cost advantage over flowable fill, with greater risk. we dropped geofoam from our list of permissible fixes (in consultation with the owner and specialty contractor) as a result.
as slideruleerafff">fff"> implied - follow the "kiss" principle.
derecha1,
instead of placing void formers within your section to minimise the amount of concrete used, it may be cheaper to use plums or low stremgth concrete in the central section.
an additional benefit of using a really lean mix in the central section would be to minimise heat gain during hydration.
the normal strength concrete would only be required on the outside for durability and strength purposes and can be placed at the same time as the lean concrete.
hmmm,
but you still have set up and strip forms twice. and if the filler is 10 feet high (for a 25 ft tall wall), the bracing issue will be significant.
pour it solid - and forget it.
i appreciate all of your advise and consideration. i think that answer is just go with concrete. i just wanted to see if there was anything else out there.
thanks both for all of your help.
if they want it so - let it be. this is not a "commercial" project - but an important civil work - the extra concrete is not likely that much in the overall picture. if permitted, you might use rubble concrete - that is by judiciously placing riprap size stone (say 300x300x300mm) within the concrete. normally, in this, though, there are restrictions about proximity of stones with each other and to outer surfaces.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
retaining wall retaining water huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 06:41 PM
retaining wall near a river bank huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 06:39 PM
retaining wall failure huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 06:38 PM
in enercalc masonry wall design, what is parapet heigh huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 07:17 PM
concrete seawalli-wall huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 12:35 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 01:07 PM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多