Logowanie
Zarejestruj się
Zresetuj hasło
Publikuj i Dystrybuuj
Rozwiązania Wydawnicze
Rozwiązania Dystrybucyjne
Dziedziny
Architektura i projektowanie
Bibliotekoznawstwo i bibliologia
Biznes i ekonomia
Chemia
Chemia przemysłowa
Filozofia
Fizyka
Historia
Informatyka
Inżynieria
Inżynieria materiałowa
Językoznawstwo i semiotyka
Kulturoznawstwo
Literatura
Matematyka
Medycyna
Muzyka
Nauki farmaceutyczne
Nauki klasyczne i starożytne studia bliskowschodnie
Nauki o Ziemi
Nauki o organizmach żywych
Nauki społeczne
Prawo
Sport i rekreacja
Studia judaistyczne
Sztuka
Teologia i religia
Zagadnienia ogólne
Publikacje
Czasopisma
Książki
Materiały konferencyjne
Wydawcy
Blog
Kontakt
Wyszukiwanie
EUR
USD
GBP
Polski
English
Deutsch
Polski
Español
Français
Italiano
Koszyk
Home
Czasopisma
Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Tom 44 (2022): Zeszyt 2 (June 2022)
Otwarty dostęp
Numerical Evaluation of Partially Strengthened Floating Granular Pile Raft With Vertical and Radial Displacement Compatibility
Raksha Rani Sanadhya
Raksha Rani Sanadhya
,
Jitendra Kumar Sharma
Jitendra Kumar Sharma
oraz
Ashish Solanki
Ashish Solanki
| 28 maj 2022
Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Tom 44 (2022): Zeszyt 2 (June 2022)
O artykule
Poprzedni artykuł
Następny artykuł
Abstrakt
Artykuł
Ilustracje i tabele
Referencje
Autorzy
Artykuły w tym zeszycie
Podgląd
PDF
Zacytuj
Udostępnij
Article Category:
Original Study
Data publikacji:
28 maj 2022
Zakres stron:
148 - 161
Otrzymano:
07 cze 2020
Przyjęty:
14 lut 2022
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2022-0008
Słowa kluczowe
Floating GP
,
Settlement impact factor
,
Radial displacement impact factors
,
Comparative length of strengthening
,
Strengthening factor
© 2022 Raksha Rani Sanadhya et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1
Force and stresses on a partially strengthened piled raft foundation.
Figure 2
(a) Stresses on the GP and raft due to soil. (b) Stresses in the soil due to GP and raft. (c) Stresses on any ith element of the GP.
Figure 3
Variation of SIF, ip, with comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP– effect of strengthening factor, μr, and radial and vertical settlement compatibility on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp =10, dr/dp =3, λr =0.4).
Figure 4
Variation of SIF, ip, with comparative strengthening, μr, of GP– effect of comparative length of strengthening, Kp, of GP and radial and vertical settlement compatibility on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp =10, dr/dp=3, λr =4).
Figure 5
Variation of SIF, ip, considering radial displacement with comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP– effect of comparative length, λr, of strengthening from top of GP and comparative size of raft, dr/dp, on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp =10, μr=4).
Figure 6
Variation of SIF, ip, considering radial displacement with comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP– effect of strengthening factor, μr, and comparative size of raft, dr/dp, on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp =10, λr =0.4).
Figure 7
Variation of SIF, ip, considering radial displacement with comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP– effect of comparative size of raft, dr/dp, and stiffness factor, μr, on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp =10, λr =0.4).
Figure 8
Variation of SIF, ip, considering radial displacement with comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP– effect of comparative length of GP, Lp/dp, and stiffness factor, μr, on partially strengthened GP– raft foundation (dr/dp=3, λr =0.4).
Figure 9
Variation of radial displacement impact factor, ir, with comparative length of pile z1 = z/Lp – effect of strengthening factor μr and comparative size of raft, dr/dp, and radial and vertical settlement compatibility on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, Kp=100, λr =0.4).
Figure 10
Variation of radial SIF, ir, with the normalized depth, z1=z/Lp – effect of comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP and strengthening factor, μr, on a partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=5, λr=0.4).
Figure 11
Variation of radial SIF, ir, with the normalized depth, z1=z/Lp – effect of comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP and comparative length of strengthening, λr, on a partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp =3, μr=4).
Figure 12
Variation of normalized shear stresses, τ*= τ/(F/πdpLp), with radial compatibility of the normalized depth, z1 =z/Lp – effect of stiffness factor, μr, and comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP on a partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=5, λr =4).
Figure 13
Variation of normalized shear stresses, τ*= τ/(F/πdpLp), with radial compatibility of the normalized depth, z1=z/Lp – effect of stiffness factor, μ, and comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP on a partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=3,μr=2).
Figure 14
Variation of normalized radial stresses, σr* = σr (πdpLp)/F, with the normalized depth, z1=z/Lp – effect of stiffness factor, μr, and comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP on a partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, μr=2, λr=0.4).
Figure 15
Variation of normalized radial stresses, σr*= σr(πdpLp)/F, with the normalized depth, z1=z/Lp – effect of stiffness factor, μr, and comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP on a partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=3, λr=0.4).
Figure 16
Variation of SIF for any depth, ipd, with normalized depth, z1=z/Lp–effect of stiffness factor, μr, on homogeneous GP–raft and partially strengthened GP–raft (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=3, λr=0.4).
Figure 17
Variation of SIF for any depth, ipd, with normalized depth, z1=z/Lp – effect of comparative length λr of strengthening from top of GP on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, Kp=50, μr=0.4).
Figure 18
Variation of contact pressure (pr* =Fr/q) with normalized distance from the center of raft R*=r/dp–effect of strengthening factor, μr, and vertical and radial compatibility of displacement on a partially strengthened GP–raft and solid raft (Kp =50, Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=3, λr=0.4).
Figure 19
Variation of contact pressure (pr* =Fr/q) with normalized distance from the center of raft R*=r/dp–effect of comparative strengthening, Kp, of GP and comparative size of raft, dr/dp, on partially strengthened GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, μr=4, λr=0.4).
Figure 20
Variation of percentage load w. r. t. total load with the comparative strengthening of GP, Kp – effect of comparative length of strengthening of GP, μr, on a partially strengthen GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=3,λr=0.4).
Figure 21
Variation of percentage load w. r. t. total load with the comparative strengthening of GP, Kp– effect of comparative length of GP, dr/dp, on a partially strengthen GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10,μr=4,λr=0.4).
Figure 22
Variation of percentage load w. r. t. total load with the comparative strengthening of GP, Kp– effect of comparative length of strengthening of GP, λr, on a partially strengthen GP–raft foundation (Lp/dp=10, dr/dp=3,μr=4).
Podgląd