Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 9 Design, Analysis, and Testing of Laterally Loaded Deep Foundations that Support Transportation Facilities


AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS (2014)



Download 6.03 Mb.
View original pdf
Page194/205
Date29.05.2022
Size6.03 Mb.
#58903
1   ...   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   ...   205
hif18031
Soldier Rev B
6.9
AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS (2014)
Although no new concepts are introduced in the manual compared to other publications, a brief summary of the highlights related to lateral deep foundation design are included in this section. In Figure C fixity relative to flexural strength of the foundation element is defined by a graphic as the second point of zero deflection from a P analysis, above which a resistance factor of 1.0 is recommended for flexure and 0.70 for axial for steel piles. Only structural analysis relative to axial loading is needed for piles exceeding this depth.


274 In section C the formulas for calculating the depth to fixity for preliminary structural design are included, which are referenced from Davisson and Robinson (1965). The estimation of nominal lateral resistance is discussed in section 10.7.3.12 which recommends using p-y curves, group effects accounted for using P-multipliers, and a resistance factor of 1.0. Resistance of the pile cap is allowed if it is to be embedded. Section 10.7.2.4 allows the use of strain wedge model for large diameter, relatively short piles or shafts, but notes that P-multipliers are not applicable due to the overlap of wedge zones. Minimum penetration to obtain fixity is relative to the applied lateral loads at the Strength Limit State as indicated in section 10.7.6. The majority of State DOT practice is consistent with the guidance presented in AASHTO LRFD (2014), with the DOTs occasionally providing additional guidance. In some cases, that DOT guidance is more conservative, such as using resistance factors, and in other cases the DOT guidance is simply different, such as using Broms method for final design or employing critical depth instead of fixity depth. A few of the other recurring differences include Defining the head deflection limits Different definition of the fixity depth Recommendations regarding head fixity Defining geotechnical and structural discipline responsibilities

Download 6.03 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   ...   205




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page