Preface |
|
ix | |
About the authors |
|
xiii | |
|
|
1 | (6) |
|
2 Slope failure and stabilisation methods |
|
|
7 | (28) |
|
|
7 | (2) |
|
2.2 Shallow slope failure |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
2.3 Variation of shear strength of highly plastic clay soil |
|
|
10 | (8) |
|
2.4 Effect of rainfall on slope stability |
|
|
18 | (6) |
|
2.5 Methods of repair of shallow slope failures |
|
|
24 | (11) |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
2.5.2 Pipe piles and wood lagging |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
2.5.3 Geosynthetic/geogrid repair |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
|
26 | (1) |
|
2.5.5 Repair with launched soil nails |
|
|
26 | (1) |
|
|
27 | (1) |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
2.5.9.1 Low masonry or concrete walls |
|
|
30 | (1) |
|
|
30 | (2) |
|
2.5.9.3 Shallow mechanically stabilised earth walls |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
2.5.10 Pin piles (micropiles) |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
2.5.13 Recycled plastic pins |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
3 Generation and recycling of plastics |
|
|
35 | (8) |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
3.2 Generation of plastic waste |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
3.3 Management of plastic waste |
|
|
37 | (4) |
|
|
37 | (2) |
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
3.3.3 Potential benefits of recycling plastic waste |
|
|
40 | (1) |
|
3.4 Use of recycled plastics in different applications |
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
3.5 Use of recycled plastic for manufacture of recycled plastic pins |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
|
43 | (18) |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
4.2 Manufacturing process of RPPs |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
4.3 Engineering properties of RPPs |
|
|
44 | (10) |
|
4.3.1 Compressive and tensile strength |
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
4.3.3 Effect of weathering on long-term properties |
|
|
47 | (5) |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
4.3.4.1 Creep of RPPs in slope stabilisation |
|
|
53 | (1) |
|
4.4 Effect of environmental conditions |
|
|
54 | (7) |
|
|
61 | (24) |
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
5.2 Limit state design method |
|
|
62 | (2) |
|
5.3 Performance-based design approach |
|
|
64 | (3) |
|
5.3.1 Limit failure of soil adjacent to RPPs |
|
|
64 | (1) |
|
5.3.2 Limit resistance of RPPs |
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
5.3.2.1 Limit horizontal displacement of RPPs |
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
5.3.2.2 Limit maximum flexure for prolonged creep life |
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
5.4 Determination of limit soil pressure |
|
|
67 | (4) |
|
5.4.1 Calculation of limit soil pressure |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
5.4.2 Calculation of limit soil resistance |
|
|
68 | (3) |
|
5.5 Limit horizontal displacement and maximum flexure of RPPs |
|
|
71 | (4) |
|
5.6 Finalising the design chart |
|
|
75 | (1) |
|
5.7 Calculation of factor of safety |
|
|
76 | (5) |
|
5.7.1 Approach 1: conventional method of slices |
|
|
76 | (2) |
|
5.7.1.1 Design steps for approach 1 |
|
|
78 | (1) |
|
5.7.2 Approach 2: infinite slope |
|
|
78 | (3) |
|
5.7.2.1 Design steps for approach 2 |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
5.8 Design recommendations |
|
|
81 | (4) |
|
5.8.1 Extent of reinforcement zone |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
|
81 | (2) |
|
5.8.3 Selection of RPP spacing |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
5.8.4 Minimum RPP length and RPP sections |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
5.8.5 Recommendations on design method |
|
|
83 | (2) |
|
|
85 | (12) |
|
6.1 Early development of construction techniques |
|
|
85 | (1) |
|
6.2 Types of equipment and driving tools for field installation |
|
|
86 | (4) |
|
6.2.1 Davey Kent DK 100B drilling rig |
|
|
86 | (1) |
|
6.2.2 Klemm 802 drill rig with KD 1011 percussion head drifter |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
6.2.3 Deere 200D with FRD F22 hydraulic hammer |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
6.2.4 Caterpillar CAT 320D LRR with CAT H130S hydraulic hammer |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
6.3 Field installation rate |
|
|
90 | (2) |
|
6.4 Potential challenges of RPP installation |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
6.4.3 Connection between the hammer and pile head |
|
|
93 | (1) |
|
6.5 Special installation techniques in adverse situations |
|
|
93 | (4) |
|
|
97 | (58) |
|
7.1 US highway 287 slope in Midlothian, Texas |
|
|
97 | (19) |
|
|
98 | (2) |
|
7.1.2 Slope stability analyses at US 287 slope |
|
|
100 | (1) |
|
7.1.3 Slope stabilisation using RPPs |
|
|
101 | (1) |
|
|
102 | (3) |
|
7.1.5 Instrumentation and performance monitoring |
|
|
105 | (4) |
|
7.1.6 Performance of RPPs based on the results from instrumentation |
|
|
109 | (6) |
|
7.1.7 Performance of the unreinforced northbound slope |
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
7.2 Highway slope near Mockingbird Lane, Dallas, Texas |
|
|
116 | (8) |
|
|
116 | (2) |
|
7.2.2 Slope stability analysis and design of slope stabilisation |
|
|
118 | (2) |
|
|
120 | (3) |
|
7.2.4 Field instrumentation and performance monitoring |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
7.3 Highway slope at SH 183, Fort Worth, Texas |
|
|
124 | (9) |
|
|
124 | (1) |
|
7.3.2 Slope stability analysis and design of slope stabilisation scheme |
|
|
125 | (3) |
|
|
128 | (4) |
|
7.3.4 Field instrumentation and performance monitoring |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
7.4 Interstate 70 (I-70) Emma field test site in Columbia, Missouri (Loehr and Bowders, 2007) |
|
|
133 | (12) |
|
|
134 | (1) |
|
7.4.2 Slope stabilisation scheme |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
|
136 | (3) |
|
7.4.4 Instrumentation and performance monitoring |
|
|
139 | (6) |
|
7.5 Interstate 435 (I-435)--Wornall Road Field test site, Missouri |
|
|
145 | (10) |
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
7.5.2 Slope stabilisation scheme |
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
7.5.4 Instrumentation and performance monitoring |
|
|
148 | (7) |
Appendix A Design charts |
|
155 | (58) |
Appendix B Sample calculations |
|
213 | (16) |
References |
|
229 | (6) |
Subject Index |
|
235 | |