Geo-Trends Review

During triaxial compression, you can estimate Poisson's ratio by measuring lateral expansion of the specimen (while measuring vertical compression of course). You can also measure Poisson's ratio from pressuremeter measurements or dilatometer measurements in the field, as well as by measuring both p-wave and s-wave velocity.

it is diffical to get reliable poisnes ratio from field but you can get in laboratory in triaxial test

Hello,

I would recomend APAGEO, they are the pionneers in pressuremeter testing, with broad experience and expertise.

For prices, you can contact them : http://www.apageo.com/en/18/in-situ-testing-soil-investigation.html

Regards,

Hi,

You can use the article tittled "Subgrade Modulus of Laterally Loaded Piles in Clays" by  DANIEL O. WONG. This article brings out the whole analysis procedure to obtain the "k" horizontal value.

Regards,

You may perform point load tests on the rock material and u can correlate it with Ucs value.   The angle of repose can be consider in calculating allowable bearing capacity.The Angle of Repose because Rock Triaxial instruments are rarely available in the local industry. Further reading is recommended on intermediate Geo-Materials ”IGM

Bowles (fifth edition, p279) suggests that you can make calculation of the bearing capacity of the ground, according to the same equations that are derived for soil materials, when you have value of RQD<25. Make the best estimation of the parameters of the ground (fi and C), for the given stress state.

Regards

Hi,

All the above recommendations are great. I would advise you to consider the rock formation as a cohesionless soil with 0 cohesion and fi above 35 degrees. You can improve the design by considering it to be an intermediate Geo-Material, as one of the respondents above has commented. You can solve this problem with the "ALLPILE" program, it has a special provision for this kind of material.

Regards,

hi it is very difficalt to estimate the rock bearing capacity in UCS if its RQD value is zero hence the very important thing is that geotecnicall oberve the geological formation/orentation of the rock, discontiniuty, fault and other gaps  of the area/pit/ and identify weather it is suitable or saviere then we can considers as soil or weatherd rock and calculate the bearing capacity using the adopted formmulas 

Hi,

If you have pressuremeter test results, this is quite enough to provide a suitable solution. On the other hand, it is important to have soil classification information as basic data in the design process. If it is an onshore project, I would recommend that you employ screw/helical piles, as they are easy to install (aprox. rate of installation - 1.8m/min), then join them with a pile cap on top which would already have the needed anchors to receive the wind turbine. Another advantage with this technology is that the fabricant of the helicals will provide free of charge foundation design. You can send me an email, then I can send you photos of some case studies we have had in this regard.

All the best in your project!

Hi,

Applicability of compaction techniques (Vibrocompaction, Dynamic Compaction, Rapid Impact Compaction, etc) will be mainly dependent on grain size distributions.

Applicability of reinforcement techniques with flexible inclusions (Stone Columns, Dynamic Replacement, etc) will mainly depend on depth of improvement, and lateral strenght of soil.

Applicability of reinforcement techniques with rigid inclusions (such as Controlled Modulus Columns) are frequently used for Wind Turbine foundations. Limitations could be related to significant uplifting forces, which may require to have armed rigid inclusisions linked to structure, i.e. piling solution.

Other than technical consideration, the economic aspect and availability of technique are key elements in the selection of the method.

Regards,

Having designed a variety of soil improvement and foundations for wind turbines in a wide range of soil conditions, I can tell you the right solution cannot easily be determined from simple soil properties.  Soil shear strength, soil density, degree of saturation, layer thicknesses, depth to firm stratum, soil chemistry/corrosivity, thermal resistivity, site location, and availability of matierials and equipment all have a roll to play in method selection.  Depth to rock or a stiff stratum can be a really important factor, especially for surface treatment methods such as RIC or DDC. You can get into a whole realm of solutions involving micropiles or anchors where soft soils are too deep for practical improvement and rock is too shallow to permit adequate uplift resistance.  Foundations over soft rock such as coal, can pose a whole different set of issues.  Each site can be very individual.  Many wind energy sites are not virgin ground and may have had prior industrial or minerals extraction activities that may have significantly altered the subsurface conditions increasing complexity of the sites.  

Ultimately it comes down to selecting the most economical and technically feasible method.  Unless you are dealing in a single geologic setting, you will have to assess the potential for geologic hazards including hydrocollapse, expansive clays, sinkholes, landslides, acid rock drainage, soluble minerals such as halite or gypsum, and other factors that can affect the selection of foundation support methods.  If working on contaminated sites, a whole additional set of factors comes into play related to safety, cross contamination and discposal of excavated soils.  Practical issues such as access for materials and equipment to remote locations and variability of conditions across sites can have a profound impact on the choice the method, since flexibility and applicabilty to a wide range of expected of conditions may be necessary.  I am not sure if any of this helps you, but at the very least, I hope it gives you some insight into the selection process to set appropriate limits for the applicability of your solution.  I suspect that trying to develop a universal approach would be problematic.  I would suggest that you should at the very least limit any programmed solution to a particular set of conditions or geoplogic setting.  Good luck.