2020
DOI: 10.24849/j.geot.2020.150.06
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Avaliação de métodos de estimativa da capacidade de carga de fundações diretas em solos não saturados

Abstract: O presente artigo apresenta uma análise experimental e numérica do comportamento de um solo não saturado no que diz respeito à capacidade de carga de fundações superficiais. Para isso, apresentam-se inicialmente os resultados de duas provas de carga diretas executadas em uma placa de 30cm de diâmetro no Campo Experimental de Fundações da Universidade Federal do Ceará, com o solo em duas diferentes condições, uma com perfil de umidade natural e outro com pré-inundação. Foram coletadas amostras do solo em cada u… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is also worth noting that flow rate profiles equal to zero (q = 0) represent the hydrostatic profile, flow rates profiles lower than zero (q < 0) represent a downward flow (infiltration, which represent wetting profiles), and those with rates higher than zero (q > 0) are drying profiles, since they have an upward flow (evaporation). According to Almeida et al (2020) [13], in the simulations, the variation of the water level around the depth found in a percussion test simulates its seasonal actual variation. In the SPT test at the Experimental Field, the water level was found at 7.35m.…”
Section: Suction Profilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also worth noting that flow rate profiles equal to zero (q = 0) represent the hydrostatic profile, flow rates profiles lower than zero (q < 0) represent a downward flow (infiltration, which represent wetting profiles), and those with rates higher than zero (q > 0) are drying profiles, since they have an upward flow (evaporation). According to Almeida et al (2020) [13], in the simulations, the variation of the water level around the depth found in a percussion test simulates its seasonal actual variation. In the SPT test at the Experimental Field, the water level was found at 7.35m.…”
Section: Suction Profilesmentioning
confidence: 99%