The relationship of geophysical measurements to engineering and construction parameters in the Straight Creek Tunnel pilot bore, Colorado

Scott, James H.; Lee, F.T.; Carroll, R.D.; Robinson, Charles Sherwood

doi:10.1016/0148-9062(68)90020-x

Cited by 25 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Where g is the acceleration due to free fall, γ is the unit weight of the soil, ρ is density and s V is shear wave velocity. The reciprocal of shear modulus is equal to compressibility and can be determined from it (Scott et al, 1968). The Unit Weight ) (γ is related to Pwave velocity as:…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of allowable bearing capacity of Ayila Soil, south-west Nigeria

Ozebo¹,

Ikuemonisan²

2019

Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate determination of allowable bearing capacity of soil is key to geotechnical foundations design so as to prevent collapse of structures built on them. Allowable bearing capacity of the study location has been determined by shear wave velocity approach. The seismic data used in this study are the in-situ shear and compressional wave velocities values measured by a 12-channel signal enhancement seismograph. Three layers were detected by the method. Empirical formulations and mathematical relationship between seismic velocities and elastic parameters were used to evaluate the allowable bearing capacity and other parameters presented in Table 1. Results show that allowable bearing capacity for layer 1 ranges from 123.56 to 173.54kN/m 2. Layer 2 ranges from 233.24 to 377.62kN/m 2 , while layer 3 ranges from 437.62-616kN/m 2. It was observed that allowable bearing capacity increases with depth-a 13% difference between layers 1 and 2 while between layer 2 and 3 there is a 22% difference. By comparison, the allowable bearing capacities evaluated in this study are in agreement with empirical values of allowable bearing capacity of soils proposed by other scholars. Findings show the study location is suitable for geotechnical foundation designs.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Modulus of elasticity/Young's modulus ) (E : Modulus of elasticity is the ratio of tensile stress to tensile strain. Its reciprocal is equal to compliance (Scott et al, 1968). Modulus of elasticity can be expressed as:…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of allowable bearing capacity of Ayila Soil, south-west Nigeria

Ozebo¹,

Ikuemonisan²

2019

Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large amount of research has been conducted on the use of active and passive seismic methods for this purpose (see Carlson and Young, 1993;Cabrera et al, 1999;Backblom and Martin, 1999;Cosma et al, 2001;Alheid et al, 2002;Malmgren et al, 2007, for example). Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and resistivity methods have shown potential in a few isolated studies, although their use requires further testing and development (Scott et al, 1968;Kruschwitz and Yaramanci, 2004;Suzuki et al, 2004;Gibert et al, 2006;Silvast and Wiljanen, 2008;Kantia et al, 2013;Lesparre et al, 2013). This study aims to further test these methods through the comparison of multiple different data sources to test for consistency of the results obtained.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Non-invasive detection of fractures, fracture zones, and rock damage in a hard rock excavation — Experience from the Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory in Sweden

Walton

Lato

Anschütz

et al. 2015

Engineering Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The inversion algorithm uses the delay-time method (Pakiser and Black, 1957) to obtain a first approximation depth model. It is then trimmed up by a series of ray tracing and model adjustment iterations to minimize the discrepancies between the field measured arrival times and the corresponding times traced through the 2-1 Ú2-D cross sectional depth model (Scott et al, 1968;and Scott and Markiewicz, 1990). …”

Section: The Seismic Refraction Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%