Uplift Capacity of Spiral Bar through the Model Experiment

Choi, Man Soo; Yun, Sung Wook; Kim, Ha Neul; Lee, Si Young; Kang, Dong Hyeon; Yoon, Young Wook

doi:10.12791/ksbec.2015.24.3.202

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This comparative analysis highlights that continuous pipe foundations, as recommended by disaster-resistant criteria, offer higher Rpull-out values at the same embedment depth than other foundation types. Similarly, the spiral bar is also effective Figure 20a presents the R pull-out of rebar stakes from this study at different installation angles (refer to Figure 18) alongside the R pull-out of rafter pipe, spiral steel peg, and spiral bar from previous studies [10,14,25], which used sandy loam in soil box experiments. The embedded lengths in all other studies were consistent at 40 cm, and the installation and pull-out directions were vertical.…”

Section: Comparison Of Pull-out Resistance With Other Foundation Typesmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The γ d refers to the unit weight of the soil measured in the field, and γ d,max represents the maximum dry unit weight that is achieved in the lab by compaction tests with a specific compaction type. In previous studies, the CR was used to represent the compaction level of soil [10,14,[24][25][26][27]. Those studies commonly used compaction type A to estimate γ d,max and decide the CR.…”

Section: Soil Compaction Meter Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this section, we compare the R pull-out of rebar stakes to that of other foundation types, including rafter pipe, spiral steel peg, spiral bar, and continuous pipe foundations, as evaluated in previous studies [10,14,24,25]. Each foundation type is visually shown in Figure 19.…”

Section: Comparison Of Pull-out Resistance With Other Foundation Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each foundation type is visually shown in Figure 19. Figure 20a presents the Rpull-out of rebar stakes from this study at different installation angles (refer to Figure 18) alongside the Rpull-out of rafter pipe, spiral steel peg, and spiral bar from previous studies [10,14,25], which used sandy loam in soil box experiments. The embedded lengths in all other studies were consistent at 40 cm, and the installation and pull-out directions were vertical.…”

Section: Comparison Of Pull-out Resistance With Other Foundation Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have examined various greenhouse foundation systems [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. In South Korea, several studies examined the pull-out resistance of continuous pipe foundations compared with other types of foundations using a soil container [25][26][27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Pull-Out Resistance of Rebar Stake Depending on Installation Conditions and Compaction Levels of Agricultural Soil

Heo,

Choi,

Lee

et al. 2024

Horticulturae

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strong winds, particularly in the absence of disaster-resistant designs, significantly impact the stability of greenhouse foundations and eventually lead to structural damage and potential harm to crops. As a countermeasure, rebar stakes are commonly used to reinforce the foundations of non-disaster-resistant greenhouses. This study evaluates the pull-out resistance (Rpull-out) of rebar stakes considering various factors like soil compaction, embedded length, installation duration and angle, and changes in soil water content against uplift pressure by strong winds. A combination of field (i.e., the cone penetration test and rebar stake pull-out test) and laboratory (i.e., the compaction test, soil compaction meter test, and soil box test) tests are performed for the assessment of Rpull-out. The results indicate that Rpull-out increases with higher soil compaction, greater embedded length, longer installation duration, and an inclined installation angle. The soil compaction exerts the most significant impact; 90% to 100% of the soil compaction rate has approximately 10 folds higher Rpull-out than the 60–70% compaction rate. If the embedded length is increased from 20 cm to 40 cm, there is a two-fold increase in the average of Rpull-out. Inclined installation of rebar stakes increases Rpull-out by 250% to 350% compared to vertical installation, and rebar stakes installed prior to the uplift event have 1.5 to 6.4 fold increases in Rpull-out than those with instant installation. Additionally, we observed variations in the surface soil moisture due to climatic changes introducing variability in Rpull-out. These findings lead to the proposition of efficient rebar stake installation methods, contributing to the enhanced stability of a greenhouse.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Pull-out Resistance With Other Foundation Typesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Soil Compaction Meter Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Of Pull-out Resistance With Other Foundation Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Of Pull-out Resistance With Other Foundation Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pull-Out Resistance of Rebar Stake Depending on Installation Conditions and Compaction Levels of Agricultural Soil

Heo,

Choi,

Lee

et al. 2024

Horticulturae

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Foundation Methods for the Soft Ground Reinforcement of Lightweight Greenhouse on Reclaimed Land: A review

Lee¹,

Kang²,

Lee³

2020

phpf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The demand for large-scale horticultural complexes utilizing reclaimed lands is increasing, and one of the pending issues for the construction of large-scale facilities is to establish foundation design criteria. In this paper, we tried to review previous studies on the method of reinforcing the foundation of soft ground. Target construction methods are spiral piles, wood piles, crushed stone piles and PF (point foundation) method. In order to evaluate the performance according to the basic construction method, pull-out resistance, bearing capacity, and settlement amount were measured. At the same diameter, pull-out resistance increased with increasing penetration depth. Simplified comparison is difficult due to the difference in reinforcement method, diameter, and penetration depth, but it showed high bearing capacity in the order of crushed stone pile, PF method, and wood pile foundation. In the case of wood piles, the increase in uplift resistance was different depending on the slenderness ratio. Wood, crushed stone pile and PF construction methods, which are foundation reinforcement works with a bearing capacity of 105 kN/m 2 to 826 kN/m 2 , are considered sufficient methods to be applied to the greenhouse foundation. There was a limitation in grasping the consistent trend of each foundation reinforcement method through existing studies. If these data are supplemented through additional empirical tests, it is judged that a basic design guideline that can satisfy the structure and economic efficiency of the greenhouse can be presented.

show abstract

Effects of Uplift Resistance on Continuous-Pipe-Foundation of Single-Span Plastic Greenhouse by Steel Plate Pipe Connector

Kim

2022

Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The single-span plastic greenhouses are affected by strong winds which generate uplift resistance causing the bending of members, damage to protective films, and damage to crops. This study performed a field test using the static axial tensile load method to present basic data to prevent damage to a single-span plastic greenhouse. Three representative areas were selected, and the effects of pipe connectors, rafter spacing, and embedding depth were tested. In the field test results, it was found to be greatly affected by the pipe connector. The pull-out resistance at the site fixed by welding instead of the pipe connector was measured as 4.5 times the sliding resistance standard value of the Rural Development Administration. In other sites, the measurement was below the standard value of the sliding resistance of the pipe connector. It was confirmed that the uplift resistance is determined by the sliding resistance of the pipe connector, the rafters, and the crossbar pipe. Therefore, it seems possible to increase the uplift resistance of a single-span plastic greenhouses continuous foundation through the reinforcement of the pipe connector. The field test results can be utilized as basic data for the reinforcement of the commercialization of single-span plastic greenhouses and new standards.

show abstract

Uplift Capacity of Spiral Bar through the Model Experiment

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Pull-Out Resistance of Rebar Stake Depending on Installation Conditions and Compaction Levels of Agricultural Soil

Pull-Out Resistance of Rebar Stake Depending on Installation Conditions and Compaction Levels of Agricultural Soil

Foundation Methods for the Soft Ground Reinforcement of Lightweight Greenhouse on Reclaimed Land: A review

Effects of Uplift Resistance on Continuous-Pipe-Foundation of Single-Span Plastic Greenhouse by Steel Plate Pipe Connector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About