Abstract:18 Installation damage of geosynthetics occurs during their handling, positioning on the ground

In this paper, data from field installation trials of geosynthetics and laboratory tests are presented and analysed.The influence of several factors was assessed, namely nominal strength and type of geosynthetic, soil, compaction energy and method used to induce installation damage. Visual observations using a scanning electron microscope were performed. From the data collected, reduction factors for installation damage were derived using tensile strength values (traditional approach) and stiffness modulus (for 2% strain). Relative to the stiffness approach, the results obtained indicate that the traditional approach can be conservative. The reduction factors, determined using the traditional approach, were also compared with interval estimates from the literature. To contribute to supporting a shift from a factor of safety approach to a limit state design, bias statistics to correct the deterministic predictions were determined from the results. Different correlations were also established to enable using these results to interpolate reduction factors for similar installation conditions and/or geosynthetics from the same family of products. Installation damage reduction factors should be used in limit state design (ultimate and serviceability). Nevertheless, the stiffness approach can only be used for limit states where tensile failure of the geosynthetics will not occur.

In todayâ??s society engineer professionals play a crucial role in tackling challenges such as climate change or economic constraints, in order to promote economical development and increase of quality of life ensuring principles like sustainability or safety. It is fundamental to prepare the future engineers to these and future challenges. According to the literature, traditional engineering educational strategies used to prepare the future engineers (lectures, lab experiences and homework) have two main drawbacks. Firstly, they inadequately prepare engineering students to engage in collaborative partnerships (essential for the practicing engineer) and, secondly, they promote passive learning and contribute to a compartmentalized curriculum. As such, the traditional deductive learning may not adequately prepare students for their innovative and flexible role as future engineers. An alternative approach is the use of non-traditional learning strategies, as in the case study hereby presented. Active learning strategies, namely project-based learning, were used to contribute to enhancing problem solving and higher order thinking skills of the graduates in Civil Engineering program of University of Aveiro, Portugal. Seizing the opportunity created by the Bologna process, two complementary courses on Geotechnical subjects (Soil Mechanics I and II) have been redesigned. The non-traditional strategies implemented include project-based learning using cooperative and collaborative models, put into practice since 2007/2008. The learning strategies referred are described and discussed. Their contribution to the development of problem solving and high order thinking skills of students is pointed out. Several strategies used to promote acceptance by students are put forward. The models were assessed using three strategies: studentsâ?? feedback during the semester; academic performance; questionnaires at the end of the semester. The evolution of the studentsâ?? response to these models is discussed using data collected in the courses. The models have been adapted to overcome some of the difficulties faced during their implementation.

Since the 1990s, the low number of students choosing to study science and technology in higher education has been on the societal agenda and many initiatives have been launched to promote awareness regarding career options. The initiatives particularly focus on increasing enrolment in the engineering programmes. This article describes and compares eight European initiatives that have been established and operated by universities (and in some cases through collaboration with other actors in society). Each initiative is summarised in a short essay that discusses motivation, organisation, pedagogical approach, and activities. In the introduction, the initiatives are characterised by looking at The initiatives are characterised by comparing the driving forces behind their creation, how the initiative activities relate to the activities at the university, size based on the number of participants and cost per participant and pedagogical framework. There seem to be two main tracks for building outreach activities, one where outreach activities are based on the university's normal activities, and one where outreach activities are designed specifically for the visiting students.

Abstract:11 This paper contributes to understanding how installation damage of geosynthetics influences 12 their long-term response and design. A geotextile and a geogrid were exhumed after installation 13 under real conditions; their long-term tensile behaviour was investigated using conventional

Abstract:Since 2007/2008 project-based learning models have been used to deliver two fundamental courses on Geotechnics in University of Aveiro, Portugal. These models have evolved and have encompassed either cooperative or collaborative teamwork.Using data collected in five editions of each course (Soil Mechanics I and Soil Mechanics II), the different characteristics of the models using cooperative or collaborative teamwork are pointed out and analysed, namely in terms of the students' perceptions. The data collected includes informal feedback from students, monitoring of their marks and academic performance, and answers to two sets of questionnaires: developed for these courses, and institutional. The data indicate students have good opinion of the project-based learning model, though collaborative teamwork is the best rated. The overall efficacy of the models was analysed (sum of their effectiveness, efficiency and attractiveness). The collaborative model was found more adequate.

No abstract

Highlights 11 Laboratory damage tests were performed on a geotextile, a geogrid and a geocomposite. 12 Abrasion damage was the most important mechanism for the tensile response. 13 Mechanical damage was the most important mechanism for the hydraulic properties.14  Positive synergy between mechanical and abrasion damage for the tensile properties. 15 Traditional approach for estimating hydraulic properties is likely unsafe. for the permittivity of the geotextile and the geocomposite, likely due to clogging of their pores. 34For the permittivity and the characteristic opening size of these geosynthetics, negative synergy 35 between mechanical and abrasion damage was found; the traditional approach was found likely 36 to result in unsafe estimates of these properties.