2015
DOI: 10.3989/mc.2015.06614
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new procedure to adapt any type of soil for the consolidation and construction of earthen structures: projected earth system

Abstract: ABSTRACT:The "projected earth system" is put forward as an alternative construction method. The soil from each site is adapted following a specific protocol to make it suitable for spraying. The type of construction and the receiving surface determine the machinery and spraying system used (dry or wet mix). The result will be similar in texture and colour to the original material (in the case of earth walls) or to the surrounding material. RESUMEN:Un procedimiento nuevo para adaptar cualquier tipo de suelo pa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
(15 reference statements)
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Both size distribution and Atterberg limits establish an SM or SC-SM classification [1] with different percentages of gravel for the soil used. If we compare with the results in samples from level 2 of the "Alhambra Formation" [15], which corresponds to the parental sample of this edaphic soil, the lack of fines in the soil of this investigation is corroborated, since that we lack samples classified as SC, as well as the significant presence of coarse (gravel) that at the aforementioned level provides GC and GC-GM classifications. Therefore, the edaphic soil in question differs fundamentally from its parent soil in that the clay content is very low, and the coarse sizes are also poorly represented.…”
Section: Size Distribution Atterberg Limits Soil Type Classification ...supporting
confidence: 55%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Both size distribution and Atterberg limits establish an SM or SC-SM classification [1] with different percentages of gravel for the soil used. If we compare with the results in samples from level 2 of the "Alhambra Formation" [15], which corresponds to the parental sample of this edaphic soil, the lack of fines in the soil of this investigation is corroborated, since that we lack samples classified as SC, as well as the significant presence of coarse (gravel) that at the aforementioned level provides GC and GC-GM classifications. Therefore, the edaphic soil in question differs fundamentally from its parent soil in that the clay content is very low, and the coarse sizes are also poorly represented.…”
Section: Size Distribution Atterberg Limits Soil Type Classification ...supporting
confidence: 55%
“…The carbonate content varies between 15.50 and 32.50%, resulting in a characteristic average value of 22%, taking into account that two of the dominant components of the soil are carbonates (calcite, dolomite), which explains why the highest values are found between 5 and 16 mm where calcite and dolomite grains should be especially concentrated, also, in the finest particles of this level (0.16-0.18 mm), the carbonate content is also elevated, which is quite normal in the B horizon of edaphic soils due to the washing out of salts in the upper horizon. Compared to Alhambra Formation (level 2), carbonates range between 13.5 and 17.1%, essentially concentrated in fines [15].…”
Section: Size Distribution Atterberg Limits Soil Type Classification ...mentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Regarding sliding and bearing failures, the determining factor is the ground resistance. The verification of such limit states, both with EC7-1 and CTE DB SE-C, is given by Equation (4), where E d is the design effect of actions and R d is the corresponding design resistance.…”
Section: Geo Ultimate Limit Statesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these cases, there are different ways of solving the problem, which usually take into account, among other things, the restitution of the lost material not to compromise stability. In the restoration of several walls in the Generalife of the Alhambra in Granada, an innovative technique of soil projection was applied, in order to restore the lost part of the section because of the water seepage from the backfill [4]. In any case, stability verifications should be performed after any changes have been in use and also whenever the section of the wall is changed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%