Stoic

As I go about my daily activities, I will meet jerks, idiots, aggressive, passives, and a few nice well adjusted people. Patience, tolerance, and understanding is required, and ignoring that which is none of my concern is required. Heavy use of the delete button also. 

Mind Crap

from http://relievemypain.blogspot.ca/2013/01/chocolate-for-stoics.html, but could be AA

Soldier on!
Hug someone--it could be the last time
Steel yourself
Have you insulted yourself today?
Quit buying useless crap
Tolerate someone detestable
Chin up!
Accept the inevitable
Make do and mend
Throw yourself into your work
Enjoy what you already have

and then some more common but wrong from the testing years

Ignore reality, and just do it.

Ignore it, it will not bite.

If it bothers you, just don't look at it.

Just cover it, know-body will know.

It is only a test result. fail it and we will get to test it again.

Fudge some of the tests, nobody cares.

Nobody cares, they are just meaningless tests.

I do not believe in failures, you must have done the test wrong.

Philosophy

Some where up in the brain, far below the ego, we store our beliefs and values. Some of these are just wrong, many are good, right, and true. Many of our beliefs were entrenched as children, and have not been looked at them since. Occasionally, we were likely forced into situations where we had to cross our beliefs to satisfy a need, an expectation, or a want for us or someone else who we gave power over us to. (Government, employer). At changes in our career, perhaps we need to open our minds and look at our beliefs honestly and with intention. Some will be just left, as we judge them to be good, and right and true. Other we will want to rip out like a thistle, roots and all.

This is basically the intent of Albert Ellis and Alfred Adler CBT, the Stoics, and philosophy in general, to shape out beliefs. Religions do some on this, but there primary intent is to transmit the religion to the next generation. Buddhism is the exception.

So what am I on about? Positive thinking, aka you can do or be anything you want to be, you just need to go after it, is a suitable philosophy for selling hope. Some will make it. It is good for modifying the lazy, and the unmotivated. It also increases expectation, anxiety, greed, guilt, and lower authenticity, integrity  and happiness.  Like any philosophy, it has a good side, and a less good side.

It is a short term philosophy, which is difficult for those around us. It can generate aggression, action, and similar violation of ethics to achieve an end. If this is what you desire, go for it.

Expert

In order to write a report that provides required geotechnical information to design a foundation, we need to know how to design the foundation, and what the soils are. Either part by it's self is not enough. We need to know what is to be built and how, in order to provide the proper values, without a bunch of excess. Time is money, in the engineering world. Waste of time cost somebody. When we are working on fixed price, then it costs the engineering company. Hourly rate work is rare in this industry.

I do not like to teach anyone, but those who do not know basic stuff, I find extremely frustrating. The training is all fine, but they seem to be missing the basics. 

Grinders

Grinders, people who grind on designs to reduce cost. You can either take responsibility for the design as you changed it, or build it as per design. Either one, and do not expect that I will be responsible for your modification to reduce cost. That is on you.

So if you do not like my design, find another nigger.

uls sls ws

The relationship between ULS, SLS and working stress is a construct of the collective minds of structural engineers. It has become codified and is just caca el toro in soils terms, but we geotechnical engineers must live with the government decrees, no mater how stupid they are.

Consider the centre of this diagram a number line going from low to high value.

Above ground we start out with the structure loads, and up-scale those values by partial factors of safety, as found in the building code or bridge code. these become the factored loads.

The code says that the factored loads must be less than the factored resistance, which is all fine and good, but in soils terms, the factored soils value is largely theoretical. Here, and any time Standard Penetration is used, the bearing value is empirical working stress set from a bearing value that will give about 1 inch of differential settlement, 2 inches total settlement, aka SLS value. A similar exercise is used for Cone penetration, unconfined values from Shelby tubes, or pocket pen, whether in Qu or C.

Now what happens when we have a mix of values? we need to convert all to allowable design values, and compare, and then pick our report values. We can use a factor of safety to up scale the value to some theoretical unfactored ultimate, and then apply the CFEM factors to come to a factored resistance. But now both the SLS and ULS must be checked, and for most foundations the SLS should govern. But now we are doing something odd. Some use the approach of  up-scaling working stress value by 1.35 or some number between 1.25 and 1.5, the range in load factors, and use that value. 

My preference is to provide ULS and SLS values, and let the structural engineer do twice the work of previous. Some other appear to be calling the old allowable value the factored resistance, which demands larger foundations. The bearing value in some of soils reports of late from others firms seem to be odd in relationship to soil strength and traditional values, which is of concern. Not enough test holes and high factors of safety. Not good engineering. 

Enough said.           

Basement lateral pressure

Basement lateral pressure, backfill pressure, is a tricky subject. Most books say it is Ka times the vertical, and I believe that true, right after construction. Over time I am not so sure. With high plastic clays, dessication - wetting cycles, freeze thaw cycles, for shallow fills, I think the residual stress dissipate, and the wall lateral pressure increasing over time to Ko. This is not what some of the books say. I think this condition takes 30 to 40 years to develop. Are there any long term lateral pressure studies on house basements, high plastic soils, deep frost penetration? none yet found.

After the wall has failed, the lateral repair must be stronger, because prior to failure, there was a diaphragm moment due to the end walls. During failure, the end cracks relieve this moment, hence all the lateral moment must now be taken by the vertical stiffness of the wall.

When we add potential swelling pressure and potential freeze expansion pressures, the lateral pressure becomes a large transient value. The upper bound of the pressure would be Kp; however, Kp exceeds the typical probable pressure. To use Kp for design would be excessive.

There are areas of the wall that have no lateral support, either through wall openings or through no floor diaphragm as dropped floors and stairs parallel to the wall. These may need abutments or counterbalancing exterior stairs or steps. 

Epoxy injection can reach the strength of the previous wall; however, to do that, all the cracks would need to have 100 percent penetration. The other issue is that after the wall cracked, the stresses were relieved. After epoxy injection, the critical failure start point will have changed. This results in loss of effective strength. The corners have loss the deflection necessary to develop the support it had before.

I think the only way is to do a structural design accounting for all the loss of strength, using a Ko = 1.0, plus a live load for all construction equipment, and reconstruct the wall or equivalent repair. Outside stiffeners can be used, but they must account for the actual openings in the wall and diaphragm. Typical spacing may not be adequate. There will now be no (very little) support from the end walls.

Over the years these are the methods I have seen utilized are as follow:

1. Shotcrete reinforced wall inside
2. Concrete abutment inside
3. Reinforced shotcrete wall outside
4. Wall replacement with proper reinforced design accounting for openings. One required an inside abutment.
5. PWF inside wall, without plywood
6. PWF inside wall with an plywood abutment under the beam. All the PWF were inset into the floor to existing foundations. New foundations may also be required. Bottom and top lateral support is required.
7. Exterior vertical stiffeners, back to back channel bolted through the wall to bring the wall back into line.

All these methods require the wall to be excavated full length and depth, exterior water proofing, good condition weeping tile to provide drainage, and some kind of vertical water drainage is recommended on the exterior wall face.