Construction Technology: Earthmoving Technologies
Construction Technology: Earthmoving Technologies
Construction Technology: Earthmoving Technologies
Construction Technology
Earthmoving technologies
FIGURE 2-1. Typical gradation curves for coarse-grained soils. (U.S. Army Engineer School)
SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND
CLASSIFICATION
• Shrinkage: When a soil is compacted, some of the air is forced out of the soil's void spaces. As
a result, the soil will occupy less volume than it did under either the bank or loose conditions.
This phenomenon, which is the reverse of the swell phenomenon, is called shrinkage.
FIGURE 2-2. Typical soil volume change during earthmoving.
• Load and Shrinkage Factors
• Because haul unit and spoil bank volume are commonly expressed in loose
measure, it is convenient to have a conversion factor to simplify the conversion
of loose volume to bank volume. The factor used for this purpose is caned a load
factor.
• shrinkage factor.
• A factor used for the conversion of bank volume to compacted volume is
sometimes referred to as a shrinkage factor.
SOIL VOLUME-CHANGE
CHARACTERISTICS
• Job Management
HYDRAULIC EXCAVATORS
job Management
When lifting pipe into place do not exceed load given in the
manufacturer's safe capacity chart for the situation.
SHOVELS
• Operation and Employment
– Front shovel or hydraulic excavator-front shovel FIGURE 3-6. Hydraulic
– Both front-dump and bottom-dump buckets are available for shovel.
hydraulic shovels. Bottom dump buckets are more versatile,
provide greater reach and dump clearance, and produce less
spillage..
Although the shovel has a limited ability to dig below track level, it
is most efficient when digging above track level.
FIGURE 3-8. Digging action of a hydraulic FIGURE 3-9. Shovel approach methods.
shovel.
• Production Estimating
– Production for hydraulic shovels may be estimated using
Equation 3-2 together with Table 3-6, which has been prepared
from manufacturers' data.
FIGURE 3-32. Crane boom attachments. (Reproduced with permission from the
Association of Equipment Manufacturers.)
COMPARING THE COSTS – TRENCHLESS
VERSUS TRADITIONAL METHODS ( New Zealand)
Steve Apeldoorn
CONCLUSIONS: There is plenty of evidence that in many cases
Trenchless Technology is a significantly cheaper and more socially
acceptable method of construction when compared to open-cut
pipeline installation.
• The cost of Trenchless Rehabilitation in New Zealand is decreasing as
the market becomes more mature and development of technology acts
to reduce the unit rates. At the same time, the cost of open cut repairs
and replacement become more expensive as the cost of fuels, disposal
of waste and environmental and social impacts increase.
• Global warming and an increased awareness of the environment
demands that we adopt methods that will help to reduce carbon
emissions. Trenchless Technology produces 97% less emissions than
open-cut pipeline construction. When considering pipe replacement or
repair methods the full cost, including social costs, should be taken
into account as part of the Life Cycle costing to ensure that the best
method with the overall lowest total cost is selected. Increasingly,
trenchless methodologies will provide that result.