6 MODEL ASSESSMENT SPENDING FOUNDATIONS piers

ROAD BRIDGES
The foundations have considerable impact on the cost structure of modern
road concrete bridges. Their cost ranges from 19% to 27% of the total
expense according to the manufacturing method and the design of the bridge
system (Fragkakis
and Lambropoulos 2004). The figure is estimated at 18% according to Menn
(1990). Despite their high effect, the estimate of the cost of construction has
subject of a limited number of studies to date, due to the large
number of factors affecting the design of foundations, such as
the superstructure design characteristics (length and width of each opening of the
bridge) and
the piers (height and connect to the deck), the geological conditions at each
location
foundation, the applied foundation system and seismic parameters. the
Most researchers focus on cost estimates and quantities of work
superstructure to remove dependents from the place of work factors,
such as soil and hydrological conditions, steep slopes, proximity to active faults,
soil movements and the water flows.
The bridge foundation costs include the cost of earthworks
work and expense of the main structure. The first is associated with the excavation
and
special geotechnical works such as slope stabilization and soil reinforcement. The
the second relates to the construction of the foundation itself, and can be calculated
with
implement appropriate unit rates to the quantities of concrete work and
reinforcing steel. The cost of earthworks between 15% and 30%
the total expenditure bridge foundation (Fragkakis and Lambropoulos 2004).
This chapter addresses the need for convenient and reliable
cost estimates foundations of bridges in the initial stages of the project. presented
conceptual cost estimation model based on information known before

determine detailed plans and specifications. Also proposed system

soil classification and an expert system, which together allow the selection of
suitable foundation type. The components used were collected from
built bridges of Egnatia Odos. Interviews with specialists and experts
design and construction of bridges leading to the identification of important
variables
for each type of foundation. The agreement of the results with respect to the special
It examined by regression methodology rearwardly deletion. Statistical 6.1 Geology
of Egnatia Odos
The Egnatia highway crosses several mountains and crosses almost cross key
geological zones of Greece. The geological formations have been intense tectonic
deformations due to cracking, wrinkling or upthrust, thereby
generated in most cases complex and varied geologic structures
influence the design and construction of all types of civil engineering work (Hoek et
al. 2006).
Therefore, the remarkable diversity of geological conditions along the
motorway makes impossible accurate prediction of soil characteristics in
bridge foundation locations prior to performing detailed geological and geotechnical
studies.
6.2 Proposed classification of soils
As soil conditions play a key role in designing
the foundation of the piers of bridges, handy method becomes necessary
categorization for the development of cost estimation model. The Greek
Seismic Code 2000 - EAK 2000 (EPPO 2001) divides Greece into three
seismic zones with different higher ground accelerations and design parameters.
The RDI was revised in 2003 with new seismic hazard map and suggests
classification of land into five categories, as shown in Table 6-1.
In this investigation, a detailed classification of land developed, the
based on information known at the initial stages of the project. Based method
proposed by Tsiambaos and Saroglou (2009). Rocky and territorial formations
are the two main categories, which are then divided according to the

lithology, structure, strength and deformability characteristics. The rocky masses

categorized according to the Geological Strength Index (GSI) as described in
then. Table 6-2 lists the recommended types of soil.
Use-friendly tools for the assessment of geological formations strength
a key factor of the proposed categorization. The strength and
deformability of rogmatomenis (temachodous) rock mass will generally depend on
strength and deformability of unbreakable rock and the characteristics and
discontinuities strength slice the rock mass. The proposed categorization
land used for rock formations classification according to the GSI.
This classification was developed in the mid 1990s by Hoek
(1994) and Hoek, Kaiser and Bawden (1995) and extended for patients rock mass
from Hoek, Marinos and Benissi (1998) and Marinos and Hoek (2000) to include
leafy and sheared, low resistance and strongly tektonismenous geological
formations. then expanded by Marinos and Hoek (2001) for the flysch and
by Marinos, Marinos and Hoek on molasses (2004) and ophiolites (2005). The GSI
applies for isotropic rock masses that a sufficient number of discontinuities
randomly oriented. This classification system combines two fundamental
geological parameters for the description and characterization of rocky masses,
structure
the rock mass, and the state of surface discontinuities, as shown in
Figure 6-1. The first parameter describes the degree of interlocking of rocky
pieces, and the second the size of the shear strength.
According to Marino (2007), the GSI quickly established because of its simplicity
of, the confirmation of the experience and the possibility of describing very patient
rock mass. This indicator allows the assessment of the conditions changes
They occur in the same type of rock, and the quantification of numerous
characteristics of the rock, resulting in reduced mechanical uncertainties.
Calculated based on visual inspection of the rock mass through surface
appearances
and excavations, such as road building, tunnel fronts and drilling cores. benefits
the proposed classification of soils resulting from the use of GSI are

following:
Identify the most important parameters that affect the behavior
rock mass.
International application and acceptance.
Simplicity and clarity in the application.
Assign qualitative expressions with numbers.
Create a common base of communication between engineers and geologists.

Table 6-2: Proposed categorization territories

I. Rock Formations
OR
Solid metamorphic and igneous rocks, healthy to moderately weathered
(GSI> 70).
IB1
Rogmatomena metamorphic and igneous rocks and healthy to moderate
weathered (70> GSI> 50).
IB2 As above but highly weathered (50> GSI> 30).
IC1 Solid sedimentary rocks healthy to moderately weathered (GSI> 70).
ID1 Rogmatomena sedimentary rocks, healthy to moderately weathered (70> GSI>
50).
ID2 As above but highly weathered (50> GSI> 30).
IE1 fragmented rock (RQD <10%, 20> GSI> 50).
IE2
Rocks schistopoiimena or leafy structure, strongly folded and sheared
(20> GSI> 5).
IE3 siltstones, shales aluminate, marl, flysch often alternating layers
II. Territorial Formations
IIA1 Thick dense sand or gravel.
IIA2 Hard clay (or sandy clay).

IIV1 Middle density gravels or sands.

IIV2 Styfri clay (or sandy clay).
IIc
Recent loose deposits in streams and river beds (gravel,
ammoilyes, soft clays).
III. Special Cases
IIIA karstified limestone or marble.
IIIB
Gypsum or intercalations - gypsum enclaves in other formations (limestone, marl
etc.).
IIIc Steep side slopes with loose scree.
IIID proximity to active faults.

Figure 6-1: Display GSI for different categories of Table 6-2 Soil