In 10:02, you draw a line from F' to E' which has a slope of Gamma * (Kp - Ka), how could that be parallel to the line from F to E which has a slope of Gamma * Kp? Thanks
In 10:47 if the specific weight and friction angles of the soils are uniform (Gammas and Φs are the same), I think the elevation of z should be at the elevation of O.
I think the last term in equation 1 should be -.5*Gamma*z((H+2D)(Kp - Ka)). And the last term in equation 2 should be -(1/6)*Gamma*z^2((H+2D)(Kp - Ka)). All the other terms in both equations are correct.
Thanks a lot bra, You've just saved my design project
How far apart can I excavate in front of the wall without affecting it?
In 10:02, you draw a line from F' to E' which has a slope of Gamma * (Kp - Ka), how could that be parallel to the line from F to E which has a slope of Gamma * Kp? Thanks
You are right. That is a mistake that needs to be noted.
In 10:47 if the specific weight and friction angles of the soils are uniform (Gammas and Φs are the same), I think the elevation of z should be at the elevation of O.
i don't understand at 49:53, why when two rectangles are superimposed, there comes out a triangle?
Eqn 2 appears to be wrong. the 2nd and third term is wrong. similarly in the last term it should be H+2D and not H-2D. pl correct me
+
Yep, change (H-2D) with Ka(H+2D)
I think the last term in equation 1 should be -.5*Gamma*z((H+2D)(Kp - Ka)).
And the last term in equation 2 should be -(1/6)*Gamma*z^2((H+2D)(Kp - Ka)). All the other terms in both equations are correct.
Actually, the last term in equation 2 should be (1/6)*Gamma*z^2((H+2D)(Kp - Ka)) because its sign has to be consistent with the first term.
In 42.11, the slope is Gamma, NOT Gamma* H.
BE' should be "gamma DKp - gamma H Ka"