DEEP SUPPORT SYSTEMS USING DIAPHRAGM WALLS AND CONTIGUOUS PILES

Manish Kumar ITD Cementation India Limited, Kalina, Mumbai Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT: Inadequate space in urban settings has set forth a challenging trend to go deeper into the ground, and increase the space required for providing public amenities, parking and for housing utilities. Closely spaced structures in the vicinity of excavation, soft and compressible landfills, presence of underground utilities, and restriction of lateral ground movements have made the supporting systems a formidable task to execute. The support systems commonly adopted include Braced walls, Sheet pile walls, Contiguous or Secant pile walls, Diaphragm walls and RCC retaining walls. This article aims to present constructional and design elements of the retaining systems very commonly adopted in cities of India, namely Diaphragm walls, Contiguous piles and Soldier pile system with wooden laggings. The experiences and factors advocating selection of appropriate retaining system, determination of lateral earth and hydrostatic pressure distribution, constructional features, water related problems and bottle-necks during execution are described herein.

1. INTRODUCTION Urban settings pose unique challenge to the construction Industry. Special features of urban areas are restricted movements, inadequate space for equipment, soil heterogeneity (including fill and remains of old foundations or other unexpected obstructions); effects of changes in the water table; foundation interaction (the detrimental effects of construction of new structures on the surrounding buildings). Heavy traffic and lack of adequate space has compelled Civil engineers to excavate deeper into the ground to create additional floor space to meet increasing space requirements for amenities, parking and for housing of building utilities. As the number of deep excavations in city is seen to increase exponentially so are the problems associated with their construction. Structures in the immediate vicinity of excavations, dense traffic scenario, presence of underground obstructions and utilities have made excavations a formidable task to execute. Clearly, deep excavations are posing mounting problems that demand a site specific and tailor made retaining solution.

Even in complicated urban settings, deep retaining systems have been deployed successfully by overcoming construction challenges. This article describes some of the key retaining structures that have been successfully executed in the urban areas of India.

2. HAZARDS OF DEEP EXCAVATIONS Unsupported excavations pose several hazards, and the following list gives some of the important ones: (i) (ii) Very high risk potential of collapse or failure of excavation walls and consequently posing hazard to workers and equipment Hazards during excavation due to presence of public utilities, such as electricity, water, gas, or natural gases and oxygen deficient atmosphere (iii) (iv) (v) Dewatering problems Wet, slushy ground conditions, causing slips, trips, or falls, complicated by limited spaces in which personnel work Ground and/or ground water table changes affecting nearby structures.

Support provision for excavation depends on the type of soil in the area, the depth of the excavation, the type of foundation being built, and the space around the excavation. During excavation, some soil types pose greater problems than others. Sandy soil is always considered dangerous even when it is allowed to stand for a period of time after a vertical cut. The instability can be caused by moisture changes in the surrounding air or changes in the water table. Vibration from blasting, traffic and heavy machinery movement, and material loads near the cut can also cause earth to collapse in sandy soil. Clayey soils in general, present less risk than sand; however, soft clay can prove to be very treacherous. Silty soils are also unreliable and require the same precautions and support provision as sand.

3. COMMON TYPES OF EARTH SUPPORT SYSTEMS Several in-situ support systems have been deployed for containing deep excavations. The criteria for the selection of these systems are excavation depth, ground conditions, ground water level, allowable vertical and horizontal displacements of adjacent ground, availability of construction know-how, cost factors, subsequent 2

construction methodology, working space limitations etc. One of the key governing factors is the requirement of water tightness of the retaining structure. Following types of deep support systems are commonly used in metropolitan cities. (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) Diaphragm walls Pile walls (Contiguous, Tangent or Secant) Soldier pile with wooden lagging walls Sheet pile walls Composite supporting systems that is, any of the retaining systems (i) to (iv) above strengthened by Anchors, internal strutting etc. Diaphragm walls, Contiguous Piles and Soldier piles with wooden lagging walls are addressed in the following sections.

4. DESIGN SYSTEMS

PHILOSOPHY

INVOLVING

FLEXIBLE

RETAINING

Diaphragm walls and Contiguous piles are commonly designed as flexible retaining walls. Such retaining systems are considered to be vertical cantilever designed to resist lateral earth and ground water pressures, and to rotate about some point b below the dredge level (Fig. 1). The flexibility leads to development of passive pressure at the toe in the backfill side of the wall. Blums simplification replaces the passive pressure behind the retaining wall with a force applied to the wall at some height above the toe (Fc in Fig.1B). The necessary depth of penetration is found by taking moments about the replacement force position, C. Moment equilibrium gives the required depth of penetration, provided that the net pressure diagram is calculated including the effects of groundwater. The computed may be increased by 20 to 40% beyond the point required by equilibrium (Teng, 1962); or the effective horizontal pressure on the passive side may be reduced by applying a factor of safety of 1.5 to 2.0 before the embedment depth of pile is computed. Unit length of diaphragm wall is considered for determining its reinforcement requirements, whilst for contiguous piles, the c/c spacing is used for estimating reinforcement quantity.

A C T IV E

N E T P A S S IV E ( P p- Pa)

N E T P A S S IV E ( P p- Pa) X

c (a) A S S U M E D M O D E O F W ALL M O V E M E N T (b ) ID E A L IZ E D P R E S S U R E D IS T R IB U T I O N

R S H E E T - P I L E W A L L D E S I G N P R I N C IP L E S A. C A N T I L E V EOF A DESIGN PRINCIPLES FLEXIBLE RETAINING SYSTEM

N E T T O T A L P R E S S U R E D IA G R A M , B A S E D O N A C T IV E P R E S S U R E + N E T W ATER PRESSURE - (p a s s iv e p re s s u re ) (fa c to r o f s a fe ty ) B

C D

Fc

B DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS OF FLEXIBLE RETAINING SYSTEM D E S IG N A S S U M P T I O N F O R C A N T I L E V E R S H E E T - P I L E

W ALLS

Fig. 1: Flexible Retaining Systems Design Principles and Assumptions (Clayton et. al., 1993) For computation of the earth pressure, classical earth pressure theory is used. The pressure distribution shall depend on the nature of backfill, which is often observed to be heterogeneous at site. Diaphragm walls account for hydrostatic pressures from the back side. While in the contiguous piles, on account of provision of clear space between pile faces, water table is assumed to be at the dredge level. The hydrostatic pressure below the dredge level is assumed to cancel out.

A generalized equation for active and passive earth pressure computation is stated below: pa = (q+h)Ka 2c Ka1/2 pp = (q+h)Kp + 2c Kp1/2 Where, pa and pp are Active and Passive earth pressure intensity, Ka and Kp are the coefficients of earth pressures for active and passive states, respectively q = surcharge load intensity c = unit soil cohesion = unit weight of soil h = depth under consideration. Typical earth pressure diagrams for diaphragm walls computed on the basis of Rankinee earth pressure theory in sandy, clayey and stratified soils can be seen in Fig.2. ---- (1) ---- (2)

For any height of water column h, the hydrostatic pressure is computed as w h.

Fig. 2: Earth Pressure Distribution in Different Soil Systems

5. DIAPHRAGM WALLS 5.1 General Diaphragm walling is a technique of constructing a continuous underground wall from the ground level. Diaphragm walls provide structural support and water tightness. These reinforced concrete diaphragm walls are also called Slurry trench walls due to the reference given to the construction technique where excavation is made possible by filling and keeping the wall cavity full with bentonite-water mixture during excavation to prevent collapse of vertical excavated surfaces. These retaining structures find following applications: earth retention walls for deep excavations; basements, and tunnels; High capacity vertical foundation elements; Retaining wall foundations; water control. These are also used as a permanent basement walls for facilitating Top-down construction method. Typical wall thickness varies between 0.6 to 1.1m. The wall is constructed panel by panel in full depth. Panel width varies from 2.5m to about 6m. Short widths of 2.5m are selected in less stable soils, under very high surcharge or for very deep walls. Different panel shapes other than the conventional straight section like T, L are 6

possible to form and used for special purposes. Traditionally, panel excavation is carried out using cable supported Grab. Hydraulic grabs with Kelley arrangement have recently been introduced in India on large Infrastructural projects. More recently developed hydraulic cutter type machines are not being used in India hence have not been discussed here. Slurry wall technique is a specialized technique and apart from the crane mounted Grab, other equipment involved are cranes, pumps, tanks, desanding equipment, air lifts, mixers etc. Steps involved in the construction of diaphragm wall can be broadly listed as follows: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) Guide wall construction along alignment Trenching by crane operated Grab/ hydraulic grab Bentonite flushing Lowering reinforcement cage Concreting using tremie

The sequence of construction of diaphragm wall panel has been schematically illustrated in Fig. 3. It must be remembered that Diaphragm walls are constructed as a series of alternating primary and secondary panels. Alternate primary panels are constructed first which are restrained on either side by stop-end pipes. Before the intermediate secondary panel excavation is taken up, the pipes are removed and the panel is cast against two primary panels on either side to maintain continuity. Water stoppers are sometimes used in the construction joints between adjacent panels to prevent seepage of ground water.

5.2 Merits and Demerits Diaphragm wall construction is relatively quiet, and minimum noise and vibration levels make it suitable for construction in urban areas. The water tight walls formed can be used as permanent structural walls and are most economical when used in this manner. The finished structural wall formed prior to excavation allows subsequent construction of the basement in a water tight and clean environment. Once the diaphragm walls are constructed, work can be planned to proceed simultaneously above and below the ground level. There is a minimum of space wasted. Work may be carried out right against existing structures and the line of wall may be adjusted to any shape in plan. 7

BENTONITE SLURRY

GUIDE WALL

TRENCHING UP TO FOUNDING LEVEL

FIRST STOPEND INSTALLATION

SECOND STOPEND INSTALLATION

REINFORCEMENT CAGE READY FOR LOWERING

II

III

IV

VI

VII

AIR LIFT FLUSHING

COMPRESSED AIR FRESH BENTONITE

2.5M 5.0-6.0M

REINFORCEMENT CAGE LOWERED

AIR LIFT FLUSHING

TREMMIE PIPE LOWERED FOR D.W. CONCRETE

CONCRETING IN PROGRESS

COMPLETED DIAPHRAGM WALL PANEL

VIII

IX

XI

XII

Fig. 3: Construction Sequences in Diaphragm Wall Construction Diaphragm walls however, require the use of heavy construction equipment that requires reasonable headroom, site area, and considerable mobilization costs. In limited headroom conditions, smaller cranes can be used though this could compromise efficiency. They are not considered efficient means in hard and rocky grounds, where the conventional grabs are undeployable.

5.3 Case History Diaphragm Wall Construction at BC-24 Stretch of Delhi Metro Corridor This project involved diaphragm wall construction for station buildings at Khan Market, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Jungpura and for vertical shaft construction at Lajpat nagar and Udyog Bhawan locations. Vertical shafts formed launching area which facilitated construction of rail tubes using TBM machines. Table 1 reports the thickness and length of diaphragm walls constructed at these sites. Average embedment depth of diaphragm wall below depth of excavation in most of these areas was 3m.

Table 1: Diaphragm walls for BC-24 (DMRC) Site

Among the various stretches of the Delhi Metro rail corridor, diaphragm wall constructional features at Jungpura station have been discussed here.

Diaphragm wall at Jungpura Station In Jungpura station area, diaphragm wall was used to support 17m deep excavation. This station area comprised rectangular access area at the centre, with vertical launching shafts at the ends. The total length of diaphragm wall including the access and shaft portion was 612m (Table 1), and 125 panels were used with their width varying from 3m to 6m. A minimum width was governed by the minimum split width capability of the grab. M35 concrete was used for the diaphragm wall, with main rebar diameter of 36mm. Total weight of the reinforcement cage varied from 16 to 24MT depending on the panel width (Plate 2). Laps in rebars were avoided by employing threaded couplers. Dextra nuts were used which was threaded at special fabrication shed at the site. Few of the concrete panels of the diaphragm wall at the launching shaft were constructed using 40mm and 25mm diameter fibre reinforcement to facilitate cutting operation through the end diaphragm walls using TBM machines. Trenching for diaphragm wall was carried out using rope operated grabs of 6.50T to 8.0 T capacity with the help of TFC 280 and Tata 955 cranes (75 T Capacity) (refer Plate 1). The entire trench was stabilized with bentonite slurry by restricting its specific gravity to a maximum value of 1.12. Additional quality control exercise on the slurry included determination of Marsh cone viscosity (maintained between 30 to 60 seconds), Ph value (9 to 11.5), sand content (restricted to 3%). 9

The vertical alignment of the wall and the shape of cross section were checked using Koden ultrasonic drilling monitor, which gave the precise output in form of continuous log. Inclinometers were installed to monitor the movement of the diaphragm walls during various stages of excavation.

Plate 1: Trenching with Mechanical Grab 6. Contiguous Pile Walls 6.1 General Piled Retaining Systems

Plate 2: Cage Lowering for D/W at Jungpura site

There are different types of pile walls (Fig.4). Diameter and spacing of the piles is decided based on soil type, ground water level and magnitude of design pressures. Large spacing is avoided as it can result in caving of soil through gaps. In Contiguous bored pile construction, center to center spacing of piles is kept slightly greater than the pile diameter. Secant bored piles are formed by keeping this spacing of piles less than the diameter. Tangent piles are used when secant piling or diaphragm walling equipment is not available.

10

PILES (0.6M TO 1.2M)

PLAN
CAPPING BEAM DEPTH

CAPPING BEAM

CUT-OFF LEVEL BACKFILL SIDE

MAXIMUM DREDGING DEPTH EMBEDMENT DEPTH

PILES

MAXIMUM DREDGE LEVEL

PILE TIP LEVEL

SIDE ELEVATION

ELEVATION

Fig. 4: Schematic Arrangement of Contiguous Piled Retaining System.

6.3 Contiguous Piles - Merits and Demerits Contiguous piles serving as retaining walls are popular since traditional piling equipments can be resorted for their construction. They are considered more economical than diaphragm wall in small to medium scale excavations due to reduction in cost of site operations. Common pile diameters adopted are 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0m. These piles are connected with a Capping beams at the top, which assists equitable pressure distributions in piles. These retaining piles are suitable in areas where water table is deep or where soil permeability is low. However, some acceptable amount of water can be collected at the base and pumped out. Contiguous piles are suitable in crowded urban areas, where traditional retaining methods would otherwise encroach the adjoining properties. Provision of Contiguous piles restricts ground movements on the backfill side, and thus protects the neighbouring structures, foundations and boundary walls from the detrimental effects of the excavation. Contiguous piles facilitate deployment of several independent sets of equipment and gangs along its alignment which can speed up its execution. They can be constructed using even the conventional piling equipments, and can be constructed in hard and rocky sub-soil conditions where diaphragm wall construction is difficult. Such retaining systems has advantage of employing varying diameter of piles in lieu of change in sub-surface conditions, or on encountering competent stratum at a depth which is different than that anticipated during design. Further,

11

unlike the diaphragm wall which relies on the orthogonal geometry of the excavated area contiguous pile retaining system can constructed to form any shape in the excavated area. They are however, not considered suitable for construction in areas of high water table, as retention and containing water is not possible in contiguous piles. Perfect alignment of piles is often difficult to achieve at site, and this in turn is found to affect the dimension and alignment of the Capping beams. In design parlance, only the portion of concrete and steel away from the neutral axis is known to offer resisting moment. As a result, some concrete and steel area remains under-utilized.

6.4 Case History Contiguous Piling Works For a Commercial Complex at Mumbai A supporting system for proposed 12.2m deep excavation was necessary for a commercial complex at Worli, Mumbai. Presence of existing footing, underground obstructions and utilities in addition to presence of trees were some of the decisive factors that eliminated choice of diaphragm wall. Idealized sub-surface features can be seen in Fig. 5, which indicated filled ground overlying Stiff clay and weathered Breccia formation. Presence of weathered Brecciatic formation at 6m depth posed impediment to effective construction of the diaphragm wall. Further, presence of neighbouring building and boundary wall at immediate vicinity of excavation denied provision of anchors in any form of retaining system. In this situation, the choice of retaining system rested on provision of contiguous pile wall. The remedial supporting provision comprised 1200mm diameter bored cast-in-situ piles spaced at 1.3m c/c, with an average embedment depth of 3.8m in the moderately weathered Breccia. These piles were designed as cantilever retaining system without provision of anchors. Capping beam (1.2m x 0.75m deep) was provided above the contiguous piles, which were designed to take care of differential changes in the earth pressures in the adjacent piles. The peripheral length of excavation was 366.31m and 292 piles were involved in the support work.

12

Individual piles were constructed in the same way as a typical Bored Cast-in-situ piles using temporary casings and bentonite slurry. General construction sequence for piling operation was: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (ix) Centering of rotary rig on the proposed pile point Carrying out the boring operation upto the weathered rock layer, that is upto about 6m below the established ground level Driving the casing to an approximate depth of about 4m below the ground Maintaining the stability of the borehole simultaneously bentonite slurry Continuing boring operation in soil and rock using soil bucket and/or Soil/Rock auger depending on the stratum After completion of boring, cleaning of borehole by bentonite flushing Lowering of rebar cage into the borehole Pouring concrete through tremie upto about 0.5m above the cut-off level.
124.8M

with

(viii) Repeat bentonite flushing operation and subsequently

EGL(0.0M) 3.0M FILL MATERIAL C=0;Phi=15 Navg=5 FIRM TO STIFF HIGHLY PLASTIC CLAY (CH) avg=1 0 C=25kN/m;Phi=0 ,N

BASEMENT RETAINING WALL

EXCAVATED PORTION

1.0M

COMPLETELY WEATHERED ROCK Navg=47 MODERATELY WEATHERED ROCK (UCS)avg=349.O kN/m

ALIGNMENT OF CONTIGUOUS PILES

12.0M RAMP

LAYOUT OF CONTIGUOUS PILES 3.2M

MODERATELY WEATHERED ROCK (UCS)avg=786.0 kN/m IDEALIZED SUB-SURFACE LOG

1.3

ARRANGEMENT OF CONTIGUOUS PILES

Fig. 5: Contiguous Pile Retaining System for Commercial a Complex at Worli, Mumbai.

14.162

5.0M

35.10M

22.10

50.605M

13

In this project, the centre to centre spacing between adjacent piles was maintained as 1300mm. After completion of piling, Capping beam of 1200 x 750mm size was cast along the alignment of the pile. Dowel bars emanating from the piles were inserted into the capping beam to ensure continuity and homogeneity of concrete. Excavation operations proceeded only in those areas where pile concrete attained maturity.

Plate 3: Cage Lowering for Bored Cast-in-Situ Piles

Plate 4: Contiguous piles supporting excavation at Worli, Mumbai

7. Soldier Pile with Wooden Lagging System Soldier pile and lagging walls are some of the oldest forms of retaining systems used in deep excavations. These walls have successfully been used since the late 18th century in metropolitan cities world over. This type of retaining system involves the following broad based activities: (i) Constructing soldier piles at regular intervals (1 to 3m on center typically) (ii) Excavating in small stages and installing wooden lagging. (iii) Backfilling and compacting the void space behind the lagging. Soldier piles are driven/ bored at regular interval and allowed to gain strength. Excavation proceeds step by step after placement of Soldier piles at the periphery of the excavation. Depending on the ground conditions, wooden laggings are placed spanning from one soldier pile to another. At some predetermined levels, horizontal Waling beams and supporting elements (struts, anchors or nails) are erected. Ground anchors are increasingly used in such supports due to easy access to equipments.

14

Moment resistance in soldier pile and lagging walls is provided solely by the soldier piles. Passive soil resistance is obtained by embedding the soldier piles beneath the excavation grade. The lagging bridges and retains soil across piles and transfers the lateral load to the soldier pile system.
SOLDIER PILES (STEEL H- SECTION) LAGGING OODEN ELEMENTS)

EXCAVATED PORTION

TO

3M

Fig. 6: Soldier Pile and Wooden Lagging System

7.2 Merits and Demerits Soldier pile and lagging walls are the most inexpensive systems compared to other retaining walls. They are also very easy and fast to construct. These are found to be suitable for soils with some cohesion and without water table. They are commonly preferred in narrow excavations for pipe laying or similar works, but are also used for deep and large excavations in conjunction with struts. The major disadvantages of soldier pile and lagging systems are that they are primarily limited to temporary construction. They cannot be used in high water table conditions without extensive dewatering. Poor backfilling and associated ground losses can result in significant surface settlements. They are not as rigid as other retaining systems. Because only the flange of a soldier pile is embedded beneath subgrade, it is very difficult to control basal soil movements.

8 0M

15

7.3 Case Study Soldier Piles and Wooden Lagging supported system at BC-24 stretch of Delhi Metro Project, near Udyog Bhavan Excavation was required at the Cut and Cover portion of TBM launching shaft of the Delhi Metro Rail Corp. (DMRC) at Udyog Bhawan site of BC-24 stretch. Soldier piles with timber lagging were provided to support the Eastern (Udyog Bhavan) and Western (Airforce HQ) boundary of the excavation. The sub-surface comprised silty strata of increasing N value from 5 at near ground surface to about 15 followed by weathered Quartzite at varying depth. The average depth of excavation varied from 3m on the northern side to about 16m at the southern side which faces the launching shaft. The supporting system comprised soldier piles spaced at 1.8m c/c and with a closer spacing of 1.6m c/c near the launching shaft (Fig.8). Wooden laggings of thickness 100mm to 120mm were supported between the soldier piles. Three levels of Struts were provided at depths 3.285, 7.285, and 10.831m below the established ground level (EGL-209.80m). Additional level of Waler beam with pre-stressed rock anchors were provided 2m above the excavation level. Rock anchors with capacity of 86.4T, spaced at 3.6m c/c, were embedded 6m into the quartzitic bedrock to meet the bond strength considerations. King Post consisting of H-shaped structural steel section NBP 600 x 220 x 154.4 was employed. Boring operations was carried out with conventional way using Rotary rig till 3 to 4 m depth, casing was then lowered into the drilled hole with necessary verticality. Further, boring & drilling was carried out with auger / soil bucket and boring operation was terminated after a penetration of 0.6 m into weathered Quartzite Rock. Throughout, the boring operation, borehole wall was stabilized with bentonite slurry having specific gravity of 1.04 at supply point to about 1.11 for the flushed out flow. On termination of borehole kingpost along with reinforcement cage provided for bottom 1.5 m length was lowered into the borehole. After ensuring necessary alignment, cement sand grout of M25 Grade was pumped into borehole. The kingpost was supported and thereafter the annular space in the borehole was backfilled with sand. 16

Excavation of about 1.5 to 2.0 m was considered free standing for few hours and in the ensuing period wooden laggings were inserted into the web portion of adjacent H shaped soldier piles. Excavation operation was followed by insertion of lagging, and was continued till the required excavation depth was achieved.
S O IL FAC E
28

PR E B O R E

EX C AV A TED FAC E

SO IL FA CE
S O LD ER PILE H -S H A PE STEEL W O O D EN L AG G IN G

S LO PIN G RAM P TO W AR D S LA UN C H IN G SH A FT LA G G IN G S O LD ER PILE EX C AV A TED FAC E

01

27

E X C A V A TED FAC E

LA YO U T PLA N O F S O LD IER PILE

D ETA ILS O F W O O D EN LAG G IN G

ID IC A T IV E TEN TA TIV E P O S IT IO N O F R O C K A N CH O R (TY P)

Fig. 8: Soldier Piles & Laggings Wooden Supporting System at Udyog Bhawan of DMRC, New Delhi.

Plate 5: Soldier Piles and Wooden Lagging System at Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi

17

8.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In the forgoing sections, the retaining systems suitable in the urban environment were outlined. Restrictions of space in the urban settings compel use of deep vertical excavations, which require supports that are designed to consume minimum construction space. Retaining systems like diaphragm wall, contiguous pile walls; and soldier piles with wooden lagging described in this article has been successfully used in India. Case studies of their use indicate that adequate quality control measures and instrumentation monitoring of these systems go a long way in ensuring their safe and economic deployment at site.

9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors express their gratitude to management and staff of ITD Cementation India Limited, Mumbai, for encouragement and support in research and innovative endeavours. Thanks are also to IGS Mumbai Chapter for providing august platform for sharing their experiences.

10. REFERENCES Clayton, C.R.I., Milititsky, J., Woods, R.I. (1993). Earth Pressure and Earth Retaining Structures. Blackie Academic & Professional, London. Teng, W.C. (1962). Foundation Design, Prentice Hall International. Winterkon, H.F, Fang Hsai-Yang (1975). Foundation Engineering Handbook, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York.

18