P. 1
Robertson Cam Panel La Interpretation of CPT

Robertson Cam Panel La Interpretation of CPT

|Views: 64|Likes:
Published by Johan Van Staveren

More info:

Published by: Johan Van Staveren on May 03, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less






Published by Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 20, No.4, Nov. 1983.

Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests Part I (Sand) and Part II (Clay) P.K. Robertson and R.G. campanella TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT -PART I (SAND)

INTRODUCTION • • • Equipment and Interpretation in general. SOIL CLASSIFICATION STRATIGRAPHY • DRAINED SOIL • Density ••••• Drained Shear Strength of Sand Deformation Characteristics of Sand Constrained Modulus Young's Modulus Shear Modulus Stress History •• SPT-CPT CORRELATIONS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • REFERENCES • • • • • • • ABSTRACT -PART II (CLAY)

2 3 9

10 10 17 23 23 28

33 34 37 39
40 45



INTRODUCTION • • • UNDRAINED SOIL • Undrained Shear Strength of clay. Sensitivity • • • • • • • •••• Drained Shear Strength of clay •• Overconsolidation Ratio •••• •••• DEFORMATION CHARACTERISTICS OF CLAY Constrained modulus and compression index Young's Modulus PIEZOMETER CONE •••• Pore pressure measurements Pore pressure element location Unequal end area affects •• • • ••• Saturation of pore pressure measuring system • • • • Soil Type and Stress History • Coefficient of Consolidation • • • • • • • Permeability • • • •• •••• Groundwater Conditions ••••• SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • REFERENCES • • • •

46 46 46 52 52
53 54 54 59

61 61 62 63 64
65 72







INTERPRETATIONCONE OF PENETRATION TESTS- PARTI (SAND) P.K. Robertson & R.G. Campanella Engineering, University of British

Department of Civil

Columbia, V6T lW5

ABSTRACT Significant developnent, The addition has added advances have been made in of recent years in research, testing. testing

interpretation of pore pressure a

and application

cone penetration cone penetration of

measurements during to the

new dimension



parameters. The cone penetration strains around the test induces

complex changes developed the




cone tip. to this

one has yet Hence, to soil

a comprehensive test the

theoretical provides

solution indices


cone penetration Therefore,

which can be correlated of cone penetration geotechnical discusses the


interpretation to obtain This penetration engineers drained strength the

data is made with empirical


required paper

parameters. significant recent developments for in cone

testing for

and presents for the test

a summarized work guide soil classification,

practicing for shear

interpretation during

and parameters density, Factors drained that


such as relative of sand.

and deformation are (Clay),

characteristics discussed


interpretation Part II

and guidelines undrained

provided. during

The companion the test and such stress



conditions parameters

summarizes recent as, undrained

developnents strength,

to interpret deformation

for clay soils of clay, and pore


characteristics permeability



charac teristics,


The advantages topic in Part

and use of the piezometer II (Clay). The authors

cone are discussed personal experiences

as a separate and current

recommendations are included. Key Words: Static cone penetration shear strength, modulus, density, stress testing, history, in-situ, interpretation, pore pressures.



INTRODUCTION The cone penetration test is becoming increasingly more popular as an in-situ test for site investigation and geotechnical design. tool this technique is unequalled with respect and the continuous rapid

a logging

to the delineation of of parameters like



bearing and friction. Recent publications have provided vast amounts of information about cone penetration methods and their interpretation (ASCE Symposium on COne Penetration Testing and Experience, 1981 and the 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing, 1982) •






developed at the University of British COlumbia (UBC) over the past 5 years in research, devel.opaent interpretation and application of cone testing , from many service to industry projects as well as thesis research. About the only recent publication to summarize interpretation of cone penetration results was produced by John Schmertmann (1978a) in a report to the U.S. Department report of Transportation, prepared which is now out-of-print. for interpretation of




mechanical cone data although much of the report is applicable to electric cone data. Also, Schmertmann's report was prior to the deve10pnent of the

piezometer cone. 'Ibis paper is limited to a discussion of the recent advances in interpretation of cone penetration test data-to obtain soil parameters in an attempt to update the 1978 report by Schmertmann.

In the space available, it is not possible to discuss in detail all recent developments. However, an attempt has been made to discuss the

significant developments, present a summarized work guide for practicing engineers and to provide the reader with a comprehensive list of

references that will provide further details. The paper has been divided into two parts. Part I (Sand) deals with

the general topics of soil classification, stratigraphy and interpretation of soil parameters in drained soil. Part II (Clay) deals with

interpretation of soil parameters in undrained soil and the interpretation of pore pressure data from a piezometer cone. Equipment and Interpretation in General The use of the Da t ch mechanical friction cone is gaining wider

popularity in the U.S.

Unfortunately, its initial low cost is more than

offset by its relatively slow incremental procedure, ineffectiveness in very soft soils, requirement for moving parts, labor intensive data

handling and presentation, and generally poor accuracy and shallow depth capability. benefits in While electric cones have an initial higher cost, they reap terms of a more rapid procedure, continuous recording,

potential for automatic data logging, reduction and plotting, and high accuracy and repeatability. The electric cone also has allowed the

addition of pore pressure measurements during penetration.

The continuous

measurement of pore pressures along with bearing and friction has enhanced the electric cone penetrometer as the premier tool for stratification logging of soil deposits. However, mechanical cones will continue to have

a usefulness because of their lower cost and simpliCity of operation. The cone is best suited for stratigraphic logging and preliminary evaluation of soil parameters. Other more specialized in-situ test

Utah. No. design obtained Rui ter. where more detailed fic soil parameters. soil simplified for identifying of site type. Figure 2 is a Nevada (USGS Open-File working version progression 81-284. 1979) and European Standard (ISSMFE. Arizona 1980). accuracy importance equipment of results are and procedure using related and repeatability the electric Equipment and procedure standards given in ASTM (D344l. testing. using cone penetration site profiles The usual test investigation (CPT) is to perform the CPT soundings. Therefore. as defined by the 3 logging method. SOILCLASSIFICATION The electric copy of in Fig. publications (1981 & 1982). most comprehensive recent is work on that by soil classification using A cone penetrometer their 1. develop detailed . to this is one has yet a comprehensive of theoretical cone solution problem. such as The correlated Unified extensive and with Soil other provided was by the on Classification System.methods are better suited for use in critical areas. data Do ug La s and Olsen (1981). The cone penetration strains around the test induces No complex changes in developed the stresses and cone tip. empirical interpretation to penetration data made with correlations obtain required geotechnical parameters. chart data is has proposed soil-behaviour The chart type classification test those shown been shows how cone penetration soil type indices. 1977). by de assessments may be required undisturbed of speci- which of course may include sampling and laboratory Recent Robertson. correlation based data collected from areas Report in California. (1982) the and Campanella of and have highlighted to cone. Oklahoma.

FRICTION Douglas and Olsen.1: SOIL CLASSIFICATION ELECTRIC (After CHART FOR STANDARD CONE. .Q c r- W U 100 80 60 40 20 10 8 6 <f Z ~ (/) (/) W a: U Z 0 W 4 2 123 456 % FR I eTION RATIO. FR..4 1000 100 100 tOO 200 II) . 1 bar ·100 kPa =::: 1 kgf/cm2 FIG. 1981).

/ / SILTY CLA}S CLAYS ~ LaJ 10 ~ 6 o Z 8// / ~./' /'/ 2 I~--~----_'----~----'_----~--~ o 2 3 4 /' /' / / 5 6 FR leTION RATIO.. FR. 2: SIMPLIFIED FOR STANDARD SOIL CLASSIFICATION ELECTRIC FRICTION CHART CONE.5 I bo r = 100kPo = 1. °'0 FIG./ / /' / / SANOY / 40 / / / SILTS AND SILT / / . .I / u 4 . ~ _ ~ 1 S CLAYEY SILTS AND .02 lem! kgf 400~--~----~----~----~--~----~ SANDS / 200 s "u CT e / SILTY SANDS/ 100 80 60 / / -.

With respect to bearing. necessary. It appears that there is little difference between corrected and uncorrected friction ratios for most soil types except for those soils that classify in . An all around water pressure causes a thrust on the friction sleeve which in turn causes a zero offset on the load cell output. Recent illustrated work by Campanella. friction stress and friction ratios. 3). Thus cones of slightly different designs will give different bearing. A discussion of bearing corrections is given in Part II under unequal end area effects. in general. Robertson and and Gillespie the effect (1983) has With local experience this latter step is often not 6 the importance of cone design that water pressures have on the measured bearing and friction due to unequal end areas (Fig. the water pressure is ~ only partially sensed by the tip or bearing load cell because the area is for current designs always less than A q (see Fig. and then selectively sample and test to provide any additional information regarding ambiguous classifications. The friction sleeve offset can be calculated as the total water pressure during penetration multiplied by the difference in end area (~-A2) and can be either positive or negative depending upon which end area is larger.with the soil classification charts (Figs. since. 1) used bearing and friction values that had not been corrected for pore pressure effects. 1 and 2). A detailed discussion concerning cone design is also given by Schaap and Zuidberg (1982)• 'llie data used to compile the classification chart (Fig. the tip should measure total stress or intergranular pressure plus water pressure. With proper calibration and measurement. However. the effects of unequal end areas can be corrected. 3). pore pressure measurements were not made.

3: INFLUENCE OF UNEQUAL END AREAS. . Unequal End Area. A2 FRICTION SLEEVE WATER SEALS Bearing Net Area Ratio = AN IAq Friction .A. . :# A2 FIG.7 END AREA.

Increased use of these cones will eventually lead to further imprOVements in the soil classification chart shown in Fig. However. 1. 1 and 2 should be used with caution. Several recent publications have suggested soil classification based on pore pressure and bearing data (Jones et a1. especially for soft saturated soils. and Olsen (1981). as noted values. Robertson and Gillespie. it may be important to account for these effects for most soil types. Baligh et al. and should always be adjusted to reflect local experience. there is currently no cone design which eliminates the need to correct bearing for net area ratio. Jones and Rust. namely. Also. pore pressure measurements are included and the necessary corrections applied to the data. Some electric cones. These soils usually generate 8 large positive pore pressures during penetration and have very low measured bearing very (qc <10 bars) and small friction values where corrections become These soils also tend to have high liquidity index by Do ugLas significant. 1).. Significant improvements in classification are made if all three parameters.. 1983). silts and clayey silts. pore pressure. For this type of data the chart in Fig. 1981. like the one developed at UBC. a classification chart that combines all three has . bearing and friction ratio are used (Campanella. in off-shore investigations where significant hydrostatic water pressures exist. Most standard electric cone data does not include pore pressure measurements and the measured bearing and friction values are therefore not corrected for pore pressure effects. have equal end area friction sleeves where the friction measurement requires no correction. Unfortunately. 1 can be If used directly to provide a reasonable estimate of soil type. Figs.the lower left portion of the chart (Fig. This is especially true for partially drained soils like fine sands. 1982. 1980).

the distance over which the cone tip senses an interface tends to increase with depth (Treadwell. 1 and 2 based on local experience. '!he chart is similar to that proposed by Schmertmann (1978a) although considerably more information is contained on Searle's chart.e. A comprehensive classification chart for use with a mechanical cone was proposed by Searle (1979). which the measured to reach full value characteristic for the soil within the layer) is about 10 to 20 cone diameters. Since stiffness increases 'with increasing overburden pressure. improvements to Figs. For the standard 10 cm2 electric cone. the thinnest layer for cone bearing represents a full response (i. the minimum . Recently the CPT has also been used for classification and interpretation of unconventional soils such as carbonate sediments (Searle 1979. interface increases with The distance over which the cone tip senses an increasing soil stiffness. 1982). STRATIGRAPHY The properties cone penetration tip resistance is influenced by the soil ahead and behind the tip. the accuracy of Figs. and Power. CPT Thus. For interbedded relatively shallow deposits. q c 1975).9 not yet been developed. Experience gained by the writers suggest that the friction ratio for some fine grained soils may decrease with increasing effective overburden pressure. Chamber studies by Sclnnertmann (1978a) showed that the tip senses an interface between 5 to 10 cone diameters ahead and behind. 1 and 2 may be reduced somewhat for Of course there is no substitute for data from very deep soundings.

of soil (Campanella. 1982) have proposed and successfully used thin (2. the soil type in the The pore pressure the cone tip. during of cone penetration stratigraphy responds to in the some The continuous can significantly of pore pressures the identification 1983). the density in the sand may be severely monitoring improve underestimated. Robertson and Gillespie. for sense much thinner layers.minimumand in-situ relative density as problems in correlating with measured soil . This has example. has soils the cohesionless is often soils the density. cm thick and located resistance between. say. cone bearing. penetration of the may not reach its of the adjacent value within the sand because relative close proximity interfaces.5 mm)pore pressure elements located immediately behind the cone tip. behaviour relative used as an intermediate stress-strain Recent research of cohesionless density difficul densities of ties as pro- shown that is soil. DRAINED SOIL Density For density. within immediate area silt To aid identification researchers of very thin (Torstensson. tip resistance will Since the cone tip is advanced continuously. or more commonly the soil parameter. or sand layers clay deposits. than about the cone significant relative 70 implications density when interpreting in sand. Thus. the and strength solely too complex to be represented Several papers in by the relative have discussed ASTM(1973) associated well with determination of maximum. but not fully.layer thickness to ensure full or plateau value of tip resistance is the 10 between 36 cm to 72 em. determination If a sand layer two soft full clay is less deposits.

Baldi et a1. be accounted However. because many engineers continue to use relative density 11 as a guide in design some discussion is given here on recent work relating cone penetration resistance to soil relative density. (1981) and Baldi et a1. A review of the numerous calibration chamber tests performed on a variety of different sands shows a significant range of D r versus relationships. Recent work in large calibration chambers (Veismanis. Chapman and Donald. All the chamber test results. 1981. (1981) for two levels of relative . show that the curves are all similar in shape and most show that the cone resistance can be more uniquely related to relative density. 1980 and Vi11et and Mitchell. If the horizontal effective stress is used the relationship can be expected to apply to both normally and overconso1idated sand.perties. Fig. on detailed inspection part of the variation can for due to differences in chamber size and boundary conditions. However. for any given sand. 4 shows a comparison between the curves proposed by Schmertmann (1978b). particularly at higher densities. and Iunne (1982) has also shown that the measured relationships between relative density and cone resistance is influenced by the small calibration chamber size. in-situ effective stress and relative density since other factors such as soil compressibility also influence cone resistance. however. in-situ Recent work by Parkin effective stress and cone resistance for all sands. Parkin et a1. Most of these works have also shown that no single unique relationship exists between relative density. 1981. 1981) has provided numerous correlations of cone resistance (qc) r wi th so i1 relative density (D ).. if correlated with the in-situ initial horizontal effective stress (aho). It is not surprising that no unique relationship exists between cone resistance. Vi11et and Mitchell. 1974.

and obtained curves almost identical to those of Vi11et and Mitchell (1981). compressibility Monterey Sand. All the curves have been corrected for chamber size. test data (Fig. Schmertmann (1978b) also performed tests on Ottawa sand. 4) shows the importance of sand The curves by Schmertmann (1978b) represent the results of tests on Hilton Mines sand. (1981) (Ticino Sand) was a quartz. an estimate of relative density is required for a predominantly quartz sand of moderate compressibity. Th. the writers recommend that the relation given by Baldi et a1. has shown that there is relatively little variation in the compressibility for most quartz sands. The sand used by Baldi et a1. compressibility have a and Mitchell (1981) D -q rc and Thus. mica mixture wi th subangular particles. (1981 & 1982) be . The curves by Vi11et and Mitchell (1981) represent results on Monterey Sand which is a relatively incompressible quartz sand with subrounded particles. A large portion of CPT work is often carried out in sands where the grain minerals are predominately quartz and feldspar. mica mixture with angular grains. These are sands Research The Ticino Sand appears to have a moderate somewhere between the two extremes of Hilton Mines and similar to those tested in most of the calibration chamber work. which is a highly compressible quartz. Details of 12 the sands used in the calibration chamber studies are given in Table 1. 1982). Angular quartz sands tend to be more If compressible than rounded quartz sands. feldspar. it appears that sands with a low relationship similar to that shown by Vi11et with a high compressibility have a sands relationship similar to that shown by Schmertmann (1978b).e calibration compressibility.density. although this depends on the angularity of the & grains (Joustra de Gijt. feldspar. which is also an incompressible quartz sand with rounded particles.

100 200 300 400 500 t:i en ~ .Moderate Monterey Sand .. LL.Low Compressibility FIG.. LLJ LLJ 4 5 CD @ @ SCHMERTMANN (1976) Hilton Mines BA LOI et 01.a 0 '- r-----~------~------~------~----__. 2 cn n:: (f) LLJ .J 0 t- <t n:: LLJ LLJ > > 3 ~ 0 LL.4: ~OMPARISON. ." o o • -> 0 .HiQh Compressibility Compressi bi lity Ti ci no Sand .13 CO N ERE SIS TAN C E • qc' bars .OF DIFFERENT RELATIVE DENSITY RELATIONSHIPS. ( 1982) VILLET 6 MITCHELL (1981) Sand .

50 0.48 nmin 0.36 0.43 0.5 0.19 0.47 0. (1981." -Frankston Chapnan & Donald (1981) -.24 0.29 0.5 Vi1let & Mitchell Monterey (1981) Schmertmann (1978b) " Parkin et a1 (1980) Veismanis (1974) " Holden (1971) " Ottawa 190 Hilton mines Bokksund Edgar Ottawa South Oakleigh 0.--- * Percent mica by volume TABLE 1: Properties of Sand Tested in Calibration Chamber Studies .35 0.15 0.17 0.36 Baldi et al.54 0.25 0.30 0.65 0.44 0.42 0.44 0.12 0.32 0.29 -.37 0.45 0.14 leference Sand Name Mineralogy Shape Gradation (mm) D60 DlO 0.18 0..45 0.41 0. 1982) Ticino Mainly quartz 5%* mica Mainly quartz some feldspar quartz quartz + mica + feldspar 35% quartz 45% feldspar 10%* mica Mainly quartz Quartz Quartz Quartz Mainly Quart Sub angul ar to angular Subrounded to subangu1ar Rounded Angular Rounded to subangular Subangu1ar Subangular Subangular Sub angular Rounded to Subangular 0.13 0.40 0.27 Porosity nmax 0.37 0.48 0.33 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.

5 should be used only as a guide to insitu relative density.-----~-- -------- used. the application of this relationship to overconsolidated sands appears. this It would also seem likely that detailed information concerning the frictional strength of the soil and the lateral earth pressure (Ko) is not often available. corrected c for 15 chamber test size (Baldi et al. Fig. Villet and Mitchell (1981) extended the bearing capacity theory developed by Durgunoglu and Mitchell (1975) so that cone resistance.. at present. The writers suggest that Fig. overcon- solidated or aged sands are encountered. and if . 1982).45. Care should be exercised in interbedded deposits where the cone resistance may not have reached the full value within a layer. where K . theory takes no account of the soil compressibility. relative density. vertical stress curves for any sand could be constructed based on a and its variation with stress o knowledge of the soil friction angle (cp) level and a current lateral earth pressure coefficient (K). However.. o The relationship is for normally If uncemented and unaged sands. but can be expected to provide reasonable estimates for clean normally consolidated moderately compressible quartz sands. In an effort to overcome some of the above problems. visual improve A classification of the grain characteristics would significantly the choice of relative density correlation. very difficult because of the inherent difficulties in measuring or choosing an appropriate 0bo in-situ and assessing the stress history of natural sand deposits. 5 shows Baldi's relationship between relative density (Dr) vertical effective stress (0' ) and cone resistance vo (q ). 0. consolidated. the horizontal effective stress (Oh' ) should be used instead of o 0' vo • However.

.16 CO NEB EAR IN G t qc • bo rs an ¢ H o ~ 0"""--""'--""'---""'------ o 100 200 300 400 500 o 0:: o I..L I. 1982).L LaJ LaJ4~----f----+----l----+---+-\-----\-+---'-~ o o N :t: 2._--... SANDS.0 0:: LaJ t(/) LaJ > (/) (/) .L.. 1..0 o to:: « _. t- o I......... ._--. (/) (/) . - LaJ >5._--.L I...L LaJ LaJ t- 0:: LaJ _..5 (/) 3~----~~+-~~~~--~~--~ LaJ > t- tZ 0:: <[ o I._--._-~ Or: 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% FIG.5: RELATIVE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP FOR UNCEMENTED (After AND UN AGED QUARTZ Baldi et al. 1..

Most of the available bearing capacity theories on deep penetration neglect both the curvature of the shear strength envelope and the compressibility of the soil. The increasing influence of these two factors tend to reduce the tip resistance. the requirement for a knowledge of relative density would probably not exist. failure envelope for granular The curvature of the Mohr-Coulomb been observed repeatedly by soils has nunerous investigators and is presently recognized as a typical material behaviour. The cavity expansion theory by Vesic. cannot incorporate volume expansion. however. 1972). 1974. namely bearing capacity theory (Janbu and Senneset.sufficient information were available. 1975) and those based on cavity expansion theory (Vesic. 17 Drained Shear Strength of Sand Many theories and empirical or semi-empirical correlations for the interpretation of drained shear strength of sand from cone resistance have been published. those based on The theories can be divided into two categories. Durgunoglu and Mitchell. (1981) showed that the cavity expansion theory appeared to model the measured response extremely well. since soil compressibility influences the cone resistance. Baligh (1976) developed this further to incorporate the The comprehensive calibration chamber curvature of the strength envelope. Vesic (1972) developed a theory for tip resistance taking account of soil compressibility and volume change characteristics. At first this appears to be a major disadvantage since almost all sands . Work by Vesic (1963) has shown that no unique relationship exists between friction angle for sands and cone resistance. test work by Baldi et al. Based on cavity expansion concepts.

dilate (expand) during shear. due to the curvature of the strength envelope. that the high stresses developed during cone penetration in sands cause a compressive punching failure beneath the tip. In addition. 80%) will compress The stresses immediately in front of the cone tip during Thus it seems reasonable penetration into sand often exceeds 200 bars. Calibration chamber results illustrate the complex nature of cone penetration in sands and show that simple closed form solutions to derive the shear strength are not possible. . Thus. chamber tests provide valuable insight into the relative importance of the various factors that influence cone penetration in sands.. Mikasa and T. which cannot take account of soil compressibility. Work by Vesic and Clough (1968) showed that r = 18 at high stresses (greater than 50 bars) dense sand (D during shear. the work by Villet and theory developed predictions by Mi tchell Durgunoglu showed Mitchell the bearing provided capacity reasonable (1975) for a variety of different sands. The cavity expansion analysis. The chamber test study by Baldi et a1.. however. that However. 1982). assuned to be about 9 times the in-situ horizontal stress (Baldi et al.akada. 1974). (1981) showed that Durgunoglu and Mitchell's theory gave excellent agreement with measured friction angle at a failure stress level approximately equal to The average stress around the cone was the average stress around the cone. could not provide reliable predictions (1981) and of friction angle. is complex and requires considerable input data regarding compressibility and shear strength. observed behaviour from model This agrees well with the (Robinsky and tests of deep penetration Morrison. 1964. In general. the Durgunoglu and Mitchell theory appears to underestimate the friction angle at the insitu stress level by about 2 degrees. it would be expected that the bearing capacity theories.

proposed by Janbu and Senneset (1974) and furgunoglu and Mitchell (1975). especially when compared to the possible variation of shear strength. carbonate sands).As discussed earlier. Awkati (1975) showed that. and produce reasonable estimates of friction angle. in-situ O'ho)' The results of the comparison are shown Details of the sands used in the studies are given in Table The scatter in the results illustrate the limited influence of soil Also shown in Fig. This is probably due to the fact that for most natural quartz sands the variation in compressibility is not that large. The Durgunoglu and Mitchell method includes the effect of in-situ . Thus it has been possible to use bearing capacity theories..e. shear strength had significantly more influence on cone resistance than compressibility. the two main parameters that control penetration Work by Al- 19 resistance in sands are shear strength and compressibility. These sands are similar to those tested in the calibration chamber studies (see Table 1).e. for the predominantly quartz sands he tested. A review of the calibration chamber test results was carried out to compare the measured cone penetration resistance to measured friction angle from drained triaxial tests. effective stress in the calibration chamber before cone (i. This observation is particularly important when one considers that a large portion of natural sands encountered in the northern hemisphere consist predominantly of quartz and feldspars with small amounts of mica. 6. The friction angle values were obtained from triaxial tests performed at confining stresses ap~roximately equal to the horizontal penetration on Fig. in which the influence of compressibility is neglected. It is interesting to note that such theories will give conservatively low estimates of friction angle for more compressible sands (i. 1. 6 are the theoretical relationships compressibility.

'The difference between the normally consolidated 20 state. incompressible quartz sands have friction ratios of about 0. as shown on Fig. predominantly quartz sands. (see Fig. 6. Fig. 7 is related to the in-situ initial horizontal stress level before cone penetration. and the overconsolidated state (OCR'" 6).0. If the average relationship is taken. a useful design chart for estimation of friction angle from cone penetration resistance can be developed. for a= 0. the presence of compressible sands may be identified using the friction ratio. 1982) whereas. where Ko '" l-sin$. Since the solution by Janbu and Senneset (1974). 'The writers recommend that. as shown in Fig. for sands where the friction ratio is about 0. For highly compressible sands.horizontal stresses. 7. as shown on Fig. typical percent.5 Thus. moderately incompressible. 7. little change in predicted friction angle for relatively large changes in stress history. 6) tends to slightly over-estimate $ and Durgunoglu and Mitchell tends to under-estimate $. In overconsolidated sands. is less than 2 degrees. the chart would tend to predict conservatively low Durgunoglu and Mitchell's theory shows that there is friction angles.5%. It is important to note that the friction angle predicted from Fig. It is interesting to note that the friction ratio for sands increases with increasing compressibility. 7 may slightly overestimate the friction angle . where Ko = 1. an average empirical relationship is proposed by the writers. 7 can be expected to provide reasonable estimates of friction angle for normally consolidated. The proposed chart in Fig. Many compressible carbonate sands have friction ratios as high as 3 percent (Jonstra and de Gijt. 6. the peak friction angle can be estimated using Fig. similar to those used in the chamber studies.

0 ) --/ 40 20 Il VILLET / / / / / / ~--+---~ m z r>u Proposed correlation « a.21 1000~--------------------------------~ LEGEND: 800 600 • CHAPMAN 8 DONALD (1981) 400 200 II + V BALDI et oJ.2 FIG. NUMBER AND FRICTION LARGE CALIBRATION CHAMBER .6: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BEARING ANGLE CAPACITY FROM TESTS.2 0.4 0.0 I~----~----~----~~--~~----~~~ 0. (1980) 8 MITCHELL (1981) / Z 0" a::: w ~ ~ 100r---------------------~~~ / 80 Durgunaglu a Mitchell (1975) / 60 ( Ko = 1.6 TANGENT cpt 0.0 1.8 1. (l9BI) HOLDEN ( 1976) { VEISMANIS (1974) PARKIN o et 01. « u C) 10~----------~~~------------------~ 8 6 4 a::: w z « rn 2 0.

. u.. W <t u t- . 1. .5 30° o:: w > - 4...22 CONE BEARING .aUARTZ SANDS.0 3. .J 3.bars .0 1.0 b> (J) (J) (J) w 0:: r- w > ru 2.0 FIG.5 w u.c 0 _0 .q O~--~----~----~----~--~ o 100 200 300 400 500 0.7: PROPOSED CORRELATION AND FRICTION BETWEEN ANGLE FOR CONE BEARING UNCEMENTED.5 2.5 en '- c .

M is the drained constrained modulus (equal to l/mv from oedometer The factor a is generally recommended in the range of 1. 1981) are Results indicate that a = 3 should provide the most The choice of a shown in Table 2. D r = relative density.(see Fig. form M = aq c ( 1) where tests)• 4. M 1l'ihlberg (1974) found a to increase with based on values obtained from screw plate tests for precompressed a values sand.As already discussed. Instead. Vesic (1970) proposed a = a should remain constant where q c 2(1+Dr 2).5 to Considerable confusion appears to exist as to whether or not with depth.0. the cone penetration resistance in sand is a complex function of both strength and deformation properties. when Other references by Mitchell and Gardner use decreased exceeds a certain limit. no generally applicable analytical solution for cone resistance as a function of deformation modulus is available. 6). Considerable insight into the relationship be t seen one dimensional . Review of calibration chamber tests (Lunne and Kleven. many empirical between cone resistance and deformation modulus have been Mi tchell and Gardner (1975) made a comprehensive review of The correlations generally take the the existing correlations for sand. Deformation Characteristics of Sand Constrained MOdulus . Hence. correlations established. conservative estimates of one-dimensional settlement. Care should be exercised in interbedded deposits where the 23 cone resistance may not have reached the full value within a layer. value depends on judgement and experience.

(1981) report tangent moduli corresponding to the last load increment for normally consolidated samples. can be developed. The test results by Baldi et al (1981) k m on Ticino sand show a relationship between the modulus number. Baldi et al. Dense Very dense D and relative density. to cone resistance. 5. which varies with relative density = modulus exponent. (1963) : and apply them to the empirical formula proposed by Janbu Mt where ~ = k m PaC Pa VO) a' n (2) = tangent constrained modulus = modulus number. a series of curves relating tangent constrained modulus. . If the correspondence between relative density and modulus number is used in cooperation with the correlation developed by Baldi et a1. 46% r= k m 575 D D 70% r= 90% r= k = 753 m k = 815 m Similar values were reported by Parkin and Arnold (1977) and Byrne and Eldridge (1982). 8. usually taken as 1 bar or 100 kPa. which may be approximately 0. shown in Fig. as shown on Fig.24 deformation modulus and cone resistance can be obtained from a careful review of calibration chamber tests. (1981). Mt. follows: Medium dense.4 = = k m n a' vo Pa vertical effective stress reference stress. ar vo qc' for different levels of vertical effective stress.

1981) .11 3-4 3 absolute lower limit )3 3 1 1 Baldi et al.25 N.9 Veismanis (1974) Parkin et a1.15 (12 average) 3.11 3 .C.30 5 . (1982) 1 1 TABLE 2: Summary of Calibration Chamber Results for Constrained MOdulus Factor a.. Sand Reference No.. (1980) ChapDan & Donald (1981) 2 1 1 3 . Sand a No.C. (After Lunne and Kleven. sands a 5 . sands O.30 8 . .

Review of Fig. 8 illustrates the apparent reason for the wide range in a values reported in Table 2. Some of the confusion concerning the use of CPT for interpretation of deformation considered. a) Soil is not linear elastic and modulus varies with both stress and strain level. b) MOdulus is often derived from or applied to non one-dimensional loading conditions. c)
Di fferent











theoretical methods were applied when obtaining correIa-

tions. The simple fact that soil is not a linear elastic material makes the assumption of a constant modulus unrealistic. This is further complicated

by the fact that many of the correlations where derived from non onedimensional loading conditions for which "elastic" solutions were applied to back-figure a modulus. Thus '"reasonable agreement can be expected only

if the required problem involves similar boundary conditions and the same theoretical method predicting example. is reapplied. Schmertmann's (1970) CPT method for

settlements in sand under Schmertmann applied his

spread foundations is a typical

strain influence elastic theory to An equivalent Young's modulus

analyse the results of screw plate tests. (E ) was calculated s

using a secant slope over the 1 bar - 3 bars (I tsf This interval was chosen principally Thus,

3 tsf) increment of plate loading.

because real footing pressures commonly fall within this interval. Sc hmertmann' s design method, where E



can be expected to produce

good results if the proposed design problem has similar loading conditions to the screw plate (i.e. circular spread footing loaded from 1-3 bars) and











SAND ~O"~o

0 .D




, Dr: 70% t Dr: 90%

= 8 bars


« .....
0 W Z

















qc ,bars














on Data from Baldi et al.1981).

the same strain


theory is reapplied.


Young's Modulus - A commonproblem, however, appears one-dimensional loading modulus, logical constrained modulus (M ) applied t cases

to be the use of the to non one-dimensional an equivalent Young's

conditions. as suggested

For non one-dimensional by Schmertmann (1970),

would appear

to be a more


A review, et a!.

performed by the writers, 1981) provides

of the calibration between the stresses, levels factor on an

chamber results drained secant


a relationship failure

Young's modulus at

the 50 and 25 percent qc'

E50 and E25, respectively, of vertical against sand, average Thus, values with effective

and cone resistance, (Fig. is 9).

for different safety


Since the overall around 4 for in

bearing the

capacity is stress

failure usually level





a Young's modulus for of the failure


around 25 percent on normally

stress. sand give



chamber results


of E25/qc


between 1.5 and 3.0 which are in good agreement of 2 by Schmertmann (1970) for computation of on to sand. allow for Schmertmann (1978a) the variation A careful increment stress stress load level level of has shape

the recommended value of shallow to

settlements changed factors Fig. bars the for

foundations 2.5 and 3.0


square and strip in


respectively. the load

review of of 1 to 3

9 shows that

Schmertmann's study to the 50 percent

was probably closer


for loose for medium (1 to 3

to medium dense sands and closer dense bars) to dense sands. For very

to the 25 percent dense sands the of the failure suggest of 3 to


was only a small percentage Re su l ts from chamber tests is in the range

stress. of E25/qc for over conlarger than those for

the ratio 6 times





(/) ::)











• Or : 46% • Dr: •


or :

70% 90°1c °

bars II

750 ::) >
0 ...J
0 LLJ ~

...J ...J LLJ


z a::





en en en



I-- en

z a::
0 en

c> w

en '-






..0 300

>- W 4501- a::














<t w'"


a:: c::t:



0 W


~ ° 10





eTD "'__0.5<Tomox. ....-- 0.25<TOmox.

~ 0 0 1.0 Z


150- I<t a:: <t






0 500

c , bo r s AND




et aI.1981).

10. 11.A similar approach can be applied to develop a correlation between cone resistance and shear modulus. cone resistance relationship developed by Baldi et aL (1981) a series of curves relating G max to qc can be developed. Once a correlation has been developed for the dynamic shear modulus it . G max to G where max = kG Pa (~)0. Handin and Drnevich. 1972) to relate dynamic shear modulus. Pa = 1 bar) If = = Pa the empirical equations can be compared. However. as shown on Fig. G.. The 'use because samples. 1970. When expressed in the form. the application of 30 these larger factors to overconsolidated sands should be used with caution. 10 is combined the with the relative density.normally consolidated sands (i. 6 ~ a ~ 18). soil index properties. since the increase is dependent on degree of overconsolidation and density (Baldi et al.5 Pa a' (3) kc. of Fig. Shear MOdulus .e. 9 may underestimate the in-situ Young's fudulus it is based on laboratory measured moduli using re-constituted Many in-situ sand deposits have had some past stress history that can cause a significant increase in soil stiffness. EXtensive laboratory work has been conducted by several researchers (Seed and Idriss. This has been done by the writers and is shown on Fig. = a' m modulus nunber mean effective stress reference stress (i. proposed relationship for kG shown in Fig.e. for sands. 1982).

emox.emin. .=0. :::::> 0 0 ~ 500~ 0 01 a 50 R E LA T I V E 0 ENS' T Y 100 .31 A HARDIN 8 DRNEVICH(972).n.4 2000 ~ C) o n:: w CD ~ :::::> 1500 z C/) 1000 Proposed correlation :::::> _. % FIG.= SEED 8 IDRISS (1970) 0.10: CORRELATION BETWEEN DYNAMIC SHEAR MODULUS NUMBER AND RELATIVE DENSITY.9.

qc t bars FIG. . CONSOLIDATED. 11: RELATIONSHIP DYNAMIC BETWEEN CONE BEARING AND SHEAR MODULUS FOR NORMALLY UNCEMENTED • QUARTZ SANDS.32 3000 en 0 .Ll '- 2500 )C . 2000 0 (!) U') E ::J _J 0 ~ 0 ::J 1500 a:: UJ J: U') <X 1000 :E <X Z - u >- 0 500 O~----~----------------------------~ o 100 200 300 400 500 CONE BEARING.

The use of Fig. i. E The writers suggest the use of Figs. can be obtained from . 9 may underestimate the in-situ Young's Modulus because the correlation is based on laboratory measured moduli. 9 and 11 for estimating and G from CPT data in sands. The compressibility of the sands can be expected to significantly effect any correlation between cone bearing and modulus. it is not possible to distinguish the stress history from cone penetration data during drained penetration. Eldridge Byrne and 33 (1982) suggest that the initial tangent modulus under static This is because of loading conditions is about 1/5 the dynamic modulus.. 1982) between dynamic shear modulus and SFT N value for sands. high OCR. 8. The SPT N value has been converted to cone bearing. moderately correlations incompressible. 11 is the relationship developed in Japan (Imai and Tononchi. are applicable However. Stress History Unfortunately. Sometimes.e. The correlations presented may significantly underestimate the moduli for overconso1idated sands. qc' using the relationship for sands (Robertson et al. it should be recognised that the to normally consolidated. an indication of high horizontal stresses. 1982). the combined effect of strain level and repeated loading associated with the resonant column tests to obtain G • max Also shown on Fig.5 • M.should be possible to estimate the shear modulus at any strain level by using the reduction curves suggested by Seed and Idriss (1970). predominantly quartz sands. = 4.

HOwever. With time. Many geotechnical engineers have developed considerable experience with design methods based on local SPT correlations. in sandy soils the pore pressures tend to dissipate almost as fast as they are generated pressure. with developed based on local experience and field observation. the initial introduction of CPT data there is a need for better SPT-CPT correlations so that CPT data can be used in existing SPT data based design correlations. 5 is used with the to predict relative vo' it is possible 100%). Sometimes the presence of high horizontal stresses can produce high friction sleeve values. to quantify the stress level. 5). is usually a sign of high horizontal stresses or cementation. d ensi ties in excess of 100% (Dr » This.34 the relative density correlation (Fig. f s • HOwever. 0' If Fig. despite continued efforts to standardize the SPT procedure there are still continued problems associated with its repeatability and reliability. vertical effective stress. Part II. it is necessary to know the friction sleeve value of the same sand under normally consolidated conditions. A discussion of how the piezometer cone can be used to estimate stress history is given in the companion paper. A considerable number of studies have taken place over the years to . resulting in a measure of the in-situ equilibrium water SPT-CPT CORRELATIONS The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is still the most commonly used in-situ test in North !merica. Unfortunately. direct CPT design correlations will also be HOwever.

as a function of mean It is clear from Fig. the typical energy delivered from a standard donut type hammer is about 50% to 60% of the theoretical maximum (Kovacs and Salomone.). not to Also sand mention the variability of delivered energy in the 8PT data.0 mm) is significantly influenced by the larger gravel sized particles. Most of the data presented in Fig. 12. an efficiency of about 55% may be the norm for which it can be assumed that many North American SPT correlations were developed. drill rig type. The energy delivered to the drill stem varies with the number of turns of rope around the cathead and varies with the fall height. D50 There is also some difficulty in defining the from some of the references. and operator characteristics. When using the rope and cathead procedure with two turns of the rope. Kovacs et al. 1982) has discussed how the q c IN ratio varies with the amount of energy delivered to the drill rods. 475 J (4. 12 that grain size. IN ratio increases with increasing results appears to increase with increasing grain size.200 in.35 quantify the relationship between q• 8PT N value c and CPT cone bearing resistance. 1982). 12 was . deposits in general are usually stratified or non-homogeneous causing rapid variations in CPT tip resistance.lb. (1982) have shown that the energy delivered to the rods during a 8PT can vary from about 20% to 90% of the theoretical maximum.. A recent publication (Robertson et a1. (1981) and Robertson et a1. The scatter in This is not size (D c ). by reviewing 50 The variations the derived q c IN ratio can be IN ratios. Schmertmann (1976) has suggested that based on limited data. as shown in Fig. to much clarified grain the q c A wide range of q IN q ratios have been published leading in published c confusion. surprising since penetration in gravelly sand (D50 ~ 1. hammer and anvil type.

.9 ~I -"" .. N.~ "u CT V· 16 ~~ 3 ~ . Campanella . ~ 12.Campanelia & Wightman . ~ a: 0 3 2 __ ~ 12 ! .. blows/foot SILTY SAND (Ibore SAND 100kPo) 36 10 CLAYEY SILTS 8 SILTY CLAY SANOY SILT 8 SILT 9 8 • 4 9 ...0 I MEAN 1. Meyerhof (1956) 0.. ~ Ii ~ !A5'13 0 o 0.t at (1879) 0 SPT { • SPT N.ERi a N c· ER i• 55.".. .. Goel (1982) 14. Mitchell (1 D83) } USC farm 8. .1 SIZE.1 '0 55°/0 SITE. D50• mm 9. Schmertmann (1970) 12. McDonalds FIG. Douglas (1982) 1. De Alencar Venoso (1959) 5.~~I12 ~8 ~5 5.qc . '(A fter Robertson... ~e- _. z 7 6 5 4 . Ishihara & Koga (1981) 6.001 0.1982). c 3 . Sutherland (1974) 7. Muromachi & Kobayashi (1982) 13. Laing (1983) 16.i.12: Variation of qc/N Ratio with Mean Grain Size. Nixon (1982) 10. Rodin (1961) 4. ERi • 47% TILBURY ISLAND SITE o • SPT N.0 GRAIN 2.. r- ~.bars CLAY .. Kruizinga (1982) 11. Meigh and Nixon (1961) 3.. .. Thornburn & MacVicar (1974) 15.ERp=65°/0 SPT Ne ..

For mechanical cone data use can be made of classification charts by Schmertmann (1978a). SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS It is important to realize that the correlations presented here for interpretation of CPT data are empirical. 1982).obtained using the standard donut type hammer with a rope and cathead system. Searle (1979) or Muromachi and Atsuta (1980). 12 can therefore be used to convert CPT data to equivalent SPT N values. (1982) presented energy measurements on SPT data that indicate that the average energy ratio of 55% may represent the average energy level associated with the q c 3. Robertson et al. The addition of pore pressure the classification chart shown in Fig. 12.4 (Douglas.7 IN correlation shown in Fig. 2 should be used as a guide to grain size. Tb estimate the mean grain size from CPT data use can be made of The classification chart in Fig. a trip hammer was used it is likely that the energy level would be higher than the average 55% level by a factor of about 1. the If q c IN ratios shown in Fig. discuss the factors that influence An attempt has been made to and to provide the interpretation guidelines for the practicing engineer. Thus q c IN ratios would be slightly higher than those shown in Fig. 12. Fig. 12 may be slightly in error. 2. measurements during cone penetration would significantly improve the soil classification (see Bart II). . If local design correlations have been developed based on SPT data obtained using alternative procedures such as a trip hammer or procedures other than the rope and cathead technique.

the peak friction angle correlation appears less influenced by grain .The CPT is a fast. on the other hand. grain It should be possible in the near future to quantify the by performing simple compressibility tests on characteristics disturbed bulk samples and comparing the results with similar tests on the chamber test sands. The moduli correlations are likewise influenced by variations in grain characteristics because the parameter is a small strain measurement. The continuous measurement of pore pressure during cone penetration can significantly aid in the assessment of the applicability of these correlations to different soil types. cone resistance. is a large The strain measurement. friction and dynamic pore 38 These parameters can be used to provide a preliminary estimate The of geotechnical parameters based on the correlations presented here. Thus. economic logging test that can provide continuous measurements pressure. In interbedded deposits. continuous soundings enable detailed site profiles to be developed and critical areas or zones to be identified. the The density correlation can be improved significantly if of the sand can be assessed from the grain compressibility characteristics. it is important to remember that the cone resistance may not obtain its full value within a layer if the layer has a thickness less than about 70 em. of parameters like bearing. The main correlations presented in Part I of the paper are applicable to cone penetration test data in drained soil. require further testing with specific These critical areas may then that may include test methods sampling and laboratory testing. The correlations for density and moduli are approximate and should be used as a guide.

12 should be adjusted to reflect local practice and experience.39 characteristics because it also is a large strain parameter. Mines and Resources of Canada.. ERi * 55%). B.e. University of Br itish Cohmbia appreciated. and the technical staff of the Civil Engineering Department. Therefore. If local design correlations have been developed based on SPT data obtained using alternate procedures with resulting different average energy levels (i. the Department of Energy.V. 2 and 12. when interpreting CPT data in sands more reliance can be placed on the estbnated friction angle than density or moduli. Fig. Ertec Western.C. Ministry of Transportation and Highways. is much appreciated. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The assistance of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of canada. Fugro B. The equivalent SPT N value can be estimated from CPT data using Figs. The work of Don Gillespie is also .

C. "Cavity Expansion in Sand with Curved Envelopes". Norris R. American Society for Testing and Materials. Department of Civil Engineering.M. Geotechnical Engineering Division. No. P... V. Duke University. Vivatrat. 23-35. April. pp. Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. Bellotti. GTll.. R.. Journal. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division. 1981.. LB. G. and Ladd. 2. 1982. P.. 427-432. "State of the Art in In-situ Testing of Soils: Developnents since 1978". California.A. 20. M. 23 pgs. and Pasqualini. ASCE. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. R. 57. 1976. and . M. Campanella. 2. 1980. "Design Parameters for Sands from CPT". 106.G. Vol.. St.. STP.M. ASTM. pp. ASCE. May 1982.1.L. "Cone Penetration in Soil Profiling". 1979. 1982. Baligh.. Holtz. January. Cone Penetration Testing and Experience.D. Oct. E. and Pasqualini. Oct. and Donald.M. M. Stockholm. 1131-1146. Vol. No. 102.M. pp. 455-458. 1981. 1981. G. pp.. Missouri. Ghionna..K.. Baligh. Thesis. Campanella. 10th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.A. ESOPT II. 1976. Nov. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division.1973. Cone and FrictionCone Penetration Tests of Soil. Vol. 447-461. pp. E. 425-438. 523. ASTM Designation: D344l. Z. pp. Santa Barbara. P. GT4... 1981. V. T. 1983. Canadian Geotechnical Vol. "A Three Parameter Dilatant Elastic Stress-strain Model for Sand". Byrne..G. 1981. 1981. 2. Baldi. Chapnan. R. and Eldridge. 343-362.D. "Cone Resistance of a Dry Medium Sand". Vol.. 510 P> Baldi.. C. G. 1982. "Interpretation of Static Penetration Tests in Sand". Bellotti. Louis. pp. Campanella. and Gillespie. "On Problems of Soil Bearing Capacity at Depth". "Cone Penetration Testing in Deltaic Soils". D. and Robertson. 10th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Eng. Ghionna. Engineering Foundation Conference on Updating Subsurface Sampling of Soils and Rocks and Their In-situ Testing. V. R.K. Proceedings of a Symposiumsponsored by the Geotechnical Division of ASCE.40 REFERENCES Al-Awkati...G. Robertson. "Applied Cone Research". February. Standard Method for Deep Quasi-Static. ASCE. May 1982. "Evaluation Projects Involving of Relative Cohesionless Density and its Role in Geotechnical Soils". and Robertson. R. M. 1975. Amsterdam. Jamiolkowski. Vol. University of British Columbia.K. Stockholm.. Jamiolkowski. Edited by G. Civil Engineering Department Soil Mechanics Series No. P. Ph.

Douglas. 1.. 2. Sweden..T. Vol.Dahlberg. Oct. ISSMFE. pp. Report of the Subcommittee on Standardization of Penetration Testing in Europe. Vol. Proceedings. Vol. University of Florida. Janbu. pp. Internal Report. ESOPT II. 2. and Mitchell.J.S.A.. Louis. Raleigh. Vol. 1974. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. "Correlation of N Value with S-wave Velocity and Shear Modulus". 1982. Vol.K. Hardin. North Carolina. 1971. ASCE. pp. Department of Civil Engineering. International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. "Static Penetration Resistance of Soils: I-ANALYSIS". "Soil Classification Using Electric Cone Penetrometer". 95-152. ESOPT II. T. Stockholm. de Ruiter. Stockholm. 303-324 41 . ASCE. 1981. Amsterdam. J. H. Proceedings 9th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.. 98.P. Appendix 5. "Mine Tailings Characterization by Piezometer Cone". "Shear Modulus and Damping in Soils: Design Equations and Curves".C. 1981. Vol. pp. Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Parameters of the Geotechnical Division. Oct. V.. D.2. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. K.. B. and Olsen. Gainsvi11e. and Tonouchi. Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing. and Rust. Holden. Geotechnical Engineering Division. ESOPT II. "Penetration. 1977. ASCE.O. Jones. K. pp. pp. 67-72. Durgunog1u. B. 389-405.. 1974. and Senneset. 1975.2.. ESOPT I. 667-692. "The Static Cone Penetration Test State-of-the-Art Report".. Pressuremeter and Screw Plate Tests in a PreLoaded Natural Sand Deposit". J. J . 41. 1982. ASCE Specialty Conference on InSitu Measurement of Soil Parameters. Drnevich. pp. "Laboratory Research on Static Cone Penetrometers". Raleigh. N. 1.. Van Zy1.J.. Proceedings of ASCE. Tokyo. I. Geotechnical Engineering Division.. pp. 3. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 209-227. 1975. 1982. 181-193. Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division. R. Douglas. St. Vol. Imai. June 1975. 1972. E. 1981. "Effective Stress Interpretation of In Situ Static Penetration Tests". Amsterdam. 2. May 1982.. CE-SM-71-1.owcouut Variability Correlated to the CPT". Vol. G. R.. Amsterdam. B. "SPT Bl. SM7. In-situ Measurement of Soil Properties. ESOPT I. Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Penetration Testing.

"The Measurement of Soil Properties In-situ". ASCE. Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. "SPT HammerEnergy Measurements". 2. Mitchell. "Piezometer Penetration Testing CUPT". pp. A.A. G. "Role of CPT in North Sea Foundation Engineering". J.. Vol. T. and Atsuta. Salomone.. 1982. Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposiumon Penetration Testing. 615-626... Kovacs.Y. F. Mitchell. State-of-the-Art Report. T. Mikasa. Vol.. Amsterdam. K.C. II. W. 2. J. 1974. and Lunne. GT4. and Takada. L. 761-768. Amsterdam. W.. and Vil1et. .S. Muromachi.S. U. Oslo.. Parkin. 2. Report 52108-9. 94720. pp. L.B. 1978. Proceedings of the Conference on In-situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Vol. Vol.A. A. Building Science Series 135. Last. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute. Report prepared for U. S. OSLO. T. Oct. and Arnold. E. and Kleven.. M. and Gardner. Raleigh. Vol. National Bureau of Standards. "Energy Measurements in the Standard Penetration Test". Ca.A. and de Gijt. pp. ESOPTII. Proceedings of the Second European Symposiumon Penetration Testing. "Soil Classification with Rf Value of Dutch Cone". M.A.K. Moscow. T. "Laboratory Investigations of CPT's in Sand". 1. 67 pgs. ESOPT II. N. Sounding Symposium. J..S. Journal of the Geotechnical 108. Holden... W. J. Berkeley. Geotechnical Engineering Division. Calibration Chamber". Guzikowski. May 1982. 1981. 49-75.42 Jones. 1981. Part 2. Parkin.K.. Aamot. A. March 1978. 1977.. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. "An Analysis of Penetration Measurements in the C. N. G. No. Proceeding of the European Symposiumon Penetration Testing.. ASCE. Kovacs. 1982. "Boundary Effects in the Laboratory Calibration of a Cone Penetrometer in Sand". pp.. Amsterdam. and Salomone. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. and Yokel. Report Parkin. Lunne. W.R. 1980.D.D. Tokyo. ESOPTII. Symposiumon Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. pp. University of California. Department of Energy Contract W-7405-ENG-48. K. North Carolina State University. Engineering Division.. Internal 52108-3 Norwegian Geotechnical Institute. 1981. April. "In-Situ Measurement of Volume Change Characteristics". 599-620. A. 1975. and Lunne. "Results and Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests in Soils of Different Mineralogic Composition".K. 1982. Joustra..K. and Rust. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. 1982. K.. F. 607-613. Vol. 1980. "Significance of Centrifugal Model Tests in Soil Mechanics".

Vol. 769-774. May 1982. Department of Civil Engineering. May 1982. Civil Engineering Department. 1982. 57-138. Performance and Design".H. Session 7. March 1964.. 1976. 81-93. Robertson. pp. 62 and Journal of the Geotechnical Division. and Zuidberg. Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station. "Predicting the qc/N Ratio". A. "Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test. "SPT-CPT Correlations". 2. Session 7. ASCE (Accepted May 1983). 145 pgs. Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on In Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing.. Amsterdam. L.K. Raleigh. Vol. 96. J.K. P.!.. University of Florida.43 Power. ESOPT II. Gainesville.H. No.2. Department of Civil Engineering. P.F.. 2.H. 1982. Schaap. A. pp. 1982. Report FHWATS-78-209. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division. ESOPT I. Soil Mechanics Series.D. pp. pp. E. 1982. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. "The Use of the Electic Static Cone Penetrometer in the Determination of the Engineering Properties of Chalk". 1982. Final Report D-636. Federal Highway Administration. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 1982. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. ESOPT II. March. J. . pp. R.. and Wightman. ASCE. P. Stockholm. 841-851. ASCE.M. "Sand Displacement and Compaction Around Model Friction Piles". and Morrison. J . Vol. 395 pgs. Robertson. Ph. 1975. No. University of British Columbia.G. June 1974.T. 1964.J. Vol. 1974. Amsterdam. Robinsky. also see discussions. 409-586. Dissertation. Schmertmann. H. Amsterdam. pp. "Measurement of In-Situ Shear Strength". 1978a. Stockholm. 2. Proceedings of the Conference on "Updating Subsurface Sampling of Soils and Their In-situ Testing". Soil Exploration and Sampling..A. The Netherlands. Santa Barbara.. Washington. 8M3. 1983.H. Vol. Schmertmann. C. Engineering Foundation Conference. "Mechanical and Electrical Aspec ts of the Electric Cone Penetration Tip". Vol. 1011-1043.. Proceedings 10th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Founadtion Engineering. Jan. 4. ESOPT II. Campanella. Schmertmann. 4-8. Vol.. July 1978. "Static Cone to Compute Static Settlement Over Sand".. 1970. University of British Columbia. J . Published by National Swedish Building Research. 1981. 2. Schmertmann. Balkema. California.. 1.

210 pgs. "Soil Moduli and Damping Factors Dynamics Response Analysis". 265-270. "Cone Resistance. Report S-78-2. "Laboratory Investigation of Electrical Friction-cone Penetrometers in Sand". Prestress. A. Vol. ASCE. pp. 1963. Vesic. Amsterdam. Vesic. 1974. ASCE. pp. and Layering on Soil Resistance to Static Penetration"..Scbmertmann. Compressibility. U. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division.S. Highway Research Board. 2. USGSOpen-File Report No. Proceedings of the Second European Symposiumon Penetration Testing.B. EERC70-10.C. SM2.C. Vil1et. pp... H. 1981. "Expansion of Cavities in Infinite Soil Masses". D. Vesic. for 44 Torstensson. pp.D. Treadwell. Highway Research Report 39. 1972. Vol. Dec. D. Univ. ESOPTI. Washington. Ogeechee River Site". 903-908. National Research Council. Dissertation. Seed. "The Influence of Gravity. Inc. Graduate Division of the University of California. Vol. Geotechnical Engineering Division.. ASCE... 2.W. G. ESOPTII. W. A.. SM3. May 1968. A. pp. 1975. 1980. and Mitchell. ASCE. 1982. and Idriss. Prepared by Fugro.S. of California.2. . Vol. 661-688.. 1981. Oct. Brighton. Ph. pp.. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division.B. and Clough. Berkeley. LB. Proceedings of 7th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. 1970.-A.. B. 1979. 265-290. "Study of Feasibility of Using Wissa-Type Piezometer Probe to Identify Liquefaction Potential of Saturated Sands". Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. J. "Behaviour of Granular Materials under High Stresses". Berkeley.K.S. 561-584. LW.. 178-208. 96. J.S. Searle. "The Interpretation of BegemannFriction Jacket Cone Results to Give Soil Types and Design Parameters". Vesic. Relative Density and Friction Angle".S.H. 2. A. 98. SM3. "Bearing Capacity of Deep Foundations in Sand". Veismanis. A. "A Combined Pore Pressure and Point Resistance Probe". 81-284. Vol. Stockholm. 1970. "Tests on Instrumented Piles. Proceedings of the European Symposiumon Penetration Testing. 1968. Symposiumon Cone Penetration Testing and Experience.D.. 1978b. "Evaluation of the Cone Penetrometer for Liquefaction Hazard Assessment". Report No.

friction angle characteristics of sand. The advantages. use and interpretation of the piezometer cone are Factors that influence the interpretations are discussed The companion paper. stress history.G.45 INTERPRETATION OF CONE PENETRATION TESTS PART II (CLAY) P. Robertson and R. consolidation. Static cone penetration testing. interpretation. Campanella ABSTRACT This paper is the second of two parts and presents a summarized work guide for practicing engineers for interpretation of parameters for undrained conditions during the cone penetration test such as. undrained shear strength. drained conditions during such as parameters relative density. . pore pressures. in-situ. overconsolidation ratio and deformation characteristics of clay. considers the test and summarizes interpretation of and deformation also discussed.K. The authors personal experiences and current recommendations are included. permeability. Key Words: strength. and guidelines provided. Part I (Sand). shear modulus.

is the cone factor. ~ .46 INTERPRETATION OF CONE PENETRATION TESTS . Estimates following form: of c u from CPT results usually employ an equation of the = where a o cuNk + a0 (~ is the in-situ overburden total pressure.PART II (CLAY) P. of undrained shear strength of c u (c ) of clays (Schmertmann. UNDRAINED SOIL Undrained Shear Strength of Clay One of the earliest applications of the cone penetration test was in the evaluation 1975). The need to measure and interpret equilibrium pore pressures to evaluate groundwater conditions is also discussed. Note that the undrained shear strength of clay is not a unique parameter and depends significantly on the type of test used. (1982). (1980). u Comprehensive reviews evaluation from CPT data have been presented by Ba1igh et a1. Robertson & R. and Lunne and Kleven (1981).G. Campanella INTRODUCTION Part I (Sand) of this paper deals with the general assessment of soil type and the interpretation of CPT data in drained soil. Jamio1kowski et a1. the rate of strain and the orientation of the failure planes. Part II (Clay) of the paper deals with the interpretation of CPT data in undrained soil and the interpretation of pore pressure data from a piezometer cone.K.

Baligh (1975) combined these tl«) approaches in approximate form to obtain the results shown in Fig. 1 clearly demonstrates that horizontal stress (Oh ) rather than o standard (Fugro) type electric cone. Meyerhof. Landanyi. 1961) and more recently by use of cavity expansion theories (eg. The is usually measured from field vane tests but sometimes half compression test is used.. . 1972). Other factors such as cone type and rate of penetration may significantly affect the penetration resistance. where values. Nk I r should not be a constant for all clays and for the case of the standard cone. situ horizontal total stress (Oho)' or the in-situ octahedral Theoretical solutions for Nk (Ooct = . softening. reference c u Nk is generally obtained from empirical correlations.(Ovo + 20ho))· have been based on bearing capacity theories (eg. 1967. Landanyi (1972). The rigidity index (I ) is the ratio of the r undrained shear modulus to undrained strength and the vertical axis gives Nk similar in form to Eq . The solution by Baligh (1975) involves several simplifying Nk = 16 ± 2 over the full range of likely assunptions. 0 Note the use of the in-situ total vo and that the theory applies to the Fig. 1. However.The contribution interpreted of the total overburden pressure (0 o ) has been or the instress 47 as either the in-situ vertical total stress (0 vo ).. The overburden pressure (0 ) is o the unconfined usually taken as the in-situ total vertical stress (0 vo ) since the in-situ horizontal stress is usually not known. on the other hand. The former can be adequately approximated by using the Neglecting strain- average of the vertical and horizontal strengths. and Vesic. can lead to a serious error for sensitive clays. such as neglect of undrained strength anisotropy and strain softening behavior. 1.

. 1975)._~--~--~--~ 6 10 20 RIGIDITY 100 200 .48 w z 22 u I(/) (/) c:r 20 W 0:: I- a.1: EFFECT OF RIGIDITY INDEX AND CONE ANGLE RESISTANCE OF CLAY. ON THE PENETRATION (After Batigh. 400 u INDEX OF CLAY. a c:r _J z e I CT u II u ~ 18 0 W N Z ¥ 16 ~ 0:: 14 a z 12 ~_. G r. = c- Fig.--~~--.

Senneset et a!. q' c Th. the cone factor Nk of falls between 11 and 19 with an average of 15. 49 consolidated Bjerrum's. Investigations by consolidated Kjekstad et a1. case. (1978) in non-fissured overIn this The clays. correction for plasticity index).eypropose N' = 9 with a likely variation c One of the major drawbacks of this method is the accuracy to which In soft normally consolidated clays. indicate c u an average cone factor Nk = 17. marine clays using corrected 1972. the reference value of The was obtained by triaxial compression tests. the total can be determined.Da ta presented by Iamne and Kleven (1981) shows that for normally field vane strength (i. value determined as a function of cone resistance (q ) in c highly overconsolidated clay deposits must be used with great caution since it is difficult to establish the extent fissures affect drainage and their effect on progressive failure. using a standard (Fugro) type electric These results were obtained at a standard rate cone penetration of 2 cm/sec.e. It is more difficult to establish similar correlations in stiff overconsolidated clays because of the effects of fabric and fissures on the response of the clay. . of ±3. Nk c u appears to be independent of overconsolidated ratio. (1982) have recently suggested the use of effective bearing (q') to determine c c u from q' c c u = Nt c = (2) where q' c is defined as the cone resistance (q ) minus the total measured c dynamic water pressure (uT).

the maximum pressure could be estimated using the spherical cavity expansion theory (Vesic. the measured to be less than the measured the method which is physically impossible and makes qc is corrected. qc' should be corrected for measured dynamic pore pressures qT. and would be in the range.. If the pore pressure is measured behind the cone tip. the location of the pore pressure element becomes extremely important. Robertson and Gillespie (1983) suggest that all measured cone resistance. . unequal qc is sometimes observed end area effects.50 dynamic water pressure generated on the tip during cone penetration is often as high as 90 percent or more of the measured cone resistance. 3. 1972) and would be in the range. 4 < Au c u < 7 (spherical cavity).e. However. (3) where Au u 0 = \\r = u0' and (4 ) equilibrium water pressure. Research is currently underway to investigate the potential benefits of using effective bearing analysis. (1982) unusable unless Campanella. the maximum excess pore pressure could be estimated using the cylindrical cavity expansion theory. It should also be possible to estimate c u from the excess pore pressure (Au) generated during penetration using cavity expansion theories. Because of cone designs (i. This using the net area ratio to give a true total stress measure. Fig. Part I). q' c Thus is an extremely small quantity. point is more thoroughly discussed later in the paper. by Senneset et a1. excess pore If the pore pressure is measured on the cone tip.

are only applicable to normally consolidated non-sensitive soils and tend to slightly overestimate c• u The excess pore pressure tends to increase The semi-empirical solution proposed by with increasing soil sensitivity. Bjerrum 1972) instead of using other in-situ tests or laboratory measured values. With be reduced to around 10 or less depending on the degree The overburden pressure can be taken as the total vertical stress. G = -) c u (5) 51 The range is dependent on the rigidity index (I r of the soil. The lower values apply to the more highly plastic soils (PI higher values apply to the low plasticity soils (PI :>: > 80) and the These values 15). the value should sensi tivity. of course. Torstenssen (1977) and Massarch (1978) would enable this approach to be applied to overconsolidated clays. individual correlations for Nk ~ can be developed for be defined for a The writers also recommend that . requires a reliable estimate of to the particular design problem. appropriate Uncertainties involved in this assessment can be reduced somewhat by making reference to values of c u back-figured from well documented case histories (eg. local experience specific clays.3 < b. Schmertmann (1975) wisely comments that the best procedure is to make individual correlations for based on c u measurements for specific clays and CPT procedures. The writers preliminary suggest using equation (1) with an c• u ~ value of 15 for Nk 0f assessment of For sensitive clays.u c u < 5 (cylindrical cavity). provided an estimate of Skempton's pore pressure parameter (Af) could be made. the in-situ c u This.

specific method P. however. to "10" is the most appropriate parameter to use in Eq. distribution Any of method total of analyses and must pore make assumptions around as the to the stresses pressures cone.I. can be subject to serious problems. (1982) have suggested a method to determine the drained effective stress shear strength parameters (c'. = 10 FR% (6 ) Equation (6). provides only a rough estimate of sensitivity of a With an increased use of electric sleeves. however. Sensitivity The sensitivity (St) of a clay which is the ratio of undisturbed strength to totally remolded strength can be estimated from the friction ratio (FR%) using. determine through local experience if It is essential. stress parameters from undrained cone penetration data. ~'). . cones with equal end area friction estimate of sensitivity may be developed in the near future. Drained Shear Strength of Clay Senneset et al. as with any method for determining effective However. 6 for clays in a specific region. since c u of evaluating cu' such as by field vane corrected for 52 is not a unique soil parameter.. from the cone penetration resistance and the measured total pore pressures. Equation (6) implies that the friction measurement from the electric cone is close to the remoulded shear strength of a clay. a new and more reliable clay based on the writers' experience. their method.

does appear to give realistic effective stress strength values from CPT data in soft. A detailed discussion about limitations of the theories relating to interpretation of CPT data in clays is given by Tavenas et a1. The authors feel that the present state of interpretation and analysis of CPT data has not yet reached a stage to allow reliable estimates of drained shear strength parameters from undrained cone penetration data. the subject of applying an effective As 53 stress interpretation to CPT data in undrained soil is a high priority for intense study by many researchers. which is not identified by Senneset et a L. (1982). that the method by Senneset et a L. Overconsolidation Ratio An estimate of overconsolidation ratio and maximum past pressure may be obtained using the following method suggested by Schmertmann (1978a) and modified slightly by the writers: i) ii) estimate c u from 0' estimate vertical effective stress. an important problem. It should be pointed out. 2b. since different locations give different measured total pore pressures. normally consolidated clays. (1982) is the location of the porous element. compute c/o' u vo from soil profile. the distribution of stresses and pore pressures around a cone is extremely complex in all soils and has not adequately been modelled or measured to date except perhaps in soft normally consolidated clays. however. (1982). Also.Unfortunately. . vo' iv) estimate the average normally consolidated (c /0' )NC for the soil u vo using Fig. mentioned previously. . iii) . The writers feel that it is this area where major advances should be made in the next decade. A knowledge of the plasticity index is required.

M. young clays where overconsolidation has been caused by erosion desication. the tip resistance profile will be approximately constant or even decrease with depth until the depth where the deposit is normally consolidated and will then increase linearly with depth. is approximately normally consolidated. normally consolidated clay deposits with hydrostatic For groundwater For most or conditions. the tip resistance may continue to stay approximately constant with depth. the tip resistance is linearly increasing with depth. 2a. If the plasticity index of the deposit is not available.Mitchell and Gardner (1975) made a comprehensive review of the nunerous correlations between cone Most of these take the general resistance and constrained modulus. For aged clays where the OCR is constant with depth. form M = 1 m = (7 ) v where m v = volumetric compressibility = (6v/v/6p). In these cases. Schmertmann (1978a) suggests assuming an average normally consolidated (c 10' )NC ratio u vo of 0.of the tip resistance profile can also provide an approximate indication of a clays stress history. .33 for most post-pleistocene clays.v) estimate OCR from correlations by Ladd and Foott (1974) and 54 normalized by Schmertmann and reproduced in Fig. at depth. DEFORMATION CHARACTERISTICS OF CLAY Constrained Modulus and Compression Index . It should also be noted that the shape. the OCR will decrease with depth until the deposit.

5 2 3 4 R ti max._~~--._~~~ o 20 40 Plasticity 60 80 Index r.with recommended average • cu/O"YO 4 (cu /O"y'o )NC 3 2 1.2b: STATISTICAL RATIO RELATION BETWEEN INDEX. .0037 Iw + o~~----. 100 120 FIG._~~--.11 0. 1978a o 0.55 5 Range of data 7NC and OCclays. ).past O"ym OCR = 0 verconso I'd ati I Ion a 10 preSent O"~o I . 5 6 7 8910 • FIG.2a: NORMALIZED ( After CU /CTvo RATIO VS~ OCR FOR USE IN ESTIMATING Schmertmann OCR.2 cu/O"~O= 0. Cu /CTv'o AND PLASTICITY FOR NORMALLY CONSOLIDATED CLAYS.

va These methods provide only a rough estimate of soil compressibility. as shown on Table The volumetric compressibility (m ) and the compression index (C ) are v c related by: 0. related the a values are given Schmertmann developed a slightly more logical method that c la' u vo ratio to the overconsolidation ratio (OCR) and then to C. 2. Mitchell and Gardner's (1975) summary of Sanglerat's in Table 1. c the one dimensional compression index of the soil. especially when based on general empirical correlations. total stress undrained measurements from a cone cannot yield parameters for drained conditions without the addition of pore pressure measurements. C' c or compressibility.435 m v = C c (l+e )a o va (8) where a e 0 = = initial void ratio. The values by Schmertmann in Table 2 appear to give very conservative estimates of C. The predictions of volume change based on qc .Sanglerat et al. average of initial and final stresses. The estimation of drained parameters such as the one dimensional compression index. (1972) developed a comprehensive array of a values 56 for different cohesive soil types with different cone resistance values. mv' from an undrained test is liable to serious error. Conceptually. c Additional data from Atterberg limit tests (PI) or undisturbed sampling and oedometer tests are required for more reliable estimates.

57 TABLE 1. (After Mitchell and Gardner.4 < a < 1 Peat and organic clay (Pt' OH) 50 < w< 100 < w < 200 w> 200 . Estimation of Constrained Modulus.5 < a < 4 1 < a < 1. 1975) 1 m M = aq v c qc 7 < < > 7 bars 3<a<8 2<a<5 1 < a < 2. M.5 Clay of low plasticity (CL) qc < 20 bars 20 bars qc qc qc ) 20 bars 20 bars 3<a<6 1<a<3 < } Silts of low plasticity (ML) qc < 20 bars 2<a<6 Highly plastic silts clays (MH.5 0. CH) Organic silts (OL) & qc < 12 bars 2<a<8 qc < 7 bars: 100 1.

51 .0. .58 Cu!o:ro approx.0.25 0. OCR less than I 1 1 to 1.05 o .3 0.1 0.10 0.1.5 (assume 1) 3 6 greater than 6 Cc/(1 + el) greater than 0.00 1-4 over 4 TABLE 2: Estimation of Compression Index.50 0.26 . 1978a).4 0.4 (still consolidating) 0. Cc' from cu/a'vo ratio (After Schmertmann.1 .15 0.0.

overconsolidation sensitivity and other factors (Ladd et al. 3. 3(a). cu' in the form E u = nc u (9) where ratio. n is a constant that depends on stress level. Fig. 3(b). Young's Modulus . 1977). using Fig. with 59 local experience individual correlations can be developed for specific soil types. The writers' recommended procedure for the estimation of the undrained Young's modulus (E ) is to first estimate the undrained shear strength (c ) u u from CPT profiles. (15 E Ic u u with stress level for seven different cohesive Fig. (1977) that shows the variation of the ratio soils. shows the variation of E < PI < 75). with the undrained E . 3(a) presents data for normally consolidated soils from Ladd et al. the choice of relevant stress level is very important. because soil behaviour is non-linear. As clay discussed earlier. previously discussed. (OCR) using the ratio. as history estimate problem.using either Table 1 or Table 2 may be in error by ±lOO%. u l c: u with overconsolidation ratio (OCR) at two stress levels for the same soil types shown in Fig. However. 2). then estimate the stress Then. c la' (Fig.The estimation usually made using empirical of undrained Young's modulus. . u vo E u for the relevent stress level appropriate for the particular A knowledge of the plasticity index (PI) would significantly improve the estimate. is u correlations shear strength.

.26 .60 2000 ..rrlO"~c OCR: O"~rrlO"~c (b) FIG.---No..CK U simple shear tests All soils norma lIy consolidated .4 0..._.----_.1977).. ...20 3 Bangkok CH 2 Cloy LL=65 PI =41 .8 (0) APPLIED SHEAR STRESSRATIO Tr/Cu 2 4 6 810 2 4 6 810 OC R: O".2 0. 7 4 Moine CH OH . (Adapted from Ladd et al.24 0.6 0.20 st-IO L= 35 2 Boston CL Cloy LL=41 PI=22 . DESCRIPTION cu/p' Portsmouth 1 CL ClOt PI =15 ..29 Cloy LL=65 PI = 38 5 ~~~7~Hp~~'!l0 Atcha falaya 6 CH Clay LL=95 PI=75 7 Tailor River Peat w = 500% .3: SELECTION OF SOIL STIFFNESS RATIO FOR CLA VS.

after complete dissipation reached. when the steady penetration is stopped. Pore Pressure Measurements During cone penetration. soils tend to generate pore pressures. can generate significant excess pore pressures during cone penetration. The excess pore pressure (6u) measured during penetration is a useful indication of the soil type and provides an excellent means for detecting details in stratigraphy. The continuous measurement of pore pressures along with bearing and friction has enhanced the electric penetrometer as the premier tool for stratigraphic logging of soil deposits.PIEZOMETER CONE 61 The addition of pore pressure measurements during static cone penetration testing has added a new dimension to the interpretation of geotechnical parameters. For sandy soils these pore pressures dissipate almost as fast as they are generated and the high cone resistance pore pressure ratios (qc) c in sands generally gives Silty differential (~u/q) of essentially zero. . provides important data on the ground water conditions. because of their relatively low permeability. In addition. These points will be discussed in more detail in the following sections. and clayey soils. equilibrium o Finally the is pore pressure value (u ). The differential pore pressure ratio (~u/q ) c also appears to be a good index of soil type and relative consistency and a rough indicator of stress-history. the excess pore pressure decay with time can be used as an indicator of the coefficient of consolidation.

Saturation of pore pressure measuring system. This logic applies equally well to sandy soils in that loose sands tend to generate positive pore pressures and dense sands negative pore pressures during shear. Use of the pore pressure or differential pore pressure ratio is very dependent on the details of the cone design. The three significant aspects of cone design in relation to pore pressure measurements are: i) ii) iii) Pore pressure element location. the location of the pore pressure element can significantly affect the measured pore pressure during cone penetration.Because of the complex variation of stresses and strains around a cone tip. pore pressures measured . overconsolidated positive pore silts and clays tend to develop smaller positive or even negative pore pressures during shear. However. Unequal end area effects. the excess pore pressure (~u) may be a direct measure of the soil deposit stress history. the excess pore pressure can give an excellent both the volume change characteristics and relative permeability. where large positive pore pressures are generated during shear. indication of Thus. i) Pore pressure element location . In normally consolidated clays and silts.The volume change characteristics are a direct measure of a soils stress history. whereas. large Normally consolidated silts and clays tend to develop pressures during shear. because of their relatively high perme- ability these pore pressures often dissipate as fast as they are generated and very little excess pore pressures are recorded. Therefore. if the permeability of a soil deposit is relatively low such that drainage during cone penetration is small.

and fine sands. 1983). A detailed discussion concerning cone design is given by Campanella et al. the pore the tip encourages the measurement pressures. This is never the case and the tip always records a stress less all around pressure because of unequal areas ~ and A q than an applied at the tip (see Fig. Thus. with the of low or located element behind dynamic pore element immediately behind the tip the differential pore pressure ratio appears to be a more sensitive measure of stress history since it tends to accentuate the soil behaviour during shear. the area behind the tip appears to measure a response dominated by the shear behaviour of the soil. experienced pressure negative Furthermore. every cone has a given bearing net design and dimensions.Since the tip resistance is a total stress element. the area immediately behind the tip is in a zone Pore pressures are generated in saturated soils of total stress relief. because of both increases in normal stresses as well as shear stresses.63 on the face of the tip are generally about 10-20 percent larger than pore pressures measured ~ediately behind the tip (Roy et al. area ratio associated with its Thus. Thus.Part I). it should record a bearing stress equal to an all around applied pressure. This is because the area along the face of the cone tip is in a zone of maximum compression and shear.. ii) Unequal area effects . because of the stress relief by a soil element as it passes behind the tip. 3 . Robertson and Gillespie. Campanella. 1983). In overconsolidated clays and silts. Robertson and Gillespie. On the other hand. (1983) and . pore pressures on the face of the tip tend to be positive whereas pore pressures measured immediately behind the tip may be negative (Campanella. 1982. where small positive or negative pore pressures are generated during shear.

5.Part I could easily have a net area ratio of less than 0. it possible to check saturation before penetrating the soil. (10) is the total dynamic pore pressure (u +~u) and "a" is bearing net area ratio (A I A ). not using total bearing. as follows = where is total stress. dissipation times are is not significantly effected by air Unfortunately. . ~/qT' which is not recommended.6 to 0. is measured bearing. It is very important when using the pore pressure ratio that the bearing values be corrected to total stress. o -If q This correction can not be eliminated except with a unitized. pressure ratio. 3 . Pore pressure response was compared for saturated and air entrapped piezometer cone systems.It has been previously shown by Campanella and Robertson (1981) that complete saturation of the piezometer tip is essential for fast reliable response.8. Most cones have bearing net area ratios of 64 from about 0. design is not yet available. the differential pore can be expected to relate more uniquely to the Some researchers prefer to use the especially for offshore or stress history of soil deposits. ~u/qT' qT' is used. u o underwater CPT where values can be large. Also. ratio. jointless design where the sleeve is strain gauged to measure tip load. required to determine undrained shear strength from cone bearing.Schaap and Zuidberg (1982). but a bulbous cone tip like the one shown in Fig. Both the maximum pore pressure and entrapment. reported wide variations qT' may account for some of the Nk. If the total tip resistance. Such a of calculated bearing capacity factor. iii) Saturation of pore pressure measuring system .

Measuring dynamic pore pressures wi th the piezometer cone requires careful consideration of probe design. low compressibility and viscosity of fluid. effectively as a saturating fluid. 1982). Details of the saturation procedure used by the writers is given in a paper by Campanella et al. is also reduced if only equilibrium during stops in the penetration. The importance of initial saturation piezometric readings are required Soil Type and Stress History No clear correlation between soil type and pore pressure measurements The recently suggested soil classification during CPT has yet emerged. 1982) shows considerable promise. The resulting equilibrium water pressure is then often sufficient to put any minor air bubbles into solution. has boiling and freezing points at 290°C and -17°C and a viscosity about 50% larger than water. MOst researchers believe that it is just a matter of time before sufficient field correlations are obtained to allow a soil . For a high frequency response. the design must aim at a 65 small fluid filled cavity. The importance of initial complete saturation is reduced somewhat once penetration in excess of about 5 m below the water table has been achieved. The glycerin combined with a relatively rigid polypropylene porous plastic filter develops a high air entry tension to prevent loss of saturation during use and penetration through soils above the water table. The writers have found glycerin to work Glycerin has a compressibility about Pure glycerin half that of water yet is completely miscible with water. chart based on pore pressure and bearing data (Jones and Rust. (1983). choice of the porous element and probe saturation. a high permeability of the porous filter and a large area to wall thickness ratio of the filter (Smits.

1983. (iv) c flu q -0 vo Senneset et al. Jones and Rust.classification chart to be developed. UTe The second is standardization in definition of pore pressure ratio. However. for pore this can not be pressure element 66 accepted The writers believe that a location immediately behind the tip will soon become the standard. Jefferies and Funegard.. Tumay et al.. 1982. proposed to date are: The main definitions (i) Baligh et al. . until some standard is Unfortunately. achieved location. any correlation. since these have a significant influence on measured cone bearing. 1981 (iii) c flu q -u 0 Smits. 1982. 1982). Several researchers have recently shown that the pore pressure ratio can be related in a quantitative manner to OCR for clay soils (Smits. there are several factors that influence The first is standardization of the cone design and pore pressure element location. 1981 (if) flu Campanella and Robertson. qc' and pore pressure.. 1982. 1982.

High excess pore pressures are generally generated by normally consolidated soils with a high rigidity index (i. The writers believe that the last definition (iv) may become the standard provided the measured If cone bearing. 2. The previous discussion should provide a guide as to how soil permeability. similar to that shown in Fig. excess pore pressures generated during cone penetration immediately start to dissipate. The rigidity index also tends to decrease as OCR Thus. index (I r The excess pore pressures depend on the rigidity Generally. The third factor that will influence any correlation between stress history and pore pressure ratio is related to the fact that even for normally consolidated clays. the measured excess pore pressure (6u) is not unique for all clays. (1982) have shown that for Canadian . Coefficient of Consolidation Upon the arrest of steady penetration. increases (see Fig. definitions (ii) and (iii) are very similar u for shallow cone profiles where o is small. 1Rvenas et al. qc' is corrected for unequal area effects (qT). qT is used. PI (see Fig.e.67 The latter two definitions are important for offshore CPT work. sensitivity of a soil may also complicate any correlation. any future correlation is likely to The some relation to PI. I r = G c = -). 3). contain Therefore. 3). for the same OCR. a low PI). it may not be clear if a low excess pore pressure is related to a normally consolidated soil with a high PI or a soil with a high OCR. The rate of dissipation depends upon the coefficient of consolidation of the soil for a homogeneous deposit.E u 3c increases with u decreasing plasticity index. stress history and cone design influence the measured pore pressures during cone penetration.

4 shows the decay of excess pore pressure. u The reason for this is that a stiff soil will extend a zone of influence much larger than a soft soil. The solution by Randolph and Wroth. yield essentially the same result. A summary of these solutions are shown on Fig. (1979). E . h The solution by Baligh and Levadoux. (1977). (1980). . theoretical solutions are available to obtain the Several from coefficient dissipation of excess pore pressures generated by cavity expansion. is not shown because of its similarity to that of Torstensson. to the undrained The undrained Youngs modulus and shear modulus are related by G = 2(!+JJ) E u (11) since JJ= 0. The solutions by Randolph and Wroth and by Torstensson require an estimate of the soil stiffness ratio or rigidity index (G/c). T = c t/r2. Fig. they have been non-dimensionalized and shown in Fig. By 68 monitoring the rate of dissipation of the excess pore pressure. ~u.-clays. the undrained Youngs modulus. c t/r2. which highlights the major differences between solutions.5 for undrained conditions. In order to compare results of the different solutions. time factor. T. ness can be expressed shear modulus. h plotted against a non-dimensional allows Use of the time factor. and the cylindrical solution by Torstensson. c• u G. a quick calculation for the coefficient of consolidation. 4. or the shear strength. the rate of pore pressure dissipation is mainly governed by the consolidation characteristics of the intact clay away from the probe. The result of a larger zone of influence is to decrease The soil stiffu the rate of decay of excess pore pressures at the cone. (1977). an estimate of the coefficient of consolidation of the soil may be obtained. as either. 4.

(G/cu) 1/2 ri r cODaoUd.E.. .!...69 Autbor Cavity Type Material Hodel IDitial Pore Preasure DhtributioD fro.ipatioo analytical aolutioD Randolph . F.1 iDfluence of apherical co.Lo~ ) .~ ~ . r 0 (G/cu) 1/3 ( a) 1 . 4: SUMMARY OF EXISTING SOLUTIONS FOR PORE PRESSURE DISSIPATION • .. Torateuaoo 1917 apherical elastic-plaatic "'i • 4 cu . atudiea USing atraiD path _tbod Proposed Appl1cuiou ILeaarlte laUgh' Levado"" 1980 c:_binad radial and apherical DOn-liDear BoatoD Slue clay coDaolidatioD characteriatics abo"s very ...e ~ e ..5 .3 . (Adapted from Gillespie. r 0 (G/cu) 1/2 COD8olLdatioD characteristic8 vertical draiDs propo8eS averase of two result. ical solution Torstensson 1977 cylindrical solution o E/eu -500 .1982). 1. T • ct/r2 FIG. • radius of cavlt.. ..2 .8 .7 A Baiioh and Levadoux 1980 B Soderberg 1962 C Torstensson 1977 spte .6 ...tioo arouod pile.pooeot of di .9 ."c'ent of consolidation t • time .. Wroth 1979 cylindrical alaatic-plaatic o\Ii • 2 cu lD(~) ! r 0 SoderberS 1962 ToratauaoD 1917 cyliDdrical elaatic-plaatic ~ u ui ..1 .. . preasur_ter analysh cODaolidatioD around pile8 COD8olidatioo characteriatic8 cyliDdrical elaatic-plaatic o\Ii • 2 eu lD~) .01 T • time factor c • co.!..

the effect of soil disturbance. for the purpose of obtaining consolidation characteristics.70 E G :: 3 u (12) Selection of an exact stiffness ratio is complicated by the variation in moduli with strain level. G SO or E uSO ). and . Provided equilibrium pore pressures are not required. Although some doubt surrounds the selection of an appropriate stiffness ratio the solutions are not very sensitive to soil stiffness. the predicted coefficient of consolidation changes by a factor of about 2. . In spite of these limitations. 3. The applicability and meaning several phenomena. . of the solutions is complicated by These phenomena include: the importance of vertical as well as horizontal diffusion.soil anisotropy and nonlinearity of soil compressibility. the usefulness of the test procedure is encouraged by the repeatability of the test and the vast range in dissipation rates measured for various soils encountered.Non-homogeneity due to soil layering or nearness to a layer boundary (this problem is minimized when horizontal drainage dominates). The influence of vertical dissipation was shown by Gillespie and . level and change of total radial stresses. to wait past the 50 percent level of dissipation.uncertainty over the distribution. as shown in Fig. For a four-fold increase in stiffness ratio. it is not necessary. This is a relatively small variation for a parameter that can vary by several orders of magnitude. With the complex variation in strains around the cone it seems reasonable to select a stiffness ratio a t an intermediate stress level (say.

appears were not clamped a drop in the measured pore pressure load was released explains is from the tip. at horizontal least. solutions are applicable only to soft. behind the tip.. (1977) can be expected by Gillespie and Results study Campanella (1981) showed that coefficient in the of consolidation. especially direction This slightly since overconso1idated the soil result reasonable around the tip. information the design of vertical (Battag1io et a1. solutions appear to give a for a soil seems has in the horizontal state (OCR '" 2). The theoretical consolidated cone is clays. the theoretical ~.Campanella (1981) appears pressure dissipation to give to to be insignificant consolidation and that process. dissipation for the pore 71 dominate the element located solutions. to clamp the rods at It the ground surface that if the rods when recording pore pressure dissipation. pore pressure distribution A detailed discussion reasonably limitations of the theories of these is given by Tavenas et a1. the sensitivity pore It of would result appears the location decay response at the tip to of the sensing procedure used. by Torstensson from a Hence. reasonable immediately behind the tip. is useful here to comment on the procedure used while recording Some researchers penetration have reported that they the pore pressure found it while necessary dissipations. normally around the about the where the initial well defined. been pre10aded due to the process of penetration. in and macrofabric The test also appears drains It provide very important 1981). pressures immediately drop in . the dissipation test provides a useful In spite limitations means of evaluating and related to drainage approximate consolidation paths of natural clay properties deposits. (1982). cylindrical such as that results. element When load released.

. that respectively. for standard 60° cones. It therefore appears that. Since: k v = = (13) where and kv and kh are the coefficient of permeability in the vertical Results can of be limited regarded past as horizontal directions.. especially for classification. then: (14) . even with the rods clamped. it is assumed that soil compressibility is isotropic. the location of the piezometer element behind the tip is less sensitive to the prodedure . This is an important point because the amount of load applied to the tip. soil experience suggests compressibility h approximately isotropic. will change with time due to stress relaxation.response to the decrease in total stress. fine grained soils. mv = m (Mitchell et a1. a factor based on local experience. 1978. can be made from the consolidation and compressibility characteristics.used. Ladd et a1. then estimates of vertical Estimates of m v can be made using Table 1 can be obtained. in the 72 zone of failed soil the stress level does not change significantly when load is released. Whereas. Permeability A crude estimate of permeability can be made from the soil type A more reliable estimate of permeability. behind the tip. Since an estimate of permeability or using an If m v can be made. 1977) for the purposes of estimating permeability.

Identifying for the actual of groundwater conditions dams. friction and dynamic pore pres- sure records. full slopes and tidal to will is reach The time required stop in penetration it equilibrium soil pore pressure permeability. Groundwater Conditions The provides addition a direct profile of pore pressure of measurements during cone testing measure can groundwater measured by the conditions. before the rods and during in any . (1980). Evidence of the from examination of the bearing. to obtain in a borehole the groundwater conditions of water The hydrostatic. embankments. during has The equilibrium a stop in the piezometric penetration. pressures ability Often there resulting is a slight upward or downwardgradient groundwater pressures from overall regional conditions. valuable areas.73 An estimate Baligh obtained of the ratio kv/kh can be obtained soil from Table heterogeneity 3. to measure equilibrium is useful for piezometric during a stop in the or unusual can be tailings penetration hydraulic extremely disposal evaluating consolidation conditions gradients. after can be and Levadoux. during a depend on the to take For many the investigations. investigations areas. sufficient pulling equilibrium measurements at rod breaks end of the profile sand layers. be directly writers Experience feature gained shown this to be an in both the extremely important drained height for the piezometer cone for penetration It but has been commonpractice rarely are and undrained of water soils.

NO evidence of layering Slight layering.2 ± 0.S. 1980) . 10 ± 5 TABLE 3: Anisotropic Permeability of Clays (After: Baligh and Levadoux. sedimentary clays with occasional silt dustings to random lenses 1.2 2 to 5 3. Varved clays in north-eastern U..74 Nature of Clay 1. eg.

The major problem. with the determination of undrained shear strength. developed for specific soil types. 'nle addition of pore pressure measurements during cone penetration testing has significantly improved the interpretation of CPT data to obtain . The cone penetration test has traditionally produced excellent continuous profiles of undrained shear strength. The authors feel that the present state of the art is such that interpretation of CPT data has not yet reached a stage to allow reliable estimates of drained shear strength parameters from undrained cone penetration data. The concept of effective stress interpretation of CPT data is currently a topic of intense research. which are based on undrained cone resistance may be in large error. with information on vo and PI. of the in-situ c u c u appropriate to the particular design since the depends on the stress path followed during shear. can. u however. and have been. developed With a measure from cone data. such as compression index. and have been.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Many of the recommendations suggested by the authors are already in use by many engineers. ~ value of 15 is The recommended general empirical correlation using an related to the field vane strength. it is possible to estimate over o consolidation ratio. is the evaluation problem. Also many of these suggested correlations may 75 require slight adjustment based on local experience for specific soil types. with local experience significantly improved correlations can. (c ). (OCR). However. correlations for ~ of c u With local experience individual for specific clays. The recommended predictions of volume change characteristics.

geotechnical parameters. The authors also feel that the cone designs should be further standardized to include equal end area friction sleeves. A secondary problem is the saturation of the pore pressure A very convincing argument can be made to standardize measuring system. in the authors experience. this is rarely necessary if the porous element is located immediately behind the tip. Cone penetration . The major problem facing the quantitative interpretation of the pore pressure measurements during cone penetration is the location of the porous element. 1983). The continuous measurement of pore pressures has 76 also enhanced the electric penetrometer for stratigraphic logging of soil deposits. It would appear logical that the overall cone design should also be made such that the porous element location can be changed in the field to allow for possible special soundings to be carried out to obtain specific pore pressure data. Procedures are recommended to estimate the horizontal coefficient of consolidation from pore pressure dissipation curves.. all pore pressure measurements from cone testing must clearly identify the location and size of the sensing element. . If new pore pressure related correlations are to be developed and applied in engineering practice. the location to provide a wide range of applications but yet maintain a practical location for saturation and protection. Although. The authors believe that the pore pressure element should be located immediately behind the cone tip to meet these requirements (Campanella et a l. The soil permeability can also be estimated after the soil compressibility is estimated from cone bearing. a concensus is required as to the cone design and pore pressure element location. As a minimum.

should be fully calibrated for cross-talk effects. and the technical staff of the Civil Engineering nepartment.C. All cones. '!he authors plan to publish a paper in the near future that discusses the various application techniques for CPT data.77 resistance qT. Mines and Resources of Canada.V. such as. University of British Columbia is much appreciated. B. is beyond the scope of this paper. all channels should be recorded during each calibration of load. Ministry of Transportation and Highways. appreciated. This paper deals principally with the interpretation of electric CPT data for the assessment of geotechnical parameters. It is only when all cone data is uneffected by water pressure effects that significant improvements can be made in the interpretation of CPT data. i. design of shallow or deep foundations.. The application of these parameters or the direct use of cone data to design problems. Fugro B. The work of Don Gillespie is also .e. especially piezometer cones. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The assistance of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. where possible. to total stress. all around pore pressure and friction and that these should be reported for a given cone and its CPT data. the Department of Energy. data should also be corrected. Ertec Western..

Campanella. "Piezometer Probe Test in Cohesive Deposits". 1981. of 2nd European Symposiumon Penetration Testing. R78-40..M. M. P. Proc.. Gillespie..G. "Theory of Deep Site Static Cone Penetration Resistance". December. 1980. Robertson. M. "Embankment on Soft Grounds". April. 1981. A. ESOPTII. Symposiumon Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. No. ASCEProceedings of the Specialty Conference on Performance of Earth and Earth-Supported Structures". Vivatrat. 447-461. Ba1igh.K. M.. 1978. V. and Robertson. Journal. A. "In-Si tu Testing in Saturated Silt.G. Massachusetts 02139. R. 1981. Ba1igh.75-76 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.. 1982.. "Cone Penetration Testing in Deltaic Soils".M. M. Vol.. 1-54.. R. "Applied Cone Research". pp. M. and Levadoux. Louis.K. R. Oct. ASCE. Lafayette.. Maniscalco. Geotechnical Division. ASCE. Report No. (Drained or Undrained?)" Proceedings.. R. 1983. and Morrison.1. Jamio1kowski. 2..A. D. Wissa. N. "Cone Penetration in Soil Profiling". 106. C. Martin. . M. Massachussetts Institute of Technology. pg. St. R. "Pore Pressures during Cone Penetration Testing". "Pore Pressure Dissipation After Cone Penetration". Ba1igh. L. "Exploration and Evaluation of Engineering Properties for Foundation Design of Offshore Structures".. 343-362.M. and Gillespie. pp . Lance11otta.E.S. M.J.. Ba1igh. 264-302.. ASCE. Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing and EKperience. Bj errum. Vol. Geotechnical Engineering Division. pp. ASCE. pp. 02139.Z... Canada. Cambridge. Cambridge. R. 23-35. P. 20. Ba1kema. Campanella. 1980. J.G.K. 1975. P. A. Department of Civil Engineering. 247-263. D.T.. P. Canadian Geotechnical Conference. D. C. 1981. pp. "The Piezocone Penetrometer". Symposiumon Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. Robertson. R..... 34th. Campanella. 1978.M.. GT4.G.. Department of Civil Engineering. 1972. pp. 507-512. Mass. Geotechnical Division. 1981..C. Vivatrat.C.M. Canadian Geotechnical Vol. M. Construction Facilities Division. and Ladd. Campanella.K.. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. and La dd . February.. Research Report No.78 REFERENCES Ba1igh. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division. R. Azzouz. V. Fredericton. and Gillespie. and Robertson. Batag1io.

599-606. G. Kjekstad.. Proceedings of 3rd Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. December 1981.Gillespie.. Tordella. No. No. C. K. .G. 104. Foott. H. Marine Geotechnology. pp. R. 1983. Vol. ESOPTII. Ishihara. Texas. Paris.. Vol.R. 421-494.C. 17 pgs. 1982..G. Ladd. 11091123. "Stress-Deformation and Strength Characteristics".Sc. and Campanella. No.. 1981. Lancellotta. and Poulos. M. B. T. 1981. Department of Civil Engineering. Gillespie. Amsterdam. Thesis. "Consolidation Characteristics from Pore Pressure Dissipation after Piezometer Cone Penetration". "The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Wedge Shaped Foundations". 1974. pp. pp. G. 0. Vol. 1967. Vol.F. and Kleven. Soil Mechanics Series No. R. Ladanyi. K. 1961. GT 8. A. ASCE.J.. pp.. 763-786. 2. 607-613. 3. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Department of Civil Engineering. 11. Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing and Experience. ESOPTII.G..A. Lunne. Me yerhof.. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division. October. Japan. 1981. GT7.. 47. "Deep Punching of Sensitive Clays". Austin. Jones. Tokyo. Jamiolkowski. Vol. 1977.. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division. Massarsch. R.2. "Cone Penetration Testing in the Beaufort Sea". Caracas. "Comparison Between Insitu Cone Resistance and Laboratory Strength for Overconsolidated North Sea Clays". 1972. Amsterdam. "Role of CPT in North Sea Foundation Engineering".. M. and Rust. T..4.A. pp. ASCE. D.3.C. of ASCE. E. L. C. "Undrained Strength from CPT". "New Design Procedure for Stability Soft Clays".. C. The University of British Columbia. Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing. "New Aspects of Soil Fracturing in Clay". M. "The Piezometer Cone Penetration Test".. R.... Ninth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.. and Battaglio. Vol. Lunne. 1978.A. 220-243. Jefferies. ASCESpecialty Conference. 1982. 79 Ladd. "In-situ Determination of Undrained Stress-Strain Behaviour of Sensitive Clays with the Pressuremeter". University of British Columbia. Geotechnical Practice in Offshore Engineering. 9. Geotechnical Engineering Division. pp. Proceedings. pp. Canadian Geotechnical Journal.. and Funegard. Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. F. and Clausen. D. Vo1. and Foott. B. E. Vol. Schlosser. 1978. "Piezometer Penetration Testing CUPT".G.G. 2. Ladanyi. M. May 1982. 100. 49-75.

July 1978.. C. ESOPTII. Vancouver. 67 pgs. M. Senneset. F.H. 1978. ASCE. Ph. 19. 1982. F. 1982. H. II.. W..B. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. pp. Schmertmann.P. North Carolina State University. pp. 7. Dissertation.H. A. "The Measurement of Soil Properties In-situ". Amsterdam. pp. "In-Situ Measurement of Volume Change Characteristics".C. Federal Highway Administration.. Raleigh. Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on In Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. "Strength and Deformation Parameters from Cone Penetrations Tests".. Elsevier.M.K. 1978a. 1975. "The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration". Performance and Design". Amsterdam. 1982. "Measurement of In-Situ Shear Strength". 3. Janbu. Randolph. N. 217229. 2. Department of Civil Engineering. 1975. Washington. 841-851. Tremblay. "Penetration Pore Pressure Measured with Piezometer Cones". pp.2. 57-138. and Gardner. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. pp. J. Roy. (1957).. March 1978. Vol. "An Analytical Solution for the Consolidation Around a Driven Pile".80 Mitchell.K. 1979. F. M. ESOPTII. "Discussion: Hong Kong Airport". International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics. and Zuidberg. Vol.. ..S. Berkeley. Vol. and Villet. J. pp. March. Mitchell. 395 pgs. 124138. pp. May 1982. Schaap. 1982.H. Tavenas. "Mechanical and Electrical Aspects of the Electric Cone Penetration Tip". P. and La Rochelle. Proceedings of the European Symposiumon Penetration Testing. 1983. The Planning and Design of the New Institution of Civil Engineers. W. L.. Robertson.. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. ESOPTII. Proceedings of the Conference on In-situ Measurement of Soil Properties. 2. J. 305-307. K. Ca. and Wroth. State-of-the-Art Report. Report prepared for U. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Amsterdam.K. Department of Energy Contract W-7405-ENG-48. 145 pgs.D.. G.. 94720.J.W. and Svanc.. Vol. London. M. Schmertmann. Raleigh. 2. University of California.P... "Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test. 1972. P. Sanglerat. Smits. No. 863-870. Canada. May 1982.S. Skempton. Proceedings. Report FHWATS-78-209. Guzikowski. "Development of Pore Pressures in Static Penetration Tests in Sensitive Clay".. Vol. G. 877-881. J. University of British Columbia. Vol.F..

Torstensson. pp. Pile 81 Tavenas.15. SM3. . Paper No.. 1962. pp. 265-290. Nordiske Geotekniske in Soft Proceedings ESOPTII. M. 889-894. 1982. Vol. "Consolidation Theory Applied to Foundation Time Effects". Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division. Lerouei1. Probe". E. 217-232. and Deseze. S. "The Piezocone Test in Clays: Use and Limitations". M. pp. Amsterdam.. "Soil Exploration Clays with the Quasi-static Electric Cone Penetrometer". Tumay. 98. Vol.O.1-34. B. 1972.. of the Second European Symposiumon Penetration Testing.The Pore Pressure M$te. Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 915-921. Y. Vesic. Geotechnique.Soderberg. 1977. ASCE. Acar. A. "Expansion of Cavities in Infinite Soil Masses". ESOPTII. Amsterdam. 2. L.. 34..T.. and Roy.-A. F. 12.S. Oslo. Vol... . pp. 1982.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->