Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Title: The Measurement of Soil Properties in-situ -- Present Methods -- Their Applicability and Potential Author: Mitchell, J.K. Guzikowski, Frank Villet, Willem C.B. Publication Date: 03-01-1978 Publication Info: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0375f55m

eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide.

THE MEASUREMENT OF SOIL PROPERTIES IN-SITU
Present Methods - Their Applicability and Potential

by
James K. Mitchell, Frank Guzikowski and Willem C.B. Villet

Department of civil Engineering University of California, Berkeley

ABSTRACT
The measurement.of soil properties in-situ offers the advantages of minimal disturbance, retention of the in-situ state of stress, temperature, chemical and biological environments, and cost effectiveness relative to many types of laboratory tests for evaluation of undisturbed soil properties. This report is concerned with techniques for in-situ measurement of permeability, strength, stressdeformation properties, and volume change properties; property classes which are of interest in most geotechnical ,engineeringproblems. Emphasis is on test concepts, data analysis and interpretation, and advantages and limitations of methods, as opposed to details of apparatus and procedure. Permeability (hydraulic conductivity) is often measured in-situ by means of inflow or outflow borehole pumping tests employing either,constant or falling heads. Large scale pumping tests provide the most accurate results, but their high cost generally restricts their use to large projects. Tests for determining shear strength include the standard penetration test (SPT), static cone penetration, vane shear, pressuremeter, and the Iowa borehole s~ear tests. The SPT has been the most widely used, but is least accurate. The static cone and pressuremeter provide more reliable data and are expected to be increasingly employed. The vane shear test, previously considered to be very reliable in soft clays, is now known to frequently overestimate soil strength. The borehole shear test, a rapid and low cost technique, is limited to soils with some cohesion suitable for stage testing. In-situ stresses may be determined by pressure cells, hydraulic fracturing and the pressuremeter; deformation characteristics by.the pressuremeter, plate load tests, seismic methods and back analysis of completed projects. The pressuremeter is seen as being of great promise. Hydraulic fracturing tests, while suitable for use in rock, provide results which are often extremely difficult to interpret in soils. Seismic methods of determining elastic moduli involve very small strains, so results need to be corrected before application in most cases. Plate load tests can yield accurate estimates of properties, but costs may be prohibitively high. Volume change parameters have not often been measured by in-situ methods. However, tne following techniques may be successfully employed: borehole permeability tests, penetration resistance (both dynamic and static), plate bearing tests, screw plate tests, and the pressuremeter. In-situ permeability tests are particularly well suited for the evaluation of the consolidation rate of fine grained soils. Correlations of penetration resistance with volume change characteristics are empirical and may yield misleading results. Both the load bearing and screw plate tests can provide reliable volume change parameters. However, because of practical time limitations, their use is mostly restricted to sands and slightly cohesive soils. State of the art equipment, testing techniques and evaluation methods, as reviewed in this report, can provide many geotechnical design parameters with a degree of accuracy which compares favorably with conventional laboratory testing, often with substantial savings in cost and time. It is anticipated that existing methods for the in-situ measurement of soil properties will be even more widely accepted, further developed and supplemented by the introduction of new techniques in the foreseeable future.

I.

INTRODUCTION

The determination of soil properties by insitu measurement has assumed greatly increased importance in Geotechnical Engineering in recent years. Improvements in apparatus, instrumentation, measurement techniques and analysis procedures have been significant. It is probable that for many projects the determination of properties by in-situ measurement will assume an importance equal to, or greater than laboratory testing.

There are several reasons for in-situ testing, including: 1) To determine properties of soils, such as continental shelf and sea floor sediments and sands, that can't be easily sampled in the undisturbed state. 2) To avoid some of the difficulties of laboratory testin~ such as sample disturbance and the

June 1974. 1975): 1) Assess the problem. If so. and contained in. disposal of solid wastes and prevention or correction of landslides. the proceedings of two recent conferences. and the ASCE Geotechnical Engineering Division Speciality Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Similarly. 2) Design to accomodate a chosen range of permeability.2 proper simulation of in-situ stresses. for face and roof instability in tunnels and for piping and erosion in earth/rock dams.Groundwater seepage has been responsible for slope and base instability in excavations. June 1975. and chemical and biological environments. Large local variations of permeability are a common condition and lead to tlow concentrations which may cause dewatering difficulties such as local piping. For many applications. Details of test apparatus and measurement methods are not considered except as they influence the values obtained for the properties of interest.5 10-6 10. The coefficient of permeability. 102 10 10-1 10-2 10. one or more of which may be important in most geotechnical problems: 1) Permeability 2) Strength 3) In-situ 4) Volume stress change and deformation characteristics characteristics (hydraulic conductivity) Many difficult construction problems are directly related to the presence of ground water flow. The success of many projects therefore depends upon a knowledge of in-situ permeability and its degree of variation. Fig.3 10. such as pressuremeter and penetration test~ can be used to deduce information about more than one property. not be cost of an ex- II. In-situ tests cannot be considered however. action. but they are very appropriate for monitoring changes with time. The general range of in-situ permeability values for different soil and rock types is presented in Figure II~l. k-cm/sec.4 10. In-situ tests are not generally suitable for prediction of the fifth property class. a defensive design consisting of four steps may be appropriate (Gordon. This report draws heavily on material presented at. economical design will be possible. some of the principles and considerations in testing relate to all the properties. simplified approach based on reliable geologic data will yield equally good results as the most involved mathematical simulations (Milligan. A list of pertinent references summarizing the current state-of-the-art is appended to this report. k. . It is organized in terms of property class rather than by test type. temperature. Some of the in-situ test types. storage of contaminated water.7 10.Gravels Sands XBL 776-9396 5) DUrability cor susceptibility to changes in properties due to time and changes in environmental conditions. All soil and rock deposits are permeable to some degree. effective 2) Uncertain empirical correlations between measured quantities and properties are often used. 4) To increase the cost effectiveness ploration and testing program. namely the European Symposium on Penetration Testing (ESOPT). 3) To test a volume of soil larger than can conveniently be tested in the laboratory. In many cases. 3) Monitor subsequent behavior. the object of a permeability measurement is simply to determine if a problem exists. probably exhibits the largest range of magnitude of any parameter indicative of geotechnical properties. 11-1 Approximate in soil and range r~ck of permeability Milligan. 1975) (from This report is concerned mainly with the first four of these property classes. 3) Flow (in permeability tests) and stress directions cannot . (kl. Principal stress directions in the test may differ from those in real problems.be independently varied in most cases. 4) Take appropriate Defensive design may be applied to seepage control for dams and reservoirs. This report considers the evaluation of soil properties that are needed for engineering analyses from the results of in-situ tests. if the coefficient of permeability can be evaluated to within an order of magnitude a safe. Seepage losses in dam foundations or from reservoirs directly influence the safety and economics of water conservation projects. 4) The possible effects of future changes in environmental conditions cannot be readily determined. held in Stockholm. a panacea. for the following reasons: 1) Some of the tests may in all cases. An analysis of dozens of dam foundations has shown that a conceptually correct. held at North Carolina State University. 1975).8 Silts 4-. . PERMEABILITY Introduction A. There are five property classes.

Variation of In-Situ Permeability The in-situ permeability of soil and rock is influenced by both microscopic and macroscopic features. Deviations from direct proportionality between flow velocity and gradient may sometimes develop when changes in soil structure occur during flow (Mitchell. Therefore. The test may be performed as a constant head test in which the rate of pumping which is necessary to maintain a constant water level in the borehole is measured. such a procedure may provide an estimate of in-situ permeability. kin' that may be lower than the true in-situ value. Darcy's law is then employed to calculate a value of permeability. ~ tion of permeability is therefore a necessity for many projects. be retained through undisturbed sampling. 1976). higher than the values measured in the laboratory. which may be higher than the true in- where: v = flow velocity lost per i = hydraulic gradient. however. ).n (11-2) Use of this equation implies a judgment that the true in-situ permeability lies between kin and kout. k. At best. the flow of water through pore space.e. Microscopic properties such as void ratio and particle size. The in-situ permeability of clean sandy soils. Fluid Flow in Soils and Rock In soils and rocks. shape and orientation may. The effects of important macroscopic features. (k. head unit length of flow path k = coefficient of permeability (hydraulic conductivity). increasing soil porosity and resulting in the measurement of a coefficient of permeability. In the remainder of this section. the true in-situ permeability. it is these macroscopic features which will most likely govern field behavior. A fully or partially cased borehole is usual- . the test is described as being an "inflow" test. which lose their in~situ structure during even careful sampling. Darcy's law also provides the basis for the measurement of permeability. i. A comparison of corresponding field and laboratory permeability test results will usually show the field permeability to be considerably. In-flow tests tend to clog the soil voids with dislodged particles. normally expressed in velocity units Experience has shown that this relationship is valid for a wide range of soil conditions. ) V tKout l. in some cases. kout. It is possible. Direct Measurement of In-Situ Permeability B. the test is classified as an "out-flow" test. fissures and clay seams. discontinuities or cracks is usually assumed to be laminar and to obey Darcy's Law. If the induced flow during testing proceeds from the measuring device into the soil to be tested. Alternatively. c. The procedural details of these tests are thoroughly discussed in the references cited in Table II-I. The procedure common to all direct methods of permeability measurement is to impose a hydraulic gradient and measure the resulting flow across a known cross sectional area. Outflow tests tend to erode particles from the soil skeleton. 1975). Similarly.. can be estimated by: k = f(k. such as sand lenses. but is closer to kin than kout. but unpredictably. situ permeability. i (II-I) Methods which are commonly used for the direct measurement of permeability have been summarized by Milligan (1975) and are reproduced in Table 11-1 of this report. It has been noted that the approach which is common to all these direct methods is to impose a known hydraulic gradient and measure the resulting flow. D. A reliable in-situ determina- The value of the ratio. may be estimated in the laboratory by testing samples which have been carefully recompacted to the appropriate relative density. together with their applicability to engineering practice. v = k . a variable head test may be performed by observing the change in water level in the borehole after pumping has stopped. If a constant hydraulic gradient is maintained during testing the test may be classified as a "constant head" test. the test is classified as a "falling head" or "variable head" permeability test. since laboratory compaction cannot be expected to reproduce a complicated in-situ soil structure which is the product of many physical and chemical processes. cannot usually be duplicated in laboratory testing. According to Milligan. voids. that the presence of preferred flow paths in an otherwise essentially impervious material may decrease the significance of an "average" permeability value. In addition to being the governing equation for fluid flow in geotechnical problems. (kout/kin) may be as large as 500 in extreme cases (Milligan. if the imposed gradient induces flow from the soil mass into the measuring device. resulting in the measurement of a coefficient of permeability. the methods of in-situ permeability measurement are examined in more detail. The Borehole Permeability Test Borehole permeability tests are performed by pumping water either ou~ of a borehole (drawdown test) or into a borehole (infiltration test).3 In-situ permeability values may be utilized in fluid flow calculations or in conjunctio~ with laboratory measurements of stress-strain behavior in order to deduce rates of consolidation. However. the implicit assumption is that the erosion effect of outflow tests is more severe than the clogging effect of in-flow tests. If the imposed hydraulic gradient decreases or varies with time during testing. .

~u set up in pushing tip. measured . casing when pushed. base must be lines ~).W. . during construction extensive excava- .TABLE II-1- DIRECT (from TESTING Milligan OF IN SITU PERMEABILITY IN SOILS (1975» APPLICATION TO: METHOD .L. section iii) Well point placed iii) As for (ii) above .. time ? - Fair USBR. Only where k>1O-3 cm/sec - Difficult water to maintai~ in coarse levels Poor U5BR. . .. 'k' 10-7 out 1 range cm/sec. - Expensive. coarse silts. Gass (1963) VS . SAND SILT 1 CLAY METHOD RATING REFERENCE Augerhole A Test Pit above G.. at least. .. but direct benefit contractual of to 1 0f foundation material) -- dewatering stage) (Initial costing I . (1974) gravels ? Poor Lacroix (1960) i) Cased (no borehole inserts) ii) Falling/rising ~ in casing head. Variable heads also possible E Well pumping test Constant outflow Danger of fracture hydraulic Drawdown in central well monitored in observation wells on.. . ~) C Cased borehole used) i) Generally ~ ii) measured falling head filter plug ... Cannot boring be is used as Fair Hvorslev (1951) advanced. Gass (1963} measured VS time ii) Short Cell (Cementation) (independent Outflow ONLY of boring) measured . . variable required lO-~ to Golder.. (1972) drawn/pushed boring. . Q in VS head mainout.. + I I (inserts i) ii) Sand ? I VS tiIOO only heads possible .. flushclog ? I Possible (falling Hvorslev (1951) B VS time Constant tained flow.... in boring. Gibson (1966) Wilkinson (1968) Hvorslev Bjerrum (1951) et aI. TECHNIQUE PROBLEMS GRAVEL Shallow uncased hole unsaturated material in .. in adit - Carried OR tunne Good (local zones) Golder. two 900 radial directions Monitoring more .. ! 1 I casing... (1) F Test excavation testes) than tion E pumping . measured VS t~me. (1974) Pumping (rising where WL lowered excessively... . Perforated/slotted casing in lowest Variable ? - Single tests only. .. casing drawn back Fair to Good ~ D Piezometers/Permeameters i) Suction tus boring) Bellows inflow apparaof ONLY - Restricted I to fine bellows (with OR without casing) (independent ? .. in hole. Square OR rectangular test pit circular (equivalent hole above) to .. . . sands.. - Screened should stratum portion cover tested Excellent complete Todd (1959) (?) (Mass permeability .time iii) Piezometer tip pushed withahead head( of I Y Possible tip' smea:!:' into soft deposits/ placed sealed. Borehole ed. ..

The advantages of transient flow testing are that testing time may be reduced as compared with equi~ibrium testing. ' '.: :"~LL. is monitored. ~' .10 to 0.. 'i. and groundWater drawdown may be controlled..=. In:f~ct'aJu:nct~qning site dewatering system may be analyzed'as a pumping test.J.'. ranging from 0. .:':~""'1*''"==~-J L. . 1975) Large scale pumping tests are currently the preferred method for determining the in-situ permeability. In an equilibrium pumping test. It can be visualized that the results of p~rmeabilitytesting in these profiles will vary g~eatly with borehole location and testing depth.':::'Med saiid.J. or may not.1. .. Giave i\:". ~iJ slt'~ ''''~~1~~~~~ FineSanqJJ:. The time required for this equilibrium to occur may be very great. .. The test conditions closely simulate full scale site dewatering..":" " ::~ :'cr .. the resulting change of groundwater leve+. the effect of geologiCicliscontinuitieson full scale performance cannot be directly predicted from their effect on small scale tests.. their presencemay dominate the testing flow conditions and bias the measured value 9f permeability.-:""""'7 ' : '" . BHi I --" 1~~S~{i. Con$tant head tests are preferred to variable he~d tests. '. Generally.3 Limitations of sampling/in-situ tests in a single borehole: (a) in soils (b) in rock (from Milligan. which a~e described by Lang (1967) and others. observa- ly employed in this method.. As pumping proceeds. permeability data for relatively pervious deposits. II".. :'d..1 " (b) Fig. Such a testing program was employed by Ahmad et ale (1975) in order to estimate seepage losses from an artificial lake. The borehole permeability test is usually performed as an in-flow test. The soil deposit in question was an unconfined sand aquifer.. In the non-equi~ibrium test.four or more of these observation wells are. from Hvorslev (1951).costs involved. b~cau$e they are easier to perform properly and have been found to provide more reliable and consistent data. . . l . especially when the test is performed in soils of low permeability. Test results from Borehole #2 may. and the .'" "'f. The 'results may be viewed as general indicators of the order of magnitude of in-situ permeability appropriate for the relatively small zone of tested soil. The equations which are appropriate for a number of test configurations are reproduced in Figure' II-2.. The primary advantage of the borehole permeability test is its simplicitY.employed. Large scale pumping tests with observation wells provide the most reliable. An average value of permeability for the deposit under study can be computed from the test data by relationships such as the Thiem Formula.. and the consequent rate of water level change in the observation wells are recorded. or halted if necessary.L.:." :'".'. The permeability of a localized ?one of $oil surrounding the base and uncased portions of the borehole is computed by the application of theoretically derived equations. as discussed by Schmidt et ale (1976). reflect the presence of the pervious jointing patterns. :-\~! ":~ :'::~ '::{) . tests r r 1 l I r rl BH2 . but their importance can be reduced by performing a large number o~ tests.5 If such geologic discontinuities are encountered in a borehole permeability test. the rate of pumping. but most expensive. Large Scale Pumping Tests Large sca~e pumping tests are performed by pumping water into or out of a screened well embedded below the natural groundwater table.. ob".~:n surrounding. . if necessary.. samples of which exhibited a uniformity coefficient ranging from 2 to over 20. partially because inexpensive pumps are ~imit~d in their ability to affect drawdown ~t a cqn$tant pumping rate..for large construction projects which can justify the.L. The test data can be analyzed by a procedure such as the one proposed by Theis (1935). but the important flow paths afforded by the sandy layers will remain undetect~ ed. ' - (a) '. : :::' I . Twq simplified geologic profiles ar~'presenteCiln F~gure II-3. The investigator must refer to a geologic site model.:' . 1 k' :-:r::~ . ing testing will depend upon the relative dimensions of the test section and the joint spacings. ~ . However. Surprisingly consistent values of permeability coefficients were tained. sible ~Li~~(sJi~ J In SItu ~ I of samples. the groundwater level measurements are recorded once a constant water level has been attained in the observation wells.:. Permeab~lity tests in Borehole #1 will consistenly yield the fairly low value of k exhibited by the silt stratum. Permeability testing ~n a single borehole is likely to yield misleaging ~esults. Pumping tests may be categorized as equilibrium (steady state) or non-equilibrium (transient flow) tests. perform more small scale tests or resort to full scale testing. .. and. tion wells.' I J.""''j-'''~':-..r ) . The probability of detecting a joint dur.J~ I r .-I:-:-.15 cm/sec.'_. L . Theuncertainties involved in a single test are significant. ':'~~ . and partially because it is usually difficult to accurately monitor the drawdown water level in the borehole.' I <..

T " D k. m = vkAlk. "..I) dO.!!. . kA 1 - 8 ...) H. - Ii. . infinite depth. No disturbance...'d' H) km = 8.75.= d' 'L D"T 4'q'L k.. k. for I = I) (em) C 'I km = 2. sample (em) d = Diameter..'1) H) for d=D H. for k: k. = Mean coeff. " k: D dO. ( ) In = log. " D -'-+L 11 m H) = k.D 'I . Nq air or gas in soil. H) InII. .D H) for d=D k = -Inm 8.-II) d' . Basic k. perm. m k: = D' . = VerI.'D km = ~ for d = D (em) = I. (I. k: == 'I 8"' k. L HI -B 'I km = 2 . D' .T + (~n Delerminalion lag T basic time + (".D km=-InII . swelling.d'. H. = ~ T -'. 'I = Flow 1 = Time T .) H) H 2 )In !!2 H. m +L .. D"H." . well point.) In II. I~ A d"L HI k. " .'D"~ ) ' k: = D' . = T for d = D "d' km = 8 .! H. or filter negligible. 2mL for D > 4 G kA kA q'ln [~+)I 2.'1) H. = Constant piez. -'-'-+L " k: D "k. . -'-'+L 11 k. D . standpipe (em) L = Length. L . or pipe. (t. k.D k.D L. = Vert. L 'He d"ln[~+~J 8'L'(/. .H) H 2mL D >4 . T . ) (/.= vkA'k. (cm/see) of water (cm"/s«) (see) time lag (see) perm.'d' HI '1) In km L k. =-rk ..I) I d"ln (11 k. .. . ( " k: D k ' L) . D . II-2. sample (em) H.:. L . (t. or consolidation of soil.=-ln " . (I.3 log)o k. " D -'. D.. (I. T . In D HI 8 . perm. IT. + L m) (8"'~ D.L .H. intake. and kA constant)..:. Hydraulic losses in pipes. H [ 2.'I) InIi.+L D''(/. head (em) H) H..'I) (..m . .I) H. segregation. for ( d=D F IkA=q'ln .. mL for Ii > 4 ASSUMPTIONS kA= d"ln [~+jt 2mL 8. m (cm/see) = Transformationratio E k: " k: D 4''1' -'-'11 k. D . ". " . D '. head for I head. ground (cm/see) km k: =k. (t. + (". = ". = " -In .+ for {k d=D .ln Ad2 . = D'. well point.=-In n d..d' km = 11. No sedimentation or . casing D 4. L . H. = 11 D ..6 ~ ~ u "a 0 c t2 ~ ~ II He laboratory permeameter A Flush bottom at impervious boundary B Flush bottom in uniform soil C Soil in casing at impervious boundary D Soil in casing in uniform soil E Well point-filter at impervious boundary F Well point-filter in uniform' soil G Fig. 2mL - D+vl+C~L I kA= )J d"ln kA ~ [8~+yl+\~n ( 2mL 4mL .) InIi.'D km = g-:-r for d = D = Pia. perm. T L k. for d ....) InH.. In [ D+yl ( ) T 2mL ~ '8'L'T + \D)J ( )~ 2mL In-.. leakage. = Pia. .. intake. ground (em/see) kA= Harz.D d". Configurations and appropriate equations for borehole permeability tests (after Hvors1ev. m ( 8 m k. (I. . for d = D . In kA= ~ ( D) mL for Ii > 4 Soil at intake.. and directional isotropy (k. for =- 4mL D 8 'L. (t. ( ) In~ (- d"' k: = "D " k: .L)'J kA ( ) 2mL d' . 1951) Constant Head Variable Head Basic Time Lag Notation D = Diam. = 2. -'-'-+L 8 k.' = k. +L k: = k.

however. Su (half the unconfined compressive strength). ~'." Soil strength can be affected by the imposition of post-construction environmental conditions. biological. The resulting blow count. which is usually sufficient to enable a saf~. and in-situ measurement eliminates the need to reproduce complex chemical.observations are an essential supplement to any important permeability testing program. friction angle ~. Conclusions Most fine grained soils are relatively impervious. the effects of different factors on blow count are a subject of continuing study. Once an in-situ strength parameter has been obtained. A disadvantage of in-situ testing is that the soil strength parameters must be measured "as is. the costs of undisturbed sampling and testing can be reduced. Soil strength is most commonly described as a peak shear str~ngth in terms of the Mohr failure envelope parameters. SHEAR STRENGTH B. and cohesion c. thermal and stress environments.soil shear strength. large scale field. For non-clays. thermal and chemical environments may often be simulated in laboratory testing. and 6 may be mitigated by the use of careful procedures.permeability information. ~d many of the commonly used borehole permeability methods. but the residual. If existing methods are applied with discretion and engineering judgment. This discussion does not concern the many different ways of describing soil strength. economical design. is at the present time probably the most widely used index of subsurface soil conditions in the U. employed as an index of another geotechnical property. in terms of effective stresses is considered as the governing strength parameter. Consequently. not usually possible to measure the resulting "future" behavioral properties in-situ. E. other than to make a distinction between drained and undrained loading conditions. low strain and yield strength values may also be important in many projects. Postconstruction changes in the stress. For clay soils. as it is defined in ASTM Standard 1586. simplicity of procedure and widespread acceptance and familiarity among practicing civil engineers. Advantages of the SPT include economy of use. Disadvantages of the SPT include the uncertain . and fluid flow problems in these soils occur as the result of geologic discontinuities. F. Conventional soil investigations. It is. is taken as the measure of strength. 1975) Test Standard Penetration Quasi-Static Cone Penetration Vane Shear Pressuremeter Borehole Shear Abbreviation SPT Q-CPT VST PMT BST III. Althoughthe details and advantages of the SPT. after Schmertmann (1975).A. can yield misleading. Coarser soils which exhibit a coefficient of permeability greater than about 10-5 cm/sec can be expected to cause TABLE 111-1 problemsiri seepagecontrol. A simple method of obtaining at least some information concerning the degree of compactness of soil in-situ consists of counting the number of blows of a weight dropping a given distance required to drive a sampling spoon for a distance of one foot (30 cm). but in general. the peak undrained shear strength. are widely known. the angle of internal friction. such as fissures or sand lenses. The following sections describe the use of these tests in engineering practice. the coefficient of permeability can often be predicted to within one order of magnitude. The most commonly used in~situ strength tests are listed in Table III-I. A painstaking soils investigation is reqpired to detect the presence and extent of these discontinuities. In-Situ Strength Testing The advantages of strength measurement in-situ are threefold: the large effects of sampling disturbance on soil strength can be minimized. Commonly Used In-Situ Strength Tests (after Schmertmann. Potential Errors in In-Situ Permeability Measurement The sources of error in a typical in-situ permeability test include: I} Inaccurate water quantity measurement 2} Inaccurate head measurement 3} Inaccurate test length 4} Inaccurate measurement of test section dimensions 5} Plugging or smearing of fractures or pores 6} Use of excessive pressures 7} Unknown flow resistance of measuring system The effects of 1. the contributions of the other sources of error are difficult to isolate or interpret. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Introduction Almost all geotechnical projects involve some consideration of. it may be substituted in a limit equilibrium design analysis.7 results used to refine the system as work proceeds. used to classify the soil stratigraphically. or used as a quantitative basis for decisions regarding further testing. A. 3.S. 2. N.

Dr' as an intermediate parameter. such as bearing capacity calculations. 111-1 I 2 3 gf ~ 1.~ '5l 0 ~ )( 35 E E 33 0 31 29 0 20 40 Relative :2: 60 Density.0 angle on data) (~') from SPT 1971 blowcount analysis.8 N effects of a large number of influencing factors. This correlation is reproduced in Figure 1114. w > Overburden Pressure .9395 Fig. 0. Gibbs and Holtz (1957).5 1.0 N~ m z ~ g w 1.0 Ii. a correlation such as that recommended for quartz sands by Schmertmann (1975) may be used to obtain ~'.percent between sands effec(from Fig. the error in ~' may be as large as I5° (Schmertmann. w 60 I:: w <l 2. 1975).kgf/cm2 Method for estimating effective friction (based USBR t w (N) 1.0 . Use of this chart yields conservative values of ~'.0 0 10 STANDARD 20 PENETRATION 30 40 50 N. u.5 u i= a:: ~ 40 z 0 (J ~ 0 CD 20 Ia. and the poor reproducibility and large variability of test results. Dr correlation 80 100 . and a third relationship suggested by Schultze and Melzer (1965) are compared. Three correlations between relative density and standard penetration resistance 45 CII ~ 43 CJ'I ~ I 41 ~39 . even if the overburden pressure and "true" blow count are known with certainty. In Figure 111-3. The original Gibbs and Holtz relation is reproduced in Figure 111-2. Gibbs and Holtz. is often employed.5 a:: Im w 2: 2. DeMello's i= a:: w > 2.5 ~ III-3 Another common practice is to estimate ~' .2 0 w > 3. 6! XBL 776. w <l 0 2. bl/f! 60 70 XBL 776.0 t.5 u. A correlation of relative density. U') <U . Analyses. although at high relative densities the relationalthough at high relative densities the relationship suggested by Bazaraa (1967) may be more appropriate. must therefore include large safety factors if this approach is used. which are sensitive to variations in ~'. which are not applicable to shallow soil depths. Once the relative density estimate and split spoon sample identification have been obtained. 0 Q l N E ~0 ~ l ~ Estimating Strength of Sand from the SPT A correlation between blow count and ~' for sands has been established by DeMello (1971) and is reproduced as Figure III-I. 60 70 80 a -GIBBS ANDHOLTZ(1957) BAZARAA (1967) SCHULTZE AND MELZER (1965) -'-'-'- 0 0 Fig. III-2 C :J Correlation between relative density and standard penetration resistance according to Gibbs and Holtz (1957) STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE. the Bazaraa. 111-4 Approximate tive friction angle (~') and relative density (Dr) in quartz Schmertmann. 1975) .939B 80 RESISTANCE Fig. An inspection of this composite chart shows that an estimate of Dr from the SPT may easily involve a large uncertainty.using relative density. 3.. BLOWS/ft. Because estimating Dr by the SPT can easily involve an error of I20%.

A number of published correlations between Su and blow count for insensitive clays are presented in Figure 111-5. is at least as great as NilS (Schmertmann. overburden pressure and relative density.8 Part of Blow Count Due to FR Typical Soil Types End Bearing 1% Richmond Cloy (After Casagrande. en ~ Fig.. in the manner depicted in Figure 111-6. and corrections for overburden pressure and overconsolidation ratio are not available. the possible influence of 0h' on measured N values may be considered in only a very quali~ tative sense. 111-6 FR = Friction ratio = unit side friction f unit end bearing stress St = Sensitivity . in addition.9 Estimating Strength of Clay from the SPT SPT results are occasionally employed to estimate the undrained strength of clays. 1975) unlessnoted *) CPT-Based N-Resistance 1975) Distributions (Schmertmann. but by the entire in-situ stress state. Clay sensitivity may decrease the blow count for a given undisturbed strength because of strength loss during penetration.6 0. such as fine. The generation and dissipation of pore pressure during the SPT may have a major influence on the resulting blow count. will yield decreased values of N. SPT results are. Dilatant soils will generate negative pore pressures during driving and increase the recorded blow count. 2) Pore Pressures.tIere N 25% 75% (assumed: 0.50' =observed blow count NSt =corrected blow count for undisturbed strength Estimated count with decrease in standard blow increasing clay sensitivity at constant undrained strength (from Schmertmann. 1975) St) 8% 14% 86% Fig. The results obtained by Schmertmann (1975). as well as stress history. 0h' may actually have twice the proportional effect of vertical stress on blow count (Schmertmann. For the insensitive clay in Table 111-2. 3) Sampler Side Friction. There is evidence that side friction between soil and the sampling spoon may corttributea significant fraction of the measured penetration resistance. FR. Table 111-2 30 z i20 ::) 0 0 0 CD 10 . Soils.4 Insensitive peaty soils clay. There is a wide degree of scatter in the correlations.loose sands. Sand. silt. Factors Which Influence SPT Blow Count The methods used for the prediction of ~' from the SPT allow variously for the effects of soil type.50' remolded sensitivity =0. 1. The friction ratio. One "rule of thumb" is that su' in tsf. will generally increase with increasing soil cohesion.4 Side Friction 44% ~ z 56% 0. a 2 4 6 8 10 Partial Sensitivity Along Inside and Outside of SPT Sampler v. which generate significant positive pore pressures during driving. 86% of the measured penetration resistance originated from side friction. above and below groundwater Silty marl. 1975). as a result of the decreased effective stress levels during driving. (J1 EO.0 0. in turn. The in-situ horizontal effective stress.a. Blow count is affected not simply by overburden pressure. The 1ifficulties of estimating horizontal stresses are discussed in Section IV of this report.2 2% /966) 34% 66% a clayey sand 4% Sandy clay. 111-5 count Some correlations (N) and unconfined between SPT blow compressive strength (qu) in clays (from DM-7 (from Schmertmann. clay with St . reproduced in Table 111-2 show that the contribution of soil-sampler side friction to penetration resistance increases dramatically with increasing soil friction ratio.. affected to a significant degree by a number of other influencing factors: 1) State of Stress. 1975). At present.

. and are presented in Table 111-4. A full discussion of these considerations may be found in DeMello (1971).20 1. an important The usual cathead-slackened rope procedure of releasing the drive weight may result in a significantly larger blow count than that obtained if a "free fall" weight release mechanism is used.06 In England. into existing correlations between N-values and soil properties?" Application of the one-dimensional wave equation to the SPT by McLean et al. . 1975) -- Investigators Soil Natural Depth ? GWT ? N-range 2 N/NFF 1.--- thru h ----- i:-:lati: Very rtance 1mportant . 40% N .lb) c. Some findings of this study have been summarized by Schmertmann (1975). from Schmertmann (1975). (71. Fletcher (1965) and Sanglerat (1972).15 3. 72) Serota Dune sands I-12m At surcharged surface 'above Dry do SP. N N for l/E 8R (kips) if (350 Very important E=70%. 8 @2m 1.. (1975). MEASURED INCREASES IN "N" WITH IMPEDANCE OF HAMMER FREE FALL (Schmertmann. SOME FINDINGS FROM WAVE EQUATION STUDIES OF SPT (from Schmertmann.10 TABLE III-3._------ 1. Energy nput= E mer system 2. . One of the most significant sources of uncertainty in the SPT relates to above ground apparatus and test conditions.---. The unanswered question is: "How much drop friction is built . Rods: length type loose (A. A summary of data on this effect is presented in Table 111-3.2:. Total sistance on sam er = R ---. ft. Conclusions The SPT is. Distri but ion of N increases Important Minor Minor i R alon g sampler going from 100 -+0% end bearing % change important at very low N NN slightly Maybe Impt.4 GWT = ground water table TABLE 111-4. larger in 3D 4. 2 rope turns do. 1 rope turn on cathead do.21 1.100+ 7 . and will remain.N) joints buckling 1 I Minor than NA Minor 4) Testing Technique. Dr=95%. but cathead hammer weighed system less 1. 5 @llm Zolkov. has provided some important information concerning the relative importance of different details in SPT technique. . . SP-SM w = 1-6% & Dry sand Lowther (73) compacted in a drum 10 .60 over 10-12" cathead 1. 2 turns sliprope Frydman (70) I I . 1975) I rI . -~'ar Comments ~_.4 Notes In Israel.

----. and side friction. The general effects of many influencing factors in the SPT are becoming better understood. a.6 c: 3- ~ Fig. & 3. a penetrometer of 10 cm2 base area and 60° apex angle is advanced vertically at a constant rate (2 cm/sec) into the soil to be tested. Q-CPT or "Dutch Cone" method is the most commonly used in engineering practice. Standards for equipment and procedure would make the SPT results more quantitatively meaningful. are measured separately.-. pr~viding simultaneous sampling.-. Inertial Worldwide worldwide France switzerland Sweden Norway Uses special penetrometer tips into soil/rock surface --- variable Offshore. fs.. dimensionless function of ~I. Qu. GENERAL TYPES OF CONE PENETRATION TESTS (from Schmertmann. 151) Methods for Estimating Strength In the widely used Dutch cone test. The quasi-static.varietyof sizes. Screw 6. ESO! 1974). A conservative method has been developed de Beer for determining ~' from qc on the basi bearing capacity theory (Sanglerat. Tip Advance Method t"lhere Rate 0 1-2 cm/see variable Used Research Notes Too slow for general field use Usually 10 cm2 60° cone point Great. weights. The SPT is most properly applied to the "day to day" design projects which do not justify more sophisticated testing and in areas where the soil conditions are reasonably well known. etc. 111-7 Method for estimating (~') effective an i: of friction from static cone: bearing resistance (qc) reported in USSR (ESOPT. 1971) have shown that: . ---. but many practicing engineers are able to apply judgment and local experience to derive satisfactory designs on the basis of personal or published correlations.80 N y ( cm ) (I: where Ny is. Quasistatic 3.11 geotechnical tool.... 1975) r-------'! Type --'-------- ---. -' During increments of constant load Hydraulic or mechanical jacking Impact of drive weight Combines 2. Terzaghi's bearing capacity factor.. e ~ ~ 0. The friction jacket advances simultaneously (electrical cones) or alternately (mechanical cones) with the tip.-.asistatic & dynamic 5. using dynamic when Q-CPT cannot penetrate further Rotation of a weighted.. Cone Penetration Tests :a Many types of cone-tipped penetration devices are used in Europe and are receiving increasing acceptance in the United States because of the simplicity of testing. Large scale model footing tests on sand (Muhs Weiss. -...-. 1972. Dynamic cone penetration tests are subject to the same disadvantages as the SPT with an additional drawback of not. The resulting tip resistance. it is important that they be considered in the interpretation and application of test results. A combination dynamic-quasi-static system facilitates penetration through stiff layers which resist the static cone. qc.-. Dynamic 4. A less conservative. helical cone Dropped or propelled variable 1..-. The general types of cone penetration devices are summarized in Table 111-5.. This correlatior applies most directly to the bearing capacity ( TABLE III-5.4 B ~ 0..'-'''. reproducibility of results and the greater amenability of the test data to rational analysis.-..2 ~ 0.. . 1974.. The precision of the test is admittedly low. p.----c------. during Military measured deaccelera-I tion Useful for soils in inaccessible areas . Static 2. qc kg2 = 0. semi-empirical c( lationbetween ~' and qc has been used in the and is presented in Figure 111-7. after ESOPT N ~ ~ e ::J E 0 0 C.

valu. 111-9 putations for shallow footings.d 30. The data points show the qc ~ ~' correlation presentedby Meyerhof field cases.dict.~ 8 \! \ I . 1975) 1.4 -0. stress stat~ and penetrometer base roughness have been recbgnized by Schmertmann (1975) and. For cohesionless materials. . o/~'.. 4000 6000 eooo 12QX) r-~ COE = 105 .0 ~ 5 ::> 16 5. ultir'nat. In reality.Durgunoglu and Mitchell (1975). \ '1ii 10. as indicated in Figure 111-10 overburden pressure p' = effective of soil Np = slope of qc - p' profile Bearing capacity factors.0 -r-- I 18 Fig. Using equation (111-2).0 ~ 0 ~ \ u CT L&J U Z 50. 1975) from qc on the basis of a rigid-plastic wedge Mitchell (1975): displacement bearing capacity theory with empirical corrections for a qircular cone shape by Durgunoglu and qc = c Nc S c + ys B = F Nyq S yq (111-2) by Berezantzev (1961).5 If) L&J 14 L " ~ 10. 111-8 Effect of depth on resistance factor Nyq according to different theories (Durgunoglu-Mitchell.1 Biarn and Gr. as indicated in Figure III-II .s 8 let> :0. Biarez and Gresillon (1972) and Meyerhof (1961). -~. and (1974) for actual N where: ~ y~ (~'.12 NI'q 500. together with N as calculated using other methods proposed yq Nq = F (tan ~') = Np + 1.. 'ii a:: 12 .. Nyq' for the case of a Dutch cone and ~'= 45°.0 35 40 45 _deg 50 ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION' Fig.5 e Muhs Weiss data obtained t. The effects of other factors.(: IjIpr. . including soil compressibility. from Meyer-hof A Kerisel (1974) {0 Melzer N ' E .(19E1a) " z 0 u u .sillon . and the concept of a critical depth (Durgunoglu and Mitchell.0 I)()()() 0 '{

U

Related Interests

\ \ \ 41-. ~' has been correlated with qc as presented in Figure 111-9.--I I j:: ._I y' 6 CD \ \ ~ 1 III Z 100.Syq of penetrometer of penetrometer factors between = depth base where: a = shape 0 = friction angle base and soil Ys = unit weight penetrometer = penetration resistance intercept parameter. LinNI: variation M. Equation (17) parabolic variation ( DI B )cr! 20 . c = 0. BIcJ> =1. Kahl et at.0 cJ> =90. ~. D/B) = penetrometer base semi~apex base angle Sand profiles which possess a constant ~' and exhibit a linear variation of qc with depth may be analyzed using a method suggested by Janbu and Senneset (1973): qc + a = Nq (pi + a) (111-3) B = width D Sc. 1975).. . A procedure has been developed for estimating ~' Ultimate cone resistance as a function of friction angle for several sands (from Durgunoglu and Mitchell.0 <{ tn in L&J a:: L&J \ i ~ . to 't! "" to I <. qc is not uniquely correlated with ~'. - " I 0. are presented in Figure 111-8 as a function of soil depth.1972.~rhof "-.

60°..0 Fig.sin~'.8 Friction.0 50 E :J Z 0 0 Q. If the overconsolidation ratio (OCR) is known. silty fine to uniform medium sands (after Schmertmann. 300 . suggestedbe taken as: qc ()= qc NC 1 + 0. &i I 200 T \ \ Q) > 0 Q) > "".4 0. 10 cm2.Q.0 Fig. (qc)NC.!!. then Ko'/(Ko')NC can be estimated using Ko'/(Ko')NC = (OCR)O. 1976) Q-CPT :. % 4. is then used to estimate ~'. Np' and intercept. Use of this relationship *The correlation applies when using the Fugrotype electrical cone. advanced continuously at 2 cm/sec..kgf /cm2 I. As with the SPT. a.0 Vertical 2. In practice. uncemented.: \I\I- ~ 100 ~ \ . after Schmertmann (1976)*. 111-10 Principle of static cone tion. Janbu and Senneset interpreta(1973) method Fig.~ 201 where: q = c measured penetrometer tip resistance penetrometer in-situ (qC)NC Ko' 01 c "i: 0 Q) = = the normally consolidated case lateral stress tip resistance for coefficient for the m (Kd~c = I 0 lateral stress coefficient normally consolidated case 0.0 . and appears to provide reasonable results for appropriate profile conditions.13 300 Net Cone Resistance N ~ ~ £1u.rJ gQ!L !.0.200 " Z. 0 U ( Ko' ()Ko NC 1 ) (111-4) .N u c where: - ing ~' from penetrometer data. Dr' may be employed as an intermediate parameter for estimat- Before applying the relationship presented in Figure 111-12.. based on the results of chambertests.75 . Su = undrained shear strength p = overburden NC pressure - Bearing Capacity Factor appropriate for deep.p' profile. The relationship of Nq = Np + 1 with ~I.a' -b.OO . toncp' & Senneset. circularfoundations .0 Effective Stress. . This method has the advantage of including overburden effects. the investigator must estimate Ka'/ (Ka')NC and then employ Equation 111-4 in order to convert the measured tip resistance. 100 ~ 200 Cloy or Silt ~u>a 00 1. cylindrical tip. relative density. the investigator estimates the slope. Strength of Clays from the CPT The shear strength of clays. su' is most often estimated from penetrometer resistance by employing a relationship of the form: qc p (111-5) s =. Values of Ng versus 1. qc' to the 'equivalent"normally consolidated" tip resistance.: Q) requires a correction for overconsolidated sands. which Schmertmann (1974a). 111-12 bearing capacity to estimate relative density in normally consolidated. primarily quartz.42 and (Ka)NC = 1 . 111-11 I973) tan ~ (after Janbu An example of the use of this method is presented in Figure 111-10. as presented in Figure 111-11. of the average linear qc .2 0.. saturated fine sands is presented in Figure 111-12. A correlation of qc' Dr' and overburden pressure for normally consolidated.0 3.6 0.

the measured soil-steel friction. Values of Nc ranging from 5 to 70 have been back-calculated by different investigators from measured values of qc and values of Su determined from other types of strength tests. thinner vanes. the Vane Shear Test. Effective tan CP' 5. Some values of Nc appropriate for different clay types are presented in Table 111-7. or pushed into the ground by means of an extension apparatus .2 Continuous (electrical penetration penetration decreases Nc compared to incremental (mechanical tips) because of higher pore pressures. (1975. Nc' is. fs' is suggested by Schmertmann (1975) as a lower bound for suo The Vane Shear Test Introduction. Rate of penetration 1. Nc factor potential Direction Notes 1. the vane may be installed at the bottom of a predrilled borehole. Changing method the test for obtainSu 2 to 3 Better sampling. 2 to 3 3 IncreQses with Janbu (1974) increasing cpr Increases with increasing K Janbu (1974) or OCR 6. The best approach for design purposes is to experimentally determine Nc for a given clay type. after Schmertmann (1975). not a simple constant. 2) 1. Method of 1.2 Increasing rate increases Nc Viscous. penetrometer apparatus. Ratio increasing/ decreasing modulus (E+/E-) at peak Su 4. no pore pressure effects tips) Example in Amar et al. or OCR friction. D. SOME OF THE VARIABLES THAT INFLUENCE Nc IN EQUATION (111-5) (Schmertmann. K. Shape of penetrometer tip 2 Clay adhesion on mantle of mechanical tips increases Nc Reduced diameter above cone can decrease Nc in very sensitive clays 7. Three common methods for installing the vane are illustrated in Figure 111-13. after Brand et ale (1974). In contrast with methods which derive strength parameters from intermediate variables. As indicated in the figure. The bearing capacity factor. Shearing resistance is considered to be mobilized on a cylindrical failure surface of rotation.. 1975) Variable Approx. corresponding to the top. such as penetration resistance. testing procedure and reference suo If a friction-cone tip is employed.5 Schmertmann (1972) 8. bottom and sides of the vane assembly.14 TABLE 111-6. in fact. Fig. use of sUPMT decrease all Nc with stiffVesic (1972) ing reference . Clay ratio stiffness 3 Increases increasing = G/su 3 ness Decreases with decreasing ratio Ladanyi (1967) 3. 2. VST. attempts to measure undrained shear strength directly. The test procedure is to advance a vane configuration to a desired soil depth and measure the applied torque as the vane is rotated at a constant rate.. but is affected by a number of factors as summarized in Table 111-6.

.5-4* / 2 ' . (1974) I Patras Clay 17 19 30 60-130 35 60-130 18 60-120 3-7+ 1.T" ':1.3-3. a1.tl. £ . washboringor rotary drilling (b) Equipment pushed into the ground by the extension pipe (c) Vane pushed into the ground by the extension rod Fig.f 'l GrOUnd Surface Extension Pipe E .on VaneWithdrawal Shoe for Rod !2 Friction Rod-Clay . 1974) Reference I Clay one Factor w.15 TABLE III-7.3-3.5 16 50-70 72-84 60-70 50 40 70-80 23 20 40-50 2. III-13 Methods for installing shear vaneS .5* 5. Arabl.5-3 5-7 I ' Soft Bangkok Clay .9* 30-50 10-35 5-7 Soft Bangkok Clay (City) Anagnostopou1os (1974) Brand et. a1.2* 6-8 i i It t Groun Surface Possibly Drilling Fluid on ExtenSl Rod 6Ic-.vl. CONE FACTORS DETE'RMINED FOR CLAYS (after Brand et a1.(Bangp1i) j I Brand et.. % wL' % 80-85 60-71 38-62 C Clay Properties Ip' % 55 36-43 20-35 su'ton m 5-29+ 21-52+ 0.8* 1. Vane ~ Cased 50c.ty 5 Thomas (1965) Ward et a1.3-2.on 1 t E xlens. No Friction Rod-Cloy Vane Frict!On Couphng Vane Uncased (0) Drillholemade by augering.anGulf Soft Clay 18 15. I Sensl.5 16 20-30 22-26 30-47 (1965) Meigh & Corbett (1969) Ladanyi & Eden (1969) Ladanyi & Eden (1969) Pham (1972) Leda Clay (Gloucester) I Leda Clay (Ottawa) I I 7.5 5.7* 1. London Clay London Clay . (1974) ! WeatheredBangkokClay (Bangp1i) 14 100-130 100-135 60-80 1.tens.on P:'::t.

16

~oc~

IOem

~) '3I~ r-6.5 .,
em
(I)

rn~m
,

1-13em-l

(2) Fig. 111-14 Some

( 3)
shear vane configurations

(4) in common use

(5)

rod, with or without the.use of a protection shoe. A number of different vane configurations are in current use, as depicted in Figure 111-14, but the preferred design, as specified in ASTM Standard D2573, is a four bladed vane with a height/diameter
ratio of 2.

Determination of Strength from the VST Undrained shear strength may be calculated from measured torque in the VST, provided that horizontal and vertical shear strengths are assumed equal, by employing the following equation:

Measurements of suv using different vane configurations will be influenced by different pro~ portions of sh and sv,as noted in Figure 111-14. It has been found that, in general, the ratio sh/sv is less than unity (Duncan and Seed, 1966; and Lemasson, 1974). It therefore seems that an accurately determined.value of suv may be used as a conservative estimate of sv. Accuracy of the VST Until recently, the VST was consider~d to be a most reliable means of measuring undrained shear strength in soft to medium clays, possessing the advantages of economy of use and reduced soil disturbance, compared to sampling and laboratory testing. A number of cases have been encountered, however, in which the use of suv leads to unconservative results in undrained stability analyses (Bjerrum, 1972; Pilot, 1972). Accordingly, a correction procedure was developed (Bjerrum, 1973) which attributes the discrepancy in field behavior mainly to strain rate effects. The true undrained strength is related to the measured shear strength as follows:

suv
'IT

2'r
(III-6a)

D3

(H/D

+ a/2)
strength, from

where:
suv

=

the undrained

the VST

shear

T = maximum

applied

torque

H = vane height
D

=

vane

diameter

a = factor which depends on the assumed shear distribution along the top and bottom of the failure cylinder

s = u (field)
The Bjerrum correction

].l

s uv

(111-8)

= 2/3 if uniform

shear

is assumed

factor,].l , is correla-

= 1/2 if triangular

distribution is assumed (i.e., shear strength mobilized is proportional to strain) distribution is

=
For

3/5 if parabolic

assumed
a uniform shear strength distribution,
,

and ASTM D2573 vane configuration, Equation1II-6a reducesto: 6 T s =- (III-6b) uv 7 D3
Under these conditions, shearing resistance on the side (vertical) face of the failure cylinder contributes some 85% of the measured.resistance to rotation, T. What is actually measured in the VST is therefore a weighted average of the shear strengths Sv on vertical and sh on horizontal planes. It is possible to determine both sh and Sv separately by repeating a test using a vane of a different shape or H/D ratio. This method was employed by Richardson et al. (1975) in order to determine the relative values of sh and Sv in Bangpli Clay. The results of their investigation

.ted with soil plasticity index, Ip' as shown in Figure III-16~ An inspection of Figure 111-16 shows considerable scatter in the data obtained subsequent to dev~lopment of the correlation. This correction<procedure is subject to the additional uncertainty inherent in the determination of Ip and suv' and in the formulation of stability analysis assumptions. Use of the Bjerrum correction
factor may 'actually yield occasional unconserva-

tive results as noted by LaRochelle et al. (1974) and Ladd (1973). Schmertmann (1975) notes also that as Ip is determined using disturbed clay it cannot account for differences among clays having differing undisturbed structures.
Factors \ihich Affect the VST

It is now recognized that the VST is subject to the uncertain effects of a large number of influencing factors:

are reproduced in Figure 111-15.

The ratio

Sh/Sv

is seen to be fairly constant with depth, with an average value of 0.6.

I} Disturbance. It is evident that the vane cannot be installed in the ground without causing some degree of disturbance in the soil around it. If predrilling is employed (see Figure III-13a), a zone of a certain width around the bottom of the borehole must be considered to be disturbed. In practice, it is commonly assumed that the disturbed zone does not extend more than 60 cm from the bot-

17

0 ----

0

Moisture Content -% Sensitivity 50 100 150 2 4 6
".

00

sh/s v 05

1.0

v

Weathered 2 Clay
--

':1 (., '-'
.,

.-J

- 1-..

-

l

§ .....

"\
\.

I 1
\.

--

~ 4 ~
(I.) E
I 6 -.. .s:: Soft

.....
.....

'-r .
r'-"
......

....
... ....

? Ij

~ (I.)
Qj E I ) .s:: a.
(I.) 0

\

"
I

!
(

(I.) 0 8

a.

Clay

...:::"J'"1"'" ,;:;' -

I I

'-'
I

:::'

-

10I_...
I

12

-.J -IU 0 Plastic Limit 0 Liquid Limit . Natural MoistureContent . .

I

12 Ratios of vane strengths on horizontal and vertical planes

Properties of the Bangpli clay at the vane boring site

Fig.

III-IS

Ratio of strengths planes for Bangpli

on horizontal (sh) to vertical (sv) clay (from Richardson et al., 1975)

1.4 V
Su(Field) = fL x Su(Vane) Reference 0 .* 8jerrum (1972) /:1 A*

1.2

A
:::L

0
V
<>

(972) Milligan Ladd and Foott (1974)
Flaate and Preber(r374)
LaRochelle and et 01.(1974) ,vorved clays

0 IL.

.: 1.0 E (.)
c 0 0.8

* Layered

I

. 0 u

0
0.6 ./:1

t-O-t

0.4

a

20

40

60 80 Plasticity Index, P.I.-%

100

120

Fig.

111-16

Field vane correction factor vs plasticity index derived from embankment failures (from Ladd, 1975)

18
tom of the borehole. It has been noted (Flaate, 1966), that this assumption can be questioned if the borehole is wide and the drilling procedure unfavorable. If the vane is installed by means of a protective shoe forced into the ground without predrilling (see Figure III-13b), a plastic zone will be formed around the vane head with a varying degree of disturbance. Studies by Cadling and Odenstad (1950) and Andresen and Bjerrum (1965) indicate no measurable disturbance caused by this procedure when the vane test is made at least 50 cm from the protective shoe. When the vane is installed without any predrilling or protective shoe (see Figure III-13c), the disturbance is due'only to the vane rod and the vane itself. This component of disturbance is also present if predrilling or a proteptive shoe is employed. In this regard, it is considered advantageous to minimize the "area ratio" of the vane. The area ratio is defined as the cross sectional area of the vane cross and stem as a percentage of the cross sectional area of the failure cylinder. It is recommended that the 'area ratio not be higher than about 15% (Flaate, 1966). Laboratory tests performed by Vey (1955) show that cohesive soils can stick to,the vane surface, and, in effect, increase the area ratio of the apparatus. It has been suggested (Flaate, 1966), that this effect will probably depend upon the stickiness of the soil and be of less importance in
sensitive clays.

may govern full scale behavior, yet remain undetected in the VST. Because of the uncertainties involved in describing the failure mode in a given VST, it is desirable that VST results be used in conjunction with other strength tests. 3} Dimensions of Failure Cylinder. The actual diameter of the failure cylinder in a soft clay, and hence the moment arm of mobilized shear strength, has been observed to be some 5% larger than the diameter of the vane blades (Arman et al., 1975). An uncorrected discrepancy of this magnitude will result in an over-estimate of 16% in calculated shear strength. At present, there is not enough data available to enable a quantitative correction for this effect in different soil types.

E.

The Pressuremeter

Test

(PMT)

A borehole pressuremeter, of the type developed by L.Menard, is depicted in Figure III-17. These devices are widely used in Europe and are receiving increasing acceptance in the U.S. The test proceeds once the apparatus is lowered to a desired borehole depth. Increments of hydraulic pressure are applied to the center cell, and the .resulting deformation of the borehole wall, at set time intervals, is d~termined from fluid volume change measurements of the cell chamber. The two pressurized guard cells serve to stabilize the device within the borehole and to insure essentially axial plane strain conditions at mid-height

It is recognized that the use of a damaged vane apparatus may greatly increase the magnitude of soil disturbance. 2} Mode of Failure. The stress distribution and stress strain behavior in the VST are little known. The soil is generally assumed to fail along the sides and ends of a circumscribed cylinder. It is also assumed that the shear strength is fully mobilized all along the surface at the same time, i.e., no progressive failure takes place. In the idealized case, the application of torque will produce large stress concentrations at the end of the vane blades (Flaate, 1966). The actual stress distribution will depend upon the degree of dis.turbance around the vane as well as the stressstrain properties of the undisturbed soil. The potential for progressive failure will depend upon the type of soil, its sensitivity and its stressstrain characteristics.
...

CO2 Gas GasTubes to Guard Cells

Volume Change Measured by Change in Water Level

Pressure -Volu meter

A laboratory program was carried out by LeBlanc (1975) in order to examine the actual failure pattern and stress-strain behavior during the VST. It was observed that the peak strength was obtained at very low angular deformations. Only for rotations in excess of 45° was a cylindrical failure surface observed. On the basis of these results, Roy (1975) concluded that it is questionable to interpret VST results in the classical manner which assumes a cylindrical shear failure surface at peak strength. The failure mode in the VST may not correspond to the failure mode in a prototype situation. The effect of preferred failure plane orientations

I

Protective Sheath Guard Cell Under Gas Pressure

Measuring Cell. Filled with Water Under Gas Pressure Guard Cell Under Gas Pressure

Fig.

III-17 Classic Menard pressuremeter

2) The conduct of the test permits an estimate of the in-situ lateral stresses with no limits on K. III-19b Main details of Cambridge in-situ instrument showing stress gages (fromWroth and Hughes. 111-18 Pressure-volume change history during a pressuremeter test Rushing Water Pressure Linefor Expanding Rubber Membrane Pressure Gage Rubber Membrane Fine Thread Spring Probe Diameter of Membrane before Expansion is the same as the CuttingHead ~ '@ Section X-X ClompJ Chopping Tool Cutting Edge Cutting~ Head Fig. 1972) Fig. Important recent improvements of the PMT are the "Autoforeuse" and the "Camkometer" self boring pressuremeters.a problem with well developed elastic and elasto-plastic solutions which are suited for application to soil mechanics. 1975).. and the Camkometer is depicted in Figure III-19b. (1972) and Wroth and Hughes (1973). 1972) .19 of the apparatus. developed respectively by Baguelin et al. III-19a Sketch of IIAutoforeuse" probe (from Baguelin et al. but stress-strain soil properties applicable to the direction perpendicular to the axis of the borehole cavity. A self boring pressuremeter is schematically presented in Figure III-19a. Pressure Time The PMT is seen to possess at least three distinct advantages: 1) The test models the axisymmetric expansion of an infinite cylindrical cavity -. The relationships between pressure increments. 0 3) The test results provide not only strength data. volumetric expansion. . Volumetric Expansion Fig. and time are presented in Figure 111-18 (Menard.

may be employed to deduce the complete stress-strain curve. computed from ~V T ps El p. Pf PI where: E = 0 radial deformation of the probe.5. nondilating soil were simultaneously presented by Ladanyi (1972). <j)'was determined from PMT resultsthroughIIin-house II correlations of ~' with th~ pseudo-elastic modUlus EpMT (see section IV E) and the limit pressure Pl' The reliability of such correlations may be questionable when they are generalized to different soil types. Until recently. Each investigator assumed ~ = 0. situ lateral pressure. (2) linear elastic compression of the soil and (3) plastic deformation of the surrounding soil mass. close agreement between ~'PMT and~' from triaxial tests has been shown by winter and Rodrigues (1975).kPa III-2O Theoretical pressuremeter curve ~a/a. Po' is estimated as the pressure corresponding to the kink in the curve between the recompression and elastic compression phases. 1975).-y has been applied to the determination of ~'f:r6m the PMT through the work of Gibson and Anderson (1961). s u PI . Poisson's ratio ~ = 0. applied pressure.P ) cu . respectively Elastic Recompression of Disturbed Soil Pf P A graphical procedure developed by Amar et a~. An idealized pressure-volume curve is presented in Figure III-2O. and N is a correlation factor generally taken to equal 5.c U E cu 400 For T ps small = E 0 0 g ::J d E0 (1 + Eo) (1 + Eo/2) (111-9) strains: d (p . Vesic (1972) and Ladanyi (1963). The in-situ lateral pressure. but more conventionally it is taken as the pressure corresponding to a volume increase ~V equal to the initial volume of the borehole Vi (i.. respectively = initial and differential chamber volumes.Po N (111-10) where PI and Po are as indicated in Figure 111-20.e. 111-21 for soft clay reflect three phases of the test: (1) recompression of disturbed soil. showed a poor abilityof the above theoriesto predict ~' from the results triaxial of pressurementei tests in large chambers. PI' is the abscissa value of the vertical asymptote to the pressuremeter curve. but investigations by Laier (1973) and AI-Awkati (cited byJ. where a is the cell radius. The results in Fig..Vesic's theory.c 0 T ps ~ E 0 d E0 0 It 200 E = 1 ~V C(V. p = = = equivalent plane-strain shear stress equivalent corrected axial applied compressive pressure strain and in- tN Vo Plastic 0 V. The limit pressure may be determined directly from the curve. .P=Pl @ ~V=Vi)as volume increasesfor pressure increments at this point are normally relatively large.+ ~V) 0 Po Fig. Schmertmann.50 and showed the validity of the following equations: d (p . Using. (1972). Applied pressure should be corrected to account for membrane stiffness and the hydrostatic head of the fluid in the connecting tubes. the the limit pressure. Cavity expansion theo. Shear strength is frequency determined from the Menard PMT through the semi-empirical relationship: Typical result of a pressuremeter test in soft clay Obtaining Strength and Stress-Strain Data from the PMT PMT results are usually presented as a plot of chamber volumevs.Palmer (1972) and Baguelin et al. ~V J.20 Three independent theories for extracting a complete stress-strain curve from the results of pressuremeter tests in incompressible. Pressure . By definition. J. (1975).P ) ~ ~ ~ 600 cu E C\ c: 0 .

A new method for determining ~' from pressuremeter tests in sand has been developed by Al-Awkati and reported by Schmertmann (1975). Al-Awkati presents a correlation between--<p-~and the volumetric strain between 0 and 100% relative density for quartz sands which is reproduced in Figure 111-23. using ~o' (from Schmertmann. 2) Measure 2'5 0. 2) At or near the limit pressure. The predicted triaxial ~' applies to the mean normal stress. Fig. and inserting the apparatus must be chosen which minimizes soil disturbance. as summarized in Figure 111-24 after Al-Awkati. . 1975).3 e as defined in Figure 111-22. 1975). enters 40 ~ 0 Quartz Sand 30 One may determine ~o' from a triaxial test in which the volumetric strain rate becomes zero at peak strength or by correcting for volumetric work in a test where this rate "differs from zero. the bulge in the pressuremeter cell seriously violates the plane strain assumption (Schmertmann. This method has been applied to correspond- .l 35 4>~-degrees 40 ing PMT and laboratory triaxial test results.2 0. ~' not due to dilatanFactors Which Affect the PMT The standard Menard type PMT is highly sensitive to variations in test procedure. CII (0) 40 " . A sample curve is presented in Figure 111-22. Many methods will produce approximately the same 4) Read predicted triaxial ~' on horizontal scale. E ---~~ ~ -----(""' ~11 --I~ (/)0 . Alternately. 111-22 3) Enter chart in Figure 111-22 with tan e and move vertically to measured or estimated ~d where Al-Awkati's theoretical correlation between PMT data and triaxial maximum ~'.=0 0 > '~ 20 ~~-10 25 30 Triaxia. 1975. ad ' where: a '= '0 ~ 1 + p sin~' when sand (III-II) and Pf = chamber failure pressure state.I -9- 35 "0 4) The initial soil modulus used in these theories may be underestimated when the conventional pressuremeter test is employed (Schmertmann. Fig. A method of boring. 1975) ~d representsthat part of cy.21 45 The application of these theories to the determination of ~' is hindered by four factors: 1) Pressuremeters with ordinary length to diameter ratios require major correction factors to convert real PMT limit pressures to the limit pressure corresponding to infinite pressuremeter length (Laier et al.( 0 ~ 1) Plot PMT data as In (Eo = ~a/a) vs. 1975). The method employs only the low strain portion of the PMT curve and thus avoids the uncertainty associated with evaluating Pl' Al-Awkati's method proceeds as follows: '. c: 0 '(50 -=. 1975). 111-23 Correlation for estimating ~o' using volume strain from relative density tests (suggested 1975) by Al-Awkati in Schmertmann. In (corrected pressure). 3) Any evaluation of ~' requires in-situ stress conditions which ly determined in the conventional Hartmann and Schmertmann. a knowledge of may only be crudePMT (Laier. CI) CII CII C.. yielding a close agreement between predicted and measured values of ~'.

the rate to assure essentially drained or unconditions is not known. because of the large number of tests required. By performing a number of. At this point the shear plates may be contracted. very few pressuremeters are so equipped. When consolidation is complete the shear head is either pulled upwards. especially in sensitive clay deposits. 1975) between 35 Pulling Yoke ~' Expandable Shear Head 'limit pressure.) c and ~values determined by this method show good corr..i: I1:1 ~ 35 ::I ~ II) 0 Q. contain such a pore pressure transducer. drained conditions for the initial pressure increments. The Iowa Borehole Shear Test The Iowa Borehole Shear Test is performed by lowering a shear head. It is likely that no part of the test will. Since the of soil volume change will increase as pressure increases in successive increments. An alternateapproach . At the required test positionthe two shearplates are expanded until skated in the . another seating pressure selected and the test repeated.. to' consolidation to occur. consisting of two opposing horizontally grooved shear plates to an uncased sectionof . A common set an arbitrary time interval (1 Fig. slow = drained) the test results become unaffected. a Mohr-Coulomb failure line and subsequently c and ~ may be determined. 111-25 Iowa borehole shear test apparatus .) 1:1 . a time interval for proceduremay result in nearly pushed downwardsat a steadyrate of 2 mm/min. therefore. During a pressure is of expansion drained test practice 2 minutes) magnitude fixed is . rotated through 90° and the test repeated. The required forces for shearing are measured. At present.22 II) Q. and the shearing stress plotted against the normal press~re. In practice the number of tests that can be reliably repeated at the same position are influenced by the inherent friction of the soil.) 45 Hydrauli c Upward Pull Pressure ~ ' 0'1 Q. but essentially undrained conditions for the final pressure increments. whereas in sand the limit may be determined by how far the shear heads can be'expanded.a borehole (Figures 111-25. As a result. The shear head is then re~urned to the original position. depicted in Figure 1II-19b.to the pore pressure problem is to experiment with different rates of cell expansion to determine at what rates (fast = undrained.and direct shear tests. but an accurate evaluation of soil deformation requires the best possible borehole preparation. 111-24 A1-Awkati's comparisons measured and predicted (Schmertmann. 0 0 ~ Creates Shear Farce ~ 40 . or each pressureincrement. the number may be as low as 2. Such an approach is generally impractical' in engineering applications. F. Versions of the Cankometer. partially drained or undrained conditions. it is not possible to determine whether the strength parameters are those for drained.elationwith those determined in triaxial.boreholewalls at a preselected pressure. This uncertainty in pore pressure behavior may be resolved by measuring pore pressure with a suitable transducer affixed to the face of the device. Major Limitations of the Method i) Drainage conditions are not known.( .tests at different seating pressures.. the shear head lowered to its original position. Some time is allowedfor .. (In clays.) Uncasecl Borehole 40 45 Predi.cted Triaxial cp'-degrees Fig.be fully drained or un- drained.' standard PMT. and. the variation of pore not measured. and 111-26).

whereas greatest applicability of the static cone has been to sands. III-26. as well as uncertainties in interpretation.23 The Standard Penetration Test and Dynamic Cone Penetration Test suffer from a lack of theoretical understanding and controlled use. At presen~ best use of the method for strength evaluation requires the establishment of a cone factor for a'particular soil deposit by means of a few separate strength tests by another method. it can be anticipated that its use will continue for evaluation of the in-situ strength of soft clays. In many cases SPT data are the only information available. The static cone and vane shear devices cannot penetrate very stiff deposits. Knife Edge Pistons . Pressuremeter testing. iii) Tests may'be located at selected strata. Borehole The quasi-static cone penetration test possesses many practical advantages and prospects for the development of a reasonable theoretical analysis of the test in the future are good. The borehole shear device has had its greatest applicability thus far in stiffer deposits. The applicability of stage testing to different soil types is a subject which needs to be studied further. Its use is limited to testing those soils which are suitable for stage testing. and the particular strength parameters to use in design will depend on the nature of a specific problem. .Contact Plate . in the absence of economical replacements and because of the great number of available empirical correlations. not under pressure from the shear head plates but which extend along the ends of the plates. however. although it appears well-suited to soft and medium clays as well. ii) The shear strength of unconsolidated portions of the borehole wall. The borehole shear test is expected to increase in popularity as a result of its relative simplicity and the direct design value of the raw test data. but the high costs of reliable results indicate that this approach may be most efficient if it is used in conjunction with simpler strength index measurements. G. Conclusions Soil strength may be expressed in a number of ways. The potential accuracy of the self-boring PMT is promising. Sheor Planes -2 . In-situ strength testing methods and programs should be selected on this basis. especially for the SPT. The vane shear test is best suited for soft clays. is not suitable in deposits containing interspersed cobbles or rock fragments. . The SPT and dynamic cone tests are most suitable for strength estimates in sands and stiffer soils. may add to the resisting shear force but is not accounted for in the calculations. Use of these methods will continue.' . Advantages of Borehole Shear Test i) The Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters may be determined in less than one hour for some soils. .' . as well as stress-strain behavior. as the tests are only performed after a hole is bored and logged. The pressuremeter test has great potential for use in measuring soil strength. while suitable in principle for most soil types except gravels and rockfills. } . ii) Erroneous shear values resulting from poor seating or remolding are usually apparent and may be systematically eliminated.. :-LVOT . Fig. Schematic of borehole shear device (A) circumferential shearing resistance must be minimized for uniform distribution for contact pressure and (B) knife edges minimize and resistance nl' In spite of the several difficulties cited relative to the interpretation of vane shear test results. The different methods are not equally applicable in all soil types. .

of lateral earth pressure. uo' a~ = a~ = a~ The calculation of avo may be influenced by In Figure IV-I.a3)/2 (IV-I) reasonably p' = (aI' + a2' + a3')/3 T) (IV-2) the vertical stress is a principal stress which may be calculated from the weight of overlying material. is varied (Wroth. Wroth (1975) suggests that correct evaluation of the in-situ lateral stress may not be possible from the results of laboratory tests. Therefore. and aI' . 2) The presence of a dry. quantities-that can best be determined by in-situ tests. is observed between ah'and a. C. under these loading . A constant ratio. fluctuations 7) Failure to achieve complete equilibrium between the groundwater and the measuring system. 3) The pore pressure 4) The coefficient Ko' is known. Ke.24 IV. even with the best piezometers currently available. borehole depths are probably known only to the nearest 0. avo' and pore pressure. a3' = major. as considered by Massarsch et al. A consequence of this disturbance is that predictions based-upon laboratory test results may grossly overestimate the movements. the in-situ stress state may deviate significantly from these assumed conditions as a result of tectonic or geologic processes. is subject to laboratory measurement errors. uncertainty will arise in the determination of the vertical stress.1 meter.. In conventional soil investigations.O kPa). Yt.l m of water head (Il. Sources of error in the measurement of Uo include: 1) Temperature 2) Fluctuations 3) Calibration 4) Zero effects in atmospheric errors transducers placement groundwater table pressure The response of soil to the application of load stresses depends greatly upon the initial state of stress and the stress path experienced by the soil. are independent of soil deformation characterIstics and the magnitude of initial lateral stresses. so that The nature of in-situ lateral stresses may be understood by examining the results of laboratory oedometer tests which model the one-dimensional consolidation experienced by an idealized soil deposit as the overburden pressure.a2'. where: q = (al . IN-SITU STRESSES TERISTICS Introduction AND DEFORMATION CHARAC- several sources of uncertainty. a' v = a' 1 In reality. fissured crust will produce horizontal variations in avo' 3) The assignment of an average unit weight to an interval of depth may not reflect the true average unit weight of that depth interval. as performed by geotechnical engineers. 4) The determination of depth and layer thicknesses is subject to error. intermediate principal effective respectively For the usual case where the in-situ horizontal stress is less than the overburden stress. the prediction of settlements depends upon the accurate determination of deformation parameters. shift in electrical depth 5} Uncertain 6) Seasonal of transducer of the Some inadequacies of this approach are evident. The measurement of pore water pressure is probably only accurate to within IO. = q/p' and minor stresses. the magnitude of the in-situ vertical and lateral effective stresses and the nature of the stress changes imposed during construction. Significant soil disturbance is inevitable as a result of the sampling and laboratory testing processes. 1973). (1975): 1) Determination of total unit weight. (1975b) and Tavenas et al. The importance of stress path considerations have been giscussed by Lambe and Whitman (1969) and Ladd and Foott (1974). Historically. The observed stress paths corresponding to one-dimensional laboratory consolidation and subsequent unloading take the form presented in Figure IV-I. among others. for a given soil. A. Deformations and local yielding are consequently affected to a marked degree by the geologic stress history. Even if these assumptions hold true for a particular deposit. 1975). The Estimation of In-Situ Stresses The is based 1) The simplest upon ground concept of an :in-situ stress regime several surface simplifying is assumptions: level. is known. In fact. Most limit analyses. 2) Horizontal stresses are equal in all directions. On the other hand. resulting in overconservative designs (Marsland. the vector AB represents the stress path of a soil under a one-dimensional loading which models the increasing overburden pressure and normal consolidation during sedimentation. Proper simulation of field conditions in laboratory tests requires knowledge of in-situ stress conditions. In-Situ Lateral Stresses B. which in turn depend upon the in-situ effective stress levels. deformation parameters have been evaluated from the results of laboratory experiments on nominally undisturbed samples and then substituted in a simple elastic analysis to yield values of stresses and displacement for use in analysis and design.

is subjected to onedimensional unloading. the stress path takes on a curved shape similar to the arc segment CD. (IV-4c) is pre- calculate K~c' and ll'is obtained from Ip using the plot in Figure IV-2. K6 may be readily estimated from I~. Heavily Overconsolidated Soil If a soil at stress state "c" in Figure IV-l is subjected to additional one-dimensional unloading. IV-l Typical effective stress paths for soil consolidated one-dimensionally (from Wroth.1) (IV-6) B where: K' = coefficient of lateral earth presnc sure for a normally consolidated state ll' = Poisson's ratio. and the resulting plot of ll'vs Ip is reproduced in Figure IV-2. becomes clarity (J3 in in the this major range. the stress path will follow a vector similar to BC. OCR. K' = (OCR) (K' ) 0 nc a:' v. The test data appear in Table IV-I. C5h is however. ~ pi (d) 0 (c) ':lOA . and Ko is equal to 1. 1944): 1 .' h pi By applying Equation IV-5 to the results of laboratory tests on 2 sands and 6 remolded clays. the horizontal and vertical stresses are equal. where the soil is in a state of'passive failure. cpt. Along the stress path CD. and stress. this state corresponds to an overconsolidation ratio. At point "C".~ Fig. the value of Ko'is greater than unity.25 and. It is emphasized that this correlation only applies to lightly overconsolidated soils. the theory of elasticity may be applied to show that.0) (IV-4a) For normally consolidated soils. in terms of effec- tive stresses a. based upon geologic information and/or laboratory test results. =C5 '/C5' h v (a constant less than 1.and OCR. IV-2 20 Plasticity Index% Values of Poisson'sratio for lightly overconsolidated soils (fromWroth. for any point on the stress path BC: Figure ~C5 ' h =~ 1-11' ~C5 v ' (IV -5) identified . ranging from 4 to 5. principal IV-I. The maximum value of Ko'occurs at point "D".sin <P' 1 + sin cpt in terms D° Fig.sin cpt The derivation of these expressions sented in Huck et ale (1974). C5v'. Equation IV-6 is then employed to determine Kb. 1975). 1975) ~ conditions: 0 CL Ko. An important consequence of these findings is that for a lightly overconsolidated clay. If the stress path BC is assumed to be linear.0. If a normally consolidated soil. at stress state "B" in Figure IV-I. still C5h ' is therefore C5l' For as greater than the vertical stress. a theoretical relationship may be derived (Jaky. and steadily increases with increasing OCR. Along the "heavily overconsolidated" portions of the stress path between C and D. 1972): Ko ~ 1 . effective stresses. The best estimate of the OCR is made.E~\ Inp' much lower values of ll' as reported by Wroth (1975). Heavily overconsolidated soils may exhibit I (0) (b) YJ e A B -. representative values of ll'have been obtained and correlated with Plasticity Index. For many soils (Ladd. B q ~ 1 - . the horizontal stress. 1975) KO = (1 + 2/3 sin cp') (IV-4b) of where <P' = soil friction angle. A value of cpt is substituted ln Equation IV-4 to A convenient approximation for this expression is often used that has been found to be accurate enough for most engineering applications (Wroth. Ip' by Wroth (1975). ll' (OCR .

BCD. 1975) The values of the OCR corresponding to selected values of K~ may thus be calculated for a . IV-3 One-dimensional unloading of Bearpaw shale (from Wroth. after Wroth (1975).287 0. and are reproduced in Figure IV-3.60 1. 1975) m. given soil.ln Overconsol idotionRoti Fig. nB = stress point. The results of Brooker's (1964) experiments on Bearpaw shale have been presented in this manner. IV-5 Comparison of computed and experimental dat~ for one-dimensional unloading of Boston blue clay (from Wroth.26 2.346 0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I Soil Pennsylvania sand Wabash river sand Chicago clay Goose Lake flour Weald Clay Kaolin London clay Bearpaw shale I % P 10 16 20 32 38 78 ]11 0. and the natural logarithm of the stress point. n. In (p'). if the parameters m and ~c are known.60 1. after Wroth (19751. The K~ .4 m 0 0 20 40 Plasticity Variation with of the rebound gradient. The value of ~c may be calculatedfrom ~' using Equation IV-4.54 1.254 0.267 0.OCR relationship predicted in this manner is compared in Figure IV-5 with the values of Kd and OCR measuredduringone-dimensional un- 7] 0.371 m 1.92 Author Hendron Hendron Brooker Brooker Brooker Nadarajah Brooker Brooker It has been shown by Wroth (1972) that the stress path segment BCD in Figure IV-l may be transformed into a log-linear plot of the stress ratio. may therefore be represented by the equation: 2 m (n nB) = (IV - 7 ) In (p' /p~ ) where: p ~. The parameter m has been obtained for the soils listed in Table IV-I.58 1.325 0. plasticity (from Wroth.26 Values of Soil Parameters Plotted in Figure IV-2 Wroth (1975) TABLE IV-I. 1975) Fig.281 0. No. "B" in Figure stress IV-l ratio at Ka m = inverse of the gradient in Figure IV-l Equation ~ of BCD IV-7 may be rewritten ) 3 (l-K~) as: OCR (1+2KilC) [ - 0 1+2K' a (IV 8) ] 3 (l-K' 1 2 4 8 0 16 32 m l nc 1+2K' nc - 1+2K' a ] .36 1.282 0. IV-4 The unloading stress path. and correlated with I as presented in Figure IV-4.4 B 3 2 0 P'/Pe -0. Fig.81 2.

since the effective stresses have not changed during secondary consolidation. Even the most advanced techniques. for low values of OCR. Ka'is that of a normally consolidated soil. as sketched in Figure IV-6(a). water table fluctuations and previous construction history. If additional vertical stresses are imposed. and hence possess identical overconsolidation ratios. the methods presented previously could be employed to show that Kq' should aecrease with depth as sketched in Figure IV-6(b). with constant unit weight and horizontal ground surface. the void ratio will decrease to a value. At a point near the ground surface. where the overconsolidation ratio is sufficiently The vertical stress at state "1" would be interpreted as the preconsolidation pressure. z. erosion. because stress state "C" is located on a path of primary unloading. The method described previously. the void ratio will decrease along the recompression curve "eB" eln. If a soil layer of thickness. eH' while the stress state. may be expected to produce accurate results only when applied to normally consolidated soils. Laboratory Measurement of ~ The most widely used assumptions in the laboratory evaluation of in-situ lateral stresses are of questionable validity (Wroth. is in also seen to produce~reliable predictions of Boston blue clay. however. after Wroth (1975). pi (b) Fig. the current stress state is unpredictable if a soil deposit has been subjected to more than one cycle of loading (deposition) and unloading (erosion). aJ ' and preconsolidation pressure. The value of in Kq' will decrease rapidly. the soil will behave as if it were lightly overconsolidated. Current Yield Envelope pi Stress states liEII and "C" correspond to the same vertical stress. Figure IV-7. In fact. (0) e Distribution of Kd in the Ground The distribution of Ke' in a natural soil de- posit may be the result 6f a complex sequence of stress variations caused by deposition. remains unchanged from pointG. . If a soil element at stress state "G" and void ratio eG in Figure IV-7 undergoes secondary consolidation. 1975). will exhibit a uniform distribution of KQ with depth. H. the value of the overconsolidation ratio at any depth. would become equal to (z + zo)/z. If the soil is only lightly overconsolidated. and a value of Kq'would be estimated accordingly. IV-7 Change of state caused by delayed consolidation 0 Knc Ko Delayed. z (0) Fig. while stress state "E" is located on a reloading path. as described by Bjerrum (1967). the value also of ~ will be limited by a passive stress in- failure condition. Therefore.27 loading of Boston blue clay. This phenomenon will produce an effect of apparent OCR which is independent of depth. as a large increase q aJ is accompanied by little change in ari . applicable to lightly overconsolidated soils. such as those developed by Poulos and Davis (1972) or Tavenas et all (1975). Reconsolidated Soil If the soil at stress state "D" in Figure IV-l is reloaded one-dimensionally the effective stress will follow the approximately linear segment DE. vegetation. IV-6 Typical vertical overconsolidated profile deposit (h) of Kd. (a~ )B. tectonic movement. high. An equivalent distribution of from the effective ~ would result ~ crease and decrease caused by a fall and subsequent rise of the water table. capillary pressures and heterogeneous soil distributions will serve to complicate this situation even further. is a common cause of apparent overconsolidation. zo' were to be removed through erosion. At this state. or secondary compression. The predicted and observed values are seen to be in close agreement. for an An idealized soil deposit in the normally consolidated state. The values of Kd will differ. The effects of secondary compression.

The "closure pressure II is D. These techniques are only summarized in the following paragraphs. The direct measurement of stresses in earth fills may be achieved through the installation of pressure cells during construction. Stress Measurement in Soft Clays Pressure Cells: Total pressure cells. in-situ measurement may be very successful if soil disturpance can be minimized.. A number of imaginative techniques have been developed which attempt to realize these goals.cells Fig.there is no satisfactory method of determining Ko for a natural soil by laboratory testing. Soil fracture. Accurate resuIts are difficult to obtain and verify. The Glatzl cell. and the reader is referred to the references for more details. IV~8 Measurement A thorough consideration of the factors influencing.cracks close and water flow drops significantly. Increasing wa. and is discussed in detail by Tavenas et ale (1975) and Massarsch et ale (1975b). and when the water pressure is equal to the stress which is normal to the cracks. In principle along the minor principal plane. may provide reliable stress information if disturbance is kept to a minimum and adequate time is.28 Flowmeter Outflow _From 2 -To I 1ft Cell Pressure (a) Total cell earth pressure and read-out unit (b) Schematic diagram of the earth pressure cell (Glotzl) method of the in-situ lateral pressure using ~lofiU. depicted in Figure IV-S. Mercury Manometer Cant rols Screw PlasticTubing Piezometer Fig. but the techniques of installation and measurement are fairly well developed.the determination of Ko has prompted Wroth (1975) to conclude that ". has been found to be suitable. Strictly speaking.allowed for the dissipation of pore pressures. The applied pressure is gradually reduced. In-Situ Measurement of Lateral Stress The measurement of . II Hydraulic Fracturing The hydraulic fractu~ing technique is frequently used.in-situstresses is clearly an area which holds great potential for the successful application of in-situ testing methods. is accompanied by a marked increase in water in-flow which is monitored at the surface. A schematic of the operation is presented in ~igure "IV-9. since the insertion of a measuring device creates disturbance and modifies the local state of stress. which are pushed into undisturbed soil or placed in uncased boreholes.terpre~sure is applied to an isolated section of a borehole. In practice. and is experiencing increasing use in soil studies.to determine stresses in rock strata. it is not possible to directly measure stresses in undisturbed soil.and adequate time allotted for the re-establishment of equilibrium stress conditions. the. IV-9 Schematic diagram of the hydraulic fracture method ..

Hydraulic fracturing is effective only if Ko is less than one. since stress-strain behavior is stress path dependent. who pre- It has been emphasized that soil deformation characteristics must be measured under the appropriate combination of effective stresses. respectively U'. Newer methods. yielding a convenient relationship between the drained and undrained modulus of compression: E' 2Gu = 2G' = 1+""'U" Eu = 1+U u (IV-IO) where: E'. but for this discussion in-situ measurement procedures will be considered in the framework of the theory of elasticity. Most current methods for predicting soil deformations model the soil skeleton as a linearelastic material. Pushedin-place total pressure cells generally cannot be used because of the high resistance of these soils to penetration. The estimation of these in-situ stresses may be a source of error in conventional laboratory testing. The closure pressure is not always clearly defined. E = Young'smodulus for drained u and undrained loading. however. since the preferred crack orientation may be along horizontal stratifications. sands. Pressuremeter Tests The idealized results of a pressuremeter test in soft clay are presented in Figure III-21 and the details of the pressure-volume curve are discussed in Section III E. and is subject to the uncertain effects of soil strength and deformation characteristics. fer the use of total pressure cells to the hydraulic fracturing method. and may be catalogued as follows: The pressuremeter device may be the most suitablemeans of directly measuring lateral stresses in these materials according to Wroth (1975) . The details of the testing procedure are considered by Tavenas et ale (1975) and Massarsch et ale (1975Pl. The shear modulus. hydraulic fracture can measure ah only in soils in which Ko is less than unity.a. and is not possible in previous sand deposits. G. In-Situ Measurement of Deformation Characteristics recorded and is an estimate of ah' In theory.E3 shear modulus aI' a3 = major and minor principal stresses El' E3 = major and minor principal strains Equation IV-9 may be transformed by applying relationships between the elastic constants. is a convenient deformation parameter. Methods of Measuring Deformation Parameters The methods currently used for measuring deformation parameters in~situ have been reviewed by Wroth (1975). Terms which apply to total stress will be denoted with the subscript "u" while terms relat~d to effective stress will be identified with a prime. Measurement of Ko in Stiff Soils The measurement of Ko in stiff clays. once this dissipation has occurred. point B is often poorly defined: Borehole advancement produces disturbance and stress relief in the adjacent soil. '. Tavenas et ale (1975) conclude that the conventional pressuremeter test is unsuitable for determining lateral stresses in soft clay because of this.29 E. will receive increasing attention~ . Self boring instruments with load cells have been used. The s~lf boring pressuremeter. but may present problems of compliance. The equilibrium values of lateral stresses are not greatly affected. and soft rocks poses particular problems. The theory of the fracture mechanism has been presented by Bjerrum et ale (1972). A great deal of development work needs to be done in this area of in-situ testing. minimizes soil disturbance by limiting lateral soil movements to small values. which predict ground response on the basis of elastic-plastic behavior. respectively It is re-emphasized that these moduli are dependent upon stress level. in that the stiffness of these soils may be significant when compared to the stiffness of the load cell itself. The pressure at point B (in Figure III-21) is generally assumed to represent ah' but in practice. (IV-9) El . depicted in Figure 111-19. Even this small disturbance produces excess pore pressures which must be allowed to dissipate before testing. and should be measured at stress levels appropriate for the prototype situation. Nonlinear stress-strain response is treated in apiece-wise linear manner. Application of the theory of elasticity necessitates a clear distinction between total and effective stresses. In practice. It is anticipated that "secondary" methods.E3 El . and small details of test technique have been found to introduce large uncertainties in test results. For an isotropic elastic material: 2G where: G = al = a3 = cri . the closure pressure often represents a weighted average of ah and av. are receiving increased attention. because it is defined in terms of a stress difference which may be calculated from either effective or total stress measure-ments. Uu = Poisson's ratio for drained and undrained loading. In-situ testing has the potential of "bypassing" this source of uncertainty. which deduce stress conditions from other parameters.

it responds elastically until the previous maximum pressure is reached at point E. 2) Plate Loading Tests are frequently employed. radial deformation. of a general point is indicated as ~B' Compressive strains are given positive values. of loading of loading 1975) parameter. 1975) The results of a two-cycle PMT in sand are presented in Figure IV-10 as a plot of applied pressure vs. In the following sections. each of these methods is discussed. strains. These assumptions have been shown to hold true by Wroth and HUghes (1973) and Hartman and Schmertmann (1975) As a result" an analysis of the PMT need only consider one horizontal plane of soil at midheight of the apparatus and consider the variation of stresses. the expense and complexity ofth"e procedure may make use of this method impractical in many cases. the membrane of the pressuremeter deflates to its original size. and displacements along a typical radius ABC shown in Figure IV-ll(a). thus be derived from a PMT in permeable soil. Interpretation of a Drained PMT The interpretation of an undrained PMT is discussed in section III-E. The secondary unloading and reloading path.S) is introduced and the coordinate. and a loose annulus of soil collapses around the pressuremeter. The circumferential strain. the sand once again exhibits elastic rebound. That analysis has been extended by Wroth and Windle (1975) to take account of volume changes. but does constitute the means of. l[8C.~ . is chosen to refer to the displaced position B' of the general point B. all displacements therefore being radial in direction. Analysis of the Pressuremeter Test (Wroth. through points C. F. . the cavity in the soil. with special emphasis placed upon the Pressuremeter Test. the difference being due to the extremely disturbed state of the soil at point H. serves as an eXample of the effects of disturbance on the measurement of deformation parameters in conventional pressuremeter tests. illustrated in segment HIJ. " 4) Back Analysis of well documented case histories is an important means of understanding any aspect of soil behavior.H 0 tensile.z. K 60 N c -S 40 £! . illustrates that for small strains. However.30 1) Pressuremeter Tests have been found to yield the most appropriate values of parameters for the prediction of ground deformation caused by foundation and earthwork 'construction. B B'. The two major cycles of loading are identified by the paths between points ~ through ~ and ~ through ~. PMT results in terms of the have been dimensionless plotted at Landvetter. The behavior of the disturbed sand. a loose annulus of soil may collapse around the apparatus. . This phenomenon might well occur as the result of performing a PMT in an oversize borehole. The displacement. ES' is everywhere O. and small pressure increments will induce inordinately large deformations in the disturbed material. so: 6 IV-lO Results of Pressuremeter test in sand 8 -E S =r ~ > . ~ A cylindrical coordinate system (r. r. at the wall . HIJK. Upon unloading from point E to g. It was explained that the complete undrained stress-strain curve could be obtained from PMT results in an incompressible soil. evaluating the "everyday" design methods. The sand then yields. IV-10. D and E in Fig. As the applied pressure is decreased from point Q to ~. exhibits an initial gradient which is an order of magnitude less than that of the original loading curve. 3) Seismic Methods possess unique advantages. This approach is not practical for "everyday" . 0 in Figure E (IV-II) IV-lO of Fig. 1st cycle 0 2nd cycle Sweden (from Wroth. The soil surrounding the expanding cylindrical membrane is assumed to be deformed in axial symmetry and plane strain.design problems. -Ee. The reloading curve. The drained stress-strain curve may. the unloadingbehavi 0 r is linear and recoverable. undergoing plastic strain as it rejoins the virgin compression curve BCF. When the sand is reloaded from point D. but yield deformation parameters which correspond to levels of strain an order of magnitude or more smaller than the strains which occur in other testing methods. = ~A/aO' which is equal to the strain. A correction must therefore be made before the results are applied to the predidtion of ground deformations other than those caused by vibration. and yield reliable results if performed with care.

however.sinv t = 1 . Similarly. as the analysis applies to each small increment of the expansion of the membrane.T = 1/2(ar . Electrical resistivity methods have been employed to measure this volume change by Windle . it may be said that.t r The detailed derivation by Wroth and Windle (1975) leads to the following expression for shear stress. the volumetric strain is seen to vary linearly with shear strain for a large portion of the test.That is to say: E v where ~V represents = lw Vo = .V . The angle of dilation.. and negative for soil contraction. and equation (IV-IS) becomes T If some drainage is assumed to occur. since the method is applied to the test data at specific points in time. introduced by Fig.31 and the factor t is positive for soil expansion (dilation).e. It should be noted that t need not remain constant during the pressuremeter test. and t may be calculated for each such increment. Ee. so that: !:. a completely undrained test in a saturated soil) corresponds to a value of 0 for the factor t. For that portion of the test.V /V0 1 (IV-17) E 1 . 1975) As the test proceeds. (b) .r (IV-14) ~ <I > therefore: E r t-l+'E 1 . The value of t need not be constant. the factor t is therefore a constant. The volume change may be negative or positive. -to = E(l+E) 2 (2+E) dp dE (!V-19) Equation (IV-19) is identical to equation (111-9) presented earlier. and different values of t may be substituted in each iteration.1 + sinv cry.ae) in terms of the D=l+-=- Rowe (1962): appliedpressurep. t can be caiculated and the complete stress-strain curve may therefore be derived from equation (IV-IS). V. D. The plane strain assumptions imply that the vertical strain. times a factor. At any instant during the test. In Figure IV-ll(c). and is defined as: d!:. is equal to the tangential strain.I 6 I 8£ fNIv I % 8 I /" a' 4r- / I 10 (e) 1t h I 20 y% (e-j) £ (-EO) £ ' . IV-II Stress-strain behavior of dense sand during pressuremeter test (from Wroth.tE e' (IV-13) an increase in soil volume. The radial strain in the soil. The important consequence of this analysis is that if the volume change in the annulus of soil immediately surrounding the membrane can be measured. a soil element of initial volume Vo will exhibit a volume change ~V in response to the increased effective stresses. The stress-strain and volume change behavior are illustrated in Figure IV-II.. Ez. the volumetric strain. sin V = --a:y- The parameter t may be expressed in terms of the angle of dilation. . is indicated in the figure. 15 ) e 2sinV 1 + sinv (IV-16) (d) (e-ii) Alternatively.d~ dr > 0 (IV-12) The case of no soil volume change (i. Er' is everywhere compressive.V/VO a 8' c c' ! r (0) -e-. Ev. soil at point B will move some distance ~B to the point B'.E + E = +tE e -e Vo . is zero. t may be expressed in terms of the stress dilatancy parameter. for the soil in contact with the membrane. and that for small deformations: !:. the membrane expands. and corresponding strain E: T = E (l+E) (2+E-t) 2 (1+tE) dp dE (IV-IS) E r = .. and an element of soil which was originally located at point A in Figure IV-ll(a) will be displaced a distance ~A' and will now be located at point A'. The Mohr circle of strain for the soil element which has been distorted from point A to A' is presented in Figure IV-ll(b)..

= -0. V. ~~ese assumptions are reasonable ol1lyfor the case.can be estimated.v. 'IT O'f ) 20I (IV-33) 2 €% 4 6 8 10 strain: Fig. The field measurements indicated porosity changes which were consistent and reasonable.Pf where: a In . but rather the strength of the soil after some degree of consolidation has occurred. E. 0'1'-0'3"/0'1'+0'3'. V Hughes.cp' 1 + (1 + sin sin CP' V) (IV-. a.sin cpt c.32 and Wroth (1975). has been introduced in the analysis of a 'drained PMT. Wroth and Windle (1975) have shown that it is possible to obtain a complete solution to the stress and displacement fields within the annular soil failure zone. by the fact that an undrained PMT. from the fact that the measured field resistivity is actually the average resistivity of a fairly lar.sin cpt c. soil porosity was correlated with soil resistivity.in estimating the probable errors involved when the "undrained" analysis is applied to a test in which some drainag~ occurs. is substituted in the "drained analysis.ingfield pressuremeter tests by means of electrodes mounted on the membrane face. by the equation: In E.e which indicate that for a substantial range of strain the sand deforms at a nearly constant stress ratio. from drained triaxial tests on loose samples of the sand in question. Analysis of a Pressuremeter Test in Sand The original analysis of a PMT in sand.v. IV-12 Results on sand of part of pressuremeter (after Wroth. If the stress dilatancy relationship in Equation (IV-20) is employed. and rate of dilation.v. 80 K 60 P Ib f. (IV-21) . The actual degree of this compensation is not known.455.the laboratory.06. a.the true in-situ undrained strength of the soil. The stressstrain behavior of a dense sand in plcme strain is illustra'tedin Figure IV-II d and. The virgin loading segment of the PMT curve in Figure IV-IO has been replotted in this manner in Figure IV-12. An average gradient. sin cpt) (IV-251 Use of the undrained analysis for a partially drained PMT in clay will therefore result in an underestimate of the peak shear stress.of ~ very l. 1 1 + sincp' sincp' 1 + sinV 1 . may be expressed in terms of either V or cpt: the computed values of shear stress will be somewhat higher than the values of shear stress calculated according to the "undrained" analysis.231 f denotes the onset of failure. and through triginometric substitution Equation (IV-20) can be transformed to: ations in CP' c ' and so for most purposes it is sufficiently aXcurate to estimate ~'c. .is appropriate for a normally consolidated clay'in a fully drained PMT.v. it is not yet feasible to measure soil volume changes during a conventional PMT. The method of analysis calls for considera~ tion of volume changes only with a narrow annulus of soil.sinV 1 + 1 sin cpt c. with no volume change. In . however. In practice. is seen to fit the then data closely. where volume.)cse sand. The cP pertains c. Laboratory tests performed by Windle and Wroth (1975) indicate that a value of -0. equations (IV-24) and (IV-2fi) may be employed to determine ~' and v.v.. assumed that thl~sand failed at a constant stress ratio. v. ) sin cpt (1 . The "undrained" analysis is seen to underestimate shear stress by some 25% for R.gevolume of soil. Soil resistivity was measured dur. p. a (1 .v. 1975) test CP'=CP' f c. lnE.v. a straight line with a slope. The definition of V is recalled. The "drained" analysis is useful nOI1etheless. (IV-221 Ef a and subscript sin. which relates cptat any point to the angle of dilation. + sin V (IV1 + sin cpt 241. however. is related to the strain.sincp'c.v.3 for the volume change factor. a = 0..'n~ 40 -= a3' For plane a ' I ( 1+- fN/V tan -+-' ( 4 E ) 2 2 . If the value of cp'c..£. the parameter. presented by Gibson and Anderson (1961). The approach suffers. The behavior may be described by the stress dilatancy relationship: Equation (IV-22) indicates that if PMT results are plotted as lnp vs.v.3 and E = . should result. c. This error is partially compensated. to shear at constant This method is not sensitive to small vari- angle of dilation. If this value of R. The membrane pressure.measures a shear strength which is not. a sin cpt c. R".

the method does not require an estimate of the limit pressure. The elastic modulus deduced from a PMT is This method has been applied to the PMT data in Figure IV-lO. An investigation by Laier et. In practice. A correction for the limit pressure is therefore required . The pressuremeter modulus. it has been found convenient. On the other hand.cr' ) e Ee) 2) For the "pre-failure" stage of the test. stress. The important parameters ~' and V may be accurately evaluated. The gradient of the derived shear-stress curve in Figure IV-13 may be related to the shear modulus G'. of the pressuremeter apparatus will affect the limit pressure as indicated in Figure IV-IS. The effect of a smear zone of disturbed soil on the value of the pressuremeter modulus is illustrated in Figure IV-14 after Hartman and Schmertmann (1975). The resulting stress-strain curves are presented in Figure IV-13. of the order of 10%. be pressure. 0 0 2 f% Fig. (IV- 26) Pressuremeter Tests in Sand A number of considerations should be kept in mind when evaluating a PMT in sand. resulting in the measurement of a more nearly accurate modulus value. stress cr'e)' calculated 1 2 d(cr' r . including the following. Recalling Equations (IV-13) and (IV-14) Er . if the rate of volume change. soil disturbance results in the measurement of a decreased modulus.' 8 Non-linear soil behavior limits the validity of the assumption of a constant pressuremeter modulus.applied cr'e. po. Application of this equation requires the selection of a value of i for each data PQint.cr' ) e dE = (2 .2 '/2 (ar'0"8) 0 = volume of the cavity at the instant when ~p/~V is measured. For sand in contact with the membrane. It is seen that the calculated value of cr'eremains nearly constant throughout the test.is minor equal to the may . appropriate for stresses and strains in the horizontal direction only. Finite Element studies performed by Hartman and Schmertmann (1975) have shown that non-linear soil behavior is required to produce ~V vs. The complete stress-strain behavior of a sand may be derived from a PMT with a minimum of computation effort. provided ~p/~V is measured in the pseudo elastic phase of the test'indicated in Figure 111-20. This may be important when testing anisotropic materials. the hysteresis of borehole unloading and reloading results in the measurement of an increased modulus. IV-13 4 L 6 ~ Stress-strain curves derived from the pressuremeter test on sand (data in Figure IV-lO) (from Wroth. 1975) The importance of this method of analysis is evident. i. and the from p. corresponding to segmentAB in Figure IV-lO. the principal stress ratio. 11 = Poisson's ratio a. shear stress may be calculated by means of Equation (IV-IS). The presence of a smear zone does not alter the general shape of the PMT curve. PI' and thus permits the termination of a PMT after a small strain. the two effects may compensate.33 The calculation of the complete stress-strain from a PMT in sand proceeds according to this method as follows: 1) While the sand is failing. (along curve BCDEFG in Figure IV-lO). providing a confirmation of the in-situ effective stress. Since soil volume changes are small during this phase of the PMT. ale (1975) has shown that the length/diameter ratio. and hence EpMT must be considered as a fictitious property. Furthermore. so tor the the cr'r . deviaprincipal (cr'r ratio. EpMT' suggested by Menard (1975) is frequently used in practice as opposed to values deduced theoretically according to the methods just described and is defined as 60 follows: a:' r EpMT where: V 2 (1 + 11) V 0 /jp/~V tI:V~27) 40 Stress Ibf/in.Ee therefore: = (t 2)E8 (2 - t)E stress. and not inaccurate.t) 2 (2 t) G' d(cr' deEr r - . the major principal stress. is known. In pre-bored holes. cr'r/cr'e' is given by the value of~' deduced from the experimentally observed value of a. L/D. to set t = o. when applying Equation (IV-19) to the "pre-failure" stage. p curve of the usual type presented in Figure 111-20. and deformation parameters may be obtained from the stress-strain curve.

4 3.g/Cm! v 6 AX:44 51 1.3 (from Hartman and Schmertman.00 1. measure~ ments of elastic modulus do not need to be corrected for the infinite length assumption. At present.. 17. 10 AX:44 44 1. The effects of different borehole preparation techniques on observed lateral stress. = 1975) Deformation Modulus.mm Size.H.. (1975)has lateral stress and modulus The effects of disturbance 1975) shown that soil disturbance has a dramatic on the observed a PMT in clay.04 <I 0 ~.2 45 2 4 40 E . AX:44 51 1. 0 Q) E I 8 10 12 Borehole ~robe Auger DensityRatio' NO'"Pt Slze. 0 ~. As long as the ratio. 35 0 Q) 6 10 30 t! "V ~ 0 i J- Borehole Probe Auger Density No.04 >1 ~ 9.mm.04 I 0 11. 12 AX:44 AX: 44 BX. He.04 >1 1. Fb-IOOKN/m2 00 0.1975) ~ if the test interpretation is based upon an assumption of infinite pressuremeter length. Pressuremeter An Tests in Clay effect for on the . Pr.AX: 44 HI2 IV-16 51 1. IV"'15 20 L40 60 OJ :: Q.04 <1 >1 rl =0. Fig... the most effective way of minimizing soil disturbance in thePMT is through the use of self boring devices.34 E2=50 Undisturbed Material HorizontalPressure. AX:44Drivinq andRelaxation IV-17 Deformation modulus measured at the Saint-Alban site (from Roy et al.09 >1 Fig. such as those sketched in Figure 111-19.6 2. and 18.60 51 44 5.10 II.mm Size. LID. modulus and limit pressure are summarized in Figures IV-16.1 Widthof SmearZone-ft 2rl =0. investigation by Roy et a1. 51 1.t.12 BX:60 51 1. Ep -100 KN/m2 3 DR. ..8 1. I 0 3JM = d Fig. is greater than about 4. H. observed limit pressure were found to be minor.. 0/0 00 o~ 0 97 2 4 6 20 40 60 80 PLj{PL)~ =Gt) 2 . H.Size.2 Fig.mm cycm3 Q 14~ d EI=25 0 6 ---AX:44 7 9.04 1 1.00)1 14~ 0 7 AX:44 51 1.09 >1 HI2 Influence of PM length/diameter on measured limit pressure (~V measured along middle 1/3 of pressuremeter) (from Laier et al. IV-14 Modulus calculations as a function of width of smear zone in linear plastic material with V 0. 1975) Horizontal pressure measured at the Saint-Alban site (from Roy et al.

deduced from the load settlement behavior of a suitable bearing plate placed at a desired depth.9. 12 17 18 AX: 44 AX: 44 ax: 60 ax:60 I 51 44 51 Sampler(57 mm) Drivino Drivino Dr_ivino Mini: 22 I 0 . the plate load test is considerably more expensive than the other in-situ methods.>asis of all seismic exploration techniques for evaluation of deformation characteristics is an interpretation of the time required for particular types of elastic waves to travel known or inferred distances thro~gh the subsurface. 2. a I 2 A 3 4 8 5 - a ~ 6 8 10 a orehole No. Experience has proven the reliability of plate tests.24 IV-18 Limit pressure measured at the Saint-Alban site: A-with different techniques.5 produces an increase of 13% in the calculated moduli. 1975). 7 8. plate bearing tests. have shown that an order of magnitude difference may exist between field and laboratory values of soil moduli. The calculations assumed a value of 0. . B-with different probes (from Roy et al. 14 23. E. PL-100 KN/m2 45.33 for Poisson's ratio. 6.. Fig. H. G. Both the difference in strain rate between the two methods and the disturbance of laboratory samples contribute to this discrepancy. The more painstaking second series yielded higher modulus values. The vertical modulus of deformation is.. pressuremeter tests and lab- . A state of the art review of vibroseismic methods for the determination of soil moduli Shields and Bauer (1975) have undertaken a comparative study of full scale footing tests. particularly when it is performed with the degree of care which is required for accurate results. it must be carried out at a speed such that the rate of strain experienced by the soil is considerably higher than would normally be the case in good laboratory practice. 1975) oratory triaxial tests on sensitive clay in Ottawa. pr Probe Size Auger Siz e Ratio >1 I <I - mm mm -a V A <> . A variation of the method is to measure the horizontal modulus using one side of a trench for the bearing test and the other side for the reaction. I. Use of the correct undrained Poisson's ratio of 0. and a more complete review of this method is planned for a subsequent report.10 II. and by reestablishing the in-situ effective stresses before testing. The first series yielded low modulus values as the result of a large degree of soil disturbance. but the large costs involved have stimulated increasing interest in alternate methods.35 00 2 E 4 . for the purpos~s of' estimating the immediate settle- ment of spread footings. The PMT moduli in Figure IV-2l have been increased by this amount The plate loading tests are seen to provide modulus values which most closely coincide with those determined from the model footing test. Plate Bearing Tests Plate bearing tests have been a traditional in-situ method . Recent tests at the Division of Building Research Station in the U. This discrepancy may be minimized by leaving the excavated surface exposed as short a time as possible. In order to insure that a pressuremeter test is truly undrained. Vibro-Seismic Tests The J:. as reported by Marsland (1973. Two series of pressuremeter tests were performed.3. Values of soil moduli determined in the laboratory may be expected to be considerably less than the corresponding values measured in an undrained PMT.for estimating the soil modulus.r::. Canada. A variety of information of interest to the geotechnical engineer may be obtained from vibroseismic test results.K. The soil profile is reproduced in Figure IV-19 and a schematic of the footing test arrangement is presented in Figure IV-20. . However. 2 3 Limit Pressure. The moduli determined from these tests are summarized in Figure IV-21.

0m Bottom of Rock Socket Fig. Pipe to Rock .7 1.6 Extra High E t4 a Q) Strength Conenco Test Load of 2.7MN isO.:' :. Silt J-nt. IV-2l Test arrangement for large scale plate load tests (from Shields and Bauer.0.0 ~ to I 0 10 1. Secant Modulus.sSome Grovel Grovel OverRoc t t t 0 10 00 ::::'. E'.:::~ . 2.8 . 1975) ClayBrown 1.8' .25 ClayGrey- '36.Pipe Deep Settlement Anchors Tendon Casino 16cm 1.2 m Bottom of Soil Sleeve Casing wos Reamed to 1.:imi'.vibratory source Rayleigh wave dispersion Crosshole methods UpholejDownhole methods s: ~E 0 Soil Type Natural Water Content I and Atterbero 20 40 ~ 0 Limits 60% Fig.0. IV-19 Subsoil profile at site of large scale plate load tests (from Shields and Bauer.lmxo. l~m'Rock Socket 15. : '.11111..E1857m ReinforcedConcrete' BottomOfFootinQ Test Footing 2 3.85h -EJ.6cm I. IV-20 !7td 11( EI.68.24 .3m RockSurface . 1975) .D.:' -. Silty. Brown 3. ClayGrey. ". I Ee.x2m Long Hydra Rigid Tendon Sheath Soil Sleeve. 1. 80. CUCycled Triaxial Tests 6 Eu. " :' '.2 m. 1975) Comparison of modulus values as determined by different techniques (from Shields and Bauer.D.1mx3.5 IFissured CiQy:Grey.::". UU Cycled -Triaxial Tests Es. em I.Tendon 12/0. Static KoTriaxial Tests 81 Below Rock Surface ~ Fig.2cmD. ::. The following five approaches were discussed: Refraction Rayleigh wave .61.66m 7.36 has been presented by Ballard and McLean (1975).

that under some conditions crosshole tests may not be possible. or even reliable because of uncertainties in hole location and alignment.37 The study showed the crosshole method to be the most versatile and the most adaptable to techniques of signal enhancement.. . y time. OCR and Po was also applied to tge soil deposits. The in-situ impulse test shown schematically in Figure IV-24 (Miller et al. Due to hysteresis effects.2B) Tronsd~ Body Wave Impulse Rod and the corresponding shear modulus G is given by Fig..c Primary Response' ~ Sample Secondary Response 10 10'Z Time.min. distance relationship. Disturbance alters soil behavior by destroying natural structure or fabric and by modifying the system of stresses experienced by the soil. A plot of arrival time vs. the effects of changes in soil structure or fabric are irrecoverable. 1975) allows for the determination of shear modulus at varying shear strain levels (10-5 to 10-1%).~ used during where G = pvs density. Corresponding field crosshole and laboratory resonant column test results have been compared by Anderson and Woods (1975). Values of Vs after 20 years of secondary consolidation were extrapolated from the lab data. however. IV-22 (b) ToScope To Hammer Triggering system for cross-hole tests (from Anderson and Woods. and were found to be in agreement with the measured field values. but yielded velocities which were generally higher than the field and laboratory velocities.. Resistor To Impulse Rod Fig. A schematic diagram of their crosshole set-up and triggering system is presented in Figure IV-22. vs' vs. economical.10mf The in-situ measurement of initial stresses and deformation characteristics is especially sensitive to the degree of soil disturbance caused by apparatus installation and testing procedure.n. 20 years corresponded to the time elapsed since the last major stress change due to excavation or construction.e. Shear strain y can be calculated from: ::: v Vs (IV. 103 104 Fig. however. In many cases. 600 1/1 eTo = 20 psi ~ ~400 ?::' 'u 0 10psi j CII > 0 3= ~ 5psi< Detroit Cloy R2-1 «) g200. . vs' was observed in the laboratory and attributed to secondary consolidation. velocities and moduli which are inaccurately high. For the deposits studied. provided they are accurately known. a reversible stress change will not result in a reversible change in initial . t . IV-23 Comparison of Vs with time of consolidation for Detroit clay (from Anderson and Woods. productive approach towards dealing with soil 1975) disturbance is therefore to try to avoid it in the first place. The measured variation of Vs with time is presented in Figure IV-23. the effects of disturbance may be alleviated by the re-establishment of in-situ effective stresses. The transducer records give vertical particl~ velo~ city Capacitive Circuit Hammer v vs. Sc~ematic of equipment cross-hole tests p is the soil 1. Conclusions ::=:: 12. IV-22 2 ( ( ( 11I1 I . Seafloor testing is one situation wherein uphole-downhole tests may be more appropriate. A time dependent increase of the shear wave velocity. To some extent. It should be noted. distance of each sensor from the energy source allows evaluation of the shear wave velocity. (IV-29) (a) . The most t::--IcopocOOr 1000 . 1975) The Hardin-Black (1969) empirical correlation of v with void ratio.6 V 1. It was also found by B~llard and McLean (1975) that the most common errors in the execution of vibroseismic m~thods lead to unconservative conclusions: i.deformation behavior.

---~ ' M . J \ ""-' / . -"/ / tI -r . The advantages of the method include: 1) A potential minimization of soil disturbance.'" - / .Dia. instrument advance rate and drilling fluid pressure. "':"A il Displacements Vertical L_.II 'I " II II I.I .2 f. I Sensor Hole I L--II I Sensor Hole ~6 ~-z.' II. I~ . The pressuremeter test is seen as being a method of great promise. It is expected that increased experience with self boring devices in different soil types will help to define the effects of details of technique.. I I. especially with the use of a self-boring device. The accurate measurement of initial stresses in the ground is very difficult. BellevilleSPring I' I WAVE GENERATING STATION Load Cell~ T I IL- II 'I 'I I. .I I II I. including the effects of soil volume change. .38 RECORDS ~:= 'f." Anchor --~ :: Slolion 2 IV~. / /. but the number of assumptions required precludes the accurate determination of in-situ stresses in the laboratory. but there is a conspicuous lack of information on the Deasurement of stresses in sands. o. Troncoso and Brown.. / "". 2} The possible derivation of the complete stress-strain behavior of the tested soil.. stiff clays and soft rock.\ I I I I I Ground Surf a ce . 1975) Some progress has been made in the measurement of in-situ stresses in clay soils using pressure cells. such as cutting rate. I I . and its increased use is predicted. ~ 0 Recording II II /f?tOrpq ~ I. . The value of competent and experienced testing personnel is evident. Laboratory tests may provide useful bounds to the likely values of in-situ stresses.: I Impact Hammerl!!. ~ ~ / / / " Time AnChor Sensor I Sensor 2 Sensor 3 GuideRod AnchorHole IOin. IV-24 Schematic representation of in-situ i~ulse test (from Miller. 3) The fairly accurate estimat~on of insitu lateral stresses. The self-boring method of advancing instruments into the ground is seen as being a very promising approach for minimizing soil disturbance. JI I. soil disturbance can be minimized only through the careful use of appropriate test procedures. II I I I I I I .: . I '/' . I I I I I .I II r. The determination of in-situ lateral stress by means of the hydraulic fracturing method is not very reliable in many cases. I Transducer II Vertical II l :1 .// . Selection of a test procedure should involv~ a consideration of the particular soil type to be studied.e. Vibroseismic methods of measuring shear and with any test method.' I / I " . . I I L_Jesting 11 Plane I Fig.

One-dimensional compression index Monitoring of fills and excavations In-situ density and water content Special tests. A number of empirical and analytical procedures have been developed to predict the rate and amount of soil volume changes in response to stress changes.u. collapse measurements. A con.hange in pore water m v pressure y w DR E' ~' - Unit weight content . These include: Plate' load Screw plate Pressuremeter Permeability Penetration resistance (dynamic and static) B.Hydraulic conductivity in the vertical v c vv - direction Coefficient of consolidation for vertical compression ~nd vertical flow c h. 0 f compress~ ' ' b ~ l~ty ' de = -d I p out the test.Overconsolidation ratio = 9'~ Ip ~ where p' is the 9resent overburden effective stress. A disadvantage of the method is that the levels of induced strain are very small. the permeability (hydraulic solidation conductivity) and coefficients or swelling may be calculated.. is maintained through. The direct determination of in-situ soil volume change is difficult. 2. such as sample disturbance and simulation of the in-situ environment. electroosmosis. are partially avoided.. de d(loglOPl) Consolidation Properties from Borehole or Piezometer Permeability Tests Theory where e is void ratio and pi is effective consolidation pressure Cs . a mv . consolidation or swelling will occur. 1 modulus !J.One-dimensional deformation (constrained) compression moduli are also of great value. on un Ioa d~ng oglOP) . In-situ measurement of volume change properties remains desirable. The specific properties needed to describe the consolidation behavior (rate of volume change) that may be computed or estimated from the results of in-situ tests .Hydraulic conductivity (permeability) in the horizontal direction .Effective 9reconsolidation pressure c (maximum 9ast effective pressure) OCR . and measures parameters which are representative of large volumes of soil. The method avoids many of the effects of soil disturbance. The expense of this approach.. Procedures A variety of field tests are available that.. VOLUME CHANGE CHARACTERISTICS A. If the' applied pressure and rate of water flow into or out of the soil are measured. of con. but their interpretation is more difficult. Unlike the PMT.. can yield data from-which volume change properties can be deduced. however. on reloading stant head difference. Properties The specific properties that may be used to characterize the amount of soil compression and expansion which may be computed or estimated from the results of 'in-situ tests include the following: Cc . since difficulties of laboratory testing. pi .. = C.are the following: k h k . dielectricreponse properties.39 E s .o V.One-dimensional recompression index = de d(lo~ 10 a v Coe ff ~c~ent " Spherical and cylindrical piezometer configurations are sketched in Figure V-I.Compressibility = 1 +ve 0 .gconditions. Variable headitests are also feasible.Water Relativedensity - Deformation modulus under drained conditions Poisson's ratio under drained cionditions. precludes its general use.soil volume change is probably the one least studied by means of in-situ measurements. Introduction Of the four geotechnical property classes discussed in this report. de ' If a hydrostatic head difference is applied between the water in a piezometer or borehole probe and the water in the surrounding compressible soil. Properties and Procedures 1.Coefficient c compression of consolidation for vertical and horizontal flow. Cr . and thus tpst results must be corrected before they are used in most predictions of ground deformation.. including blasting. however. The most accurate predictions of deformation behavior may be obtained from large scale field tests which closely simulate the prototype loadir. seismic methods do not yield estimates of soil strength.. These methods are summarized in the following section which is based on portions of the state of the art paper prepared by Mitchell and Gardner (1975).One dimensional swelling index = . !:m.C. and may require long time periods in the case of fine grained soils..

:. The effects of a smear zone and the variation of k and ffivduring 2 c (a u + ~ au) = au (r>a) (V-I) ar2 r ar at where c is the coefficient of consolidation or swelling. (V-2) Yw [ . H r u (r. The solution for the flow rate.40 r Twin leads to piezometer tip . Large smear zones were shown to render the test invalid. but the influence of variation of k and ffivwas found to k~u Q(t) = 41Tawhere: k T l 1+-.IS 0 <I :.l) . as a function of time is (Gibson. u is hydrostatic excess pressure. 1968) to consider the case of a cylindrical piezometer in anisotropic soil.b .~o Manometer or 4u U(r. Q. be minor.t. connected to lead k = constant r h >"?a (a) Spherical Piezometer . This solution has been extended by Wilkinson (1967.All =0 A UO-'Yw'" k = constant h > >a. l/~. 1963) testing are also considered. V-I Schematic representation of in-situ test for determination of consolidation properties from permeability measurement For the spherical piezometer. r is radial distance and t is time.>O UO='Yw" pressure gauge.. the governing equation for consolidation or swell is: The values of k and c may therefore be deduced from the intercept and slope of a plot of Q(t) vs.-F Constant' pressu re l.t) t . = permeability ct = t~me factor = ~ a . in the manner illustrated in Figure V-2.o. The effect of soil anistropy is to impart a curvedshape to the plot of Q(t) vs.a~ (b) Cylindrical Piezometer r Fig. 1fT ] It\.

5 QR = Q 2~ (8u) b ~ QR and T to (V-8) TESTED NOVEMBER 29-30. water flow through the ends neglected. stress system and disturbance. Borehole and piezometer permeability tests do not give soil compressibility.5 0. laboratory and full scale performance measurements are almost unavoidable as the result of differences in flow direction. Field tests predicted values of Cv which were substantially lessor greater than field performance values in some cases. case: =is h a2u 1 au a2u (+ .c 1.2~8u b k (1 + -) .5 21T16u)bkh .0. The field permeability values were in agreement with both the full scale field performance and the laboratory values.S. Application of Methods 1975) For the cylindrical c. of the cylinder may be for the flow rate be- The availableevidenceindicatesthat the values of k and c determined in the field are generally greater than the values predicted from laboratory tests. Additional descriptions of the application of these methods are provided by Al-Dhahir and Morgenstern (1969).6 + 7. 2.5) + 12.-V2) Constant head test results for foundation clay at fiddler's ferry ash lagoon embankment foundation illustrating basis for evaluation of permeability and coefficient of consolidation (data from AI-Dhahir et al.1966. V-3 Normalized flow rate as a function of time factor for a short permeameter (b/a = 0. AT TIP-3-7 PS..2) (from Jezequel and Mieussens. and the solution comes: with a ratio.0 + 4Y~(N rT . (V-7) Normalize short permeameter permeameter using: data. N > 2. Discussion For a long permeameter. potentially~ be greatlyreduced throughthe use of a piezometer probe such as describedby Wissa et al.0. V-2 Imin. the vertical permeability. and c: mv k = cYw (V-IO) .6 a::: 0 Y IT Fig. The discrepancies in Cv were attributed to probable stress history effects. IQ69) Fig.1964.4 0. mv.44 au at (V. directly but it is possible to estimate IDv using the values of k Q(t) T 2 .0 c: E . The testing time required for a pressure increment in field testing is comparable to that of laboratory testing. 6U APPLIED ATTIP-5-9P. IT J (V-4) where: N = diameter length = 2a 2b flow through purely radial the in (V-5) For section T < 0. Differences in the values of c calculated from field. 4.5 ..3) The solution Q(t) = ka Yw [ 2~ (N .. 6U 6U APPLIED APPLIED AT TIP-5-8PS.44..Yw h IWT (V-6 ) = cht a 2 (V-7 ) If a short permeameter is used. Obtain ch and kh using a long and Equations (V-6).1 0. may be computed according to a me~hod prescrib~d by Jezequel and Mieussens (1975): 1.. 3.-) + c ar2 r2 ar v az2 for 8u T < 0.I. (1975)and shown in Figure V-4 of this report. u u 0 1. 20 ~ <J I ~ I:: '16 ~ 0. Al-Dhahir et al.. Enter RK kv Figure V-3 with obtain = ~/RK (V-9) 2.2 0. water in Figu~e V-I is central direction.0 ~ :.(\/ 0 12 8 4 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I/Vf Yw ~O 0 0.I. -f--I~ 2. The field testing time may.- .3 0.41 Yw TESTED NOVEMBER 13-15. TESTED NOVEMBER 1-2.1965.I. (1969) and Jezequel and Mieussens (1975). k .5) The methods described above have been applied to field tests in embankment soils as reported by Bishop and Al-Dhahir (1969).

1 =-=Esma v O-ring Seals 'pressure Tronsducer Locknut 1 + e v (V-II) Proposed correlations between Es and SPR for different sands are summarized in Table V-I and Figure V-5. SPR. Factors such as pore pressure behavior and possible grain crushing must be considered when comparing compressibility and penetration resistance.. the piezometer ~975) probe (from 700 An approach for the evaluation given good results is to compute it equation (V-IO) using mv determined tests and k from field measurements. """ 600 D..BLOWS/30cm Fig. Stainless Steel Porous Tip 800 Fig. Es' that is. is usually expressed as an equivalent constrained modulus.. A wide degree of variation is evident. but the effects of pore pressure generation must be considered for individual 'tests. if any. The methods to be described apply only to dry or completely saturated soils.8PT and Dutch Cone methods. A wide variety of penetrometers are in current 01 .but this discussion will be limited to the . 0 use. Compressibility as. on the preconsolidation pressure in sands. Pratective Polyethylene Penetration tests do. establiShed which correlation. Penetration Resistance Compressibility Considerations as a Measure of Soil 0 2 i C\I 500 General As noted in an earlier section the static or dynamic penetration resistance of a soil is a complex function of soil deformation...riCit provide information Square A-Rod Thread Tubing 3/8' 0. void ratio and in-situ stress. Penetration resistance usually decreases when the ground water table is crossed. E 0 """ 400 111 +In W CJ) :> .. but a number of empirical correlations have been proposed. 10 20 30 40 50 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE .Indicated by the Standard Penetration Test Ferrule Transducer Electric Cable Compressibility based on the value of Standard Penetration Resistance.J :> 0 0 ~ 300 200 100 O. Soil dilation will induce neg- .. Correlations betweenSPR and the compressibility of cohesive soils have not been welldefined. 1975) . V-4 Schematic of Wissa et al. The correlations are of 'little use unless it can be.. since the compressibility of sand is significantly influenced by its OCR. V-5 Relationships for cqmpressibility modulus as a function of standard penetration resistance (from Mitchell and Gardner. strength and compressibility characteristics. Analytical solutions for penetration resistance as a function of compressibility are not yet available. holds true for a particular sand in question.42 ative pore pressures and increase penetration resistance in a saturated soil. Contact stresses greater than about 100 kgf/cm2 may cause crushing of soil grains. of c that has by means of from laboratorY 0 Q. gradation.D.. This is a serious limitation. with susceptibility to crushing dependent on mineralogy. particle size and shape.

emax.6 Soil Types Basis Penetration tests in field and in test shaft.3 (1 +e) Cc ~ qc (V-IS) It is evident that since a may vary by tlOO%. a.6:!: 57.2 kg/cm2 Po Webb (1969) = effective overburden pressure = = 5 (N + 15) 10/3(N+ 5) Es Es tons/ft2 tons/ft2 Sand C:Jayey sand Screw Plate Tests Below water table Farrent (1963) Es = 7. inches B in inches Silty sand Analysis of field data of Schultze and Sherif (1973) Conservative estimate of of maximum shallow settlement foundations Note: N is penetration resistance in blows per 30 cm. The relationship C (1 + ---. A general correlation proposed by Sanglerat et al. qc' with Cc: cr' a = 2. where cr' C 0 = effective overburden stress.) (V~12) cr . (1972) is presented in Figure V-7. In fact. A consistent value of a may be exhibited by a given deposit.S22 kg/cm2 v = 246. . llcr Recommended values of a range from 1. 2 a = 2 (1 + 100) ] (V-17) thus. qc' and compressibility have been proposed. for a given sand.. In general. (blows/ft. as illustrated in Figure V-6. (Schultzeand Moussa. A number of them are listed in Table V-2.5 to 8 for normally consolidated soils. with higher values associated with softer more compressible soils.3 (1 +e) C c (v-14) has been proposed by Vesic (1970) for Ogeechee River sand. it is not clear whether a will increase or decrease withqc' Conflicting results exist and have not yet been explained (Mitchell and Gardner. sand Es C = C(N+6) 3(silt l2(gravel with N < 15 to gravel sand) with sand) Trofimenkov E = (350 to 500) logN kg/cm2 Sand Sand and USSR practice (1974) Meyerhof S = P¥'B /2N inches (1974) S p gravel = in pvB /N tons/ft2. 1975) Reference Relationship Es = vaO.In . and emin. C.) Compressibility Resistance as Indicated by Static Cone The compressibility.2 10gN 263. The parameter. 1961) Remarks Correlation coefficient Schultze and Melzer (1965) Dry sand = 0. lle llh 1 .730 for 77 tests 0< Po < 1. 1975). predictions of volume change based on q are rough estimatesat best. a is not constant.4 Po + 375. C and Cc are related: C = 2. Cc' For one dimensional compression: E s = mv = (V-16) aqc . Compressibility based on e.5 (1- jJ2)N tons/ft2 Sand jJ = Poisson's ratio Terzaghi and Peck loading settlement curves Used in Greece Begemann (1974) ES = = 40 + C(N-6) kg/cm2 kg/cm2 N> 15 Silt sand with with to . IDv' may be expressed as: 1 Many correlations between static cone resistance. = h and. Correlations have been developed using both the constant of compressibility.43 Table V-I Compressibility as Indicated by Standard Penetration Resistance (Mitchell and Gardner. may be used to relate the cone resistance. and the compression index. = -C c llcr log (1 + cr ) (V-13) Dr .

at higher values. 522 s mv \I = 301.5qc Sand Overpredictssettlementsby a factor of two Based on field and lab penetration tests " Schultze and Melzer (1965). 3 Po + 60.3-1.emaxamd emn Correlation coefficient 90 tests valid for Po = 0.Gardner.5 qc Sands Sand Trofimenkov (1964) Es Es = 2. = 0.8 for kg/cm2 = Bachelier and Parez (1965) Es = Cl.5 qc = 100 + 5 qc De Beer (1967) Es = 1.8.7 CI.qc Pure sand Silty sand Clayey sand Soft clay CI. = 1.778 0 to 0.3 (l+e) sand Cc e) Cs Aoed = 2.0.J:. attributedto grain crushing Webb (1969) 5 Es = Z(qc + 30) tsf Sand below water table Clayey sand below water table 5 Es = 3(qc + 15) psf Based on screw plate tests Correlatedwell with settlementof oil tanks .qc Based on penetrationand compression tests in large chambers Lower valnes of CI.382.8-5. = 3.3 :!: 50.1 log qc . E =. of 3 - 12 qc.9 CI.7 ~ ~ De Beer (1967) A = C Aoed Coed Overconsolidated C from field tests Aoed and Coed from lab oedometertests Coed = 2.9 CI. 1975) Reference Relationship Es Soil Types Remarks Overpredictssettlementsby a factor of about two Lower limit Average Buisman (1940) = 1..3 Dry sand compressibility based on e.Table Compressibility as Indicated by Static Cone V-2 Resistance (Mitchell al1d. = 7. = = 3 sands Cl.3 (1+ Thomas (1968) ES CI.. \laD.

4 < Ct.< 4 Peat and organic clay (Pt.3 < Cc < 0.2 < Cc < 0.2 c See Fig.5 0.< 1. (1972) Es = 2qc Sand Based on screw plate tests ~cr = 2 tsf } Es = aqc 3 < a < 8 2 < a < 5 1 < a < 2.< 6 2 < a < 8 1.Table V-2 (continued) Reference Heigh and Corbett (1969) Vesic (1970) E Relationship Soil Types Soft silty clay Remarks See Fig. 2 and text s = -1.2 c C < 0.< 3 2 < Ct.< 1 2 < a < 4 1. } } Silts of low plasticity (ML) Highly plastic silts and Clays (MH. 9 25 < w < 40% 40 < w < 100% qc < 7 bars.CH) Organic silts (OL) .5 < a < 3 a Ct. 12 bars.< 6 1 < Ct. OH) Basedon Clays of low plasticity (CL) 600 comparisonsbetween field penetration and lab oedometer tests q c < 7 bars 7 < qc < 20 bars q c > 20 bars q c > 20 bars q c < 20 bars q c < 20 bars q c < 12 bars q c < 7 bars: 50'< w < 100 100 < W < 200 w > 200 20 < qc < 30 bars q c > 30 bars q c < 50 bars q c > 100 bars qc > < qc 12 bars.3 0.5 w < 30% w < 25%' } C < 0. mv = aq c Es = 2(1+DR2)qc density Sand Based on pile load tests and assumptions concerningstate of stress DR = relative Schmertmann Gielly et Sanglerat (1970) al. 111 1 < Ct.5 3 < Ct. } Gravel } Sand =2 = 1.5 < Ct. 0.j:>. (1969) et al.7 < Cc < 1 w > 130 C > 1 c .7 100 < W < 130% 0.

Table V-2 (continued) Reference Bogdanovic (1973) Relationship Soil Types Remarks Based on analysis of silo settlements over a period of 10 years ES = a.based on analysis of vertical strain ES determinedby lab tests on reconstituted samples of sand Es back-calculatedfrom screw plate settlementusing Buisman-DeBeer and Schmertmannmethods. see text Alpersteinand Leifer (1975) Dahlberg (1974) E = (11 .5 qc Bulgarianpractice ~ 0'\ Sand Sand Sand.= 1.= 1.qc 1 < a.1nits S = settlement Conservative estimate. 9 qc Es = f (qc + 3200) kN/m2 Fine to medium eand South African practice Es Es Trofimenkov (1974) = t (qc + 1600) 1.R.5 . Belgian practice ES=1.S.5 kN/m2 = a.1. } Greek practice Italian practice Es = = 3 qc ' qc < 30 kg/cm2 } Es > 3/2qc or Es = 2 qc Es 1.22) qc Overconsolidated sand NC and OC sand E = a.0 qc > 40 kg/cm2 20 < qc <40 10 < qc < 20 5 < qc < 10 Sands.5 qc qc NC sands NC sands L/B L/B = 1 to 2 ~ 10 axisymmetric = 3. practice Sands Clays Cohesionless soil Es Es = = 3 qc 7 qc } U.B . = 2.3. sandy gravels Silty saturated sands Clayey silts with silty sand and silty saturated sands with silt } Schmertmann (1974a) Es Es = 2.S.qc' < a.5 a.K.qc a. a.B a. practice Meyerhof (1974) S = pB/2 qc in consistent 1.5 plane strain De Beer (1974b) C > .5 a.increaseswith increasingqc.= 1.2.5 . < 2 Clayey sands.2qc 2cr 0 3 qc A > E: "2 0'0 NC sands Belgian practice OC sands Sand ' qc > 30 kg/cm2 3 < E:< 10.6qc-B Es = 1. PI < 15% ) Sands U.< 4 .

The distance between this point and the existing ground surface corresponds to the depth of soil removed. as published for example by Ladd and Foott (1974).. Alternatively.cited in 1). Load Bearing Tests for th~ Determination of Compressibility Properties The load bearing test.. Basis of Load Bearing Test Interpretation The load vs.! t'./ ton 0.47 modulus 00 sq. or more fundamentally. An estimate of the OCR in clays may be obtained through the following method suggested by Schmertmann (1974a): remains a valuable test method.. Only the derivation of Es will be considered in this report.tt.. assUming a constant unit w~ight throughout the profile. Interpretation from._-'--- Crust Very soft silty clay becominq firmer with dept:h ISanglerat) Some laminations fine pockets . occasional of shells ~50 . and deformations at surface points located nearby. . 2) Statistical Methods use relationships between the . For a rigid LBT plate: E. ~ plot of qc vs.settlementof bearing plates and large scale footings. otdomthr test D dissipation test Fig. soil deformation at different depths. LBT. The approaches used for the evaluation of Es from the LBT generally fall into three classifications: 1) estimate Su from qc 2) estimate p~ 3) from profile information compute su/p~ 4) refer to the relationships between su/p. 80 90 . settlement curve derived from the static LBT is usually interpreted to deduce the allowable bearing pressure. the moduli applicable to volume change prediction.. > 01 §I.. 3) Finite Element Analyses consider both elastic and inelastic material response. but the LBT .O e 0 of silty sand and -. and OCR for different clays. 70 ----. employing the same measurements. suited particularly to the testing of uncontrolled fills and stoney soils.Elastic Solutions Foundation materials may be idealized as an isottopic. . 1969) Overconsolidation Ratio and Maximum Past Pressure from Static Cone Resistance A knowledge of the maximum past pressure at points in a soil deposit is needed for many analyses..J:j . 1) Elastic Solutions are based on settlement of test plate.-. V-6 Comparison between compressibility of a soft silty clay as measured by oedometer tests and based on cone resistance (from Meigh and Corbett. depth may be extrapolated above the ground surface to where qc = O. 'a ~60 a. Factors of cost and testing time have increased the relative advantages of other in-situ methods.15 GtVL 10 20 . represents the first know~ application of in-situ testing to investigate soil compressibility. elastic half space.-"30 .. A determination of this quantity by means of the static cone penetration test alone is not possible in cohesionless soils.

w < 2~ 25 < W < .48 Cc 6 u t) " " " n OJ "tI I:: H I:: 0 'r-! UJ >: C' .. . . Based on a statistical anaiysis of LBT results on 'footingsand test plates.. t ~~. U ~J °'I 0 : ! ~ I ... t . . E where: s = I0 II k (1 ..30 30 < W < I. The appropriate influence factors and the solution for this case are presented in Figure V-8. . " . . The influence factors for a number of other cases are The best known . -'- I I 0 I ~ . . . . ". . V-7 Correlation between compression index and cone resistance (from Sanglerat et al. ::.. 1972) (V-18) given by Mitchell and Gardner (1975).. .( D + Dl ) . . .statistical relationship between settlement and footing size for a given bearing pressure is that'proposed... ~I .. t '. .. . 0 J I I 0z I ~..'J 100 < W < 100 100 < W < 130 W > 130 I i . .~2) D Interpretation from Statistical Relationships D = diameter of test plate 11.. '. .. 'i' .. . I 'j' . " .1 = influence factors for surface 0 loading and loading at depth k = = coefficient Poisson's of subgrade ratio reaction ~ The simplest case is that of a rigid LBT plate located'at the ground surface. : .:':':.qc in bars 30 !~ '° Static Cone Resistance Fig. ~--:~ 10 I~ 10 ooL 0 .. .. .. .- . .. -"".... ..:.by Terzaghiand P~ck (1948) for sands.. . the settlement of a footing or plate of diameter D has been relatedtd that of a smaller footing or plate of diameter Dl by the following equation: 2 2D P (V-19) PI =. . """.~ .

815 Fig. 2D ) D 1 (V-20) elastic modulus det~rmined from LBT. A plot of settlement ratio vs. Po --=r- °0= 00 Q E s RIGID PLATESHAPE Circular Square = 10 °0 (1-J. is not appropriate for sands at various relative densities./presented by Gibson (1967) are in agreement with the FEM solutions. V-8 Influence factors for LBT on surface By recalling Equation (V-18). Interpretation ofLBT from Finite Element Analyses The finiteelementmethod (FEM) of analysis is readily adaptable to the interpretation of volume change parameters in the LBT.different volume change characteristics. Complex test geometries. Equation (V-20) may be simplified: = E0 + nvz - E s =D ( D + 1 2 E 2D sl ) - (V-21) An independent analysis of LBT data by Bjerrum and Eggestad (1963) has indicated that a single relationship. Carrier and Christian (1973) have presented comprehensiveFEM solutions for the settlement of a rigid circular plate on an isotropic linearly elastic and on a non-homogeneous linearly elastic half space.5D D + 1. does not exist. Screw plate tests are well suited for use in sandy soils where undisturbed sampling is difficult. but one is persuaded to concur w~th Bjerrum and Eggestad in concluding that a unique relationship independent of relative density. the ratio of the "equivalent elastic moduli. If the two soils have." Es/Esl' may be expressed as follows: Lambe and Whitman (1969) have noted that a LBT will be most successful if soil disturbance below the plate is minimized.of the test plate will be due primarily to strains ih sq~l A. F.l2)D Po INFLUENCE FACTOR 0. Case #1 Es = E 0 Case #2 Es = nvz Case #3 E For a LBT with Dl equal to unity. The wide range of observed settlement ratios. D is measured in feet. They are less suitedfor in-situtests on clays except for estimating immediate deformations. and the settlement of the screw plate is observed. increments of pressure are applied to the hydraulic piston. and if the soil in question is homogeneous for a depth which is large relative to the size of the actual footing. An amended version of Equation (V-21) has been proposed by Bazaraa (1967): The closed form isotropic elastic solutions of Case #1 and the non-homogeneous elastic solution for case #2 as'. The auger is screwed to the desired depth in the soil. pIPl' for different relative densities and footing sizes is illustrated in Figure V-9~ The Terzaghi-Peck correlation is also sketched in the figure. and is seen to underestimate prediqtions of settlement in a number of cases.auger device of the type depicted in Figure V~ll is used in the screw plate test--termed a field 'com pres so meter by Janbu and E s where: D ( 2.5\ 2 I D sl (V-22 ) Senneset (1973)-to observe the load-settlement behavior of soil at depth. diameter which corresponds to that predicted by Equation (V-22) has been superimposed on the data in Figure V-9.piim~rilyto strains in soil B. .-( ESI where: ESI . The solutions were based upon the three following variations of deformation modulus. such as Equation (V-21). The settlement . Es' with depth. as well as non-homogeneous linearly elastic or non-elastic behavior may be accommodated. the settlement behavior of the plate and footing may be considerably different. The horizontally projected area over the single 3600 auger flight is taken as the loading plate area.---1. Compressibility Characteristics from Screw Plate Tests A flat pitch. z: ~ E D+D 2 D . No solutions are avafHible for comparison with the FEM solutions for Case #3. because of the long consolidation time that would be required to define drained deformations. A soil profile which will yield misleading LBT results is depicted in Figute V-IO. or other parameters. (through an equation of the form of Equation (V-18» elastic modulus appropriate for a footing bf breadth or dia- E s meter D Dl' D = breadth or diameter of LET or footing respectively. while the footing settlement will be dlie.<19 Q The correlation is seen to be somewhat better than Equation (V-19).785 0.

1M . anchor SCREW PLATE 0 Scole 50 ~ Field cOlTf)ressometer 100 cm SCALE 0 ~cm FiS. V-ll Screw plate test as developed (from Janbu in Norway and Senneset..&...' ~ ~ L. I I .II967) T~lhi-Peck .36m (drcuI8r) Da. O.'" /.O. V-lO A soil profile which will yield misleading load bearing test results _.. 100""" /~ ~cy~t::::--.I 0 I y .--~-'_. "'i. BAztr.. HYDRAULIC HOSE INNER PIPE Hydraulic hose gouges 5clliement OUTER PIPE PISTON Anchor from e Earl\. ... 1973).32m (square).. ~ . .j<" :. 100 1000 Fig.' ."'" r- ~ ".. ~ ~ L: .50 100 I I _8 - Dense + Medium Raft and sin'" footinp ~~O::k: " i 'Q:10 '" Spre8dfootinp ~ } .tJ'" ~" ".. ' I ' ]J I. - . ..-" _.. 1963) Test Plote c::J Soil A Soil B Footi no Fig.A-- y~ + 10 Width ratio DIDo- Da. V-g Comparison between settlement and dimension of loaded area (from Bjerrum and Eggestad..

The modulus is related to a derived modulus number. B I z p correction) least dimension of r~ctangular footing or diameter ~f bearing plate. The Evaluation of Volume Change Properties with the PMT The procedure and apparatus of the pressuremeter test have been described in earlier sections.26t where: a n m = 1.cr' = 392 kPa (from Dahlberg. 00 25 5 100 (V-SCALE) 225 1. The method has yielded resul~s that compare well with results of oedometer tests as illustrated in Figure V-13. The method is illustrated in Figure V-12. it may be shown that: 2V (1 + t:. = settlement influence factor increment in stress 1-' Z IJJ 1:: IJJ J I- .10 ~ 0.10 C. An idealized pressurevolume curve from a PMT is presented . 392 kPo (SEE ALSO FIG. Another procedure for determining Es is described by Janbu and Senneset (1973). The coefficient of consolidation may also be deduced from the time settlement record obtained during a screw plate test.335 t. The terms of Equation (V-25) have been defined in Section (IV). as follows: I-a E m p (V-24) ~ Q30 0 25 100 225 400 EXAMPLE TEST J 3 + 16.00 L 0 625 0 . windle and Wroth (1975) have suggested an electrical resistivity method for measuring soil volume change during a partially drained PMT. Time limitations and creep effects limit the usefulness of this method in clays for the measurement of volume change properties. V-12 = ~ s where: a a ( Pa) for DC clays and undrained loading of soft saturated clays = 1 = 1/2 for many sands and silts = p 1 = a for NC fine grained soils 2 stress Determination of cvh by screw plate test. Drainage during the screw plate test is essentially radial so the parameter measured is cvh.Sweden I:. following procedures given by Janbu and Senneset (1973) and summarized by Mitchell and Gardner (1975).which are relevant to each phase of the test are indicated in the figure..5 to 2.. 0. Es' may be calculated from screw plate test results by employing a relationship proposed by Schmertmann (1970): 2B I (V-23) p = Cl C2 I:. t. The moduli.0 = porosity = 1.in Figure V-15. p G. For an infinitely thick elastic cylinder corresponding to the tested soil in a PMT. m.95 LOAD STEP (['. The pre consolidation pressure may also be obtained from the screw plate test in the manner illustrated in Figure V-14. The basis of the test interpretation is a correlation which has been observed between soil resistivity and porosity: resistivity. where: Cl = = = 1 - 0.t}J = apw n-m (V.51 The modulus for one-dimensional compressibility. = The summation form of Equation (V-23) enables soil layering to be accounted for in the analysis. The significance of the computed Es depends upon the point of the test curve being considered.z TIME.O 6.p (E: ) I:.1 (creep E E 0.5 (::) (embedment correction) C 2 1 + 0.2 log (t years) 0. The method has been describedin Section (IV-E). R1 IMPERVIOUS ~Q20 (/) '1:. The method has proved successful in the interpretation o~ pressuremeter tests in soft rock. 18) Fig.0 for marine soils Es 0 ---xv (V-25) Pw = resistivity of pore wat~r . Data shown are for a field test in a sand near Stockholm. 1974) reference = 10 ton/m 1 atmosphere Corresponding values of screw plate pressure and settlement are used as a basis for evaluation of m.

.. V-13 Comparisons between modulus numbers and coefficients of consolidation determined by screw plate tests and by oedometer tests (from Janbu and Senneset..j_.... (a) Silt deposit in Stjf6rdal 0 4 0 4 crein m2/year 200 400 I -'1. w a: 20 Fig..J ': w 12 (/) w ~ 16 ~ .'0' at '"..8 W -. crt ... 1974) . n 10':1. J..s: 0 : ~ 24-1 ! 28 . kPa 0117'. 0 .... . 1-=t -- Fig.00 800 .52 Cr and Cv in m 2 year 100 200 0 0 0 / 2 --: -- 1 - .: 20 -t.---T 8 (b) Sand deposit in Steinkjer ~ 16 --r-- .-t-.. V-14 Evaluation of the preconsolidation pressure.... 1973) PRESSURE (f'. from the results of a screw plate test c (from Dalberg.: Z W ~.

by KID ~4 before entering v these charts. a number of theories may be applied to deduce values of cv' Es. There are. Cs' Cr and Cc from the behavior of constructed facilities. the sand cone and nuclear probes provide reliable means for evaluating in-situ water content and density. Nonetheless. Collapse and Expansion Behavior In~situ density is a useful indicator of potential expansion or collapse in partly saturated soils. Monitoring of Earth and Earth Supported Structures Monitoring during construction and after construction should be considered as much a part of in-situ measurement as is testing strictly for initial design purposes.. . Satisfactory prediction of the amount and rate of heave in any case depends at least on the following factors: 1) 2) 3) 1) Unknown boundary conditions 2) Isolation of the volumetric component of measured deformation 3) Measurement and prediction of effective stress Thickness of expansive soi11ayer Depth to water table Extent of soil dessication . Data gathered from an instrumentation program both shapes the design of future facilities and influences the construction rate and sequence of the facility under study. settlement under cyclic loading and liquefaction.back analyses. expansion. The utilization of performance records from large scale instrumented earth loads and excavations has particular appeal because of the close approximation of conditions which will control the behavior of the as-constructed facility. Relative Density and Porosity as Indicators of Volume Change Properties A knowledge of the in-situ density or relative density and water content provides an indication of the potential for. the Washington densometer. electrical resistivity and plate load tests have also been successfully employed to measure density. J. This correction may alter the derived relative density considerably. Soils with combinations of liquid limit and natural dry density that plot below and to the right of the solid curved lines are susceptible to expansion. if the appropriate data are available. monitoring becomes an integral part of the design process. serious problems concerned with this approach. Volume Change Properties and Expansive Soils Expansive soils pose very serious problems in many areas of the world. soil pressure or load. CPT Some suggested correlations between relative density and qc are presented in Figure V-l6. The proper evaluation of effective stresses and the influences of soil creep behavior constitute the largest obstacles to the implementation of . Field data indicate that the effective overburden stress. 2. - // v/ J/ ' I ~ E ::J I» Pseudo-Elastic Zone 0 Plastic Zone Py ~ 0 ~ XBL 776-9429 pressure-V-15 Idealized pressuremeter test curve indicating soil moduli which are applicable to each phase of testing Undisturbed sampling. The relationships were developed from chamber test results and statistical correlations. Penetration Resistance as a Measure of Relative Density H. and less frequently. In a defensive design format. those plotting above and to the left are susceptible to collapse on wetting. a' . several volume change phenomena including col!apse. In-Situ Density. porewater pressure. yet methods for in-situ measurement of their volume change properties are in a very early stage of development. Fig. 1.53 4) Evaluation of loading and unloading rate effects CJ tJI C C ~ U t = Deformation modulus Eo = Alternated or rebound modulus E+ = Recompression modulus Po Horizontal earth pressure at rest Pv = Creep limit ~ = Limit pressure Ed I 5) Cost considerations 1. including the determination of the reference relative densities themselves. Penetration resistance. 5. since compacted sand fills may exhibit a coefficient of lateral pressure as great as 1. ~. A comprehensive description of field instrumentation is given by Cooling (1962) and more recent innovations are described by Dunnicliff (1971) and Selig (1974). should be mul tiplied. Correlations of this type are subject to a number of uncertainties. Good quality field measurements are the first requirements of a "back calculation" procedure. which include the following: Some correlations between relative density and blow count have been presented in Figures 111-2 and 111-3. however. or magnitude of. Figure V-17 presents a general guide for assessing this behavior on the basis of natural dry density and liquid limit. The most commonly measured quantities are vertical or horizontal deformation.

is the unit swell at the ground surface A distribution of soil swell which varies parabolically with distance above the water table ..54 ~ z 100 ~ C '60 (/) ~90 a:: w 80 a. '/1 //1 // / /1/ h /1 // //../ //' "'. but the techniques are not yet commonplace.0 kG/cm! 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 CONE RESISTANCE./' .! ~ « . 01(1960) .:: 100 Z w 90 ~ ~ (/) .. /"'..!5kG/cm! a:: 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 CONE RESISTANCE Qc (kg/cm2) CONE RESISTANCE Qc (kg/cm2) ~ ~ . has been considered by vijayvergiya and Sullivan (1974). ~ ~ 40 30 ~ ~ W 20 i= 10-/ /.. . h. The surface heave../ ': 60 /.TURNBULL . I I ~IOO w ~90 w 0. and is given by the equation 1 ~h ( (V-27) H='3h where: (~h)0 h )0 In-situ methods are capable of providing information on each of these factors. ./ / /' / / / / / / / / VERTICAL EFFECTIVE STRESS.' /' >.. The distribution is sKetched in Figure V-18.50 C~ 60 . Qc (kQ/cm2) Fig. Qc(kg/cm2) ../" /" /" ~ a: >./ /' / ..I" SCHULTZE-MELZER (1965 SCHMERTMANN (1970 a:70 I' /. I I ../' / ~ 40 C 30 / W > 20 i= :3 ~ 10 '/ 0 I' .::. 70 . ~ 90 ".J W a:: 0 // ." / ~. '" 80 70 . ....' /( /' / ... /~/ /.'" / ".60 ~ 50 - /'/' i/ .J W a:: 201/ 10 VERTICAL I I 0 25 50 EFFECTIvE I I 75 100 I 125 STRESS-O I I 150 175 200 c 1/' -SCHULTZE-MELZER(1965 w 30 /' ==~~~:~~T(~::~ (1971) ~ 20 ./' wao a. 70 a: .00 Z "" SCHMElnMANN (1971) ~ a:: w a.. V-l6 Correlations effective between staticcone resistance. 01(1960) "./ .-TURNBULL Of --THOMAS SCHMERTMANN (1969) (1971) 01 (1960) VERTICAL EFFECTIVE a:: 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 CONE RESISTANCE. Qc (kg/cm2) STRESS' 2./' !:: 50 I ~/ ~ 40 ../ .80 I 1// / /".- .../ « 10 VERTICALEFFECTIVE G1 / STRESS.--- .' I /? " '/ / / / / -.-.- THOMAS (1969) TURNBULL .. . and relative density 4) In-situ stress 5) Applied stresses 6) Soil characteristics which determine the swellingindex and coefficient of swelling 7) Depth of'seasdnal moisture variation 8) Chemical and biological environment 9) Temperature distributions./" ' c . ./ /. -. ~ !:: 50 Z 40 w c 30 w t. vertical stress.4.'" /' / ? '~ cf60 ~ . O.0 I19/cm! 25 50 15 100 125 150 115200 225 250 215 300 CONE RESISTANCE./ /" .90 u 70 100 " ffi 80 '/ //. corresponds to the summation of soil swell over the depth./ ~ . l I .U) Z w c w > 50 40 30 20 i= « 10 . H.

'" "Specific ""'Speclflc gravity = 2.J cr a: ::) 100 v Icr Z V' 1/ M 110 . 40 50 60 70 90 60 &L U Il. Degree of EKpansi veness very high High Medi um high Medium Medium low Low Guide to collapsibility....VERY HIGH . and expansion based on in-situ dry density and liquid limit (adapted from Gibbs. V-18 variation of swell with depth according to Vijayvergiya and Sullivan (1974) .70 gravity = 2. .60! 1 Lines of 100.Fig.V V c >a: c 90 ..55 10 20 30 L I QUID LI M I T. >.. 1969) V-17 (~h/h )0 SURFACE HEAVE =SHADED AREA h GROUND ~ WATER TABLE Fig.... (/) Z ~ 80 I 70 .. saturation Estimated S~bol H Y M X L .. compressibility.

with substantial variations in relative density indicated by a given penetration resistance according to different correlations. including screw plate tests" (4) presstiremeter tests. such as sampling (particularly in cohesionless soils) and simulation of in7si~u short time. if not better than. with recent developments in finite difference and finite element techniques for analysis of consolidation. Nonetheless.staticpenetration tests. but can give misleading results if overconsolidated sands are misinterpreted as normally consolidated. Each:of these. rapidly Varyirigproperties with distance from the probe and changing stress fields adjacent to the test device may be important. Load:bearing tests are usually interpreted using elastic theory to give a modulus of deformation for undrained or drained conditions.or evaluation of . static cone and screw plate. The most suitable currently available in-situ tests for evaluation of the volume change properties of differen-tsoil types are as follows: The borehole or piezometer permeability test is particularly well::-suited +. one could conceive a load bearing test with pore pressure measuremE:mt:s and/or artificial drains from which both compressibility and consolid~tion properties might be determined in a for determination of volume change properties of soils and soft rocks.ofconsq:j. pressuremeter tests Penetration resistance measurements. Correlations with volume change properties are empirical. however. (5) and test fills or excavations. however. Normallyconsolidated sands .screw plate tests. To sort out the combined influence of relative density. Analysis of pressuremeter tests can be made in terms of undrained or drained deformation parameters depending on the time allowed for consolidation under each applied stress. This would permit/both the establishment of more data points on correlation curves and prediction of behavior for other cases on the same soil.56 Indirect methods which measure "such parameters as pH. self~ boring pressuremeter tests Stiff clay. The required testing time for a fully drained load b~aring test on a'c6hesive soil may be prohibitive. e~g. In addition in-situ tests that provide a measure of density or porosity yield an indicatiqnof volume change properties. speed. the available correlations are tenuous.oad bearihgtests. The static cone penet~ationtest can be well suited for evaluation of the compressibilityand relative density of normally consolidated sands. and the test results in cohesionless soils are sensitive to in-situ stress conditions. and low cost are attractive. It provides data from which the compressibility and coefficient of consolidation can be calculated. K. woUld seem to overcome. static penetration tests.are available allowal1. .for evaluation of the preconsolidation pressure of most soil types. salt content.assessing potential settlements 'or volume change. predictions based on the results of laboratory tests. (3) :j. depending on soil type and time of loading. although time limitations will probably restrict its use to cohesionless to slightly cohesive soils. and'there would appear to be need for considerable'further work on tests for use in these materials. screw plate tests. ' stress conditions. because of their simplicity." Significant advances"should be possible were more"of the available data for full scale structures used to back-calculate properties.use in most cases. pressuremeter tests In the case of cohesionless soils. shale . The static cone resistance may offer more reliable means for assessment of relative density. Conclusions Several types of in-situ tests .bffer-the best means for.ataccord with full.ce . particularly if the in-situ stress conditions are unknown. and none can be considered suitable for all soils under all conditions.load bearing tests. in-situtestsi if:'properly done and interpreted. Problems because of disturbance.the rate of consolidation properties of fine-grained soils. a knowledge of the relative density may be of primary importance because of concern over liquefaction potential in seismic areas. load bearing tests pressuremeter tests Soft clay . although suitable correlations are still in early stage of development. The screw plate test offers a method . or electrical properties are seen to hold some promise fo~ the in-situ measurement of volume change properties in expansive soils. ' Large scale test fills and excavations probablY. High cost and long testing time preclude their. Most applications to date in cohesive soils have been for determination of uhdrained properties.permeability tests. in-situ stress and fabric will probably necessitate the combined use of more than one test type.types of test has advantages and disadvantages.idation under each applied stress could provide a basis for determination of volume change properties.scale performance at least as well as. Whether this type of test can be used for evaluation of compressibility as well (see equation V-lO) remains to be seen. however. including(l) borehole or piezometer permeability tests. (2) penetration resistance measurements.' some of the problems associated with the use of laboratory tests for evaluation of volume change' properties. Analysis of the data in terms of effective stresses or the Overconsolidated sands . The use of in-situ tests for evaluation of the swell properties of expansive soils is in its early'stages. giving results th. Although the standard penetration test has been widely used for this purpose.

The problem of test "loading" is a fundamental consideration of property measurement. Introduction of new methods. i. The PMT is a prime example of a method which is expected to see increasing use.as an interpretation of the CPT in terms of cavity expansion. the potential for future development of the different methods for improved determination of different parameters has been assessed. The potential advantages of in-situ measurement of soil properties are both fundamental and practical.. B or C. The references cited provide more complete details of the procedures for each test. but rather a standardization of technique. with A indicating high app1icabi1ity. Of particular interest in this regard are geophysical and remote sensing approaches. are expected to be hvai1ab1e ih the near future. what is necessary is not a drastic improvement. '''How much does the measurement of a given quantity affect the magnitude of that quantity?" Future Developments in in-situ testing may possible improvements be categorized as follows: 1. This is not to say that these methods will not see continued use and refinement. such as the SPT. anisotropic and non-linear soil properties. and some important methods. 2.the present time 1) Decreased soil disturbance as compared to that incurred during sampling and laboratory testing. . Some significant contributions such as the drained analysis of the PMT have been described in this report. 21 Retention of the in-situ stress. and to provide accuracy and relevant design parameters for specific engineering problems. San Francisco. In~situ testing constitutes a potential means of defining such conditions and characterizing such behavior. and no mark indicating . The disadvantages. Sophisticated analytical methods for predicting soil behavior can now be used to evaluate complex boundary conditions and the effects of non-homogeneous. On the basis of i~formation obtained for preparationof this report.57 VI. the goal of in-situ testing research is two-fold: to improve our understanding of the behavior of undisturbed soil deposits. On the other hand. The practical advantages include: 1) Increased cost-effectiveness of testing. . as well as the lack of a sample (in many instances) for verification of the actual soil type being tested. Work supported in part by the U. The fundamental advantages include: Acknowledgements Financial support for studies of in-situ testing and analysis procedures and for preparation of this report was provided by the Geoscience Research Program of the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory and by the Professional Development Program of Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Synthesis of existing The refinement of existing procedures and methods of interpretation is an on-going process.hO applicability for determination of the property. California.S. An assessment of the applicability of the methods discussed is presented in Table VI-I. Each method is listed and its suitability for determining various different geotechnical parameters is indicatedb~T a "grade" of A. but at. 2) The potential ability to increase the intensity of testing for a given project and thus develop a data base which is suitable for statistical evaluation. In many cases. In this context. temperature. '3. 3) Decreased number of error sources. Department of Energy. the accuracyof analyticalmethoas usually'"sur. methods.C indicating limited applicability. These conclusions are summarized in TableVI-2 It is recognized that.me~hods Refinement of existing procedures and of interpretation. offer relatively little potential for future development. as their potential isrecognized and exploited. which enjoy widespread use 'at present.of'in-situ testing lie in the difficulty of attaining the realization of these potential advantages.e. passes the accuracy attainable in measuring input parameters. A second report is planned concerning potential new approaches and methods for evaluation of soil geotechnical properties insitu. chemical and biological environments. It is believed that a number of techniques.such an assessment is very subjective in nature. SU~1ARY AND CONCLUSIONS This report describes many of the methods currently used for the in-situ measurement of soil properties and indicates procedures for deduction of specific property values from the acquired data. Similarly the static cone penetration test is likely to see greatly increased use in the U. such. S. some methods which are infrequently used at present are expected to become increasingly popular.

B = moderate applicability.-4 +J U Q) -1 lI-/ +J U Q) r:r:I -.-4 +J U 0.-4 s:: II) 0 U) +J ~ ~ +J Q)U) > 0 II) to:! Q) -..-4 +J U ::I Io-! II) It! ~ B B ~ t:) -.-4 II) II) Q) r:r:I r-I Ir-I It! ~~ Q) -.-4 to:! +J 0.c:: +J t1I .-4 ~ ~ It! ~ ~ r-I It! s:: Q) ~ +J U) ~ It! Q) ..-4 II) ::I r-I ::I 'tj s:: 0 0.-4 +J.-4~ -1 ~ -1 S Q) 0 ou t) ~N ~ ~ Q) :2 III 0 Q) r-I t1I 0 Ilt ~ It! lI-/+J -1 ~ Q) OJ 0> u.58 TableVI-l.-4~ ~+J 0U) :I: ~ III Q) Io-! >t +J -.-4 .-4 II) 0 ~ 0 III -1 >t +J s:: It! 0 s:: -..-4 +J It! It!~ 'tjQ -. D = No applicability.-4 lI-/ Io-! t.-4 ::I r-I It! II) s:: ~ ::I +J It! U) U Q) -. CUrreAt suitability of methods Q) t1I TABLE VI-I.-4 Io-! 'd N' II) 0.-4 It! U -..-4 It! +J t1I .. Borehole Permeability Large Scale Pumping Hydraulic Fracture Piezometer Probe Pressuremeter Borehole Shear Direct Shear Plate Load Screw Plate B I B C C C A B B C C C C C A A B C B C B A C A A C B C C C B C A C B A A C C A B A B B A B B A A A C B B B B A A A C A A C A Piezometer A i B A = high applicability.-4 s:: ~ 0 0 Ute 0 0 ~ U) II) t1I ~ Q) +J s:: H lI-/ +J U) ~ § ~ +J ~ S Q) Soil Profile II) -.J s:: Q) +J s:: s:: +J -.c:: U) 'tj Q) s:: -. Q) ~ ::I II) II) Q) . .-4 Q) -.-4 It! U 'tj -.(S It! Q) .-4 II) s:: Q) Q 0 U ~ Q) +J 0 -.c:: s:: :>t +J -.-4 ~ ~ Q) :2 +J II) > ~ A A Dynamic Penetration Static Penetration Vane Shear Falling/Constant Head.-4 Or-l -. C = limited applicability.-40.-4 +J It! r-II -.c:: +J II) II) Q) ~ r-I -. Q) Q) CURRENT SUITABILITY OF METHODS > -..c:: U) 'tj Q) s:: -.-4 . § :8 ~ 'B 0 H ~ I t!1 r-I +J It! U s:: 0 0 -.Q s:: -.-4 lI-/ -1 > -.

-Ilrtl c: ~ I UJ rtl (.. ~ 1-1 I I 1-1 +J tJ"1 . I i . I+J c: I ! +J 4-f 'M 0. ! I '"dQ 'M .J 1-1 Q) :> I 1 OM 1-1 0 II: 2 U +J fJj ... ~ I: I.. I c: I .I I I 0 1-1 0 p. ~ ~ ~E (]j 0 I I UII: I!-! 1-1 0 0 m I ~ . '8 I.r.. : ! I! i . .. . I e B C A B B B A C Shear I C Falling/Constant Head.. .59 Table VI-2..:>..! Q IS:(/) B U C Dynamic Static Vane Penetration Penetration e B Ie A B B . C 0 oM +J.. 'M ~ 1.~.j.~ I +J 0 I'M I \ Q) 1-1 +J (/) 1-1 rtl (]j I I I I ! : 'M 4-f 0 .Q)OO 1-1+J ooo 1-1 o.-I UJ c: 0 'M .. :>.---. Potential methods for further future development and improvement r--'-r ! TABLE VI-2..c c: +J tJ"1 ()) 1-1 c: +> oo '1-1 cO (l) I I ~ ~ OM I +J 1) I . P. (]) 0 0 r. 1 --.j c: E i ~ I rtl ::J..x: I ~ +J ~I-I (l) <1J I ' O. e I Piezometer e j I i e e applicability.j.-1 'M I . ' I (]) I0 ~ I <1J ~ ~ ~ r-I (]). :> I I I!+J i I! i j'M .c +> oo c ~ "" I I .-I 01 .-I rtl +J c: c: D '"d Q) C 'M cO 1-1 Q ..c oo . 1-1 ~UJ 01 ~ .I : ! I i. I A = high applicability. I UJ I I I Q) 01 UJ I .. c: rtl rtl 1-1 10C: I 'M'M I +J rtl ! . .c: oo ~ '.. 1-1 I I. limited D = No applicability.. c5 '"d OM ::J ..0 0 .-I . S I oo ! :> C A B B ::r: p. N elI'M e 0 p. UJ fJj ell I I I ~ ...I .! I i I Q)'M I :> <1J':' +J J --rl r . 0 N +J fJj'M 1-11:1-1 :>....o +J:> C:'M 'M )UJ.(]jjcO I UJ c: I rtl OU " QJII: I 0:> U--- :>i c: ::J 0 (]j '"d Q) c: 'M rtl 1-1 "d ..j 1-1 ::J +J ~...J ' +JI-I N (l) ''''''1-1 !:!I OM t' ill I U 1-1 (]) +J i.-1 I I I ~ OM 1-1 ~ 8~ Q) +> I I +J Q) +J I>: 0 .-I ::J ::J i . Borehole Permeability Large Scale Pumping C C C ! B C B B B B Hydraulic Piezometer Fracture Probe e e C e B B A C A A B e A A B I t B A A B Pressuremeter Borehole Direct Plate Screw Shear Shear A B B I I I C I I C e e i I Load Plate I 1 e A I C A e A ! i I e A ! I e e B = moderate applicability. I i Soil Profile I 1 . i I '-r-" I ..!) I o~ .-I1 I OM fJj'M .c t POTENTIAL OF METHODS FOR FURTHER FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT 'I I .

433-450. 251-264. 1974. Biarez.3." Geotechnique. pp. pp. Raleigh. I. Bemben. L. Berezantzev. 4. F. S. (l969) "Some Comparisons Between Laboratory Tests. and Steinbach. 1974. (1974) "GeneralReport for Centraland pp. 69-92. and Parez. pp. Bachelier. J-F." Journal.D. pp. In-Situ Tests and Full Scale Performance.2. I. (1975) "Comparison of Field and Laboratory Shear Moduli.. No.." Conference on In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock." Geotechnique. and Al Dhahir. North Carolina State University. January. ASTM STP 193. Vol. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Contributions from Scandinavia. Al Dhahir. A. Raleigh. pp.2. 1-21. J. pp. Anagnostopoulos. N. published by National Swedish Building Research. I. Stockholm. Raleigh.K." Proceedings of the European symposium on Penetration Testing. Engrg. R. Anderson. No. A.A. Vol. F. andMorgenstern. pp.G. M. M. 93-120. No. J ." Symposium. 17. (1969) "In- Z. Alperstein. SMll. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. pp. A. Bjerrum. Vol. Raleigh. Bjerrum.2. pp. pp. GT5. University of Illinois. 1975. (1975) "pumping Tests in an Unconfined Aquifer. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. North Carolina State University. Euro~an Conf." Proc. and Le Mehaute. 98. 29-39. 2. on Soil Mech. ASCE. Stockhblm. Vane Shear Testing of Soils. L. 3.1. European Symposium on Penetration Testing. I. (1975) "Seismic Field Methods for In-Situ Moduli. (1963) "Interpretation of Loading Tests on Sand. Baguelin. Ballard. Inst. (1969) "Observations on Pore Pressures Beneath the Ash Lagoon Embankments at Fiddler's Ferry Power Station. 13-14.." Proceedings. Al Dhahir. No. Geotechnical Engineering Division. S. (1975) "Site Investigation with Static Cone Penetrometer.G. 102. 22. A. R. I. pp. Z.L. Jezequel. Baguelin. L. pp. 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. S.. Begemann. June 5-7. Jezequil. with Special Reference to Permeability and Coefficient of Consolidation. Vol. Greece. Vol. Vol." Proceedings. 1129~1142. (1972) "Expansion of Cylindrical Probes in Cohesive Soils.. Bazaraa. 1-54. Bjerrum. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division.60 REFERENCES Ahmad." Proceedings. Arman. D." Ph. 1975. ASCE. and Ahmad. of Civil Engineers.D.A. Vol. and Myers. R." Conference on the In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock.Kennard.G. Thesis." proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. L. and Leifer. Engrg.". 121-150.W. 539-555. N. pp. 2. Nash. published by National Swedish Building Research. 107. Vol.. Bjerrum. Poplin. and Gresillon. (1972) "Tests and Proposed Methods for the Calculation of the Bearing Capacity of Piles in a Granular Medium. A. and McLean.Proceedings of the Conference on InSitu Measurement of Soil Properties. North Carolina State University.M. Amar." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.R. 6th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Vol. 175-186. and Woods. of Civil Engrs. Vol. J.K. R. and Found. Moscow.M. Vol. Morgenstern. I. Vol. Vol.F. (1967) "Use of the Standard Penetration Test for Estimating Settlements of Shallow Foundations on Sand. Y.E. p." Proceedings.H. A. . Vol. pp. (1974) "Evaluation of the Undrained Shear Strength from Static Cone Penetration Test in a Soft Silty Clay in patras.. 22-45. Vol. D. Vol. (1972) "Embankments on Soft Ground. V." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Gibson. (1965) "Contribution to the Study of Soil Compressibility by Means of a Cone Penetrometer. p. and Bjerrum. Bishop. (1975) "A Study of Vane Shear. S. (1974) "The Influence of Rate of Penetration on Static Cone Resistance Values in Connecticut River valley Varved Clay. Purdue University. LeMee." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. F. 2.pp. (1973) "Problems of Soil Mechanics and Construction on Soft Clays. L. (1972) "Hydraulic Fracturing in Field permeabili ty Testing. pp.G.. Montreal. J.. N. Vol.A. Paris.. North Carolina State University.G. 3-7. R. J. E. and Eggestad. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. 2. Vol. Andresen. June 5-7. 22. 54. Western Europe. and LeMehaute. A.F.R. L.. (1967) "Engineering Geology of Norwegian Normally Consolidated Marine Clays as Related to Settlement of Buildings. ASCE Specialty Conference on Performance of Earth and Earth Supported Structures.. InSt. 1974. II. 2. Vol." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division.. (1961) "Load Bearing Capacity and Deformation of piled Foundations. .T. L. (1965) "Vane Testing in Norway.A. on Soil Mech. 81-118. Urbana. Stockholm. North Carolina State Universit~ Raleigh. and Found. Bjerrum. J. .A. (1975) "In Situ Shear Resistance of Clays." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 111-159. Kennard. June 5~7. ASCE. Z. A. Lacroix.M." Soil Science." Proceedings 8th International Conf. 33-34." Geotechnique. and take Factors for Cylindrical Piezometer Tips.

T. 1974.J. 1975. R. A. Farrent. 1975.3. 4th Int.E. June 5-7." Symposium on Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Foundations. (1974) "Interpretation of Dutch Cone Tests in Soft Bangkok Clay. p. 92. 2.S." Ph. 346-348.and Foundation Engineering. pp.t. Engrg. Vol.".. pp. (1963) "An Analysis of System Flexibility and its Effect on Time Lag in Pore Water Pressure Measurements. Geotechnique. K. SM5. SM2. 1975. European Symposium on Penetration Testing. June 5-7. DM-7 (1971) "DESIGN MANUAL . on Soil Mech. W. Thesis.K. (1966) "Factors Influencing the Results of Vane Tests." Second Rankine Lecture. 13. pp.2. (1973) "Settlement of Stiff Structures (Silos) Founded on Soft Soil with Low Penetration Resistance. DeBeer. FoundaNaval Brand. Vol. J. pp. Pressuremeter and Screw Plate Tests in a Pre loaded Natural Sank Deposi. H. G. 1950. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. published by National Swedish Building Research." Proc. 12." Proceedings. (1974) "Penetration.F. XVI. Stockholm. June 5-7. North Carolina State University. No. No. 2.. pp. Carrier." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. 1974. (1967) "Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Shallow Foundations on Sand. Conf. and Found.. pp." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. I. April 5/6. Vol. Raleigh. Gibson. pp. University of Illinois. 4th panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. E." Proc.E. S. 67. (1957) "Research on Determining the Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing. Vol. of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing.1.D. Conf. Durham. (1969) "Discussion on Expansive Clays. Dahlberg. 457-472.T. Z-C. Washington. R. Vol. E. on Soil Mech. No. 21-50. Waltman. R. Moh. 1975. (1974a) "Decrease in Penetration Resistance Due to Excavation in an Overconsolidated Glauconitic Sand. 256-259. No.B. Vol. and Mitchell. E. H. Vol.61 Bogdanovic. Specialty Session No. III. (1974) "Estimating Relative Density from Standard Penetration Test Resistances. p.E. p.2. pp.E." -Proc.. DeBeer. No.C. E. DeBeer. Facilities Command. and Christian. II . Publ. De Ruiter. Vol. 1965.W. Vol. and Odenstad. Stockholm. 161. H.C." NAVFAC-DM7. Fletcher.3.2. 23." Geotechnique. published by National Swedish Building Research. Buisman. pp. II." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. L.F." Geotechnique. R. 1. and Holtz.A. No. Vol." Proc. pp.New Zealand Conf. (1963) "The Prediction and Field Verification of Settlements in Cohesionless Soils. 77-104. 4th Australia . and Seed. Vol. Cooling. (1975) "Cost Effectiveness of In-Situ Testing.Soil Mechanics tions. Duncan." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Brooker." Transactions of the SR Institute for Testing Materials. (1940) Groundmechania.F. and Earth Structures. H. SM4. (1971) "Electric Penetrometer for Site Investigations. Delft. T. Engrg. Stockholm. Duke University. Brown. Stockholm. National Swedish Building Research. II.. 103-104.K. 97. Gibbs. Vol. R. 1-86. Flaate. "Expansive Soils and Moisture Movement in Partly Saturated Soils. (1971) "The Standard Penetration Test.Analysis.C.B. Vol.J. Brown. on Soil Mech.1. (1975) "Static Penetration Resistance of Soils. 1-11. 1974. Belgrade. published by National Swedish Building Research.G.1. I . 2:1." 7th Int. ASCE. Gibson. pp." Geotechnique. J." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. Vol. (1964) "The Influence of Stress History on Certain Properties of Remolded Cohesive Soils. Swedish Geotechnical Institute. Durgunoglu. No. (1973) "Rigid Circular Plate Resting on a Non-Homogeneous Elastic Half-Space. European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Vol. 151-189.M. (1965) "Standard Penetration Test: Its Uses and Abuses. 15-33. National Swedish Building Research.A." Proceedings. (1962) "Field Measurements in Soil Mechanics. E. and Found. Vol. (1950) "The Vane Borer. I. ESOPT (1974) Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 35. (1966) "Anisotropy and Stress Reorient<3.. (1974b) Discussion on Interpretation of Results of Static Penetration Tests. (1971) "Equipment for Field Deformation Measurements. . Dunnicliff. W.E.W. de Mello. L.tion in Clay. J. No. Sept. Cadling. 2.2. ASCE. 11-17. No. ASCE." Proc." Canadian Geotechnical Journal. ASCE Specialty Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. (1966) "A Note on the Constant Head Test to Measure Soil Permeability In-Situ. P. L. 34. 51-58.. 1975.D. No. and Wirojanagud.. 93.1. E. V. pp. Fourth Panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics. Engrg. Stockholm. 69-87. Gibbs. and Found. D. pp." Proc. N. Vol. 319-332. ASCE. Mexico City. Stockholm. J. pp. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Stockholm. J.Proceedings.Evaluation of Theory and Implications for Practice.

Conf. W.1.B. I. A. (1974) Discussion to ESOPT "Penetrations in Clay at Undrained Conditions. (1961) "In-Situ Measurement of Soil properties with the Pressuremeter. Pub 1. pp~i 153-160. B.F. Vol. for Determining Permeability of Soil Strata. North Carolina State University. pp. l-l. and Found. 8th Int. 129-132. (1944) "The Coefficient of Earth Pressure at Rest. Engrg. Pincus.H. of civil Engineers. Thesis. pp. ASCE.." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Hartman. No. (1975) "The InSitu Measurement of Coefficients of permeability and Consolidation in Fine Soils." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division.(1975) "FEM Study of Elastic Phase of Pressuremeter Test. Raleigh. Vol." Vol. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Proceedings of the Conf. pp. 2." ASTM Sp. 322 (Fie. 349-351.ld Testing of Soils) . J." Geotechnique. Conf." ASTM. on Soil Mech. North Carolina State University. Schmertmann. November. and Inderbitzen. on In-Situ Investigations in Soils and Rocks. Ladd. pp. Ladanyi." Canadian Geotechnical Journal.. Gielly. Raleigh. K.(1973).V. Moscow.. pp. GT7. FHWA-RD-74-68. (1975) Panel Discussion.pp. Vol.Sao Paulo. B. Caracas. Ladanyi. ." by J. Hvorslev. Janbu. Ladd. Vol. B. 9. and Foott." Report No. (1973) "Effects of Pressure meter Probe Length/Diameter Ratio and Bore Hole Disturbance on PMT Results in Dry Sand. Janbu. Hirst. 1531-1539. 3-20. M. J. (1969) Closure to "Vibration Modulus of Normally Consolidated Clay. (1972) "A Static Cone Penetrometer for Ocean Sediments. (1951) "Time Lag and Soil Permeability in Ground Water Measurements. and Senneset..J. 208-224. North Carolina State University. London. No. Vol. 50 pp. Vol.F. Y. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Vol. and Chugh. Richards. Ladanyi. 58-67.Q. Waterways Experiment Station. Gibson. 95. (1975) Panel Discussion: Field Measurements of Permeability in Soil and Rock. pp.J. (1963) "Evaluation of Pressuremeter Tests in Granular Soils. (1960) "Notes on the Determination of Coefficients of Permeability in the Laboratory and In-Situ. N. of the Geotechnical Div. Laier. Jaky. J.L. Ladanyi. ASCE. W. Geotechnical Engineering Division. Laier.M. Schmertmann. Moscow. (1969) "Correlation Between In-Situ Penetrometer Tests and the Compressibility Characteristics of Soils. I. Session V. Vol. (1963) "Field Tests.D.C. ASCE." proceedings of the Conf. 69-80.A. B. Presented at 8th International Conf. 167-179.62 Gibson. Y. R. . Lambe. T. Ladd.. (1969) "Use of Deep Sounding Penetration Tests in Sensitive Clay. John Wiley. Springfield.1. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.E.. North Carolina State University. pp. . (1975) Discussion of "The Measurement of In-situ Shear Strength. J. 764-786. on In~Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Lareal. M. Huck. 37-38. pp. (1973) Invited Discussion of Bjerrum . and Schmertmann. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. 241-259.E. Raleigh. A~L.. North Carolina State University. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Jezequel. and Found.. No. (1974) "New Design Procedure for Stability of Soft Clay." polytechnic School Zurich (Unpublished) . Eng. W. Raleigh.P." Corps of Engineers. and Anderson.H.. pp. W. 7th Int. and Whitman. Singh. pp. II.F." Journal. H~J. G. vicksburg. (1973) "Field Compressometer--Principlesand Applications.J. (1975) "Effect of Finite Pressuremeter Length in Dry Sand. 313-321.C. pp. R.E. (1967) "Deep Punching of Sensitive Clays. R. (1967) "Some Results Concerning Displacements and stresses in a Non-Homogeneous Elastic Half-Space. Vol. Conf. prepared for Federal Highway Administration." Proc. T. Gordon. 3rd panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. ASCE." Ph. J. STP 501.O.and Gass. ASCE. 1. (1972) "In-Situ Determination of Undrained Stress-Strain Behavior of Sensitive Clays with the pressuremeter. VA 22151. Technical Information Service. I. H. Raleigh. S. B. 56. Miss." Civil Engineering and Public Works Review. New York.J. No. Vol. pp. and Schaub. Bulletin 36. 2nd Panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering . Janbu. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. 100. and Eden. J. Available through Natl..H. (1969) Soil Mechanics.H. University of Florida." Proc. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. pp. North Carolina State University. Vol. II. Mexico City. P. J. J. Golder.E. 191-198. 615-618. Hardin. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. and Sanglerat. Lacroix. (1974) "Determination of the In situ State of StresS in Soil Masses.. C. I. II." Proc. N. 225-230. B. C. Vol. I. 17.C. Magyar Mernok es Epitesz Egylet Kozlonye. SM6. and Blac:k. C. A.P. 190-207. pp." Proc. Soil Mech. P. 533-546. pp." Proceedings. C. ASCE." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Raleigh.3. Inst." (In Hungarian). ASCE. Vol. R. 553 pp. N. Specialty Conf. Vol. and Mieussens. Vol. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. pp.

on In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock.G.. 319-335." Proc. Vol. (1975) "Influence of Mechanical Variables on the SPT. Purdue University. (1972) "Pan~lDi~cussion. and Weiss. North Carolina State University. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engrg.K.. 2.G. (1971) "Untersuchung von Greritztragfahigkeitun'Setzungverhalten flachgegrundeter Einzelfundamente im Ungleichformigen nichtbindigen Boden. Conf. Leblanc.H. Vol. STP 417. Muhs.D.." Proc.3. B. Stockholm. of the Geotechnical Div." Sols Soils. Holm. Roy. Trak. Milligan." Bulletin de Liaison des Laboratoires de Ponts de Chaussees. No. (1975) "In-situ Impulse Test for Dynamic Shear Modulus of Soils. 'A. 2. J. Thesis No. Specialty Conf. I. Embankments on Soft Ground. Session I. V. Asian Inst. p. G. Massarsch. Troncosco. ASCE. 266-286." M. G. W. Miller.. Vol. (1975) "The Interpretation of Pressuremeter Test Results. 422 p. Vol. (1972) "Study of Five Embankment Failures on Soft Clay. of Technology. Lafayette. Miliigan.M. 105.B. No. of the Geotechnical Div. E. T. Raleigh. (1974) "Un Exemple D'Utilisation Du Scissometre de Cahntier.N. M. pp. Palmer. Inst.1975. 22. and Fredriksson. Raleigh. June 5-7." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. (1972) "Application of the Dutch Cone Bangkok Area. Specialty Conf. G... pp. in Pilot. Poulos. Franklin. Meigh. B. July. A. No. and Gardner. John Wiley and Sons. B. 173-179. Proceedings of the Conf. K. B. 35-55. 245-252. 3-36. LaRochelle. 4l~48. 279-345. Raleigh. North Carolina State University. (1974) "Failure of a Test' Embankment on a Sensitive Champlain Clay Deposit.1. R. pp. A. Tavenas. 287-318. (1975) "In-Situ and Laboratory Tests on Glacial Clays at Redcar." State of the Art Paper. Vol." Proceedings. Permeability and Capillarity of Soils.G.. Research Establishment Current Marsland. A.R. 26. Specialty Conf. pp.. Massarsch.H. 177182. pp. on In-Situ M~asurement of Soil Properties. Symposium on the Behavior of Glacial Materials." Proceedings of the-Conf. North Carolina State University. and Brown. Paris. pp." State-of-the-Art Report. H. pp. Purdue University.63 Lang. Universite Laval. North Carolina State university. No. and Corbett. June 5-7. Vol.R. Bangkok. McLean." Geotechnique. 1974. Birmingham. (1961) "The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Wedge Shaped Foundations. Meyerhof. Vol. 1. (1975b)"Measurement of Horizontal In-Situ Stresses.R. Raleigh. I." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. and Dahlstrand. ASCE. published by the National Swedish Building Research. pp. New York. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. H. Broms. Vol. 81100. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. Specialty Conf. Raleigh. Meyerhof. J. 1975. XI. on Performance of Earth and Earth Supported Structures. A. (1975):"Field Measurement of Permeability in soil and Rock. Stockholm." Geotechriique." ASCE Specialty Conf. Marsland. I." Deg~bo Heft 26. K. pp.G.1. 377. and Davis.K. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Mitchell. I. Vol. Vol. . 1974. 260-265. Marsland. (1975) "In Situ Measurement of Volume Change Characteristics..VoL 22. Inc.K.. 451-457. pp. . II. pp. (1974) General Report for Outside Europe. pp. ASCE. H. p. (1976) Fundamentals of Soil Behavior. Vol. A. (1975a) "Pore Pressure Determination with Multiple Piezometer.G." Proceedings of the Conference on In~Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.Sc. Vol. (1975) "Analyse De La Resistahce Non Draine des Argiles Mesuree au Scissometre. Menard. (1972) "Undrained Expansion of a Cylindrical Cavity in Clay: A Simple Interpretation of the Pressuremeter Test. P. Thesis. II. 142-164. of the Geotechnical Div. ASCE Specialty Conference on Performance of Earth and Earth~Supported Structures. Vol. of Civil Engineers. Phami T. ASCE. (1972) "Laboratory Determination of In-Situ Horizontal Stress in Soil Masses. (1969) "A Comparison of In~Situ Measurements in a Soft Clay with Laboratory Tests and the Settlement of oil Tanks. F.S.. and Sundqui.. published by National Swedish Building Research . 40-48. L. 20. F. Fifth International Conf. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. S. Mitchell. (1973) "Laboratory and In-Situ Measurements of the Deformation Moduli of London Clay.G." Building Paper 24. of the Geotechnical Div. J.O.P. North Carolina State University. on Insitu Measurement of Soil Properties. pp. O." Canadian Geotechnical Journal. R.. (1967) "pumping Tests for Determining Aquifer Characteristics. Vol.C. V.C. pp. I. 7. Session 1. Holtz. North Carolina State University. ASCE. pp. Jr. VII. F. Raleigh. K.." M. A." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Froperties." Proceedings. (1974) "Comparisons of the Results from Static Penetration Tests and Large In Situ Plate Tests in London Clay. 2:2.Eng... Lemasson." ASTM. A.

(1975) "In Situ Measurement of the Properties of Sensitive Clays by Pressuremeter Tests. (1965) "The Determination of the Modulus of Compressibility of Non-Cohesive Soils by Soundings. Urban Mass Transportation Administration.. June 5-7." Proceedings of the Conf. pp. Static Settlement Over Sand. (1974) "Soil Strain Measurements Using Inductance Coil Method. A. Specialty Con- Schmidt. pp. p. 1. ASCE. Ottawa. of the Geotechnical Div. Puerto Rico.. No.. 269. pp. 1975. 500-527. I. 1." State-of-the-Art Paper. Roy. Vol." Woodward-Clyde Consultants Field Measurements Subcommittee. G. 336-349. .. Vol. 350-372. E. and Foun~. Gielly. Blanchette. of the Geotechnical Divo." Prepared for Fugro-Cesco. Dunnicliff.H. II. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. 1. Lareal. E. G. Vol. I. A. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Schmertmann. C. of the Geotechnical Div. Vol. published by National Swedish Building Research." Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division. North Carolina State University.Des Travaux Publics. B. Vol. 395-449. F. (1971) Discussion to de Mello (1971) Proc.W. Specialty Conf. Vol. No. Amsterdam. J. Supplement No. (1972) The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration. 1011. Vol. A. (1975) "Measurement of In-Situ Shear Strength. III.E. Vol.64 Prevost. F. ASCE. John Wiley. Developments in Geotechnical Engineering. Sanglerat. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div." Proceedings." Appendix III .2. Schmertmann. Vol. M. ~ng. Vol. (1975) "In-Situ Determination of Anisotropy of a Soft Clay. Tavenas. C. pp. G. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. pp. Vol. Division of Building G-l. 354-358.H. pp. Leidschendam. Tavenas." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. ASCE. p. 1974. Raleigh. J. July.. Vol. II' Proceedings. pp. North Carolina State University. R.I.H. J. 4th panamerican Conf.S. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. R. 1st Edition. 422-449.. Specialty Conf. M. K-J. (1975) "Difficulties in the In-situ Determination of Ko in Soft Sensitive Clay. (1970) "Static Cone to Compute. Montreal.H. (1972) "Le penetromitre Statique et la Compressibilite des Sols. Schmertmann. and Melzer.. pp. 298. (1975) "In-Situ Measurement of Shear Strength. Leroueil.. and Bauer. Stokoe.H. Raleigh. ASCE." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.A." Proceedings of the Conf. Project Schmertmann." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. J. J. Raleigh. ~. Office of Research and Development. New York. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. ference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.. I. 450-476. Washington." Proceedings. Proceedings of the Conf. and Abdel-razzak. P." Discussion." Proceedings of the Conf. ASCE. F. Schmertmann. (1975) "The Interpretation and Use of the Pressuremeter Test for Settlement Predictions.H.. (1976) "pilot Field and Laboratory Study of the Feasibility of Using the Wissa-Type Piezometer Probe to Identify the Liquefaction Potential of Saturated Fine Sands. J. 57-138. Juneau. Sanglerat. Selig. (1948) Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. Information Bulletin.J. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Schultze. D. ASCE. and Tavenas.H.and Memon. Richardson.. LaRochelle. K. 96.M. and Peck. F. European Symposium on Penetration Testing... and Chapeau.. and LaRochelle. on Soil Mech.W.H. 2. Raleigh. P. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. (1962) "The Stress-Dilatancy Relation for Static Equilibrium of an Assembly of Particles in Contact.T. Shields." Report DOT-TSC-UMTA-76-3. North Terzaghi. Vol. U. ASCE. pp. Jr. E.F. ASCE Carolina State University. pp. Dept. D. (1974b) "Penetration Pore Pres- sure Effects on Quasi-Static Cone Bearing. Roy. S. and Alsup. DACW-39-76-M-6646. 352-355. 717-732. Schmertmann." Canadian National Research Council. pp. P. Waterways Experiment Station. pp. (1975) "Analysis of Pressuremeter in Strain Softening Soil. J .G. The Netherlands. North Carolina State University.. North Carolina State University. North Carolina State University. ASCE.H.a Sensitive Clay using Laboratory and In-Situ Tests. (1976) "Subsurface Exploration Methods for Soft Ground Rapid Transit Tunnels.H. Matarazzi." Annales de L'Institut Technique du Baitment et. Raleigh. Stockholm.II. SM3. (1975) "Determination of the Modulus Deformation of . (1972) "Static Cone Penetration Tests. I. Schmertmann. P. Internal Report Research.C. Raleigh. Vol. ASCE. K.. 164-167.An Updated Correlation Between Relative Density Dr and Fugro-Type Electric Cone Bearing. North Carolina State University. (1974a) "Guidelines for Design Using CPT Data. of Transportation. and Hoeg... 6th International Conf. Vol. Rowe. (1975) "Shear Moduli of Two Compacted Fills. on InSitu Measurement of Soil Properties. 90-98. J. K. M.qc'" Proceedings. Royal Society of London. Tabor. GT8. 101. G. Raleigh. October. I.. Elsevier. 345. J. Specialty Conf. K. G. Roy. S. "In Situ Te?ting: Permeability. Session III." ASTM Symposium on Performance Criteria and Monitoring for Geotechnical Construction. Brand. II.

" Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. . Vol. pp. pp.D. 1. 1975.3." by Hamilton.2. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. 2nd Edition. Vol. Geotechnique.and l{ughes. June 5-7. North Carolina State University.Angle in Granular Soils Using th~ Pressuremeter. and Sullivan.1. Marsland. A. Raleigh. "Earth Colorado. No. C.. 33-52." Denver. vesic. R. 536-545. D. (1975) "Analysis of the Pressuremeter"Te. J.. (1975) "Electrical Resistivity Method for Determining VblumeChanges that Occur During a PressuremeterTest. J. pp. (1975) "In situ M~asurement of Initial Stresses and Deformation Character. 561-584. 1974. ASCE. J. North Carolina State University. (1968) "Constant Head ~n-Situ Permeability Tests in Clay Strata.P.4. Vol. 519-524. W. XXV. aridRodriguez. Proceedings of the ConFerence on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Madrid. No.B....J. on Soil Mech.L. (1973) "An Instrument for the In-Situ Measurement of the Proper~ ties of Soft Clays." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measur~ment of Soil Properties. South Africa. Webb. USBR (1974) (United Interior. 17. and Found. 321-344. 598-604. 68-71. S.~'Geotechnique. Wroth.. 24-28. Test to Measure Permeability Geotechnique. pp. 17-20. Vbl. (1975) "The Piezometer Probe. Wilkinson. Todd. D.P. Vol. I. Vol. Wroth." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. Paper 843." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Vol. I. Wilkinson. (1974) "Penetration Testingin Eastern Europe. 487-494. pp. Trofimenkov.Z. A. (1967) "A Note Soil on the Constant In-Situ. Published by National Swedish Building Research.H." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. (1969) "Settlement of Structures on Deep Alluvial Sandy Sediments in Durban. (1935) "Relation between Lowering of Piezometric Surface and Duration of Discharge of a Well Using Groundwater Storage. D. Ward. 18. C.istics.A. 18.E." Geotechnique.P. North Carolina State University. Vol. Proc. States Department of the of Reclamation). Thomas. E. D. Vol. I." Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists." Geotechnique. 277-291.stAllowing for Volume Change. C. SM2. Vol.65 Theis. Speci~lty Conference.G. Vol. pp.. 511-522. SM3. of civil Engineers.Vol. pp." . (1974) "Simple Technique for Identifying Heave Potential. pp. XI.N. pp. and Samuels." Proceedings of the Conferenc~ cmln-Situ Measurement of Soil Prop~rties. pp. 98.S. pp. 181--230. E. 487-510. Spepialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. 8th Int." Conference on In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock. (1972) "Expansion of Cavities in Infinite Soil Mass. 15. In-Situ and Undrained Strength Tests. vijayvergiyi." Geotechnique.G. II. J. Martin. "Tests on Instrumented Piles. W. pp. Thomas.P.. London. pp. 2. 472-488. (1975)j"Borehol~ Shear Device. Sp~cialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. (1965) "Properties of the London Clay at the Ashford Common Shaft.Raleigh. (1955) Discussion of paper "Field Vane S." Proceedings. D. Conf. . 81. and Wroth. pp. . No. C.Gray. No.E." Moscow: Building Literature Publishing House. I.B. 1955. Engrg.M. Winter. 5th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. ASCE. R.hearTests of Sensitive CohesiveSoils. and'Wihdle. Vol.V. ASCE. No. Inst. 181-188. 15.K. Raleigh. Vol. (1964) "Field Methods for Testing the Structural Properties of Soils. Trofimenkov. pp. (1975) "Evaluation of Preconsolidation andFriction.S. (1968) "Deepsounding Test Results and the Settlement of Spread Footings on Normally Consolidated Sands. (1959) Groundwater Hydrolog~ John Wile~ New York.G. (1970) Ogeehee River Site. A. No. North Carolina State University. ASCE. Moscow." State-of-the-Art Paper. A. pp. 523-535. Vol. (1965) "static Cone Penetration Tests in London Clay. Vesic. Vey. C." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. D. Bureau Manual. 179. . Raleigh. Head W. pp." American Geophysical Union Transcripts. 177-194. Vol. Vol. 96. Stockholm. 2. Wissa. pp. pp. Specialty Conference of the G~otechnical Div.O. Wroth. 175Windle. C:P. V.1. and Garlang~r. (1972) "General Theories bf Earth Pressure and Deformations.T. Wroth." Proceedings.of the Geotechnical Div. North Carolina State University.2. Win~land. ASCE. Raleigh." Technical Note.A.

Ea Ed EpMT ES Es..lateralearth pressure coeftic~ent In-situ lateral earth pressure coefficient Maximum passive earth pressure coefficient Coefficient of subgrade reaction Coefficient of permeability (~ydraulic conductivity) Coefficient.. N rods test blow in the counts for MOdulus obtained test . 0 1<0' .' Pf Applied Constant Piezometric head at time tl' t2 '\F~~~rpressure when soil fails during pfes~uremeter test . under undrained loading Nc' Nyg Bearing capacity -factors NFF .in the horizontal direction Length pf borehole£or-permeability tests Iowa.Standard penetration test blow count for .ideally free falling hammer N.66 h LIST OF SYMBOLS a Cell ANDABBREvIATIO:NS Ip radius of the presstiremeter of borehole.shear test Coefficienb Base width of compressibility dimension at..by.Diameter d . shear . tration test Alternated Deformation loading modulus. Standard penetration test blow counts in serisitiveclays n NC static penetrometer Porosity Normally conSQlidated ratio at rest Overconsolidation Horizontal Creep .Dr for vertical k' v Vertical coefficient of permeability for basing penetrometer . vertical permeability Relative . The slope of the point resistance versus P effective overburden pressure profile for the static penetration test modulus Nst modulus under drained .throughthestandardpene.of.tiO'n"or-. (k . v B b BST C c C r C s Cl'C2 Lateral earth pressure coefficient normally consolidated soils.the c vv D D D D DR.Est Eu E+ E' e FR fs G GWT br rebound modulus Correlation factor for strength pressuremeter test analysis Standard penetration A. permeability. Mean coefficient of permeability . Transformation ratio.c cch Cohesion Coefficient compression Coefficient compression bepthof Diameter Stress Vane dilatancy parameter test m of cohsolidationfor and horizontal flow of consolidation and vertical flow L Jl.horizontal and.borehole shear test Embedment and.taining to~hevane.' k.limit ratio on the Side fri9.count for standard penetration test E:lastic modtiltis Energy input.. the pressuremeter .. creep correction for the screw plate 'test : k m.dimensional compression index recomPress~onindex swelling .. In~situ..index factors IO .E E (/k7k ) h v m my N N Modulus number Compressibility Blow. the static penetrometer Shear mti~lUS~~i'\::"" Ground shear water table OCR Po Py P earth pressure H Hc HlH2 Total overburden pressure pressure during screw plate test vane height Piezometric head .. diameter 'density for the vane. pertaining to .~ . depth for the' load bearing gradient for a a.for permeability Iz II' i' c K. vertical k v m = lk v . per. Depth increment index influehce factors factor loading and test . . h ) Coefficientofp~rmeability vertical direction in. One dimensional Elastic bearing modulus test NA.Plasticity Settlement Influence loading Hydraulic a a . .1-Rf.Kp K k One7dimensional One-dimensional One. ..base Length Factorutilizedihpressuremetertest a~aiysisrelatingvolumetricto tangential strain. Diameter for surface tests Penetration resistance interceptfadtor Shear stress distribution factor.NN (constrained} determined modulus by thedload Young's modulus conditions Recompression Deformation conditions Void ratio Friction ""<".

cr2.sUV Sv Resistivity Settlement Soil density Undrained shear strength Undrained shear strength from the Vane Shear Test Vertical shear strength Standard Penetration Resistance Standard penetration test Maximum applied torque in the vane shear test Time factor Time lag in the borehole permeability test Time or elapsed time Chamber volume of the pressuremeter Initial chamber volume of the pressuremeter Flow velocity Shear wave velocity Particle velocity Vane shear test Water content Liquid Layer limit thickness Pore water resistivity Settlement of one foot diameter bearing plate Total horizontal stress Effective horizontal stress Radial stress during the pressuremeter test Total vertical stress stress SPR SPT T crh cr' h crr crv cr' v crl.67 Ys Yw pressure in pressure<5 p Limit test pressure during pressuremeter Saturated unit weight of soil Unit weight of water Friction angle between penetrometer and soil Radial strain during pressuremeter test Volumetric strain Vertical strain Radial strain of the pressuremeter cell Equivalent axial compressive strain during the pressuremeter test E3 Majo::.cr3 T T ps <P T T t V Effective vertical V. derived by the pressuremeter test <P' <Pcv a Parameter relating cone resistance with constrained modulus Penetrometer base semi-apex angle <Po a. s. ~ v Vs V VST W WL Z Major. in terms of effective stress Angle of internal friction.E2' intermediate and minor principal Volumetric Deviator Volumetric Static cone flow stress flow point rate Ee rate resistance strength 11 on q q qc qu QR Q R RK sh Circumferential strain during pressuremeter test Stress ratio between deviator stress and average principal effective stresses Bjerrum correction factor during vane shear tests poisson's ratio Unconfined Normalized Quasi-static compressive flow rate 11 . Shear Shear stresses intermediate and minor principal stress stress. Q El. not due to dilatancy. plane strain Angle of internal friction in terms of total stress Angle of internal friction in terms of effective stress Angle of internal friction pertaining to shear at constant volume Component of angle of internal friction. stra~ns. B during pressuremeter test Shape Bulk factors resistivity during pressuremeter test Total resistance on standard penetration test samples Ratio of horizontal to vertical permeability shear strengthin vane shear Horizontal test Su . in terms of effective stress.CPT penetration test v ~A' ~B ~c'~q P p P P Pw PI Angle of dilation Radial displacement of point A. effective average of stresses Effective Plasticity Pressuremeter Plane strain preconsolidation index test pressure Eo El p. Po p' p' p'c PI PMT In-situ lateral meter test Effective Stress ciple overburden pressure the three prin- Er Ev Ez point. Y Yt <t>~MT Shear strain during pressuremeter test Total unit weight .

Related Interests

U","static_promo_banner_cta_url":"https://www.scribd.com/"},"eligible_for_exclusive_trial_roadblock":false,"eligible_for_seo_roadblock":false,"exclusive_free_trial_roadblock_props_path":"/doc-page/exclusive-free-trial-props/201366438","flashes":[],"footer_props":{"urls":{"about":"/about","press":"/press","blog":"http://literally.scribd.com/","careers":"/careers","contact":"/contact","plans_landing":"/subscribe","referrals":"/referrals?source=footer","giftcards":"/giftcards","faq":"/faq","accessibility":"/accessibility-policy","faq_paths":{"accounts":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246346","announcements":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246066","copyright":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246086","downloading":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/articles/210135046","publishing":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246366","reading":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246406","selling":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246326","store":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246306","status":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001202872","terms":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246126","writing":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246366","adchoices":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/articles/210129366","paid_features":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246306","failed_uploads":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210134586-Troubleshooting-uploads-and-conversions","copyright_infringement":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210128946-DMCA-copyright-infringement-takedown-notification-policy","end_user_license":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210129486","terms_of_use":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210129326-General-Terms-of-Use"},"publishers":"/publishers","static_terms":"/terms","static_privacy":"/privacy","copyright":"/copyright","ios_app":"https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/scribd-worlds-largest-online/id542557212?mt=8&uo=4&at=11lGEE","android_app":"https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.scribd.app.reader0&hl=en","books":"/books","sitemap":"/directory"}},"global_nav_props":{"header_props":{"logo_src":"/images/landing/home2_landing/scribd_logo_horiz_small.svg","root_url":"https://www.scribd.com/","search_term":"","small_logo_src":"/images/logos/scribd_s_logo.png","uploads_url":"/upload-document","search_props":{"redirect_to_app":true,"search_url":"/search","query":"","search_page":false}},"user_menu_props":null,"sidebar_props":{"urls":{"bestsellers":"https://www.scribd.com/bestsellers","home":"https://www.scribd.com/","saved":"/saved","subscribe":"/archive/pmp_checkout?doc=201366438&metadata=%7B%22context%22%3A%22pmp%22%2C%22action%22%3A%22start_trial%22%2C%22logged_in%22%3Afalse%2C%22platform%22%3A%22web%22%7D","top_charts":"/bestsellers","upload":"https://www.scribd.com/upload-document"},"categories":{"book":{"icon":"icon-ic_book","icon_filled":"icon-ic_book_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/books","name":"Books","type":"book"},"news":{"icon":"icon-ic_articles","icon_filled":"icon-ic_articles_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/news","name":"News","type":"news"},"audiobook":{"icon":"icon-ic_audiobook","icon_filled":"icon-ic_audiobook_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/audiobooks","name":"Audiobooks","type":"audiobook"},"magazine":{"icon":"icon-ic_magazine","icon_filled":"icon-ic_magazine_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/magazines","name":"Magazines","type":"magazine"},"document":{"icon":"icon-ic_document","icon_filled":"icon-ic_document_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/docs","name":"Documents","type":"document"},"sheet_music":{"icon":"icon-ic_songbook","icon_filled":"icon-ic_songbook_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/sheetmusic","name":"Sheet Music","type":"sheet_music"}},"nav_categories":["mixed","book","audiobook","magazine","document","sheet_music"],"selected_content_type":"mixed","username":"","search_overlay_props":{"search_input_props":{"focused":false,"keep_suggestions_on_blur":false}}}},"recommenders":{"related_titles_recommender":{"ids":[64780349,242898993,326589723,338840322,213430826,265556733,295750481,327395592,83040052,321130832,369135617,381731335,260277731,92633465,268045103,342451021,336287302,241866732,269655773,387987510,385573752,331788340,236194097,92651540,200076306,377028306,53316703,119738331,295099603,328819244,210683399,210677401,210676105,271646343,210683181,275969404,304928224,271646220,271645963,336133428,201364732,258674889,210678233,235248852,258675302,160661362,148094946,174031573,174039722,133886695,133886747,139266429,135182642,199711553,174038132,135955120,198097594,201362257,201361806],"title_link":null,"title":null,"track_opts":{"compilation_id":"noZWfaH0NTne07Z7oiMxTmDn314=","module_id":"Lc1/T+sNdr6I/4uG0azbUalTmY8=","widget_name":"right sidebar","track_id":"flattened_recommender"}},"footer_recommenders":{"recommenders":[{"ids":[64780349,242898993,326589723,338840322,213430826,265556733,295750481,327395592,83040052,321130832,369135617,381731335,260277731,92633465,268045103,342451021,336287302,241866732,269655773,387987510,385573752,331788340,236194097,92651540,200076306,377028306,53316703,119738331,295099603,328819244],"title_link":null,"title":"Documents Similar To The Measurement of Soil Properties in-situ (Mitchell James K.)","track_opts":{"compilation_id":"noZWfaH0NTne07Z7oiMxTmDn314=","module_id":"fPqXtqLQAmAtXSRJYIzlhT2bqt0=","widget_name":"document_carousel"}},{"ids":[210683399,210677401,210676105,271646343,210683181,275969404,304928224,271646220,271645963,336133428,201364732,258674889,210678233,235248852,258675302,160661362,148094946,174031573,174039722,133886695,133886747,139266429,135182642,199711553,174038132,135955120,198097594,201362257,201361806],"title_link":null,"title":"More From jcaz","track_opts":{"compilation_id":"noZWfaH0NTne07Z7oiMxTmDn314=","module_id":"a9kOPAsJ1iXvh3ydamdiI4vGnzg=","widget_name":"document_carousel"}}]},"seo_new_docs_recommenders":{"recommenders":[]},"documents":{"53316703":{"type":"document","id":53316703,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/53316703/149x198/f1a9c88903/1486686898?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/53316703/298x396/a508661e68/1486686898?v=1","title":"DESIGN OF PILES USING EURO CODE-7","short_title":"DESIGN OF PILES USING EURO CODE-7","author":"GEOMAHESH","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":53316703,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"xTsH1h+boH69F3VkXhn3xI7AtB8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/53316703/DESIGN-OF-PILES-USING-EURO-CODE-7","top_badge":null},"64780349":{"type":"document","id":64780349,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/64780349/149x198/712f46eaa0/1315901174?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/64780349/298x396/c15facf2b7/1315901174?v=1","title":"FHWA-HI-98-032","short_title":"FHWA-HI-98-032","author":"Hari Setiawan","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":64780349,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"E6UmTcmxvZBOhGyGAm2UAOhzQBQ="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/64780349/FHWA-HI-98-032","top_badge":null},"83040052":{"type":"document","id":83040052,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/83040052/149x198/103ec2f464/1380359893?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/83040052/298x396/1e48f385de/1380359893?v=1","title":"Design Examples","short_title":"Design Examples","author":"Brajesh Suman","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":83040052,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"eEYJl5lB0VQM7k5cmE2USodlu+Q="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/83040052/Design-Examples","top_badge":null},"92633465":{"type":"document","id":92633465,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92633465/149x198/bf5f44968b/1336353060?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92633465/298x396/bc5fffab3d/1336353060?v=1","title":"Cyclic Simple Shear Test Print","short_title":"Cyclic Simple Shear Test Print","author":"Alher Hera","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":92633465,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"rjxmqgkhMUyoehBQWSZ6FVyC3Qk="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/92633465/Cyclic-Simple-Shear-Test-Print","top_badge":null},"92651540":{"type":"document","id":92651540,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92651540/149x198/8f84cec06d/1361247530?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92651540/298x396/8d66425ade/1361247530?v=1","title":"(GEOSS) - Guidelines on Good Practices for Pile Load Test","short_title":"(GEOSS) - Guidelines on Good Practices for Pile Load Test","author":"Peter Kyaw","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":92651540,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"NRWcu54lSDgYvsQH2eSU7CFIdBA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/92651540/GEOSS-Guidelines-on-Good-Practices-for-Pile-Load-Test","top_badge":null},"119738331":{"type":"document","id":119738331,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/119738331/149x198/2999aaddb6/1357795827?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/119738331/298x396/c1f44d7d7e/1357795827?v=1","title":"US MIL Directional Drilling 6","short_title":"US MIL Directional Drilling 6","author":"BigBaby Julian","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":119738331,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"QmsGM1zVsnYKfVpmxOTmp63h7Pw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/119738331/US-MIL-Directional-Drilling-6","top_badge":null},"133886695":{"type":"document","id":133886695,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886695/149x198/2dff626027/1431953925?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886695/298x396/4302ec9f32/1431953925?v=1","title":"Capricorn i o","short_title":"Capricorn i o","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":133886695,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"XlqCrjIjDuB/v1txwxdVGw+LaTc="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/133886695/Capricorn-i-o","top_badge":null},"133886747":{"type":"document","id":133886747,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886747/149x198/a88b2012fd/1409704901?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886747/298x396/fff59e9053/1409704901?v=1","title":"Calculo Vectorial","short_title":"Calculo Vectorial","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":133886747,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"exrLPm9QlesD0V5j6d6voi3/xh8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/133886747/Calculo-Vectorial","top_badge":null},"135182642":{"type":"document","id":135182642,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135182642/149x198/5b9c9f5fb8/1475290676?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135182642/298x396/e4bac46ac8/1475290676?v=1","title":"Ku Brix Rhino Manual","short_title":"Ku Brix Rhino Manual","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":135182642,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ufFtiF/kmUK7idFdGJdAv0ZGKk8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/135182642/Ku-Brix-Rhino-Manual","top_badge":null},"135955120":{"type":"document","id":135955120,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135955120/149x198/44e011986b/1399927321?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135955120/298x396/3eafe8cf0d/1399927321?v=1","title":"GiD User Manual","short_title":"GiD User Manual","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":135955120,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"Fl+DNktFxN6G68UT0F5+qse8ii4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/135955120/GiD-User-Manual","top_badge":null},"139266429":{"type":"document","id":139266429,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/139266429/149x198/86e5cbc2b9/1367594245?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/139266429/298x396/561a47246e/1367594245?v=1","title":"Gonzalez-Romo (Estimación de propiedades dinámicas de arcillas) Revista IS","short_title":"Gonzalez-Romo (Estimación de propiedades dinámicas de arcillas) Revista IS","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":139266429,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"rfJ9+n4HHxgpWOhdBbTzSgx1TZU="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/139266429/Gonzalez-Romo-Estimacion-de-propiedades-dinamicas-de-arcillas-Revista-IS","top_badge":null},"148094946":{"type":"document","id":148094946,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/148094946/149x198/302a3072f6/1448172846?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/148094946/298x396/90b59d2919/1448172846?v=1","title":"Some Pitfalls When Using Modified Cam Clay (Potts)","short_title":"Some Pitfalls When Using Modified Cam Clay (Potts)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":148094946,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"Z5Dw3dupSrPBRCfA3qrkRBD0lTs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/148094946/Some-Pitfalls-When-Using-Modified-Cam-Clay-Potts","top_badge":null},"160661362":{"type":"document","id":160661362,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/160661362/149x198/e7dfd88560/1538787169?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/160661362/298x396/d45e6fe807/1538787169?v=1","title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","short_title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":160661362,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"kx+OEdPeUxTWN4WD9Drj5tKrKYc="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/160661362/Ingenieria-de-Cimentaciones-Enrique-Tamez","top_badge":null},"174031573":{"type":"document","id":174031573,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174031573/149x198/58bcdbffbf/1405826803?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174031573/298x396/9a27f0a356/1405826803?v=1","title":"Fabricacion y Colocacion de Pilotes","short_title":"Fabricacion y Colocacion de Pilotes","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":174031573,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ghQn9RpUduf/3RSboq6QHwL+Mo8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/174031573/Fabricacion-y-Colocacion-de-Pilotes","top_badge":null},"174038132":{"type":"document","id":174038132,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174038132/149x198/38df8f70bc/1431011927?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174038132/298x396/230a25b0a1/1431011927?v=1","title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","short_title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":174038132,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"jDx59CfGD15sQBloAd+zdRafzsI="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/174038132/Ingenieria-de-Cimentaciones-Enrique-Tamez","top_badge":null},"174039722":{"type":"document","id":174039722,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174039722/149x198/b7b2d1576e/1437137819?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174039722/298x396/8c000e4be6/1437137819?v=1","title":"APG Civil 2013 3D TOC Sample","short_title":"APG Civil 2013 3D TOC Sample","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":174039722,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"tuILGqWJ+mjjswmwEWrWYf361iI="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/174039722/APG-Civil-2013-3D-TOC-Sample","top_badge":null},"198097594":{"type":"document","id":198097594,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/198097594/149x198/067633259b/1390102411?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/198097594/298x396/3885fe0b87/1390102411?v=1","title":"Dissertation Writing for Engineers and Scientists by Mark Breach","short_title":"Dissertation Writing for Engineers and Scientists by Mark Breach","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":198097594,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"FKFwPacfneUunmTcNAHL79OYacw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/198097594/Dissertation-Writing-for-Engineers-and-Scientists-by-Mark-Breach","top_badge":null},"199711553":{"type":"document","id":199711553,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/199711553/149x198/86574a6669/1423997451?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/199711553/298x396/3d82003b76/1423997451?v=1","title":"3-1BasicGrading","short_title":"3-1BasicGrading","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":199711553,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"7UPg74Kbya+zgEkn+IFS1DBYw38="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/199711553/3-1BasicGrading","top_badge":null},"200076306":{"type":"document","id":200076306,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/200076306/149x198/f4aaa8e425/1389865431?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/200076306/298x396/1af559b7f6/1389865431?v=1","title":"Iss26 PES - 3D Pile Raft Foundation FE Model","short_title":"Iss26 PES - 3D Pile Raft Foundation FE Model","author":"theodorebayu","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":200076306,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"X/U1zpWj8ALPVuvuBuXsldze+Z4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/200076306/Iss26-PES-3D-Pile-Raft-Foundation-FE-Model","top_badge":null},"201361806":{"type":"document","id":201361806,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201361806/149x198/6fba05b3bc/1403867290?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201361806/298x396/2a396d7861/1403867290?v=1","title":"01.- NAVFAC 7.1 (Soil Mechanics Design Manual)","short_title":"01.- NAVFAC 7.1 (Soil Mechanics Design Manual)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":201361806,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"riy08IQvdO6NU1TaEtsX8hXmJbw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/201361806/01-NAVFAC-7-1-Soil-Mechanics-Design-Manual","top_badge":null},"201362257":{"type":"document","id":201362257,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201362257/149x198/6e12ce3477/1390364354?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201362257/298x396/35999f6b42/1390364354?v=1","title":"Verruijt. .Soil.mechanics.(2001)","short_title":"Verruijt. .Soil.mechanics.(2001)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":201362257,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"mwtYh7Siy6g3T+KirFEV9WP45UM="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/201362257/Verruijt-Soil-mechanics-2001","top_badge":null},"201364732":{"type":"document","id":201364732,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201364732/149x198/82c4525088/1539659787?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201364732/298x396/805f0bd1b7/1539659787?v=1","title":"(Crespo villalaz)Problemas resueltos de mecánica de suelos y de cimentaciones","short_title":"(Crespo villalaz)Problemas resueltos de mecánica de suelos y de cimentaciones","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":201364732,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"kFyzsQSlQupZccX59S30yU3IeSg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/201364732/Crespo-villalaz-Problemas-resueltos-de-mecanica-de-suelos-y-de-cimentaciones","top_badge":null},"210676105":{"type":"document","id":210676105,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210676105/149x198/fb46bd783a/1434964173?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210676105/298x396/4fdcc39a89/1434964173?v=1","title":"19593877 4th Athenian Lecture","short_title":"19593877 4th Athenian Lecture","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210676105,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"j/H7nseiXDgQi1p8JCNd6WFoH0I="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210676105/19593877-4th-Athenian-Lecture","top_badge":null},"210677401":{"type":"document","id":210677401,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210677401/149x198/4cf9745de9/1393985174?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210677401/298x396/4f6bc6179f/1393985174?v=1","title":"A 2D Seismic Stability and Deformation Analysis","short_title":"A 2D Seismic Stability and Deformation Analysis","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210677401,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ofZSpllTRvG9h7sRRWvnGF/mDhY="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210677401/A-2D-Seismic-Stability-and-Deformation-Analysis","top_badge":null},"210678233":{"type":"document","id":210678233,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210678233/149x198/7cf85026a3/1428925539?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210678233/298x396/bb5df63b97/1428925539?v=1","title":"Guia Matlab","short_title":"Guia Matlab","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210678233,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"OnIfZctKb3Ag/A7Wp7QEb2gsMhs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210678233/Guia-Matlab","top_badge":null},"210683181":{"type":"document","id":210683181,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683181/149x198/581e59e0a4/1400169540?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683181/298x396/54fbe8b6d7/1400169540?v=1","title":"TAREA 1_ Correlación q´c y Vs","short_title":"TAREA 1_ Correlación q´c y Vs","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210683181,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"rFBouUy1f8+w8HbfuNVR7rOZMNs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210683181/TAREA-1-Correlacion-q-c-y-Vs","top_badge":null},"210683399":{"type":"document","id":210683399,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683399/149x198/77559fb42e/1449503223?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683399/298x396/ccee034071/1449503223?v=1","title":"Aguilar Colombia","short_title":"Aguilar Colombia","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210683399,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"AqV1Nwcr2zVMfwYJjzx8tQ1Zb7o="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210683399/Aguilar-Colombia","top_badge":null},"213430826":{"type":"document","id":213430826,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/213430826/149x198/560531ce25/1408871955?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/213430826/298x396/d0bcf6efc2/1408871955?v=1","title":"Triaxial Test","short_title":"Triaxial Test","author":"sipil2009","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":213430826,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"qBujpakj/1bFN3RvPlHS3JmlJ4w="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/presentation/213430826/Triaxial-Test","top_badge":null},"235248852":{"type":"document","id":235248852,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/235248852/149x198/296218772f/1406521746?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/235248852/298x396/71856d06aa/1406521746?v=1","title":"Mathcad - Trinity Bearing Capacity_mdk","short_title":"Mathcad - Trinity Bearing Capacity_mdk","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":235248852,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"kiZl8xyCiwM8zS2KAM6QSD4PGlg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/235248852/Mathcad-Trinity-Bearing-Capacity-mdk","top_badge":null},"236194097":{"type":"document","id":236194097,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/236194097/149x198/b64d0c7e89/1407469126?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/236194097/298x396/3485505560/1407469126?v=1","title":"Canterbury Technical Guidance Foundations Part c","short_title":"Canterbury Technical Guidance Foundations Part c","author":"Ran Wang","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":236194097,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"V3g+kBCcxcLjCtEuuXqyO7HiN3o="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/236194097/Canterbury-Technical-Guidance-Foundations-Part-c","top_badge":null},"241866732":{"type":"document","id":241866732,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/241866732/149x198/6285bb1539/1412403982?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/241866732/298x396/198a2a28c3/1412403982?v=1","title":"Engineering Geology Volume 28 Issue 1-2 1990 [Doi 10.1016%2F0013-7952%2890%2990041-x] Jawad S. Al-Sulaimi; Mohammad a. Mollah; Muneer a. Matti -- Geotechnical Properties of Calcrete Soil (Gatch) in Kuwait","short_title":"Engineering Geology Volume 28 Issue 1-2 1990 [Doi 10.1016%2F0013-7952%2890%2990041-x] Jawad S. Al-Sulaimi; Mohammad a. Mollah; Muneer a. Matti -- Geotechnical Properties of Calcrete Soil (Gatch) in Kuwait","author":"Joe Armanda","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":241866732,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ugnxk7w1ek+h8iZGSl4eKTxgdjk="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/241866732/Engineering-Geology-Volume-28-Issue-1-2-1990-Doi-10-1016-2F0013-7952-2890-2990041-x-Jawad-S-Al-Sulaimi-Mohammad-a-Mollah-Muneer-a-Matti-Geot","top_badge":null},"242898993":{"type":"document","id":242898993,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/242898993/149x198/f522737c84/1520880387?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/242898993/298x396/77e8ab1dae/1520880387?v=1","title":"Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete With Strut-And-tie Models (Sp-208 Aci)","short_title":"Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete With Strut-And-tie Models (Sp-208 Aci)","author":"mamandawe","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":242898993,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"dlUDAy9hhAQSoDeNO69rZj8u90M="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/242898993/Examples-for-the-Design-of-Structural-Concrete-With-Strut-And-tie-Models-Sp-208-Aci","top_badge":null},"258674889":{"type":"document","id":258674889,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258674889/149x198/d188ae567a/1426307761?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258674889/298x396/859a8e6093/1426307761?v=1","title":"01. Perforadora de Arrastre","short_title":"01. Perforadora de Arrastre","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":258674889,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"gDhdLuiHSZeQYHBsAmdPNtkrEvg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/258674889/01-Perforadora-de-Arrastre","top_badge":null},"258675302":{"type":"document","id":258675302,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258675302/149x198/d492b5de29/1461407915?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258675302/298x396/228f5f5166/1461407915?v=1","title":"Plan de Desarrollo (Metepec)","short_title":"Plan de Desarrollo (Metepec)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":258675302,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"Bg1zvCp6vCv0X8FLv/3Ec0+WjHs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/258675302/Plan-de-Desarrollo-Metepec","top_badge":null},"260277731":{"type":"document","id":260277731,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/260277731/149x198/8af41f81ea/1427637015?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/260277731/298x396/cbd24a7a1b/1427637015?v=1","title":"Foundation General","short_title":"Foundation General","author":"thakrarhits","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":260277731,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"cATDXu01AsCXS9klSlUGGkinOqU="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/260277731/Foundation-General","top_badge":null},"265556733":{"type":"document","id":265556733,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/265556733/149x198/a17041acc2/1431805335?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/265556733/298x396/3d00aec4a6/1431805335?v=1","title":"EXP.11","short_title":"EXP.11","author":"Rakan Abdulrahman","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":265556733,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"BehTeWJYXDNTyYWR4TvYLneXZG0="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/265556733/EXP-11","top_badge":null},"268045103":{"type":"document","id":268045103,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/268045103/149x198/abf2e91cd1/1433782826?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/268045103/298x396/34b1da88f7/1433782826?v=1","title":"Katalog WF 2007","short_title":"Katalog WF 2007","author":"Ing István-Mátyás Tupper Máté","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":268045103,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"J/6KBdBgE8YHUgIHZuG6f1Gc+tA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/268045103/Katalog-WF-2007","top_badge":null},"269655773":{"type":"document","id":269655773,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/269655773/149x198/be5943feed/1435226522?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/269655773/298x396/19109b20ad/1435226522?v=1","title":"Design Risk of Ground Improvement Methods Including Rigid Inclusions W.wehr M. Topolnicki W.sondermann 2012 (1)","short_title":"Design Risk of Ground Improvement Methods Including Rigid Inclusions W.wehr M. Topolnicki W.sondermann 2012 (1)","author":"anar","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":269655773,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"4aS0xNruW3maLn8MiIhVj+wDPvM="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/269655773/Design-Risk-of-Ground-Improvement-Methods-Including-Rigid-Inclusions-W-wehr-M-Topolnicki-W-sondermann-2012-1","top_badge":null},"271645963":{"type":"document","id":271645963,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271645963/149x198/5dc7e12fc9/1436960767?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271645963/298x396/4a05ca7631/1436960767?v=1","title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","short_title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":271645963,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"tROnnz/FKjaSZ6RG9r2Mu9n1JT8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/271645963/Pyre-Ese-Bay-Mud","top_badge":null},"271646220":{"type":"document","id":271646220,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646220/149x198/85e8702823/1436961022?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646220/298x396/a55609be3e/1436961022?v=1","title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","short_title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":271646220,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"SEtuJEjl0WVIsn1tc7dO3kqT1ZE="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/271646220/Pyre-Ese-Bay-Mud","top_badge":null},"271646343":{"type":"document","id":271646343,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646343/149x198/db9a15f4c4/1436961128?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646343/298x396/c5fffa720a/1436961128?v=1","title":"01.- Carta Geológico-Minera (Estado de BC)","short_title":"01.- Carta Geológico-Minera (Estado de BC)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":271646343,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"+UOOL4Ve4zF0n7Y5k3rV3/uv/1g="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/271646343/01-Carta-Geologico-Minera-Estado-de-BC","top_badge":null},"275969404":{"type":"document","id":275969404,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/275969404/149x198/032ccd893f/1440470073?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/275969404/298x396/e243fafd41/1440470073?v=1","title":"01. Instructions to Authors Word11","short_title":"01. Instructions to Authors Word11","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":275969404,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"XgoYwncrYODEID8O2SMYw5VM/tQ="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/275969404/01-Instructions-to-Authors-Word11","top_badge":null},"295099603":{"type":"document","id":295099603,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295099603/149x198/832b623b7d/1452509034?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295099603/298x396/5d255f04b6/1452509034?v=1","title":"2.-Susie-Gourvenec_SUT-presentation_for-website.pdf","short_title":"2.-Susie-Gourvenec_SUT-presentation_for-website.pdf","author":"Senthil","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":295099603,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"hfVhU3kA9sJ7zLPdGy7uut01CUM="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/295099603/2-Susie-Gourvenec-SUT-presentation-for-website-pdf","top_badge":null},"295750481":{"type":"document","id":295750481,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295750481/149x198/641432df9c/1493107365?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295750481/298x396/19be5c20a7/1493107365?v=1","title":"L. E. Reese, Analysis and Design of Shallow and Deep Foundations, 2006","short_title":"L. E. Reese, Analysis and Design of Shallow and Deep Foundations, 2006","author":"Karim Abousselham","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":295750481,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"JHaJAyxKpxgF/gmDToP23/h+teA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/295750481/L-E-Reese-Analysis-and-Design-of-Shallow-and-Deep-Foundations-2006","top_badge":null},"304928224":{"type":"document","id":304928224,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/304928224/149x198/922d0b1a23/1458099798?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/304928224/298x396/fa84fffb69/1458099798?v=1","title":"Sid698 (Norma Patricia) Flujo de agua","short_title":"Sid698 (Norma Patricia) Flujo de agua","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":304928224,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"h6/y4p6ecEHvASmZgyR1ZfGLghA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/304928224/Sid698-Norma-Patricia-Flujo-de-agua","top_badge":null},"321130832":{"type":"document","id":321130832,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/321130832/149x198/f4517edb62/1471176647?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/321130832/298x396/c3b4367a29/1471176647?v=1","title":"soft-2.pdf","short_title":"soft-2.pdf","author":"Ahmed Rushdy Towfeek","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":321130832,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"tmzLRoHxyby74XYi6vBHZLz0QOs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/321130832/soft-2-pdf","top_badge":null},"326589723":{"type":"document","id":326589723,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/326589723/149x198/7009e2614d/1540295808?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/326589723/298x396/cf1884d9f2/1540295808?v=1","title":"BS EN ISO 22282-3_2012 Geotechnical investigation and testing. Geohydraulic testing.pdf","short_title":"BS EN ISO 22282-3_2012 Geotechnical investigation and testing. Geohydraulic testing.pdf","author":"Om Bun","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":326589723,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"EFcNYL3yPPEq/YATy/3xGkl9Tgw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/326589723/BS-EN-ISO-22282-3-2012-Geotechnical-investigation-and-testing-Geohydraulic-testing-pdf","top_badge":null},"327395592":{"type":"document","id":327395592,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/327395592/149x198/67325bf487/1476329925?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/327395592/298x396/8c1cf2405d/1476329925?v=1","title":"Gabion Design 24 Des 2015","short_title":"Gabion Design 24 Des 2015","author":"coreteam","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":327395592,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"diEifiohHiaF84wmj/HXhptc4T4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/327395592/Gabion-Design-24-Des-2015","top_badge":null},"328819244":{"type":"document","id":328819244,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/328819244/149x198/93c9c7df71/1477388916?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/328819244/298x396/9ab2f86cf8/1477388916?v=1","title":"pubAnnu","short_title":"pubAnnu","author":"Mahendiran Raju","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":328819244,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"mQhbfi4/v9xrbVqtWY8dNLLtN0o="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/328819244/pubAnnu","top_badge":null},"331788340":{"type":"document","id":331788340,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/331788340/149x198/92afb17422/1479713989?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/331788340/298x396/f6360a017c/1479713989?v=1","title":"05 Chapter 2","short_title":"05 Chapter 2","author":"Tri Aryanto","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":331788340,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"3Czj/fW5a0lbD1+1bX5JpAH7MDQ="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/331788340/05-Chapter-2","top_badge":null},"336133428":{"type":"document","id":336133428,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336133428/149x198/482686b491/1484019471?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336133428/298x396/11c8f719eb/1484019471?v=1","title":"Jefferies_TRB2007.pdf","short_title":"Jefferies_TRB2007.pdf","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":336133428,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"7csYMV3h4DHZtyO8tKedTDavcr4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/336133428/Jefferies-TRB2007-pdf","top_badge":null},"336287302":{"type":"document","id":336287302,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336287302/149x198/c830ec53a8/1484153396?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336287302/298x396/2b900bf85e/1484153396?v=1","title":"determination of soil paramteres","short_title":"determination of soil paramteres","author":"Mois Daniel","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":336287302,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"OlitIT8oD5xSezotHHSg0NjfGLo="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/336287302/determination-of-soil-paramteres","top_badge":null},"338840322":{"type":"document","id":338840322,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/338840322/149x198/5cf91dfc1c/1510883395?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/338840322/298x396/d7b2612175/1510883395?v=1","title":"Software to Compute Pile Load Capacity in Case of Variable Soil Stratification.","short_title":"Software to Compute Pile Load Capacity in Case of Variable Soil Stratification.","author":"IJAR Journal","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":338840322,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"jmk/99CNLNdpaFZHJWxpdixBuW8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/338840322/Software-to-Compute-Pile-Load-Capacity-in-Case-of-Variable-Soil-Stratification","top_badge":null},"342451021":{"type":"document","id":342451021,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/342451021/149x198/9832abf8e5/1490021406?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/342451021/298x396/92669fa41a/1490021406?v=1","title":"Plaxis Products 2010 Eng","short_title":"Plaxis Products 2010 Eng","author":"Ari Sentani","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":342451021,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"HwBwjMFYGqLe4YYq+o0lGxGxOKA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/342451021/Plaxis-Products-2010-Eng","top_badge":null},"369135617":{"type":"document","id":369135617,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/369135617/149x198/b04b507e1d/1515961289?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/369135617/298x396/e1e9254620/1515961289?v=1","title":"Degradation Characteristics of Shear Strength of Joints in Three Rock Types Due to Cyclic Freezing and Thawing","short_title":"Degradation Characteristics of Shear Strength of Joints in Three Rock Types Due to Cyclic Freezing and Thawing","author":"Albert Pontus","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":369135617,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"nsa9KeFUdB2U4L+0MaKk4OeU5hg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/369135617/Degradation-Characteristics-of-Shear-Strength-of-Joints-in-Three-Rock-Types-Due-to-Cyclic-Freezing-and-Thawing","top_badge":null},"377028306":{"type":"document","id":377028306,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/377028306/149x198/b8341e3fc4/1524390738?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/377028306/298x396/a4066d5081/1524390738?v=1","title":"371572207","short_title":"371572207","author":"rnelly","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":377028306,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"jMyr0F5p7LFkUcLut6D2NJNL9hY="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/377028306/371572207","top_badge":null},"381731335":{"type":"document","id":381731335,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/381731335/149x198/b73153fdc6/1528917397?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/381731335/298x396/5031b77b87/1528917397?v=1","title":"11.pdf","short_title":"11.pdf","author":"Mrutyunjaya Behera","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":381731335,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"/OQ8UWZPfmeEWlS0zGaRLAKTrSI="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/381731335/11-pdf","top_badge":null},"385573752":{"type":"document","id":385573752,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/385573752/149x198/4e326e3f02/1533572867?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/385573752/298x396/1c2f0868ee/1533572867?v=1","title":"SOIL_MECH_CHAPTER_1.pptx;filename_= UTF-8__SOIL MECH CHAPTER 1-1.pptx","short_title":"SOIL_MECH_CHAPTER_1.pptx;filename_= UTF-8__SOIL MECH CHAPTER 1-1.pptx","author":"Jonniel De Guzman","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":385573752,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"QWCN+qSYl1M5dhDQLIqAgDpvTC4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/presentation/385573752/SOIL-MECH-CHAPTER-1-pptx-filename-UTF-8-SOIL-MECH-CHAPTER-1-1-pptx","top_badge":null},"387987510":{"type":"document","id":387987510,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/387987510/149x198/3668eef98a/1536243595?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/387987510/298x396/ab1b080bb0/1536243595?v=1","title":"det2101.pdf","short_title":"det2101.pdf","author":"Anonymous LftmCNmw","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":387987510,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"NuMAr8wF8TW6+BWHKLJaAIo+G2I="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/387987510/det2101-pdf","top_badge":null}}},"seo_roadblock_props_path":"/doc-page/seo-roadblock-props/201366438","signup_context":null,"toolbar":{"search_path":"/search-4gen?allowed_pages=1%2C2%2C3%2C18%2C19%2C20&auth_token=5ha%2FYASk6bOWtEL1iRcS%2FMuTQYY%3D&authenticity_token=A5Zr6gxDMw7tc7sLQcxlVEZ4VPZ7oLb%2B0tWfVWRhfR%2FrUp%2FyHHL2bCdED1ogKIXA9IMxX0dLUHZA2EkG4VwBmw%3D%3D&expires=1540914782&wordDocumentId=201366438&wordUploadId=205620907"},"renewal_nag_props":null}-->
\ \ \ 41-. ~' has been correlated with qc as presented in Figure 111-9.--I I j:: ._I y' 6 CD \ \ ~ 1 III Z 100.Syq of penetrometer of penetrometer factors between = depth base where: a = shape 0 = friction angle base and soil Ys = unit weight penetrometer = penetration resistance intercept parameter. LinNI: variation M. Equation (17) parabolic variation ( DI B )cr! 20 . c = 0. BIcJ> =1. Kahl et at.0 cJ> =90. ~. D/B) = penetrometer base semi~apex base angle Sand profiles which possess a constant ~' and exhibit a linear variation of qc with depth may be analyzed using a method suggested by Janbu and Senneset (1973): qc + a = Nq (pi + a) (111-3) B = width D Sc. 1975).. . A procedure has been developed for estimating ~' Ultimate cone resistance as a function of friction angle for several sands (from Durgunoglu and Mitchell.0 <{ tn in L&J a:: L&J \ i ~ . to 't! "" to I <. qc is not uniquely correlated with ~'. - " I 0. are presented in Figure 111-8 as a function of soil depth.1972.~rhof "-.

60°..0 Fig.sin~'.8 Friction.0 50 E :J Z 0 0 Q. If the overconsolidation ratio (OCR) is known. silty fine to uniform medium sands (after Schmertmann. 300 . suggestedbe taken as: qc ()= qc NC 1 + 0. &i I 200 T \ \ Q) > 0 Q) > "".4 0. 10 cm2.Q.0 Fig. (qc)NC.!!. then Ko'/(Ko')NC can be estimated using Ko'/(Ko')NC = (OCR)O. 1976) Q-CPT :. % 4. is then used to estimate ~'. Np' and intercept. Use of this relationship *The correlation applies when using the Fugrotype electrical cone. advanced continuously at 2 cm/sec..kgf /cm2 I. As with the SPT. a.0 Vertical 2. In practice. uncemented.: \I\I- ~ 100 ~ \ . after Schmertmann (1976)*. 111-10 Principle of static cone tion. Janbu and Senneset interpreta(1973) method Fig.~ 201 where: q = c measured penetrometer tip resistance penetrometer in-situ (qC)NC Ko' 01 c "i: 0 Q) = = the normally consolidated case lateral stress tip resistance for coefficient for the m (Kd~c = I 0 lateral stress coefficient normally consolidated case 0.0 . and appears to provide reasonable results for appropriate profile conditions.13 300 Net Cone Resistance N ~ ~ £1u.rJ gQ!L !.0.200 " Z. 0 U ( Ko' ()Ko NC 1 ) (111-4) .N u c where: - ing ~' from penetrometer data. Dr' may be employed as an intermediate parameter for estimat- Before applying the relationship presented in Figure 111-12.. based on the results of chambertests.75 . Su = undrained shear strength p = overburden NC pressure - Bearing Capacity Factor appropriate for deep.p' profile. The relationship of Nq = Np + 1 with ~I.a' -b.OO . toncp' & Senneset. circularfoundations .0 Effective Stress. . This method has the advantage of including overburden effects. the investigator must estimate Ka'/ (Ka')NC and then employ Equation 111-4 in order to convert the measured tip resistance. 100 ~ 200 Cloy or Silt ~u>a 00 1. cylindrical tip. relative density. the investigator estimates the slope. Strength of Clays from the CPT The shear strength of clays. su' is most often estimated from penetrometer resistance by employing a relationship of the form: qc p (111-5) s =. Values of Ng versus 1. qc' to the 'equivalent"normally consolidated" tip resistance.: Q) requires a correction for overconsolidated sands. which Schmertmann (1974a). 111-12 bearing capacity to estimate relative density in normally consolidated. primarily quartz.42 and (Ka)NC = 1 . 111-11 I973) tan ~ (after Janbu An example of the use of this method is presented in Figure 111-10. as presented in Figure 111-11. of the average linear qc .2 0.. saturated fine sands is presented in Figure 111-12. A correlation of qc' Dr' and overburden pressure for normally consolidated.0 3.6 0.

the measured soil-steel friction. Values of Nc ranging from 5 to 70 have been back-calculated by different investigators from measured values of qc and values of Su determined from other types of strength tests. thinner vanes. the Vane Shear Test. Effective tan CP' 5. Some values of Nc appropriate for different clay types are presented in Table 111-7. or pushed into the ground by means of an extension apparatus .2 Continuous (electrical penetration penetration decreases Nc compared to incremental (mechanical tips) because of higher pore pressures. (1975. Nc' is. fs' is suggested by Schmertmann (1975) as a lower bound for suo The Vane Shear Test Introduction. Rate of penetration 1. Nc factor potential Direction Notes 1. the vane may be installed at the bottom of a predrilled borehole. Changing method the test for obtainSu 2 to 3 Better sampling. 2 to 3 3 IncreQses with Janbu (1974) increasing cpr Increases with increasing K Janbu (1974) or OCR 6. The best approach for design purposes is to experimentally determine Nc for a given clay type. after Schmertmann (1975). not a simple constant. 2) 1. Method of 1.2 Increasing rate increases Nc Viscous. penetrometer apparatus. Ratio increasing/ decreasing modulus (E+/E-) at peak Su 4. no pore pressure effects tips) Example in Amar et al. or OCR friction. D. SOME OF THE VARIABLES THAT INFLUENCE Nc IN EQUATION (111-5) (Schmertmann. K. Shape of penetrometer tip 2 Clay adhesion on mantle of mechanical tips increases Nc Reduced diameter above cone can decrease Nc in very sensitive clays 7. Three common methods for installing the vane are illustrated in Figure 111-13. after Brand et ale (1974). In contrast with methods which derive strength parameters from intermediate variables. As indicated in the figure. The bearing capacity factor. Shearing resistance is considered to be mobilized on a cylindrical failure surface of rotation.. 1975) Variable Approx. corresponding to the top. such as penetration resistance. testing procedure and reference suo If a friction-cone tip is employed.5 Schmertmann (1972) 8. bottom and sides of the vane assembly.14 TABLE 111-6. in fact. Fig. use of sUPMT decrease all Nc with stiffVesic (1972) ing reference . Clay ratio stiffness 3 Increases increasing = G/su 3 ness Decreases with decreasing ratio Ladanyi (1967) 3. 2. VST. attempts to measure undrained shear strength directly. The test procedure is to advance a vane configuration to a desired soil depth and measure the applied torque as the vane is rotated at a constant rate.. but is affected by a number of factors as summarized in Table 111-6.

.5-4* / 2 ' . (1974) I Patras Clay 17 19 30 60-130 35 60-130 18 60-120 3-7+ 1.T" ':1.3-3. a1.tl. £ . washboringor rotary drilling (b) Equipment pushed into the ground by the extension pipe (c) Vane pushed into the ground by the extension rod Fig.f 'l GrOUnd Surface Extension Pipe E .on VaneWithdrawal Shoe for Rod !2 Friction Rod-Clay . 1974) Reference I Clay one Factor w.15 TABLE III-7.3-3.5 16 50-70 72-84 60-70 50 40 70-80 23 20 40-50 2. III-13 Methods for installing shear vaneS .5* 5. Arabl.5-3 5-7 I ' Soft Bangkok Clay .9* 30-50 10-35 5-7 Soft Bangkok Clay (City) Anagnostopou1os (1974) Brand et. a1.2* 6-8 i i It t Groun Surface Possibly Drilling Fluid on ExtenSl Rod 6Ic-.vl. CONE FACTORS DETE'RMINED FOR CLAYS (after Brand et a1.(Bangp1i) j I Brand et.. % wL' % 80-85 60-71 38-62 C Clay Properties Ip' % 55 36-43 20-35 su'ton m 5-29+ 21-52+ 0.8* 1. Vane ~ Cased 50c.ty 5 Thomas (1965) Ward et a1.3-2.on 1 t E xlens. No Friction Rod-Cloy Vane Frict!On Couphng Vane Uncased (0) Drillholemade by augering.anGulf Soft Clay 18 15. I Sensl.5 16 20-30 22-26 30-47 (1965) Meigh & Corbett (1969) Ladanyi & Eden (1969) Ladanyi & Eden (1969) Pham (1972) Leda Clay (Gloucester) I Leda Clay (Ottawa) I I 7.5 5.7* 1. London Clay London Clay . (1974) ! WeatheredBangkokClay (Bangp1i) 14 100-130 100-135 60-80 1.tens.on P:'::t.

16

~oc~

IOem

~) '3I~ r-6.5 .,
em
(I)

rn~m
,

1-13em-l

(2) Fig. 111-14 Some

( 3)
shear vane configurations

(4) in common use

(5)

rod, with or without the.use of a protection shoe. A number of different vane configurations are in current use, as depicted in Figure 111-14, but the preferred design, as specified in ASTM Standard D2573, is a four bladed vane with a height/diameter
ratio of 2.

Determination of Strength from the VST Undrained shear strength may be calculated from measured torque in the VST, provided that horizontal and vertical shear strengths are assumed equal, by employing the following equation:

Measurements of suv using different vane configurations will be influenced by different pro~ portions of sh and sv,as noted in Figure 111-14. It has been found that, in general, the ratio sh/sv is less than unity (Duncan and Seed, 1966; and Lemasson, 1974). It therefore seems that an accurately determined.value of suv may be used as a conservative estimate of sv. Accuracy of the VST Until recently, the VST was consider~d to be a most reliable means of measuring undrained shear strength in soft to medium clays, possessing the advantages of economy of use and reduced soil disturbance, compared to sampling and laboratory testing. A number of cases have been encountered, however, in which the use of suv leads to unconservative results in undrained stability analyses (Bjerrum, 1972; Pilot, 1972). Accordingly, a correction procedure was developed (Bjerrum, 1973) which attributes the discrepancy in field behavior mainly to strain rate effects. The true undrained strength is related to the measured shear strength as follows:

suv
'IT

2'r
(III-6a)

D3

(H/D

+ a/2)
strength, from

where:
suv

=

the undrained

the VST

shear

T = maximum

applied

torque

H = vane height
D

=

vane

diameter

a = factor which depends on the assumed shear distribution along the top and bottom of the failure cylinder

s = u (field)
The Bjerrum correction

].l

s uv

(111-8)

= 2/3 if uniform

shear

is assumed

factor,].l , is correla-

= 1/2 if triangular

distribution is assumed (i.e., shear strength mobilized is proportional to strain) distribution is

=
For

3/5 if parabolic

assumed
a uniform shear strength distribution,
,

and ASTM D2573 vane configuration, Equation1II-6a reducesto: 6 T s =- (III-6b) uv 7 D3
Under these conditions, shearing resistance on the side (vertical) face of the failure cylinder contributes some 85% of the measured.resistance to rotation, T. What is actually measured in the VST is therefore a weighted average of the shear strengths Sv on vertical and sh on horizontal planes. It is possible to determine both sh and Sv separately by repeating a test using a vane of a different shape or H/D ratio. This method was employed by Richardson et al. (1975) in order to determine the relative values of sh and Sv in Bangpli Clay. The results of their investigation

.ted with soil plasticity index, Ip' as shown in Figure III-16~ An inspection of Figure 111-16 shows considerable scatter in the data obtained subsequent to dev~lopment of the correlation. This correction<procedure is subject to the additional uncertainty inherent in the determination of Ip and suv' and in the formulation of stability analysis assumptions. Use of the Bjerrum correction
factor may 'actually yield occasional unconserva-

tive results as noted by LaRochelle et al. (1974) and Ladd (1973). Schmertmann (1975) notes also that as Ip is determined using disturbed clay it cannot account for differences among clays having differing undisturbed structures.
Factors \ihich Affect the VST

It is now recognized that the VST is subject to the uncertain effects of a large number of influencing factors:

are reproduced in Figure 111-15.

The ratio

Sh/Sv

is seen to be fairly constant with depth, with an average value of 0.6.

I} Disturbance. It is evident that the vane cannot be installed in the ground without causing some degree of disturbance in the soil around it. If predrilling is employed (see Figure III-13a), a zone of a certain width around the bottom of the borehole must be considered to be disturbed. In practice, it is commonly assumed that the disturbed zone does not extend more than 60 cm from the bot-

17

0 ----

0

Moisture Content -% Sensitivity 50 100 150 2 4 6
".

00

sh/s v 05

1.0

v

Weathered 2 Clay
--

':1 (., '-'
.,

.-J

- 1-..

-

l

§ .....

"\
\.

I 1
\.

--

~ 4 ~
(I.) E
I 6 -.. .s:: Soft

.....
.....

'-r .
r'-"
......

....
... ....

? Ij

~ (I.)
Qj E I ) .s:: a.
(I.) 0

\

"
I

!
(

(I.) 0 8

a.

Clay

...:::"J'"1"'" ,;:;' -

I I

'-'
I

:::'

-

10I_...
I

12

-.J -IU 0 Plastic Limit 0 Liquid Limit . Natural MoistureContent . .

I

12 Ratios of vane strengths on horizontal and vertical planes

Properties of the Bangpli clay at the vane boring site

Fig.

III-IS

Ratio of strengths planes for Bangpli

on horizontal (sh) to vertical (sv) clay (from Richardson et al., 1975)

1.4 V
Su(Field) = fL x Su(Vane) Reference 0 .* 8jerrum (1972) /:1 A*

1.2

A
:::L

0
V
<>

(972) Milligan Ladd and Foott (1974)
Flaate and Preber(r374)
LaRochelle and et 01.(1974) ,vorved clays

0 IL.

.: 1.0 E (.)
c 0 0.8

* Layered

I

. 0 u

0
0.6 ./:1

t-O-t

0.4

a

20

40

60 80 Plasticity Index, P.I.-%

100

120

Fig.

111-16

Field vane correction factor vs plasticity index derived from embankment failures (from Ladd, 1975)

18
tom of the borehole. It has been noted (Flaate, 1966), that this assumption can be questioned if the borehole is wide and the drilling procedure unfavorable. If the vane is installed by means of a protective shoe forced into the ground without predrilling (see Figure III-13b), a plastic zone will be formed around the vane head with a varying degree of disturbance. Studies by Cadling and Odenstad (1950) and Andresen and Bjerrum (1965) indicate no measurable disturbance caused by this procedure when the vane test is made at least 50 cm from the protective shoe. When the vane is installed without any predrilling or protective shoe (see Figure III-13c), the disturbance is due'only to the vane rod and the vane itself. This component of disturbance is also present if predrilling or a proteptive shoe is employed. In this regard, it is considered advantageous to minimize the "area ratio" of the vane. The area ratio is defined as the cross sectional area of the vane cross and stem as a percentage of the cross sectional area of the failure cylinder. It is recommended that the 'area ratio not be higher than about 15% (Flaate, 1966). Laboratory tests performed by Vey (1955) show that cohesive soils can stick to,the vane surface, and, in effect, increase the area ratio of the apparatus. It has been suggested (Flaate, 1966), that this effect will probably depend upon the stickiness of the soil and be of less importance in
sensitive clays.

may govern full scale behavior, yet remain undetected in the VST. Because of the uncertainties involved in describing the failure mode in a given VST, it is desirable that VST results be used in conjunction with other strength tests. 3} Dimensions of Failure Cylinder. The actual diameter of the failure cylinder in a soft clay, and hence the moment arm of mobilized shear strength, has been observed to be some 5% larger than the diameter of the vane blades (Arman et al., 1975). An uncorrected discrepancy of this magnitude will result in an over-estimate of 16% in calculated shear strength. At present, there is not enough data available to enable a quantitative correction for this effect in different soil types.

E.

The Pressuremeter

Test

(PMT)

A borehole pressuremeter, of the type developed by L.Menard, is depicted in Figure III-17. These devices are widely used in Europe and are receiving increasing acceptance in the U.S. The test proceeds once the apparatus is lowered to a desired borehole depth. Increments of hydraulic pressure are applied to the center cell, and the .resulting deformation of the borehole wall, at set time intervals, is d~termined from fluid volume change measurements of the cell chamber. The two pressurized guard cells serve to stabilize the device within the borehole and to insure essentially axial plane strain conditions at mid-height

It is recognized that the use of a damaged vane apparatus may greatly increase the magnitude of soil disturbance. 2} Mode of Failure. The stress distribution and stress strain behavior in the VST are little known. The soil is generally assumed to fail along the sides and ends of a circumscribed cylinder. It is also assumed that the shear strength is fully mobilized all along the surface at the same time, i.e., no progressive failure takes place. In the idealized case, the application of torque will produce large stress concentrations at the end of the vane blades (Flaate, 1966). The actual stress distribution will depend upon the degree of dis.turbance around the vane as well as the stressstrain properties of the undisturbed soil. The potential for progressive failure will depend upon the type of soil, its sensitivity and its stressstrain characteristics.
...

CO2 Gas GasTubes to Guard Cells

Volume Change Measured by Change in Water Level

Pressure -Volu meter

A laboratory program was carried out by LeBlanc (1975) in order to examine the actual failure pattern and stress-strain behavior during the VST. It was observed that the peak strength was obtained at very low angular deformations. Only for rotations in excess of 45° was a cylindrical failure surface observed. On the basis of these results, Roy (1975) concluded that it is questionable to interpret VST results in the classical manner which assumes a cylindrical shear failure surface at peak strength. The failure mode in the VST may not correspond to the failure mode in a prototype situation. The effect of preferred failure plane orientations

I

Protective Sheath Guard Cell Under Gas Pressure

Measuring Cell. Filled with Water Under Gas Pressure Guard Cell Under Gas Pressure

Fig.

III-17 Classic Menard pressuremeter

2) The conduct of the test permits an estimate of the in-situ lateral stresses with no limits on K. III-19b Main details of Cambridge in-situ instrument showing stress gages (fromWroth and Hughes. 111-18 Pressure-volume change history during a pressuremeter test Rushing Water Pressure Linefor Expanding Rubber Membrane Pressure Gage Rubber Membrane Fine Thread Spring Probe Diameter of Membrane before Expansion is the same as the CuttingHead ~ '@ Section X-X ClompJ Chopping Tool Cutting Edge Cutting~ Head Fig. 1972) Fig. Important recent improvements of the PMT are the "Autoforeuse" and the "Camkometer" self boring pressuremeters.a problem with well developed elastic and elasto-plastic solutions which are suited for application to soil mechanics. 1975).. and the Camkometer is depicted in Figure III-19b. (1972) and Wroth and Hughes (1973). 1972) .19 of the apparatus. developed respectively by Baguelin et al. III-19a Sketch of IIAutoforeuse" probe (from Baguelin et al. but stress-strain soil properties applicable to the direction perpendicular to the axis of the borehole cavity. A self boring pressuremeter is schematically presented in Figure III-19a. Pressure Time The PMT is seen to possess at least three distinct advantages: 1) The test models the axisymmetric expansion of an infinite cylindrical cavity -. The relationships between pressure increments. 0 3) The test results provide not only strength data. volumetric expansion. . Volumetric Expansion Fig. and time are presented in Figure 111-18 (Menard.

may be employed to deduce the complete stress-strain curve. computed from ~V T ps El p. Pf PI where: E = 0 radial deformation of the probe.5. nondilating soil were simultaneously presented by Ladanyi (1972). <j)'was determined from PMT resultsthroughIIin-house II correlations of ~' with th~ pseudo-elastic modUlus EpMT (see section IV E) and the limit pressure Pl' The reliability of such correlations may be questionable when they are generalized to different soil types. Until recently. Each investigator assumed ~ = 0. situ lateral pressure. (2) linear elastic compression of the soil and (3) plastic deformation of the surrounding soil mass. close agreement between ~'PMT and~' from triaxial tests has been shown by winter and Rodrigues (1975).kPa III-2O Theoretical pressuremeter curve ~a/a. Po' is estimated as the pressure corresponding to the kink in the curve between the recompression and elastic compression phases. 1975).-y has been applied to the determination of ~'f:r6m the PMT through the work of Gibson and Anderson (1961). s u PI . Poisson's ratio ~ = 0. applied pressure.P ) cu . respectively Elastic Recompression of Disturbed Soil Pf P A graphical procedure developed by Amar et a~. An idealized pressure-volume curve is presented in Figure III-2O. and N is a correlation factor generally taken to equal 5.c U E cu 400 For T ps small = E 0 0 g ::J d E0 (1 + Eo) (1 + Eo/2) (111-9) strains: d (p . Vesic (1972) and Ladanyi (1963). The in-situ lateral pressure. but more conventionally it is taken as the pressure corresponding to a volume increase ~V equal to the initial volume of the borehole Vi (i.. respectively = initial and differential chamber volumes.Po N (111-10) where PI and Po are as indicated in Figure 111-20.e. 111-21 for soft clay reflect three phases of the test: (1) recompression of disturbed soil. showed a poor abilityof the above theoriesto predict ~' from the results triaxial of pressurementei tests in large chambers. PI' is the abscissa value of the vertical asymptote to the pressuremeter curve. but investigations by Laier (1973) and AI-Awkati (cited byJ. where a is the cell radius. The results in Fig..Vesic's theory.c 0 T ps ~ E 0 d E0 0 It 200 E = 1 ~V C(V. p = = = equivalent plane-strain shear stress equivalent corrected axial applied compressive pressure strain and in- tN Vo Plastic 0 V. The limit pressure may be determined directly from the curve. .P=Pl @ ~V=Vi)as volume increasesfor pressure increments at this point are normally relatively large.+ ~V) 0 Po Fig. Schmertmann.50 and showed the validity of the following equations: d (p . Using. (1972). Applied pressure should be corrected to account for membrane stiffness and the hydrostatic head of the fluid in the connecting tubes. the the limit pressure. Cavity expansion theo. Shear strength is frequency determined from the Menard PMT through the semi-empirical relationship: Typical result of a pressuremeter test in soft clay Obtaining Strength and Stress-Strain Data from the PMT PMT results are usually presented as a plot of chamber volumevs.Palmer (1972) and Baguelin et al. ~V J.20 Three independent theories for extracting a complete stress-strain curve from the results of pressuremeter tests in incompressible. Pressure . By definition. J. (1975).P ) ~ ~ ~ 600 cu E C\ c: 0 .

A new method for determining ~' from pressuremeter tests in sand has been developed by Al-Awkati and reported by Schmertmann (1975). Al-Awkati presents a correlation between--<p-~and the volumetric strain between 0 and 100% relative density for quartz sands which is reproduced in Figure 111-23. using ~o' (from Schmertmann. 2) Measure 2'5 0. 2) At or near the limit pressure. The predicted triaxial ~' applies to the mean normal stress. Fig. and inserting the apparatus must be chosen which minimizes soil disturbance. as summarized in Figure 111-24 after Al-Awkati. . 1975).3 e as defined in Figure 111-22. 1975). enters 40 ~ 0 Quartz Sand 30 One may determine ~o' from a triaxial test in which the volumetric strain rate becomes zero at peak strength or by correcting for volumetric work in a test where this rate "differs from zero. the bulge in the pressuremeter cell seriously violates the plane strain assumption (Schmertmann. This method has been applied to correspond- .l 35 4>~-degrees 40 ing PMT and laboratory triaxial test results.2 0. ~' not due to dilatanFactors Which Affect the PMT The standard Menard type PMT is highly sensitive to variations in test procedure. CII (0) 40 " . A sample curve is presented in Figure 111-22. Many methods will produce approximately the same 4) Read predicted triaxial ~' on horizontal scale. E ---~~ ~ -----(""' ~11 --I~ (/)0 . Alternately. 111-22 3) Enter chart in Figure 111-22 with tan e and move vertically to measured or estimated ~d where Al-Awkati's theoretical correlation between PMT data and triaxial maximum ~'.=0 0 > '~ 20 ~~-10 25 30 Triaxia. 1975. ad ' where: a '= '0 ~ 1 + p sin~' when sand (III-II) and Pf = chamber failure pressure state.I -9- 35 "0 4) The initial soil modulus used in these theories may be underestimated when the conventional pressuremeter test is employed (Schmertmann. Fig. A method of boring. 1975) ~d representsthat part of cy.21 45 The application of these theories to the determination of ~' is hindered by four factors: 1) Pressuremeters with ordinary length to diameter ratios require major correction factors to convert real PMT limit pressures to the limit pressure corresponding to infinite pressuremeter length (Laier et al.( 0 ~ 1) Plot PMT data as In (Eo = ~a/a) vs. 1975). The method employs only the low strain portion of the PMT curve and thus avoids the uncertainty associated with evaluating Pl' Al-Awkati's method proceeds as follows: '. c: 0 '(50 -=. 1975). 111-23 Correlation for estimating ~o' using volume strain from relative density tests (suggested 1975) by Al-Awkati in Schmertmann. In (corrected pressure). 3) Any evaluation of ~' requires in-situ stress conditions which ly determined in the conventional Hartmann and Schmertmann. a knowledge of may only be crudePMT (Laier. CI) CII CII C.. yielding a close agreement between predicted and measured values of ~'.

the rate to assure essentially drained or unconditions is not known. because of the large number of tests required. By performing a number of. At this point the shear plates may be contracted. very few pressuremeters are so equipped. When consolidation is complete the shear head is either pulled upwards. especially in sensitive clay deposits. 1975) between 35 Pulling Yoke ~' Expandable Shear Head 'limit pressure.) c and ~values determined by this method show good corr..i: I1:1 ~ 35 ::I ~ II) 0 Q. contain such a pore pressure transducer. drained conditions for the initial pressure increments. The Iowa Borehole Shear Test The Iowa Borehole Shear Test is performed by lowering a shear head. It is likely that no part of the test will. Since the of soil volume change will increase as pressure increases in successive increments. An alternateapproach . At the required test positionthe two shearplates are expanded until skated in the . another seating pressure selected and the test repeated.. to' consolidation to occur. consisting of two opposing horizontally grooved shear plates to an uncased sectionof . A common set an arbitrary time interval (1 Fig. slow = drained) the test results become unaffected. a Mohr-Coulomb failure line and subsequently c and ~ may be determined. 111-25 Iowa borehole shear test apparatus .) 1:1 . a time interval for proceduremay result in nearly pushed downwardsat a steadyrate of 2 mm/min. therefore. During a pressure is of expansion drained test practice 2 minutes) magnitude fixed is . rotated through 90° and the test repeated. The required forces for shearing are measured. At present.22 II) Q. and the shearing stress plotted against the normal press~re. In practice the number of tests that can be reliably repeated at the same position are influenced by the inherent friction of the soil.) 45 Hydrauli c Upward Pull Pressure ~ ' 0'1 Q. but essentially undrained conditions for the final pressure increments. whereas in sand the limit may be determined by how far the shear heads can be'expanded.a borehole (Figures 111-25. As a result. The shear head is then re~urned to the original position. depicted in Figure 1II-19b.to the pore pressure problem is to experiment with different rates of cell expansion to determine at what rates (fast = undrained.and direct shear tests. but an accurate evaluation of soil deformation requires the best possible borehole preparation. 111-24 A1-Awkati's comparisons measured and predicted (Schmertmann. 0 0 ~ Creates Shear Farce ~ 40 . or each pressureincrement. the number may be as low as 2. Such an approach is generally impractical' in engineering applications. F. Versions of the Cankometer. partially drained or undrained conditions. it is not possible to determine whether the strength parameters are those for drained.elationwith those determined in triaxial.boreholewalls at a preselected pressure. This uncertainty in pore pressure behavior may be resolved by measuring pore pressure with a suitable transducer affixed to the face of the device. Major Limitations of the Method i) Drainage conditions are not known.( .tests at different seating pressures.. the shear head lowered to its original position. Some time is allowedfor .. (In clays.) Uncasecl Borehole 40 45 Predi.cted Triaxial cp'-degrees Fig.be fully drained or un- drained.' standard PMT. and. the variation of pore not measured. and 111-26).

whereas greatest applicability of the static cone has been to sands. III-26. as well as uncertainties in interpretation.23 The Standard Penetration Test and Dynamic Cone Penetration Test suffer from a lack of theoretical understanding and controlled use. At presen~ best use of the method for strength evaluation requires the establishment of a cone factor for a'particular soil deposit by means of a few separate strength tests by another method. it can be anticipated that its use will continue for evaluation of the in-situ strength of soft clays. In many cases SPT data are the only information available. The static cone and vane shear devices cannot penetrate very stiff deposits. Knife Edge Pistons . Pressuremeter testing. iii) Tests may'be located at selected strata. Borehole The quasi-static cone penetration test possesses many practical advantages and prospects for the development of a reasonable theoretical analysis of the test in the future are good. The borehole shear device has had its greatest applicability thus far in stiffer deposits. The applicability of stage testing to different soil types is a subject which needs to be studied further. Its use is limited to testing those soils which are suitable for stage testing. and the particular strength parameters to use in design will depend on the nature of a specific problem. .Contact Plate . in the absence of economical replacements and because of the great number of available empirical correlations. not under pressure from the shear head plates but which extend along the ends of the plates. however. although it appears well-suited to soft and medium clays as well. ii) The shear strength of unconsolidated portions of the borehole wall. The borehole shear test is expected to increase in popularity as a result of its relative simplicity and the direct design value of the raw test data. but the high costs of reliable results indicate that this approach may be most efficient if it is used in conjunction with simpler strength index measurements. G. Conclusions Soil strength may be expressed in a number of ways. The potential accuracy of the self-boring PMT is promising. Sheor Planes -2 . In-situ strength testing methods and programs should be selected on this basis. especially for the SPT. The vane shear test is best suited for soft clays. is not suitable in deposits containing interspersed cobbles or rock fragments. . The SPT and dynamic cone tests are most suitable for strength estimates in sands and stiffer soils. may add to the resisting shear force but is not accounted for in the calculations. Use of these methods will continue.' . Advantages of Borehole Shear Test i) The Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters may be determined in less than one hour for some soils. .' . as well as stress-strain behavior. as the tests are only performed after a hole is bored and logged. The pressuremeter test has great potential for use in measuring soil strength. while suitable in principle for most soil types except gravels and rockfills. } . ii) Erroneous shear values resulting from poor seating or remolding are usually apparent and may be systematically eliminated.. :-LVOT . Fig. Schematic of borehole shear device (A) circumferential shearing resistance must be minimized for uniform distribution for contact pressure and (B) knife edges minimize and resistance nl' In spite of the several difficulties cited relative to the interpretation of vane shear test results. The different methods are not equally applicable in all soil types. .

of lateral earth pressure. uo' a~ = a~ = a~ The calculation of avo may be influenced by In Figure IV-I.a3)/2 (IV-I) reasonably p' = (aI' + a2' + a3')/3 T) (IV-2) the vertical stress is a principal stress which may be calculated from the weight of overlying material. is varied (Wroth. Wroth (1975) suggests that correct evaluation of the in-situ lateral stress may not be possible from the results of laboratory tests. Therefore. and aI' . 2) The presence of a dry. quantities-that can best be determined by in-situ tests. is observed between ah'and a. C. under these loading . A constant ratio. fluctuations 7) Failure to achieve complete equilibrium between the groundwater and the measuring system. 3) The pore pressure 4) The coefficient Ko' is known. Ke.24 IV. even with the best piezometers currently available. borehole depths are probably known only to the nearest 0. avo' and pore pressure. a3' = major. as considered by Massarsch et al. A consequence of this disturbance is that predictions based-upon laboratory test results may grossly overestimate the movements. the in-situ stress state may deviate significantly from these assumed conditions as a result of tectonic or geologic processes. is subject to laboratory measurement errors. uncertainty will arise in the determination of the vertical stress.1 meter.. In conventional soil investigations.O kPa). Yt.l m of water head (Il. Sources of error in the measurement of Uo include: 1) Temperature 2) Fluctuations 3) Calibration 4) Zero effects in atmospheric errors transducers placement groundwater table pressure The response of soil to the application of load stresses depends greatly upon the initial state of stress and the stress path experienced by the soil. are independent of soil deformation characterIstics and the magnitude of initial lateral stresses. so that The nature of in-situ lateral stresses may be understood by examining the results of laboratory oedometer tests which model the one-dimensional consolidation experienced by an idealized soil deposit as the overburden pressure.a2'. where: q = (al . IN-SITU STRESSES TERISTICS Introduction AND DEFORMATION CHARAC- several sources of uncertainty. a' v = a' 1 In reality. fissured crust will produce horizontal variations in avo' 3) The assignment of an average unit weight to an interval of depth may not reflect the true average unit weight of that depth interval. as performed by geotechnical engineers. 4) The determination of depth and layer thicknesses is subject to error. intermediate principal effective respectively For the usual case where the in-situ horizontal stress is less than the overburden stress. the prediction of settlements depends upon the accurate determination of deformation parameters. shift in electrical depth 5} Uncertain 6) Seasonal of transducer of the Some inadequacies of this approach are evident. The measurement of pore water pressure is probably only accurate to within IO. = q/p' and minor stresses. the magnitude of the in-situ vertical and lateral effective stresses and the nature of the stress changes imposed during construction. Significant soil disturbance is inevitable as a result of the sampling and laboratory testing processes. 1973). (1975): 1) Determination of total unit weight. (1975b) and Tavenas et al. The importance of stress path considerations have been giscussed by Lambe and Whitman (1969) and Ladd and Foott (1974). Historically. The observed stress paths corresponding to one-dimensional laboratory consolidation and subsequent unloading take the form presented in Figure IV-I. among others. for a given soil. A. Deformations and local yielding are consequently affected to a marked degree by the geologic stress history. Even if these assumptions hold true for a particular deposit. 1975). The Estimation of In-Situ Stresses The is based 1) The simplest upon ground concept of an :in-situ stress regime several surface simplifying is assumptions: level. is known. In fact. Most limit analyses. 2) Horizontal stresses are equal in all directions. On the other hand. resulting in overconservative designs (Marsland. the vector AB represents the stress path of a soil under a one-dimensional loading which models the increasing overburden pressure and normal consolidation during sedimentation. Proper simulation of field conditions in laboratory tests requires knowledge of in-situ stress conditions. In-Situ Lateral Stresses B. which in turn depend upon the in-situ effective stress levels. deformation parameters have been evaluated from the results of laboratory experiments on nominally undisturbed samples and then substituted in a simple elastic analysis to yield values of stresses and displacement for use in analysis and design.

is subjected to onedimensional unloading. the stress path takes on a curved shape similar to the arc segment CD. (IV-4c) is pre- calculate K~c' and ll'is obtained from Ip using the plot in Figure IV-2. K6 may be readily estimated from I~. Heavily Overconsolidated Soil If a soil at stress state "c" in Figure IV-l is subjected to additional one-dimensional unloading. IV-l Typical effective stress paths for soil consolidated one-dimensionally (from Wroth.1) (IV-6) B where: K' = coefficient of lateral earth presnc sure for a normally consolidated state ll' = Poisson's ratio. and the resulting plot of ll'vs Ip is reproduced in Figure IV-2. becomes clarity (J3 in in the this major range. the stress path will follow a vector similar to BC. OCR. K' = (OCR) (K' ) 0 nc a:' v. The test data appear in Table IV-I. C5h is however. ~ pi (d) 0 (c) ':lOA . and Ko is equal to 1. 1944): 1 .' h pi By applying Equation IV-5 to the results of laboratory tests on 2 sands and 6 remolded clays. the horizontal and vertical stresses are equal. where the soil is in a state of'passive failure. cpt. Along the stress path CD. and stress. this state corresponds to an overconsolidation ratio. At point "C".~ Fig. the value of Ko'is greater than unity.25 and. It is emphasized that this correlation only applies to lightly overconsolidated soils. the theory of elasticity may be applied to show that.0) (IV-4a) For normally consolidated soils. in terms of effec- tive stresses a. based upon geologic information and/or laboratory test results. =C5 '/C5' h v (a constant less than 1.and OCR. IV-2 20 Plasticity Index% Values of Poisson'sratio for lightly overconsolidated soils (fromWroth. for any point on the stress path BC: Figure ~C5 ' h =~ 1-11' ~C5 v ' (IV -5) identified . ranging from 4 to 5. principal IV-I. The maximum value of Ko'occurs at point "D".sin <P' 1 + sin cpt in terms D° Fig.sin cpt The derivation of these expressions sented in Huck et ale (1974). C5v'. Equation IV-6 is then employed to determine Kb. 1975). 1975) ~ conditions: 0 CL Ko. An important consequence of these findings is that for a lightly overconsolidated clay. If the stress path BC is assumed to be linear.0. If a normally consolidated soil. at stress state "B" in Figure IV-I. still C5h ' is therefore C5l' For as greater than the vertical stress. a theoretical relationship may be derived (Jaky. and steadily increases with increasing OCR. Along the "heavily overconsolidated" portions of the stress path between C and D. 1972): Ko ~ 1 . effective stresses. The best estimate of the OCR is made.E~\ Inp' much lower values of ll' as reported by Wroth (1975). Heavily overconsolidated soils may exhibit I (0) (b) YJ e A B -. representative values of ll'have been obtained and correlated with Plasticity Index. For many soils (Ladd. B q ~ 1 - . the horizontal stress. 1975) KO = (1 + 2/3 sin cp') (IV-4b) of where <P' = soil friction angle. A value of cpt is substituted ln Equation IV-4 to A convenient approximation for this expression is often used that has been found to be accurate enough for most engineering applications (Wroth. Ip' by Wroth (1975). ll' (OCR .

BCD. 1975) The values of the OCR corresponding to selected values of K~ may thus be calculated for a . IV-3 One-dimensional unloading of Bearpaw shale (from Wroth. after Wroth (1975).287 0. and are reproduced in Figure IV-3.60 1. 1975) m. given soil.ln Overconsol idotionRoti Fig. nB = stress point. The results of Brooker's (1964) experiments on Bearpaw shale have been presented in this manner. IV-5 Comparison of computed and experimental dat~ for one-dimensional unloading of Boston blue clay (from Wroth.26 2.346 0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I Soil Pennsylvania sand Wabash river sand Chicago clay Goose Lake flour Weald Clay Kaolin London clay Bearpaw shale I % P 10 16 20 32 38 78 ]11 0. and the natural logarithm of the stress point. n. In (p'). if the parameters m and ~c are known.60 1. after Wroth (19751. The K~ .4 m 0 0 20 40 Plasticity Variation with of the rebound gradient. The value of ~c may be calculatedfrom ~' using Equation IV-4.54 1.254 0.267 0.OCR relationship predicted in this manner is compared in Figure IV-5 with the values of Kd and OCR measuredduringone-dimensional un- 7] 0.371 m 1.92 Author Hendron Hendron Brooker Brooker Brooker Nadarajah Brooker Brooker It has been shown by Wroth (1972) that the stress path segment BCD in Figure IV-l may be transformed into a log-linear plot of the stress ratio. may therefore be represented by the equation: 2 m (n nB) = (IV - 7 ) In (p' /p~ ) where: p ~. The parameter m has been obtained for the soils listed in Table IV-I.58 1.325 0. plasticity (from Wroth.26 Values of Soil Parameters Plotted in Figure IV-2 Wroth (1975) TABLE IV-I. 1975) Fig.281 0. No. "B" in Figure stress IV-l ratio at Ka m = inverse of the gradient in Figure IV-l Equation ~ of BCD IV-7 may be rewritten ) 3 (l-K~) as: OCR (1+2KilC) [ - 0 1+2K' a (IV 8) ] 3 (l-K' 1 2 4 8 0 16 32 m l nc 1+2K' nc - 1+2K' a ] .36 1.282 0. IV-4 The unloading stress path. and correlated with I as presented in Figure IV-4.4 B 3 2 0 P'/Pe -0. Fig.81 2.

since the effective stresses have not changed during secondary consolidation. Even the most advanced techniques. for low values of OCR. Ka'is that of a normally consolidated soil. as sketched in Figure IV-6(a). water table fluctuations and previous construction history. If additional vertical stresses are imposed. and hence possess identical overconsolidation ratios. the methods presented previously could be employed to show that Kq' should aecrease with depth as sketched in Figure IV-6(b). with constant unit weight and horizontal ground surface. the void ratio will decrease to a value. At a point near the ground surface. where the overconsolidation ratio is sufficiently The vertical stress at state "1" would be interpreted as the preconsolidation pressure. z. erosion. because stress state "C" is located on a path of primary unloading. The method described previously. the void ratio will decrease along the recompression curve "eB" eln. If a soil layer of thickness. eH' while the stress state. may be expected to produce accurate results only when applied to normally consolidated soils. Laboratory Measurement of ~ The most widely used assumptions in the laboratory evaluation of in-situ lateral stresses are of questionable validity (Wroth. is in also seen to produce~reliable predictions of Boston blue clay. however. after Wroth (1975). pi (b) Fig. the current stress state is unpredictable if a soil deposit has been subjected to more than one cycle of loading (deposition) and unloading (erosion). aJ ' and preconsolidation pressure. The value of in Kq' will decrease rapidly. the soil will behave as if it were lightly overconsolidated. Current Yield Envelope pi Stress states liEII and "C" correspond to the same vertical stress. Figure IV-7. In fact. (0) e Distribution of Kd in the Ground The distribution of Ke' in a natural soil de- posit may be the result 6f a complex sequence of stress variations caused by deposition. remains unchanged from pointG. . If a soil element at stress state "G" and void ratio eG in Figure IV-7 undergoes secondary consolidation. 1975). will exhibit a uniform distribution of KQ with depth. H. the value of the overconsolidation ratio at any depth. would become equal to (z + zo)/z. If the soil is only lightly overconsolidated. and a value of Kq'would be estimated accordingly. IV-7 Change of state caused by delayed consolidation 0 Knc Ko Delayed. z (0) Fig. while stress state "E" is located on a reloading path. as described by Bjerrum (1967). the value also of ~ will be limited by a passive stress in- failure condition. Therefore.27 loading of Boston blue clay. This phenomenon will produce an effect of apparent OCR which is independent of depth. as a large increase q aJ is accompanied by little change in ari . applicable to lightly overconsolidated soils. such as those developed by Poulos and Davis (1972) or Tavenas et all (1975). Reconsolidated Soil If the soil at stress state "D" in Figure IV-l is reloaded one-dimensionally the effective stress will follow the approximately linear segment DE. vegetation. IV-6 Typical vertical overconsolidated profile deposit (h) of Kd. (a~ )B. tectonic movement. high. An equivalent distribution of from the effective ~ would result ~ crease and decrease caused by a fall and subsequent rise of the water table. capillary pressures and heterogeneous soil distributions will serve to complicate this situation even further. is a common cause of apparent overconsolidation. zo' were to be removed through erosion. At this state. or secondary compression. The predicted and observed values are seen to be in close agreement. for an An idealized soil deposit in the normally consolidated state. The values of Kd will differ. The effects of secondary compression.

The "closure pressure II is D. These techniques are only summarized in the following paragraphs. The direct measurement of stresses in earth fills may be achieved through the installation of pressure cells during construction. Stress Measurement in Soft Clays Pressure Cells: Total pressure cells. in-situ measurement may be very successful if soil disturpance can be minimized.. A number of imaginative techniques have been developed which attempt to realize these goals.cells Fig.there is no satisfactory method of determining Ko for a natural soil by laboratory testing. Soil fracture. Accurate resuIts are difficult to obtain and verify. The Glatzl cell. and the reader is referred to the references for more details. IV~8 Measurement A thorough consideration of the factors influencing.cracks close and water flow drops significantly. Increasing wa. and is discussed in detail by Tavenas et ale (1975) and Massarsch et ale (1975b). and when the water pressure is equal to the stress which is normal to the cracks. In principle along the minor principal plane. may provide reliable stress information if disturbance is kept to a minimum and adequate time is.28 Flowmeter Outflow _From 2 -To I 1ft Cell Pressure (a) Total cell earth pressure and read-out unit (b) Schematic diagram of the earth pressure cell (Glotzl) method of the in-situ lateral pressure using ~lofiU. depicted in Figure IV-S. Mercury Manometer Cant rols Screw PlasticTubing Piezometer Fig. but the techniques of installation and measurement are fairly well developed.the determination of Ko has prompted Wroth (1975) to conclude that ". has been found to be suitable. Strictly speaking.allowed for the dissipation of pore pressures. The applied pressure is gradually reduced. In-Situ Measurement of Lateral Stress The measurement of . II Hydraulic Fracturing The hydraulic fractu~ing technique is frequently used.in-situstresses is clearly an area which holds great potential for the successful application of in-situ testing methods. is accompanied by a marked increase in water in-flow which is monitored at the surface. A schematic of the operation is presented in ~igure "IV-9. since the insertion of a measuring device creates disturbance and modifies the local state of stress. which are pushed into undisturbed soil or placed in uncased boreholes.terpre~sure is applied to an isolated section of a borehole. In practice. and is experiencing increasing use in soil studies.to determine stresses in rock strata. it is not possible to directly measure stresses in undisturbed soil.and adequate time allotted for the re-establishment of equilibrium stress conditions. the. IV-9 Schematic diagram of the hydraulic fracture method ..

Hydraulic fracturing is effective only if Ko is less than one. since stress-strain behavior is stress path dependent. who pre- It has been emphasized that soil deformation characteristics must be measured under the appropriate combination of effective stresses. respectively U'. Newer methods. yielding a convenient relationship between the drained and undrained modulus of compression: E' 2Gu = 2G' = 1+""'U" Eu = 1+U u (IV-IO) where: E'. but for this discussion in-situ measurement procedures will be considered in the framework of the theory of elasticity. Most current methods for predicting soil deformations model the soil skeleton as a linearelastic material. Pushedin-place total pressure cells generally cannot be used because of the high resistance of these soils to penetration. The estimation of these in-situ stresses may be a source of error in conventional laboratory testing. The closure pressure is not always clearly defined. E = Young'smodulus for drained u and undrained loading. however. since the preferred crack orientation may be along horizontal stratifications. sands. Pressuremeter Tests The idealized results of a pressuremeter test in soft clay are presented in Figure III-21 and the details of the pressure-volume curve are discussed in Section III E. and is subject to the uncertain effects of soil strength and deformation characteristics. fer the use of total pressure cells to the hydraulic fracturing method. and may be catalogued as follows: The pressuremeter device may be the most suitablemeans of directly measuring lateral stresses in these materials according to Wroth (1975) . The details of the testing procedure are considered by Tavenas et ale (1975) and Massarsch et ale (1975Pl. The shear modulus. hydraulic fracture can measure ah only in soils in which Ko is less than unity.a. and is not possible in previous sand deposits. G. In-Situ Measurement of Deformation Characteristics recorded and is an estimate of ah' In theory.E3 shear modulus aI' a3 = major and minor principal stresses El' E3 = major and minor principal strains Equation IV-9 may be transformed by applying relationships between the elastic constants. is a convenient deformation parameter. Methods of Measuring Deformation Parameters The methods currently used for measuring deformation parameters in~situ have been reviewed by Wroth (1975). Terms which apply to total stress will be denoted with the subscript "u" while terms relat~d to effective stress will be identified with a prime. Measurement of Ko in Stiff Soils The measurement of Ko in stiff clays. once this dissipation has occurred. point B is often poorly defined: Borehole advancement produces disturbance and stress relief in the adjacent soil. '. Tavenas et ale (1975) conclude that the conventional pressuremeter test is unsuitable for determining lateral stresses in soft clay because of this.29 E. will receive increasing attention~ . Self boring instruments with load cells have been used. The s~lf boring pressuremeter. but may present problems of compliance. The equilibrium values of lateral stresses are not greatly affected. and soft rocks poses particular problems. The theory of the fracture mechanism has been presented by Bjerrum et ale (1972). A great deal of development work needs to be done in this area of in-situ testing. minimizes soil disturbance by limiting lateral soil movements to small values. which predict ground response on the basis of elastic-plastic behavior. respectively It is re-emphasized that these moduli are dependent upon stress level. in that the stiffness of these soils may be significant when compared to the stiffness of the load cell itself. The pressure at point B (in Figure III-21) is generally assumed to represent ah' but in practice. (IV-9) El . depicted in Figure 111-19. Even this small disturbance produces excess pore pressures which must be allowed to dissipate before testing. and should be measured at stress levels appropriate for the prototype situation. Nonlinear stress-strain response is treated in apiece-wise linear manner. Application of the theory of elasticity necessitates a clear distinction between total and effective stresses. In practice. It is anticipated that "secondary" methods.E3 El . and small details of test technique have been found to introduce large uncertainties in test results. For an isotropic elastic material: 2G where: G = al = a3 = cri . the closure pressure often represents a weighted average of ah and av. are receiving increased attention. because it is defined in terms of a stress difference which may be calculated from either effective or total stress measure-ments. Uu = Poisson's ratio for drained and undrained loading. In-situ testing has the potential of "bypassing" this source of uncertainty. which deduce stress conditions from other parameters.

it responds elastically until the previous maximum pressure is reached at point E. 2) Plate Loading Tests are frequently employed. radial deformation. of a general point is indicated as ~B' Compressive strains are given positive values. of loading of loading 1975) parameter. 1975) The results of a two-cycle PMT in sand are presented in Figure IV-10 as a plot of applied pressure vs. In the following sections. each of these methods is discussed. strains. These assumptions have been shown to hold true by Wroth and HUghes (1973) and Hartman and Schmertmann (1975) As a result" an analysis of the PMT need only consider one horizontal plane of soil at midheight of the apparatus and consider the variation of stresses. the expense and complexity ofth"e procedure may make use of this method impractical in many cases. the membrane of the pressuremeter deflates to its original size. and displacements along a typical radius ABC shown in Figure IV-ll(a). thus be derived from a PMT in permeable soil. Interpretation of a Drained PMT The interpretation of an undrained PMT is discussed in section III-E. The secondary unloading and reloading path.S) is introduced and the coordinate. and a loose annulus of soil collapses around the pressuremeter. The circumferential strain. the sand once again exhibits elastic rebound. That analysis has been extended by Wroth and Windle (1975) to take account of volume changes. but does constitute the means of. l[8C.~ . is chosen to refer to the displaced position B' of the general point B. all displacements therefore being radial in direction. Analysis of the Pressuremeter Test (Wroth. through points C. F. . the cavity in the soil. with special emphasis placed upon the Pressuremeter Test. the difference being due to the extremely disturbed state of the soil at point H. serves as an eXample of the effects of disturbance on the measurement of deformation parameters in conventional pressuremeter tests. illustrated in segment HIJ. " 4) Back Analysis of well documented case histories is an important means of understanding any aspect of soil behavior.H 0 tensile.z. K 60 N c -S 40 £! . illustrates that for small strains. However.30 1) Pressuremeter Tests have been found to yield the most appropriate values of parameters for the prediction of ground deformation caused by foundation and earthwork 'construction. B B'. The two major cycles of loading are identified by the paths between points ~ through ~ and ~ through ~. PMT results in terms of the have been dimensionless plotted at Landvetter. The behavior of the disturbed sand. a loose annulus of soil may collapse around the apparatus. . This phenomenon might well occur as the result of performing a PMT in an oversize borehole. The displacement. ES' is everywhere O. and small pressure increments will induce inordinately large deformations in the disturbed material. so: 6 IV-lO Results of Pressuremeter test in sand 8 -E S =r ~ > . ~ A cylindrical coordinate system (r. r. at the wall . HIJK. Upon unloading from point E to g. It was explained that the complete undrained stress-strain curve could be obtained from PMT results in an incompressible soil. evaluating the "everyday" design methods. The sand then yields. IV-10. D and E in Fig. As the applied pressure is decreased from point Q to ~. exhibits an initial gradient which is an order of magnitude less than that of the original loading curve. 3) Seismic Methods possess unique advantages. This approach is not practical for "everyday" . 0 in Figure E (IV-II) IV-lO of Fig. 1st cycle 0 2nd cycle Sweden (from Wroth. The soil surrounding the expanding cylindrical membrane is assumed to be deformed in axial symmetry and plane strain.design problems. -Ee. The reloading curve. The drained stress-strain curve may. the unloadingbehavi 0 r is linear and recoverable. undergoing plastic strain as it rejoins the virgin compression curve BCF. When the sand is reloaded from point D. but yield deformation parameters which correspond to levels of strain an order of magnitude or more smaller than the strains which occur in other testing methods. = ~A/aO' which is equal to the strain. A correction must therefore be made before the results are applied to the predidtion of ground deformations other than those caused by vibration. and yield reliable results if performed with care.

however.sinv t = 1 . Similarly. as the analysis applies to each small increment of the expansion of the membrane.T = 1/2(ar . Electrical resistivity methods have been employed to measure this volume change by Windle . it may be said that.t r The detailed derivation by Wroth and Windle (1975) leads to the following expression for shear stress. the volumetric strain is seen to vary linearly with shear strain for a large portion of the test.That is to say: E v where ~V represents = lw Vo = .V . The angle of dilation.. and negative for soil contraction. and equation (IV-IS) becomes T If some drainage is assumed to occur. since the method is applied to the test data at specific points in time. introduced by Fig.31 and the factor t is positive for soil expansion (dilation).e. It should be noted that t need not remain constant during the pressuremeter test. and t may be calculated for each such increment. Ee. so that: !:. a completely undrained test in a saturated soil) corresponds to a value of 0 for the factor t. For that portion of the test.V /V0 1 (IV-17) E 1 . 1975) As the test proceeds. (b) .r (IV-14) ~ <I > therefore: E r t-l+'E 1 . The value of t need not be constant. the factor t is therefore a constant. The volume change may be negative or positive. -to = E(l+E) 2 (2+E) dp dE (!V-19) Equation (IV-19) is identical to equation (111-9) presented earlier. and different values of t may be substituted in each iteration.1 + sinv cry.ae) in terms of the D=l+-=- Rowe (1962): appliedpressurep. t can be caiculated and the complete stress-strain curve may therefore be derived from equation (IV-IS). V. D. The plane strain assumptions imply that the vertical strain. times a factor. At any instant during the test. In Figure IV-ll(c). and is defined as: d!:. is equal to the tangential strain.I 6 I 8£ fNIv I % 8 I /" a' 4r- / I 10 (e) 1t h I 20 y% (e-j) £ (-EO) £ ' . IV-II Stress-strain behavior of dense sand during pressuremeter test (from Wroth.tE e' (IV-13) an increase in soil volume. The radial strain in the soil. The important consequence of this analysis is that if the volume change in the annulus of soil immediately surrounding the membrane can be measured. a soil element of initial volume Vo will exhibit a volume change ~V in response to the increased effective stresses. The stress-strain and volume change behavior are illustrated in Figure IV-II.. Ez. the volumetric strain. sin V = --a:y- The parameter t may be expressed in terms of the angle of dilation. . is indicated in the figure. 15 ) e 2sinV 1 + sinv (IV-16) (d) (e-ii) Alternatively.d~ dr > 0 (IV-12) The case of no soil volume change (i. Er' is everywhere compressive.V/VO a 8' c c' ! r (0) -e-. Ev. soil at point B will move some distance ~B to the point B'.E + E = +tE e -e Vo . is zero. t may be expressed in terms of the stress dilatancy parameter. for the soil in contact with the membrane. and that for small deformations: !:. the membrane expands. and corresponding strain E: T = E (l+E) (2+E-t) 2 (1+tE) dp dE (IV-IS) E r = .. and an element of soil which was originally located at point A in Figure IV-ll(a) will be displaced a distance ~A' and will now be located at point A'. The Mohr circle of strain for the soil element which has been distorted from point A to A' is presented in Figure IV-ll(b)..

= -0. V. ~~ese assumptions are reasonable ol1lyfor the case.can be estimated.v. 'IT O'f ) 20I (IV-33) 2 €% 4 6 8 10 strain: Fig. The field measurements indicated porosity changes which were consistent and reasonable.Pf where: a In . but rather the strength of the soil after some degree of consolidation has occurred. E. 0'1'-0'3"/0'1'+0'3'. V Hughes.cp' 1 + (1 + sin sin CP' V) (IV-. a.sin cpt c.32 and Wroth (1975). has been introduced in the analysis of a 'drained PMT. Wroth and Windle (1975) have shown that it is possible to obtain a complete solution to the stress and displacement fields within the annular soil failure zone. by the fact that an undrained PMT. from the fact that the measured field resistivity is actually the average resistivity of a fairly lar.sin cpt c. soil porosity was correlated with soil resistivity.in estimating the probable errors involved when the "undrained" analysis is applied to a test in which some drainag~ occurs. is substituted in the "drained analysis.ingfield pressuremeter tests by means of electrodes mounted on the membrane face. by the equation: In E.e which indicate that for a substantial range of strain the sand deforms at a nearly constant stress ratio. from drained triaxial tests on loose samples of the sand in question. Analysis of a Pressuremeter Test in Sand The original analysis of a PMT in sand.v. IV-12 Results on sand of part of pressuremeter (after Wroth. If the stress dilatancy relationship in Equation (IV-20) is employed. and rate of dilation.v. 80 K 60 P Ib f. (IV-21) . The actual degree of this compensation is not known.455.the laboratory.06. a.the true in-situ undrained strength of the soil. The stressstrain behavior of a dense sand in plcme strain is illustra'tedin Figure IV-II d and. The virgin loading segment of the PMT curve in Figure IV-IO has been replotted in this manner in Figure IV-12. An average gradient. sin cpt) (IV-251 Use of the undrained analysis for a partially drained PMT in clay will therefore result in an underestimate of the peak shear stress.of ~ very l. 1 1 + sincp' sincp' 1 + sinV 1 . may be expressed in terms of either V or cpt: the computed values of shear stress will be somewhat higher than the values of shear stress calculated according to the "undrained" analysis.231 f denotes the onset of failure. and through triginometric substitution Equation (IV-20) can be transformed to: ations in CP' c ' and so for most purposes it is sufficiently aXcurate to estimate ~'c. .is appropriate for a normally consolidated clay'in a fully drained PMT.v. it is not yet feasible to measure soil volume changes during a conventional PMT. The method of analysis calls for considera~ tion of volume changes only with a narrow annulus of soil.sinV 1 + 1 sin cpt c. with no volume change. In . however. In practice. is seen to fit the then data closely. where volume.)cse sand. The cP pertains c. Laboratory tests performed by Windle and Wroth (1975) indicate that a value of -0. equations (IV-24) and (IV-2fi) may be employed to determine ~' and v.v.. assumed that thl~sand failed at a constant stress ratio. v. ) sin cpt (1 . The "undrained" analysis is seen to underestimate shear stress by some 25% for R.gevolume of soil. Soil resistivity was measured dur. p. a (1 .v. 1975) test CP'=CP' f c. lnE.v. a straight line with a slope. The definition of V is recalled. The "drained" analysis is useful nOI1etheless. (IV-221 Ef a and subscript sin. which relates cptat any point to the angle of dilation. + sin V (IV1 + sin cpt 241. however. is related to the strain.sincp'c.v.3 for the volume change factor. a = 0..'n~ 40 -= a3' For plane a ' I ( 1+- fN/V tan -+-' ( 4 E ) 2 2 . If the value of cp'c..£. the parameter. presented by Gibson and Anderson (1961). The approach suffers. The behavior may be described by the stress dilatancy relationship: Equation (IV-22) indicates that if PMT results are plotted as lnp vs.v.3 and E = . should result. c. This error is partially compensated. to shear at constant This method is not sensitive to small vari- angle of dilation. If this value of R. The membrane pressure.measures a shear strength which is not. a sin cpt c. R".

the method does not require an estimate of the limit pressure. The elastic modulus deduced from a PMT is This method has been applied to the PMT data in Figure IV-lO. An investigation by Laier et. In practice. A correction for the limit pressure is therefore required . The pressuremeter modulus. it has been found convenient. On the other hand.cr' ) e Ee) 2) For the "pre-failure" stage of the test. stress. The important parameters ~' and V may be accurately evaluated. The gradient of the derived shear-stress curve in Figure IV-13 may be related to the shear modulus G'. of the pressuremeter apparatus will affect the limit pressure as indicated in Figure IV-IS. The effect of a smear zone of disturbed soil on the value of the pressuremeter modulus is illustrated in Figure IV-14 after Hartman and Schmertmann (1975). The resulting stress-strain curves are presented in Figure IV-13. of the order of 10%. be pressure. 0 0 2 f% Fig. (IV- 26) Pressuremeter Tests in Sand A number of considerations should be kept in mind when evaluating a PMT in sand. resulting in the measurement of a more nearly accurate modulus value. stress cr'e)' calculated 1 2 d(cr' r . including the following. Recalling Equations (IV-13) and (IV-14) Er . if the rate of volume change. soil disturbance results in the measurement of a decreased modulus.' 8 Non-linear soil behavior limits the validity of the assumption of a constant pressuremeter modulus.applied cr'e. po. Application of this equation requires the selection of a value of i for each data PQint.cr' ) e dE = (2 .2 '/2 (ar'0"8) 0 = volume of the cavity at the instant when ~p/~V is measured. For sand in contact with the membrane. It is seen that the calculated value of cr'eremains nearly constant throughout the test.is minor equal to the may . appropriate for stresses and strains in the horizontal direction only. Finite Element studies performed by Hartman and Schmertmann (1975) have shown that non-linear soil behavior is required to produce ~V vs. The complete stress-strain behavior of a sand may be derived from a PMT with a minimum of computation effort. provided ~p/~V is measured in the pseudo elastic phase of the test'indicated in Figure 111-20. This may be important when testing anisotropic materials. the hysteresis of borehole unloading and reloading results in the measurement of an increased modulus. IV-13 4 L 6 ~ Stress-strain curves derived from the pressuremeter test on sand (data in Figure IV-lO) (from Wroth. 1975) The importance of this method of analysis is evident. i. and the from p. corresponding to segmentAB in Figure IV-lO. the principal stress ratio. 11 = Poisson's ratio a. shear stress may be calculated by means of Equation (IV-IS). The presence of a smear zone does not alter the general shape of the PMT curve. PI' and thus permits the termination of a PMT after a small strain. the two effects may compensate.33 The calculation of the complete stress-strain from a PMT in sand proceeds according to this method as follows: 1) While the sand is failing. (along curve BCDEFG in Figure IV-lO). providing a confirmation of the in-situ effective stress. Since soil volume changes are small during this phase of the PMT. ale (1975) has shown that the length/diameter ratio. and hence EpMT must be considered as a fictitious property. Furthermore. so tor the the cr'r . deviaprincipal (cr'r ratio. EpMT' suggested by Menard (1975) is frequently used in practice as opposed to values deduced theoretically according to the methods just described and is defined as 60 follows: a:' r EpMT where: V 2 (1 + 11) V 0 /jp/~V tI:V~27) 40 Stress Ibf/in.Ee therefore: = (t 2)E8 (2 - t)E stress. and not inaccurate.t) 2 (2 t) G' d(cr' deEr r - . the major principal stress. is known. In pre-bored holes. cr'r/cr'e' is given by the value of~' deduced from the experimentally observed value of a. L/D. to set t = o. when applying Equation (IV-19) to the "pre-failure" stage. p curve of the usual type presented in Figure 111-20. and deformation parameters may be obtained from the stress-strain curve.

4 3.g/Cm! v 6 AX:44 51 1.3 (from Hartman and Schmertman.00 1. measure~ ments of elastic modulus do not need to be corrected for the infinite length assumption. At present.. 17. 10 AX:44 44 1. The effects of different borehole preparation techniques on observed lateral stress. = 1975) Deformation Modulus.mm Size.H.. (1975)has lateral stress and modulus The effects of disturbance 1975) shown that soil disturbance has a dramatic on the observed a PMT in clay.04 <I 0 ~.2 45 2 4 40 E . AX:44 51 1. 0 Q) E I 8 10 12 Borehole ~robe Auger DensityRatio' NO'"Pt Slze. 0 ~. As long as the ratio. 35 0 Q) 6 10 30 t! "V ~ 0 i J- Borehole Probe Auger Density No.04 >1 ~ 9.mm.04 I 0 11. 12 AX:44 AX: 44 BX. He.04 >1 1. Fb-IOOKN/m2 00 0.1975) ~ if the test interpretation is based upon an assumption of infinite pressuremeter length. Pressuremeter An Tests in Clay effect for on the . Pr.AX: 44 HI2 IV-16 51 1. IV"'15 20 L40 60 OJ :: Q.04 <1 >1 rl =0. Fig... the most effective way of minimizing soil disturbance in thePMT is through the use of self boring devices.34 E2=50 Undisturbed Material HorizontalPressure. AX:44Drivinq andRelaxation IV-17 Deformation modulus measured at the Saint-Alban site (from Roy et al.09 >1 Fig. such as those sketched in Figure 111-19.6 2. and 18.60 51 44 5.10 II.mm Size. LID. modulus and limit pressure are summarized in Figures IV-16.1 Widthof SmearZone-ft 2rl =0. investigation by Roy et a1. 51 1.t.12 BX:60 51 1. Ep -100 KN/m2 3 DR. ..8 1. I 0 3JM = d Fig. is greater than about 4. H. observed limit pressure were found to be minor.. 0/0 00 o~ 0 97 2 4 6 20 40 60 80 PLj{PL)~ =Gt) 2 . H.Size.2 Fig.mm cycm3 Q 14~ d EI=25 0 6 ---AX:44 7 9.04 1 1.00)1 14~ 0 7 AX:44 51 1.09 >1 HI2 Influence of PM length/diameter on measured limit pressure (~V measured along middle 1/3 of pressuremeter) (from Laier et al. IV-14 Modulus calculations as a function of width of smear zone in linear plastic material with V 0. 1975) Horizontal pressure measured at the Saint-Alban site (from Roy et al.

deduced from the load settlement behavior of a suitable bearing plate placed at a desired depth.9. 12 17 18 AX: 44 AX: 44 ax: 60 ax:60 I 51 44 51 Sampler(57 mm) Drivino Drivino Dr_ivino Mini: 22 I 0 . the plate load test is considerably more expensive than the other in-situ methods.>asis of all seismic exploration techniques for evaluation of deformation characteristics is an interpretation of the time required for particular types of elastic waves to travel known or inferred distances thro~gh the subsurface. 2. a I 2 A 3 4 8 5 - a ~ 6 8 10 a orehole No. Experience has proven the reliability of plate tests.24 IV-18 Limit pressure measured at the Saint-Alban site: A-with different techniques.5 produces an increase of 13% in the calculated moduli. 1975). 7 8. plate bearing tests. have shown that an order of magnitude difference may exist between field and laboratory values of soil moduli. The calculations assumed a value of 0. . B-with different probes (from Roy et al. 14 23. E. PL-100 KN/m2 45.33 for Poisson's ratio. 6.. Fig. H. G. Both the difference in strain rate between the two methods and the disturbance of laboratory samples contribute to this discrepancy. The more painstaking second series yielded higher modulus values. The vertical modulus of deformation is.. pressuremeter tests and lab- . A state of the art review of vibroseismic methods for the determination of soil moduli Shields and Bauer (1975) have undertaken a comparative study of full scale footing tests. particularly when it is performed with the degree of care which is required for accurate results. it must be carried out at a speed such that the rate of strain experienced by the soil is considerably higher than would normally be the case in good laboratory practice. 1975) oratory triaxial tests on sensitive clay in Ottawa. pr Probe Size Auger Siz e Ratio >1 I <I - mm mm -a V A <> . A variation of the method is to measure the horizontal modulus using one side of a trench for the bearing test and the other side for the reaction. I. Use of the correct undrained Poisson's ratio of 0. and a more complete review of this method is planned for a subsequent report.10 II. and by reestablishing the in-situ effective stresses before testing. The first series yielded low modulus values as the result of a large degree of soil disturbance. but the large costs involved have stimulated increasing interest in alternate methods.35 00 2 E 4 . for the purpos~s of' estimating the immediate settle- ment of spread footings. The PMT moduli in Figure IV-2l have been increased by this amount The plate loading tests are seen to provide modulus values which most closely coincide with those determined from the model footing test. Plate Bearing Tests Plate bearing tests have been a traditional in-situ method . Recent tests at the Division of Building Research Station in the U. This discrepancy may be minimized by leaving the excavated surface exposed as short a time as possible. In order to insure that a pressuremeter test is truly undrained. Vibro-Seismic Tests The J:. as reported by Marsland (1973. Two series of pressuremeter tests were performed.3. Values of soil moduli determined in the laboratory may be expected to be considerably less than the corresponding values measured in an undrained PMT.for estimating the soil modulus.r::. Canada. A variety of information of interest to the geotechnical engineer may be obtained from vibroseismic test results.K. The soil profile is reproduced in Figure IV-19 and a schematic of the footing test arrangement is presented in Figure IV-20. . However. 2 3 Limit Pressure. The moduli determined from these tests are summarized in Figure IV-21.

0m Bottom of Rock Socket Fig. Pipe to Rock .7 1.6 Extra High E t4 a Q) Strength Conenco Test Load of 2.7MN isO.:' :. Silt J-nt. IV-2l Test arrangement for large scale plate load tests (from Shields and Bauer.0.0 ~ to I 0 10 1. Secant Modulus.sSome Grovel Grovel OverRoc t t t 0 10 00 ::::'. E'.:::~ . 2.8 . 1975) ClayBrown 1.8' .25 ClayGrey- '36.Pipe Deep Settlement Anchors Tendon Casino 16cm 1.2 m Bottom of Soil Sleeve Casing wos Reamed to 1.:imi'.vibratory source Rayleigh wave dispersion Crosshole methods UpholejDownhole methods s: ~E 0 Soil Type Natural Water Content I and Atterbero 20 40 ~ 0 Limits 60% Fig.0. IV-19 Subsoil profile at site of large scale plate load tests (from Shields and Bauer.lmxo. l~m'Rock Socket 15. : '.11111..E1857m ReinforcedConcrete' BottomOfFootinQ Test Footing 2 3.85h -EJ.6cm I. IV-20 !7td 11( EI.68.24 .3m RockSurface . 1975) .D.:' -. Silty. Brown 3. ClayGrey. ". I Ee.x2m Long Hydra Rigid Tendon Sheath Soil Sleeve. 1. 80. CUCycled Triaxial Tests 6 Eu. " :' '.2 m. 1975) Comparison of modulus values as determined by different techniques (from Shields and Bauer.D.1mx3.5 IFissured CiQy:Grey.::". UU Cycled -Triaxial Tests Es. em I.Tendon 12/0. Static KoTriaxial Tests 81 Below Rock Surface ~ Fig.2cmD. ::. The following five approaches were discussed: Refraction Rayleigh wave .61.66m 7.36 has been presented by Ballard and McLean (1975).

that under some conditions crosshole tests may not be possible. or even reliable because of uncertainties in hole location and alignment.37 The study showed the crosshole method to be the most versatile and the most adaptable to techniques of signal enhancement.. . y time. OCR and Po was also applied to tge soil deposits. The in-situ impulse test shown schematically in Figure IV-24 (Miller et al. Due to hysteresis effects.2B) Tronsd~ Body Wave Impulse Rod and the corresponding shear modulus G is given by Fig..c Primary Response' ~ Sample Secondary Response 10 10'Z Time.min. distance relationship. Disturbance alters soil behavior by destroying natural structure or fabric and by modifying the system of stresses experienced by the soil. A plot of arrival time vs. the effects of changes in soil structure or fabric are irrecoverable. 1975) allows for the determination of shear modulus at varying shear strain levels (10-5 to 10-1%).~ used during where G = pvs density. Corresponding field crosshole and laboratory resonant column test results have been compared by Anderson and Woods (1975). Values of Vs after 20 years of secondary consolidation were extrapolated from the lab data. however. IV-22 (b) ToScope To Hammer Triggering system for cross-hole tests (from Anderson and Woods. and were found to be in agreement with the measured field values. but yielded velocities which were generally higher than the field and laboratory velocities.. Resistor To Impulse Rod Fig. A schematic diagram of their crosshole set-up and triggering system is presented in Figure IV-22. vs' vs. economical.10mf The in-situ measurement of initial stresses and deformation characteristics is especially sensitive to the degree of soil disturbance caused by apparatus installation and testing procedure.n. 20 years corresponded to the time elapsed since the last major stress change due to excavation or construction.e. Shear strain y can be calculated from: ::: v Vs (IV. 103 104 Fig. however. In many cases. 600 1/1 eTo = 20 psi ~ ~400 ?::' 'u 0 10psi j CII > 0 3= ~ 5psi< Detroit Cloy R2-1 «) g200. . vs' was observed in the laboratory and attributed to secondary consolidation. velocities and moduli which are inaccurately high. For the deposits studied. provided they are accurately known. a reversible stress change will not result in a reversible change in initial . t . IV-23 Comparison of Vs with time of consolidation for Detroit clay (from Anderson and Woods. productive approach towards dealing with soil 1975) disturbance is therefore to try to avoid it in the first place. The measured variation of Vs with time is presented in Figure IV-23. the effects of disturbance may be alleviated by the re-establishment of in-situ effective stresses. The transducer records give vertical particl~ velo~ city Capacitive Circuit Hammer v vs. Sc~ematic of equipment cross-hole tests p is the soil 1. Conclusions ::=:: 12. IV-22 2 ( ( ( 11I1 I . Seafloor testing is one situation wherein uphole-downhole tests may be more appropriate. A time dependent increase of the shear wave velocity. To some extent. It should be noted. distance of each sensor from the energy source allows evaluation of the shear wave velocity. (IV-29) (a) . The most t::--IcopocOOr 1000 . 1975) The Hardin-Black (1969) empirical correlation of v with void ratio.6 V 1. It was also found by B~llard and McLean (1975) that the most common errors in the execution of vibroseismic m~thods lead to unconservative conclusions: i.deformation behavior.

---~ ' M . J \ ""-' / . -"/ / tI -r . The advantages of the method include: 1) A potential minimization of soil disturbance.'" - / .Dia. instrument advance rate and drilling fluid pressure. "':"A il Displacements Vertical L_.II 'I " II II I.I .2 f. I Sensor Hole I L--II I Sensor Hole ~6 ~-z.' II. I~ . The pressuremeter test is seen as being a method of great promise. It is expected that increased experience with self boring devices in different soil types will help to define the effects of details of technique.. I I. especially with the use of a self-boring device. The accurate measurement of initial stresses in the ground is very difficult. BellevilleSPring I' I WAVE GENERATING STATION Load Cell~ T I IL- II 'I 'I I. .I I II I. including the effects of soil volume change. .38 RECORDS ~:= 'f." Anchor --~ :: Slolion 2 IV~. / /. but the number of assumptions required precludes the accurate determination of in-situ stresses in the laboratory. but there is a conspicuous lack of information on the Deasurement of stresses in sands. o. Troncoso and Brown.. / "". 2} The possible derivation of the complete stress-strain behavior of the tested soil.. stiff clays and soft rock.\ I I I I I Ground Surf a ce . 1975) Some progress has been made in the measurement of in-situ stresses in clay soils using pressure cells. such as cutting rate. I I . and its increased use is predicted. ~ 0 Recording II II /f?tOrpq ~ I. . The value of competent and experienced testing personnel is evident. Laboratory tests may provide useful bounds to the likely values of in-situ stresses.: I Impact Hammerl!!. ~ ~ / / / " Time AnChor Sensor I Sensor 2 Sensor 3 GuideRod AnchorHole IOin. IV-24 Schematic representation of in-situ i~ulse test (from Miller. 3) The fairly accurate estimat~on of insitu lateral stresses. The self-boring method of advancing instruments into the ground is seen as being a very promising approach for minimizing soil disturbance. JI I. soil disturbance can be minimized only through the careful use of appropriate test procedures. II I I I I I I .: . I '/' . I I I I I .I II r. The determination of in-situ lateral stress by means of the hydraulic fracturing method is not very reliable in many cases. I Transducer II Vertical II l :1 .// . Selection of a test procedure should involv~ a consideration of the particular soil type to be studied.e. Vibroseismic methods of measuring shear and with any test method.' I / I " . . I I L_Jesting 11 Plane I Fig.

One-dimensional compression index Monitoring of fills and excavations In-situ density and water content Special tests. A number of empirical and analytical procedures have been developed to predict the rate and amount of soil volume changes in response to stress changes.u. collapse measurements. A con.hange in pore water m v pressure y w DR E' ~' - Unit weight content . These include: Plate' load Screw plate Pressuremeter Permeability Penetration resistance (dynamic and static) B.Hydraulic conductivity in the vertical v c vv - direction Coefficient of consolidation for vertical compression ~nd vertical flow c h. 0 f compress~ ' ' b ~ l~ty ' de = -d I p out the test.Overconsolidation ratio = 9'~ Ip ~ where p' is the 9resent overburden effective stress. A disadvantage of the method is that the levels of induced strain are very small. the permeability (hydraulic solidation conductivity) and coefficients or swelling may be calculated.. is maintained through. The direct determination of in-situ soil volume change is difficult. 2. such as sample disturbance and simulation of the in-situ environment. electroosmosis. are partially avoided.. de d(loglOPl) Consolidation Properties from Borehole or Piezometer Permeability Tests Theory where e is void ratio and pi is effective consolidation pressure Cs . a mv . consolidation or swelling will occur. 1 modulus !J.One-dimensional deformation (constrained) compression moduli are also of great value. on un Ioa d~ng oglOP) . In-situ measurement of volume change properties remains desirable. The specific properties needed to describe the consolidation behavior (rate of volume change) that may be computed or estimated from the results of in-situ tests .Hydraulic conductivity (permeability) in the horizontal direction .Effective 9reconsolidation pressure c (maximum 9ast effective pressure) OCR . and measures parameters which are representative of large volumes of soil. The method avoids many of the effects of soil disturbance. The expense of this approach.. Procedures A variety of field tests are available that.. VOLUME CHANGE CHARACTERISTICS A. If the' applied pressure and rate of water flow into or out of the soil are measured. of con. but their interpretation is more difficult. Unlike the PMT.. can yield data from-which volume change properties can be deduced. however. on reloading stant head difference. Properties The specific properties that may be used to characterize the amount of soil compression and expansion which may be computed or estimated from the results of 'in-situ tests include the following: Cc . since difficulties of laboratory testing. pi .. = C.are the following: k h k . dielectricreponse properties.39 E s .o V.One-dimensional recompression index = de d(lo~ 10 a v Coe ff ~c~ent " Spherical and cylindrical piezometer configurations are sketched in Figure V-I.Compressibility = 1 +ve 0 .gconditions. Variable headitests are also feasible.Water Relativedensity - Deformation modulus under drained conditions Poisson's ratio under drained cionditions. precludes its general use.soil volume change is probably the one least studied by means of in-situ measurements. Introduction Of the four geotechnical property classes discussed in this report. de ' If a hydrostatic head difference is applied between the water in a piezometer or borehole probe and the water in the surrounding compressible soil. Properties and Procedures 1.Coefficient c compression of consolidation for vertical and horizontal flow. Cr . and thus tpst results must be corrected before they are used in most predictions of ground deformation.. including blasting. however. The most accurate predictions of deformation behavior may be obtained from large scale field tests which closely simulate the prototype loadir. seismic methods do not yield estimates of soil strength.. These methods are summarized in the following section which is based on portions of the state of the art paper prepared by Mitchell and Gardner (1975).One dimensional swelling index = . !:m.C. and may require long time periods in the case of fine grained soils..

:. The effects of a smear zone and the variation of k and ffivduring 2 c (a u + ~ au) = au (r>a) (V-I) ar2 r ar at where c is the coefficient of consolidation or swelling. (V-2) Yw [ . H r u (r. The solution for the flow rate.40 r Twin leads to piezometer tip . Large smear zones were shown to render the test invalid. but the influence of variation of k and ffivwas found to k~u Q(t) = 41Tawhere: k T l 1+-.IS 0 <I :.l) . as a function of time is (Gibson. u is hydrostatic excess pressure. 1968) to consider the case of a cylindrical piezometer in anisotropic soil.b .~o Manometer or 4u U(r. Q. be minor.t. connected to lead k = constant r h >"?a (a) Spherical Piezometer . This solution has been extended by Wilkinson (1967.All =0 A UO-'Yw'" k = constant h > >a. l/~. 1963) testing are also considered. V-I Schematic representation of in-situ test for determination of consolidation properties from permeability measurement For the spherical piezometer. r is radial distance and t is time.>O UO='Yw" pressure gauge.. the governing equation for consolidation or swell is: The values of k and c may therefore be deduced from the intercept and slope of a plot of Q(t) vs.-F Constant' pressu re l.t) t . = permeability ct = t~me factor = ~ a . in the manner illustrated in Figure V-2.o. The effect of soil anistropy is to impart a curvedshape to the plot of Q(t) vs.a~ (b) Cylindrical Piezometer r Fig. 1fT ] It\.

5 QR = Q 2~ (8u) b ~ QR and T to (V-8) TESTED NOVEMBER 29-30. water flow through the ends neglected. stress system and disturbance. Borehole and piezometer permeability tests do not give soil compressibility.5 0. laboratory and full scale performance measurements are almost unavoidable as the result of differences in flow direction. Field tests predicted values of Cv which were substantially lessor greater than field performance values in some cases. case: =is h a2u 1 au a2u (+ .c 1.2~8u b k (1 + -) .5 21T16u)bkh .0. The field permeability values were in agreement with both the full scale field performance and the laboratory values.S. Application of Methods 1975) For the cylindrical c. of the cylinder may be for the flow rate be- The availableevidenceindicatesthat the values of k and c determined in the field are generally greater than the values predicted from laboratory tests. Additional descriptions of the application of these methods are provided by Al-Dhahir and Morgenstern (1969).6 + 7. 2.5) + 12.-V2) Constant head test results for foundation clay at fiddler's ferry ash lagoon embankment foundation illustrating basis for evaluation of permeability and coefficient of consolidation (data from AI-Dhahir et al.1966. V-3 Normalized flow rate as a function of time factor for a short permeameter (b/a = 0. AT TIP-3-7 PS..2) (from Jezequel and Mieussens. and the solution comes: with a ratio.0 + 4Y~(N rT . (V-7) Normalize short permeameter permeameter using: data. N > 2. Discussion For a long permeameter. potentially~ be greatlyreduced throughthe use of a piezometer probe such as describedby Wissa et al.0. V-2 Imin. the vertical permeability. and c: mv k = cYw (V-IO) .6 a::: 0 Y IT Fig. The discrepancies in Cv were attributed to probable stress history effects. IQ69) Fig.1964.4 0. mv.44 au at (V. directly but it is possible to estimate IDv using the values of k Q(t) T 2 .0 c: E . The testing time required for a pressure increment in field testing is comparable to that of laboratory testing. 6U APPLIED ATTIP-5-9P. IT J (V-4) where: N = diameter length = 2a 2b flow through purely radial the in (V-5) For section T < 0. Differences in the values of c calculated from field. 4.5 ..3) The solution Q(t) = ka Yw [ 2~ (N .. 6U 6U APPLIED APPLIED AT TIP-5-8PS.44..Yw h IWT (V-6 ) = cht a 2 (V-7 ) If a short permeameter is used. Obtain ch and kh using a long and Equations (V-6).1 0. may be computed according to a me~hod prescrib~d by Jezequel and Mieussens (1975): 1.. 3.-) + c ar2 r2 ar v az2 for 8u T < 0.I. (1975)and shown in Figure V-4 of this report. u u 0 1. 20 ~ <J I ~ I:: '16 ~ 0. Al-Dhahir et al.. Enter RK kv Figure V-3 with obtain = ~/RK (V-9) 2.2 0. water in Figu~e V-I is central direction.0 ~ :.(\/ 0 12 8 4 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I/Vf Yw ~O 0 0.I. -f--I~ 2. The field testing time may.- .3 0.41 Yw TESTED NOVEMBER 13-15. TESTED NOVEMBER 1-2.1965.I. (1969) and Jezequel and Mieussens (1975). k .5) The methods described above have been applied to field tests in embankment soils as reported by Bishop and Al-Dhahir (1969).

1 =-=Esma v O-ring Seals 'pressure Tronsducer Locknut 1 + e v (V-II) Proposed correlations between Es and SPR for different sands are summarized in Table V-I and Figure V-5. SPR. Factors such as pore pressure behavior and possible grain crushing must be considered when comparing compressibility and penetration resistance.. the piezometer ~975) probe (from 700 An approach for the evaluation given good results is to compute it equation (V-IO) using mv determined tests and k from field measurements. """ 600 D..BLOWS/30cm Fig. Stainless Steel Porous Tip 800 Fig. Es' that is. is usually expressed as an equivalent constrained modulus.. A wide degree of variation is evident. but the effects of pore pressure generation must be considered for individual 'tests. if any. The methods to be described apply only to dry or completely saturated soils.8PT and Dutch Cone methods. A wide variety of penetrometers are in current 01 .but this discussion will be limited to the . 0 use. Compressibility as. on the preconsolidation pressure in sands. Pratective Polyethylene Penetration tests do. establiShed which correlation. Penetration Resistance Compressibility Considerations as a Measure of Soil 0 2 i C\I 500 General As noted in an earlier section the static or dynamic penetration resistance of a soil is a complex function of soil deformation...riCit provide information Square A-Rod Thread Tubing 3/8' 0. void ratio and in-situ stress. Penetration resistance usually decreases when the ground water table is crossed. E 0 """ 400 111 +In W CJ) :> .. but a number of empirical correlations have been proposed. 10 20 30 40 50 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE .Indicated by the Standard Penetration Test Ferrule Transducer Electric Cable Compressibility based on the value of Standard Penetration Resistance.J :> 0 0 ~ 300 200 100 O. Soil dilation will induce neg- .. Correlations betweenSPR and the compressibility of cohesive soils have not been welldefined. 1975) . V-4 Schematic of Wissa et al. The correlations are of 'little use unless it can be.. since the compressibility of sand is significantly influenced by its OCR. V-5 Relationships for cqmpressibility modulus as a function of standard penetration resistance (from Mitchell and Gardner. strength and compressibility characteristics. Analytical solutions for penetration resistance as a function of compressibility are not yet available. holds true for a particular sand in question.42 ative pore pressures and increase penetration resistance in a saturated soil. Contact stresses greater than about 100 kgf/cm2 may cause crushing of soil grains. of c that has by means of from laboratorY 0 Q. gradation.D.. This is a serious limitation. with susceptibility to crushing dependent on mineralogy. particle size and shape.

emax.6 Soil Types Basis Penetration tests in field and in test shaft.3 (1 +e) Cc ~ qc (V-IS) It is evident that since a may vary by tlOO%. a.6:!: 57.2 kg/cm2 Po Webb (1969) = effective overburden pressure = = 5 (N + 15) 10/3(N+ 5) Es Es tons/ft2 tons/ft2 Sand C:Jayey sand Screw Plate Tests Below water table Farrent (1963) Es = 7. inches B in inches Silty sand Analysis of field data of Schultze and Sherif (1973) Conservative estimate of of maximum shallow settlement foundations Note: N is penetration resistance in blows per 30 cm. The relationship C (1 + ---. A general correlation proposed by Sanglerat et al. qc' with Cc: cr' a = 2. where cr' C 0 = effective overburden stress.) (V~12) cr . (1972) is presented in Figure V-7. In fact. A consistent value of a may be exhibited by a given deposit.S22 kg/cm2 v = 246. . llcr Recommended values of a range from 1. 2 a = 2 (1 + 100) ] (V-17) thus. qc' and compressibility have been proposed. for a given sand.. In general. (blows/ft. as illustrated in Figure V-6. (Schultzeand Moussa. A number of them are listed in Table V-2.5 to 8 for normally consolidated soils. with higher values associated with softer more compressible soils.3 (1 +e) C c (v-14) has been proposed by Vesic (1970) for Ogeechee River sand. it is not clear whether a will increase or decrease withqc' Conflicting results exist and have not yet been explained (Mitchell and Gardner. sand Es C = C(N+6) 3(silt l2(gravel with N < 15 to gravel sand) with sand) Trofimenkov E = (350 to 500) logN kg/cm2 Sand Sand and USSR practice (1974) Meyerhof S = P¥'B /2N inches (1974) S p gravel = in pvB /N tons/ft2. 1975) Reference Relationship Es = vaO.In . and emin. C.) Compressibility Resistance as Indicated by Static Cone The compressibility.2 10gN 263. The parameter. 1961) Remarks Correlation coefficient Schultze and Melzer (1965) Dry sand = 0. lle llh 1 .730 for 77 tests 0< Po < 1. 1975). predictions of volume change based on q are rough estimatesat best. a is not constant.4 Po + 375. C and Cc are related: C = 2. Cc' For one dimensional compression: E s = mv = (V-16) aqc . Compressibility based on e.5 (1- jJ2)N tons/ft2 Sand jJ = Poisson's ratio Terzaghi and Peck loading settlement curves Used in Greece Begemann (1974) ES = = 40 + C(N-6) kg/cm2 kg/cm2 N> 15 Silt sand with with to . IDv' may be expressed as: 1 Many correlations between static cone resistance. = h and. Correlations have been developed using both the constant of compressibility.43 Table V-I Compressibility as Indicated by Standard Penetration Resistance (Mitchell and Gardner. may be used to relate the cone resistance. and the compression index. = -C c llcr log (1 + cr ) (V-13) Dr .

at higher values. 522 s mv \I = 301.5qc Sand Overpredictssettlementsby a factor of two Based on field and lab penetration tests " Schultze and Melzer (1965). 3 Po + 60.3-1.emaxamd emn Correlation coefficient 90 tests valid for Po = 0.Gardner.5 qc Sands Sand Trofimenkov (1964) Es Es = 2. = 0.8 for kg/cm2 = Bachelier and Parez (1965) Es = Cl.5 qc = 100 + 5 qc De Beer (1967) Es = 1.8.7 CI.qc Pure sand Silty sand Clayey sand Soft clay CI. = 1.778 0 to 0.3 (l+e) sand Cc e) Cs Aoed = 2.0.J:. attributedto grain crushing Webb (1969) 5 Es = Z(qc + 30) tsf Sand below water table Clayey sand below water table 5 Es = 3(qc + 15) psf Based on screw plate tests Correlatedwell with settlementof oil tanks .qc Based on penetrationand compression tests in large chambers Lower valnes of CI.382.8-5. = 3.3 :!: 50.1 log qc . E =. of 3 - 12 qc.9 CI.7 ~ ~ De Beer (1967) A = C Aoed Coed Overconsolidated C from field tests Aoed and Coed from lab oedometertests Coed = 2.9 CI. 1975) Reference Relationship Es Soil Types Remarks Overpredictssettlementsby a factor of about two Lower limit Average Buisman (1940) = 1..3 Dry sand compressibility based on e.Table Compressibility as Indicated by Static Cone V-2 Resistance (Mitchell al1d. = 7. = = 3 sands Cl.3 (1+ Thomas (1968) ES CI.. \laD.

4 < Ct.< 4 Peat and organic clay (Pt.3 < Cc < 0.2 < Cc < 0.2 c See Fig.5 0.< 1. (1972) Es = 2qc Sand Based on screw plate tests ~cr = 2 tsf } Es = aqc 3 < a < 8 2 < a < 5 1 < a < 2.< 6 2 < a < 8 1.Table V-2 (continued) Reference Heigh and Corbett (1969) Vesic (1970) E Relationship Soil Types Soft silty clay Remarks See Fig. 2 and text s = -1.2 c C < 0.< 3 2 < Ct.< 1 2 < a < 4 1. } } Silts of low plasticity (ML) Highly plastic silts and Clays (MH. 9 25 < w < 40% 40 < w < 100% qc < 7 bars.CH) Organic silts (OL) .5 < a < 3 a Ct. 12 bars.< 6 1 < Ct. OH) Basedon Clays of low plasticity (CL) 600 comparisonsbetween field penetration and lab oedometer tests q c < 7 bars 7 < qc < 20 bars q c > 20 bars q c > 20 bars q c < 20 bars q c < 20 bars q c < 12 bars q c < 7 bars: 50'< w < 100 100 < W < 200 w > 200 20 < qc < 30 bars q c > 30 bars q c < 50 bars q c > 100 bars qc > < qc 12 bars.3 0.5 w < 30% w < 25%' } C < 0. mv = aq c Es = 2(1+DR2)qc density Sand Based on pile load tests and assumptions concerningstate of stress DR = relative Schmertmann Gielly et Sanglerat (1970) al. 111 1 < Ct.5 3 < Ct. } Gravel } Sand =2 = 1.5 < Ct. 0.j:>. (1969) et al.7 < Cc < 1 w > 130 C > 1 c .7 100 < W < 130% 0.

Table V-2 (continued) Reference Bogdanovic (1973) Relationship Soil Types Remarks Based on analysis of silo settlements over a period of 10 years ES = a.based on analysis of vertical strain ES determinedby lab tests on reconstituted samples of sand Es back-calculatedfrom screw plate settlementusing Buisman-DeBeer and Schmertmannmethods. see text Alpersteinand Leifer (1975) Dahlberg (1974) E = (11 .5 qc Bulgarianpractice ~ 0'\ Sand Sand Sand.= 1.= 1.qc 1 < a.1nits S = settlement Conservative estimate. 9 qc Es = f (qc + 3200) kN/m2 Fine to medium eand South African practice Es Es Trofimenkov (1974) = t (qc + 1600) 1.R.5 . Belgian practice ES=1.S.5 kN/m2 = a.1. } Greek practice Italian practice Es = = 3 qc ' qc < 30 kg/cm2 } Es > 3/2qc or Es = 2 qc Es 1.22) qc Overconsolidated sand NC and OC sand E = a.0 qc > 40 kg/cm2 20 < qc <40 10 < qc < 20 5 < qc < 10 Sands.5 qc qc NC sands NC sands L/B L/B = 1 to 2 ~ 10 axisymmetric = 3. practice Sands Clays Cohesionless soil Es Es = = 3 qc 7 qc } U.B . = 2.3. sandy gravels Silty saturated sands Clayey silts with silty sand and silty saturated sands with silt } Schmertmann (1974a) Es Es = 2.S.qc' < a.5 a.K.qc a. a.B a. practice Meyerhof (1974) S = pB/2 qc in consistent 1.5 plane strain De Beer (1974b) C > .5 a.increaseswith increasingqc.= 1.2.5 . < 2 Clayey sands.2qc 2cr 0 3 qc A > E: "2 0'0 NC sands Belgian practice OC sands Sand ' qc > 30 kg/cm2 3 < E:< 10.6qc-B Es = 1. PI < 15% ) Sands U.< 4 .

The distance between this point and the existing ground surface corresponds to the depth of soil removed. as published for example by Ladd and Foott (1974).. Alternatively.cited in 1). Load Bearing Tests for th~ Determination of Compressibility Properties The load bearing test.. Basis of Load Bearing Test Interpretation The load vs.! t'./ ton 0.47 modulus 00 sq. or more fundamentally. An estimate of the OCR in clays may be obtained through the following method suggested by Schmertmann (1974a): remains a valuable test method.. Only the derivation of Es will be considered in this report.tt.. assUming a constant unit w~ight throughout the profile. Interpretation from._-'--- Crust Very soft silty clay becominq firmer with dept:h ISanglerat) Some laminations fine pockets . occasional of shells ~50 . and deformations at surface points located nearby. . 2) Statistical Methods use relationships between the . For a rigid LBT plate: E. ~ plot of qc vs.settlementof bearing plates and large scale footings. otdomthr test D dissipation test Fig. soil deformation at different depths. LBT. The approaches used for the evaluation of Es from the LBT generally fall into three classifications: 1) estimate Su from qc 2) estimate p~ 3) from profile information compute su/p~ 4) refer to the relationships between su/p. 80 90 . settlement curve derived from the static LBT is usually interpreted to deduce the allowable bearing pressure. the moduli applicable to volume change prediction.. > 01 §I.. 3) Finite Element Analyses consider both elastic and inelastic material response. but the LBT .O e 0 of silty sand and -. and OCR for different clays. 70 ----. employing the same measurements. suited particularly to the testing of uncontrolled fills and stoney soils.Elastic Solutions Foundation materials may be idealized as an isottopic. . 1969) Overconsolidation Ratio and Maximum Past Pressure from Static Cone Resistance A knowledge of the maximum past pressure at points in a soil deposit is needed for many analyses..J:j . 1) Elastic Solutions are based on settlement of test plate.-. V-6 Comparison between compressibility of a soft silty clay as measured by oedometer tests and based on cone resistance (from Meigh and Corbett. depth may be extrapolated above the ground surface to where qc = O. 'a ~60 a. Factors of cost and testing time have increased the relative advantages of other in-situ methods.15 GtVL 10 20 . represents the first know~ application of in-situ testing to investigate soil compressibility. elastic half space.-"30 .. A determination of this quantity by means of the static cone penetration test alone is not possible in cohesionless soils.

w < 2~ 25 < W < .48 Cc 6 u t) " " " n OJ "tI I:: H I:: 0 'r-! UJ >: C' .. . . Based on a statistical anaiysis of LBT results on 'footingsand test plates.. t ~~. U ~J °'I 0 : ! ~ I ... t . . E where: s = I0 II k (1 ..30 30 < W < I. The appropriate influence factors and the solution for this case are presented in Figure V-8. . " . . The influence factors for a number of other cases are The best known . -'- I I 0 I ~ . . . . ". . V-7 Correlation between compression index and cone resistance (from Sanglerat et al. ::.. 1972) (V-18) given by Mitchell and Gardner (1975).. .( D + Dl ) . . .statistical relationship between settlement and footing size for a given bearing pressure is that'proposed... ~I .. t '. .. . 0 J I I 0z I ~..'J 100 < W < 100 100 < W < 130 W > 130 I i . .~2) D Interpretation from Statistical Relationships D = diameter of test plate 11.. '. .. 'i' .. . I 'j' . " .1 = influence factors for surface 0 loading and loading at depth k = = coefficient Poisson's of subgrade ratio reaction ~ The simplest case is that of a rigid LBT plate located'at the ground surface. : .:':':.qc in bars 30 !~ '° Static Cone Resistance Fig. ~--:~ 10 I~ 10 ooL 0 .. .. .. .- . .. -"".... ..:.by Terzaghiand P~ck (1948) for sands.. . the settlement of a footing or plate of diameter D has been relatedtd that of a smaller footing or plate of diameter Dl by the following equation: 2 2D P (V-19) PI =. . """.~ .

815 Fig. 2D ) D 1 (V-20) elastic modulus det~rmined from LBT. A plot of settlement ratio vs. Po --=r- °0= 00 Q E s RIGID PLATESHAPE Circular Square = 10 °0 (1-J. is not appropriate for sands at various relative densities./presented by Gibson (1967) are in agreement with the FEM solutions. V-8 Influence factors for LBT on surface By recalling Equation (V-18). Interpretation ofLBT from Finite Element Analyses The finiteelementmethod (FEM) of analysis is readily adaptable to the interpretation of volume change parameters in the LBT.different volume change characteristics. Complex test geometries. Equation (V-20) may be simplified: = E0 + nvz - E s =D ( D + 1 2 E 2D sl ) - (V-21) An independent analysis of LBT data by Bjerrum and Eggestad (1963) has indicated that a single relationship. Carrier and Christian (1973) have presented comprehensiveFEM solutions for the settlement of a rigid circular plate on an isotropic linearly elastic and on a non-homogeneous linearly elastic half space.5D D + 1. does not exist. Screw plate tests are well suited for use in sandy soils where undisturbed sampling is difficult. but one is persuaded to concur w~th Bjerrum and Eggestad in concluding that a unique relationship independent of relative density. the ratio of the "equivalent elastic moduli. If the two soils have." Es/Esl' may be expressed as follows: Lambe and Whitman (1969) have noted that a LBT will be most successful if soil disturbance below the plate is minimized.of the test plate will be due primarily to strains ih sq~l A. F.l2)D Po INFLUENCE FACTOR 0. Case #1 Es = E 0 Case #2 Es = nvz Case #3 E For a LBT with Dl equal to unity. The wide range of observed settlement ratios. D is measured in feet. They are less suitedfor in-situtests on clays except for estimating immediate deformations. and the settlement of the screw plate is observed. increments of pressure are applied to the hydraulic piston. and if the soil in question is homogeneous for a depth which is large relative to the size of the actual footing. An amended version of Equation (V-21) has been proposed by Bazaraa (1967): The closed form isotropic elastic solutions of Case #1 and the non-homogeneous elastic solution for case #2 as'. The auger is screwed to the desired depth in the soil. pIPl' for different relative densities and footing sizes is illustrated in Figure V-9~ The Terzaghi-Peck correlation is also sketched in the figure. and is seen to underestimate prediqtions of settlement in a number of cases.auger device of the type depicted in Figure V~ll is used in the screw plate test--termed a field 'com pres so meter by Janbu and E s where: D ( 2.5\ 2 I D sl (V-22 ) Senneset (1973)-to observe the load-settlement behavior of soil at depth. diameter which corresponds to that predicted by Equation (V-22) has been superimposed on the data in Figure V-9.piim~rilyto strains in soil B. .-( ESI where: ESI . The solutions were based upon the three following variations of deformation modulus. such as Equation (V-21). The settlement . Es' with depth. as well as non-homogeneous linearly elastic or non-elastic behavior may be accommodated. the settlement behavior of the plate and footing may be considerably different. The horizontally projected area over the single 3600 auger flight is taken as the loading plate area.---1. Compressibility Characteristics from Screw Plate Tests A flat pitch. z: ~ E D+D 2 D . No solutions are avafHible for comparison with the FEM solutions for Case #3. because of the long consolidation time that would be required to define drained deformations. A soil profile which will yield misleading LBT results is depicted in Figute V-IO. or other parameters. (through an equation of the form of Equation (V-18» elastic modulus appropriate for a footing bf breadth or dia- E s meter D Dl' D = breadth or diameter of LET or footing respectively. while the footing settlement will be dlie.<19 Q The correlation is seen to be somewhat better than Equation (V-19).785 0.

1M . anchor SCREW PLATE 0 Scole 50 ~ Field cOlTf)ressometer 100 cm SCALE 0 ~cm FiS. V-ll Screw plate test as developed (from Janbu in Norway and Senneset..&...' ~ ~ L. I I .II967) T~lhi-Peck .36m (drcuI8r) Da. O.'" /.O. V-lO A soil profile which will yield misleading load bearing test results _.. 100""" /~ ~cy~t::::--.I 0 I y .--~-'_. "'i. BAztr.. HYDRAULIC HOSE INNER PIPE Hydraulic hose gouges 5clliement OUTER PIPE PISTON Anchor from e Earl\. ... 1973).32m (square).. ~ . .j<" :. 100 1000 Fig.' ."'" r- ~ ".. ~ ~ L: .50 100 I I _8 - Dense + Medium Raft and sin'" footinp ~~O::k: " i 'Q:10 '" Spre8dfootinp ~ } .tJ'" ~" ".. ' I ' ]J I. - . ..-" _.. 1963) Test Plote c::J Soil A Soil B Footi no Fig.A-- y~ + 10 Width ratio DIDo- Da. V-g Comparison between settlement and dimension of loaded area (from Bjerrum and Eggestad..

The modulus is related to a derived modulus number. B I z p correction) least dimension of r~ctangular footing or diameter ~f bearing plate. The Evaluation of Volume Change Properties with the PMT The procedure and apparatus of the pressuremeter test have been described in earlier sections.26t where: a n m = 1.cr' = 392 kPa (from Dahlberg. 00 25 5 100 (V-SCALE) 225 1. The method has yielded resul~s that compare well with results of oedometer tests as illustrated in Figure V-13. The method is illustrated in Figure V-12. it may be shown that: 2V (1 + t:. = settlement influence factor increment in stress 1-' Z IJJ 1:: IJJ J I- .10 ~ 0.10 C. An idealized pressurevolume curve from a PMT is presented . 392 kPo (SEE ALSO FIG. Another procedure for determining Es is described by Janbu and Senneset (1973). The coefficient of consolidation may also be deduced from the time settlement record obtained during a screw plate test.335 t. The terms of Equation (V-25) have been defined in Section (IV). as follows: I-a E m p (V-24) ~ Q30 0 25 100 225 400 EXAMPLE TEST J 3 + 16.00 L 0 625 0 . windle and Wroth (1975) have suggested an electrical resistivity method for measuring soil volume change during a partially drained PMT. Time limitations and creep effects limit the usefulness of this method in clays for the measurement of volume change properties. V-12 = ~ s where: a a ( Pa) for DC clays and undrained loading of soft saturated clays = 1 = 1/2 for many sands and silts = p 1 = a for NC fine grained soils 2 stress Determination of cvh by screw plate test. Drainage during the screw plate test is essentially radial so the parameter measured is cvh.Sweden I:. following procedures given by Janbu and Senneset (1973) and summarized by Mitchell and Gardner (1975).which are relevant to each phase of the test are indicated in the figure..5 to 2.. 0. Es' may be calculated from screw plate test results by employing a relationship proposed by Schmertmann (1970): 2B I (V-23) p = Cl C2 I:. t. The moduli.0 = porosity = 1.in Figure V-15. p G. For an infinitely thick elastic cylinder corresponding to the tested soil in a PMT. m.95 LOAD STEP (['. The pre consolidation pressure may also be obtained from the screw plate test in the manner illustrated in Figure V-14. The basis of the test interpretation is a correlation which has been observed between soil resistivity and porosity: resistivity. where: Cl = = = 1 - 0.t}J = apw n-m (V.51 The modulus for one-dimensional compressibility. = The summation form of Equation (V-23) enables soil layering to be accounted for in the analysis. The significance of the computed Es depends upon the point of the test curve being considered.z TIME.O 6.p (E: ) I:.1 (creep E E 0.5 (::) (embedment correction) C 2 1 + 0.2 log (t years) 0. The method has been describedin Section (IV-E). R1 IMPERVIOUS ~Q20 (/) '1:. The method has proved successful in the interpretation o~ pressuremeter tests in soft rock. 18) Fig.0 for marine soils Es 0 ---xv (V-25) Pw = resistivity of pore wat~r . Data shown are for a field test in a sand near Stockholm. 1974) reference = 10 ton/m 1 atmosphere Corresponding values of screw plate pressure and settlement are used as a basis for evaluation of m.

.. V-13 Comparisons between modulus numbers and coefficients of consolidation determined by screw plate tests and by oedometer tests (from Janbu and Senneset..j_.... (a) Silt deposit in Stjf6rdal 0 4 0 4 crein m2/year 200 400 I -'1. w a: 20 Fig..J ': w 12 (/) w ~ 16 ~ .'0' at '"..8 W -. crt ... 1974) . n 10':1. J..s: 0 : ~ 24-1 ! 28 . kPa 0117'. 0 .... . 1-=t -- Fig.00 800 .52 Cr and Cv in m 2 year 100 200 0 0 0 / 2 --: -- 1 - .: 20 -t.---T 8 (b) Sand deposit in Steinkjer ~ 16 --r-- .-t-.. V-14 Evaluation of the preconsolidation pressure.... 1973) PRESSURE (f'. from the results of a screw plate test c (from Dalberg.: Z W ~.

by KID ~4 before entering v these charts. a number of theories may be applied to deduce values of cv' Es. There are. Cs' Cr and Cc from the behavior of constructed facilities. the sand cone and nuclear probes provide reliable means for evaluating in-situ water content and density. Nonetheless. Collapse and Expansion Behavior In~situ density is a useful indicator of potential expansion or collapse in partly saturated soils. Monitoring of Earth and Earth Supported Structures Monitoring during construction and after construction should be considered as much a part of in-situ measurement as is testing strictly for initial design purposes.. . Satisfactory prediction of the amount and rate of heave in any case depends at least on the following factors: 1) 2) 3) 1) Unknown boundary conditions 2) Isolation of the volumetric component of measured deformation 3) Measurement and prediction of effective stress Thickness of expansive soi11ayer Depth to water table Extent of soil dessication . Data gathered from an instrumentation program both shapes the design of future facilities and influences the construction rate and sequence of the facility under study. settlement under cyclic loading and liquefaction.back analyses. expansion. The utilization of performance records from large scale instrumented earth loads and excavations has particular appeal because of the close approximation of conditions which will control the behavior of the as-constructed facility. Relative Density and Porosity as Indicators of Volume Change Properties A knowledge of the in-situ density or relative density and water content provides an indication of the potential for. the Washington densometer. electrical resistivity and plate load tests have also been successfully employed to measure density. J. This correction may alter the derived relative density considerably. Soils with combinations of liquid limit and natural dry density that plot below and to the right of the solid curved lines are susceptible to expansion. if the appropriate data are available. monitoring becomes an integral part of the design process. serious problems concerned with this approach. Volume Change Properties and Expansive Soils Expansive soils pose very serious problems in many areas of the world. soil pressure or load. CPT Some suggested correlations between relative density and qc are presented in Figure V-l6. The proper evaluation of effective stresses and the influences of soil creep behavior constitute the largest obstacles to the implementation of . Field data indicate that the effective overburden stress. 2. - // v/ J/ ' I ~ E ::J I» Pseudo-Elastic Zone 0 Plastic Zone Py ~ 0 ~ XBL 776-9429 pressure-V-15 Idealized pressuremeter test curve indicating soil moduli which are applicable to each phase of testing Undisturbed sampling. The relationships were developed from chamber test results and statistical correlations. Penetration Resistance as a Measure of Relative Density H. and less frequently. In a defensive design format. those plotting above and to the left are susceptible to collapse on wetting. a' . several volume change phenomena including col!apse. In-Situ Density. porewater pressure. yet methods for in-situ measurement of their volume change properties are in a very early stage of development. Fig. 1.53 4) Evaluation of loading and unloading rate effects CJ tJI C C ~ U t = Deformation modulus Eo = Alternated or rebound modulus E+ = Recompression modulus Po Horizontal earth pressure at rest Pv = Creep limit ~ = Limit pressure Ed I 5) Cost considerations 1. including the determination of the reference relative densities themselves. Penetration resistance. 5. since compacted sand fills may exhibit a coefficient of lateral pressure as great as 1. ~. A comprehensive description of field instrumentation is given by Cooling (1962) and more recent innovations are described by Dunnicliff (1971) and Selig (1974). should be mul tiplied. Correlations of this type are subject to a number of uncertainties. Good quality field measurements are the first requirements of a "back calculation" procedure. which include the following: Some correlations between relative density and blow count have been presented in Figures 111-2 and 111-3. however. or magnitude of. Figure V-17 presents a general guide for assessing this behavior on the basis of natural dry density and liquid limit. The most commonly measured quantities are vertical or horizontal deformation.

is the unit swell at the ground surface A distribution of soil swell which varies parabolically with distance above the water table ..54 ~ z 100 ~ C '60 (/) ~90 a:: w 80 a. '/1 //1 // / /1/ h /1 // //../ //' "'. but the techniques are not yet commonplace.0 kG/cm! 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 CONE RESISTANCE./' .! ~ « . 01(1960) .:: 100 Z w 90 ~ ~ (/) .. /"'..!5kG/cm! a:: 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 CONE RESISTANCE Qc (kg/cm2) CONE RESISTANCE Qc (kg/cm2) ~ ~ . has been considered by vijayvergiya and Sullivan (1974). ~ ~ 40 30 ~ ~ W 20 i= 10-/ /.. . h. The surface heave../ ': 60 /.TURNBULL . I I ~IOO w ~90 w 0. and is given by the equation 1 ~h ( (V-27) H='3h where: (~h)0 h )0 In-situ methods are capable of providing information on each of these factors. ./ / /' / / / / / / / / VERTICAL EFFECTIVE STRESS.' /' >.. The distribution is sKetched in Figure V-18.50 C~ 60 . Qc (kQ/cm2) Fig. Qc(kg/cm2) ../" /" /" ~ a: >./ /' / ..I" SCHULTZE-MELZER (1965 SCHMERTMANN (1970 a:70 I' /. I I ../' / ~ 40 C 30 / W > 20 i= :3 ~ 10 '/ 0 I' .::. 70 . ~ 90 ".J W a:: 0 // ." / ~. '" 80 70 . ....' /( /' / ... /~/ /.'" / ".60 ~ 50 - /'/' i/ .J W a:: 201/ 10 VERTICAL I I 0 25 50 EFFECTIvE I I 75 100 I 125 STRESS-O I I 150 175 200 c 1/' -SCHULTZE-MELZER(1965 w 30 /' ==~~~:~~T(~::~ (1971) ~ 20 ./' wao a. 70 a: .00 Z "" SCHMElnMANN (1971) ~ a:: w a.. V-l6 Correlations effective between staticcone resistance. 01(1960) "./ .-TURNBULL Of --THOMAS SCHMERTMANN (1969) (1971) 01 (1960) VERTICAL EFFECTIVE a:: 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 CONE RESISTANCE. Qc (kg/cm2) STRESS' 2./' !:: 50 I ~/ ~ 40 ../ .80 I 1// / /".- .../ « 10 VERTICALEFFECTIVE G1 / STRESS.--- .' I /? " '/ / / / / -.-.- THOMAS (1969) TURNBULL .. . and relative density 4) In-situ stress 5) Applied stresses 6) Soil characteristics which determine the swellingindex and coefficient of swelling 7) Depth of'seasdnal moisture variation 8) Chemical and biological environment 9) Temperature distributions./" ' c . ./ /. -. ~ !:: 50 Z 40 w c 30 w t. vertical stress.4.'" /' / ? '~ cf60 ~ . O.0 I19/cm! 25 50 15 100 125 150 115200 225 250 215 300 CONE RESISTANCE./ /" .90 u 70 100 " ffi 80 '/ //. corresponds to the summation of soil swell over the depth./ ~ . l I .U) Z w c w > 50 40 30 20 i= « 10 . H.

'" "Specific ""'Speclflc gravity = 2.J cr a: ::) 100 v Icr Z V' 1/ M 110 . 40 50 60 70 90 60 &L U Il. Degree of EKpansi veness very high High Medi um high Medium Medium low Low Guide to collapsibility....VERY HIGH . and expansion based on in-situ dry density and liquid limit (adapted from Gibbs. V-18 variation of swell with depth according to Vijayvergiya and Sullivan (1974) .70 gravity = 2. .60! 1 Lines of 100.Fig.V V c >a: c 90 ..55 10 20 30 L I QUID LI M I T. >.. 1969) V-17 (~h/h )0 SURFACE HEAVE =SHADED AREA h GROUND ~ WATER TABLE Fig.... (/) Z ~ 80 I 70 .. saturation Estimated S~bol H Y M X L .. compressibility.

with substantial variations in relative density indicated by a given penetration resistance according to different correlations. including screw plate tests" (4) presstiremeter tests. such as sampling (particularly in cohesionless soils) and simulation of in7si~u short time. if not better than. with recent developments in finite difference and finite element techniques for analysis of consolidation. Nonetheless.staticpenetration tests. but can give misleading results if overconsolidated sands are misinterpreted as normally consolidated. Each:of these. rapidly Varyirigproperties with distance from the probe and changing stress fields adjacent to the test device may be important. Load:bearing tests are usually interpreted using elastic theory to give a modulus of deformation for undrained or drained conditions.or evaluation of . static cone and screw plate. The most suitable currently available in-situ tests for evaluation of the volume change properties of differen-tsoil types are as follows: The borehole or piezometer permeability test is particularly well::-suited +. one could conceive a load bearing test with pore pressure measuremE:mt:s and/or artificial drains from which both compressibility and consolid~tion properties might be determined in a for determination of volume change properties of soils and soft rocks.ofconsq:j. pressuremeter tests Penetration resistance measurements. Correlations with volume change properties are empirical. however. (5) and test fills or excavations. however. Normallyconsolidated sands .screw plate tests. To sort out the combined influence of relative density. Analysis of pressuremeter tests can be made in terms of undrained or drained deformation parameters depending on the time allowed for consolidation under each applied stress. This would permit/both the establishment of more data points on correlation curves and prediction of behavior for other cases on the same soil.56 Indirect methods which measure "such parameters as pH. self~ boring pressuremeter tests Stiff clay. The required testing time for a fully drained load b~aring test on a'c6hesive soil may be prohibitive. e~g. In addition in-situ tests that provide a measure of density or porosity yield an indicatiqnof volume change properties. speed. the available correlations are tenuous.oad bearihgtests. The static cone penet~ationtest can be well suited for evaluation of the compressibilityand relative density of normally consolidated sands. and the test results in cohesionless soils are sensitive to in-situ stress conditions. and low cost are attractive. It provides data from which the compressibility and coefficient of consolidation can be calculated. K. woUld seem to overcome. static penetration tests.are available allowal1. .for evaluation of the preconsolidation pressure of most soil types. salt content.assessing potential settlements 'or volume change. predictions based on the results of laboratory tests. (3) :j. depending on soil type and time of loading. although time limitations will probably restrict its use to cohesionless to slightly cohesive soils. and'there would appear to be need for considerable'further work on tests for use in these materials. screw plate tests. ' stress conditions. because of their simplicity." Significant advances"should be possible were more"of the available data for full scale structures used to back-calculate properties.use in most cases. pressuremeter tests In the case of cohesionless soils. shale . The static cone resistance may offer more reliable means for assessment of relative density. Conclusions Several types of in-situ tests .bffer-the best means for.ataccord with full.ce . particularly if the in-situ stress conditions are unknown. and none can be considered suitable for all soils under all conditions.load bearing tests. in-situtestsi if:'properly done and interpreted. Problems because of disturbance.the rate of consolidation properties of fine-grained soils. a knowledge of the relative density may be of primary importance because of concern over liquefaction potential in seismic areas. load bearing tests pressuremeter tests Soft clay . although suitable correlations are still in early stage of development. The screw plate test offers a method . or electrical properties are seen to hold some promise fo~ the in-situ measurement of volume change properties in expansive soils. ' Large scale test fills and excavations probablY. High cost and long testing time preclude their. Most applications to date in cohesive soils have been for determination of uhdrained properties.permeability tests. in-situ stress and fabric will probably necessitate the combined use of more than one test type.types of test has advantages and disadvantages.idation under each applied stress could provide a basis for determination of volume change properties.scale performance at least as well as. Whether this type of test can be used for evaluation of compressibility as well (see equation V-lO) remains to be seen. however. including(l) borehole or piezometer permeability tests. (2) penetration resistance measurements.' some of the problems associated with the use of laboratory tests for evaluation of volume change' properties. Analysis of the data in terms of effective stresses or the Overconsolidated sands . The use of in-situ tests for evaluation of the swell properties of expansive soils is in its early'stages. giving results th. Although the standard penetration test has been widely used for this purpose.

The problem of test "loading" is a fundamental consideration of property measurement. Introduction of new methods. i. The PMT is a prime example of a method which is expected to see increasing use.as an interpretation of the CPT in terms of cavity expansion. the potential for future development of the different methods for improved determination of different parameters has been assessed. The potential advantages of in-situ measurement of soil properties are both fundamental and practical.. B or C. The references cited provide more complete details of the procedures for each test. but rather a standardization of technique. with A indicating high app1icabi1ity. Of particular interest in this regard are geophysical and remote sensing approaches. are expected to be hvai1ab1e ih the near future. what is necessary is not a drastic improvement. '''How much does the measurement of a given quantity affect the magnitude of that quantity?" Future Developments in in-situ testing may possible improvements be categorized as follows: 1. This is not to say that these methods will not see continued use and refinement. such as the SPT. anisotropic and non-linear soil properties. and some important methods. 2.the present time 1) Decreased soil disturbance as compared to that incurred during sampling and laboratory testing. . Some significant contributions such as the drained analysis of the PMT have been described in this report. 21 Retention of the in-situ stress. and to provide accuracy and relevant design parameters for specific engineering problems. San Francisco. In~situ testing constitutes a potential means of defining such conditions and characterizing such behavior. and no mark indicating . The disadvantages. Sophisticated analytical methods for predicting soil behavior can now be used to evaluate complex boundary conditions and the effects of non-homogeneous. On the basis of i~formation obtained for preparationof this report.57 VI. the goal of in-situ testing research is two-fold: to improve our understanding of the behavior of undisturbed soil deposits. On the other hand. The practical advantages include: 1) Increased cost-effectiveness of testing. . as well as the lack of a sample (in many instances) for verification of the actual soil type being tested. Work supported in part by the U. The fundamental advantages include: Acknowledgements Financial support for studies of in-situ testing and analysis procedures and for preparation of this report was provided by the Geoscience Research Program of the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory and by the Professional Development Program of Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Synthesis of existing The refinement of existing procedures and methods of interpretation is an on-going process.hO applicability for determination of the property. California.S. An assessment of the applicability of the methods discussed is presented in Table VI-I. Each method is listed and its suitability for determining various different geotechnical parameters is indicatedb~T a "grade" of A. but at. 2) The potential ability to increase the intensity of testing for a given project and thus develop a data base which is suitable for statistical evaluation. In many cases. In this context. temperature. '3. 3) Decreased number of error sources. Department of Energy. the accuracyof analyticalmethoas usually'"sur. methods.C indicating limited applicability. These conclusions are summarized in TableVI-2 It is recognized that.me~hods Refinement of existing procedures and of interpretation. offer relatively little potential for future development. as their potential isrecognized and exploited. which enjoy widespread use 'at present.of'in-situ testing lie in the difficulty of attaining the realization of these potential advantages.e. passes the accuracy attainable in measuring input parameters. A second report is planned concerning potential new approaches and methods for evaluation of soil geotechnical properties insitu. chemical and biological environments. It is believed that a number of techniques.such an assessment is very subjective in nature. SU~1ARY AND CONCLUSIONS This report describes many of the methods currently used for the in-situ measurement of soil properties and indicates procedures for deduction of specific property values from the acquired data. Similarly the static cone penetration test is likely to see greatly increased use in the U. such. S. some methods which are infrequently used at present are expected to become increasingly popular.

B = moderate applicability.-4 +J U Q) -1 lI-/ +J U Q) r:r:I -.-4 +J U 0.-4 s:: II) 0 U) +J ~ ~ +J Q)U) > 0 II) to:! Q) -..-4 +J U ::I Io-! II) It! ~ B B ~ t:) -.-4 II) II) Q) r:r:I r-I Ir-I It! ~~ Q) -.-4 to:! +J 0.c:: +J t1I .-4 ~ ~ It! ~ ~ r-I It! s:: Q) ~ +J U) ~ It! Q) ..-4 II) ::I r-I ::I 'tj s:: 0 0.-4 +J.-4~ -1 ~ -1 S Q) 0 ou t) ~N ~ ~ Q) :2 III 0 Q) r-I t1I 0 Ilt ~ It! lI-/+J -1 ~ Q) OJ 0> u.58 TableVI-l.-4~ ~+J 0U) :I: ~ III Q) Io-! >t +J -.-4 .-4 II) 0 ~ 0 III -1 >t +J s:: It! 0 s:: -..-4 +J It! It!~ 'tjQ -. D = No applicability.-4 lI-/ Io-! t.-4 ::I r-I It! II) s:: ~ ::I +J It! U) U Q) -. CUrreAt suitability of methods Q) t1I TABLE VI-I.-4 Io-! 'd N' II) 0.-4 It! U -..-4 It! +J t1I .. Borehole Permeability Large Scale Pumping Hydraulic Fracture Piezometer Probe Pressuremeter Borehole Shear Direct Shear Plate Load Screw Plate B I B C C C A B B C C C C C A A B C B C B A C A A C B C C C B C A C B A A C C A B A B B A B B A A A C B B B B A A A C A A C A Piezometer A i B A = high applicability.-4 s:: ~ 0 0 Ute 0 0 ~ U) II) t1I ~ Q) +J s:: H lI-/ +J U) ~ § ~ +J ~ S Q) Soil Profile II) -.J s:: Q) +J s:: s:: +J -.c:: U) 'tj Q) s:: -. Q) ~ ::I II) II) Q) . .-4 Q) -.-4 It! U 'tj -.(S It! Q) .-4 II) s:: Q) Q 0 U ~ Q) +J 0 -.c:: s:: :>t +J -.-4 ~ ~ Q) :2 +J II) > ~ A A Dynamic Penetration Static Penetration Vane Shear Falling/Constant Head.-4 Or-l -. C = limited applicability.-40.-4 +J It! r-II -.c:: +J II) II) Q) ~ r-I -. Q) Q) CURRENT SUITABILITY OF METHODS > -..c:: U) 'tj Q) s:: -.-4 . § :8 ~ 'B 0 H ~ I t!1 r-I +J It! U s:: 0 0 -.Q s:: -.-4 lI-/ -1 > -.

-Ilrtl c: ~ I UJ rtl (.. ~ 1-1 I I 1-1 +J tJ"1 . I i . I+J c: I ! +J 4-f 'M 0. ! I '"dQ 'M .J 1-1 Q) :> I 1 OM 1-1 0 II: 2 U +J fJj ... ~ I: I.. I c: I .I I I 0 1-1 0 p. ~ ~ ~E (]j 0 I I UII: I!-! 1-1 0 0 m I ~ . '8 I.r.. : ! I! i . .. . I e B C A B B B A C Shear I C Falling/Constant Head.. .59 Table VI-2..:>..! Q IS:(/) B U C Dynamic Static Vane Penetration Penetration e B Ie A B B . C 0 oM +J.. 'M ~ 1.~.j.~ I +J 0 I'M I \ Q) 1-1 +J (/) 1-1 rtl (]j I I I I ! : 'M 4-f 0 .Q)OO 1-1+J ooo 1-1 o.-I UJ c: 0 'M .. :>.---. Potential methods for further future development and improvement r--'-r ! TABLE VI-2..c c: +J tJ"1 ()) 1-1 c: +> oo '1-1 cO (l) I I ~ ~ OM I +J 1) I . P. (]) 0 0 r. 1 --.j c: E i ~ I rtl ::J..x: I ~ +J ~I-I (l) <1J I ' O. e I Piezometer e j I i e e applicability.j.-1 'M I . ' I (]) I0 ~ I <1J ~ ~ ~ r-I (]). :> I I I!+J i I! i j'M .c +> oo c ~ "" I I .-I 01 .-I rtl +J c: c: D '"d Q) C 'M cO 1-1 Q ..c oo . 1-1 ~UJ 01 ~ .I : ! I i. I A = high applicability. I UJ I I I Q) 01 UJ I .. c: rtl rtl 1-1 10C: I 'M'M I +J rtl ! . .c: oo ~ '.. 1-1 I I. limited D = No applicability.. c5 '"d OM ::J ..0 0 .-I . S I oo ! :> C A B B ::r: p. N elI'M e 0 p. UJ fJj ell I I I ~ ...I .! I i I Q)'M I :> <1J':' +J J --rl r . 0 N +J fJj'M 1-11:1-1 :>....o +J:> C:'M 'M )UJ.(]jjcO I UJ c: I rtl OU " QJII: I 0:> U--- :>i c: ::J 0 (]j '"d Q) c: 'M rtl 1-1 "d ..j 1-1 ::J +J ~...J ' +JI-I N (l) ''''''1-1 !:!I OM t' ill I U 1-1 (]) +J i.-1 I I I ~ OM 1-1 ~ 8~ Q) +> I I +J Q) +J I>: 0 .-I ::J ::J i . Borehole Permeability Large Scale Pumping C C C ! B C B B B B Hydraulic Piezometer Fracture Probe e e C e B B A C A A B e A A B I t B A A B Pressuremeter Borehole Direct Plate Screw Shear Shear A B B I I I C I I C e e i I Load Plate I 1 e A I C A e A ! i I e A ! I e e B = moderate applicability. I i Soil Profile I 1 . i I '-r-" I ..!) I o~ .-I1 I OM fJj'M .c t POTENTIAL OF METHODS FOR FURTHER FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT 'I I .

433-450. 251-264. 1974. Biarez.3." Geotechnique. pp. pp. Raleigh. I. Bemben. L. Berezantzev. 4. F. S. (l969) "Some Comparisons Between Laboratory Tests. and Steinbach. 1974. (1974) "GeneralReport for Centraland pp. 69-92. and Parez. pp. Bachelier. J-F." Journal.D. pp. In-Situ Tests and Full Scale Performance.2. I. (1975) "Comparison of Field and Laboratory Shear Moduli.. No.." Conference on In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock." Geotechnique. and Al Dhahir. North Carolina State University. January. ASTM STP 193. Vol. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Contributions from Scandinavia. Al Dhahir. A. Raleigh. pp.2. 1-21. J. pp. Anagnostopoulos. N. published by National Swedish Building Research. I. Stockholm. Raleigh.K." Proceedings of the European symposium on Penetration Testing. Engrg. R. Anderson. No. A.A. Vol. F. andMorgenstern. pp.G. M. M. 93-120. No. J ." Symposium. 17. (1969) "In- Z. Alperstein. SMll. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. pp. A. Bjerrum. Vol. Raleigh. Bjerrum.2. pp. pp. GT5. University of Illinois. 1975. (1975) "pumping Tests in an Unconfined Aquifer. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. North Carolina State University. Euro~an Conf." Proc. and Le Mehaute. 98. 29-39. 2. on Soil Mech. ASCE. Stockhblm. Vane Shear Testing of Soils. L. 3.1. European Symposium on Penetration Testing. I. (1975) "Seismic Field Methods for In-Situ Moduli. (1963) "Interpretation of Loading Tests on Sand. Baguelin. Ballard. Inst. (1969) "Observations on Pore Pressures Beneath the Ash Lagoon Embankments at Fiddler's Ferry Power Station. 13-14.." Proceedings. Al Dhahir. No. Geotechnical Engineering Division. S. (1975) "Site Investigation with Static Cone Penetrometer.G. 102. 22. A. R. I. pp. Z.L. Jezequel. Baguelin. L. pp. 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. S.. Begemann. June 5-7. Jezequil. with Special Reference to Permeability and Coefficient of Consolidation. Vol. Greece. Vol. Vol." Proceedings. 1129~1142. (1972) "Expansion of Cylindrical Probes in Cohesive Soils.. Bazaraa. 1-54. Bjerrum. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division.60 REFERENCES Ahmad." Proceedings. Arman. D." Ph. 1975. ASCE. and Ahmad. of Civil Engineers.D.A. Vol. and Myers. R." Conference on the In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock.Kennard.G. Thesis." proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. L. and Leifer. Engrg.". 121-150.W. 539-555. N. pp. 2. Nash. published by National Swedish Building Research. 107. Vol.. Bjerrum. Poplin. and Gresillon. (1972) "Tests and Proposed Methods for the Calculation of the Bearing Capacity of Piles in a Granular Medium. A. and McLean.Proceedings of the Conference on InSitu Measurement of Soil Properties. North Carolina State University.M. Amar." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.R. 6th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Vol. 175-186. and Woods. of Civil Engrs. Vol. J.K. R. and Found. Moscow.M. Vol. Morgenstern. I. Vol. Vol.F. (1967) "Use of the Standard Penetration Test for Estimating Settlements of Shallow Foundations on Sand. Y.E. p." Proceedings.H. A. . Vol. pp. (1974) "Evaluation of the Undrained Shear Strength from Static Cone Penetration Test in a Soft Silty Clay in patras.. 22-45. Vol. D. Vol. (1972) "Embankments on Soft Ground. V." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Gibson. (1965) "Contribution to the Study of Soil Compressibility by Means of a Cone Penetrometer. p. and Bjerrum. Bishop. (1975) "A Study of Vane Shear. S. (1974) "The Influence of Rate of Penetration on Static Cone Resistance Values in Connecticut River valley Varved Clay. Purdue University. LeMee." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. F. 2.pp. (1973) "Problems of Soil Mechanics and Construction on Soft Clays. L. (1972) "Hydraulic Fracturing in Field permeabili ty Testing. pp.G.. Montreal. J.. N. Vol.A. Paris.. North Carolina State University.G. 3-7. R. J. E. and Eggestad. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. 2. Vol. Andresen. June 5-7. 22. 54. Western Europe. and LeMehaute. A.F.R. L.. (1967) "Engineering Geology of Norwegian Normally Consolidated Marine Clays as Related to Settlement of Buildings. ASCE Specialty Conference on Performance of Earth and Earth Supported Structures.. InSt. 1974. II. 2. Vol." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division.. (1961) "Load Bearing Capacity and Deformation of piled Foundations. .T. L. (1965) "Vane Testing in Norway.A. on Soil Mech. 81-118. Urbana. Stockholm. North Carolina State Universit~ Raleigh. and Found. Bjerrum. J. .A. (1975) "In Situ Shear Resistance of Clays." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 111-159. Kennard. June 5~7. ASCE. Z. A. Lacroix.M." Soil Science." Proceedings 8th International Conf. 33-34." Geotechnique. and take Factors for Cylindrical Piezometer Tips.

T. 1974.J. 1975. R. A. Farrent. 1975.3. 4th Int.E. June 5-7." Symposium on Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Foundations. (1974) "Interpretation of Dutch Cone Tests in Soft Bangkok Clay. p. 92. 2.S." Ph. 346-348.and Foundation Engineering. pp.t. Engrg. Vol.".. pp. (1963) "An Analysis of System Flexibility and its Effect on Time Lag in Pore Water Pressure Measurements. Geotechnique. K. SM5. SM2. 1975. European Symposium on Penetration Testing. June 5-7. DM-7 (1971) "DESIGN MANUAL . on Soil Mech. W. Thesis.K. (1966) "Factors Influencing the Results of Vane Tests." Second Rankine Lecture. 13. pp.2. (1973) "Settlement of Stiff Structures (Silos) Founded on Soft Soil with Low Penetration Resistance. DeBeer. FoundaNaval Brand. Vol. J. pp. Pressuremeter and Screw Plate Tests in a Pre loaded Natural Sank Deposi. H. G. 1950. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. published by National Swedish Building Research." Proc. 12." Proceedings. (1974) "Penetration.F. XVI. Stockholm. June 5-7. North Carolina State University. No. No. 2.. pp. Carrier." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. 1974. (1967) "Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Shallow Foundations on Sand. Conf. and Found.. pp." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. I. April 5/6. Vol. Raleigh. Gibson. pp. University of Illinois. 4th panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. E." Proc.E. S. 67. (1957) "Research on Determining the Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing. Vol. of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing.1.D. Conf. Durham. (1969) "Discussion on Expansive Clays. Dahlberg. 457-472.T. Z-C. Washington. R. Vol. E. on Soil Mech. No. 21-50. Waltman. R. Moh. 1975. (1974a) "Decrease in Penetration Resistance Due to Excavation in an Overconsolidated Glauconitic Sand. 256-259. No.B. Vol. and Mitchell. E. H. Vol.61 Bogdanovic. Specialty Session No. III. (1974) "Estimating Relative Density from Standard Penetration Test Resistances. p.E. p.2. pp.E." -Proc.. DeBeer. No.C. E. DeBeer. Facilities Command. and Christian. II . Publ. De Ruiter. Vol. 1965.W. Vol. and Odenstad. Stockholm. 161. H.C." NAVFAC-DM7. Fletcher.3.2. 23." Geotechnique. published by National Swedish Building Research. Buisman. pp. II." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. L.F." Geotechnique. R. 1. and Holtz.A. No. Vol." Proc. pp.New Zealand Conf. (1963) "The Prediction and Field Verification of Settlements in Cohesionless Soils. 77-104. 4th Australia . and Seed. Vol. Cooling. (1975) "Cost Effectiveness of In-Situ Testing.Soil Mechanics tions. Duncan." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Brooker." Transactions of the SR Institute for Testing Materials. (1940) Groundmechania.F. and Earth Structures. H. SM4. (1971) "Electric Penetrometer for Site Investigations. Delft. T. Engrg. Stockholm. Duke University. Brown. Stockholm. National Swedish Building Research. II.. 103-104.K. 97. Gibbs. Vol. R. 1-86. Flaate. "Expansive Soils and Moisture Movement in Partly Saturated Soils. (1971) "The Standard Penetration Test.Analysis.C.B. Vol.J. Brown. on Soil Mech.1. (1975) "Static Penetration Resistance of Soils. 1-11. 1974. Belgrade. published by National Swedish Building Research.G.1. I . 2:1." 7th Int. ASCE. Gibson. pp." Geotechnique. J." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. Vol. (1964) "The Influence of Stress History on Certain Properties of Remolded Cohesive Soils. Swedish Geotechnical Institute. Durgunoglu. No. (1973) "Rigid Circular Plate Resting on a Non-Homogeneous Elastic Half-Space. European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Vol. 151-189.M. (1965) "Standard Penetration Test: Its Uses and Abuses. 15-33. National Swedish Building Research.A." Proceedings. (1962) "Field Measurements in Soil Mechanics. E. and Found. Vol. (1950) "The Vane Borer. I. ESOPT (1974) Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. 35. (1966) "Anisotropy and Stress Reorient<3.. (1974b) Discussion on Interpretation of Results of Static Penetration Tests. (1971) "Equipment for Field Deformation Measurements. . Dunnicliff. W.E.W. de Mello. L.tion in Clay. J. No. Sept. Cadling. 2.2. ASCE. 11-17. No. ASCE." Proc." Canadian Geotechnical Journal. ASCE Specialty Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. (1966) "A Note on the Constant Head Test to Measure Soil Permeability In-Situ. P. L. 34. 51-58.. 1975.D. No. and Wirojanagud.. 93.1. E. V. pp. Fourth Panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics. Engrg. Stockholm. 69-87. Gibbs. and Found. D. pp." Proc. N. Vol. 319-332. ASCE. Mexico City. Stockholm. J. pp. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Stockholm. J.Proceedings.Evaluation of Theory and Implications for Practice.

Conf. W.1.B. I. A. (1974) Discussion to ESOPT "Penetrations in Clay at Undrained Conditions. (1961) "In-Situ Measurement of Soil properties with the Pressuremeter. Pub 1. pp~i 153-160. B.F. Vol. for Determining Permeability of Soil Strata. North Carolina State University. pp. l-l. and Found. 8th Int. 129-132. (1944) "The Coefficient of Earth Pressure at Rest. Engrg. Pincus.H. of civil Engineers. Thesis. pp. ASCE.." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Hartman. No. (1975) "The InSitu Measurement of Coefficients of permeability and Consolidation in Fine Soils." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division.(1975) "FEM Study of Elastic Phase of Pressuremeter Test. Raleigh. Vol." Vol. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Proceedings of the Conf. pp. 2." ASTM Sp. 322 (Fie. 349-351.ld Testing of Soils) . J." Geotechnique. Conf." ASTM. on Soil Mech. North Carolina State University. Schmertmann. November. and Inderbitzen. on In-Situ Investigations in Soils and Rocks. Ladd. pp. Ladanyi." Canadian Geotechnical Journal.. Gielly. Raleigh. K.(1973).V. Moscow.. pp. GT7. FHWA-RD-74-68. (1975) Panel Discussion.pp. Vol.Sao Paulo. B. Caracas. Ladanyi. ." by J. Hvorslev. Janbu. Ladd. Vol. B. 9. and Foott." Report No. (1973) "Effects of Pressure meter Probe Length/Diameter Ratio and Bore Hole Disturbance on PMT Results in Dry Sand. Janbu. Hirst. 1531-1539. 3-20. M. J. (1969) Closure to "Vibration Modulus of Normally Consolidated Clay. (1972) "A Static Cone Penetrometer for Ocean Sediments. (1951) "Time Lag and Soil Permeability in Ground Water Measurements. and Senneset..J. 208-224. North Carolina State University. London. No. Vol. 50 pp. Vol.F. Y. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Vol. and Chugh. Richards. Ladanyi. 58-67.Q. Waterways Experiment Station. Gibson. 95. (1975) Panel Discussion: Field Measurements of Permeability in Soil and Rock. pp.J. (1963) "Evaluation of Pressuremeter Tests in Granular Soils. (1960) "Notes on the Determination of Coefficients of Permeability in the Laboratory and In-Situ. N. of the Geotechnical Div. Laier. Jaky. J.L. Ladanyi. ASCE. W. Geotechnical Engineering Division. Laier.M. Schmertmann. Moscow. (1969) "Correlation Between In-Situ Penetrometer Tests and the Compressibility Characteristics of Soils. I. Session V. Vol. (1963) "Field Tests.D.C. ASCE." proceedings of the Conf. 69-80.A. B. Presented at 8th International Conf. 167-179.62 Gibson. Y. R. . Lambe. T. Ladd.. (1969) "Use of Deep Sounding Penetration Tests in Sensitive Clay. John Wiley. Springfield.1. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.E.. North Carolina State University. pp. . (1975) Discussion of "The Measurement of In-situ Shear Strength. J. 764-786. on In~Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Lareal. M. Huck. 37-38. pp. (1973) Invited Discussion of Bjerrum . and Schmertmann. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. 241-259.E. Raleigh. A~L.. North Carolina State University. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Jezequel. and Found.. No. (1974) "New Design Procedure for Stability of Soft Clay." polytechnic School Zurich (Unpublished) . Eng. W. Raleigh.P." Corps of Engineers. and Anderson.H.. pp. W. 7th Int. and Whitman. Singh. pp. II.F." Journal. H~J. G. vicksburg. (1973) "Field Compressometer--Principlesand Applications.J. (1975) "Effect of Finite Pressuremeter Length in Dry Sand. 313-321.C. pp. R.E. (1967) "Deep Punching of Sensitive Clays. R. (1967) "Some Results Concerning Displacements and stresses in a Non-Homogeneous Elastic Half-Space. Vol. Conf. prepared for Federal Highway Administration." Proc. T. Gordon. 3rd panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. ASCE." Ph. J. STP 501.O.and Gass. ASCE. 1. (1972) "In-Situ Determination of Undrained Stress-Strain Behavior of Sensitive Clays with the pressuremeter. VA 22151. Technical Information Service. I. H. Raleigh. S. B. 56. Miss." Civil Engineering and Public Works Review. New York.J. No. Vol. pp. and Schaub. Bulletin 36. 2nd Panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering . Janbu. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. 100. and Eden. J. Available through Natl..H. (1969) Soil Mechanics.H. University of Florida." Proc. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. pp. North Carolina State University. Vol. II. Mexico City. P. J. J. Golder.E. 191-198. 615-618. Hardin. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. and Sanglerat. Lacroix. (1974) "Determination of the In situ State of StresS in Soil Masses.. C. I. II." Proc. N. 225-230. B. C. Vol. I. 17.C. Magyar Mernok es Epitesz Egylet Kozlonye. SM6. and Blac:k. C. A.P. 190-207. pp." Proc. Soil Mech. P. 533-546. pp." Proceedings. C. ASCE." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Raleigh.3. Inst." (In Hungarian). ASCE. Vol. R. 553 pp. N. Specialty Conf. Vol. and Mieussens. Vol. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. pp.

on In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock.G.. 319-335." Proc. Vol. (1975) "Influence of Mechanical Variables on the SPT. Purdue University. (1972) "Pan~lDi~cussion. and Weiss. North Carolina State University. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engrg.K.. 2.G. (1971) "Untersuchung von Greritztragfahigkeitun'Setzungverhalten flachgegrundeter Einzelfundamente im Ungleichformigen nichtbindigen Boden. Conf. Leblanc.H. Vol. STP 417. Muhs.D.." Proc.3. B. Stockholm. of the Geotechnical Div." Sols Soils. Holm. Roy. Trak. Milligan." Bulletin de Liaison des Laboratoires de Ponts de Chaussees. No. (1975) "In-situ Impulse Test for Dynamic Shear Modulus of Soils. 'A. 2. J. Thesis No. Specialty Conf. I. Embankments on Soft Ground. Session I. V. Asian Inst. p. G. Massarsch. Troncosco. ASCE. 266-286." M. G. W. Miller.. Vol. (1975) "The Interpretation of Pressuremeter Test Results. 422 p. Vol. (1972) "Study of Five Embankment Failures on Soft Clay. of Technology. Lafayette. Miliigan.M. 105.B. No. of the Geotechnical Div. E. T. Raleigh. (1974) "Un Exemple D'Utilisation Du Scissometre de Cahntier.N. M. pp. Palmer. Inst.1975. 22. and Fredriksson. Raleigh. June 5-7." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. (1972) "Application of the Dutch Cone Bangkok Area. Specialty Conf. G... pp. in Pilot. Poulos. Franklin. Meigh. B. July. A. No. and Gardner. John Wiley and Sons. B. 173-179. Proceedings of the Conf. K. B. 35-55. 245-252. 3-36. LaRochelle. 4l~48. 279-345. Raleigh. North Carolina State University. (1974) "Failure of a Test' Embankment on a Sensitive Champlain Clay Deposit.1. R. pp. A. Tavenas. 287-318. (1975) "In-Situ and Laboratory Tests on Glacial Clays at Redcar." State of the Art Paper. Vol." Proceedings. Permeability and Capillarity of Soils.G.. Research Establishment Current Marsland. A.R. 26. Specialty Conf. pp.. Massarsch.H. 177182. pp. on In-Situ M~asurement of Soil Properties. Symposium on the Behavior of Glacial Materials." Proceedings of the-Conf. North Carolina State University. and Brown. Paris. pp." State-of-the-Art Report. H. pp. Purdue University.63 Lang. Universite Laval. North Carolina State university. No. and Corbett. June 5-7. Vol.R. Bangkok. McLean." Geotechnique. 1974. Birmingham. (1961) "The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Wedge Shaped Foundations. Meyerhof. Vol. 1. (1975b)"Measurement of Horizontal In-Situ Stresses.R. Raleigh. I." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. and Dahlstrand. ASCE. published by the National Swedish Building Research. pp. New York. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. H. Broms. Vol. 81100. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. Specialty Conf. Raleigh. Meyerhof. J. 1975. XI. on Performance of Earth and Earth Supported Structures. A. (1975):"Field Measurement of Permeability in soil and Rock. Stockholm." Geotechriique." ASCE Specialty Conf. Marsland. I." Deg~bo Heft 26. K. pp.G.1. 377. and Davis.K. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Mitchell. I. Vol. Vol. . 1974. 260-265. Marsland. (1975) "In Situ Measurement of Volume Change Characteristics..VoL 22. Inc.K.. 451-457. pp. . II. pp. (1974) General Report for Outside Europe. pp. ASCE. H. p. (1976) Fundamentals of Soil Behavior. Vol. A. (1975a) "Pore Pressure Determination with Multiple Piezometer.G." Proceedings of the Conference on In~Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.Sc. Vol. (1975) "Analyse De La Resistahce Non Draine des Argiles Mesuree au Scissometre. Menard. (1972) "Undrained Expansion of a Cylindrical Cavity in Clay: A Simple Interpretation of the Pressuremeter Test. P. Thesis. II. 142-164. of the Geotechnical Div. ASCE Specialty Conference on Performance of Earth and Earth~Supported Structures. Vol. of Civil Engineers. Phami T. ASCE. (1972) "Laboratory Determination of In-Situ Horizontal Stress in Soil Masses. (1969) "A Comparison of In~Situ Measurements in a Soft Clay with Laboratory Tests and the Settlement of oil Tanks. F.S.. and Sundqui.. published by National Swedish Building Research . 40-48. L. 20. F. Fifth International Conf. Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. S. Mitchell. (1973) "Laboratory and In-Situ Measurements of the Deformation Moduli of London Clay.G." Building Paper 24. of the Geotechnical Div. J.O.P. North Carolina State University. on Insitu Measurement of Soil Properties. pp. O." Canadian Geotechnical Journal. R.. (1967) "pumping Tests for Determining Aquifer Characteristics. Vol.C. V.C. pp. I. 7. Session 1. Holtz. North Carolina State University. ASCE. pp. Jr. VII. F. Raleigh. K.." M. A." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Froperties." Proceedings. (1974) "Comparisons of the Results from Static Penetration Tests and Large In Situ Plate Tests in London Clay. 2:2.Eng... Lemasson." ASTM. A.

(1975) "In Situ Measurement of the Properties of Sensitive Clays by Pressuremeter Tests. (1965) "The Determination of the Modulus of Compressibility of Non-Cohesive Soils by Soundings. Urban Mass Transportation Administration.. June 5-7." Proceedings of the Conf. pp. Static Settlement Over Sand. (1974) "Soil Strain Measurements Using Inductance Coil Method. A. Specialty Con- Schmidt. pp. p. 1. ASCE. Ottawa. of the Geotechnical Div. Puerto Rico.. No.. 269. pp. 1975. 500-527. I. 1." State-of-the-Art Paper. Roy. Vol." Woodward-Clyde Consultants Field Measurements Subcommittee. G. 336-349. .. Vol. 350-372. E. and Foun~. Gielly. Blanchette. of the Geotechnical Divo." Prepared for Fugro-Cesco. Dunnicliff.H. II. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. 1. Lareal. E. G. Vol. I. A. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. Schmertmann. C. of the Geotechnical Div. Vol. published by National Swedish Building Research." Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division. North Carolina State University.Des Travaux Publics. B. Vol. 395-449. F. (1971) Discussion to de Mello (1971) Proc.W. Specialty Conf. Vol. No. Amsterdam. J. Supplement No. (1972) The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration. 1011. Vol. A. (1975) "Measurement of In-Situ Shear Strength. III.E. Vol.64 Prevost. F. ASCE. John Wiley. Developments in Geotechnical Engineering. Sanglerat. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div." Proceedings." Appendix III .2. Schmertmann. Vol. M. ~ng. Vol. (1975) "In-Situ Determination of Anisotropy of a Soft Clay. Tavenas. C. pp. G. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. pp. Vol. Division of Building G-l. 354-358.H. pp. Leidschendam. Tavenas." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. ASCE. p. 1974. Raleigh. J. July.. Vol. II' Proceedings. pp. North Carolina State University. R.I.H. J. 4th panamerican Conf.S. on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. R. 1st Edition. 422-449.. Specialty Conf. M. K-J. (1975) "Difficulties in the In-situ Determination of Ko in Soft Sensitive Clay. (1970) "Static Cone to Compute. Montreal.H. (1972) "Le penetromitre Statique et la Compressibilite des Sols. Schmertmann. and Melzer.. pp. 298. (1975) "In-Situ Measurement of Shear Strength. Leroueil.. and Bauer. Stokoe.H. Raleigh. ASCE." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.A." Proceedings of the Conf. Project Schmertmann." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. J. J. Raleigh. ~. Office of Research and Development. New York. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. ference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties.. I. 450-476. Washington." Proceedings. Proceedings of the Conf. and Abdel-razzak. P." Discussion." Proceedings of the Conf. ASCE. F. Schmertmann. (1975) "The Interpretation and Use of the Pressuremeter Test for Settlement Predictions.H.. (1976) "pilot Field and Laboratory Study of the Feasibility of Using the Wissa-Type Piezometer Probe to Identify the Liquefaction Potential of Saturated Fine Sands. J. 57-138. Juneau. Sanglerat. Selig. (1948) Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. Information Bulletin.J. Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Schultze. D. ASCE. and Tavenas.H.and Memon. Richardson.. LaRochelle. K. 96.M. and Peck. F. European Symposium on Penetration Testing... and Chapeau.. and LaRochelle. on Soil Mech.W.H. 2. Raleigh. P. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. (1962) "The Stress-Dilatancy Relation for Static Equilibrium of an Assembly of Particles in Contact.T. Shields." Report DOT-TSC-UMTA-76-3. North Terzaghi. Vol. U. ASCE. pp. Jr. E.F. ASCE Carolina State University. pp. Dept. D. (1974b) "Penetration Pore Pres- sure Effects on Quasi-Static Cone Bearing. Roy. S. and Alsup. DACW-39-76-M-6646. 352-355. 717-732. Schmertmann." Canadian National Research Council. pp. P. Waterways Experiment Station. pp. (1975) "Analysis of Pressuremeter in Strain Softening Soil. J .G. The Netherlands. North Carolina State University.. North Carolina State University. North Carolina State University. ASCE.H.a Sensitive Clay using Laboratory and In-Situ Tests. (1976) "Subsurface Exploration Methods for Soft Ground Rapid Transit Tunnels.H. Matarazzi." Annales de L'Institut Technique du Baitment et. Raleigh. Stockholm.II. SM3. (1975) "Determination of the Modulus Deformation of . (1972) "Static Cone Penetration Tests. I. Schmertmann. P. Internal Report Research.C. Raleigh. Vol. ASCE. K.. 164-167.An Updated Correlation Between Relative Density Dr and Fugro-Type Electric Cone Bearing. North Carolina State University. (1974a) "Guidelines for Design Using CPT Data. of Transportation. and Hoeg... 6th International Conf. Vol. Rowe. (1975) "Shear Moduli of Two Compacted Fills. on InSitu Measurement of Soil Properties. 90-98. J. K. M.qc'" Proceedings. Royal Society of London. Tabor. GT8. 101. G. Raleigh. October. I.. Elsevier. 345. J. Specialty Conf. K. G. Roy. S. "In Situ Te?ting: Permeability. Session III." ASTM Symposium on Performance Criteria and Monitoring for Geotechnical Construction. Brand. II.

" Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. . Vol. pp. pp.D. 1. 1975.3." by Hamilton.2. Specialty Conference of the Geotechnical Division. 2nd Edition. Vol. Geotechnique.and l{ughes. June 5-7. North Carolina State University.Angle in Granular Soils Using th~ Pressuremeter. and Sullivan.1. Marsland. A. Raleigh. "Earth Colorado. No. C.. 33-52." Denver. vesic. R. 536-545. D. (1975) "Analysis of the Pressuremeter"Te. J.. (1975) "Electrical Resistivity Method for Determining VblumeChanges that Occur During a PressuremeterTest. J. pp. (1975) "In situ M~asurement of Initial Stresses and Deformation Character. 561-584. 1974. ASCE. J. North Carolina State University. (1968) "Constant Head ~n-Situ Permeability Tests in Clay Strata.P.4. Vol. 519-524. W. XXV. aridRodriguez. Proceedings of the ConFerence on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. Madrid. No.B....J. on Soil Mech.L. (1973) "An Instrument for the In-Situ Measurement of the Proper~ ties of Soft Clays." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measur~ment of Soil Properties. South Africa. Webb. USBR (1974) (United Interior. 17. and Found. 321-344. 598-604. 68-71. S.~'Geotechnique. Wroth.. 24-28. Test to Measure Permeability Geotechnique. pp. 17-20. Vbl. (1975) "The Piezometer Probe. Wilkinson. Todd. D.P. Vol. I. Vol. Wroth." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. Paper 843." Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Vol. I. Wilkinson. (1974) "Penetration Testingin Eastern Europe. 487-494. pp. Trofimenkov.Z. A. (1967) "A Note Soil on the Constant In-Situ. Published by National Swedish Building Research.H." Proceedings of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties. (1969) "Settlement of Structures on Deep Alluvial Sandy Sediments in Durban. (1935) "Relation between Lowering of Piezometric Surface and Duration of Discharge of a Well Using Groundwater Storage. D. Ward. 18. C.istics.A. 18.E." Geotechnique.P. North Carolina State University. Vol. Proc. States Department of the of Reclamation). Thomas. E. D. Vol. I." Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists." Geotechnique. 277-291.stAllowing for Volume Change. C. SM2. Vol.65 Theis. Speci~lty Conference.G. Vol. pp.. 511-522. SM3. of civil Engineers.Vol. pp." . (1974) "Simple Technique for Identifying Heave Potential. pp. XI.N. pp. and Samuels." Proceedings of the Conferenc~ cmln-Situ Measurement of Soil Prop~rties. pp. 98.S. pp. 181--230. E. 487-510. Spepialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. 8th Int." Conference on In-Situ Behavior of Soil and Rock. (1972) "Expansion of Cavities in Infinite Soil Mass. 15. In-Situ and Undrained Strength Tests. vijayvergiyi." Geotechnique.G. II. J. Martin. "Tests on Instrumented Piles. W. pp. Thomas.P.. London. pp. 2. 472-488. (1975)j"Borehol~ Shear Device. Sp~cialty Conference of the Geotechnical Div. (1965) "Properties of the London Clay at the Ashford Common Shaft.Raleigh. (1955) Discussion of paper "Field Vane S." Proceedings. D. Conf. . 81. and Wroth. pp. . No. C.Gray. No.E." Moscow: Building Literature Publishing House. I.B. 1955. Engrg.M. Winter. 5th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. ASCE. R.hearTests of Sensitive CohesiveSoils. and'Wihdle. Vol.V. ASCE. No. Inst. 181-188. 15.K. Raleigh. Vol. (1964) "Field Methods for Testing the Structural Properties of Soils. Trofimenkov. pp. (1975) "Evaluation of Preconsolidation andFriction.S. (1968) "Deepsounding Test Results and the Settlement of Spread Footings on Normally Consolidated Sands. (1959) Groundwater Hydrolog~ John Wile~ New York.G. (1970) Ogeehee River Site. A. No. North Carolina State University. ASCE. Moscow." State-of-the-Art Paper. A. pp. 523-535. Vol. (1965) "static Cone Penetration Tests in London Clay. Vesic. Vey. C." Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. D. Bureau Manual. 179. . Raleigh. Head W. pp." American Geophysical Union Transcripts. 177-194. Vol. Vol. 96. Stockholm. 2. Wissa. pp. pp. Specialty Conference of the G~otechnical Div.O. Wroth. 175Windle. C:P. V.1. and Garlang~r. (1972) "General Theories bf Earth Pressure and Deformations.T. Wroth." Proceedings.of the Geotechnical Div. North Carolina State University.2. Win~land. ASCE. Raleigh." Technical Note.A.

Ea Ed EpMT ES Es..lateralearth pressure coeftic~ent In-situ lateral earth pressure coefficient Maximum passive earth pressure coefficient Coefficient of subgrade reaction Coefficient of permeability (~ydraulic conductivity) Coefficient.. N rods test blow in the counts for MOdulus obtained test . 0 1<0' .' Pf Applied Constant Piezometric head at time tl' t2 '\F~~~rpressure when soil fails during pfes~uremeter test . under undrained loading Nc' Nyg Bearing capacity -factors NFF .in the horizontal direction Length pf borehole£or-permeability tests Iowa.Standard penetration test blow count for .ideally free falling hammer N.66 h LIST OF SYMBOLS a Cell ANDABBREvIATIO:NS Ip radius of the presstiremeter of borehole.shear test Coefficienb Base width of compressibility dimension at..by.Diameter d . shear . tration test Alternated Deformation loading modulus. Standard penetration test blow counts in serisitiveclays n NC static penetrometer Porosity Normally conSQlidated ratio at rest Overconsolidation Horizontal Creep .Dr for vertical k' v Vertical coefficient of permeability for basing penetrometer . vertical permeability Relative . The slope of the point resistance versus P effective overburden pressure profile for the static penetration test modulus Nst modulus under drained .throughthestandardpene.of.tiO'n"or-. (k . v B b BST C c C r C s Cl'C2 Lateral earth pressure coefficient normally consolidated soils.the c vv D D D D DR.Est Eu E+ E' e FR fs G GWT br rebound modulus Correlation factor for strength pressuremeter test analysis Standard penetration A. permeability. Mean coefficient of permeability . Transformation ratio.c cch Cohesion Coefficient compression Coefficient compression bepthof Diameter Stress Vane dilatancy parameter test m of cohsolidationfor and horizontal flow of consolidation and vertical flow L Jl.horizontal and.borehole shear test Embedment and.taining to~hevane.' k.limit ratio on the Side fri9.count for standard penetration test E:lastic modtiltis Energy input.. the pressuremeter .. creep correction for the screw plate 'test : k m.dimensional compression index recomPress~onindex swelling .. In~situ..index factors IO .E E (/k7k ) h v m my N N Modulus number Compressibility Blow. the static penetrometer Shear mti~lUS~~i'\::"" Ground shear water table OCR Po Py P earth pressure H Hc HlH2 Total overburden pressure pressure during screw plate test vane height Piezometric head .. diameter 'density for the vane. pertaining to .~ . depth for the' load bearing gradient for a a.for permeability Iz II' i' c K. vertical k v m = lk v . per. Depth increment index influehce factors factor loading and test . . h ) Coefficientofp~rmeability vertical direction in. One dimensional Elastic bearing modulus test NA.Plasticity Settlement Influence loading Hydraulic a a . .1-Rf.Kp K k One7dimensional One-dimensional One. ..base Length Factorutilizedihpressuremetertest a~aiysisrelatingvolumetricto tangential strain. Diameter for surface tests Penetration resistance interceptfadtor Shear stress distribution factor.NN (constrained} determined modulus by thedload Young's modulus conditions Recompression Deformation conditions Void ratio Friction ""<".

cr2.sUV Sv Resistivity Settlement Soil density Undrained shear strength Undrained shear strength from the Vane Shear Test Vertical shear strength Standard Penetration Resistance Standard penetration test Maximum applied torque in the vane shear test Time factor Time lag in the borehole permeability test Time or elapsed time Chamber volume of the pressuremeter Initial chamber volume of the pressuremeter Flow velocity Shear wave velocity Particle velocity Vane shear test Water content Liquid Layer limit thickness Pore water resistivity Settlement of one foot diameter bearing plate Total horizontal stress Effective horizontal stress Radial stress during the pressuremeter test Total vertical stress stress SPR SPT T crh cr' h crr crv cr' v crl.67 Ys Yw pressure in pressure<5 p Limit test pressure during pressuremeter Saturated unit weight of soil Unit weight of water Friction angle between penetrometer and soil Radial strain during pressuremeter test Volumetric strain Vertical strain Radial strain of the pressuremeter cell Equivalent axial compressive strain during the pressuremeter test E3 Majo::.cr3 T T ps <P T T t V Effective vertical V. derived by the pressuremeter test <P' <Pcv a Parameter relating cone resistance with constrained modulus Penetrometer base semi-apex angle <Po a. s. ~ v Vs V VST W WL Z Major. in terms of effective stress Angle of internal friction.E2' intermediate and minor principal Volumetric Deviator Volumetric Static cone flow stress flow point rate Ee rate resistance strength 11 on q q qc qu QR Q R RK sh Circumferential strain during pressuremeter test Stress ratio between deviator stress and average principal effective stresses Bjerrum correction factor during vane shear tests poisson's ratio Unconfined Normalized Quasi-static compressive flow rate 11 . Shear Shear stresses intermediate and minor principal stress stress. Q El. not due to dilatancy. plane strain Angle of internal friction in terms of total stress Angle of internal friction in terms of effective stress Angle of internal friction pertaining to shear at constant volume Component of angle of internal friction. stra~ns. B during pressuremeter test Shape Bulk factors resistivity during pressuremeter test Total resistance on standard penetration test samples Ratio of horizontal to vertical permeability shear strengthin vane shear Horizontal test Su . in terms of effective stress.CPT penetration test v ~A' ~B ~c'~q P p P P Pw PI Angle of dilation Radial displacement of point A. effective average of stresses Effective Plasticity Pressuremeter Plane strain preconsolidation index test pressure Eo El p. Po p' p' p'c PI PMT In-situ lateral meter test Effective Stress ciple overburden pressure the three prin- Er Ev Ez point. Y Yt <t>~MT Shear strain during pressuremeter test Total unit weight .

","static_promo_banner_cta_url":"https://www.scribd.com/"},"eligible_for_exclusive_trial_roadblock":false,"eligible_for_seo_roadblock":false,"exclusive_free_trial_roadblock_props_path":"/doc-page/exclusive-free-trial-props/201366438","flashes":[],"footer_props":{"urls":{"about":"/about","press":"/press","blog":"http://literally.scribd.com/","careers":"/careers","contact":"/contact","plans_landing":"/subscribe","referrals":"/referrals?source=footer","giftcards":"/giftcards","faq":"/faq","accessibility":"/accessibility-policy","faq_paths":{"accounts":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246346","announcements":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246066","copyright":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246086","downloading":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/articles/210135046","publishing":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246366","reading":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246406","selling":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246326","store":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246306","status":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001202872","terms":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246126","writing":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246366","adchoices":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/articles/210129366","paid_features":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/sections/202246306","failed_uploads":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210134586-Troubleshooting-uploads-and-conversions","copyright_infringement":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210128946-DMCA-copyright-infringement-takedown-notification-policy","end_user_license":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210129486","terms_of_use":"https://support.scribd.com/hc/en-us/articles/210129326-General-Terms-of-Use"},"publishers":"/publishers","static_terms":"/terms","static_privacy":"/privacy","copyright":"/copyright","ios_app":"https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/scribd-worlds-largest-online/id542557212?mt=8&uo=4&at=11lGEE","android_app":"https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.scribd.app.reader0&hl=en","books":"/books","sitemap":"/directory"}},"global_nav_props":{"header_props":{"logo_src":"/images/landing/home2_landing/scribd_logo_horiz_small.svg","root_url":"https://www.scribd.com/","search_term":"","small_logo_src":"/images/logos/scribd_s_logo.png","uploads_url":"/upload-document","search_props":{"redirect_to_app":true,"search_url":"/search","query":"","search_page":false}},"user_menu_props":null,"sidebar_props":{"urls":{"bestsellers":"https://www.scribd.com/bestsellers","home":"https://www.scribd.com/","saved":"/saved","subscribe":"/archive/pmp_checkout?doc=201366438&metadata=%7B%22context%22%3A%22pmp%22%2C%22action%22%3A%22start_trial%22%2C%22logged_in%22%3Afalse%2C%22platform%22%3A%22web%22%7D","top_charts":"/bestsellers","upload":"https://www.scribd.com/upload-document"},"categories":{"book":{"icon":"icon-ic_book","icon_filled":"icon-ic_book_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/books","name":"Books","type":"book"},"news":{"icon":"icon-ic_articles","icon_filled":"icon-ic_articles_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/news","name":"News","type":"news"},"audiobook":{"icon":"icon-ic_audiobook","icon_filled":"icon-ic_audiobook_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/audiobooks","name":"Audiobooks","type":"audiobook"},"magazine":{"icon":"icon-ic_magazine","icon_filled":"icon-ic_magazine_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/magazines","name":"Magazines","type":"magazine"},"document":{"icon":"icon-ic_document","icon_filled":"icon-ic_document_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/docs","name":"Documents","type":"document"},"sheet_music":{"icon":"icon-ic_songbook","icon_filled":"icon-ic_songbook_fill","url":"https://www.scribd.com/sheetmusic","name":"Sheet Music","type":"sheet_music"}},"nav_categories":["mixed","book","audiobook","magazine","document","sheet_music"],"selected_content_type":"mixed","username":"","search_overlay_props":{"search_input_props":{"focused":false,"keep_suggestions_on_blur":false}}}},"recommenders":{"related_titles_recommender":{"ids":[64780349,242898993,326589723,338840322,213430826,265556733,295750481,327395592,83040052,321130832,369135617,381731335,260277731,92633465,268045103,342451021,336287302,241866732,269655773,387987510,385573752,331788340,236194097,92651540,200076306,377028306,53316703,119738331,295099603,328819244,210683399,210677401,210676105,271646343,210683181,275969404,304928224,271646220,271645963,336133428,201364732,258674889,210678233,235248852,258675302,160661362,148094946,174031573,174039722,133886695,133886747,139266429,135182642,199711553,174038132,135955120,198097594,201362257,201361806],"title_link":null,"title":null,"track_opts":{"compilation_id":"noZWfaH0NTne07Z7oiMxTmDn314=","module_id":"Lc1/T+sNdr6I/4uG0azbUalTmY8=","widget_name":"right sidebar","track_id":"flattened_recommender"}},"footer_recommenders":{"recommenders":[{"ids":[64780349,242898993,326589723,338840322,213430826,265556733,295750481,327395592,83040052,321130832,369135617,381731335,260277731,92633465,268045103,342451021,336287302,241866732,269655773,387987510,385573752,331788340,236194097,92651540,200076306,377028306,53316703,119738331,295099603,328819244],"title_link":null,"title":"Documents Similar To The Measurement of Soil Properties in-situ (Mitchell James K.)","track_opts":{"compilation_id":"noZWfaH0NTne07Z7oiMxTmDn314=","module_id":"fPqXtqLQAmAtXSRJYIzlhT2bqt0=","widget_name":"document_carousel"}},{"ids":[210683399,210677401,210676105,271646343,210683181,275969404,304928224,271646220,271645963,336133428,201364732,258674889,210678233,235248852,258675302,160661362,148094946,174031573,174039722,133886695,133886747,139266429,135182642,199711553,174038132,135955120,198097594,201362257,201361806],"title_link":null,"title":"More From jcaz","track_opts":{"compilation_id":"noZWfaH0NTne07Z7oiMxTmDn314=","module_id":"a9kOPAsJ1iXvh3ydamdiI4vGnzg=","widget_name":"document_carousel"}}]},"seo_new_docs_recommenders":{"recommenders":[]},"documents":{"53316703":{"type":"document","id":53316703,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/53316703/149x198/f1a9c88903/1486686898?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/53316703/298x396/a508661e68/1486686898?v=1","title":"DESIGN OF PILES USING EURO CODE-7","short_title":"DESIGN OF PILES USING EURO CODE-7","author":"GEOMAHESH","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":53316703,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"xTsH1h+boH69F3VkXhn3xI7AtB8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/53316703/DESIGN-OF-PILES-USING-EURO-CODE-7","top_badge":null},"64780349":{"type":"document","id":64780349,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/64780349/149x198/712f46eaa0/1315901174?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/64780349/298x396/c15facf2b7/1315901174?v=1","title":"FHWA-HI-98-032","short_title":"FHWA-HI-98-032","author":"Hari Setiawan","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":64780349,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"E6UmTcmxvZBOhGyGAm2UAOhzQBQ="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/64780349/FHWA-HI-98-032","top_badge":null},"83040052":{"type":"document","id":83040052,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/83040052/149x198/103ec2f464/1380359893?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/83040052/298x396/1e48f385de/1380359893?v=1","title":"Design Examples","short_title":"Design Examples","author":"Brajesh Suman","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":83040052,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"eEYJl5lB0VQM7k5cmE2USodlu+Q="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/83040052/Design-Examples","top_badge":null},"92633465":{"type":"document","id":92633465,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92633465/149x198/bf5f44968b/1336353060?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92633465/298x396/bc5fffab3d/1336353060?v=1","title":"Cyclic Simple Shear Test Print","short_title":"Cyclic Simple Shear Test Print","author":"Alher Hera","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":92633465,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"rjxmqgkhMUyoehBQWSZ6FVyC3Qk="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/92633465/Cyclic-Simple-Shear-Test-Print","top_badge":null},"92651540":{"type":"document","id":92651540,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92651540/149x198/8f84cec06d/1361247530?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/92651540/298x396/8d66425ade/1361247530?v=1","title":"(GEOSS) - Guidelines on Good Practices for Pile Load Test","short_title":"(GEOSS) - Guidelines on Good Practices for Pile Load Test","author":"Peter Kyaw","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":92651540,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"NRWcu54lSDgYvsQH2eSU7CFIdBA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/92651540/GEOSS-Guidelines-on-Good-Practices-for-Pile-Load-Test","top_badge":null},"119738331":{"type":"document","id":119738331,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/119738331/149x198/2999aaddb6/1357795827?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/119738331/298x396/c1f44d7d7e/1357795827?v=1","title":"US MIL Directional Drilling 6","short_title":"US MIL Directional Drilling 6","author":"BigBaby Julian","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":119738331,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"QmsGM1zVsnYKfVpmxOTmp63h7Pw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/119738331/US-MIL-Directional-Drilling-6","top_badge":null},"133886695":{"type":"document","id":133886695,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886695/149x198/2dff626027/1431953925?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886695/298x396/4302ec9f32/1431953925?v=1","title":"Capricorn i o","short_title":"Capricorn i o","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":133886695,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"XlqCrjIjDuB/v1txwxdVGw+LaTc="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/133886695/Capricorn-i-o","top_badge":null},"133886747":{"type":"document","id":133886747,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886747/149x198/a88b2012fd/1409704901?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/133886747/298x396/fff59e9053/1409704901?v=1","title":"Calculo Vectorial","short_title":"Calculo Vectorial","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":133886747,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"exrLPm9QlesD0V5j6d6voi3/xh8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/133886747/Calculo-Vectorial","top_badge":null},"135182642":{"type":"document","id":135182642,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135182642/149x198/5b9c9f5fb8/1475290676?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135182642/298x396/e4bac46ac8/1475290676?v=1","title":"Ku Brix Rhino Manual","short_title":"Ku Brix Rhino Manual","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":135182642,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ufFtiF/kmUK7idFdGJdAv0ZGKk8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/135182642/Ku-Brix-Rhino-Manual","top_badge":null},"135955120":{"type":"document","id":135955120,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135955120/149x198/44e011986b/1399927321?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/135955120/298x396/3eafe8cf0d/1399927321?v=1","title":"GiD User Manual","short_title":"GiD User Manual","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":135955120,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"Fl+DNktFxN6G68UT0F5+qse8ii4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/135955120/GiD-User-Manual","top_badge":null},"139266429":{"type":"document","id":139266429,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/139266429/149x198/86e5cbc2b9/1367594245?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/139266429/298x396/561a47246e/1367594245?v=1","title":"Gonzalez-Romo (Estimación de propiedades dinámicas de arcillas) Revista IS","short_title":"Gonzalez-Romo (Estimación de propiedades dinámicas de arcillas) Revista IS","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":139266429,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"rfJ9+n4HHxgpWOhdBbTzSgx1TZU="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/139266429/Gonzalez-Romo-Estimacion-de-propiedades-dinamicas-de-arcillas-Revista-IS","top_badge":null},"148094946":{"type":"document","id":148094946,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/148094946/149x198/302a3072f6/1448172846?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/148094946/298x396/90b59d2919/1448172846?v=1","title":"Some Pitfalls When Using Modified Cam Clay (Potts)","short_title":"Some Pitfalls When Using Modified Cam Clay (Potts)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":148094946,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"Z5Dw3dupSrPBRCfA3qrkRBD0lTs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/148094946/Some-Pitfalls-When-Using-Modified-Cam-Clay-Potts","top_badge":null},"160661362":{"type":"document","id":160661362,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/160661362/149x198/e7dfd88560/1538787169?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/160661362/298x396/d45e6fe807/1538787169?v=1","title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","short_title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":160661362,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"kx+OEdPeUxTWN4WD9Drj5tKrKYc="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/160661362/Ingenieria-de-Cimentaciones-Enrique-Tamez","top_badge":null},"174031573":{"type":"document","id":174031573,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174031573/149x198/58bcdbffbf/1405826803?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174031573/298x396/9a27f0a356/1405826803?v=1","title":"Fabricacion y Colocacion de Pilotes","short_title":"Fabricacion y Colocacion de Pilotes","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":174031573,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ghQn9RpUduf/3RSboq6QHwL+Mo8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/174031573/Fabricacion-y-Colocacion-de-Pilotes","top_badge":null},"174038132":{"type":"document","id":174038132,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174038132/149x198/38df8f70bc/1431011927?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174038132/298x396/230a25b0a1/1431011927?v=1","title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","short_title":"Ingenieria de Cimentaciones Enrique Tamez","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":174038132,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"jDx59CfGD15sQBloAd+zdRafzsI="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/174038132/Ingenieria-de-Cimentaciones-Enrique-Tamez","top_badge":null},"174039722":{"type":"document","id":174039722,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174039722/149x198/b7b2d1576e/1437137819?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/174039722/298x396/8c000e4be6/1437137819?v=1","title":"APG Civil 2013 3D TOC Sample","short_title":"APG Civil 2013 3D TOC Sample","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":174039722,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"tuILGqWJ+mjjswmwEWrWYf361iI="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/174039722/APG-Civil-2013-3D-TOC-Sample","top_badge":null},"198097594":{"type":"document","id":198097594,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/198097594/149x198/067633259b/1390102411?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/198097594/298x396/3885fe0b87/1390102411?v=1","title":"Dissertation Writing for Engineers and Scientists by Mark Breach","short_title":"Dissertation Writing for Engineers and Scientists by Mark Breach","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":198097594,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"FKFwPacfneUunmTcNAHL79OYacw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/198097594/Dissertation-Writing-for-Engineers-and-Scientists-by-Mark-Breach","top_badge":null},"199711553":{"type":"document","id":199711553,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/199711553/149x198/86574a6669/1423997451?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/199711553/298x396/3d82003b76/1423997451?v=1","title":"3-1BasicGrading","short_title":"3-1BasicGrading","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":199711553,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"7UPg74Kbya+zgEkn+IFS1DBYw38="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/199711553/3-1BasicGrading","top_badge":null},"200076306":{"type":"document","id":200076306,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/200076306/149x198/f4aaa8e425/1389865431?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/200076306/298x396/1af559b7f6/1389865431?v=1","title":"Iss26 PES - 3D Pile Raft Foundation FE Model","short_title":"Iss26 PES - 3D Pile Raft Foundation FE Model","author":"theodorebayu","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":200076306,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"X/U1zpWj8ALPVuvuBuXsldze+Z4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/200076306/Iss26-PES-3D-Pile-Raft-Foundation-FE-Model","top_badge":null},"201361806":{"type":"document","id":201361806,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201361806/149x198/6fba05b3bc/1403867290?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201361806/298x396/2a396d7861/1403867290?v=1","title":"01.- NAVFAC 7.1 (Soil Mechanics Design Manual)","short_title":"01.- NAVFAC 7.1 (Soil Mechanics Design Manual)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":201361806,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"riy08IQvdO6NU1TaEtsX8hXmJbw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/201361806/01-NAVFAC-7-1-Soil-Mechanics-Design-Manual","top_badge":null},"201362257":{"type":"document","id":201362257,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201362257/149x198/6e12ce3477/1390364354?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201362257/298x396/35999f6b42/1390364354?v=1","title":"Verruijt. .Soil.mechanics.(2001)","short_title":"Verruijt. .Soil.mechanics.(2001)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":201362257,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"mwtYh7Siy6g3T+KirFEV9WP45UM="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/201362257/Verruijt-Soil-mechanics-2001","top_badge":null},"201364732":{"type":"document","id":201364732,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201364732/149x198/82c4525088/1539659787?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/201364732/298x396/805f0bd1b7/1539659787?v=1","title":"(Crespo villalaz)Problemas resueltos de mecánica de suelos y de cimentaciones","short_title":"(Crespo villalaz)Problemas resueltos de mecánica de suelos y de cimentaciones","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":201364732,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"kFyzsQSlQupZccX59S30yU3IeSg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/201364732/Crespo-villalaz-Problemas-resueltos-de-mecanica-de-suelos-y-de-cimentaciones","top_badge":null},"210676105":{"type":"document","id":210676105,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210676105/149x198/fb46bd783a/1434964173?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210676105/298x396/4fdcc39a89/1434964173?v=1","title":"19593877 4th Athenian Lecture","short_title":"19593877 4th Athenian Lecture","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210676105,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"j/H7nseiXDgQi1p8JCNd6WFoH0I="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210676105/19593877-4th-Athenian-Lecture","top_badge":null},"210677401":{"type":"document","id":210677401,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210677401/149x198/4cf9745de9/1393985174?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210677401/298x396/4f6bc6179f/1393985174?v=1","title":"A 2D Seismic Stability and Deformation Analysis","short_title":"A 2D Seismic Stability and Deformation Analysis","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210677401,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ofZSpllTRvG9h7sRRWvnGF/mDhY="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210677401/A-2D-Seismic-Stability-and-Deformation-Analysis","top_badge":null},"210678233":{"type":"document","id":210678233,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210678233/149x198/7cf85026a3/1428925539?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210678233/298x396/bb5df63b97/1428925539?v=1","title":"Guia Matlab","short_title":"Guia Matlab","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210678233,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"OnIfZctKb3Ag/A7Wp7QEb2gsMhs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210678233/Guia-Matlab","top_badge":null},"210683181":{"type":"document","id":210683181,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683181/149x198/581e59e0a4/1400169540?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683181/298x396/54fbe8b6d7/1400169540?v=1","title":"TAREA 1_ Correlación q´c y Vs","short_title":"TAREA 1_ Correlación q´c y Vs","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210683181,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"rFBouUy1f8+w8HbfuNVR7rOZMNs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210683181/TAREA-1-Correlacion-q-c-y-Vs","top_badge":null},"210683399":{"type":"document","id":210683399,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683399/149x198/77559fb42e/1449503223?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/210683399/298x396/ccee034071/1449503223?v=1","title":"Aguilar Colombia","short_title":"Aguilar Colombia","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":210683399,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"AqV1Nwcr2zVMfwYJjzx8tQ1Zb7o="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/210683399/Aguilar-Colombia","top_badge":null},"213430826":{"type":"document","id":213430826,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/213430826/149x198/560531ce25/1408871955?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/213430826/298x396/d0bcf6efc2/1408871955?v=1","title":"Triaxial Test","short_title":"Triaxial Test","author":"sipil2009","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":213430826,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"qBujpakj/1bFN3RvPlHS3JmlJ4w="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/presentation/213430826/Triaxial-Test","top_badge":null},"235248852":{"type":"document","id":235248852,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/235248852/149x198/296218772f/1406521746?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/235248852/298x396/71856d06aa/1406521746?v=1","title":"Mathcad - Trinity Bearing Capacity_mdk","short_title":"Mathcad - Trinity Bearing Capacity_mdk","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":235248852,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"kiZl8xyCiwM8zS2KAM6QSD4PGlg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/235248852/Mathcad-Trinity-Bearing-Capacity-mdk","top_badge":null},"236194097":{"type":"document","id":236194097,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/236194097/149x198/b64d0c7e89/1407469126?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/236194097/298x396/3485505560/1407469126?v=1","title":"Canterbury Technical Guidance Foundations Part c","short_title":"Canterbury Technical Guidance Foundations Part c","author":"Ran Wang","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":236194097,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"V3g+kBCcxcLjCtEuuXqyO7HiN3o="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/236194097/Canterbury-Technical-Guidance-Foundations-Part-c","top_badge":null},"241866732":{"type":"document","id":241866732,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/241866732/149x198/6285bb1539/1412403982?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/241866732/298x396/198a2a28c3/1412403982?v=1","title":"Engineering Geology Volume 28 Issue 1-2 1990 [Doi 10.1016%2F0013-7952%2890%2990041-x] Jawad S. Al-Sulaimi; Mohammad a. Mollah; Muneer a. Matti -- Geotechnical Properties of Calcrete Soil (Gatch) in Kuwait","short_title":"Engineering Geology Volume 28 Issue 1-2 1990 [Doi 10.1016%2F0013-7952%2890%2990041-x] Jawad S. Al-Sulaimi; Mohammad a. Mollah; Muneer a. Matti -- Geotechnical Properties of Calcrete Soil (Gatch) in Kuwait","author":"Joe Armanda","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":241866732,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"ugnxk7w1ek+h8iZGSl4eKTxgdjk="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/241866732/Engineering-Geology-Volume-28-Issue-1-2-1990-Doi-10-1016-2F0013-7952-2890-2990041-x-Jawad-S-Al-Sulaimi-Mohammad-a-Mollah-Muneer-a-Matti-Geot","top_badge":null},"242898993":{"type":"document","id":242898993,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/242898993/149x198/f522737c84/1520880387?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/242898993/298x396/77e8ab1dae/1520880387?v=1","title":"Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete With Strut-And-tie Models (Sp-208 Aci)","short_title":"Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete With Strut-And-tie Models (Sp-208 Aci)","author":"mamandawe","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":242898993,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"dlUDAy9hhAQSoDeNO69rZj8u90M="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/242898993/Examples-for-the-Design-of-Structural-Concrete-With-Strut-And-tie-Models-Sp-208-Aci","top_badge":null},"258674889":{"type":"document","id":258674889,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258674889/149x198/d188ae567a/1426307761?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258674889/298x396/859a8e6093/1426307761?v=1","title":"01. Perforadora de Arrastre","short_title":"01. Perforadora de Arrastre","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":258674889,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"gDhdLuiHSZeQYHBsAmdPNtkrEvg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/258674889/01-Perforadora-de-Arrastre","top_badge":null},"258675302":{"type":"document","id":258675302,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258675302/149x198/d492b5de29/1461407915?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/258675302/298x396/228f5f5166/1461407915?v=1","title":"Plan de Desarrollo (Metepec)","short_title":"Plan de Desarrollo (Metepec)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":258675302,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"Bg1zvCp6vCv0X8FLv/3Ec0+WjHs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/258675302/Plan-de-Desarrollo-Metepec","top_badge":null},"260277731":{"type":"document","id":260277731,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/260277731/149x198/8af41f81ea/1427637015?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/260277731/298x396/cbd24a7a1b/1427637015?v=1","title":"Foundation General","short_title":"Foundation General","author":"thakrarhits","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":260277731,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"cATDXu01AsCXS9klSlUGGkinOqU="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/260277731/Foundation-General","top_badge":null},"265556733":{"type":"document","id":265556733,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/265556733/149x198/a17041acc2/1431805335?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/265556733/298x396/3d00aec4a6/1431805335?v=1","title":"EXP.11","short_title":"EXP.11","author":"Rakan Abdulrahman","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":265556733,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"BehTeWJYXDNTyYWR4TvYLneXZG0="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/265556733/EXP-11","top_badge":null},"268045103":{"type":"document","id":268045103,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/268045103/149x198/abf2e91cd1/1433782826?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/268045103/298x396/34b1da88f7/1433782826?v=1","title":"Katalog WF 2007","short_title":"Katalog WF 2007","author":"Ing István-Mátyás Tupper Máté","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":268045103,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"J/6KBdBgE8YHUgIHZuG6f1Gc+tA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/268045103/Katalog-WF-2007","top_badge":null},"269655773":{"type":"document","id":269655773,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/269655773/149x198/be5943feed/1435226522?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/269655773/298x396/19109b20ad/1435226522?v=1","title":"Design Risk of Ground Improvement Methods Including Rigid Inclusions W.wehr M. Topolnicki W.sondermann 2012 (1)","short_title":"Design Risk of Ground Improvement Methods Including Rigid Inclusions W.wehr M. Topolnicki W.sondermann 2012 (1)","author":"anar","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":269655773,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"4aS0xNruW3maLn8MiIhVj+wDPvM="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/269655773/Design-Risk-of-Ground-Improvement-Methods-Including-Rigid-Inclusions-W-wehr-M-Topolnicki-W-sondermann-2012-1","top_badge":null},"271645963":{"type":"document","id":271645963,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271645963/149x198/5dc7e12fc9/1436960767?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271645963/298x396/4a05ca7631/1436960767?v=1","title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","short_title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":271645963,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"tROnnz/FKjaSZ6RG9r2Mu9n1JT8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/271645963/Pyre-Ese-Bay-Mud","top_badge":null},"271646220":{"type":"document","id":271646220,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646220/149x198/85e8702823/1436961022?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646220/298x396/a55609be3e/1436961022?v=1","title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","short_title":"Pyre Ese Bay Mud","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":271646220,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"SEtuJEjl0WVIsn1tc7dO3kqT1ZE="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/271646220/Pyre-Ese-Bay-Mud","top_badge":null},"271646343":{"type":"document","id":271646343,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646343/149x198/db9a15f4c4/1436961128?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/271646343/298x396/c5fffa720a/1436961128?v=1","title":"01.- Carta Geológico-Minera (Estado de BC)","short_title":"01.- Carta Geológico-Minera (Estado de BC)","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":271646343,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"+UOOL4Ve4zF0n7Y5k3rV3/uv/1g="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/271646343/01-Carta-Geologico-Minera-Estado-de-BC","top_badge":null},"275969404":{"type":"document","id":275969404,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/275969404/149x198/032ccd893f/1440470073?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/275969404/298x396/e243fafd41/1440470073?v=1","title":"01. Instructions to Authors Word11","short_title":"01. Instructions to Authors Word11","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":275969404,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"XgoYwncrYODEID8O2SMYw5VM/tQ="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/275969404/01-Instructions-to-Authors-Word11","top_badge":null},"295099603":{"type":"document","id":295099603,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295099603/149x198/832b623b7d/1452509034?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295099603/298x396/5d255f04b6/1452509034?v=1","title":"2.-Susie-Gourvenec_SUT-presentation_for-website.pdf","short_title":"2.-Susie-Gourvenec_SUT-presentation_for-website.pdf","author":"Senthil","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":295099603,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"hfVhU3kA9sJ7zLPdGy7uut01CUM="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/295099603/2-Susie-Gourvenec-SUT-presentation-for-website-pdf","top_badge":null},"295750481":{"type":"document","id":295750481,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295750481/149x198/641432df9c/1493107365?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/295750481/298x396/19be5c20a7/1493107365?v=1","title":"L. E. Reese, Analysis and Design of Shallow and Deep Foundations, 2006","short_title":"L. E. Reese, Analysis and Design of Shallow and Deep Foundations, 2006","author":"Karim Abousselham","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":295750481,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"JHaJAyxKpxgF/gmDToP23/h+teA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/doc/295750481/L-E-Reese-Analysis-and-Design-of-Shallow-and-Deep-Foundations-2006","top_badge":null},"304928224":{"type":"document","id":304928224,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/304928224/149x198/922d0b1a23/1458099798?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/304928224/298x396/fa84fffb69/1458099798?v=1","title":"Sid698 (Norma Patricia) Flujo de agua","short_title":"Sid698 (Norma Patricia) Flujo de agua","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":304928224,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"h6/y4p6ecEHvASmZgyR1ZfGLghA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/304928224/Sid698-Norma-Patricia-Flujo-de-agua","top_badge":null},"321130832":{"type":"document","id":321130832,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/321130832/149x198/f4517edb62/1471176647?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/321130832/298x396/c3b4367a29/1471176647?v=1","title":"soft-2.pdf","short_title":"soft-2.pdf","author":"Ahmed Rushdy Towfeek","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":321130832,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"tmzLRoHxyby74XYi6vBHZLz0QOs="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/321130832/soft-2-pdf","top_badge":null},"326589723":{"type":"document","id":326589723,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/326589723/149x198/7009e2614d/1540295808?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/326589723/298x396/cf1884d9f2/1540295808?v=1","title":"BS EN ISO 22282-3_2012 Geotechnical investigation and testing. Geohydraulic testing.pdf","short_title":"BS EN ISO 22282-3_2012 Geotechnical investigation and testing. Geohydraulic testing.pdf","author":"Om Bun","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":326589723,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"EFcNYL3yPPEq/YATy/3xGkl9Tgw="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/326589723/BS-EN-ISO-22282-3-2012-Geotechnical-investigation-and-testing-Geohydraulic-testing-pdf","top_badge":null},"327395592":{"type":"document","id":327395592,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/327395592/149x198/67325bf487/1476329925?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/327395592/298x396/8c1cf2405d/1476329925?v=1","title":"Gabion Design 24 Des 2015","short_title":"Gabion Design 24 Des 2015","author":"coreteam","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":327395592,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"diEifiohHiaF84wmj/HXhptc4T4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/327395592/Gabion-Design-24-Des-2015","top_badge":null},"328819244":{"type":"document","id":328819244,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/328819244/149x198/93c9c7df71/1477388916?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/328819244/298x396/9ab2f86cf8/1477388916?v=1","title":"pubAnnu","short_title":"pubAnnu","author":"Mahendiran Raju","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":328819244,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"mQhbfi4/v9xrbVqtWY8dNLLtN0o="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/328819244/pubAnnu","top_badge":null},"331788340":{"type":"document","id":331788340,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/331788340/149x198/92afb17422/1479713989?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/331788340/298x396/f6360a017c/1479713989?v=1","title":"05 Chapter 2","short_title":"05 Chapter 2","author":"Tri Aryanto","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":331788340,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"3Czj/fW5a0lbD1+1bX5JpAH7MDQ="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/331788340/05-Chapter-2","top_badge":null},"336133428":{"type":"document","id":336133428,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336133428/149x198/482686b491/1484019471?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336133428/298x396/11c8f719eb/1484019471?v=1","title":"Jefferies_TRB2007.pdf","short_title":"Jefferies_TRB2007.pdf","author":"jcaz","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":336133428,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"7csYMV3h4DHZtyO8tKedTDavcr4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/336133428/Jefferies-TRB2007-pdf","top_badge":null},"336287302":{"type":"document","id":336287302,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336287302/149x198/c830ec53a8/1484153396?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/336287302/298x396/2b900bf85e/1484153396?v=1","title":"determination of soil paramteres","short_title":"determination of soil paramteres","author":"Mois Daniel","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":336287302,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"OlitIT8oD5xSezotHHSg0NjfGLo="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/336287302/determination-of-soil-paramteres","top_badge":null},"338840322":{"type":"document","id":338840322,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/338840322/149x198/5cf91dfc1c/1510883395?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/338840322/298x396/d7b2612175/1510883395?v=1","title":"Software to Compute Pile Load Capacity in Case of Variable Soil Stratification.","short_title":"Software to Compute Pile Load Capacity in Case of Variable Soil Stratification.","author":"IJAR Journal","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":338840322,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"jmk/99CNLNdpaFZHJWxpdixBuW8="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/338840322/Software-to-Compute-Pile-Load-Capacity-in-Case-of-Variable-Soil-Stratification","top_badge":null},"342451021":{"type":"document","id":342451021,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/342451021/149x198/9832abf8e5/1490021406?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/342451021/298x396/92669fa41a/1490021406?v=1","title":"Plaxis Products 2010 Eng","short_title":"Plaxis Products 2010 Eng","author":"Ari Sentani","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":342451021,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"HwBwjMFYGqLe4YYq+o0lGxGxOKA="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/342451021/Plaxis-Products-2010-Eng","top_badge":null},"369135617":{"type":"document","id":369135617,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/369135617/149x198/b04b507e1d/1515961289?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/369135617/298x396/e1e9254620/1515961289?v=1","title":"Degradation Characteristics of Shear Strength of Joints in Three Rock Types Due to Cyclic Freezing and Thawing","short_title":"Degradation Characteristics of Shear Strength of Joints in Three Rock Types Due to Cyclic Freezing and Thawing","author":"Albert Pontus","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":369135617,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"nsa9KeFUdB2U4L+0MaKk4OeU5hg="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/369135617/Degradation-Characteristics-of-Shear-Strength-of-Joints-in-Three-Rock-Types-Due-to-Cyclic-Freezing-and-Thawing","top_badge":null},"377028306":{"type":"document","id":377028306,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/377028306/149x198/b8341e3fc4/1524390738?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/377028306/298x396/a4066d5081/1524390738?v=1","title":"371572207","short_title":"371572207","author":"rnelly","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":377028306,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"jMyr0F5p7LFkUcLut6D2NJNL9hY="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/377028306/371572207","top_badge":null},"381731335":{"type":"document","id":381731335,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-1-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/381731335/149x198/b73153fdc6/1528917397?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/381731335/298x396/5031b77b87/1528917397?v=1","title":"11.pdf","short_title":"11.pdf","author":"Mrutyunjaya Behera","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":381731335,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"/OQ8UWZPfmeEWlS0zGaRLAKTrSI="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/381731335/11-pdf","top_badge":null},"385573752":{"type":"document","id":385573752,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/385573752/149x198/4e326e3f02/1533572867?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/385573752/298x396/1c2f0868ee/1533572867?v=1","title":"SOIL_MECH_CHAPTER_1.pptx;filename_= UTF-8__SOIL MECH CHAPTER 1-1.pptx","short_title":"SOIL_MECH_CHAPTER_1.pptx;filename_= UTF-8__SOIL MECH CHAPTER 1-1.pptx","author":"Jonniel De Guzman","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":385573752,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"QWCN+qSYl1M5dhDQLIqAgDpvTC4="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/presentation/385573752/SOIL-MECH-CHAPTER-1-pptx-filename-UTF-8-SOIL-MECH-CHAPTER-1-1-pptx","top_badge":null},"387987510":{"type":"document","id":387987510,"thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/387987510/149x198/3668eef98a/1536243595?v=1","retina_thumb_url":"https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/document/387987510/298x396/ab1b080bb0/1536243595?v=1","title":"det2101.pdf","short_title":"det2101.pdf","author":"Anonymous LftmCNmw","tracking":{"object_type":"document","object_id":387987510,"track":"flattened_recommender","doc_uuid":"NuMAr8wF8TW6+BWHKLJaAIo+G2I="},"url":"https://www.scribd.com/document/387987510/det2101-pdf","top_badge":null}}},"seo_roadblock_props_path":"/doc-page/seo-roadblock-props/201366438","signup_context":null,"toolbar":{"search_path":"/search-4gen?allowed_pages=1%2C2%2C3%2C18%2C19%2C20&auth_token=5ha%2FYASk6bOWtEL1iRcS%2FMuTQYY%3D&authenticity_token=A5Zr6gxDMw7tc7sLQcxlVEZ4VPZ7oLb%2B0tWfVWRhfR%2FrUp%2FyHHL2bCdED1ogKIXA9IMxX0dLUHZA2EkG4VwBmw%3D%3D&expires=1540914782&wordDocumentId=201366438&wordUploadId=205620907"},"renewal_nag_props":null}-->