Monotonic and dilatory pore-pressure decay

during piezocone tests in clay

S.E. Burns and P.W. Mayne
Abstract: During a pause in cone penetration in fine-grained soils, pore-water pressure dissipation tests are performed
to evaluate the coefficient of consolidation. For standard piezocones with shoulder filter elements, soft clays and silts
show a monotonically decreasing response with time; however, dissipation tests performed in heavily overconsolidated
silts and clays show dilatory behavior, with the pore-pressure behavior increasing from the initial measured value to a
maximum, and then decreasing to hydrostatic values. This paper presents a theoretical framework which combines
cavity-expansion theory and critical-state soil mechanics with an analytical solution to the radial consolidation equation.
The method is able to describe the pore-pressure response curve for dissipation tests performed in soils which
demonstrate either monotonically decreasing or dilatory pore-pressure behavior.
Key words: cavity expansion, consolidation, piezocone, pore pressure.
Rsum : Durant une pose lors de la pntration du cne dans les grains fins, des essais de dissipation des pressions
interstitielles sont raliss dans le but dvaluer le coefficient de consolidation. Pour les pizocnes standard avec les
lments poreux au-dessus du cne, les argiles et les silts montrent une diminution monotonique en fonction du temps;
cependant, les essais de dissipation raliss dans les silts et argiles fortement surconsolids, montrent un comportement
en dilatation, avec un accroissement de pressions interstitielles partir de la valeur initiale mesure jusqu un
maximum, suivi dune diminution jusquaux valeurs hydrostatiques. Cet article prsente un cadre thorique qui
combine la thorie dexpansion de cavit et la mcanique des sols ltat critique avec une solution analytique de
lquation de consolidation radiale. La mthode peut dcrire la courbe de rponse de pression interstitielle pour des
essais de dissipation raliss dans des sols qui montrent soit un comportement de pression interstitielle en dilatation,
soit dcroissant de faon monotonique.
Mots cls : expansion de cavit, consolidation, pizocne, pression interstitielle.
[Traduit par la Rdaction] B urns and M ayne 1073
Introduction
Piezocone penetration tests are a widely utilized technol-
ogy for the in situ investigation of soil deposits, primarily
for profiling stratigraphy and for distinguishing fine-grained
clayey soils from coarse-grained sandy soils. In addition,
pore-pressure dissipation tests, which are performed during a
pause in the cone penetration, yield information about the
coefficient of consolidation and permeability of a soil de-
posit. Dissipation tests performed in soft, fine-grained silts
and clays measure monotonically decreasing pore-water
pressures, similar to the behavior observed in the standard
laboratory one-dimensional consolidation test. However, dis-
sipation tests performed in heavily overconsolidated silts
and clays often record dilatory pore-water pressure behavior,
showing a temporary increase in pore-water pressure with
time followed by a decrease and return to hydrostatic pres-
sure. Although several consolidationtime models are cur-
rently available to describe the dissipation behavior of soft
clays, none to date has been able to rationally explain the
dilatory behavior of stiff clays.
This paper presents a theoretical framework based on cavity-
expansion concepts and critical-state soil mechanics for
evaluating the pore-pressure behavior observed in a range of
soil consistencies, from normally to lightly to heavily
overconsolidated fine-grained soils. The pore-pressure decay
with time next to the piezocone is modeled using an analyti-
cal solution to the consolidation equation to evaluate the in
situ value of the coefficient of consolidation of a soil de-
posit.
Generation of excess pore pressure
The insertion of a cone penetrometer, or any penetrating
probe, into a soil deposit causes changes in the pore-fluid
conditions surrounding the penetrometer. For soundings in
saturated fine-grained soils with low hydraulic conductivity,
these changes occur under undrained conditions. The alter-
ation in pore-water pressure results from a combination of
the changes in the octahedral normal stress,
oct
, which re-
sults from the displacement of soil and fluid by the penetrat-
ing cone, and in the octahedral shear stress,
oct
, which is
caused by the shear deformation of the soil adjacent to the
cone body.
Can. Geotech. J. 35: 10631073 (1998) 1998 NRC Canada
1063
Received January 27, 1998. Accepted July 3, 1998.
S.E. Burns. Department of Civil Engineering, Thornton Hall,
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 229032442,
U.S.A.
P.W. Mayne. School of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
303320355, U.S.A.
Under the cone tip, the largest effect on the magnitude of
pore-water pressure is due to the changes in mean normal
stress, and the relative changes in shear stress are small
(<20%) in comparison (Baligh 1986). However, along the
shaft of the cone body, the shear stresses become a signifi-
cant portion of the induced excess pore pressure because the
large octahedral normal stresses acting on the cone tip un-
dergo stress relief at this location. Evidence suggests that the
stress regime directly behind the cone tip is more signifi-
cantly affected by the shear stress than the area located di-
rectly beneath the cone tip (Wroth 1984; Campanella et al.
1986).
The total magnitude of pore pressure measured in the
piezocone test includes not only the excess pore pressure
generated due to changes in the mean octahedral normal
stress and in the octahedral shear stress, but also the hydro-
static pore pressure (u
o
) in the soil profile, and can be repre-
sented as follows:
[1] u
m
= u
o
+ u
oct
+ u
shear
where u
m
is the measured pore pressure; u
oct
is the excess
pore pressure due to changes in the mean octahedral normal
stress; u
shear
is the excess pore pressure due to changes in
the octahedral shear stress; and u
o
=
w
h
w
, where
w
is the
unit weight of water, and h
w
is the height to the water table
above the reference depth z. If the prevailing groundwater
conditions are known, the hydrostatic term can be subtracted
which yields the following equation for measured excess
pore pressure:
[2] u
m
= u
m
u
o
= u
oct
+ u
shear
Although the contributions of the individual components
in a cone penetration test can be distinguished in a theoreti-
cal sense, note that the field measurement of penetration
pore pressure is a total magnitude response and the compo-
nents (u
oct
and u
shear
) cannot be measured separately dur-
ing a dissipation test.
Pore-pressure dissipation behavior
When cone penetration is halted, the induced excess pore
pressure will dissipate to the hydrostatic value in time. A
common pore-pressure dissipation record shows magnitudes
of pore-water pressure monotonically decreasing with time
from the initial reading, similar to the behavior seen during
one-dimensional consolidation tests, which is the same be-
havior observed in normally to lightly overconsolidated
clays when the pore-pressure filter is located on the cone
face (u
1
), behind the shoulder (u
2
), or behind the friction
sleeve (u
3
). Figure 1a shows examples of these responses for
both u
1
and u
2
measurements in soft Bothkennar clay, Scot-
land (Jacobs and Coutts 1992). The same type of behavior is
observed in heavily overconsolidated clays when the pore-
pressure filter element is located on the cone tip or face po-
sition. However, when measuring pore-pressure dissipation
in heavily overconsolidated clays with the filter element lo-
cated at the cone shoulder (u
2
) or behind the friction sleeve
(u
3
), the pore pressures often exhibit dilatory behavior, by
first increasing in magnitude, and then subsequently decreas-
ing with time to hydrostatic values. An example of dilatory
response is shown in Fig. 1b for overconsolidated desiccated
clay in Baton Rouge, Louisiana (Chen and Mayne 1994).
The shoulder position is now considered the standard for
piezocone measurements of pore-water pressure because of
the necessity in correcting cone tip resistances to their full
value (Lunne et al. 1986; Virely et al. 1995). Thus, the im-
portance of describing the response of u
2
readings is para-
mount. Additionally, proper saturation of the porous filter
element must be ensured because partially saturated filters
can exhibit sluggish response that may mimic the dilatory
response observed in overconsolidated clays.
Review of existing soil models for pore-
pressure dissipation
Many approaches have been developed to model the
change in pore pressure with time in order to obtain an in
situ evaluation of the coefficient of consolidation. A review
of these is given in Table 1. Previous solutions to the radial
consolidation problem include those formulated from simple
undrained cavity expansion (Torstensson 1977), cavity ex-
pansion with a shear-component (Battaglio et al. 1981), the
strain-path method (Baligh 1985; Baligh and Levadoux
1986; Levadoux and Baligh 1986), the finite-element
method (Houlsby and Teh 1988; Teh and Houlsby 1991),
and dislocation theory (Elsworth 1990; 1993). In all cases,
those solutions indicate a monotonic decay of pore-water
pressure with time, until equilibrium conditions are
achieved. However, many experimentalists have noted dila-
tory response (increase in magnitude, followed by a decrease
to hydrostatic) in overconsolidated materials (Davidson
1985; Lutenegger and Kabir 1988; Chen and Mayne 1994).
1998 NRC Canada
1064 C an.G eotech.J.Vol.35,1998
Fig. 1. Pore-water pressure dissipation response for (a) lightly
overconsolidated clay, and (b) heavily overconsolidated clay.
To account for the dilatory response, an empirical offset
method was suggested by Sully and Campanella (1994)
whereby the curves were shifted to the maximum value of
measured pore pressure and then subjected to the monotonic
decay solution of Teh (1987). A theoretical basis has not
been suggested until now.
Model development
The development of the model presented herein is based
on the premise that the excess pore pressures which develop
during the penetration of a probe are due to changes in both
normal and shear stresses. Compression-induced pore pres-
sures from increasing normal stresses are always positive;
however, shear-induced pore-water pressure may be either
positive (contractive) or negative (dilatant). Under the cone
tip, the shear stress component can be derived from stress
path analysis and always has positive values (Chen and
Mayne 1994); additionally, the magnitude of the normal-
induced response is often much larger than that of the shear-
induced response under the cone tip. However, along the
shaft, the normal- and shear-induced components can be
comparable in magnitude. While the normal component will
always remain positive, the shear-induced component can be
positive at low overconsolidation ratios (OCRs) or negative
at high OCRs.
The zone of influence of the octahedral normal stress is a
function of the rigidity index (I
r
= G/s
u
, where G is the un-
drained shear modulus (typically, assumed G
50
), and s
u
is the
undrained shear strength) of the soil and is large (approxi-
1998 NRC Canada
B urns and M ayne 1065
Reference Cavity type Soil model Initial pore pressure, u
i
Comments
Sderberg 1962 Cylindrical,
radius R
Elastoplastic u/u
i
= R/r Consolidation surrounding
driven piles; finite
difference
Torstensson 1975, 1977 Cylindrical;
spherical
Elastoplastic u
i
= 2s
u
ln(r
p
/r); u
i
=
4s
u
ln(r
p
/r), where r
p
is the
radius of the plasticized zone
No shear stresses; finite
difference
Randolph and Wroth 1979b Cylindrical Elastoplastic u
i
= 2s
u
ln(r
p
/r) Consolidation surrounding
driven piles; analytical
Baligh and Levadoux 1980;
Levadoux and Baligh 1986
Piezocone model Nonlinear From strain-path method Total stress soil model
Battaglio et al. 1981 Cylindrical;
spherical
Elastoplastic u
i
= 2s
u
ln(r
p
/r); u
i
=
4s
u
ln(r
p
/r)
Shear by empirical method;
finite difference
Jones and Van Zyl 1981 Experimental Empirical
approach
Measured Correlation between measured
time for 50% consolidation
t
50
and oedometer-
measured values of c
h
Kavvadas 1982 Piezocone model Nonlinear From strain-path method Effective stressstrain model
Senneset et al. 1982 Cylindrical Elastoplastic u
i
= 2s
u
ln(r
p
/r)
Tumay et al. 1982 Piezocone model Linear From strain-path method Experimental data
Gupta and Davidson 1986 Piezocone model Elastoplastic Modified cavity expansion;
dissipation as cone penetrates
Isotropic and anisotropic
Soares et al. 1987 Piezocone model Nonlinear Corrected by visual examina-
tion and regression analysis
Whittle 1987 Piezocone model Nonlinear From strain-path method Effective stressstrain model
Houlsby and Teh 1988;
Teh and Houlsby 1991
Piezocone model Nonlinear Predicted by large-strain, finite-
element analysis and strain-
path method
Finite difference
Elsworth 1990, 1993 Point-dislocation
theory
Elastoplastic From point-dislocation theory Not applicable for u
2
measurements
Aubeny 1992 Piezocone model Nonlinear From strain-path method Coupled consolidation; effec-
tive stressstrain model
Sully and Campanella 1994 Piezocone model Nonlinear Predicted by large-strain, finite-
element analysis and strain-
path method
Empirical time shift to u
max
for overconsolidated (OC)
dissipation
Burns and Mayne 1995 Spherical Elastoplastic u
oct
= 4s
u
ln(r
p
/r); u
shear
=

vo
[1 (OCR/2)
0.8
]
Incorporates shear stresses;
models OC dissipation;
finite difference
Burns 1997 Spherical Elastoplastic u
oct
= 4s
u
ln(r
p
/r); u
shear
=

vo
[1 (OCR/2)
0.8
]
Incorporates shear stresses;
models OC dissipation;
analytical
Note: Modified after Lunne et al. (1997) and Jamiolkowski (1995).
Table 1. Historical development of piezocone dissipation modeling.
mately 1020 diameters or 350700 mm), in comparison
with the zone of influence of the shear stress (approximately
110 mm). In contrast, the zone affected by interface shear
stresses is limited to a thin annulus next to the body of the
cone penetrometer. Because the volume affected by the nor-
mal stress is much larger than that affected by the shear
stress, the dissipation of the shear-induced pressures will oc-
cur more rapidly than that of the normal-induced pore pres-
sures.
The core of the model uses cavity-expansion theory to
represent the octahedral normal component of excess pore
pressure in combination with Modified CamClay to quan-
tify both the shear-induced component of excess pore pres-
sure and the variation of the undrained shear strength as a
function of OCR. In this simple model formulation, no at-
tempt has been made to incorporate strain fields (Acar and
Tumay 1986) or strain paths (Baligh 1986) which would
lead to a more rigorously correct, but significantly more
complicated model formulation. The hybrid cavity-
expansion critical-state formulation has successfully repre-
sented penetration pore-water pressures in a variety of clays
with consistencies ranging from soft to stiff to hard (Mayne
1991, 1993; Lunne et al. 1997). The model relies on an ana-
lytical solution to the radial consolidation equation
[3]

u
t
c
u
r
c
r
u
r
h
h
2
2
where c
h
is the horizontal coefficient of consolidation, u is
the pore pressure, r is the radius, and t is the time. The
method is a rapid, compact solution and is easily pro-
grammed into a personal computer. The procedure to model
both lightly and heavily overconsolidated clay dissipation
behavior with time is outlined below.
The normal-induced pore pressures used in the model
were based on derivations of cavity-expansion theory
(Bishop et al. 1945; Vesic 1972). According to the concepts
of undrained cavity expansion, the following equations are
applicable for the generated pore pressure u in cone pene-
tration testing (Torstensson 1977):
[4] u s
G
s

4
3
u
u
spherical cavity ln
[5] u s
G
s

u
u
cylindrical cavity ln
Development of shear-induced pore pressures in un-
drained loading is evaluated using a constant p stress path
for isotropically consolidated soil in Cambridge qp space
(Wroth 1984), where p is the mean effective stress, and q is
the deviator stress. The shear-induced pore stress can then
be expressed as the difference between the initial and final
effective mean stresses:
[6] u p p
shear o f

where p
o
is the initial mean principle effective stress, and p
f
is the mean principle effective stress at failure. For the pur-
poses of this study, p
o
is assumed equal to the effective ver-
tical stress
vo
(Wroth 1988), an approximation that neglects
the effect of initial anisotropic stress state.
According to Modified CamClay, the final mean princi-
ple effective stress can be represented by the following:
[7]

_
,

f vo
OCR
2

is the plastic volumetric strain ratio = 1 C

s
/C
c
, where C
s
is the swelling index, and C
c
is the compression index. Data
compiled by Mayne (1988) indicate that = 0.80 is appro-
priate for many natural clays. For estimation of the shear-
induced pore pressures along the cone shaft at the type 2 po-
sition, a value of = 0.80 is used in this representation.
The linear partial differential equation that describes ra-
dial consolidation surrounding a piezocone was solved to
obtain an analytical solution for use in the model. Prior solu-
tions to similar problems have related to heat-flow analysis
and to consolidation surrounding driven piles (Carslaw and
Jaeger 1959; Randolph and Wroth 1979b). Derivation of the
two different solutions, using the conditions imposed by
spherical and cylindrical cavity expansion, is given in a sep-
arate paper.
1
In its most simple form, the dissipation model requires in-
put values for the effective vertical stress (
vo
), the hydro-
static pore-water pressure (u
o
), cone radius (r), rigidity index
(I
r
), OCR, and effective stress friction angle () of the soil.
The undrained shear strength was represented by the critical-
state Modified CamClay model and corresponds to triaxial
compression loading in terms of effective stresses (Wroth
and Houlsby 1985)
[8]
s M
u
vo
OCR

_
,

2 2

where M is the slope of the critical-state line:

[9] M


6
3
sin
sin
Although isotropic triaxial compression is not necessarily
the most appropriate mode for both the octahedral and shear
components next to a penetrometer, the general trends are
indicative and representative of soil behavior, particularly
contractive to dilatant pore-pressure response.
The undrained shear strength ratio (s
u
/
vo
) increases as a
function of overconsolidation ratio, which is reasonable and
consistent, except in cases where the clay becomes fissured.
Fissures can occur at many scales within the soil, each of
which will affect the measurement of properties differently.
Based on experimental data reported by Bishop (1972) and
Skempton et al. (1969), a strength-reduction factor of 0.5
was chosen as appropriate for the very heavily fissured
clays. However, it is noted that additional work in quantify-
ing the strength-reduction factor due to fissuring is war-
ranted.
The size of the induced plasticized zone generated by the
cone sounding was calculated according to spherical cavity
expansion. The rigidity index affects both the size of the
1998 NRC Canada
1066 C an.G eotech.J.Vol.35,1998
1
S.E. Burns and P.W. Mayne. Analytical Solutions for Consolidation Surrounding Cone Penetrometers. In preparation.
plasticized zone and the increase in excess pore pressure due
to changes in octahedral normal stresses. However, the ap-
propriate value of the rigidity index is ill-defined and gener-
ally quite difficult to assess due to the uncertainty associated
with estimation of the stress level during testing (Mayne
1995). Consequently, the rigidity index was taken as an in-
put parameter and multiple dissipation curves are presented
based on chosen values for the rigidity index. Alternately,
when the initial generated pore pressure is measured, the ri-
gidity index can be estimated because all other parameters
(u
meas
,
vo
, , OCR, and u
o
) are known.
The next step in the model was to calculate the excess
pore pressure generated due to cone penetration. The octahe-
dral normal component of the pore pressure was calculated
using spherical cavity expansion. In reality, the zone sur-
rounding the type 2 filter is neither completely spherical nor
cylindrical, but represents a transitional area between the
two. Pore pressure was assumed to increase only within the
plastic zone; excess pore pressure outside the plastic zone
was set equal to zero.
Finally, the magnitude of shear-induced pore pressures for
a piezocone with shoulder filter element was calculated us-
ing the concepts of CamClay (Mayne and Bachus 1988):
[10]

u
shear vo
OCR

_
,

1
]
1
1
1
2
The increases in excess pore pressure due to changes in
shear stress were assumed to decrease linearly with distance
away from the cone body. The sum of the squared errors, as
discussed in detail later, was used to determine the most ap-
propriate thickness of the shear zone. For the cases exam-
ined, the shear zone width was set equal to 2 mm.
The final form of the equation for calculating the gener-
ated excess pore pressure is as follows:
[11] u
M
I
m vo r
OCR

_
,

1
]
1
1
4
3 2 2

ln
+

_
,

1
]
1
1
+
vo o
OCR
at 1
2
0

u t
[12] u
m
= u
o
at t = t
100
The initial distribution of the excess pore pressure within
the plastic zone was used as the initial condition to solve the
one-dimensional, uncoupled partial differential consolidation
equation for radial drainage. While the initial magnitude of
the octahedral induced normal stress was calculated using
spherical cavity expansion, the consolidation equation for ra-
dial drainage corresponding to cylindrical cavity expansion
was used to evaluate the change in pore pressure as a func-
tion of time. The hybrid cavity-expansion solution was used
because spherical cavity expansion provided the most accu-
rate evaluation of the initial generated pore pressure and evi-
dence suggests that radial drainage most strongly governs
consolidation surrounding a penetrating probe (Bjerrum and
Johannessen 1961; Koizumi and Ito 1967; Randolph and
Wroth 1979a).
Boundary conditions assume that there is no increase in
excess pore pressure outside the spherical cavity plastic zone
(u = 0) and that the cone body was an impermeable bound-
ary (Fig. 2). After the excess pore-pressure dissipation was
calculated, the values were added to the hydrostatic pore-
pressure value at that depth. This was done because the
1998 NRC Canada
B urns and M ayne 1067
Fig. 2. Zones affected by cone penetration. E, Youngs modulus; r
o
, cone radius; r
p
, radius of plasticized zone;
v, Poissons ratio.
1998 NRC Canada
1068 C an.G eotech.J.Vol.35,1998
piezocone measures total pore pressures (hydrostatic plus
excess).
The model was run iteratively with an input value of c
h
chosen for the initial run. Based on the results of the first it-
eration, a new value for c
h
was chosen until the deviation of
the predicted dissipation curve was at a minimum from the
actual measured dissipation curve as determined using the
sum of the squared errors. Previous versions of the model
used a finite-difference solution to the consolidation equa-
tion (Burns and Mayne 1995); however, an analytical solu-
tion was derived that required only 15 s of computer time
compared with approximately 1 h necessary for the finite-
Site
Depth
(m) OCR

I
r
(fit)
Piezoelement
data
(this study),
c
h
(mm
2
/s)
Lab-measured
c
v
(mm
2
/s)
Comments Reference
Bothkennar, U.K. 12.0 1.4 33 100 0.2 0.32 Soft clay Nash et al. 1992
Bothkennar, U.K. 12.0 1.4 33 100 0.2 0.080.13 Soft clay Jacobs and Coutts 1992
Drammen, Norway 19.5 1.1 34 100 0.2 0.531.52 Marine clay Lacasse and Lunne 1982
McDonald Farm, B.C. 20.0 1.1 35 200 1.9 1.85.5* Lean insensitive
clayey silt
Sully 1991
Saint Alban, Que. 4.6 1.2 27 200 0.6 0.30 Sensitive clay Roy et al. 1981
Amherst, Mass. 3.0 7.0 30.5 15 0.4 0.070.10* Crust of soft clay DeGroot and Lutenegger
1994; Lally 1993
Canons Park, U.K. 5.7 14.0 22.5 100 0.25 0.010.03* 102 mm pile in
London Clay
Jardine and Bond 1989
St. Lawrence Seaway,
N.Y.
6.1 3.5 30 50 0.3 0.250.80 Crust of soft clay Lutenegger and Kabir 1987
Taranto, Italy 9.0 26.0 28 200 0.4 0.100.25 Cemented clay Battaglio et al. 1986; Bruzzi
and Battaglio 1987
*Data reported by Robertson et al. (1992) in a review of methods of coefficient of consolidation prediction from dissipation testing.
Table 2. Comparison of model predictions and laboratory values for modeled sites.
Fig. 3. Model predictions in soft clay with monotonic pore-water dissipations for (a) Bothkennar, United Kingdom; (b) Drammen,
Norway; (c) McDonald Farm, British Columbia; and (d) Saint Alban, Quebec.
difference solution (Burns 1997).
Results from evaluated test sites
Documented pore-water pressure dissipation measurements
from piezocone soundings and instrumented driven pile test
sites in both normally consolidated to lightly overconsoli-
dated and heavily overconsolidated clays were chosen from
the literature for comparison with the prediction of the
model. Four soft clay sites which exhibited monotonically
decreasing dissipation curves and four stiff to hard clays that
exhibited dilatory pore-pressure behavior were chosen. A
listing of the eight sites with the input parameters used for
evaluation is given in Table 2. All model predictions of the
value of the coefficient of consolidation were performed by
minimizing the sum of the squared errors, and without prior
knowledge of either the laboratory-measured values or of
previously predicted field values.
Plots of the model results for the four lightly overcon-
solidated sites are shown in Figs. 3a3d. The Bothkennar
site (Fig. 3a) is a postglacial silty clay deposit of intermedi-
ate plasticity located in Scotland (experimental data from
Jacobs and Coutts 1992). The coefficient of consolidation
evaluated by the model was 0.2 mm
2
/s and the rigidity index
was 100. The Drammen deposit (Fig. 3b) is a low-plasticity,
low-sensitivity marine clay located in Norway (experimental
data from Lacasse and Lunne 1982). Model-estimated pa-
rameters were c
h
= 0.2 mm
2
/s and I
r
= 100. McDonald Farm
(Fig. 3b) is a test site in soft, normally consolidated clayey
silt located in British Columbia (experimental data from
Sully 1991) with a model-determined coefficient of consoli-
dation of 1.9 mm
2
/s and a rigidity index of 200. Saint Alban
(Fig. 3d) is a deposit of lightly overconsolidated sensitive
clay located in Quebec (experimental data from Roy et al.
1982). Evaluated parameters were c
h
= 0.6 mm
2
/s and I
r
=
200. In all four cases involving soft clays, the predicted
curves match well with the measured responses.
The model was also used to evaluate dilatory pore-
pressure response in heavily overconsolidated soils, with the
results shown in Figs. 4a4d. The Amherst dissipation test
(Fig. 4a) was performed in an upper desiccated crustal re-
gion of varved clay of low plasticity (experimental data from
Lally 1993). Model-estimated results were c
h
= 0.4 mm
2
/s
and I
r
= 15. Instrumented pile data from Canons Park,
United Kingdom, which exhibited dilatory pore-pressure re-
sponse were also modeled (Fig. 4b). The 102 mm diameter
driven pile was located in the heavily overconsolidated Lon-
don Clay (experimental data from Bond and Jardine 1991),
with model-evaluated results of c
h
= 0.25 mm
2
/s and I
r
=
100. The Saint Lawrence Seaway dissipation test (Fig. 4c)
was performed in the crust of a silty clay deposit in New
York (experimental data from A.J. Lutenegger, personal
communication, 1997). Slight dilatory pore-pressure re-
sponse was observed at this site; the model-estimated value
of the coefficient of consolidation was 0.3 mm
2
/s and the ri-
gidity index was 50. The Taranto deposit (Fig. 4d) is a
1998 NRC Canada
B urns and M ayne 1069
Fig. 4. Model predictions in hard clay with dilatory pore-water decays for (a) Amherst, Massachusetts; (b) Canons Park, United
Kingdom; (c) St. Lawrence Seaway, New York (SLS); and (d) Taranto, Italy.
heavily overconsolidated and cemented clay located in
southern Italy (experimental data from Bruzzi and Battaglio
1987). For this site, the determined parameters were c
h
=
0.4 mm
2
/s and I
r
= 200 and matched well with the measured
pore-water measurements.
Examination of the evaluated versus measured dissipation
curves shows that the model is able to estimate the dissipa-
tion curves for a shoulder position pore-pressure measure-
ment fairly well. The compilation of the coefficient of
consolidation data given in Table 2 shows that the value of
c
h
determined by the model is within range of the values of
the vertical coefficient of consolidation c
v
reported from lab-
oratory consolidation tests conducted on companion samples
taken at similar test depths. Note that the evaluation of the
coefficient of consolidation in piezocone testing occurs in
remolded soil, whereas the measurement in the laboratory
test does not. Additionally, the effects of soil sensitivity, age
of the deposit, and filter smearing might improve the predic-
tion if included. Additional examples of monotonic and dila-
tory responses are given by Burns (1997).
Error surfaces
A study was performed to identify the relative influence
of the model input parameters on the predicted results. Spe-
cifically, the error e
i
(or residual) was calculated between
each predicted and actual measurement using the following
definition (Santamarina and Fratta 1998):
[13] e y y
i i i

(meas) (pred)
where y
i
(meas)
is the measured value, and y
i
(pred)
is model-
predicted value. The error norm L
2
was then calculated as
the sum of the squared errors using the following equation:
[14]

L e
i
i
2
2
1 2

1
]
1
/
The best fit for the model parameters was then achieved
by varying one parameter until the error converged to a min-
imum. The L
2
error norm uses a least-squares minimization,
and assumes that the measured data follow a Gaussian distri-
bution. The input parameters which were varied included the
width of the shear zone, the coefficient of consolidation, the
rigidity index, the effective friction angle, and the OCR. The
error norms are plotted versus a reasonable operating range
of magnitude encountered in engineering practice.
Figures 5a and 5b show the resulting error norms caused
by changing the width of the zone of soil affected by the
shearing action due to the soil and penetrometer interaction
in a soft clay (Bothkennar) and in a hard clay (Taranto), re-
spectively. Each point on the graphs represents a different
run of the model. The results show clearly that the width of
the shear zone has little effect in the soft clay where the con-
tribution of shear stresses is less significant than in the stiff
clay. In the soft clay, the sum of the squared errors remained
essentially constant. However, the width of the shear zone in
1998 NRC Canada
1070 C an.G eotech.J.Vol.35,1998
Fig. 5. Error norm for the width of shear zone in (a) soft clay,
and (b) hard clay.
Fig. 6. Error norm for the effective stress friction angle in
(a) soft clay, and (b) hard clay.
the hard clay apparently had a more significant effect, espe-
cially as the width of the shear zone was increased over
2 mm. The calculated error norm reached a minimum at
2 mm, and increased as the width of the shear zone was in-
creased. Variation of the input parameters including the co-
efficient of consolidation and the rigidity index showed
similar trends.
The error norms were also calculated for the effective
friction angle and OCR, with the results for the friction an-
gle shown in Figs. 6a and 6b (similar trends were seen for
the OCR). Again, the data from the Bothkennar and Taranto
sites were used for comparison to show soft clay versus hard
clay responses. Of all the parameters examined for the hard
clays, the changes produced by these two parameters were
the most significant. The error norms for the friction angle
and OCR in the hard clay show steep gradients moving
away from the error minimum, showing that the model is
sensitive to the input value of these parameters. Similar to
the trends seen previously, the variation of the effective
stress angle and OCR are less significant for the soft clay,
producing a smaller level of error than was seen in the hard
clay for the same level of variation. The significant effect of
the effective stress friction angle and OCR makes the initial
evaluation of these parameters of critical importance in the
estimation of the coefficient of consolidation, primarily be-
cause they represent the undrained strength and initial pene-
tration pore-water pressure regime used in the evaluation.
Normalized dissipation data
The evaluated dissipation results can also be presented as
a series of normalized curves, similar to those given by Teh
and Houlsby (1991). Figures 7a7c show the normalized
dissipation curves estimated for values of equal to 20, 30,
and 40, respectively, all at I
r
= 100. The data are presented
as the measured pore pressure normalized to the initial mea-
sured value (u/u
i
). The coefficient of consolidation can be
evaluated from the normalized curves by the following:
[15] c
Tr
t
h

2
where T is the time factor. As seen in the figures, the lower
value of leads to more significant differences in behavior
for different values of OCR. This is because the lower value
of the friction angle leads to a smaller initial magnitude of
pore pressure, and a more rapid decay of the pressures when
the values are normalized to the initial value.
Conclusions
A hybrid cavity-expansion critical-state representation
of piezocone dissipation is presented as a rational interpreta-
tion of the coefficient of consolidation in clays and silts that
exhibit either monotonically decreasing or dilatory pore-
pressure response. The inclusion of components to account
for both the normal- and shear-induced pore-water pressures
provides a reasonable explanation for the initial drawdown
observed in the pore-pressure dissipation behavior of
overconsolidated soils. The utilization of an analytical solu-
tion for the consolidation equation provides a rapid and ro-
bust approach for the evaluation of pore pressure as a
function of time. The model developed in this study required
the input parameters of rigidity index, effective stress fric-
tion angle, overconsolidation ratio, effective vertical stress,
cone radius, and hydrostatic pore pressure; it was evaluated
at a variety of sites, ranging from consistencies of soft to
stiff clays, and gave estimates of the coefficient of consoli-
dation which were within range of the laboratory-measured
values. Further laboratory and field evaluation of the method
is ongoing.
1998 NRC Canada
B urns and M ayne 1071
Fig. 7. Normalized dissipation curves for u/u
i
versus time
factor T at different overconsolidation ratios (OCR) for effective
stress friction angles of (a) 20, (b) 30, and (c) 40.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of Na-
tional Science Foundation grant MSS 9257642 through
which this project was funded. Diego LoPresti, Alan
Lutenegger, and John Powell are thanked for their provision
of experimental data.
References
Acar, Y.B., and Tumay, M.T. 1986. Strain fields around cones in
steady penetration. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
112(2): 207213.
Aubeny, C.P. 1992. Rational interpretation of in situ tests in cohe-
sive soils. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Mass.
Baligh, M.M. 1985. Strain path method. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, 111(9): 11081136.
Baligh, M.M. 1986. Undrained deep penetration, II: pore pressures.
Gotechnique, 36(4): 487501.
Baligh, M.M., and Levadoux, J.N. 1980. Pore pressure dissipation
after cone penetration. Department of Civil Engineering, Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., Research
Report R80-11.
Baligh, M.M., and Levadoux, J.-N. 1986. Consolidation after un-
drained piezocone penetration. II: interpretation. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 112(7): 727745.
Battaglio, M., Jamiolkowski, M., Lancellotta, R., and Maniscalco,
R. 1981. Piezometer probe test in cohesive deposits. In Proceed-
ings, Cone Penetration Testing and Experience, American Soci-
ety of Civil Engineers, New York, pp. 264302.
Battaglio, M., Bruzzi, D., Jamiolkowski, M., and Lancellotta, R.
1986. Interpretation of CPTs and CPTUs: undrained penetra-
tion of saturated clays. In Proceedings of the 4th International
Geotechnical Seminar, Field Instrumentation and In-Situ Mea-
surements, Singapore, pp. 129156.
Bishop, A.W. 1972. Shear strength parameters for undisturbed and
remolded soil specimens. In Proceedings, Roscoe Memorial
Symposium, Cambridge University. Edited by R.H.G. Parry.
G.T. Foulis & Co. Ltd., Yeovil, U.K., pp. 3139.
Bishop, R.F., Hill, R., and Mott, N.F. 1945. The theory of indenta-
tion and hardness tests. Proceedings of the Physical Society,
London, 57(3): 147159.
Bjerrum, L., and Johannessen, I. 1961. Pore pressure resulting
from driving piles in soft clay. In Proceedings, Conference on
Pore Pressure and Suction in Soil. Butterworths, London,
pp. 108111.
Bond, A.J., and Jardine, R.J. 1991. Effects of installing displace-
ment piles in a high OCR clay. Gotechnique, 41(3): 341363.
Bruzzi, D., and Battaglio, M. 1987. Pore pressure measurements
during cone penetration tests. I quaderni dellISMES [Experi-
mental Institute for Models and Structures], Milan, Italy, No.
229.
Burns, S.E. 1997. Development, adaptation, and interpretation of
cone penetrometer sensors for geoenvironmental site character-
ization. Ph.D. thesis, School of Civil and Environmental Engi-
neering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga.
Burns, S.E., and Mayne, P.W. 1995. Coefficient of consolidation
(c
h
) from type 2 piezocone dissipation in overconsolidated
clays. In Proceedings, International Symposium on Cone Pene-
tration Testing (CPT 95), Linkping, Sweden, Vol. 2,
pp. 137142.
Campanella, R.G., Robertson, P.K., and Gillespie, D. 1986. Factors
affecting the pore water pressure and its measurement around a
penetrating cone. In Proceedings, 39th Canadian Geotechnical
Conference, Ottawa, pp. 291299.
Carslaw, H.D., and Jaeger, J.C. 1959. Conduction of heat in solids.
2nd ed. Oxford University Press, London.
Chen, B.S.Y., and Mayne, P.W. 1994. Profiling the over-
consolidation ratio of clays by piezocone tests. Georgia Institute
of Technology, Atlanta, Internal Report GIT-CEEGEO-94-1.
Davidson, J.L. 1985. Pore pressures generated during cone pene-
tration testing in heavily overconsolidated clays. In Proceedings,
11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Founda-
tion Engineering, San Francisco, Vol. 5, p. 2699.
DeGroot, D.J., and Lutenegger, A.J. 1994. A comparison between
field and laboratory measurements of hydraulic conductivity in
a varved clay. In Hydraulic conductivity and waste contaminant
transport in soil. Edited by D.E. Daniel and S.J. Trautwein.
American Society for Testing and Materials, Special Technical
Publication 1142, pp. 300317.
Elsworth, D. 1990. Theory of partially drained piezometer inser-
tion. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 116(6):
899912.
Elsworth, D. 1993. Analysis of piezocone dissipation data using
dislocation methods. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, 119(10): 16011623.
Gupta, R.C., and Davidson, J.L. 1986. Piezoprobe determined co-
efficient of consolidation. Soils and Foundations, 26(3): 1222.
Houlsby, G.T., and Teh, C.I. 1988. Analysis of the piezocone in
clay. In Proceedings, International Symposium on Penetration
Testing. Edited by J.D. Ruiter. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands, Vol. 1, pp. 777783.
Jacobs, P.A., and Coutts, J.S. 1992. A comparison of electric
piezocone tips at the Bothkennar test site. Gotechnique, 42(2):
369375.
Jamiolkowski, M. 1995. Opening address. In Proceedings, Interna-
tional Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing (CPT 95),
Linkping, Sweden, Vol. 3, pp. 715.
Jardine, R.J., and Bond, A.J. 1989. Behaviour of displacement
piles in a heavily overconsolidated clay. In Proceedings, 12th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation En-
gineering, Rio de Janeiro, Vol. 2, pp. 11471151.
Jones, G.A., and Van Zyl, D.J.A. 1981. The piezometer probe a
useful investigation tool. In Proceedings, 10th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Stockholm, Vol. 3, pp. 489495.
Kavvadas, M. 1982. Non-linear consolidation around driven piles
in clay. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Mass.
Koizumi, Y., and Ito, K. 1967. Field tests with regard to pile driv-
ing and bearing capacity of piled foundations. Soils and Founda-
tions, 7(3): 3053.
Lacasse, S., and Lunne, T. 1982. Penetration tests in two Norwe-
gian clays. In Proceedings, 2nd European Symposium on Pene-
tration Testing, Amsterdam, Vol. 2, pp. 661669.
Lally, M.J. 1993. A field and laboratory investigation of
geotechnical properties for design of a seasonal heat storage fa-
cility. M.Sc. thesis, Civil Engineering Department, University of
Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, Mass.
Levadoux, J.-N., and Baligh, M.M. 1986. Consolidation after un-
drained piezocone penetration. I: prediction. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 112(7): 707726.
Lunne, T., Eidsmoen, T.E., Gillespie, D., and Howland, J. 1986.
Laboratory and field calibration of cone penetrometers. In Use of
in-situ tests in geotechnical engineering. Edited by S.P. Clemence.
American Society of Civil Engineers, Geotechnical Special Pub-
lication 6, pp. 714729.
1998 NRC Canada
1072 C an.G eotech.J.Vol.35,1998
1998 NRC Canada
B urns and M ayne 1073
Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K., and Powell, J.J.M. 1997. Cone penetra-
tion testing in geotechnical practice. Blackie Academic and Pro-
fessional and Chapman and Hall, London.
Lutenegger, A.J., and Kabir, M.G. 1987. Pore pressures generated
by two penetrometers in clays. Department of Civil and Envi-
ronmental Engineering, Clarkson University, Potsdam, N.Y., Re-
port 87-2.
Lutenegger, A.J., and Kabir, M.G. 1988. Interpretation of
piezocone results in overconsolidated clays. In Proceedings,
Penetration Testing in the U.K. Institution of Civil Engineers.
Thomas Telford, London, pp. 147150.
Mayne, P.W. 1988. Determining OCR of clays from laboratory
strengths. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
114(GT1): 7692.
Mayne, P.W. 1991. Determination of OCR in clays by piezocone
tests using cavity expansion and critical state concepts. Soils
and Foundations, 31(2): 6576.
Mayne, P.W. 1993. In-situ determination of clay stress history by
piezocone model. In Predictive Soil Mechanics, Proceedings of
the Wroth Memorial Symposium, Oxford University. Edited by
G.T. Houlsby and A.N. Schofield. Thomas Telford, London,
pp. 483495.
Mayne, P.W. 1995. Undrained plastic modulus from original Cam
Clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 121(5):
448451.
Mayne, P.W., and Bachus, R.C. 1988. Profiling OCR in clays by
piezocone soundings. In Proceedings, International Symposium
on Penetration Testing. Edited by J.D. Ruiter. A.A. Balkema,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Vol. 2, pp. 857864.
Nash, D.F.T., Powell, J.J.M., and Lloyd, I.M. 1992. Initial investi-
gations of the soft clay test site at Bothkennar. Gotechnique,
42(2): 163181.
Randolph, M.F., and Wroth, C.P. 1979a. A simple approach to pile
design and the evaluation of pile tests. In Behavior of deep
foundations. Edited by R. Lundgren. American Society for
Testing and Materials, Special Technical Publication 670,
pp. 484499.
Randolph, M.F., and Wroth, C.P. 1979b. An analytical solution for
the consolidation around a driven pile. International Journal for
Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 3:
217229.
Robertson, P.K., Sully, J.P., Woeller, D.J., Lunne, T., Powell,
J.J.M., and Gillespie, D.G. 1992. Estimating coefficient of con-
solidation from piezocone tests. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
29(4): 539550.
Roy, M., Blanchet, R., Tavenas, F., and La Rochelle, P. 1981. Be-
havior of a sensitive clay during pile driving. Canadian Geo-
technical Journal, 18(1): 6785.
Roy, M., Tremblay, M., Tavenas, F., and La Rochelle, P. 1982. De-
velopment of pore pressures in quasi-static penetration tests in
sensitive clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 19(1): 124138.
Santamarina, J.C., and Fratta, D. 1998. Introduction to discrete sig-
nals and inverse problems in civil engineering. American Soci-
ety of Civil Engineers Press, Reston, Va.
Senneset, K., Janbu, N., and Svan, G. 1982. Strength and defor-
mation parameters from cone penetration tests. In Proceedings,
2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing, Vol. 2.
Edited by A. Verruijt, F.L. Beringen, and E.H. De Leeuw. Am-
sterdam, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 863870.
Skempton, A.W., Schuster, R.L., and Petley, D.J. 1969. Joints and
fissures in the London Clay at Wraysbury and Edgware.
Gotechnique, 19: 205217.
Soares, M.M., Lunne, T., and Lacasse, S. 1987. In-situ site investi-
gation techniques and interpretation for offshore practice. Inter-
pretation of dissipation tests in Onsy Clay. Norwegian
Geotechnical Institute, Oslo, Internal Report 40019-15.
Sderberg, L.O. 1962. Consolidation theory applied to foundation
pile time effects. Gotechnique, 12: 217225.
Sully, J.P. 1991. Measurement of in situ lateral stress during full-
displacement penetration tests. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Sully, J.P., and Campanella, R.G. 1994. Evaluation of field CPTU
dissipation data in overconsolidated fine-grained soils. In Pro-
ceedings, 13th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, New Delhi, pp. 201204.
Teh, C.I. 1987. An analytical study of the cone penetration test.
D.Phil. thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Oxford Univer-
sity, Oxford, U.K.
Teh, C.I., and Houlsby, G.T. 1991. An analytical study of the cone
penetration test in clay. Gotechnique, 41(1): 1734.
Torstensson, B.-A. 1975. Pore pressure sounding instrument. In
Proceedings, ASCE Specialty Conference on In Situ Measure-
ment of Soil Properties ISMOSP, Raleigh, N.C., Vol. 2,
pp. 4854.
Torstensson, B.-A. 1977. The pore pressure probe. Geoteknikk-
dagen, Oslo, Paper 34, pp. 34.134.15.
Tumay, M.T., Acar, Y., and Deseze, E. 1982. Soil exploration in
soft clays with the quasi-static electric cone penetrometer. In
Proceedings, 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing,
Amsterdam, Vol. 2, pp. 915921.
Vesic, A.S. 1972. Expansion of cavities in infinite soil mass. Jour-
nal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE,
98(SM3): 265290.
Virely, D., Leroueil, S., and LaRochelle, P. 1995. The development
of the Laval piezocone. In Proceedings, International Sympo-
sium on Cone Penetration Testing (CPT 95), Linkping, Swe-
den, Vol. 2, pp. 117122.
Whittle, A.J. 1987. A constitutive model for overconsolidated clays
with application to the cyclic loading of friction piles. Sc.D. the-
sis, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
Wroth, C.P. 1984. The interpretation of in-situ soil tests: 24th Ran-
kine Lecture. Gotechnique, 34(4): 449489.
Wroth, C.P. 1988. Penetration testing: a rigorous approach to inter-
pretation. In Proceedings, Penetration Testing 1988, ISOPT-1,
Vol. 1. Edited by J. de Ruiter. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands, pp. 303311.
Wroth, C.P., and Houlsby, G.T. 1985. Soil mechanics property
characterization and analysis procedures. In Proceedings, 11th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation En-
gineering, San Francisco, Vol. 1, pp. 154.