Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCP)

Test for Estimating Geotechnical

Properties of Clay Soil in
Sanandaj, Iran

Behrooz Samadian1, Ali Fakher2

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Tehran Science and Research Branch, Islamic
Azad University, Tehran, Iran
e-mail: b_samadian@yahoo.com

2
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
e-mail: afakher@ut.ac.ir

ABSTRACT
Dynamic cone penetration (DCP) test is used more in pavement design and construction, and less for
subsurface geotechnical investigation. In the present paper, evaluating geotechnical parameters of
Sanandaj’s clay in the western region of Iran using the DCP test was taken into account. Accordingly,
6 wells with maximum depths of 15 m were excavated manually in various sites of Sanandaj on clay
soils (CL). During the excavation process, 3 series of DCP tests were carried out and repeated in the
wells after excavating every one meter. The soil samples for the selected sites were also obtained for
the laboratory tests including water content, grain size, Atterberg limits, and triaxial compression tests.
Based on the results of the experiments, the repeatability of the DCP test results was acceptable, with a
coefficient of variation (Cv) of less than 30%. The relationships between Dynamic Penetration Index
(DPI), liquid index (LI), undrained shear strength (cu) and dry density (γd) of the clay soil were also
obtained with a high coefficient of determination (R2>84%).
KEYWORDS: Clay soil, Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCP), Geotechnical Properties,
Laboratory Tests

INTRODUCTION
Investigation of subsurface layers by means of laboratory tests requires the boring and
preparation of proper samples, while in situ tests do not need sampling, and are carried out in more
realistic conditions. Lightweight dynamic penetrometers are amongst the in situ tests, which are
usually utilized in preliminary investigation of subsurface layers. Dynamic cone penetration (DCP)
test is one of the lightweight, cheap and quick in situ tests, which was initially developed in Australia
(Scala, 1956). Several researches have been carried out using this test to evaluate the soil geotechnical
properties during earthwork construction; and relationships between the DCP test results and CBR,
resilient modulus, dry density, plastic properties, and shear strength have been presented (Kleyn and

- 5939 -
 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5940

Savage, 1982; Livneh and Ishai, 1988; Ayers et al., 1989; Siekmeier et al., 1999; Abu-Farsakh et al.,
2005; Chen et al., 2005; Rahman et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2014). Of course, most of the studies
employing the DCP device have been done on granular soils and aimed to control subgrade soil and
pavement layers. In the current study, capability of the DCP device in characterizing geotechnical
properties of the clay soil is assessed by means of excavating wells. For this purpose, Sanandaj’s clay
soil has been studied using the DCP tests inside the wells, as well as a series of laboratory tests.
Investigating geotechnical properties of the clay, such as undrained cohesion, water content and
density is necessary to determine their behavior in earthwork design and construction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SANANDAJ REGION
Geology plays a significant role in engineering properties of soils (Fakher et al., 2007).
Formations of Sanandaj region include shale, limestone, and volcanic rocks, which all belong to Late
Cretaceous, and also quaternary alluvial sediments (Zahedi, 1990). Figure 1 shows the map of Iran as
well as the geological map of the subject region.

 Mashhad
Tabriz 
A SanandajTehran

Besat Town
 IRAN
Isfahan
Qeshlaq River

Sheikh Salam 
Shiraz
Senadej Castle a)
Abidar Mountain
Ghopal
Degayran
Zagros Town -Fault A separating andesite and shale
-Alluvial channel deposits
-Quaternary alluviums
Baharan Town
-Andesite
-Limestone and Shale
b) -Shale (Sanandaj shale)

Figure: 1 a) Map of Iran b) Geological map of Sanandaj (Samadian and Fakher, 2016)

According to this map, a major part of Sanandaj lay on alluvial sediments. Alluvial soil of
Sanandaj is mostly clayey; and is classified as lean clay (CL) based on the unified soil classification
system (USCS). Behavior of the alluvial soil is affected by sedimentation process, erosion,
consolidation, and underground water conditions. Existing faults, Gheshlagh River, and topographical
conditions of the subject region accelerate erosion and formation of quaternary alluvial sediments.
Maximum thickness of alluvial layers in the Sanandaj center is 40 m (Samadian and Fakher, 2016).
 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5941

EXCAVATION AND SAMPLING

In order to perform in situ DCP test, as well as the laboratory tests, 6 wells, coded T1 to T6 were
excavated manually in various parts of Sanandaj. A section of the wells is a circle with a diameter of
1.2 m, and maximum depth of the wells is 15 m. Table 1 shows the depth of the wells. Excavation
was halted after every one meter to obtain disturbed and undisturbed samples using core-cutter
according to ASTM D2937 (2000). After sampling, excavation continued for another one meter and
sampling was repeated. Figure 2 shows sampling in well T2 at the depth of 8 m. It should be noted
that due to the history excavation of aqueduct in Iran, excavating well up to a depth of 20 m is easily
done by hand.

Figure 2: Sampling by core-cutter at the depth of 8 m in well T2

DCP TEST DEVICE

The DCP test is a portable penetration test used to characterize soil parameters. The mechanism
of the DCP test is a combination of SPT and CPT tests (Salgado and Yoon, 2002). Details and
methods of the DCP test are described in ASTM D6951 (2009). The DCP device consists of two
parts. The upper part includes a handle to hold the device, a rod with diameter of 16 mm and a 78.5 N
hammer with drop height of 575 mm. The lower part consists of a 1000 mm rod with diameter of 16
mm, an anvil, a cone-shaped tip with diameter of 20 mm and angle of 60° and a ruler to measure the
penetration depth. Figure 3 shows details of the device. To use the DCP device, after fixing the device
vertically at the selected location, the hammer is lifted to a height of 575 mm and released on to the
anvil and penetration depth of the cone tip is measured. The ratio of penetration depth to number of
blows (in millimeters per blow) is recorded as dynamic penetration index (DPI). The DPI value for a
given depth can be calculated by Equation (1).

Pi+1 −Pi
DPI= (1)
Bi+1 −Bi
 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5942

In Equation (1), Pi or Pi+1 is a penetration depth at the ith or (i+1)th blows (mm), and Bi or
(Bi+1) is ith or (i+1)th blow count. To establish a relationship between the DCP test results and
geotechnical properties of the soil, the values of DPI are calculated for a given penetration depth
using two methods: i) arithmetic average or ii) weighted average (Edil and Benson, 2005). In this
study, the arithmetic average is calculated for the penetration depth of 300 mm.

DCP TEST PROCEDURE

The DCP test was repeated until a depth of 1 m in the wells, and the results were recorded.
Thereafter, the well was excavated to a depth of 1 m. This procedure is repeated stage by stage until
the target depth. Table 1 shows the number of DCP tests performed in this study. It is notable that
when the DCP rod is penetrated into the soil, it is no longer possible to keep it straight, and this
causes friction between the rod and the soil; although the frictional effect is not significant in
cohesive soils (Livneh, 2000). There have also been extensive investigations into the effect of vertical
confinement on the DCP results. Based on these studies, vertical confinement has no significant effect
on DCP test results in the cohesive soils (Livneh et al., 1995). Accordingly, effects of friction and
vertical confinement on the DCP results have not been considered in this study.

LABORATORY TESTS
A series of laboratory tests was planned to characterize physical and mechanical properties of
Sanandaj clay, including water content, grain size, plastic properties, dry density, and
Unconsolidated-Undrained triaxial compression test. All the tests were performed according to
ASTM standard and number of tests is shown in Table 1.

Figure 3: Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCP)

 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5943

Table 1: The number of the tests performed in this study

Triaxial
Depth Water Grain size Atterberg
Wells DCP Density compression
(m) content distribution limits
(UU)
T1 10 3×9 9 9 9 9 3
T2 10 3×8 8 8 8 8 3
T3 10 3×9 9 9 9 9 3
T4 15 3×14 14 14 14 14 3
T5 15 3×14 14 14 14 14 3
T6 8 3×7 7 7 7 7 3

TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In the following sections, the DCP and laboratory tests results are presented and then the
correlations of the DCP test with some geotechnical properties of the clay are discussed.

THE DCP TEST RESULTS

In the process of DCP testing, 3 series of DCP tests were carried out in the wells, and
repeatability of the results was evaluated by calculating the coefficient of variation (Cv). It is
necessary to mention that depth of top soil was 2 m in well T2 and 1 m in other wells, and no tests
were performed on top soil. The diagram of the number of DCP hammer blows versus depth is
presented in Figure 4. The value of Cv for Standard Penetration Test (SPT), which is a super heavy
dynamic test, is reported between 27 to 85%; although the recommended Cv value for this test is less
than 30% (Lee et al., 1983). According to Mohammadi et al. (2008), the repeatability of the SPT test
can be used as a measure of the repeatability of the DCP test results. The results of Cv values for the 3
series of the DCP tests performed in this research are shown in Table 2. It can be seen that the
average value of Cv in all sites is smaller than 30%. In well T1, the value of Cv is 22.11% above 30%.
It is necessary to mention that in study of the correlation between DCP and geotechnical properties of
the clay, DCP test results of well T1 have been disregarded. In well T3, the value of Cv is 1.11% above
30%, which is not significant, and therefore the test results of this well are used. According to the
laboratory test results, in terms of consistency, the clay soil of well T1 is soft, and those of the other
wells are medium to stiff. In well T1, the softness of the clay soil can be the reason for the inaccuracy
of the DCP test results and their scattering.
Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5944

Figure 4: The number of DCP blows (N DCP) versus depth of wells

 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5945

Table 2: The Cv values of DCP tests in the wells

Cv>30
Wells Average(Cv) %
%
T1 21.71 21.11
T2 10.45 0
T3 12.13 1.11
T4 9.58 0
T5 8.04 0
T6 9.31 0

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

In this section, for brevity, only the test results in well T1 are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: The laboratory test results in well T1

Depth USCS Fine Sand Gravel LL PI ω γd cu

(m) % % % % % % (kN/m3) kN/m2
1.5 CL 65.3 32.1 2.6 42 26 20.1 13.81 -
2.5 CL 53.6 46.4 0.5 43 28 19.6 13.80 44
3.5 CL 78.7 20.8 0.6 42 23 23.1 14.26 -
4.5 CL 79.8 19.9 0.3 35 17 20.9 14.24 -
5.5 CL 60.6 38.4 1.0 33 12 23.3 13.07 50
6.5 CL 66.6 27.2 6.2 40 19 25.3 13.66 -
7.5 CL 55.0 32.0 13.0 34 16 22.5 13.92 -
8.5 CL 71.8 24.5 3.7 39 18 25.4 13.78 57
9.5 SC 49.1 29.9 21.0 29 14 19.4 14.73 -
In this table, LL is Liquid Limit, PI is Plasticity Index, ω is Water Content,
γd is Dry Density and cu is Undrained shear strength, “Cohesion.”

CORRELATION OF DCP TEST WITH SANANDAJ’S CLAY

In this study, the correlation between the DCP test results and geotechnical parameters of the clay
(CL) has been taken into account. Accordingly, (i) exponential, (ii) linear, (iii) logarithmic, (iv)
polynomial and (v) power regressions were studied and the equation with bigger coefficient of
determination (R2) was introduced as the best correlation.

Effect of fine, sand, and gravel content of the clay (CL) on DPI

Soil stiffness and strength, in addition to relative density, depends on the distribution of particle
sizes and percentage of fine content (Mitchell and Soga, 2005). It is also recognized that penetration
resistance depends on the particle size distribution and fine percent of soils (Skempton, 1986). In this
 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5946

study, the effect of fine content of the clay soil on cone penetration is shown in Figure 5. The
determination coefficient of Equation (2) is 0.29, which is indicative of an insignificant relationship
between the two parameters. Of course, according to this equation, increasing fine content of the clay
(CL) reduces penetration resistance, and therefore increases DPI. Effects of sand and gravel of the
clay on DPI are shown in Figures 6 and 7, respectively. Equations (3) and (4) are also indicative of an
insignificant relation; yet these equations show that increasing sand and gravel of the clay (CL)
increases penetration resistance and decreases DPI.

30
y = 0.1904x + 1.8094
25 R² = 0.2915
DPI (mm/blow)

20

15

10

0
50 60 70 80 90 100
Fine %

Figure 5: Effect of fine content of CL on DPI

Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5947

30

y = -0.2408x + 20.523
25 R² = 0.2219

DPI (mm/blow)
20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Sand %

Figure 6: Effect of sand content of CL on DPI

30

25 y = -0.2422x + 18.129
R² = 0.1454
DPI (mm/blow)

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20
Gravel %

Figure 7: Effect of gravel content of CL on DPI

y = 0.1904x + 1.8094 R2=0.29 (2)

y = -0.1896x + 20.827 R2=0.22 (3)
y = -0.2422x + 18.129 R2=0.15 (4)
 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5948

Effect of plastic properties of the clay (CL) on DPI

Amongst the effective factors in DCP test, water content, grading, density, and plastic properties
can be pointed out (Kleyn and Savage, 1982). In this study, the correlations between liquid and plastic
limits and DPI were investigated. From the regression analysis, no correlation was found with R-
squared less than 0.1. Figure 8 and Equation (5) show the correlation between water content and DPI.
It can be seen that the clay soil with smaller water content are more resistant against penetration of
the DCP device. Considering the above mentioned results, we may say that there is no significant
relationship between plastic properties and water content and DCP test results. Accordingly, in order
to establish a more significant relationship, a combination of plastic properties and water content
parameters were taken into consideration. One of the consistency criteria of cohesive soils is the
liquidity index (Das, 2008). The liquidity index (LI), as shown in Equation (6) is a combination of
plastic properties and water content. The best correlation between LI and DPI is shown in Figure 9
and Equation (7). The determination coefficient of Equation (7) is 0.84, which is indicative of a
significant relationship between the two parameters.

30

y = 1.3761x - 10.98
25 R² = 0.5018
DPI (mm/blow)

20

15

10

0
15 17 19 21 23 25 27
ω%

Figure 8: Water content variations versus DPI

 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5949

30

y = 46.868x + 6.3121
25 R² = 0.8355

DPI (mm/blow)
20

15

10

5
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
LI

Figure 9: Liquidity index variations versus DPI

y = 1.3761x - 10.98 R2=0.50 (5)

𝜔𝜔−𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
LI= (6)
𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿−𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃
In Equation (6), ω is water content, PL is plastic limit and LL is liquid limit.

LI=46.868(DPI) + 6.312 R2=0.84 (7)

Effects of Dry Density on DPI

According to Abu-Farsakh et al. (2005), the value of DPI is a function of water content and dry
density of the soil. Salgado and Yoon (2002) introduced Equation (8) between DPI and dry density of
the clayey sand. In this equation the dry density of the clayey sand is normalized using γω and
vertical effective stress (σ′ v).
σ′ V 0.5
γd =(101.5 × DPI −0.14 × � ) × γω (8)
PA

In Equation (8), σ′ v is vertical effective stress, PA is the reference stress (100 kPa), DPI is
penetration index (mm/blow), and γω is unit weight of water. Based on the DCP test results in this
study, the best correlation between dry density and DPI is presented in Figure 10 and Equation (9). It
can be observed increasing dry density increases the soil resistance against penetration of the cone.
The determination coefficient of Equation (9) is 0.84.

Effect of cohesion on DPI

 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5950

Effect of shear strength of granular soils on DCP results have been previously studied by
researchers (Ayers et al., 1989; Mohammadi et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2014). Salgado and Yoon (2002)
studied the relationship between DCP test and uniaxial compressive strength of cohesive soil. In the
present study, the relationship between undrained cohesion (cu) of the clay and the DCP results is
shown in Figure 11 and Equation (10). Given that the determination coefficient of this equation is
0.87, there is a significant correlation between the two parameters, and DCP test results can be used
to estimate cu.

17.0
y = 21.085x-0.111
16.5 R² = 0.8438
γd (kN/m3)

16.0

15.5

15.0

14.5

14.0
5 10 15 20 25 30
DPI
Figure 10: Correlation between dry density and DPI

120

110 y = 272.69x-0.425
R² = 0.8746
cu (kN/m2 )

100

90

80

70

60

50
5 10 15 20 25 30
DPI

Figure 11: Correlation between cu and DPI

 Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5951

γd=21.085×𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 −0.11 R2=0.84 (9)

cu=272.69(𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷)−0.425 R2=0.87 (10)

CONCLUSION
1- The DCP test is a rapid, portable and cost effective, which can be used for characterizing clay
soil in the wells.
2- The DCP test results indicated that except for soft clay soil, this test is reasonably repeatable,
and the coefficient of variation (Cv) is less than 30%. For soft clay soil, the value of Cv is 21.11%
above the permitted 30%.
3- According to the results of this study, fine content of the clay (CL) affects the strength of the
soil; i.e. increasing the fine content increases DPI. Sand and gravel content of the clay (CL) also
increases resistance of the clay against penetration resistance.
4- Results of this study show that it is possible to establish a correlation between the DCP test and
geotechnical properties of the clay. Table 4 shows the equations obtained in this study to estimate γd,
LI, and cu parameters using the DCP test results.

Table 4: Equations obtained in this study

Parameters Equations Determination Type of
coefficient (R2) correlation
LI LI=46.868(𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷)+6.312 0.84 Linear
γd (kN/m3) γd=21.085×𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 −0.11 0.84 Power
cu (kN/m2) cu=272.69(𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷)−0.425 0.87 Power

REFERENCES
1. Abu-Farsakh, M., M.D. Nazzal, K. Alshibli, and E. Seyman (2005) “Application of
dynamic cone penetrometer in pavement construction control,” Transportation Research
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1913, 53–61.
2. ASTM D422-63 (2002) “Standard test method for particle-size analysis of soils”.
3. ASTM D2216 (2002) “Standard Test Method for Laboratory Determination of Water
(Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass”.
4. ASTM D2487-00 (2000) “Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering
purposes”.
5. ASTM D2850-03a (2003) “Standard test method for unconsolidated-undrained triaxial
compression test on cohesive soils”.
6. ASTM D2937-00 (2000) “Standard Test Method for Density of Soil in Place by the Drive-
Cylinder Method”.
Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5952

7. ASTM D4318-00 (2000) “Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and
plasticity index of soils”.
8. ASTM D6951 (2009) “Standard test method for use of the dynamic cone penetrometer in
shallow pavement Applications”.
9. Ayers, M.E., M.R. Thompson, and D.R. Uzarski (1989) “Rapid shear strength evaluation
of in situ granular materials,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, No. 1227, 134–146.
10. Das, B.M (2008) “Advanced Soil Mechanics,” 3th edition, Taylor & Francis, New York,
NY 10016, USA.
11. Chen, D.H., D.F. Lin, P.H. Liau, and J. Bilyeu (2005) “A correlation between dynamic
cone penetrometer values and pavement layer moduli,” Geotech Test J, 28 (1), 42–49.
12. Edil, T.B., and C.H. Benson (2005) “Investigation of the DCP and SSG as alternative
methods to determine subgrade stability,” SPR#0092-01-05. Dept. of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison (WHRP 05-14).
13. Fakher, A., A. Cheshomi, and M. Khamechian (2007) “The addition of geotechnical
properties to a geological classification of coarse grain alluvium a pediment zone,” Q. J.
Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol, 40, 163–174.
14. Kleyn, E.G., and P.E. Savage (1982) “The Application of the Pavement DCP to
Determine the Bearing Properties and Performance of the Road Pavements,”
International Symposium on Bearing Capacity of Roads and Airfields, Trodheim,
Norway.
15. Lee, I.K., W. White, and O.G. Ingles (1983) “Geotechnical Engineering,” Copp Clark
Pitman, Inc, 57–89.
16. Lee, C., K.S. Kim, W. Woo, and W. Lee (2014) “Soil Stiffness Gauge (SSG) and
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests for estimating engineering properties of
weathered sandy soils in Korea,” Eng. Geol, 169:91–99.
17. Livneh, M (2000) “Friction Correction Equation for the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in
Subsoil Strength Testing,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board
Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C.
18. Livneh, M., and I. Ishai (1988) “The Relationship Between In Situ CBR Test and the
Various Penetration Tests,” Proc. First Int. Conf. on Penetration Testing, Orlando, Fl,
445-452.
19. Livneh, M., I. Ishai, and N.A. Livneh (1995) “Effect of vertical confinement on dynamic
cone penetrometer strength values in pavement and subgrade evaluations,”
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No.
1473, 1–8.
20. Mohammadi, S.D., M.R. Nikoudel, H. Rahimi, and M. Khamehchiyan (2008)
“Application of the dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) for determination of the
engineering parameters of sandy soils,” Eng. Geol, 101, 195–203.
21. Mitchell, J.K., and K. Soga (2005) “Fundamentals of Soil Behavior,” 3rd ed, John Wiley
& Sons, New Jersey.
Vol. 22 [2017], Bund. 15 5953

22. Rahman, F., M. Hossain, M.M. Hunt, and S.A. Romanoshi (2008) “Soil stiffness
evaluation for compaction control of cohesionless embankments,” Geotech. Test. J, 31
(5), 442–451.
23. Salgado, R., and S. Yoon (2002) “Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT) for Subgrade
Assessment,” Report No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2002/30, SPR-2362.
24. Samadian, B., and A. Fakher (2016) “Proposing a framework to combine geological and
geotechnical information for city planning in Sanandaj (Iran),” Eng. Geol, 209:1–11.
25. Scala, A.J (1956) “Simple methods of flexible pavement design using cone
penetrometers,” Proceedings of the 2nd Australian and New Zealand conference on soil
mechanics and foundation engineering, 73–83.
26. Skempton, A.W (1986) “Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of
overburden Pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation,”
Geotechnique, 36 (6), 425–447.
27. Siekmeier, J.A., D. Young, and D. Beberg (1999) “Comparison of the dynamic cone
penetrometer with other tests during subgrade and granular base characterization in
Minnesota,” Nondestructive Testing of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli: Third
Volume, ASTM 1375. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
28. Zahedi, M (1990) “Describing Sanandaj quadrangle geological map with scale of 1:
250000,” Iran Geological Survey and Mineral Exploration Organization (in Persian).
29. George R. Otoko, Isoteim Fubara-Manuel, Mike Igwagu, and Clement Edoh: “Empirical
Cone Factor for Estimation of Undrained Shear Strength” Electronic Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, 2016 (21.18), pp 6069-6076. Available at ejge.com.
30. M.Reza Emami Azadi: “Undrained Shear Strength of Fine Grained Azarshahr Soil Based
on Fall Cone Tests” Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2017 (22.02), pp
2353-2376. Available at ejge.com.

© 2017 ejge

Editor’s note.
This paper may be referred to, in other articles, as:
Behrooz Samadian and Ali Fakher: “Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCP)
Test for Estimating Geotechnical Properties of Clay Soil in Sanandaj,
Iran” Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2017 (22.15), pp.
5939-5953. Available at ejge.com.