UNDERSTANDING TROPICAL

GROUND INVESTIGATION
Malaysia : 13-14 June 2022

CPTU IN CONSOLIDATING SOILS

Prof. Paulus P. Rahardjo, Ph.D
Guru Besar Ilmu Geoteknik - UNPAR
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION

• 1. Background of Study
• 2. CPTu and its interpretation
• 3. Consolidating Soils
• 4. Method of Analysis
• 5. Examples and Case Histories
• 6. Conclusion Summary
BACKGROUND : LESSONS LEARNED FROM
NICHOL HIGHWAY ACCIDENT IN SINGAPORE 2004

• Body
• Point 1
• Point 2
• Body
• Point 1
• Point 2
LESSONS LEARNED FROM NICHOL
HIGHWAY ACCIDENT

Rahardjo, P.P. , 2016

Back Ground of Study
REASONS FOR RESEARCH ON
CONSOLIDATING SOILS :

SOFT SOILS IN SOUTH EAST ASIA

ARE “CONSOLIDATING SOILS” (COX
1970)

MANY GEOTECHNICAL FAILURES

ARE ATTRIBUTED DUE TO
CONSOLIDATING SOILS
 WHY CPT/CPTU ?

• CPT soundings can be very effective in site characterization, especially

sites with discrete stratigraphic horizons or discontinuous lenses.

• Today, most of the commercially-available CPT rigs operate electronic

friction cone and piezocone penetrometers, whose testing procedures
are outlined in ASTM D-5778, adopted in 1995.

• It is a valuable method of assessing subsurface stratigraphy associated

with soft materials, organic materials (peat), potentially liquefiable
materials (silt, sands and granule gravel), and landslides.
BACKGROUND OF STUDY : WHY CPTU TESTS ?

- Continuity of data along the depth of penetration

- Repeatability
- Measure Pore Pressure
- Mesure tip resistance  representing
trend of effective stress

(Larsson, 1992)

SATURATION OF THE PORE ELEMENT CONE PENETRATION TEST IN THE FIELD

 CPT vs CPTU
1. CPTU is capable to determine pore water pressure (u)
2. CPTU is capable to determine the differences of drained, partially
drained and undrained behaviour of the penetration.
3. CPTU is able to corrected the effect of pore water pressure at cone
area on cone resistance magnitude.
4. CPTU is capable to predict the consolidation characteristics and
insitu stress histories
5. CPTU is better then CPT on predicted the soil behaviour and its
shear strength parameters.
 APLICATION OF CPT/CPTU
• Soil profiling and determine its engineering properties
• Complement to the results of drilling
• Determine soil parameters for design
• Determine bearing capacity of foundation (direct)
• Estimate settlement
• Assessment of the field densification or compaction
• Assessment on the degree of consolidation
• Evaluate Liquefaction Potential
• Provide seismic velocity of soils (Vs) (Seismic Cone)
CONE PENETRATION TEST CPTU
WITH PORE PRESSURE MEASUREMENT

Factors that can affect

the results of CPTu Test :

Saturation of filter element

Penetration Speed (suggested
to be 2.0 -2.5 cm/s)
Verticality during penetration
 qt = qc + u-effect

u2 (kPa)
= qc + u2 * (1 – a-factor)
qc (kPa)

elevated pore pressure

PORE PRESSURE EFFECT –
• Pore water pressure acts on surface area of
cone tip (Ac), but also on rear end of the tip
• Affected area is difference between Ac and An
• Correction by means of a-factor:
a = An / Ac
• Corrected cone resistance:
qt = qc + (1 - a) · u2
• a-factor typically 0.6 – 0.9
a-factor of 0.8 considered to be good

Geomil Equipment B.V.

Parameter derived from CPTu
DATA FROM CPTU
𝒒𝒕 = 𝒒𝒄 + (𝟏 − 𝒂)𝒖𝟐

∆𝒖 = 𝒖𝟐 − 𝒖𝟎

∆𝒖
𝑩𝒒 =
𝒒𝒕 − 𝝈𝒗

𝒇𝒔
𝑭𝑹 =
𝒒𝒄
GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS OBTAINED
Directly measured parameters:
Cone resistance qc
Sleeve friction fs
Pore pressure u1, 2 or 3 (u2 being most common)

Derived parameters:
• Friction ratio Rf = (fs/qt) · 100%
• Equilibrium pore pressure u0
• Excess pore pressure Δu = u2 - u0
• Corrected cone resistance qt = qc + (1 - a) · u2
• Effective cone resistance qe = qc – u2
 DERIVED PARAMETERS
Indirectly derived parameters:
Total vertical stress σvo = ∑ γ (dry + wet).z
Effective vertical stress σ’vo = σvo – u0
Net cone resistance qn = qt − σvo
Friction Ratio Rf = fs / qt
Pore pressure ratio Bq = (u2 − u0) / (qt – σvo)
Normalized cone resistance Qt = (qt − σvo) / σ’vo
Normalized friction ratio Fr = fs / (qt − σvo)
ADVANTAGES OF CONE PENETRATION TEST
WITH PORE PRESSURE MEASUREMENT (CPTU)

• Obtained more accurate interpretation of soil stratification

• Measured actual Pore Water Pressure & Excess Pore Pressure
• All parameter measured at the cone tip, almost no disturbance caused
by buckling
• Large and more reliable data base
• High repeatability (less operator dependent)
SATURATION OF PIEZOCONE TIP
(VERY IMPORTANT STEP !)

Larson, 1992
SOIL CLASSIFICATION:
MECHANICAL CPT VS ELECTRONIC CPT

Schmertmann, 1978 Robertson et al, 1986

Normalized soil behaviour classification chart (Robertson, 1990)

Fr (%) Bq
Factors to be considered when you want
to do the interpretation of CPTu
1. Need to understand mechanism of testing
2. Basic knowledge of soil behavior
3. Make sure pore element is saturated
4. Compare with other data
5. Redo test when results is not satisfactory
 BACKGROUND OF STUDY

• The interpretation of CPTu The interpretation of CPTu for

for normally consolidated
clay soils and slightly, or
strongly overconsolidated
soils
• there is hydrostatic pore
water pressure BUT NO
INITIAL EXCESS PORE
PRESSURE
Consolidating soils
there is hydrostatic pore water
pressure BUT THERE IS INITIAL
EXCESS PORE PRESSURE
THERE should be A DIFFERENCE IN
THE METHOD OF INTERPRETATION
THE EXISTING EXCESS PORE PRESSURES IN
UNDERCONSOLIDATING SOFT SOILS AND ITS
CONCERNS
METHODS TO DETERMINE THE DEGREE OF
CONSOLIDATION AND UNDERCONSOLIDATION
IN SOFT SOILS
 BACKGROUND OF STUDY

PREVIOUS Study :

Schmertmann (1978)  based on the shape of tip resistance qc

Robertson (1986)  classify consolidating soils as sensitive fine grains
Tanaka and Sakagami (1989)  high value of Bq > 0.75
Rahardjo et al (Atlanta, 2008)  Use of Dissipation Test
Setionegoro (2012)  Use of Bq value
Rahardjo et al (Fukuoka, 2015)  Use of Modified Bq value
Rahardjo and Santoso (Bandung, 2016)  Effective Stress Concept
INTERPRETATION OF OCR BY SCHMERTMANN METHOD
APPLICATION OF SCHMERTMANN METHOD

Underconsolidating
Clay (OCR >1)

NC Clay
(OCR =1) OC Clay
(OCR >1)
SCHMERTMANN METHOD
DETERMINATION OF THE DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION

Fill A = 4.5 m
B = 1.5 m = 33.3 %

Estimating degree of
consolidation due to
Example 2 : fill/embankment/reclamation
DETERMINATION OF THE DEGREE OF
CONSOLIDATION USING SCHMERTMANN METHOD

Fill A=5m
B = 1.8 m
= 36 %

Estimating degree of consolidation due

to fill/embankment/reclamation
DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION USING BQ VALUE
(SETIONEGORO, 2012 AND RAHARDJO ET AL, 2014)

u Research correlation between Bq

Bq =
qc - σv from CPTu test with OCR have
been published and revealed that
correlation between Bq from
CPTu test with OCR (Over
Consolidation Ratio) show that
Bq > 0.7 is under consolidated
soil (Setionegoro, 2012 and
Rahardjo et al 2014).
DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION USING BQ VALUE

By using the
chart from
setionegoro
obtain the
OCR
Underconsolidating Underconsolidating
Soil Soil
DETERMINATION OF THE DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION
BASED ON DISSIPATION TEST (RAHARDJO ET AL., 2008)
UNDERSTANDING THE MEASUREMENT OF CPTu ON RECLAIMED
SITE
ui
ui Reclaimed u3
Unreclaimed
Site
Site

uf
uf = u0 u0 u2
u1
Log time Log time
Dup = excess pore pressure due
to cone penetration In Consolidating Soils
u2 Du = residual excess pore pressure qc =‘lower’ tip resistance
fs = ‘lower’ friction
u0 = hydrostatic pore water pressure u2 = ‘higher’ pore pressure
Degree of Consolidation interpreted by
Method of extrapolation of dissipation test
(Rahardjo et al, Atlanta – 2008)
Dissipation Curve at 8.38 m t50 = 59.95 Minute

0.2
U [%] = 1-(ut/ui)
0.18
U [%] = 1-(ut/p)
Excess Pore Pressure Due
Excess Pore Water Pressure (MPa)

0.16 To Insertion Of CPTu Cone Find u50

ui
uf
0.14 p = pressures due to fill placement
u50
t50

Depth = 9.82 m
0.12 Garis t50
1
2
3
0.1

Excess Pore Pressure

uo = 68 kPa
Garis u0
1
2

0.08 Due To Fill Material

Weight uf = 117 kPa
0.06
Hydrostatic Pore Water Pressure ut = 117-68 = 49 kPa
0.04
1 10 100 1000 10000 Ds = 64.6 kPa
Uz = 24.54 %
Log Time (Min.)
Measured Extrapolated t50 u0
Method Based on Effective Stress
(Rahardjo & Santoso, 2016)

ISOCHRONE

- EXCESS PORE PRESSURE

- EFFECTIVE STRESS PROFILE
Example of CPTu in Consolidating Soils
Soil Behaviour Type Cone resistance,qc(MPa) Sleeve resistance,fs(MPa) Pore pressure,u2(MPa) Friction ratio,FR(%) Pore pressure ratio,Bq
after Robertson,1986

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 2 4 6 8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
(7) Sand to silty sand
(8) Sand to silty sand 1 1 1 1 1
1 (8) Sand to silty sand
(9) Sand
2 2 2 2 2 2
<- Depth in m to reference level

(8) Sand to silty sand 3 3 3 3 3

3
(7) Sand to silty sand
4 4 4 4 4 4
(3) Clays

5 5 5 5 5 5

6 6 6 6 6 6

7 7 7 7 7 7

8 8 8 8 8 8

9 9 9 9 9 9

10 10 10 10 10 10
(3) Clays
(3) Clays
11 11 11 11 11 11
(3) Clays
(3) Clays 12 12 12 12 12
12
(3) Clays 13 13 13 13 13
13

14 14 14 14 14 14
(5) Clayey silt to silty clay

15 15 15 15 15 15
(4) Silty clay to clay

16 16 16 16 16 16

17 (5) Clayey silt to silty clay 17 17 17 17 17

18 18 18 18 18 18

19 19 19 19 19 19

20 20 20 20 20 20
METHOD BASED ON EFFECTIVE STRESS APPROACH

Effective Stress in
Pore water pressure
Consolidating Layer
METHOD BASED ON EFFECTIVE STRESS
(SANTOSO & RAHARDJO ET AL, 2016)
 qt (MPa)
qt (MPa)
DETERMINATION OF THE DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION
0
0
O
0.5 1 BASED ON EFFECTIVE STRESS CONCEPT

• Determine Thickness of
qt (MPa)
2
qt (MPa)

Consolidating Layer based

0 0.5 1
0
4

6
Perkiraan grafik qt saat
U=100% berdasarkan
Metode Schmertman
2
on qt
untuk NC Clay 4

• Draw “qt” for the Normally

8
6
Depth (m)

10 8
Consolidating Layer
Depth (m)

Nilai qt pada 10
12 akhir lengkung

14
12
• Degree of Consolidation at
16
14
Specific Depth
16

18 18 𝒒𝒕(𝒂𝒕 𝒄𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝑪𝑷𝑻𝒖)

𝑼𝒕,𝒛 =
20
20
𝒒𝒕(𝒂𝒕 𝑼=𝟏𝟎𝟎%)
DETERMINATION OF THE DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION
BASED ON EFFECTIVE STRESS CONCEPT

Isochrone
U vs z/H

0
U
0.5 1
• Plot data Ut,z VS z/H
0
0.1
0.2 • The degree of Consolidation can be
0.3
Calculated by :
0.4
z/H

0.5 𝟏
0.6 𝒛
0.7 𝑼= 𝑼𝒕 𝒅
𝑯
0.8 𝟎
0.9
1
EXAMPLE OF CALCULATION
CASE STUDIES
CASE 1 : FAILURES OF BRIDGE ABUTMENT DUE TO
FILL PLACEMENT ON UNDERCONSOLIDATING SOILS

Failure of Bridge Abutment in East Kalimanan (Rahardjo, 2019)

PHOTOGRAPHS
SHOWING
FAILURES OF THE
BRIDGE
DATA OF SPT AND CPTU AT BRIDGE SITE
TYPICAL CPTU DATA

Friction  0
Bq > 0.7
COMPUTER SIMULATION AND BACK ANALYSIS

• Body
• Point 1
• Point 2
RESULTS OF FEM ANALYSIS
RESULTS OF 3D FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
RESULTS OF 3D FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
MODEL FAILURES IN 3D FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
BENDING MOMENT AND SHEAR EXCEEDED
PILE CAPACITY
CASE 3 : CPTU IN RIAU PEATS AND SOFT SOILS

• Peats are abundant in Indonesia

• Many cities and infrastructures located in
peats area or must go through peatland
• Need a workout plan and quick data for
design
• Insitu testings : CPT and Dilatometer Test
are best tools and promising
PEATS IN INDONESIA
Riau Peats
SITE LOCATION AND CONDITION (2 LOCATIONS)

Pelintung

Futong Road
RIAU PEATS

Study Area
 PEAT FORMATION AND TYPES

Peat Formation (source : Hobbs, 1986)

SAMPLES AND BLOCK SAMPLES : RIAU PEATS
DRILIING LOGS
SAMPLES OF RIAU PEATS
RESULTS OF CPTU TEST
RESULTS OF CPTU TEST
INTERPRETATION OF CPTU TEST RESULTS

Strength and Compressibility

RIAU PEATS
Su = 10 – 40 kPa
M = 200 kPa

RIAU SOFT CLAYS

Su = 5 – 20 kPa
M = 500 - 2000 kPa
 CONCLUSIONS

• The use of CPTu for investigation of CONSOLIDATING SOILS

and the degree of consolidation (specially residual pore
pressure) is very effective and prospective for future use and
application.
• The use of empirical correlation for degree of consolidation
(OCR < 1.0) as well as the over-consolidation ratio using
several methods by the authors are very usefull.
TERIMA KASIH ATAS PERHATIANNYA