Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MaynePeuchen2018 CPTuNktforsuinclays
MaynePeuchen2018 CPTuNktforsuinclays
net/publication/326838102
Mayne & Peuchen (2018) - CPTu bearing factor Nkt for undrained strength
evaluation in clays
CITATIONS READS
6 6,720
2 authors, including:
Paul W. Mayne
Georgia Institute of Technology
275 PUBLICATIONS 7,733 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Geotechnical Load Factored Resistance Design (LFRD) Calculations of Settlement and Bearing Capacity for Shallow Bridge Foundations View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Paul W. Mayne on 06 August 2018.
ABSTRACT: The evaluation of undrained shear strength of clays (su) is most often sought using the net cone
resistance (qnet = qt - σvo) and a cone factor (Nkt) such that su = qnet/Nkt. While site-specific calibration of Nkt
with laboratory reference values (i.e. triaxial compression, simple shear) or field benchmark (i.e. vane) is the
best approach, this requires considerable extra time and funding to accomplish. In the approach covered here-
in, a database involving 407 high-quality triaxial compression tests (CAUC) was used to review strengths
from a wide variety of clays ranging from intact soft to firm to stiff to hard and fissured geomaterials. The
study considered a total 62 clays, categorized into five groups: soft offshore, soft-firm onshore, sensitive,
overconsolidated, and fissured clays. The backfigured Nkt factors ranged from 8 to 25 and found to decrease
with pore pressure ratio, Bq = (u2 - u0)/qnet.
formed on high-quality samples and/or selective Figure 2. List of 62 clays with CAUC-CPTU data.
field vane shear testing (VST) is the best approach,
albeit requires considerable time and financial ex-
pense because of the more involved testing program, Theoretical solutions for Nkt are readily available,
specifically added costs of drilling, sampling, including expressions based on limit plasticity (e.g.
transport, and testing. Moreover, the effects of sam- Konrad & Law 1987), cavity expansion theory (e.g.
ple disturbance on laboratory results are essentially Mayne 2016), and strain path method (Teh &
inevitable and unavoidable in most instances (e.g. Houlsby 1991), as well as algorithms that approxi-
ISO 2006; ISO, 2014). mate the results from numerical finite element simu-
Guidance on the empirical selection of Nkt factors lations (Lu et al. 2004). Yet, these approaches re-
have been given for various clays. For CPTUs in soft quire additional input geoparameters that must be
to firm clays, Lunne et al. (2005) recommend a val- assessed beforehand, such as rigidity index
ue Nkt = 12 for the CAUC undrained shear strength, (IR = G/su), cone roughness (αc), lateral stress state
suc. A study of piezocone data on 3 onshore and 11 (K0 = σho'/σvo'), friction angle (φ'), and/or other vari-
offshore clays by Low et al. (2010) found the range: ables.
8.6 ≤ Nkt ≤ 15.3, with a mean value of Nkt = 11.9 for As a consequence of the aforementioned uncer-
the triaxial compression mode. Similarly, a study of tainties and lack of guidance towards an available
17 soft to firm intact clays found a mean value of Nkt and reliable means for selecting Nkt, a detailed data-
= 11.8 for suc corresponding to the CAUC triaxial base approach was devised, with the results reported
mode (Mayne et al. 2015). by Mayne (2014).
For differing shearing modes, other operational
values of Nkt must be used. For instance, Low et al. Table 1. Summary of CAUC suc versus CPTU qnet
(2010) found a mean Nkt = 13.6 for the laboratory for clays
average strength (suAVE) from triaxial compression, Clay No. No. Statistical Factor Mean
direct simple shear, and triaxial extension (range: Group sites data Regressions = 1/m
Slope Coef.a
10.6 ≤ Nkt ≤ 17.4), which is close to the direct simple N n
m r2
Nkt Bq
shear mode (suDSS). For calibration with the field Offshore 17 115 0.0812 0.980 12.320.51
vane (suv), they determined Nkt averages 13.3 with a NC-LOC
range 10.8 ≤ Nkt ≤ 19.9. Onshore 30 191 0.0833 0.867 12.00 0.53
For several sensitive Norwegian clays tested in NC-LOC
CAUC mode, Karlsrud et al. (2005) show the cone Sensitive 5 43 0.0968 0.507 10.33 0.84
factor is lower and within the ranges: 7.5 ≤ Nkt ≤ NC-
LOCb
11.5. Similarly, for a soft sensitive clay in Québec, OC 5 36 0.0737 0.862 13.57 0.49
Wang et al. (2015) reported that an Nkt = 10.5 was Intact
needed to match VST results. OC 5 22 0.0445 0.393 22.47 -0.01
In contrast, for overconsolidated and fissured Fissuredc
clays, Powell & Quarterman (1988) showed that a All 62 407 0.0750 0.923 13.33 0.55
much higher Nkt factor (20 < Nkt < 30) was necessary Clays
a
to match reference values of su obtained from labora- Note: r2 = coefficient of determination (for Nkt only)
b
Note: confidence level for sensitive clays is low
tory triaxial compression tests and field plate load c
Note: uncertainty level for OC fissured clays is high
test results.
2 CPTU-CAUC DATABASE yield stress or preconsolidation stress (σp'), giving
quite a different strength in comparison to recom-
2.1 Clay data pression-type series of tests that do not exceed σp'
The database focused on a total of 62 clays that were (Le et al. 2008). Also, both types of SHANSEP ap-
categorized into five main groupings: (a) 17 offshore proaches rely on laboratory one-dimensional consol-
soft-firm clays that are normally-consolidated (NC) idation testing and approximate interpretation mod-
to lightly-overconsolidated (LOC); (b) 30 onshore els for estimating the OCR at each elevation, which
clays that are NC-LOC, (c) 5 sensitive clays that are in turn is utilized to provide the undrained shear
NC-LOC, (d) 5 overconsolidated (OC) intact clays, strength via normalized strength ratio power law
and (e) 5 OC fissured clays. trends established by the testing program (Ladd &
A listing of these individual clays is given in Fig- DeGroot 2003).
ure 2, including assignment of a separate symbol for These su/σvc' versus OCR trends somewhat as-
each site. For tracking purposes, the clay symbols sume that vertical and lateral variability of the soil
are also grouped by color according to each catego- deposit is negligible, where in fact there may be sig-
ry: offshore (blue), onshore (green), sensitive (pink), nificant or subtle changes across the site. In some in-
intact OC clays (purple dot with yellow infilling), stances, the traditional normalized strength plots
and fissured OC clays (brown symbol with orange have shown to vary with water content (Finno &
infilling). The results and findings herein are based Chung 1992).
on a review of high-quality laboratory and field data Note, in the cases involving the few fissured
obtained from the open literature and private un- clays, the CAUC types of tests have rarely been per-
published technical reports. formed. Hence, the majority of su reference data for
The strength data for these sites were obtained fissured clays were procured from the results of iso-
from high-end laboratory tests, including consolidat- tropically-consolidated triaxial tests (CIUC) which
ed triaxial tests, and in selected cases, also direct are believed still valid since K0 > 1 for these geo-
simple shear mode. In addition to the strength re- materials. Regardless, the characterization of fis-
sults, index parameter values and other information sured clays represents a major challenge in practice,
were also collected about each of these sites, includ- e.g. Vitone and Cotecchia (2011). The work present-
ing: water content (wn), liquid limit (LL), plasticity ed here is less reliable in fissured clays and therefore
index (PI), unit weight (γt), preconsolidation stress should be used with care.
(σp') and overconsolidation ratio (OCR = σp'/σvo'),
as well as other available data (i.e. groundwater ta- 2.3 Piezocone data
ble, calcium carbonate content, etc.), where reported. For the offshore series, most CPTu data were ob-
For both the NC-LOC offshore and onshore se- tained using Fugro equipment, thus comparable re-
ries, the in-situ OCRs generally ranged between 1 sults in high quality and reliable measurements. For
and 2.5. These 47 soft-firm clays represent the bulk the onshore series, the published results came from a
of the dataset with n = 306 paired sets of data and variety of different commercial systems and it was
are characterized by an average Bq = 0.52. not possible to scrutinize these for their design,
maintenance & wear, analog-digital resolution,
2.2 Laboratory test procedures
compliance with ASTM/ISO standards, preparation
For each of the 62 clays considered, a reference val- of filter elements, saturation, and other factors.
ue of suc was evaluated from a CAUC or CK0UC In all but one case (Osaka Bay), all three CPTu
test, or test series program, performed on an individ- readings (qc, fs, u2) were obtained for each site.
ual specimen obtained from undisturbed sampling. The test depths ranged from 1.4 m to 245.6 m be-
Corresponding CPTu data were acquired at the same low ground surface, with a mean test depth of z =
site at elevations consistent with the sampling 17.1 m. Cone resistances ranged from 112 kPa to
depths. 10.7 MPa, with a mean qnet = 1082 kPa. Sleeve fric-
One important issue is that the testing laboratories tion values ranged from 0.5 kPa to 167 kPa with a
used different reconsolidation techniques to restore mean fs = 19 kPa. Penetration pore pressures varied
in-situ stress states on the specimens, including: di- from -22 kPa to 7.2 MPa, with a mean u2 = 567 kPa.
rect recompression to σvo' and σho', true K0 condi- Using the CPTU soil behavior type (SBT) charts es-
tions versus general anisotropic states (Kc), unload- tablished by Robertson (2009), the range of soil be-
ing-type SHANSEP, and recompression-type havior type index was determined as 2.3 ≤ Ic ≤ 3.7,
SHANSEP methods, as well as other variants with a mean Ic = 3.12 and S.D. = 0.24. The corre-
(Lunne et al. 2006). In some cases, the differences sponding soil zone was 3 (clay).
in suc obtained from different laboratory procedures Note that the table excludes cemented clays, car-
may be small (say CAUC versus CK0UC). For some bonate geomaterials, and weak rock showing Ic val-
clays, the use of classical SHANSEP testing destruc- ues on the order of 3. These geomaterials provide
tures the specimens by consolidating past the in-situ specific challenges for CPTU interpretation. It is al-
so noted that CPTU u2 measurements can be prob- listed in Table 1, or by guidance in Figure 4: Nkt =
lematic for high OC and fissured clays. In such cas- 10 (sensitive clays); Nkt = 12 (NC-LOC soft-firm on-
es, acquisition of u1 measurements should be consid- shore clays); Nkt = 12.3 (NC-LOC offshore clays);
ered (Robertson et al. 1986; Peuchen & Terwindt Nkt = 14 (OC intact clays); and Nkt = 25 (OC fissured
2014), with approximate conversion to u2 (e.g. clays).
Peuchen et al. 2010). Within each group, however, there is considera-
ble range and variance for the specified Nkt that
could be associated with sample disturbance, clay
3 UNDRAINED STRENGTH FROM CPTU mineralogy, fabric, organic content, and other varia-
bles.
3.1 Database results
The total collection of 407 paired sets of undrained 3.2 Nkt trend with Bq
shear strengths obtained from triaxial compression One well-known relationship indicates that Nkt de-
mode tests (suc) versus the net cone resistance (qnet) creases with Bq (Lunne et al. 1985; Skomedal &
are presented in Table 1 and sorted according to clay Bayne, 1988; Lunne et al. 1997; Hong et al. 2010;
category as shown. The table also shows mean val- Knappett & Craig 2012; Mayne et al. 2015). Figure
ues for pore pressure ratio Bq = (u2 - u0)/qnet. Figure 5 presents this direct trend for the database of Ta-
3 provides the summary graphical results for each of ble 1. In this case, each of the 62 clays is given
the groups. weighting by a single point, so as to not bias the re-
lationship obtained by regression analyses. Adopting
1000
a continuous function between the clay groups, then
All 62 Clays suc is obtained from:
Undrained Shear Strength, suc (kPa)
30
15
Fissured OC
Fissured OC: OC Intact Clays
25
Cone Bearing Factor, Nkt
R² = 0.9369 40
600
30
y = 0.9961x y = 0.6781x
500 20
R² = 0.9347 R² = 0.8783
400 10
0
300 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
All Clays
200 CAUC suc (kPa)
Linear (All Clays)
100 Figure 7. Strength anisotropy results from clay database.
Linear (All Clays)
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 The strength anisotropy data from this study indicate
CPTu suc = qnet/Nkt (kPa) the average relationships:
Figure 6. Measured CAUC strength versus CPTU-evaluated suDSS = 0.834 suc (r2 = 0.936) (3)
2
strength with Nkt = fctn (Bq) for all 62 clays. sue = 0.678 suc (r = 0.878) (4)
Also, the following average trends were observed:
For the arithmetic statistics (dashed red line of
Fig. 6), the ratio of measured-to-estimated values suAVE = 0.999 suDSS (r2 = 0.976) (5)
gives a mean value µ, with desired best results at suAVE = 0.839 suc (r2 = 0.977) (6)
1.00. Also, the standard deviation (S.D.) and coeffi-
cient of variation (COV = S.D./µ) are given. A COV 4 CONCLUSIONS
as close to 0.0 is ideal. For the regressions (solid
green line of Fig. 6), the best fit line provides a A high-quality database consisting of 407 laboratory
slope, while the least squares equation provides a triaxial compression tests paired with field piezo-
slope and intercept. In all 3 groupings, a small inter- cone data from 62 clays was grouped into five cate-
cept of around 6 kPa or less was obtained and slopes gories: offshore, onshore, sensitive, overconsolidat-
ed, and fissured geomaterials. A general trend to Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K., & Powell, J.J.M. 1997. Cone Pene-
handle soft to firm to stiff to hard intact clays and tration Testing in Geotechnical Practice, Blackie Academ-
ic/London, Routledge, New York: 312 p.
fissured clays was observed indicating Nkt decreas- Lunne, T., Randolph, M.F., Chung, S.F., Andersen, K.H. &
ing with pore pressure parameter, Bq. Sjursen, M. 2005. Comparison of cone and t-bar factors in
The results are considered highly valuable for use two onshore and one offshore clay sediments. Frontiers in
as a reference database for assessing Nkt. However, Offshore Geotechnics (Proc. ISFOG-1, Perth), Taylor &
caution should be applied when using the database at Francis Group, London: 981-989.
new sites containing limited high-quality laboratory Lunne, T., Berre, T., Andersen, K.H., Strandvik, S. & Sjursen,
M. 2006. Effects of sample disturbance and consolidation
data, particularly when sensitive clays or overcon- procedures on measured shear strength of soft marine Nor-
solidated fissured soils exist. wegian clays. Canadian Geot. J. 43 (7): 726-750.
Mayne, P.W. 2007. NCHRP Synthesis 368: Cone Penetration
REFERENCES Testing. Transportation Research Board, National Acade-
mies Press, Washington, DC: 118 p. www.trb.org
ASTM. 2012. Standard test method for electronic friction cone Mayne, P.W. 2008. Piezocone profiling of clays for maritime
and piezocone penetration testing of soils, Vol. 04.08, site investigations. Geotechnics in Maritime Engineering,
ASTM D5778-12. ASTM Intl., West Conshohocken. Vol. 1 (Proceedings, 11th Baltic Sea Geotechnical Confer-
Dayal, U. (1980). Free fall penetrometer: a performance evalu- ence, Gdansk), Polish Committee on Geotechnics: 333-350.
ation. Applied Ocean Research, 2(1), 39-43. Mayne, P.W. 2014. Development of an automated methodolo-
Finno, R.J., & Chung, C-J. 1992. Stress-strain-strength re- gy for evaluation of undrained shear strength of offshore
sponses of compressible Chicago glacial clays. Journal of clays from piezocone penetration tests. Report 122931
Geotechnical Engineering 118 (10): 1607. submitted by Georgia Tech Research Corp. (Project:
Hong, S.J., Lee, M.J., Kim, J.J. & Lee, W.J. 2010. Evaluation 2006U94) to Fugro Engineers, Leidschendam, The Nether-
of undrained shear strength of Busan clay using CPT. lands, 192 p.
Proc., 2nd Intl. Symp. on Cone Penetration Testing, Vol. 2 Mayne, P.W., Peuchen, J. & Baltoukas, D. 2015. Piezocone
(CPT'10, Huntington Beach, CA), Omnipress: 313-320. evaluation of undrained strength in soft to firm offshore
ISO 2006. Geotechnical investigation and testing – sampling clays. Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnnics III, Vol. 2 (Proc.
xxx ISO 22475-1:2006. Geneva: International Organization ISFOG, Oslo), Taylor & Francis, London: 1091-1096.
for Standardization Mayne, P.W. 2016. Evaluating effective stress parameters and
ISO 2012. Geotechnical investigation and testing – Field test- undrained shear strengths of soft-firm clays from CPT and
ing – Part 1: Electrical cone and piezocone penetration DMT. Australian Geomechanics Journal 51 (4): 27-55.
tests, International Standard ISO 22476-1:2012. (With Peuchen, J., Vanden Berghe, J.F. & Coulais, C. 2010. Estima-
Technical Corrigendum 1, January 2013). Geneva: Interna- tion of u1/u2 conversion factor for piezocone. Proc. 2nd In-
tional Organization for Standardization. ternational Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing, Vol. 2
ISO 2014. Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Specific (CPT'10, Huntington Beach, CA): Omnipress: 15-22.
Requirements for Offshore Structures – Part 8: Marine Soil Peuchen, J. & Terwindt, J. (2014), Introduction to CPT accura-
Investigations, International Standard ISO 19901-8:2014. cy, Proc. 3rd International Symposium on Cone Penetration
Karlsrud, K., Lunne, T., Kort, D.A. & Strandvik, S. 2005. Testing (CPT’14, Las Vegas, NV): 1-46. www.cpt14.com
CPTU correlations for clays. Proc. 16th ICSMGE (Osaka); Peuchen, J., Looijen, P. & Stark, N. 2017. Offshore characteri-
Vol. 2, Millpress, Rotterdam: 693-702. sation of extremely soft sediments by free fall penetrometer.
Knappett, J.A. & Craig, R.F. 2012. Craig's Soil Mechanics, 8th Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics: Smarter Solu-
Edition, Spon Press-Taylor & Francis, London: 570 pages. tions for Future Offshore Developments: Proc. 8th Intl. Conf.
Konrad, J-M. & Law, K.T. 1987. Undrained shear strength Royal Geographical Society, Volume 1. London: Society for
from piezocone tests. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 24 Underwater Technology: 370-377.
(3): 392-405. Powell, J.J.M. & Quarterman, R.S.T. 1988. The interpretation
Kulhawy, F.H. & Mayne, P.W. 1990. Manual on Estimating of cone penetration tests in clays with particular reference
Soil Properties for Foundation Design. Report EL-6800, to rate effects. Penetration Testing 1988, Vol. 2 (Proc.
Electric Power Res. Inst., Palo Alto, 306 p. www.epri.com ISOPT-1, Orlando), Balkema, Rotterdam: 903-909.
Ladd, C.C. & DeGroot, D.J. 2003. Recommended practice for Robertson, P.K., Campanella, R.G., Gillespie, D. & Greig, J.
soft ground site characterization. Soil & Rock America 1986. Use of piezometer cone data. Use of In Situ Tests in
2003, Vol. 1 (Proc. 12th Pan American Conference, MIT), Geotechnical Engineering. (Proc. In Situ ’86, Blacksburg,
Verlag Glückauf Publishing, Essen: 3-57. Virginia), GSP No. 6, ASCE, Reston/VA: 1263-1280.
Le, M-H., Nauroy, J-F., DeGennaro, V., Delage, P., Flavigny, Robertson, P.K. 1991. Closure to: Soil classification using the
E., Thanh, N., Colliat, J-L., Puech, A., & Meunier, J. 2008. cone penetration test. Canadian Geot. J. 28 (1): 176-178.
Characterization of soft deepwater West Africa clays: Robertson, P.K. 2009. Interpretation of cone penetration tests:
SHANSEP testing is not recommended for sensitive struc- a unified approach. Canadian Geot. J. 46 (11): 1337-1355.
tured clays. Proceedings Offshore Technology Conference Teh, C.I. & Houlsby, G.T. 1991. An analytical study of the
(Paper 19193), Houston, TX. cone penetration test in clay. Géotechnique 41 (1): 17-31.
Low, H.E., Lunne, T., Andersen, K.H., Sjursen, M.A., Li, X. & Vitone, C. & Cotecchia, F. 2011. The Influence of Intense Fis-
Randolph, M.F. 2010. Estimation of intact and remoulded suring on the Mechanical Behaviour of Clays. Géotech-
undrained shear strengths from penetration tests in soft nique, Vol. 61, (12), 1003-1018.
clays. Geotechnique 60 (11): 843-859. Wang, B., Brooks, G.R. & Hunter, J.A.M. 2015. Geotechnical
Lu, Q., Randolph, M.F., Hu, Y. & Bugarski, I.C. 2004. A nu- investigations of a large landslide site at Quyon, Québec.
merical study of cone penetration in clay. Géotechnique 54 Proc. GeoQuébec 2015, Paper ID 355, Canadian Geotech-
(4): 257-267. nical Conference.
Lunne, T., Christoffersen, H.P. & Tjelta, T.I. 1985. Engineer- Won, J.Y. (2013). Anisotropic strength ratio and plasticity in-
ing use of piezocone data in North Sea clays. Proc. 11th dex of natural clays. Proc. 18th ICSMGE (Paris), 445-448:
ICSMGE, Vol. 2 (San Francisco), Balkema, 907-912. www.issmge.org