11/15/2013

Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc.

Site Investigation Experts

CPTu dissipation tests -

theory to practice
Dr. Peter K. Robertson
Webinar #11

Nov. 2013

Robertson, 2013

CPT Guide
5th Edition

Download FREE copy from:

www.greggdrilling.com
www.cpt-robertson.com
www.geologismiki.gr
Robertson 5th Edition
& Cabal (Robertson) 2012
Robertson, 2013

1
 11/15/2013

Basic Cone Parameters

Friction ratio = (fs/qc)100 %

Sleeve Friction
fs = load/2rh

Pore Pressure
u2

Tip Resistance
qc = load/ r 2

Robertson, 2013

Robertson, 2013

Example CPTu
Fraser River Delta, Vancouver, BC (UBC)
Campanella & Robertson, 1983

Organic SILT

Clean Sand

silty sand

Diss. Test
NC Clay
u0

Penetration pore pressure

Holocene-age deltaic deposit

2
 11/15/2013

Test depth = 20m

700

Pore Presssure, kPa

(ui = 590 kPa)
Initial pore pressure, ui (t = 0)

Initial excess pore pressure (Du = ui - uo)

350

Equilibrium pore pressure, u0 (u0 =186 kPa)

Depth to piezometric surface (GWL) = 20 – (186/9.81) = 1.04m

Robertson, 2013

Dissipation test
• Provides information on:
– Equilibrium pore pressure, u0 (at that location
and time)
• piezometric profile (is it hydrostatic?)
• piezometric surface (i.e. GWL)
– Rate of dissipation
• Controlled primarily by coefficient of consolidation (ch)
and permeability (hydraulic conductivity, kh)
• Varies by orders of magnitude (very fast to very slow)

Robertson, 2013

3
 11/15/2013

Equilibrium pore pressure (u0)

• CPTu dissipation tests provide a profile of
equilibrium piezometric pressures (u0)
– Identify general flow regime
• No (vertical) flow (Hydrostatic conditions)
• Upward (vertical) flow (Artesian conditions)
• Downward (vertical) flow
– Effective even if filter is not 100% saturated
– Recommend at least one per CPT to confirm
piezometric profile (GWL)
• dissipation test in sand layers - faster
Robertson, 2013

Example of downward flow

Example dissipation
tests at 19m

Tailings

Equilibrium profile less than

hydrostatic

Robertson, 2013

4
 11/15/2013

Example diss. tests to u0

1 psi = 2.306 ft of water

u0 u0

t100 ~ 10 mins t100 ~ 13 mins

u0 u0

t100 ~ 4 mins t100 ~ 33 mins

Robertson, 2013

Rate of dissipation - theory

Main theories (many others):
•Tortensson (1977) – Cavity Expansion (CE)
•Baligh & Levadoux (1986) – Strain Path
•Houlsby & Teh* (1988, 1991) – Strain Path +FE
•Burns & Mayne* (1998) – CE & CSSM

*Teh/Houlsby and Burns/Mayne the most significant

Robertson, 2013

5
 11/15/2013

Theory – key findings

Theory:
• Dissipation controlled mostly by horizontal ch
• Initial distribution of excess pore pressures has a
major influence on process
• Consolidation predominantly in recompression mode
especially for times less than 50%
• Rigidity index (IR = G/su) important
• Somewhat similar to 1-D consolidation in laboratory
– horizontal (1-D) radial consolidation

Robertson, 2013

Strain Path Method

(Houlsby & Teh, 1988, 1991)

• Monotonic decay of Du with time

• Often applied with measured time to 50%
completion, t50 (single point)
• Need estimate of undrained rigidity index,
– IR = G/su
• Can handle different filter element locations
– e.g. u1 and u2 location
• Easy to use chart based on t50

Robertson, 2013

6
 11/15/2013

Strain Path Method Dissipation curves based on theory

U
0%
Degree of Consolidation:

U = 1 - Du/Dui 50%

T*=0.118 50%
where Dui = umeas - uo
100%
during penetration

Du = remaining excess U
pore pressure. 0%

T* = modified theoretical 50%

time factor T*=0.245 50%
Houlsby & Teh, 1991 100%

From Prof Mayne

Monotonic CPTu dissipation

(T50 *)r 2 I R
ch =
t50 u2
where T50* = 0.245 for u2
(= 0.118 for u1)
r = probe radius
= 1.78 cm for 10-cm2 cone
= 2.20 cm for 15-cm2 cone u1
IR = G/su = Rigidity Index

From Prof Mayne

7
 11/15/2013

Simple chart for monotonic dissipation

Strain Path Solution (Houlsby & Teh 1991)
1000
Modified from Robertson et al., 1992 Rigidity Index, I R
Coef. of Consolidation, ch (cm /min)

100 Simple Chart 500

2

200
10 100
50
1 20

0.1

u2
0.01
2
d = 3.57 cm (10 cm )
0.001
For 15-cm2
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
cones, multiply
these by 1.5 Measured Time t 50 (minutes)

Example monotonic dissipation

Tailings profile
Dissipation tests at 19m
Fine-grained, low PI silt
tailings

t50 = 85 sec
(1.4 min)

Log time

Robertson, 2013

8
 11/15/2013

Example monotonic dissipation

t50 = 85 sec
assuming IR = 100
ch = 9.6x10-6 m2/s
= 5.76 cm2/min t50 = 85 sec
assuming IR = 100
ch = 9.6x10-6 m2/s
= 5.76 cm2/min

Better for short dissipations

(less than 100%)
t100 > 2000s
t100 > 2000s (>30mins)

Log time Square root time

Average laboratory ch values and CPTu results

Teh & Houlsby theory

for 50 < Ir < 500

After Robertson et al., 1992

Robertson, 2013

9
 11/15/2013

Rigidity Index IR
t = shear stress
tmax = su = undrained shear strength

Rigidity Index:
IR = G/su

t/gs = G= shear modulus

gRef = 1/IR gs = shear strain

From Prof Mayne

Rigidity Index from PI and OCR

300
PI = 10 Keaveny & Mitchell (1986): (1986):
Rigidity Index, IR50 = G/su

Keaveny & Mitchell

250 CK 0 UC Triaxial Data Data
CK 0 UC Triaxial

200
20
150
30

100
40

50
50
>50

0
1 2 5 10

From Prof Mayne Overconsolidation Ratio, OCR

10
 11/15/2013

Dissipation in OC Fissured Clays & Silts

Baton Rouge, LA
3000 (Chen and Mayne, 1994)
Pore Pressure (kPa) u1
Monotonic u2
2000 uo
u2
u1

1000 Dilatory

0
1 10 100 1000 10000
From Prof Mayne
Time (sec)

Dilatory dissipation
(Burns & Mayne, 1998)
Measured pore pressure
um = uo + Duoct + Dushear

rp=ro(Ir)0.333
qMIT
Dus

pMIT

Hydrostatic Spherical Cavity Stress Path

uo = hwgw Expansion (shear)

Theory: 1-D consol. + CE + Cam Clay soil model

From Prof Mayne

11
 11/15/2013

Burns & Mayne - Stiff Clay

Requires curve fitting Measured
1800
Pore Pressure (kPa)
uo
1500 Ir = 50
Ir = 100
1200 Ir = 200

900
Taranto
Depth = 9 m
600 Shear Zone = 2 mm

300 2
ch = 0.4 mm /s
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Time (sec)
From Prof Mayne

Complex dissipation data

Theories can not handle
dissipation data starting from
negative values (either true
negative of below u0)

Real soil behaviour and initial

pore pressure distribution more
complex
?
Negative values
Risk that sensor was not 100%
saturated

Robertson, 2013

12
 11/15/2013

Complex distribution of pore pressures

Modified from Campanella et al. 1985

Robertson, 2013

Complex dissipations

Root time plot

extrapolate to
assumed initial
pore pressure, ui
then calculate t50

After Sully et al, 1999

Robertson, 2013

13
 11/15/2013

Short dissipations

Root time plot

straight line fit
(Teh & Housby)

After Sully et al, 1999

Robertson, 2013

Example

Log Time Root Time

? Uncertain extrapolation
Simple with less uncertainty

t50 t50

Robertson, 2013

14
 11/15/2013

Example
Log Time Root Time

Negative values
t50 t50

Border between overlying sand and soft clay Robertson, 2013

Unloading from push rods

Rapid change in
pore pressure due
to unloading from
push rods
Fix (clamp) push
rods to avoid
unloading

Mostly u1 location

After Sully et al, 1999

Robertson, 2013

15
 11/15/2013

Complex soil behaviour

• Most theories assume simple stress-strain response
– Elastic-perfectly plastic
– Simple non-linear stress-strain (e.g. Cam Clay)
• Real soil response more complex
– Highly non-linear
– Strain softening (sensitive)
– Rate and stress path dependent
• Complex loading around cone
– Unloading around shoulder of tip

Robertson, 2013

Rate effects - drainage

Kim et al, 2010

Undrained

Dimensionless Velocity, V = v D / cv
(v = penetration rate; D = cone diameter; cv = coefficient of consolidation)

Undrained when V > 1 [i.e. cv < 7x10-5 m2/s (44 cm2/min); t50 > 30s]
Robertson, 2013

16
 11/15/2013

Rate effects on t50

DeJong & Randolph

undrained (2012) showed that
when t50 < 50s results
are influenced by partial
drainage and that
modified T50 values are
recommended when t50
< 100s
10cm2

Robertson, 2013

Average laboratory ch values and CPTu results

Partial drainage

Typical range of
t50 values (10cm2)

0.5 min < t50 < 500 min (~10hrs)

When t50 < 1min (60s)

undrained penetration is likely
penetration partially drained &
theory less applicable

Robertson, 2013

17
 11/15/2013

Dissipation test
• Many uncertainties
– Initial distribution of u (esp. for OCR > 4)
– Soil non-homogeneity (stratigraphy)
– Soil macrofabric and anisotropy
– Influence of non-horizontal dissipation
– Soil disturbance due to penetration
– Filter element clogging/smearing
– Filter not 100% saturated
• Accurate to within an order of magnitude,
unless soil is soft and homogeneous
Robertson, 2013

Anisotropy in flow
• Coefficient of consolidation (c) influenced by
permeability (k) and compressibility/stiffness (M)
c = k M/gw [k = c gw/M]

M = 1-D constrained modulus (relevant to the loading)

gw = unit weight of water
• Vertical and horizontal flow anisotropy
cv = ch (kv/kh)
Robertson, 2013

18
 11/15/2013

Permeability Anisotropy
Leroueil & Hight (2003, Singapore Workshop)
Champlain Sea Clays
Permeability Anisotropy
Canadian Clays
1.E-08
Atchafalaya Clay
Horizontal Permeability, k h (m/s)

New Jersey
Varved Clays Other Clays (Tavenas)

50 mm triaxial

Hong Kong

Swedish Clays
Ratio kh/kv Leroueil (1990)
1.E-09 = 3 Mexico City
2
Bothkennar
1.2
1 New Liskeard Varved
Data Compiled kh/kv = 1
by Leroueil et al.
kh/kv = 1.2
(CGJ Vol. 27,
No. 5, 1990) kh/kv = 2

kh/kv = 3
1.E-10
1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08

Vertical Permeability, k v (m/s)

From Prof Mayne

Permeability from CPT

Parez & Fauriel, 1988
Based on theory
via dissipation
50 kPa test, t50
100 kPa

kh = (ch gw)/M
Undrained

where:
M is the 1-D constrained
Undrained
modulus
gw is the unit weight of
Increasing M water, in compatible units.
M can be estimated from
Qtn

Robertson, 2013

19
 11/15/2013

Estimated permeability based on SBT

SBTn SBT Permeability, k (m/sec) SBT Ic

1 Sensitive fine-grained 3x10-10 to 3x 10-8 NA

2 Organic soils - clay 1x10-10 to 1x 10-8 Ic > 3.60
3 Clay 1x10-10 to 1x 10-9 2.95 < Ic < 3.60
4 Silt mixtures 3x10-9 to 1x 10-7 2.60 < Ic < 2.95
5 Sand mixtures 1x10-7 to 1x 10-5 2.05 < Ic < 2.60
6 Sand 1x10-5 to 1x 10-3 1.31 < Ic < 2.05
7 Sand to gravelly sand 1x 10-3 to 1 Ic < 1.31
8 Very dense/stiff soil* 1x 10-8 to 1x10-3 NA
9 Very stiff fine-grained 1x 10-9 to 1x10-7 NA

After Lunne et al, 1997

Robertson, 2013

Update on k from CPT via SBT Ic

k, m/s
Range suggested by
Lunne et al, 1997
DRAINED

UNDRAINED

SBT Ic

Robertson, 2013

20
 11/15/2013

Generalized CPT Soil Behaviour Type

CPT Soil Behaviour

A: Drained-dilative
A
B: Drained-contractive
B C
C: Undrained-dilative
D
D: Undrained-contractive

Robertson, 2013

Dissipation test procedures

• Saturate pore pressure sensor
• Stop penetration & record pore pressure with
time
– Frequent rate at first then more slowly
– Logarithmic rate of dissipation
• Fix rods (i.e. do not remove load during dissipation)
– avoid changing stress around cone by removing load

Robertson, 2013

21
 11/15/2013

Summary
• Dissipation tests very useful
– Equilibrium piezometric pressure, u0
– Rate of dissipation – ch & kh
• Accurate to within an order of magnitude, unless soil is
soft and homogeneous
• Useful to perform at least 1 dissipation test in
each CPT sounding (very fast in sand layers)
• Helpful to re-saturate sensor
• Helpful to evaluate time delay for pile load test

Robertson, 2013

Questions?

22