Geotechnical Engineering Handbook SCOTT we MMC Led qi") a | BOO ey fenerGeotechnical Engineering Handbook Editor: Ulrich Smoltczyk BErnst & sonntr Professor Dog. Ubien Smet Adetseabe 3 -7t032 peresn ‘exer: Campo Yao Maga, Tessin Insiumontation fr inestigating a ecarsive 250 m deep sug mass, Solxperts AG ‘This hook contsns 616 figures ard 82 tables Die Deus Biothek - CIP Catalogue Publeation Data | DateBe reo fr ts publoston s saHate "om De Deutschen Bibkotiak Isan sasso1sues (92002 Est & Sonn Vong fr Arntehtur urd teenisene Wissenscnatien GmaH una Co. AG, Bern Al its ceserved, especialy those of translation info other languages. No pat ofthis book may be reproduced In any form «By photocopying, mcronnotegranny, or an ner process ~ or be rercred of ranslazed nto 3 language useanie by machines, especialy dara processing mecrires, without whiten permission of tne publisher. "Typeset Mtterwaune& Partner Kommunikatcesenselischah mbM, Planestaat Prnting Barz Deuek Gb, Oaemstact Bieaing:Liges & Dopt Buznoindecei GnbH, Heppeneln in GormaryPreface to Volumes 1 to 3 It was in the early 1950s that a German consultant in Berlin came to the conclusion that structural engineers needed much more guidance on the special problems which they faced on a daily basis due to geotechnical difficulties associated with designing structures. He discussed this with his professional friends in civil engineering companies, administration and science and with a publisher who became quite interested in editing an appropriate “pocket book” about yeotechnical matters. This was the birth of the German “Grundbau- ‘Taschenbuch" (ground engineering packet hook). The first edition had already been quite success for the publisher but some professionals thought it could he improved. The editor at that time was assisting his professor of soil mechanics and foundation engineering at the Technical University in Berlin, who was also a member of the editorial board. He asked me to consider the concerns that had been raised, and as a result of I was given the job of criticizing authors who were much more experienced and prominent than myself. Thope, however, that those authors wito are stil alive, will forgive the ‘youngster for some of the things he wrote, In subsequent editions we added material that we thought might provide additional pro- fessional help. This, however, made the “pocketbook” expand until today it comprises three volumes of a handbook that was published at the beginning of the 21st century in its sixth edition. There is a general topic to each volume: the first one deals with the fundamentals, the second with geotechnical procedures and the third one with founda: tion elements and structures. Potential subscribers asked me why I thought they might be persuaded to spend money on a sixth edition when they already had the fifih one? was glad to point out the fact that firstly, we have been lucky enough to obtain new and famous authors to bring a fresh viewpoint to many of the problems, and secondly that the significant harmonisation of design rules in Europe has produced new types of verification procedures due to limit state design which will be new to some practitioners, Recently, globalization has also become an essential topic. both in the field of publish: ing and in international civil engineering activities. Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, a publisher of technical literature for more than 150 years, became associated with Wiley of New York, and the question was asked as to why such a handbook on geotechnies was not available in English. You are now holding the result of this discussion but we should confess that it has not been an easy job. It was realized that for many of the chapters, a one-by-one tuanslation would not have been appropriate, The authors of the various chapters were therefore asked to review their texts on behalf of the readers outside German speaking countries and to consider the international state of the art to that extent that would, at the very least, allow further concise guidance to be given by appropriate references. As a book devoted to daily practice of experts, it also had to take account of the vonsiderable bulk of technical rules already in place, the contents of which should not be repeated simply to fill pages but should be commented on, controversially if necessary.I Preface wo Volumes 1103 ‘Volume 1 starts with sn overview of the state of internationsl geotechnical harmonisation, ‘which has been achieved by the civil engineering Eurocode programme in which design is now based on the concept of limit state analysis and the establishment of characteristic values for actions and resistances. Since the editor for more than the last two decades participated in this work, he became well aware of the difficulties raised by the need to find the relationship between conventionally applied geotechnical parameters and characteristic values. Chapter 1.2 is therefore devoted to finding the characteristic values for geotechnical parameters, The next two chapters deal with field and laboratory testing whilst emphasising the state of knowledge documented in the pre-standard versions of Furocode 7 ~ Parts 2 and 3, Chapters 1.5 to 1.9 describe the scientific background and calculation models to be used in geotechnical design, whilst Chapter 1.10 explains how these numerical tools can be used nowadays in design practice. {As surveying has always been a most important method of conteolling the performance of geotechnical structures dusing construction and thereafter ~ especially when obser vational methods are used ~ the stale of modern geodetic know-how, including setelite positioning is covered in Chapter I.11, To supplement field-testing, Chapter 1.12 gives otails of the recent developments in measurement equipment. The special issues associ ated with defining the actions caused by ice and ice flows are described in Chapter 1.14 Finally, Chapters 1.13 and 1.15 focus on the engineering geology problems of mass move- ments and rok mechanies problems of slope stability. Yolume 2 collects togetiner 14 chapters dealing with the various procedures available for ground improvement (Chapter 2.1), grouting (Chapter 22). underpinning, (Chap- ter2,3), freezing techniques (Chapter 24), anchoring (Chapter 29) drilling (Chapter?.6), driving and pulling (Chapter 2.7), offshore processing (Chapter 2.8), ground dewatering (Chapter 29), rock excavation (Chapter 210), tube jacking (Chapter 2.11) earth works (Chapter 2.12), application of geotextiles (Chapter 2.13), and engineering biology (Chapter 214) Each of these chapters has been produced by authors who are experts in theic specific professional field. They outline the most recent developments that have occurred and provide the information necessary for geotechnical designers to select the proper method to achieve their foundation proposals. The broad variety of techniques used required a very concise treatment of the information, often leaving the technical details to those who are especially familiar with these. Volume 3 is concerned with the geotechnical design of structures, starting with spread foundations (Chapter 3.1), pile foundations (Chapter 3.2), and caissons (Chapter 3.3). The application of the new limit state concept is illustrated by examples. This also applies to Chapter 34 on the stability of excavations, in which German and British practice are compared, Chapters 3.5 and 3.6 are concerned with excavation pits protected by trench retaining walls or sheet pile walls, and in Chapter 3.7 a general outline of grav walls is presented. The special aspects of machine foundations and foundations in areas of subsidence are dealt with in Chapters 3.8 and 39 and finally the waterproofing of structures is discussed in Chapter 3.10. Hopefully, the three volumes will enable the practicing engineer to interpret test results ina mote meaningful way, to judge the likely imitations of any chosen method with more confidence and to therefore find the most appropriate solution to the foundation problems that he is faced with solving in his daily practice. The object of this handbook is also to close the credibility gap between geotechnical science and practice that is often seen in either type of congress and symposium.Preface to Volumes 1 t03 vil ‘The editor gratefully acknowledges the involvement of the authors who have spent a considerable amount of extra time producing the chapters, over and above their daily professional duties - especially as not all of them are sufficiently familiar with the English language. Where such difficulties arose, the authors were asked to focus on providing, the correct translation of their technical terms. The linguistic improvement, was then provided by Robert W. East, of Aylesbury, UK, whose help reviewing the papers is much appreciated. October 2002 Ulrich SmoltezykList of contributors. Dipl.-Ing. Christophe Bauduin NN. BESIX S.A. Avenue des Communautés 100 1200 Bruxelles Belgium (Chap. 1.1 International agreements, Chap. 1.2 Determination of characteristic values) UIE Bergdahl Chiet Engineer ‘Swedish Geotechnical Tnstitute 58193 Linképing Sweden (Chap. 1.3 Geotechnical field investigations) Dr. Jan Bohs Department of Engineering Geology Charles University Albertov 6 12843 Praha 2 Czech Republic (Chap. 14 Properties of soits and rocks and their laboratory determination) Dr-Ing. Clans Erichsen WEI - Beratende Ingenicure fir Grundbau und Felsbau GmbH HenricistraBe 50 52072 Aachen Germany (Chap. 1.15 Stability of rock slopes} Prot Dr-Ing Dr. h.c Gerd Gudehus Institut fur Bodenmechanik und Grundbau 76128 Karlsruhe Germany (Chap. 1.5 Constitutive laws for soits ‘from a physical viewpoint, Chap. 1.9 Farth pressure determination) Prof. Dr-Ing. Peter Gussmaan Am Bnechle 3 74629 Untersteinbach Germany (Chap. 1.10 Numerical methods) Prof. Dr-Ing. Martia Hager Merler Allee 99 53125 Boan Germany (Chap. 1.14 fee touding actions) Prof. Dr.-Ing, Ginter Kleia Ostieldstrate 64a 30559 Hannover Germany (Chap. 1.8 Soil dynamics and earthquakes) Prof. Dr. Edmund Krauter geo-international Mombacher StraBle 49-53, 55122 Maine Germany (Chap. 1.13 Phenomenology of natural slopes and their mass movement)XX. Prof. Dr-Ing. Dr. se. techn. he. Klaus Linkwitz Obere Tannenbergstratle 24 71229 Leonberg Germany (Chap. 1.11 Metrotogical monitoring of slopes, embankments and retaining walls) Dr-Ing, Klaus-Jurgen Melzer KIM Industry Consult Drosselweg 7a 61440 Oberursel Germany (Chap. 1.3 Geotechnical fietd investigations) Prot. Dr. Roberto Nova Politecnico di Milano Piazza Leonardo da Vins 20133 Milano Italy (Chap. 1.7 Treaiment of geotechnical ultimate limit states by the theory of plasticity} Prof. PhD DS¢ (Eng.) Harry Poulos PO Box 125 North Ryde New South Wales ‘Australia 2113, (Chap. 1.6 Catcutation of stress and settlement in soil masses) [Link], Dr-lIng, Herrmann Schad ReinsburgstraBe 1116 70197 Stuttgart Germany (Chap. 1.10 Numerical methods) Prof. Dr.-Ing, Willfried Schwarz ‘Am Appelgraben 50 59425 Weimar-Taubach Germany (Chap. 1.11 Metrological monitoring of slopes, embankments and retuiting walls) Lisi ufevaitibutors Prot, PRD Ian M, Smith ‘Simon Engineering clo University of Manchester Brunswick Street Manchester M13 9PL Great Britain (Chap. 1.10 Numerical methods) Prot Dr-Ing, habil. Dr-Ing, E.h. Ulrich Smoltezyk Adilerstrafe 63 71032 Bablingen Germany (Chup. 11 International agreements) Dipl.-Ing. Paul von Soos Reubiweg 30 ‘81247 Machen Germany (Chap. 1-4 Properties of soils and rocks ‘and their laboratory determination) Dr-Ing, Frank Sperling Spinozawej 12 2202 AV Nordwijk The Netherlands (Chap. 1.8 Soil dynamies and earthquakes) Dr. Arno Thut Solexperts AG POB 230, ‘8603 Schwerzenbach Switzerland (Chup. 1.12 Geotechnical measurement procedures) Prot. Dr-Ing, Walter Wittke ‘WBI- Beratende Ingenieure fir Grundbau und Felsbau GmbH Henricistragle 50 52072 Aachen Germany (Chap. 1.15 Stability of rock slopes)List of contributors ‘Tony Barley Geotechnical Consultant High View Harlow Pines, Harrogate HG3 1PZ (Chap. 2.5 Ground anchors) Dipl-Lng. Bernd Braun 620 Dover Court Coppell, TX 75019-2866 USA, (Chap. 2.4 Ground freezing) Jacob Gerrit de Git ‘Gemeentewerken Rotterdam Galvanistraat 15 Postbus 6633 3002 AP Rotterdam The Netherlands (Chap, 28 Foundations in open water) Dipl-Ing. Regine lagow-Kleff Heltorfer Strafie 91 47269 Duisburg, Germany (Chap. 24 Ground freezing) Prof. Dr-Ing. Hans-J udwig Jessberger! (Chap. 24 Ground freezing) Dipl.-Ing, Klaus Kirsch Keller Grundbau GmbH KaiserleistraBe 4 63067 Offenbach Germany (Chap. 2.1 Ground improvement) Dring, Helmut Ostermayer Drosselweg 13 2152 Krailing Germany (Chap. 2.5 Ground anchors) Dr-Ing. Thomas Rumpelt Smoltezyk & Partner GmbH Untere Waldplatze 14 70569 Stuttgart German (Chap. 2.12 Earthworks) Dring, Fokke Saathott BBG Bauberatuag Geokunststoffe GrabH Alter Bahndamm 12 49448 Lemiorde Germany (Chap. 2.13 Geosynthetics in geotechnical and hydraulic engineering) Prof. h. ¢. Dring, Hugo M. Schiechtt" (Chap. 2.14 Stope protection by bioengineering techniques) Prof, Dr-Ing. Hans-Henaing Schmidt Smoitezyk & Partner GmbH Untere Waldplatae 14 70569 Stuttgart Germany (Chap. 2.12 Earthworks) Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stephan Semprich Anstitut fr Bodenmechanik und Grundbau Technische Universitat Graz Rechbauerstrafe 12 8010 Graz, ‘Austria (Chap. 2.2 Growsing in geotechnicat engineering) Prof. Dring. Ulrich Smoltezyk AdlerstraBe 63 74032 Boblingen Germany (Chap. 23 Underpinning, undereutings Chap. 29 Ground dewatering)XVII Dr-Ing, Wolfgang Sondermann Keller Grundbau GmbH KaiserleistraBe 44 63067 Offenbach Germany (Chap. 2.1 Ground improvement) Prof, Dr-Ing. Gert Stadler Institut far Baubetrieb und Bauwirtschaft Technische Universitat Graz Rechbauerstrafee 12 8010 Graz, Austria (Chap. 2.2 Grouting in geotechnical engineering) Prof. Dr-Ing, Axel C. Toepfer Alter Weg 10a 38302 Woltenbuttel Germany (Chap. 2.10 Construction methods {for cuttings and slopes in rock: Chap. 2.11 Microtunneling) List of contuibutors Dr-kng, Georg Ulrich Baugrundinstitut Zam Brunnentobel 6 £88299 Leutkirch-Herbrazbofen Germany (Chap. 26 Driling technoloy) em. Prof Ir. Abraham F- Van Weele Hofstede 12 2821 VX Stolwijk ‘The Netherlands (Chap. 2.7 Driving and extraction) Prof, Dr-Ing. Karl J. Witt MarienstraBe 7 90421 Weimar Germany (Chap. 23 Underpinning, undercuiting)List of contributors Prof. Kurt Dieter Bigenbrod, PhD Department of Civil Engineering Lakehead University 955 Oliver Road, Thunder Bay Ontario P7B SE! Canada (Chap. 3.2 Pite foundations) Dipl.-Ing. Karl-Friedrich Emig Griningweg 27d 22119 Hamburg, Germany (Chap. 3.10 Watertight buildings and siructares) Prof, Dr-Ing. Alfred Haack clo STUVA-Koin Mathias-Briggen-StraBe 41 50827 Koln Germany (Chap. 3.10 Watertight buildings and siructures) Prof. Dr-Ing. habil. Achim Hettler Rittererbergstrafic 4 76437 Rastatt Germany (Chap. 3.4 Stability of excavations) Prof. Dr-Ing. Manfred Kany Vesinerstrale Sb 90513 Ziendoet Germany (Chap. 3.1 Spread foundations) 0, Prof. Dr-Ing. Hans-Georg Kempfert Universitit Gesamthochsehle Kassel Fachbereich I Minchebergstrae 7 34125 Kassel Germany (Chap. 3.2 Pile foundations) Dr-Ing. Dietrich Klein SteinstraBe 23, 97270 Kist Germany (Chap. 3.8 Machine foundations) Prof. Dr-Ing. Giinter Klein OstfeldstraBe 64a 30559 Hannover Germany (Chap. 3.8 Machine foundations) Dipl-Ing, Hans Lingenfelser Meyerhofener Weg 8 61352 Bad Homburg Germany (Chap. 3.3 Caissons) Prof. Dr. Dr-Ing. he. Boleslav Mazurkiewicz ul. Syrokomlt 7 81-439 Gdynia Poland (Chap, 3.6 Sheet pite walls for harbours ‘and waterways) Prof. Dr-Ing. Dieter Netzel Ingenicurgemeinschait Bauen GebelsbergstraBe 41 70199 Stuttgart Germany (Chap. 3.1 Spread foundations) Prof, Dr.-Ing. Dietmar Placzek Erdbaulaboratorium Essen SusannastraBe 31 45136 Essen Germany (Chap. 3.9 Foundations in mining regions)XVIII Brian Simpson, PhD Arup Geotechnics 13 Fiuroy Street London WIP 6BQ Great Britain (Chap. 3.4 Stability of excavations) Prof, Dr-Ing. Dr.-Ing. Eh. Ulrich Smoltezyk AdlerstraBe 63 71032 Bablingen Germany (Chap. 3.1 Spread foundations, Chap. 3.2 Pile foundations, Chap. 3.7 Gravity retaining walls) Dr-Ing. Manfred Stocker Bauer Spezialtiefbau GmbH WiltelsbacherstraBe 5 86529 Schrabeaausen Germany (Chap. walls, cu 5 Bored pile walls, diaphragne -off walls) Contents ©. Prof. Dr-Ing. Bernhard Wal, Bergische Universitit GH Wuppertal Fachbereich Bauingenieurwesen PauluskirchstraBe 7 42285 Wuppertal Germany (Chap. 3.5 Bored pile walls, diaphragm walls, cut-off walls) ©, Prof. Dr-Ing, Anton Weissenbach Am Gehl 14 22844 Norderstedt Germany (Chap. 3.4 Stability of excavations)Contents of Volume 1: Fundamentals Smoltczyk/Bauduin, International agreements Bauduin, Determination of characteristic values Melzer/Bergdahl, Geotechnical field investigations von Soos/Bohaé, Properties of soils and rocks and their laboratory determination Gudeiuus, Constitutive laws for soils from a physical viewpoint Poules, Calculation of stress and settlement in soil masses Nova, Treatment of geotechnical ultimate limit states by the theory of plasticity KleiniSperling. Soil dynamics and earthquakes Gudehus. Earth pressure determination Gussmann/Schad/Smith, Numerical methods Linkwite/Schwarz, Metrological monitoring of slopes, embankments and retaining walls Thur, Geotechnical measurement procedures Krauter, Phenomenology of natural slopes and their mass movement Hager, ice loading actions Witke/Erichsen, Stability of tock slopes Contents of Volume 2: Procedures Kirsch/Sondermann, Ground improvement SemprictiStadler, Grouting in geotechnical engineering WitcSmoticzyk, Underpinning, undercutting JessbergerHagow-KlajBraur, Ground freezing ‘Ostermayer/Barley, Ground anchors Ulrich, Drilling technology Van Weele, Driving, and extraction de Gijt, Foundations in open water Smoltczyk, Ground dewatering Toepfer, Consteuction methods for cuttings and slopes in rock Toepfer, Microtunnelling Schmid/Rumpett, Earthworks ‘Saathoff, Geosynthetics in geotechnical and hydraulic engineering Schiechul, Slope protection by bioengineering techniquesPreview Contents of Volume 2: Procedures Kinseh/Sondermann, Ground improvement Semprich’Stadler, Grouting Win’Smotuzyk, Underpinning and undercutting Jessberger/dagow-Klaff/Brown, Ground freezing ‘Ostermayer/Barley. Ground anchors Ulrich, Drilling technology van Weele, Driving and extraction de Giye, Foundations in open water Rie/Kordonis, Ground water low and drainage techniques Toepfer, Construction methods for cuttings and stapes in rock Toepfer, Micrownneling Schmid Rumpet, Eanhworks Saathoff, Application of geotextiles Schiechi, Slope protection by bioengineering techniques Contents of Volume 3: Structures Simoliezyk/Netzel/Kany, Spread foundations Kempferd Eigenbrod/Smoltczyk, Pile foundations Lingenfelser. Caissons Weifenbach/euler/Simpson, Stability of excavations Stocker/Walz, Tench walls Mazurkiewic2, Sheet-pile walls for harbours and waterways Haack/Emig, Waterproofing of buildings and structures Klein/Klein, Machine foundations Placzek, Foundations in mining regions Brandl, Slope protection and retainmentContents of Volume 1: Fundamentals Smoltezyk/Baudwin, International agreements Bauduin, Determination of characteristic values. Melzer/Bergdahl, Geotechnical field investigations von Soos/Bahdé. Properties of soils and rocks and theit laboratory determination Gudehus, Constitutive laws for Soils from a physical viewpoin Poulos Calculation of siress and settlement in soil masses Nova, Treatment of geotechnical ultimate limit states by the theory of plasticity Klein/Sperling, Soil dynamics and earthquakes Gudehus, Barth pressure determination Gussmanr/SchadSmith, Numerical methods Linkwitz/Schwarz, Mettological monitoring of slopes, embankments and retaining walls Taut, Geotechnical measurement procedures Krawer, Phenomenology of natural slopes and their mass movement Hager, ice loading actions Wiltke/Erichsen, Stability of rock slopes Contents of Volume 3: Structures SmoltczsK/Netze/Kany. Spread foundations Kempfer/Figenbrod/Smoltczyk, Pile foundations Lingenfelser, Cassons Weillenbach/Hettier/Simpson, Stability of excavations Stocker/Walz, Trench walls Mazurkiewiez, Sheet pile walls for harbours and waterways Smoltczyk, Gravity etaining walls Kein/Klein, Machine foundations Placzek, Foundations in mining regions Haack/Emig, Waterpsootig, of buildings and structuresContents International agreements, Ulrich Smottexyk and Christophe Bauduin Classification of geotechnical literature 66... 6.6 ce eeteee eee eee Symbols. International rules for foundation engineering, Basic terms by EN 1999 and EN 1997 Classification of assessments in Eurocodes (EN 1990, 1. Limit states (EN 1990) Design situations (EN 1990, 35) Geotechnical categories (EN 1997. Partial safety factor method . . Geotechnical report Ground investigation report (EN 1997-1,34) oo... ccccseeccees Ground design report (EN 1997-1, 28) References : ooo Determination of characteristic values Christophe Rauduin Introduction . From derived value to design value ........sccecssecesee essences Sequential steps Points of view when analyzing test results. - Points of view when determining characteristic values of ground parameters (EN 1997-1245) Use of statistical methods Examples Local sampling. Local sampling with V well-known Soil property increasing linearily with depth treet Analysis of shear tests - ca Example: Boulder Clay... 000s ceeeeeeeeeereeeeeeeeeneeeeneen References 0 v 7 » 25 28 31 7 38 39 a 45 49Contents Geotechnical field i Klaus-Jirgen Melzer and Ulf Bergdaht Basics .. . st Standards SI Preliminary investigations 2 Design investigations : 3 Ground investigation by excavation, drilling and sampling ............. $3 General . . 3 Investigation of soils 56 Investigation of rocks -..- ea Obtaining special samples : 67 Investigation of groundwater conditions .... 68 Ground investigation by penetration testing n General . vee . 7 Dynamic probing... . : B Standard penetration test coe 7 ‘Cone penetration test Dieteeees + Field vane test . o o to 0 Weight sounding test... : ceetttteteeeeee nese 8 Lateral pressure tests in boreholes 96 Equipment and test procedures cee 96 Evaluation... : 102 Determination of density 106 ‘Sampling methods cotiettiteeeeeeeeeeteeeeeseteee eee: 106 Radiometric methods... -- : 107 Geophysical methods : vee cece 109 General — : 109 Brief descriptions of some methods ceetteeeeeeees + 110 References . : : i Standards 66sec eceeeeeeeeeeees : feteeeees 116 Properties of soils and rocks and thei Paul von Soos and Jan Bohai Soils and rocks ~ origins and basic terms . a - 9 119 : to Diitiisciersreeeeees HY 3 120 Laboratory investigation ~ performing and evaluating .......... 120 Soil properties and laboratory testing I Properties of rocks .. . 126 ics and properties of solid soil particles 126 Particle size distribution . . ceeeeeeeee 126 Density of solid particles. 129 Mineralogical composition of soils 130 Shape and roughness of particles 132 Specie surface 12Contents xl 46 Organiccontent 4.7 Carbonate content 5 Characteristics and properties of soil aggregates 5.1 Fabric of soils bene 52 Porosity and voids ratio 53 Density 5.4 Relative density SS Water content 56 Limits of consistency ~ Atterberg limits 57 Water adsorption 58 Compaction; moisture ~ density relations .- 59 Size of voids; filters 5.10 Capillatity ooo eee eee seer ree 5.11 Water permeability 5.12 Air permeability 5 Stress-strain behaviour 6. General considerations 62. One-dimensional compression and consolida 63. Triaxial compression test ......... 64 — Unconfined compression test. 65 Tests with the general stale of stress ~ true triaxial test and biaxial test 6.6 Measurement of time dependent deformation... rn 7 Determination of shear strength parameters feces 7.1 General aspects of strength testing : ceteteete teens 72. Triaxial compression test 73. Determination of unconfined compressive strength and sei on (eedometer) test. 7.4 Shear box test 180, 8 Determination of tensile strengt : veceees 182 9 Determination of slake durability of rock 183, 19 Correlations. . cece 1B 10.1 Froctor density and optimum water content of fine-grained soils 183 10.2 Water permeability .. 184 10.3. Stress-strain relations for 185 10.4 Parameters of shear strength 187 11 Chssifcation . . : Ba LL 189 UL1 Soil classification i189 112 Rock classification . 12 References . 200 ‘Constitutive laws for soils from a physical viewpoint Gerd Gudehus 1 Introduction 207 Ll Motive and objective oo... 0. ccs ceeeee fiecteeseeserees 207 12 Contents mt PUL) 208 2 States and change of stat veeeeeeeeeee 210 21° States. PI 22 Changes of state...)xm Contents 23 Special sequences of state and stability 27 3 Strese-strain relations... ......2.e2eces : 237 3.1. Finite constitutive laws 231 3.2. Elastoplasiicity - vee eeeeeeee 2a 33. Hypoplasticity 248 4 Further constitutive laws 022.2002. ore 253 4.1 Physico-chemical and granulometric changes 253 42. Transport laws. fee : 254 43. Granular interfaces 254 S References : 256 6 Calculation of stress and settlement in soil masses Harry Poulos Introduction fev eeeeeeeeeeee ceeeeees 250 Basic relationships from the theory of elas! 260 Definitions and sign convention... -..2..0000cceeeeee cesses 260 Principal stresses, 260 Maximum shear stress . : re + 261 Octahedral stresses 261 ‘Two-dimensional stress Systems eves ese bieeeeee 202 Analysis of strain 263 Elastic stress-strain relationships for an isotropic material... ....4. 265 Summary of relationships hetween elastic parameters... + 266 Principles of settlement analysis vee biceeee 267 ‘Components of seitlement : wees 267 Application of elastic theory to settlement calculation sees 267 Allowance for effects of local soil yield on immediate settlement 269 Estimation of creep settlement ..-.e22ee2e00eeae . 269 Methods of assessing soil parameters 270 Solutions for stresses in an elastic mass . : 7) Introduction. : fitteretiteeeeesstesees 2B Kelvin problem : 2m Boussinesq problem : vee 23 Cerruti problem 23 Mindlin’s problem no. 1 , oe ceeeeees 274 Minalin’s problem no. 2 276 Point load on finite layer : 218 Finite line load acting within an infinite solid 278 49. Finite vertical line load on the surface of a semi-infinite mass, 279 4.10 Horizontal line load acting on the surface of a semi-infinite mass ........ 279 4.11 Melan’s problem ¥ . 280 4.12. Melan’s problem I : 281 4.13 Uniform vertical loading on astrip . 281 4.14 Vertical loading increasing linearly - 281 4.15. Symmetrical vertical triangular loading 282 4.16 Uniform vertical loading on circular area 283Contents 417 Unio veri toading on rectangular area 418 Other cases fee 5 Solutions for the settlement of shallow footings - : 5.1 Uniformly loaded strip footing on a homogencous clastic laye? 5.2. Uniformly loaded circular footing on layer .....-[Link] 4+ 53 Uniformly loaded rectangular footing on alayer ss... 6 Rate of settlement of shallow footings 6.1 One dimensional analysis 62 Effect of non-linear consolidation . 63 Consolidation with vertical drains 64 Iwo- and three-dimensional consolidation. -..eesc00cceeeeee 6.5 Simplified analysis using an equivalent coefficient of consolidation 7 Solutions for the settlement of strip and raft foundations 7.1 Point load ona strip foundation : 72 Uniform loading on a strip foundation... 73 Uniform loading on a circular raft 74 Uniform loading on a rectangular ralt +. vee 75 Concentrated loading on a semi-infinite raft 8 Solutions for the seitlement of pile foundations 81 Single piles .. . 82 Pile groups viene : 9 References : cette 7 Treatment of geotechnical ultimate limit states by the theory of past Roberto Nova 1 Fundamentals of ultimate limit states oo. 6620 ese cceeee 11 Introduction 12 Definitions 13 Fundamental theorems for standard materials 2 Limit analysis of shallow foundations on a purely cohesive soil 21 Introduction vs... cess 22 Lower bound! analy 23. Upper bound analysis. : 24 Refined lower bound analysis: method of characteristics 25. Refined upper bound: slip lines. 2.8 Strip footing : 2.7 Citeular footings 3 Limit analysis for non-standard materials 3.1 Introduction 32 Fundamental theorems for non-standard materials 4 Further limitations of limit analysis slope stability 41 Introduction 42 Simple lower bound analysis. . - : 43 Simple upper bound analysis 0.0002 44 Improvement of bound estimates . hee : 45. Actual critical height of a vertical cut : 5 Elastoplastic analysis of shallow foundations . a3 313 314 317 319 319 320 21 32 325 326 228 329 329 329 332 332 333 34 335 336xIV 54 53 54 55 56 57 Contents Introduction 336, Fundamental experimental findings teeeee tees 337 Behaviour in unloading-reloading : : 338 Permanent displacements and rotations... 000.0000 coetee 339 Parameter determination : seeeeeeeee tees 3a Comparison with experimental data : 342 ‘An application to the settlement ofthe Pisa belltower a 345 References . : : 351 Soil dynamics and earthquakes Giinter Klein and Frank Sperling Introduction . ceeeee . Basic mechanical considerations 354 Time dependent processes Basics of technical Dynamics of foundation structures . ‘Vibration excitation . : eeeeneennens Model systems for foundation structures... .[Link] 368 Fundamental ofthe haltspace theory « Dynamics of subsoil Dynamical properties of S0iI8 66... eevee eeeeeeeereeee S78 Characteristic parameters of dynamic soil properties 380 Design parameters for rigid foundations ..... Geousne 32 Shock protection and vibration isolation 384 Dynamics of earthquakes Basic seismological concepts Design methods for buildings... teeeeree oo Effect of earthquakes on foundation e' 398 Literature : ann wees AOR References cette coe a ~ 408 Earth pressure determination Gerd Gudehus Introduction 6... ccceeeceeeeeeeeeeee ees ceeeeeees 407 Objectives 407 Selection and organization of material in the paper Limit states without pore water Plane slip surface... . Curved slip surfaces and combined mechanisms ........00.. 0. 412 ‘Three-dimensional effects, . coe foes a8 Limit states with pore water... -..- tireretsvnaseon 421 Air-impervious soils at Air-pervious soils... : : + 26 Deformation-dependent earth pressures... 28, Granularsoils 6.2... cet titrttteeteteneteerenes 428: Clayey and organic soils .. o tiene 2 4a References . : : : 435Contents 1.10 21 22 Ba 32 4a 42 43 44 48 46 ua Numerical methods Peter Gussmann, Hermann Schad, Lan Smith General methods Difference procedures Integral equiations and the boundary element method «6... eeecceveee Basics of the finite element method (FEM) Matrices of elements and structures... coe Calculation techniques for non-linear problems ‘The application of FEM in geotechnics Statie problems « : ‘Time dependent problems ‘The kinematical element method (KEM) and other limit load methods... Basics ‘A static approach: the method of characteristics from Sokolovski : Kinemiatical methods: KEM oo. 0.00 ccccecccsssseeeeresereenaes Slice methods Application to bearing capacity of footings: comparison investigations Design formulas and design tables or charts for standard slopes References ‘Metrological monitoring of slopes, embankments and retaining walls Klaus Linkwite and Willfried Schwarz ‘Task and objective . ‘About the practical organisation, solution and carrying out ofthe task ‘Conceptual design and exploration of the measurements : Selection of the p ‘Observations... ceteeseetieeeereeneens woe Evaluations Interpretation . Geodetic methods of monitoring measurements Alignments « Polygonal traverses ‘Trigonometrical determination of individual points; nets ‘Automated methods Inclination measurements... Photogrammetrical methods of monitoring measurements Methodology and procedures o Acrial photogrammetry ‘Terrestrial photogrammetry Digital photogrammetry ......... + fee neen rere area Satellite supported methods... : System structure of GPS Procedures for absolute positioning Procedures for relative positioning Monitoring measurements with satelite supported procedures, xv 431 437 440 aah 442 488, 452 452 455 460 460 461 462 a7 474 an an 481 482 483 483 484 484 484 485 486 491 500 512 519 526 526 527 532 $33 535 536 540, 542 345Evaluation and analysis of the measurements Geodetic analysis and interpretation ........ Structural-physical analysis and interpretation Integral analysis and interpretation References Geotechnical measurement procedures Amo Thut Introduction veecere teeeee ‘Objectives of geotechnical measurements : : Measured parameters... - : : Parameters in the foundation soil Parameters during construction. Parameters in the supporting structure Parameters at adjacent structures Parameters for permanent structures 7 te Parameters for the rehabilitation of buildings Measuring instruments, installation and costs Geodetical measurements Geotechnical measurements ......2- 2.255 on Execution of the measurements, reporting Manual measurements . ... ‘Automatic measuring systems Data visualisation software Case histories : Decp excavations, adjacent structures Test embankment load, observational method . ‘Adler Tunnel - readjustment of a structure : Monitoring of unstable slopes ‘Test loading of supporting structure, pile tests, displacement measurements in pile foundation .... . References Phenomenology of natural slopes and their mass movement Lidmund Krauter Definitions. . Introduction Slope shapes . : Mass movement of slopes Causes, factors teieeresieee Classification, types... : ‘Shapes of sliding surfaces and failure mechanisms... Sequences of movements and hazard assessment . Tdemtification and investigation References . 546 546 ss 549 SSI sat S61 563 563 566 387 589 589 590 590 590 ou 603 eu? 61 615 617 6 os. el 626 638 651 654 662 664Contents xvi Ls WEEP RR ROMER eReNH Ice loading actions Martin Hager Preliminary remarks. ‘Types of ive loads and ice-structure interaetions Properties of ive beeen feee e669 teen fer peeeees 61 Mass density of ice. : cote 670 Elasticity of ice on ‘Thermal expansion of ice on Strength of jee : on Definitive values ofthe ice strength for calculation : feeee 674 Thickness of ice «2.6... eeeeeeeee eee e fee 676 Calculation of the ice loads on Ice loads on wide structures 6m Tee Toads on narrow slender structures. 678 ‘Thermal ice pressure loads + 682 Additional vertieal iee loads : 683, Ive loads on groups of structures. 683 Ice loads under special climatic and i ons 684 References... . _ : 685 Stability of rock slopes Walter Wittke and Claus Erichsen 687 ‘Structural models of rock mass tiie - 688 Mechanisms of failure of rock slopes 693 Model for the stress-strain behaviour of rock : + 696 General 696, Intact rock . . . + 698 Discontint 698, Rock mass... 01 “Model for the mechanical behaviour of a rock mass with vespect t0 stress displacement behaviour of persistent discontinuities with no filings “Model for seepage flow through a rock mas Stability i 18 to the fii General a Computation of stresses and displacements... 26... : ‘Computation of a seepage flow Presentation and interpretation of the computed results cee Influence of shear parameters of discontinuities on the stability of a slope Support of a slope with prestressed amchors...eeceee esse eee eeeveee Influence of high horizontal in-situ stresses Stability investigations on the wall of a construction pit using a refined ‘conceptual model of the mechanical behaviour of a rock mass Stability analysis on the basis of rigid-body mechanics General . : Possibilities of translation and rotation of rock mass wedges... ‘element method ,XVII xy analy is of planar rock mass wedges. ty analysis of three-dimensional rock mass wedges supported by two discontinuities... . 7.5. Stability analysis of three-dimensional rock miass wedges supported by three discontinuities vests fener 8 Buckling problems 9 Example for the stabilization ofa slope failure... 9.1 General 92 Landslide and immediate action . 93 Results of the measurements and explorat 9.4 Concepts for stabilization of the slope . 95 Chosen measure for stabilization... - 9.6 Drainage measures 10 References ....... Subject index 0.2... . . ce eeteneeeee 148 191 758 759 759 159 764 166 769 m0 ™ 75Contents Ground improvement Klaus Kirsch and Wolfgang Sondermann Introduction /overview Ground improvement by compaction Static methods . Dynamic methods -- Ground improvement by reinforcement -- Methods without a displacing effect, Methods with a displacing effect ...... Conclusion Ciivaessenesiey References Grouting in geotechnical engineering Stephan Semprich and Gert Stadler Introduction . Aims of grouting Groutability of soil and rock General Geometry of pores in soil Void volume of rock mass Water in soil and rock mass Grouting materials and their basic constituents Methods of grouting Flow regimes of grouts Classification of grouting applications Grouting parameters . . Design of grouting works Exploration of the subsoil Choice of grouting material Contract and compensation Examples of application . Grouting test in weathered rock Kélnbrein dam Debis excavation pit. References .23 ee ee yo ovesgirggeee- B ‘Underpinning, undercutting Karl J. Wier and Ulrich Smoliceyk ‘Terms General aspects «2... ‘Underpinning and its adaptations “Traditional technique : Grouting and jetting technique ...-- Micropiling : Undercutting Contents - o 2 2 wo 105 Cutand-cover methods Pel 105 Underground exeavation methods. -- : : 10 Final remarks : 12 References 113 Standards and recommendations. =... +4 beeeeeeeeees US Ground freezing Hans-Ludwig Jessberger!, Regine Jagow-Klaff, and Bernd Brawn Introduction i nt Exploration of subsurface conditions 218 Ground freezing techmiques ....-..--- cee 120 Brine freezing : cee 120 Liquid nitrogen (LN2) freezing 120 Characteristics of freezing and razon sll : 12 ‘Thermal properties. 122 Strength and deformation properties 6 Freeze wall desig 141 Structural design 141 Thermal design . : 146 Ground movements due to freezing - 151 Ground freezing applications and recommendations [or its use 182 References beeeeee 164 Ground anchors Helmut Ostermayer and Tony Barley General . 169 Standards, recommendations, technical approvals 169 Function and structural elements of anchor systems. m7 General requirements : cee foam Steel tendon and anchor head 7 Grout body... : cote : + 14 Corrosion protection 175 Execution im Drilling . m Installation, grouting and posigrouting 19 Installation of anchors against high hydrostatic head Ist Corrosion protection measures on site . 184 Removable anchors 184Contents ‘Testing, stressing and monitoring, cece . Stressing equipment and procedure . System test. : Investigation and suitability tect Acceptance test and lock-olf load Monitoring cove Fixed anchor design | General Ultimate load capacity in non-cohesive soil Ultimate load capacity in cohesive soil Working loads ee Creep displacements and load losses «|. : Performance under alternating actions Performance under dynamic actions Influence of spacing (group effect) Design of anchored structures Design requirements Prerequisites for applying ground anchors Design of the individual anchor = Design of anchors in a group Choice of appropriate anchor systems and methods of execution References cesses cee Drit ig technology Georg Ulrich Drilling with water flushing Raise boring .. Full diameter drilling of smaller diameters Soil investigation drilling Cranes and rigs Percussion dil eran Universal rotary drilling, Excavator attachments : Large diameter and deep drilling : : Slimhole drilling equipment Casing Drilling tools Natural drilling obstructions «- Directional drilling with flushing - References Driving and extraction Abraham F Van Weele Application of driving techniques Principle of impact driving Piling hammers XI 185 185 186 136 187 189 189 191 196 201 202 204 205 205 206 206 206 206 208: 214 21s 221 22 224 237 238 241 2a 2a 244 245 246. 287 248. 299 251 251 254x Contents Free fall hammers 251 Diesel hammers || : : 258 Hammers for cast in-situ piles =. 11.1 mn 261 Driving with a mandrel 261 Aternatve insalaton methods fr dispacement pls 282 Pile jacking eee SIT 26a Pile screwing with simultancous pushing 263 routed steeples MV-ples oss e. 001 : 264 Coupled piles weet neentneest vol 265; Jetting assistance : : 266 Driving cap 267 Piling machines : . 269 Sesses during impact driving no 23 Maximum compressive stresses ar Relationship between wave length and pile length for concrete piles... 274 Driving timber piles : weve 216 Driving steel piles. : : 26 Sheet piles : BS Loan Profiles on Sheet pile locks : a7 Lock cleaning and lubrication : : 278 Impact driving of piles ~ general ns Impact driving of sheet piles 2 Successive installation... fel 29 Intermittent installation | : : 280 Concrete and timber sheet piling : 281 Combined sheet pile walls S 2. 282 Vibcaiory driving and exiraction : SI 383 Principle of vibratory driving 283 Additional static pull dowa . oe 284 Vibratory extraction an 285, Piling vibrators 285 High frequency vibration - 286 Workiag procedure Se 2287 Vibratory driving of sheet piles 288 Tnfinence on bearing capacity... fie cece 288 Accessibility of the working site. SII 289 Stone layers and underground obstacles 239 Foot sensors 290 Driving and extraction close to adjacent structures 290 Consequences of tiVing. v-. seve cece 290 Consequences of extraction =... 2. : 201 Driving under special circumstances es 22 Driving jn calcareous sols S392 Driving in, or near slopes, moe 203 Driving behind earth retaining suuctures ve... 62.022 294 Dynamic quality tests on piles 284 Integrity testing... : an LD 304 Dyeamic load testing ves sees 296 *Soit” dynamic load testing 207 Adiissiblity of vibration emission 299Contents XII 28 Foundations in open water Jacob Gerrit de Gilt General Appropriate planning documents 2 Load assumptions 3. Design and construction Equipment for construction work at sea 11) 1). ..lissecseseeee 1 The most important pieces of equipment. 22 Lifting island 23° Dredgers.... 24 Procedures for breaking down rock 25. Cable- and pipe-tayers 26 Block layers... 3° Foundations in an open excavation 4 Floating structures 4.1 Preparation of the bed 42 Construction of the floating structures 43° Towage 44 Setting down 2... : : Seeereae 45. Caissons as quay wall |... 46 — Caissons for moles and breakwaters Floating structures for lighthouses, offshore platforms and storage . 48 Floating structures for tunnels underwater a 5 Caisson foundations oe “Alte Weser" lighthouse (1960/63) jrofler Vogelsand” lighthouse cisrars 6 Piled foundations 6.1 Kohlbrand viaduct, Hamburg (1971-75) - 62. Goerée Lighthouse, The Netherlands (1971) 63 Drilling platform, Cognac, USA (1978) $4 Suction ple technology «4... eeeeereeeTeneal 7 — References .... co foe 2.9 Ground dewatering Ulrich Smoltes 1 General code requirements 365 2 Basic assumptions and solutions for dewatering scheme analyses + 366 3. Methods of dewatering esneenis Ciipvesvaervexe 267 3.1 Dewatering by bored wells... 368 3.2 Dewatering by open drainage or slit pumping (line source) ......cssee 5 384. 33 Dewatering by clectro-osmosis : te 388 4 Field tests... : a : 301 41 General n enone : 301 42 Tests cee 391 5S Groundwater recharge (22111177 : 2 386 SA Steady state : ce 386 52 Initial time-dependant state... + 386 53. Capacity ofa recharge well... 397 54 Interaction of recharge wells. - 397xiv Interaction of suction and recharge wells References Construction met Avel © Toepfer Introduetion Cuttings in rock : Mechanical loosening by ripping Loosening by blasting methods, Construction method for rock slopes Mechanical construction method for the production of rock Slopes ‘Smooth blasting methods References ods for cuttings and slopes in rock Microtunnelling Axel C Toepfer Introduction The microtunnelling construction method for non-man-sized entry pipes The components of the construction method Description of soil and rock Pipe material Microtunnelling system Driving and reception shaft Construction sequence Further development References Earthworks Hans-Henning Schmidt and Thomas Rumpelt Introduction Standards, environmental legislation ‘Terms and definitions Construction materials, classifications and characteristic values Gemeral introduction Characteristic parameters Design of earthwork structures Site investitgation Design calculations Standardised slope angles ‘Assessment of the stability of slopes Drainage measures for earthworks Landscape planning... - Earthwork processesiearthwarks equipment Machines for digging, transporting and placing Loading with hydraulic excavators Hauling equipment Equipment for placing and spreading Contents 398 308 399 400 403 47 418. 418 427 a9 430 430 431 BL 432 a7 438 440 440 4a 4a 443 444 444 44s 448 448 448 450 450 453 455 455 436 458 461 461Contents xv 65 66 7 7 72 73 Ta Ts 16 27 8 BL 82 83 Ba 8S 86 9 0 u 2 124 122 123 B 14 Is 16 7 i 172 173 ira Is 176 Is 213 Compaction cee eeeteereereeeese 461 Special equipment ces 464 Planning and organisation of earthworks sites ©. 222000202022) Site survey cone Mass distribution . eonees Determination of performance»... Methods excavating or borrowing of material Method of placentent and compation ‘Compaction techniques... : ‘Compaction criteria Quality assurance: tests specifications and observations. General remarks : ‘Tests eeneees Compaction requirements for road construction 22.01. “Testing methods in road construction Compaction control in rockfils ren Observational methods Soil treatment: soil improvement, stabilisation and cementation ==... 22. 489 Excavation of cuts : : 2 489 Dams and embankments : 490 Excavations and trenches 2492 Excavations -....0.00000sses Bt pees) 492 Trenches SOI 493 Narrow trenches... fitness + 494 Backfils and fills covering structures... 1.11)... J Jsvsstesevsoses 494 Sound protection embankments De a9 Synthetic and clay liners... : ae ceeeeees 496 Recultivation 3 Embankment construction by means of hydratlic fis 498 General... a 498 Hydraulic transport of sand-water mixtures (slurries) =. 2 498 Equipment : feeeeeeees 500 Some operational details <2... no 500 Sedimentation impoundment Sol Economical aspects... 6000..scctterevereereesereresseses $02 References 303 Geosynthetics in geotechnical and hydraulic engineering, Fokke Saathoff General cevtteeees so7 Basic parameters and terms : S07 Classification of peosyntheties..20.2 0022002 507 Geotextiles : 509 Geotextile-related produets 2000020000000 pees SIZ Geomembranes . SS 133 Geomembrane-related products |... >.) : S14 Rawnateridls 2.00.0 eeeeccetocuuueeeseenne sis Functions Q : 51s References to the execution «1. feces S21Contents “Test method's 522 Fields of application « 33 Coastal protection . 5B Waterways engineering 540 Small-scale hydraulic engineering. ss Dam construction .. + 382 Landfill construction’ cine 559 Road construction, railway track construction and tunnelling, Ll 309 Notes on the form of contract su Delivery terms... eee es : oeeenneeens 592 ‘Quality management SI 52 Advice on contract tonders 593 Invoicing and warranties «<<. uo Sl 594 Summary : 504 References. me Ee SII soa Slope protection by bioengineering techniques Hugo Meinhard Schiechat' Introduction... . so joengineering slope protection . Preliminary works using inert material - 599 Combined methods .....- 607 Ground stabilizing techniques. an Soil protection techniques : 6a Supplementary construction techniques Requirements for bioengineering materials . 7 veettrr General se 662 Biotechnical suitability of plants Materials for ground stabilizing techniques : n Seed mixes . 665 Effectiveness of bioengineering slope protection 665 ‘Technical requirements rn : ce 0S Ecological requiements 665 Erfeets in terms of landscape architecture cee 666 Economic requirements . sees 666 Design and execution of bioengineering works for slope protection 666 Maintenance of bioengineering structures cee 668 References . ve hese 670 Subject index .... : travis sh i nteneeteeeerseee O71Contents 34 Spread foundations Ulrich Smoltczyk, Dieter Netzel, and Manfred Kany Definitions Basis of design Footings General aspects of design” Geotechnical design ructural design : Slab foundations... General Vertical interactio Horizontal interaction, restraints . - Mat foundations (tank foundations) General Geotechnical verifications»... Groundwater protection Tension foundations References, standards and software References . . - Programmes and guidebooks European codes (Status 2002) German standards referenced in this chapter’ | foundations Hans-Georg Kempfert, Kurt Dieter Eigenbrod, and Ulrich Smoltcayk (Section 8) Introduction . Applications Governing codes and safety concepis’ Preliminary investigations for pile foundations Terminology 5 Pile types and construction methods Selection of appropriate pile type ‘Quality assurance and control Displacement piles Bored piles Micropiles «>. Measures to increase pile resist 8 B 8B 84 85 87 87 88 39 2 108 109 tasx Contents 3 Axial pile resistance . beet eee teeee ee eee cee enee HIS 3.1 Single piles 5 3.2 Compression pile groups ee : iL 33. Pile-raft foundations . SS mo 149 34 Tension pile groups 157 4 Lateral pile resistance and moment actions IST 4 Single piles... eee eeveveeeeee eee Pe IST $2 Lateral resistance of pile groups St : 163 $- Soil action : cee IST 5.1 Negative skin friction Be o DT 167 5.2. Lateral pressure and bending due to seiticment 170 6 Bearing capacity and serviceability eneeeeeal 1 6.1 General « cect eeeeteeeeneeee ees 13 62 Bearing capacity (ULS) ia 6.3 Calculation of serviceability 11212. : : 181 7 Testing of piles Se eeneeeeen7 TL Goneral : : mo 2 184 7.2 Static axial load tests 0. oeneennnn 184 73. Static horizontal pile load tests. Be : 192 74 Dynamic pile testing 196 Anais of ile scutes «ssc sees eeseeeees 2 202 BL General ut De S202 82 Piling systems 203 82 Analysis of ail loaded pile systems... Se 203 8. I simple cases . Cee, 206 8 ‘ons from initial assumptions. 211 8.6 Design of non-axially loaded pile foundations <1... 2.213 87 Check for buckling orrees 2.218 88 Sheet pile wall as part of a piled foundation 218 89, Elgentenuencis of spatial piling sytem «+0002. see seesees 2 810 Example sess seeee eee . cee cess 220 9 References 223 33° Caissons Hans Lingenfelser 1 General os. eee cecveeees cece eee ee 229 1 229 12 230 3 i 2231 LA Fields of application . poses BP 2 Structural concept and equip LIT 24 21 General oe. nee eenenn 22M 22 Construction materials 222 vida 23° Caisson edges 25 24 Caisson working chamber and working chamber ceiling 127 25 Open caisson BOOM. .e.e see ceeeeee ee eeees 1238 26 Caissons walls cee eee 240 3° Construction of caissons Dteeeeeteeenens 2241 3.1 Monufacture on land... 0222 III aContents XI 32 33 Construction in open water beens rr 242 Construction in a dock and fidating in 243 Sinking the Caisson ve... e sees eee 245 Soil excavation aeons : : 245 Controt of sinking 2247 Sinking tolerances oe : 247 Ballasting : a : 21249 Pneumatic instalation and Works. 250 Regulations governing pneumatic works. : + 250 Essential pneumatic equipment... 002s : £251 Caisson calculation 253 Generai . Be wi 283 Calculation of the lowering diagram 200000.2000000000. 254 Loads working on the caisson cutters, 255 Dimensioning for the lowering phases [Link]... 2257 Construction examples. - eoreeenennnanenes 2. 259 References vee ees ee veces. 2 Stability of excavations Anton Weissenbach, Achim Hettler, and Brian Simpson Construction measures for the stability of excavations 6... 6eeee 0.4 273 Unlined excavations... : : ‘Timbered trenches, heet pile walls sees ec eceee Soldier pile walls : Solid walls Support by bracing oo... e seen 287 Basic design assumptions 00... Peer ees 290 Soil properties, loads and general rules 201 290 Active earth pressure for cantilever walls... 291 Active earth pressure for walls supported by props and anchors»... . 293 ‘Active earth pressure from surcharges 301 Earth pressure under backfill conditions, : 2 304 Passive earth pressure vv eeeeeee eee crteceseeeeete rene cences 306 Calculation procedures 310 Walls with fixed earth support : eeneeeenneeeenenee:y(() Walls with free earth support .- : 233 Multiple supported walls 315 Calculation using subgrade reaction... eneeeeenneeeneeeeey | Numerical analys my 320 Equilibrium of vertical forces <2. ri 329 Determination of the vertical component of the earth resisiance |... | 333 Equilibrium of horizontal forces in soldier pile walls ........ 00.0... 334 Heave of the excavation bottom 337 Safety concepts .. oo 339 British design approach . coronene DI 339 German design approach 347 General regulations in EC 71), DOT asi Design Approach 1... : cer 2354Design Approach 2 Special constructions Anchored walls... . : Excavation walls supported by faking props | Large excavations ‘Some features related (o specific shapes of excavations Excavation with asymmetric cross sections Excavation walls adjacent to existing buildings Excavations under water... oe Excavations in jointed, unstable rock’ Excavations in sof soils Calculation examples Problem ...-.- German design approach 2.1. : Eurovode 7 Design Approach 2s 00s References... 2. on Bored pile walls, diaphragm walls, cut-off walls, Manfred Stocker and Bernhard Walz Bored pile walls fees Field of application mo Advantages el Disadvantages Standards and references : Purpose and wall types . - Construction : ‘Quality assurance Diaphragm walls Field of appli Advantages Disadvantages << ..... fee Standards and references 120022222 Purpose : ‘Wall types : Construction Construction materials Characteristics . . Quality assurance 1111) Thin cutoft walls 2220222121 Field of application eon Advantages... BIN Disadvantages 1.2 mn Standards and references ee Purpose and types of wall Construction of a vibrated thin cut-off wall or vibwall Construction materials... eeeeeneesre Characteristics Quality assurance. -- : Stabilizing of earth walls using fluids «62000000200. Contents . 357 361 361 2364 365 368 374 37 382 302 304 397 397 + 398 401 2 404 2. 409 2. 410 ews all 14 412 44 si dl 44 4s 4s 416 2. 416 1 416 421 425 426 427 12s 428 2428 429 429 429 429 22430 2433 434 434 435Contents Supporting fluids Fluid supporting force and stability determination Mechanisms for transferring the fluid pressure difference ‘onto the grain skeleton Proof of the ,internal™ stability Proof of the yexternal stat : ‘Structural facilities close to suspension stabilized earth wails Standards and recommendations . Standards Recommendations aon References : Sheet pile walls for harbours and waterways Boleslav Mazurkiewicz Sheet pile wal structures, their performance and fed of application General . Application purpose Usability of different construction materials aren Regulations concerning sheet pile walls 2.22. . Sheet pile wall structures, EN 12063/1999 Recommendations of the Committee for Waterfront Structures, Harbours and Waterways, BAU 1996... 2... 2-5 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures ~ Part 5: Piling ‘Other recommendations and handbooks... Sheet pile types, profiles and anchoring parts avait land Steel grades Steel sheet pile walls Basic design of sheet pile walls... : Safety concept vine ‘Actions and resistances Load cases Ultimate limit state design of sheet pile wall structures | Calculation methods for sheet pile walls Calculation of a single-anchored sheet pile wall according to Blum Special cases of sheet pile wall calculation... a Calculation principles tor combined steel sheet pile walls Calculation principles of shect pile cofferdams ..... - Calculation of a sheet pile wall anchorage and its fittings ‘Verification of stability of an anchorage at a lower Failure plane and of safety against failure of the anchoring soil Calculation and sizing of anchor walls and anchor plates Calevlation and sizing of anchors and hinges, walings and cxpping beams made of steel and reinforced concrete Calculation and sizing of anchor piles... . Caleuaton and sizing of hinged and Fixed supports fora ay wall superstructure on steel sheet pile walls Further structural remarks and recommendations Estimation of shee pile wall diving depth and selection ‘ofits pofie . and material. . as Steel sheet pile walls xi 435 436 437 440 442 446 447 447 448 448 437 457 2458 2459 460 461 465, 468 469 2474 474 475 ant 485 488, 489 489) 490xIV 10 10.1 102 37 38 Construction of waterfront structures made of steel sheet piles General : ; Construction of new waterfront structures Protection and deepening of existing waterfront structures ‘Corrosion and corrosion protection General considerations...) Expected corrosion of steal shect piles Conosion protection of steel sheet piles References Books and papers Standards Gravity retaining walls Ulrich Smottezyk Introduction «22... General design considerations Gravity wall : Cantilever wall Drainage»... vee References ‘Machine foundations Ginter Klein and Dietrich Klein Overview Classification of machine foundations » Requirements for machine foundations Loads on machine foundations . Static loads. . wd Periodic loads... : ‘Transient loads Random loads : fot Analysis and design of machine foundations... . ‘Types of supports Rigid foundations Elastic foundations Spring foundations. Design recommendations» Examples... 2... Hammer foundation PU a Reinforced concrete box foundation for 2 100 MW steam turbine-generator set References, ao Standards... DT Books and Papers ene bees Contents 494 494 494 2501 506 506 506 506 509 2 509 2 510 su 513 251s S15 516 2518 519 519 519 521 521 522 25 530 532 532 336 539 545 546 347 347 550 557 557 557Contents xv 3.9 Foundations in mining regions Dietmar Placzek 1 General remarks on mining-induced effects 6.6... 6 vee vee 559 2. Ground movements LT 539 2.1 Ground movements above deep mine workings... 559 22 Ground movements above shallow and near-surface mine ne workings 563 3° Influence of ground movements on the foundation cee 568 3.1 Influence of equal vertical subsidence on 1 564 32 Influence of til — differential vertical subsidence : 564 33 Influence of curvatu : 566 34 Influence of strain. fo 566 3:5 Influence of ground movements above near-surface tine workings... . 567 36 Influence of discontinuous ground mover Loo) 568 4 Preventive measures in areas with deep mine workings rio 568 4.1 Types of preventive measures vein eens 568 4.2 Basic considerations on layout and design of surface structures 569 43. Bearing capacity and functionality of a structure £570 44 Provisions for tlt ceeees LS 370 45. Provisions for curvature me 371 46 jons for extensional strain - 575 47 strain ce SF 48 Provisions for discontinuous ground movernents 579 5 Preventive measures in areas with near-surface mine workings... ..... 579 5.1 Types of preventive measures. . vette renee renee ens 59 5.2. Preventive measures for structures 22. 580 5.3. Stabilisation of the ground by injection cess S81 6 Preventive measures for tunnels 0.000 54 6.1 General remarks 584 62 Options for preventive measures 6. sees e eee ee co 58S 7 Upgrading of existing structures . | : - 585 7.1 Preliminary remarks». 585 72 Provisions for equal vertical subsidence. : + 586 73. Provisions for differential vertical subsidence - 1 586 74 Provisions for horizontal ground movements, 587 8 References wee peeeeennees 589 3.10 Watertight buildings and structures Alfred Haack and Kart-Friedrich Emig 1 General... weeeeteseseeees 501 2 General aspects of design ma Ss 502 2.1 Geotechnical and structural influences <<... 22200225 502 22. Serviceability provisions .... . LIS, Soe 3° Seletion and applicability of materials | SUT 508 4 Systems... oiteneenee : 505 4.1 Bonded layers. TELS 505 42. Polymere modified bitumen compound for bonding 506 43 Loose plastic sheets... vececeeees fii! S07 44 Sicel board sealing v : 508Contents Watertight concrete structures (,white tub)... : sess 508 Special design considerations, woe TLLLT 509 Design provisions codified in DIN 18195 510 General - : 510 Structural factors || foe 5B ‘Watertight systems according to German Code 18 195 Bt SB Joint seals in watertight conerete «++ ++ +++ pests 539 Supervision : 544 References . : ‘345 German recommendations and suietines (examples) tieeeee + 546 References... IL 546 Subject index... 0.02.0. toe settee eee 69)1.1 International agreements Ulrich Smoticzyk and Christophe Bauduin 1 Classification of geotechnical literature The International Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (ISSMFE) have since 1981 used a classification scheme of geotechnical literature (IGC) as in Table 1 ‘There has also been a joint agreement with the Swedish Geotechnical Institute (SGT) since 1998 which enables access to their Information Retrieval System for Geotechnical Literature (IRS-Gco) available worldwide via the Internet. Their continuously updated database provides about 54,000 literature references from 1976 onwards. Each reference is described by IGC key words and classification codes (for combining key words, use and, or and not). Subscription is available via the SGI website at bitp://[Link]! [Link]. The references are 69% English, 16 % Swedish, 6 % German, 4% French and 5 % with other tongues ‘able 1 International geotechnical lassifation system, published in March 1981 A General B 8 Cataterrestrial Sit and Rock Cond: A. 1 Geotechnical Engineering Sco tions 5 Geel Bog Fy 9 Ce onphotis Aapet and Tera ‘A 3. Information Services, and Literature Classification {afoamation § B10 Minertoyiat Aspects A. 4 Textbooks, Handbooks, and Periodicals 8 11 Description of Regional Soil and Rock A 5. Terminology Conditions ‘A 6 Companies Institutes. and Laboratories B12 Other Environmental Aspects A. Societies, Meetings ant Tateratonal Cooperation A. & Protesionl Ethics Lega Require: _Esqipment and Techniques. of Exploration, Insnta Codesofiscice and Susndard: Prospecton Sampling an Field Tstingo! Sols ication and Rocks (eel determinaion of engineering A 9 Bducaion propertes), Presonation of Result ‘R10 Resench Actntis © 0 Geneat CL imhoro Surveys and Remete Sensing 1 Gealogct and Environmental Aves 2 Geanhysint Suen (Basie Geology, see Principal Group T) Probings (Soundings) © 4 Visual Exploration Tehnisues BO General C$ Boring Techniques and Equipment BL Formation of Soil and Rosks (coy B 2 Hydrogeologcal Aspects © 6 Somping D3. MassMovementsandTandSubsidence © 7 Measurement of Feld Conditions 3-4 Seiae Activity and Cristal Move {ine Port constuction Mentoring) ests CC & Tield Testing (exh. tests orensineerng B 5 Cimote Contons ropes se Groupe Dana) 3 Sobmarine Geological Aspects > Presentation of Rest DataBase Bae © 10 Underwater Sie InvestgstionsD Soil Properties: Laboratory and In-Situ Determinatio {incl Rockfil, Artificial Soils, Waste Materials) Concepts, Theories, Methods of Determination, Equipment, and Results DO General D1 Classifcation and Description of Sos D2 [Link] Properties D3 Composition, Steucture, Density, and Water Contents D4. Hydraulic Properties D_ 5 Compressiilty and Swelling D6 Shear-Detormation and Strength Properties D7 Dynamic Properties D_ & Thermal Properties D9 Compacrbiity D_ 10. Properties of Scil Additive Mixtures E Analysis of Soil-Engincering Problems ‘Theoretical, Empirical, and Practical Methods of Analysis 0 General Stress Analyss Deformation and Settlement Problems Bearing Capacity of Shallow Four. dations Bearing Capacity of Pies and other Deep Foundations, Anchors Earth Pressure Problems Stability of Slopes and Excavations ‘Seepage and other Hydralalc Problems Dynamic Problems Frost Action and Heat Transfer Problems 10 Analysis of Layered Systems and Pave: nents Behaviour 11 Soil-Vehicle and Soil-Too! Interaction 12. Soil Steuctures Interaction 13 Mathematical Methods, Computer Analysis Model Test Analysis ru erties: Laboratory and In-Situ Determinations Concepts, Theories, Methods of Determination, Equipment, and Results Fo Fu Genecal ‘Classification and Description of Rocks land Rock Masses Physico-Chemical Properties ‘Composition, Density, and Structural Features Hydra F2 ra ra Properties Ulrich Smoltceyk and Christophe Bauduin F3 F6 Compressibility and Swelling Shear Deformation and Strength Properties Dynamic Properties ‘Thermal Properties ET FR G_ Analysis of Rock-Engincering Problems ‘Theoretical, Empirical, and Practical Methods of Analysis GO General G1 Stress Analysis G2 Deformation and Displacement Problems G3. Beating Capacity of Rock Masses G4a- G5. Rock Pressure on Tunnels and Under ound Openings G6 Stabiiy of Rock Slopes and Open Excavations G7 Seepage and other Hydraulic Problems G8 Dynamic Problems G 9 Frost Action and Heat Transfer Problems G0 = Gu G 12 Rock Structure-Interaction G13 Mathematical Methods, Computer Analysis G14 Model Test Analysis H Design, Construction, and Behaviour of Engineering Works Description and Case Records of Engineering Works Hoo H General Foundations of Structures (other than dams) 2 Retaining Structures and Cutott Walls 3 Offshore Structures 4. Dams and Reservoirs, Embankments 5S Tunnels and Underground Openings 6 7 Roads, Railroads and Airfields Harbours, Canals and Coastal Engineering Works 8 Conduite and Cuverts 3. Slopes and Unsupported Excavations Land Use Waste Depositories REEEEE ‘Construction Methods and Equipment General Drainage Methods Sealing and Grouting Processes Preloading and Soil Replacement1 K RARA OR OR RRA International agreements 4 Earthworks and Rock Excavation, Procesting and Transportation ‘Compaction Procestes Soil Stabilization and Erosion Control Piles and Pile Driving, inc. Sheet Piles Construction of Caissons and Deep Piers 9 Construction Methods for Shallow Foundations IW Slarry-Assisted Construction of Foun dations and Cut-off Walls 11 Support of Se and Rock, Anchoring 12 Offshore Construction 13 Proteetion Measures against Frost 14 Measures for Improving Delormation and Stability Conditions. Reconstrac tion of Foundations MMaterial of Construction” M M M M M KeKS 2 D General 1 Steet 2 Wood 3. Bituminous Materials 4 Plastics and Similar Materials 5 Cement and Chemicals & Concrete 7 Pints and Coatings & Con ition Flernents Symbols Besssasa 4 Sasa aa T a 1 2 3 Ice Mechanics and Kngincering General Snow and Loe Cover Properties of Snow and lee Snow and [ee Engineering Related Disciplines? General Pare Sciences Geosciences Agneulture and Pedology Meteorology and Climatology Bicsciences Cit Pngincering Mining Engineering and Ore Prospecting Mechanical Engineering Electrical Engineering Engineering lary and Naval Engineering Instrumentation and Measuring ‘Techniques rary Environment Problems and Nature Conservation Oil Prespecting "the principal groups Mand Tare not tobe used ‘wth “Geotechnical Abstracts” Existing international agreements on symbols aze got always consistent. For civil cag Deering purposes an international standard, ISO 3898 Basis Jor design of structures ~ Notations ~ General symbols, was published in 1997 and was accepted by the Furopean ‘Commission of Standards (CEN). The standard fo SI units, ISO 1000: 1992(E), was also For geotechnical literature, the International Society agreed in 1977 to apply the following accepted by CEN. symbols: A area B ‘eauth of foundation Cy rate of secondary consolidation compression index swelling index C, uniformity cooticent D ‘depth of foundation beneath ground E modulus of lineat deformation Tre) edometric modulus FE actor of safety G ‘mods of shear deformation consistency index Tiguidity index dex index of compressibility ‘osfiicient of earth pressure at rest Bote earth pressure eneticient passive earth pressure coeficent bow count beating capacity factor asa fanction of ¢|4 Ulich Smoliezyk and Christophe Bauduin Ny bearing capacity factor asa function uy pote water pressure ‘of embedment depth a pore air pressure Ny earing eapacity factor asa function ¥ discharge velocity cof weight density 7 w water content| Q, point resistance we liquid imi total shat resistance we plastic imi R residual factor ws Shrinkage limit S. degree of saturation B angle of slope to horizontal s sensitivity 8 inclination of oad Te time factor 5 angle of wall friction u degree of consol c Tinea strain v volume 1.23 principal stains a wall adhesion ' Tinear stain rate a acceleration (org! effective ange of internal fiction © effective cohesion intercept yoru apparent angle of internal frietion Sjq___Tesicual cohesion intercept (Gor Gig. residual angle of internal fiction o apparent cohesion intercept Y shear strain « remoulded undrained shear strength shear strain rate e coefficient of consolidation y ‘weight density q rainage path Y ‘weight density of submerged sol 4 train diecneter uw weight density of dry sol e ‘exceniticty| * weight density of solid particles e void ratio Yu Weight density of water 8 ‘acceleration duc to aavity a coefficient of viscosity nue void ratio in loosest state “ ceeficient of frition min Void ratio in densest state ¥ Poisson's ratio © local side tition p sass density of soi b hydraulic head ot potential f mass density of submerged soil, i bydraulic gradient Pa mass density of dry soil lesigely inclination factors p mass density of yold particles i seepage force Pe mass density of water k cveflcieat of permeability ° total normal tess a modulus of subgrade reaction o effective normal stress m mass principal sress 2 porosity Oe Octahedral normal stress 4 rate of discharge Sq effective overburden pressure Ge static point resistance (CPT) 9%) —_precoasolidation pressure ge dynamic point resistance e shear sess Gp point resistance pressure Kor octahedral shea stress @ Unit shaft resistance seat strength a Timit pressure ck residual shear steengtn s settlement ? average shear strength mobilized a pore pressure slong siding surface 3. International rules for foundat n engineering ‘The only internationally established codification of rules for foundation engineering pur- poses that existed until now was produced by the European Commission of Standards (CEN), the aim being the introduction of a consistent system of common technical rules for the design and construction of structures inthe field of civil engincering, Eventually, this will replace the differing national standards that exist in the various member states of the European Communit moving the problems caused by the national standurdiza1.1 International agreements s tion of technical rules, a common market of products and services will be established. This, will improve the competitional capability of Luropean contractors and their consultants when working in countries off the European Community. Structural Eurocodes generally include codified assessments for the design of structures. Construction and supervision are only covered as required for quality assurance checks of the designer's assumptions. At present, the following documents are published o in preparation: Technical Committee 250: EN 1990 Basis of design for structural Eurocodes EN 1991 Actions EN 1992 Conerete structures, Part 1: General rules,... Part 3: Conerete foundations EN 1993 Steel structures. Part 1: General rules... Part 5: Stec! piles EN 1994 Mixed steel and concrete structures EN 1995 Timber structures EN 1996 Masonry structures EN 1997 Geotechnical design. Part 1: General rules, Part 2: Laboratory and field testing EN 1998 Seismic actions. Part 1: General rules, ... Past 5: Foundations, reta structures and geotechnical aspects (in addition to EN 1997-1) EN 1999 Design of aluminium alloy structures ‘Technical committee 288: EN 1536 Execution of special geotechnical work: Bored piles EN 1537 Execution of special geotechnical work: Anchors EN 1938 Execution of special geotechnical work: Diaphragm walls EN 12063 Execution of special geotechnical work: Sheet piles EN 12699 Execution of special geotechnical work: Displacement piles EN 12715 Execution of speci EN 12716 Execution of special geotechnical work: Jet-grouting I geotechnical work: Grouting EN... Execution of special geotechnical work: Miero-piles EN... Execution of special geotechnical work: Reinforced soil Technical committee 182: By introducing existing ISO documents into the CEN system: 1SO 14688 Identification and classification of soils ISO 14689 Identification and classification of rock ‘Technical committee 189: Several standards for testing geotextiles have been publishes, see Chapter 2.15.6 Ulrich Smotteryk and Christophe Bauduia Note: Developing Furopean Codes from a first draft into an officially accepted docu. ‘ment generally takes several years time. It is recommended therefore that the national standardization bodies or the appropriate CEN secretatiat are asked to confirm the lat est situation for cach code (as to TC 250, contact NNI, POB 5059, NL-2600 GB Delft, Fax +31152690190. As to TC 288, contact AFNOR, F 92049 Paris La Défense Cedcx), 4 Basic terms by EN 1990 and EN 1997 4.1 Classification of assessments in Eurocodes (EN 1990, 1.4; EN 1997-1, 1.3) Depencling on the character of the individual assessments, distinction is made in EN 1990, 1.4, between Principles and Application Rules. The codes include a main text and annexes Principles are rules to which no exemption or alternative is permitted Application Rules areinternationally acknowledged rules that are recommended for appli cation, In this case alternatives are possible, if they provide the same level of reliabili ‘and are consistent to the relevant principles, They can include the use of national specifi cations. Annexes contain additional information, including numerical values of partial safety fac- tors, The values suggested in an annex may either be accepted or modified by national determination as the level of responsibility for the reliability of the works remains with the national authorities in charge of civil engineering control. 42 Limit states (EN 1990) “According to EN 1990, 6.4.1, in EN 1997-1, 2.4, the following limit states are defined: Ultimate limit states (24.7.0: # Loss of equilibrium of the sructre or the ground, considered as a rigid bods; in which the strengths of the structural materials and the ground provide insignificant resivance (6Qu) + Internal feilure or excessive deformation ofthe structure or siractural elements, includ ing foorings, piles, basement walls ex im which the sirengi of structural materials i significant in providing resistance (STR) # failure or excessive deformation of the ground, in which the strength of soil or rock is Significant in providing resistance (GEO). # Loss of equlibriu of the structure or the ground due to uplifiby water pressure (UPL). # Hydraulic heave, internal erosion and piping in the ground caused by hydraulic gradienss (HYD), Serviceability limit states (2.4.8): States when deformations, displacements or any non-structural damage affect the intended function of a structure in terms of comfort and appearance, where “appear ‘concerned with, for example, extensive cracking rather than with aesthetics11 International agreements 7 Anticipated deformations and settlements are the main consideration here, For these, Annex H of EN 1997-1 gives some guidance (see also Chapter 3.1 of Volume 3 of the Handbook). EN 1990, 2.3, also requires that the function of the structure shall be warranted during its design working life. For example, in normal buildings Table 2.1 of EIN 1990 indicates a eign lifetime of 50 years. 4.3. Design situations (EN 1990, 3.5) In relation to a specified time interval the following design situations are identified: « persistent design situations which comply with the normal use of a structure; ‘¢ transient situations which refer to temporary conditions as for example during execution or repair; '* accidental design siwations by fire, explosion, impact or localised failure ete; «= seismic design situations, Note: A design situation’ constitutes. complete scenario, comprising a number ol various Toad cases and load combinations. 44 Geotechnical categories (EN 1997-1, 2.1) ‘To describe the mininwm requirements for the extent and content of ground investiga- ‘ions, design analyses and site supervision and the risks to property and life, three different geotechnical categories may be applied as follows: GCA: Small and relatively simple structures for which hasic stability and performance requirements can be fulfilled by experience and qualitative ground investigation and for which risks are negligible. Examplesare simple one- or two-storey buildings, lorage sheds, garages, This classification assumes that ground conditions are known by experience, The design of the building should therefore be routine and straightforward Rules which help to classify a structure into GCI are det mined nationally, GC2: Conventional structures and foundations that can be designed by routine peotech nical procedures, These should normally include quantitative analyses to verify that the fundamental design requirements are satisied. Some guidance on the extent of ground investigations is given in EN 1997, 3.2. The decision, however, should be supported by local or regional experience, GC: All circumstances other than those covered hy GC 1 and 2. Note: All parts of a project need not to be classified in the same category. 4S Observational method (IN 1997, 2.7) Tris often difficult to make a reliable prediction ahout the performance ofa structure and in such cases an observational method may be appropriate, in which the design data and8 ‘Ulrich Smoltezyk and Christophe Bauduin assumptions can be controtfed during the execution and adapted if necessary ‘This method makes the following assumptions: «© the allowable values of the performance parameters shall be assessed prior to design; «the potential variance of performance shall be determined such that the real perfor- mance remains within the predicted limits by a sufficient level of reliability: « the type and extent of monitoring shall be pre-determined; # remedial measures shall be included in design and contract to allow for situ allowable limit values booome surpassed. Ins when Smoltczyk [2] commented on the problems of this procedure and emphasized that a reaction in duc time requires the consideration of the following: ‘Activating remedies needs some time which should be considered during design. The method is not suitable for situations where reaction will most probably not be possible in time even though alarm signals have been recorded. It should not be used therefore where brittle failure phenomena may occur. ‘The method should only be applied in situations where assurance can be given that a proper reaction can be implemented prior to an ultimate limit state occuring, The method should not be [Link] a cheap protection against catastrophes. Itshould be understood as a means to provide economic alternatives within serviceability scenazia, ‘The monitoring scheme should be redundant. Redundance, however, should be provided by applying independant methods rather than by multiple records Itis not only economy but also the practicality using large numbers of recorded data which should make the designer think carefully about the necessary amount of gauges and readings. Il is the sudden change of a recorded parameter or its rate rather than the absolute ‘magnitude which gives the warning of a deviating performance, Parameters taken for ‘monitoring are mainly displacements, strains, pore pressures and water levels (Peck (1). 46 Partial safety factor method According to EN 199), section 6, the verification of limit states shall be achieved by applying partial factors of safety a$ follows: « the representative values of actions, Frep (see 4.6.1), multiplied by a partial safety factor yi «# the characteristic values of material strength parameters, X,, divided by a partial safety factor Yas the charact value of a resisting force, Rk, which is determined directly, divided by a partial safety factor yr. ‘Thus the design values (index Re= Rite. ‘The design values for the effects of actions in structural elements (moments, shear forces, hormal forces), Ey. are then obtained by either a statical calculation «© based on Fa and Xq or Ry, oF «© based on Fp and Ry, multiplied by the partial safety factor i, ) are derived by Fy = Frep 11 and Xq = Xi/rm oFLL Toternational agreements 9 Uncertainty about the calculation model of actions may be allowed for by an additional ‘model Lactor, sq, which in the first case (see EN 1990, 6.32, eq, 6.2) effects of actions are ‘multiplied by. In the second case (see EN 1990, 63.2, eq. 6.2a) this uncertaint by the partial salety factor yr = ysa- Yh A similar rule witha model factor yg is included for resisting forces (e.g. earth resistance) such that yx¢ = ya-Ym- This model factor however, is rarely applied in geotechnics because normally %, will be assessed to cover this uncertainty, too. For the same reason, in EN 1997-1 no special conversion factor n (See EN 199), 6.3.3) is required to consider effects such a load duration, model scale, temperature etc Unless required by national determination, partial factors for accidental situations and for limit states of serviceability shall equal 1.0. ‘The design values of geometrical data (a) are generally represented by a nominal value 4g = Bram In situations where possible or actual deviations of geometrical data would cause a sig- nificantly adverse effect on the reliablity of the predicted limit states, this shall be taken into account by adding a safety margin: Ad = Boom + a 46.1 Representative value of an action According to EN 1990, 6.3.1, the representative value of an action is generally given by Frop = ¥°Fe where p= 1 for the characteristic value of permanent unfavourable actions: Gx; ~ the characteristic value of a variable unfavourable action, Q), which shall be analysed as being the governing variable action to be taken at its full magnitude For persistent and transient situations the other variable unfavourable actions, Q; (i> 1) shall be reduced bya combination factor y = yo < 1, toallow for the fact that all variable actions will not occur simultaneously by th mum value ‘The representative value of an action for an accidental situation is also combined, but by applying special reduction factors yn frequent value) for Qy and y>; (greasi-permancnt value) for Q; > L associated with a time interval (EN 1990, 6.4.3). Inaddition, the nominal value of an accidental action, Ag, isto he taken into account (e.g collision force) For earthquake situations, the representative value consists of Gx, the variable unfavour able actions Qs, reduced by ya; and an earthquake action A. ‘The numerical values of these reduction -factors are separately tabled in the Annexes of EN 1999, for buildings and traific structures, For example, yy ~ 0.6 applies to wind as an accompanying action with traffic structures. Iitis not obvious which variable action isthe gover action shall be analysed in turn a8 Qy ing one, then each relevant variable10 Virich Smottezyk and Christopbe Baud 46.2 Load caves (combinations of actions) ‘The combinations of actions concerning the various verifications of ultimate limit states, are collected in EN 1990, 6.4.3, and in 6.5.3 those for serviceability limit states These combinations are based on the representative values of actions, both from the structure and the ground. In foundation engineering, where actions from the struc ture normally act in conjunction with actions from the ground, the following equations apply’ 1 Ultimate limit states for permanent and transient design situations Ditej Gea #7 vost Qe 4” i Vai“ Ors where “4 means in combination with; Gy. ~ characteristic value of a permancnt action from the structure andor from the ‘ground such as carth pressure or water pressure. According to EN 1997-1. for the weight density ofthe soil yq.j = 1 applies (see Table A 22 of the Code) Qx—characteristic value of a variable action from the structure andlor from the ground allowing for the representative values mentioned in 46.1. Applying these combi- nation factors, the diferent load combinations are obtained by substituting Qs Lor ©; to determine the governing ones Yo ~ partial savety factor of G with distinet numbers for unfavourable (Yo sup) and favourable (cir) actions. It should be noted that the factor yc: = 1.35 (EN 1990, ‘Annex A131 and EN 1997-1, Table A.2.1) with a minor factor of about 1.1 covers possible uncertainties of weight. The larger factor takes account of uncertainties resulting fcom load re-istributions during construction and thereafter; ‘to. ~ partial safety factor for unfavourable variable actions Q with a value 1.50 for Wy ultimate limit state (FN 1990, Annex A131, Favourable variable actions shall not be considered. No special reduced values for transient design situations during construction are given in EN 1997-1. The introduction of such values is permitted by national standards because reductions ofthis kind will depend significantly on distinct regional construction methods, state for an acei 2. Ultimate design Doug HP Aa HY Capit OF 21) Deer “4” ai ei Far t where ‘Ag ~the design value for the accidental action that shall be assessed as a nominal value by contract ‘vis OF yaa Shall be determined according to the type of accident or its consequences (EN 1990, 6.433). This combination also applies to the situation after an accident when A 0.[1 Tateraational agreemen n 3. Ultimate Y Guy wt Age state for an earthquake design situation where Az.g~ the design value of the action caused by an earthquake that shall be determined by EN 1998 (see also chapter 1.8). 4. Irreversibe limit state of serviceability (characteristic combination) DG Oca ot" Doves Os a 5 Frequent limit state of serviceability (see 46.1) ToGo yi Oe ok” Py Oni 6. Quasi-permanent limit state of serviceability (see 4.6.1) Lot" Devas Qs it a 46.3 Geotechnical verification of ultimate limit states Verification methods defined in EN 1997-1 for ulidmate limit states STR and GEO ditter depending on where the partial safety factors are applied in the course of analysis. ‘There are principally two possibilities to introduce partial factors: either on the input data of the calculation models or on their output data, In the lirst case this applies 10 the material parameters (shear strength, concrete strength, Yield strength of steel ete. — ‘material factor approach, MFA). In the second case this applies to the output from the ‘model used to calculate a ground resistance (pile load capacity, bearing capacity, earth resistance etc. - resistance factor approach, RFA, Ascalculation modelsin geotechnics depend either linearly on the shear strength (sliding, skin friction, slope stability of undrained cohesive ground)or non-linearily (earth pressure, Dearing capacity, slope stability of drained ground), different design results are obtained when a foundation element is sized by each procedure. For this reason, the choice of ‘one of the verification procedures indicated in EN 1990, A.1.3.1, with appropriate partial Tactors given in EN 1997-1, Annex A, remains with the national standardization bodies. ‘Three alternatives are offered for the STR and GEO ultimate limit states: ‘+ Design approach 1: Two veritication types are required; (1) based on factored actions ‘and aon-factored shear strength parameters and (2) factored shear strength parameters ‘and non-factored permanent actions with variable actions factored by yq = 1.3. The sizing and positioning of the foundation elements depends on both types, with the more adverse (0 be adopted. The factors are given in Annex A of EN 1997-1, Tables A.2.1 and A.2.2, (1) provides safety against adverse deviations of the actions from their characteristic Values and (2) provides safety against adverse deviations of the shear parameters.2 ‘Ulcich Smottezyk and Christophe Bauduin «© Design approuch 2: Uses only one type of analysis, based on characteristic values. ‘Actions are then factored as in approzch 11) and resistances are divided by partial factors given in Annex A, Tables 2:3, of EN 1997-1 © Design approach 3: Again uses one type of analysis, based on design values of structural actions, applying the same partial factors given by approach 1(1). On ground actions and resistances partial factors are applied as in approach 1(2), Ror ultimate limit states EQU, UPL, HYD straighforward procedures (EN 1997-1, [Link], 24,74 and [Link]) are required similat to the traditional global safety concept. Equal partial safety factors forthe three approaches are recommended in EN 1997-1, Annex A. (Tables A.1, A.3 and Aa) but depend, of course, on national requirements and standards. 46.4 Veriication of the limit state of serviceability (SLS) The limit state of serviceability can be checked by proving that a limit value, Cas, of a chosen quality of the structure does not accur thereby confirming the normal use of the structure (EN 1997-1, 248). The analysis may be based on checking limit values of action, effects settlements, displacements, tilting angles, accelerations ete: For the definition of movement modes see EN 1997-1, 2.49, and Annex H which give some Timit values (for further details, see chapter 3.1 of volume 3 of the Handbook). Design values Normally, design values for the SLS are equal to the characteristic values (see 4.6.2). However, partial factors > 1.0 may be appropriate if a deterioration of soil qualities or a change of boundary conditions cannot be excluded during the lifetime of the structure, see EN 195711, 2.4.83). If the check on the limiting values of deformation or movement is not required, it may be sufficient in simple cases and based on comparable experience, to prove that the level of mobilized shear strength in the ground is sufficiently low (EN 1997-1, 24.8(4)). 5 Geotechnical report A geotechnical design report and a ground investigation report are detailed in EN 1997-1 for the documentation of sci investigation results and the appropriate conclusions: The information required for these reports is summarized in clauses 28 and 3.4 The following notes should be read as comments with accompanying semarks by the second author (see [3]} The aim of a geotechnical report generally, isthe expert desciption of geotechnical con- ditions, premises and assumptions forthe design and construetion ofa structure classified in eategory 2 or 3. Fxpertse on a eategory 1 structure will normally only be made when this classification looks dubious or if itis required by court proceedings for example. The statements in the geotechnical report may a) be prepared for a project during design. 'b) accompany a project with site consulting,1.1 International agreements B ©) provide guidance during construction in terms of supervision, forexumple hy suggested monitoring etc, especially when the observational method is applied, At the stage of contract negotiations (a) normally is considered, whilst (b) often becomes necessary during construction. Itis recommended that the layout of the report is retained ina way that allow later supplements to be added easily in a clear and Iogic order. With very extensive projects such as traffic Tots, the official request of public consensus only needs rather general description of the ground conditions. In these cases, distinction can reasonably be made between preliminary investigations (see EN 1997-1, 32.2) and design investigations for individual structures and problems (see EN 1997-1, 32.3). This ‘may even be done by different consultants. 5. Ground investigation report (EN 1997-1, 3.4) The ground investigation report should start by explaining the reasons for the investi- gation. This is especially important in cases where facts have become obvious during investigation which were not realized at the time when it was planned and contracted, To manage these situations, list of unit prices for tests and services should be in the contract Following EN 1997-1, 3.42) this report should contain ‘« asummarizing documentation of the investigation results and the methods applied with reference to EN 1997.2, «© acritical commentary on the results and the parameters derived from them, Itisrecommended that the expert who does the test supervision is also involved in writing the report to ensure a consistent description is produced. When the general situation is explained, it should he said whether the investigations had tobe done in an area complety unknown until now or ifreference was possible to previous geological findings and earlier investigations. Furthermore, valuable general information may have been obtained from people who are familiar with the environment (for example: ‘a hunderd years ago, there was a like here", “this area was used for dumping for a long, time”, or “the ground water level was pumped down” etc). ‘Next, the report should contain the soil succession, the spatial geometry of the soll ayers and the surface, the ground and free water levels and the flow rates and directions and the ‘existing structures and their recognizable sensitivity to excavations orany other change of lopouraphy, Special risks such as creeping slopes, geological faults, changing water levels, erosion phenomena should be included wherever possible. All of these more general remarks should be checked to determine whether or not they are relevant for inclusion in the design report. Arguments should be given for risks that can be neglected, although the public is frightened shout a risk-bearing phenomenon. ‘The description of the soil situation to a large degree is already an expert interpretation because it provides a suggested spatial coordination hetween successions investigated at singular locations Tis therefore always possible (especially from a scientific point of view) to question this interpretation, This does not mean however that it should not be tried, since an expert description should provide overall information of the ground character for contractual purposes - itis reasonable to clarify in the report what is fact and what is, supposition. This may be indicated by introducing classes of reliability:4 Ulrich Smoltezyk and Christophe Bauduin Class 1: Areas where interpolation between investigation points is easy and, therefore, possible to a very high degree of probability, Class 2; Areas with remaining uncertainty although the available facts appear to allow interpolation Class 3: Areas where the results allow dis cerpretation which necessitates assump: tions based on facts derived from additional sources of information (for example: evaluation of geological statements), Class 4: Areas where additional investigations are necessary, a8 available information allows only limited assumptions to be made. Records which contain the results ofthe visual inspection of bored cores by an expert soil engineer or geologist and the details of sounding or test pit inspections should he included, in an annex to the report, This makes the main text clearer where not all details need to be considered. The report should rather clarify which details listed in the annex are of ‘major importance in understanding the total situation, As an example, a thin cohesive interlayer, detected in but a few borings, would be insignificant when mainly normal stresses are mobilized for the bearing capacity of a foundation embedded in plane terrain, but would have to he taken into account in sloping ground where shear strength plays the dominant role, Consideration should also be given to the fact that the results of _geotechnical calculations often have an integral character. For example, it would not make much sense to produce an when the soil suc rth pressure calculation sion is detailed into layers of 30 em each. On the other hand, thin less permeable interlayers will have great significance for the flow of groundwater or for consolidation time predictions, ‘Where organic matter is found in the boreholes, the borehole readings should be supple- ‘mented by indicating the distribution ofthis matter in a sufficiently long section (e. gm) and its degree of deterioration. For instance, it would be misleading ifa layer is described as “highly organic clayey silt layer” when within a clayey silt layer @ peat interlayer has, been foun In EN 1997-1, 3.42. it is mandatory to explain the reasons for defective or incomplete investigation results The report shall also specify where additonal or special investigations are sill missing. 5.2 Ground design report (EN 1997-1, 2.8) ‘The ground design report contains the conclusions drawn by the geotechnical expert from the investigation report as well as calculations which he has made to verify limit states. ‘The extent of work connected with this should only be given in a preliminary way: Tike the service of a doctor or a lawyer, the real amount of consulting often becomes obvious only as the project proceeds, Te consultant should be charged by established experience and mutual confidence in his capacity, rather than on a comparison of prices. The client should understand that the cheaper such work is offered, the more general and undetailed the report will be with a tendency to shift hidden risks to the client ~ often without him recognizing it In EN 1997-1, 28, itis recommended that the report should also contain statements on the suitablity of asite with respect othe proposed consiruction and the level of acceptable risks,1.1 International agreements 15 ‘There will, however, be litle freedom for alternatives when a site is located in an area which isalready densely populated. Insuch situations the guidance should focus on finding, a suitable type of foundation in terms ofits feasibility, econ ound water conditions, compatibilty with the above ground parts of the structure ete. Suitable alternatives may therefore be apt for discussion where traffic routes are to be built, ‘The ground design report, if not contracted otherwise, will he limited to findingsin terms of geotechnical verifications and duration against adverse environmental effects. This marks the houndary between geotechnical and structural engineering works, The “external sizing of foundation elements like footings or retaining walls depends on geotechnical points of view, the sizing of concrete or steel sections and the reinforcements is truly 2 structural task Even with such delimitation, the work of a geotechnical engineer contains a significant amount of quantifying engineering by analyses. General phenomenological considera- tions will not yield the kind of information that is of real value to a client. Although the details of a structure may not he known at the time whea the report is delivered, the ground design report should provide examples of typical calculations ~ especially when the design shall he based on the partial safety factor method, For legal reasons it should be clearly indicated to the client for each number in a design report whether itis the result of an investigated fact which can be proved, if queried by anyone, or an expert assumption. The expert is ohliged to state his assumptions where sufficient facts or established rules are missing. When established application rules are ‘not used, arguments shall he provided in such a way that they can he understood and realized by a user or supervisor who may not have scientific geotechnical training but a good general knowledge of civil engineering prohlems, Regional terminology should not >e used to avoid misunderstanding by users from outside the region, Recommendations for foundation procedures should contain all the possible alternatives to avoid a restricted competition. Methods that are acknowledged by the profession but can be implemented by only a few contractors must not be recommended exclusively but they may be considered by allowing for a special additional tender. In EN 1997-1, 2.8(4) itis recommended that the geotechaical design report should also deal with items which require checking during construction or which require maintenance fier construction Irom geotechnical point of view. It would be reasonable to provide concise “directions of use” guidance note to the as-built documents, delivered to the user when the work is finished, giving for example the recommended settlement checks t0 be carried out at later time intervals. As the design report follows the completed site investigation, it may become apparent luring negotiations with contractors especially when special tenders are evaluated —that the choice of a particular method of construction would need additional sil investigations. In such situations the consultant that compiled the design report should be asked for his advice and possibly to provide to necessary supplements to his report. However, it often happens (maybe even by intention, maybe just forgotten) that these additional soil investigations do not become an item in the tender contract. If at a later stage an unacceptable construction yields a legal case, it will be important that the geotechnical consultant can prove that he had pointed to the need for additional investigations and. when. On the other hand, excessive additonal investigations should not be asked for an alibi to avoid straightforward decisions. They should always remain in reasonable relation to the value of the project. In this way design reports will always have a degree16 Ulrich Smoticeyk and Christophe Bauduin of compromise: documenting the act of realizing the works in relation to ground risk avoidance, Large geotechnical design reports should have a summary containing the most important technical statements ina concise manner with examples referring to the annexes enclosed in the documents published for tenders 6 References Il] Peck, 8.8: Advantages on limitations of the observational method in applied soil mechanics Sth Rankine Lecture: Géotechnique 9 (1569), 171-187 12] Smotczyk, U: Beobachten~aber methodisch richtig Vortrige Christian Veder Symposium, Graz 1998, L-ll [3] Sraotezyk, Us Internationale Vereinbarungen. In: Grundhau Taschenbuch Teil 1, Sth edition, Eenst & Soho, Berlin 1996, 1-23,1.2 Determination of characteristic values Christophe Bauduin 1 Introduction ‘One of the most difficult tasks in geotechnical engincering is the selection of the “charae- teristic value” of a geotechnical properly, this isthe value of the property that governs the behaviour of the geotechnical structure at the limit state considered. The difficulty results from the variability of a property in the Soil, from differences between test conditions nd real conditions and from the small number of tests usually available. Therefore, all relevant information complementary to the test results should be considered, chapter illustrates the various aspects leading from test results to characteristic and design values of material properties and gives some statistical methods to assess charae- teristic values from a sample of test results, A clear insight ean only be obtained by dividing the process into sequential, well defined stops and by knowing exactly what kas been done, what information is requested, and. what output is obtained by each individual step. The first part of the chapter therefore Identifies these steps and indicates the type of uncertainty covered by the calculation procedure of the step being considered, When soil or rock tests are evaluated, the limit state on which the test results shall be applied should be taken into account, Once all the tests are analysed, a set of (derived) values of the ground parameter are obtained giving stochastic variations from which the characteristic value for the limit state considered has to be assessed (Section 2.2). Statistical methods may be useful to do this. In Section 2.3 a flow chart is given, as a schedule of factors affecting the ehoice of the characteristic value and 2 description of application rules in practice. Finally, in Section 3, the different approaches are exemplified for some typical soils. 2 From derived value to design value 21 Sequential steps ‘The design value of a soil parameter is obtained through a sequence of steps starting with some site measurements and a subdivision of the soil secession into “homogeneous layers. This subdivision isbased on previous soil investigations and ifavailable, engineering geology judgement, Homogenity means that the parameters of a soil layer show only stochastic variance, i.e. variations that are at random around the true value or follow a well established trend such as a linear increase with depth.18 ‘Chuistophe Bauduin It should be noted that homogenity need not he an absolute category: soil layer may be homoyeneous with respect to a particular property (e.g. shear strengthexpressed through angle ') but not to another one. Homogenity isalso related to scaling, considering a soil ‘mass at a small scale may lead to the conclusion that itis not homogeneous but it may be assumed to be homogeneous when considering a soil mass asa whole. ‘The sequence from test result to design value comprises the following main steps. In some situations they may be performed simultaneously or in a different order: Step 1: Measuring of the soil behaviour on ste or inthe laborwiory ‘An example of this step is carrying out a CPT or a SPT, where the resistance opposed by the soil to the (static or dynamic) penetration of a measuring device is measured as a function of depth, Another example is the use of an oedometer test where the axial strain is registered asa function of the applied stress (and also sometimes as function of time). Step 2: From measurement to measured soil property Examples of this are the assessment of the undrained shear strength of the soil, rom the measured cone resistance or blow count, or the assessment of the compression modulus ‘and consolidation coelficient from the oedometer test results, Step 3 From measured soil property 0 in situ property In this step, the measured soil property is adjusted/corrected to fit to the real conditions in the soil for the problem under consideration. This step therefore needs a good insight im the expected behaviour of the soil and the geotechnical structure. Examples are the adjustment of the undrained shear strength, obtained in previous steps, loa very different stress level in the real problem, or the establishment of the value of the compression ‘modulus for the expected stress increase Step 4: From in size property to characteristic (representative) value In this step, all individual values of the in situ property are brought together to select @ representative value for the soil layer. This step ineludes some conservatism. This tequires that not only the values obtained from devoted tests be considered, but also all other information which might increase the knowledge of the soil should be included. For example, water content and grain size distribution may also contain some information to he considered when selecting the characteristic value of the undrained shear strength, Previous knowledge i extremely valuable and should be included wherever possible. ‘Also, previous knowledge may be test results in the same soil, or the observed behaviour of existing structures, Another important point to consider at this stage is the variability of the soil parameter, so that not only the expected (mean) value of the parameter is established, but also the magnitude of its variation Of course the larger the aumber of tests and other relevant information, the higher the confidence one can have of the representativity of the value chosen andl the less conserv- ative the choice needs to be.triste values 19 Step 5: From characteristic value io a design value for use ina calculation model, applying 2 partial safety factor Yay: X= Xx /¥m When considering the above described process of determination of geotechnical parame- tets, one realizes that it involves a lot of uncertainties: ‘© Step I contains rather few uncertainties, especially as testing material and procedures are more and more standardized. Any measurement corrections should be performed at that step: ‘© Step 2 contains more uncertainty, as some interpretation is involved. For example, triaxial tests, even when well performed, may include some difficulties in trying to establish the values of c’ and g! by drawinga straight line tangent to the failure circles. When deriving a parameter value through an empirical relationship (e.g. undrained shear strength from cone resistance) the uncertainty and validity of the relationship used arises. So this step contains more uncertainty than is usually admitted; # The uncertainty related to step 3 is olten wrongly neglected. For example, the soil is ‘much stiffer at small strains than at large strains; the stiffess of the soil is often strongly influenced by the stress path. The adjustment from the measured soil property to the in situ property requires good soil mechanics judgement # Step 4 contains often the largest contibution to the uncertainty. A difficulty in this step is that the engineer has either very little information, or has to deal with a Tot of diverse, sometimes contradicting information. Statistical techniques are helpful to complement sound judgement in this crucial step. # The partial factor, introduced in step 5, aimed to cover unfavourable deviations of the real value of the soil property from the characteristic value, also includes some uncertainty ‘Table 1 summarizes the aspects of proceeding, 22 Points of view when snalyzing test results Properties of soil and rack and rock masses are quantified by geotechnical parameters which are used in design calculations, EN 1997-1 Section 3 requires ground properties to be derived irom the results of field and laboratory tests and other relevant data ‘The test results should be presented in such a way that the determination of geotechnical parameter values is understandable. ‘The values of geotechnical parameters are either directly obtained from test results or as derived values based on tests. “Derived values” are defined in Burocode 7 part 3 as: a value of a geotechnical parameter obtained by theory, correlation or empiricalism from test results" Examples of soil parameters that may be obtained directly, are the results of trigxial tests (shcar strength: peak value, at critical state, ata given Strain; E-modulus at a given stress level e.g. E39) and cedometer tests (compression modulus ata given stress interval consolidation coeflicient at a piven stress interval) ete Derived values are mainly obtained from ficld tests, Examples of this are undrained shear strength or the angle of internal friction deduced from cone resistance (CPT) of blow count (SPT). Part 3 of Eurocode 7 gives correlations for finding derived values for geotechnical parameters from most standard field tests (see Table 2for some examples).‘Table 1. Scheme of investigation steps (LS ~ Lit state) Activity Method Applied on | Requested info | Output Part of | Asepet of uncertxinty EC7 | convered Measured | Measuringon site| Testing proce. | Each single [ NA. value rin the dures test ‘Fest cesult [Analysis ofmeas- | Validation proce: | Each single | NA. Validated value of [2-3 | Testerrors ured values duces and presen: | test parameter or rela: tation ofthe tionship between measurement parameters Geotechnical] Evaluation of test Each single | Calculation model | Value ofthe geo- 2-3 | Adequacy between test, parameter | results test intended tobe used | technical para result and calulation value for analysis of the | meter for te LS ‘adel for LS consid limit state coasid. | considered ered ered = Assumed behav jour st the LS: range of stress oF strains if relevant Derived | Derivation of para- | Applying on test | Each single | ~ Calculation model | Derived value out [2-3 |— Adequacy between value meter(3) as needed | results test result, | intended robe used | of each test result test esol and eal im thecalculation | Empirical rela. | after ideal | for analysis ofthe | which can be: culation made! for model, converting | tions sationif | timitatateconsid- | geotechnical LS considered andifnecessary~ |~Semi-empiical | relevant | ered parameter value ~ Calibration of model correcting the test | relations = Assumed behaw- | -cuefficient or result into sol para- | ~ Theoretical f jourattheLS: | resistance in meter(s) assumed | mulas range of stresses or | indirect method! to modelise the soil | ~ Calibration seains relevant behaviour actors 2 e e 5g‘Table 1 (continued) Activity Method Applied on | Requestedinfo | Output Port of | Ascpet of uncertainty BC7 | convered Character. | Selection ofa cau [Statistical | Allavail- | —Limitstateconsid- | The characteristic [1 Spatial stochastic varia- Inte value | tious estimate of | methods ablerele- | ered value(s) forthe | (24.3(P)} sions of the soit para- the valne governing |—Engineering | vant deri | Statistical ype of | Jit sate consid meters around its value the occurrence of | judgement — |edvalues | data(local- | ered fof established trend in the limitstate under andcom- | regional previous homogeneous sil layer corsideraton, tak- plementary | knowledge) inginto account soil Information | ~ Ability of soil and) variability within (apron | or structure to the homogenous Knowledge | redistribute layer, andi! all previous relevant soil para experience) rcter knowledge from previous experience Design value | Deriving the value | Dividing value by | Character Design value [1 Safety margin robe usedintne ver | material factory | iti value = Unfavourable devie~ ification of the LS tions fom char, valves under consideration ~ inaccuracy in conver sion factor = Uncertainties geome tty und cale. model : a : ic2 ‘Christophe Bauduin ‘Table 2. Examples of geotechnical parameters derived from fold tests Field test | Test resutts | Derived value | B/R" | Reference to ECTS, Annex or % 5 B BI Ew B Ba corr % pile resistance & Ba PMT Pim ‘bearing capac R cr PMT 5 sotlement 2 PMT Pin pile resistance R cs sr | Wie. Ip B pa ¥ ba DP Nw Ip EL WW forbearing capacity |B 52 ‘caleulations DP Nw End B 53 wst | half tums! © B F 02m En B F Fr on a R G © B: parameter to be used in analytical method Re resistance [FL? or coefficient in semi-empirical mothods Note that derived values can he a “basic” parameter (strength parameter & of 4: ys Ce et.) or asoil resistance (heating capacity). An example of this the bearing capacity of a shallow foundation or a pile deduced from the results of pressuremeter tests. As examples oflahoratory tests derived valuesare only applied when shear strength para- meters are derived from the results of classification tests (e.g gradation, water content, ‘Auterberg limits, density), A-very important point when dealing with derived values, is the kind of correlation used. EN 1997-1, Section 2, further requires '# Values obtained from test results, derived values and other data shall be interpreted ‘appropriately for the limit state considered (2.4.3 (2)) ‘© The characteristic value of ageotechnical parametershall be [Link] estimate of the value affecting the occurrence of the limit state ([Link](2)). In the process from measurement to characteristic values therefore the adequacy between the value of the geotechnical parameter and the limit state considered should be intro- duced. To obtain reliable data, the following points shall be taken into account (2.4.3 (4)): ‘© many geotechnical parameters are not true constants but depend on stress level and the mode of deformation; «© soil and rock structure (fissures, laminations, large particles etc) that may play adifferent role in the tsi and in the geotechnical structure;2 Determination of characteristic values 2B time effees the softening effect of percolating water on soil and rock strength; the softening effect of dynamic actions; the britleness or ductility ofthe soit und rock tested: te method of installaion ofthe geotechnical siructere; the influence of workmanship on artjically placed or improved ground, the effect of consiruction activites on the properties of the ground. {In subclause (5), the nced to consider relevant published information and any kind of useful experience is also emphasized, Accalibration factor shall be applied where necessary to get laboratory and field test results to represent the behaviour of the soil and rock in the ground (2.4.3 (6)). An example of such # calibration factor is the factor 1.1 to convert ag’ value [rom triaxial tests to plane strain conditions Preferably calibration factors should be applied to each individual test result before sum- ‘ming them up and selecting the characteristic value Mlusteation the points mentioned above 1, Effect of stress and strain dependency: strain compatibitity ‘As hard and soft layers differ significantly in their stress-strain performance. the shear strength ofa soil suecession i influenced such that the hard layers yield their peak strength at small strain, when the soft layers are still far from mobilizing their maximum strength, ‘When ultimate limit sates are to be verified therefore, itis not appropriate to apply peak strength values of the different layers involved without careful consideration. In the same ‘way, deformation moduli of the soil should be chosen in accordance with the stress level. 2. Effect of differences in the soit structure herween the test and the real structure A typical example of the different effect of a fissured soil structure on the test results and ‘on the real structure is the size effect on CPT results in stiff fissured tertiary clays. For these cases, the bearing capacity for piles based on the CPT method (according to (1]) has tobe reduced by a factor depending on the ratio ofthe pile diameter fo the cone diameter. Aay corrections related to the specific test or test conditions should be performed at this early stage of the process Some considerations ubout the use of correlation to obtain derived values One of the difficulties often encountered in applying derived values is the lack of know! edge about the variance and safety contained in a correlation. A correlation might be » 2 “mean” correlation, 2 “conservative estimate”correlation, «© provide a “characteristic” value, © provide a “design” value. Ifa correlation isa “conservative estimate”, how conservative is it? (e.g. 4 cautious guess of a mean value, a lower bound correlation?)Ea Christophe Bauduin Some existing national codes provide “characteristic values” of geotechnical parame- ters derived from the results of field tests or identification tests (see e.g. NEN6740 or DIN 4014). The characteristic values in this case are often given for “classes” of measured, values. Other national codes give “design values” to he derived from (field) tests that are often denoted as “allowable values”, mostly related to a deterministic design approach (icc. unfactored loads). Here also the design values are given for “classes” of measured values. In these latter two cases homogeneous conditions are usually assumed without specilying some criteria to check if homogenity is fulfilled or not. ‘The test results available to establish derived values are often results given as a function, of depth for different test locations, To manage this information, some “idealization” of the obtained profiles is usually made, However, with natural soils, variations of mea sured properties may indicate significant variations in site conditions Lt is therefore very important that weak zones are identified, Summarizing test results from several test locations at too early stage, by using statistics, may mask the variability of the geotechnical parameter value andor the presence of weaker zones. Therefore, both the idealization of the soil succession and the determination of derived values should he done for each test location separately, ‘When correlations are applied to derive a shear parameter or deformation moduli from measured values, a diagram as illustrated by Fig. 1s produced (e. . taking the horizontal axis lor measured water contents, the vertical axis for derived shear parameter values). Fig. Example fora cautious choice slorived values trom seattering measured values ‘nessued ate As it is not evident if the correlation already considers the variance of values, it seems Togicalto choose a lower hound curve in terms of a “cautious estimate” when characteristic input data for verilying calculations are to be developed taking account of the spatial distribution in the next step. The reason for this is the fact that the applied correlations fare normally hased on wide-spread regional experiences and need not necessarily reflect local conditions, It however, itis possible to base a correlation (for example between Atterberg limitsand c,) on a sulliciently large number of site samples. "mean" correlation will be appropriate. Derived values used in semi- pirical models When using a semi-empirical model, atest result (usually from field tests) is transformed into a resistance value, The transformation rule is often the result of the comparison between the test result and the behaviour of the geotechnical structure that has been1.2 Determination of characteristic values 25 ‘measured experimentally: e.g, pile shaft unit skin friction deduced by cone resistance, is based on the comparison of the skin friction obtained by pile tests and CPT results. A calibration factor may be introduced to adapt the value of the test result or derived value to the limit state considered, Such factors also aim to increase the reliability of the prediction by covering its seatter Examples are: # The correction factor on the field test result to obtain the value of undrained shear strength for slope stability design (see EN 1997-3, Annex G). The factors given are based on local experience and back calculations of slope failures. ‘© The facior & to derive the ultimate compressive pile resistance from semi-empiical ‘methods (in situ tests, EN 1997-1, 76.2.3(6)P and Annex A). If for example CPTs are applied, the factor should be such as to have a probability of less than 5% from a deviating individual result. Remarks: ) The value of the calibration factor depends on the level of reliability chosen. This in turn depends on the total safety required for the type of geotechnical structure considered and the load and material factors applied. 'b) The calibration factor is linked with the calculation method used, 23. Points of view when determining characterist (EN 1997-1, 2.4.5) values of ground parameters Once a set of values for the geotechnical parameters has been determined, the charac teristic Value for the problem being analyzed has to be evaluated from it. The selection of the characteristic values of soil and rock properties shall take account of the following (EN 1997-1, 2.45.2(4)P): «# geological and other background information, such as data from previous projects: 1 the variability of the measured property values and other relevant information, eg. from exisiing knowledge, «the extent of the field and laboratory investigation; # the eype and number of samples; # theextent ofthe zone of ground governing the behaviour of the geotechnical structure at the limit state being considered; «the ability of the geotechnical structure to transfer loads from weak to strong zones inthe ground. Complementary sources of relevant information may include databases, known varia tion coefficients of the geotechnical parameter considered and test results from nearby locations 1. Effect of soil volume and/or ability of the structure to transfer loads The local (point) values of a geotechnical parameter fluctuate inthe soil around its mean value (or end). Tis always necessary to identify the specific volume of ground which governs the behaviour ofthe structure in the limit state considered.26 ‘Christophe Baud As the characteristic value is required to be @ cautious estimate of the value affecting the vecurrence of the limit state (EN 1997-1, 2.4.52(2)P), the first question fo be answered is: what magnitude of the soil parameter governs the limit state in relation with the extent of the soil influence zone? ‘A value close to the mean value may govern the limit state when (see 2.4$.2(7) and (9)) ‘+ alarge soil volume within the homogencous layers is involved, allowing for compensa- Con of (stochastically occurring) weaker by stronger areas; + the structure carried by the soil allows a transfer of forces from weaker to stronger foundation points. ‘A Value close to the (stochastically occurring) lowest valve of the soil parameter may govern the limit state when ‘© a small soil volume is involved that does not allow for compensation: a kinematically possible failure surface may develop mainly within the weak soil volume; ‘the structure may reach its ultimate limit state before the transfer of forces from weak to strong parts can occur. ‘The extent of the influence zone depends on several factors: # The type and sizeof the structure have the most significant effect on the influcnced soil Asan example, in the ease of a raft resting on a sand soil containing some loam lenses, the behaviour is governed by the sand, while in the case of a foundation on individual pads, the behaviour can be governed by a weak spol occurring under a single pad. The stiffacss of the structure: a stiff structure will allow load transfer from weak to stronger zones, allowing it to reduce the emphasis on the local weak spots, As an ‘example, in the ease ofa stiffstructure founded by strip footings on asand soil containing, some loam lenses, the behaviour is governed by the sand, while in the case of a weak structure foundation on individual pads, the behaviour can he governed by a weak spot ‘occurring under a single pad. ‘The loads involved: for example, the shape of the failure surface under a strip footing ‘depends on the ratio between vertical and horizontal components of the load. It should be emphasized here that “large” and “small” are related to the distance over which the stochastic fluctuation of the properly occurs around ils mean valuc (auto- correlationlength):the smaller thisdistance (i.e. quick variationsaround the mean value), the casier 2 “mean” value can be obtained. For a long auto-correlation length (i,¢. slow variations of the soil property around the mean value) a significant part of the influence zone can be located within the past of the soil having the low point values. Remark: The influenced volume of soil should not be confused with the volume of soil which needs to be investigated by borings and in situ tests, as part of the soil investigation, prior to the design, 2, Processes governed by extreme values of soil properties ‘When carrying out the design analysis, it should be noted that processes in the soil may dhe governed by “extreme” valucs of the soil parameters, despite the faet that a large soil volume is involved or that the stiffness of the structure allows transfer of loads.1.2 Determination of characteristic values 27 Examples of this are deposits formed by thin, parallel layers (sandwich formation) that are often modelled 2s homogeneous layers, although for special calculations they behave in a non-homogencous way. Examples are: ‘© groundwater-flow perpendicular to layered deposit, governed hy lowest vertical per- meability: ‘» groundwater-flow parallel to layered deposit, governed hy highest horizontal perme- ability; ‘© compression of a layered deponit, governed hy compressibility of weakest component; + reactivation of slip movements along previously developed slip surfaces; ‘+ akinematically admissible slip surface through a “chain” of weak ground section. When itis recognized that a process for limit state is governed by the extreme values of soil property within the influence zone of soil, the characteristic value should he selected, as a eautious estimate of the governing extreme value, and not as @ mean or fractile value of the property. For instance: in layered deposit, the mean value of the compressibility of the most compressible strata should be considered rather than the point value of the tests including compressible and non-compressible strata. When soil or rock masses show a brittle (or strongly expressed softening ) behaviour, ‘one should he extremely careful when considering “mean values” or “redistribution from strong to weak areas”; brittle materials do sow a brutal rupture, together with @ loss of all strength compared to ductile materials, which more or less maintain their strength when strained continuously after reaching their fll strength. Failure systems in ductile soils are more or less parallel systems while they are close to series systems in brittle soils ‘Thisis illustrated in Fig. 2 by a stiff structure supported by four foundation points, having ultimate bearing capacities of 125KN and 200KN. In the example, “brittle” corresponds to 2 complete loss of strength alter the peak value is reached, while ductile means that the maximum resistance is retained even after the maximum value is attained. 7 tt 125 200,200,128 ig.2, Example of footing support For ductile behaviour the ultimate hearing capacity of the foundation is 650kN (125 + 125 + 200 + 200) and is related to the mean value of the individual foundation points For brittle behaviour, the ultimate hearing capacity is reached once the first foundation element reachesiits maximal bearing capacity andis 50) (there is no sedistribution possible as once 125 is reached at supports 1 and 4, further loading means loss of strength in these points as the two other supports are loaded to more than 250 KN, what they cannot arty). ‘The strength in the latter case is determined by the lowest value. 3. Type of sampling, extent of investigation and complementary information Distinction should be made between “local” and “regional” sampling, taking account of the fact that the same formation may deviate in its performance, Local sampling means that the test are taken at (or close to) the site of the intended geotechnical structure. In the case of regional sampling, the results of tests taken over a wide area are brought together (maybe in a databank). Examples of this are road, railway or dyke projects. In these cases spatial variation lnas to be considered: the same soil layer may have rather28 (Christophe Baud Lifferent property values at different locations along the project, Special account has to be taken for this source of uncertainty, Clearly the more information available, the more reliable the prediction of the character istic value will be. ‘The Eurocode insists on adding all the complementary information relevant to the test results of the local soil investigation because with local sampling only a few tests are ‘normally available, The complementary information may be introduced through: A good knowledge of the coefficient of variation of the property, Within a soil layer, the coetticient of variation does not vary much, especially if compared with the mean value. When the coefficient is known, this notably reduces the uncertainty of assessing. the characteristic value. The statistical formula used will therefore be different when both the mean value and the coefficient of variation have to be determined from a set of results, compared with one used when the coefficient of variation is already known and only the mean value has to be determined. ‘¢ Bayesian statistics in which a prior knowledge of values of the soil property (established bby regional databases or previous comparable projects) is used as a starting point and in which the results of samples from a given location are used to verify it if the prior values are used or need to be updated. This method is especially useful when a good prior knowledge js available and it is not intended to perform many tests at a given construction site, However, ifonly local investigation results are available and any kind, of pre-information is lacking, then very conservative characteristic values should be assumed due to the small number of local tests, 24 Use of (ical methods EN 1997-1 allows the use of statistical methods to select the characteristic value, When they are used, in 2.45.2(11) it requires: If statistical methods are used, the characteristic value should be derived such that the calculated probability of a worse value governing the occurrence of the limit state under ‘consideration is not greater than 5%. In this respect, a cautious estimate of the mean value is the seleetion of the mean value Of the limited set of geotechnical parameter values, with 2 confidence level of 95 %; cautious estimate of the low value is 25 % fractile The difference between these cases is illustrated in Fig. 3 ‘The flow charts in Figs. 4 and 5 sum up all the previously mentioned essentials leading 10 mathematical formulation for the assessment of characteristic values. These essentials are summarized as follows: a) local or regional sampling; bb) homogeneous soil or trend: ¢) large or small soil volume involved ~ load redistribution by structural stiffness; 4) uscTul experience available, prior knowledge. The flow charts do not give all of the possible combinations between items (a) to (), but only those that are most relevant for daily practice, Bayesian analysis is not treated further here.1.2 Determination of characteristic values ‘mean vale posse astovton | estas fort | es i i Mssetoae! Ast ut HBR os (sinS4 1) Mall a. (Naps valu of paramotr poate ‘arate tories vaues| ‘moan 29 ig. 3. Example of 95% contidence equi fora mean and of a 54% fractile mean vate] [man vive} fayssad atom | |e a5% | ana ceamicence | | conenee "ev "ere nar | | vanown veraton Fig. 4 Local sampling. as starting point30 (Christophe Bauduin =e aaa ee, rey Soon (st = | pes mean value for 95% sae — ame, mong cr ero eons moe | Mi Note: Statistical methods are inappropriate when very few test results are availaible, except if they can be used in conjunction with previous experience and/or Baysian analy- sis Very often the “previous experience” is summarized in standard tables, giving charac- {eristic values of soil properties, cautiously estimated on basis of regional experience (see Section 2.2) 2A.L Statistical formulas to assess the charact A normal distribution is assumed. This assumption is discussed in more detail in Sec tion 2.4.2. Case 1 No significant trend; no experience available. In this first case the characteristic value will be an estimate of the real mean value from tests, with a confidence level of 95 % (50% fractile with 95 % confidence level). In other words the characteristic value with will be estimated such that thers is a probability of 95 % thatthe “real” mean value is more reliable than the estimated one yl Xi -X [ras v ] w where KX __—aithmetieal mean of n values X; of the geotechnical parameter V=5/X—cocificient of variation Yow -¥F ~ Student tactor with (n ~ 1) degrees of freedom at 95 % confidence12 Determination of charseterstc values 31 ‘Table 3 gives the values of &1 = Xi/X asa function of n and V, “Table 3. Numerical values off; ‘010 | 04s | 020 | 028 Case 2 As Case 1, but calculating a low value where there is only a 5% chance of finding a location in the soil having a worse value: X=X fates (0-3) ]-x ® @) It should be noted that there is a small difference between the statistical aspects of the formulas for the mean value and for the fractile value. The mean value (50 % fractile) at 95 % confidence level considers the stochastic variation and the statistical uncertainty as ‘wo different sources of uncertainty that should be covered by the statistical formula, ‘The 5 % fractile considers both uncertainties together. The mean value at 95 % hasa more “predictive aspect” while the fractile hasan “observation from test resull set” aspect. A. "05 % reliable 5 % fractile” value leads to extremely low § values. Conversely, the & values aiven for the 5% fractile in Table 4 are close to a 75 % reliability guess of a 5% fractile. ‘Table 4. Numerical values of & ‘aos | 0.10 | ots | 020 | 02s ‘03 | 066 | 049 | 023 | 016 os7 | 078 | 061 | 047 | 034 ogg | 077 | 04s | 053 | 0.92 089 | 078 | 067 | 056 | 0.46 0.90 | 080 | 070 | ost | ast ot | 092 | 082 ost | asa | 073 | 04s | 056 92 | 083 | 075 | 066 | 058 beoeaued = Case 3 Useful wellskntown experience available When enough test results (including on site and off site information) are available to sate that the variation coefficient V of the particular soil parameter is well-known and2 Christophe Bauduin that focally V does aot much differ from that known value, advantage may be taken of well established experience in terms of V by replacing 1085, by LO4S in the previous formulae ‘The decision toconsider V as heing well-known dependscon the judgement of the responsi ble engineer. Such a statement normally zequites a supporting database of acknowledged vest results, Case 4 Experience available but V not fully known, ‘This case might he approached by using Buyesian analysis ({3, 6, 7)). However, its useful ness for standard problems seems to be questionable, especially when comparing the two limit situations (V unknown — V known) mentioned above, Remarle The following cases refer to situations where the value of soil property increases (linearly) with depth or the shear resistance ~ tinereases with the meun principal stress Case 5 [No useful experience available, characteristic mean value ai a95 % confidence for linear trend, Statistical methods are available to calculate the confidence interval with « given prob- ability and the prediction interval ofa linear regression curve. The lower bound of the confidence interval, when calculated with a confidence level of 95 %, gives the character- istic value of the real mean Tae best estimate, X(z). of the ground parameter at a depth z, follows the Student’ ‘distribution with (a ~ 2) deprees of freedom. The mean value equals to the true mean of the ground parameter at this depth, and the standard deviation, sj, ¢ follows: £4 2 |S fy- 0 - be -af @) Yea?) iT ai ‘Thu, the characteristic value of X at depth zis: $ba- 88 5 ® x= ¥4b(z—7) (5) 1 Bot eto me) feta tite) 6)1.2 Determination of characteristic values 2B 1 should be noted that the calculated characteristic values are nota Tinea but a slightly hyperbolic function of depth due to the term {325,,;. The distance between the linear regression and the characteristic value is smallest atthe centre of gravity ofthe readings This shows the advantage of performing the testshoth within the relevant problem interval and slightly outside. As many calculation methods and computer codes use linear relationships, the hyperbolic relation in the relevant (stress) interval has to be lincarized, but subsequent errors are usually insignificant Remark: The significance of the presumed trend can easily he proven by a statistical test Case 6 ‘As Case 5 but for point value 5% fractile. Statistical methods are available to calculate the confidence interval with a given prob- ability and the prediction interval of a linear regression curve. The lower bound of the prediction interval gives the characteristic value of the lower (point) value (only 5% of the test results should be lower, i.e. 5 % fractile. ‘The difference between the local valuc of the ground parameter and its best estimate at 3 depth z follows Student’ tdistribution with (n — 2) degrees of freedom. The mean value is equal to zero and the standard deviation, sis: L 1, wn 4, ee? ; Yow 9 - bee 2°] © ye -2 ‘Thus the local characteristic valuc Xy at depth z is Xk #b-@ 7) 8) Case 7 As Cases $ and 6, but with pre-information. Available experience may be used, When very complicated statistical methods are to he avoided, pragmatic approaches can be followed as below: 4) to qualitatively check the assumption of an existing signilicant trend; ) to verify the b-value (semi-quantitative evaluation); ¢) to-add complementary measurements to the local set (a) and (b) evaluations should always be made. Usually, when a significant trend is estab- lished by local test results and checked according to (a) and (b), there is not much 10 ‘pain by (¢). This last one should alwways be done with care as the value of (b) may have some regional consistency but might vary on site at z = 0 due to different values of ‘overhurden:34 (Christophe Bauduin Case 8 Regional soil sampling with no regional or loval trend versus depth and no local soil test available. Mean value at a 95 % confidence level This case has to be calculated taking care to consider the variability at one point (along, vertical axis) and the global variability, A formulation according to [2] may be: M=X [pw vib “| ) with the symbols are as before plus a= F/3 +34) tion around the local mean sr = standard deviation at a specific test location (va value) assumed to be the same at all test locations, Som ~ standard deviation of the local mean values around the overall mean value. “Table gives numerical valuesy(e) — X4/K tor different values of Vand n, Values given for small test numbers (c.g. n = 8) should be disregarded: regional dataset based on so few results is very questionable Remarks: ¢ @ = 0 means dominant stochastic variations over the area under consid characteristic value is then the 5 % fractile, jon. The ‘+ «=I means no stochastic variations over the area, only local variations, The charac teristic value is the mean value at a 95 % confidence level, ‘+ A major difficulty is the choice of an appropriate a value, Dutch experience based on ‘a small number of measurements indicates values between 05, and 0.7 [2]. ‘The formula was established for embankment stability analyses. It may be used where large soil volumes (¢. g. embankments, long relainments cte) are involved in the limit state under consideration. Where small volumes are involved (e.g. strip footings), it probably provides too optimistic values: a 5 % fractile from the regional sample would then prohably he a better approach, Case 9 Local tests combined with regional sarmpling (sce Cases 3 and 4), Caleulate the local mean value and the characteristic value as in Case 3, with V produced according to regional experience. Care should he taken if the local mean value differs significantly from the regional mcan valu, either much lower or much higher. Additional tests Would then be required. Prior to using this method it should he confirmed that thers is no underlying regional tuend (cg, linear variation of the parameter value in horizontal diection). This can only be established from large data bases. Statistical analysis of such regional databases is beyond the scope ofthis chapter1.2 Determination of characteristic valves 38 Table 5. Numerical values of os [ 0.10 | os | 0.20 | 025 vite = 811860 | 096 | 093 | 0.90] a8? | Oma vaitsi2 | as7 | 094 | on | age | 086 on 09 wiaee | 096 | oot | oa? | am | O78 rairsi2 | 096 | 092 | oa | as | 080 a=08 [Link] | 09s | 089 | 084 [079 | 078 1aisi2 | oss | 099 | oas | 080 | 075 e=07 wise [os | oss | aso | 076 | 070 rari? | 05a | oss | oss | o77 | o71 a= 06 i.860 ] 093 | 087 | aso [079 | 066 | soisi2 | 094 | as7 | asi | 074 | 06s ons [Link] [093 | oss [ o78 [071 | ow rosie | 093 | 086 | 079 | 072 | 06s 092 | ose | o76 [oss | 0m 092 | oxs | 077 | 070 | 062 aaa | 092 | om [075 | 046 | 058 092 | ons | 076 | 068 | 059 oor | axe | 023 | a4 | oss ot | 083 | 078 | a66 | 057 wisse [ani [oar | om [ow | os wwiste | asi | oa | 073 | ass | 058 o=0 ‘[Link] | 090 [os | 070 [oi | ost wisi | a90 | ast | ari fos | 052 242. Choice of a distribution ‘The formulae in Seetion 24.1 have been established assuming s normal distribution of the geotechnical parameters. Is this assumption plausible? A definite answer is aot possible ‘but some general thoughts might help reflexion on this matter.36 (Christophe Bauxuin 4 The log-normal distribution (i.e. the logarithm of the parameter has a normal distrib= ution) may be used by transforming each value as follows: X/=logXi K=L x=! Piex) a 2 2 tee% a0) Ye — xp? nT # As geotechnical parameter values are always positive, they are in fact not normal distributed. # Enough tests are very seldom available to make a definite choice of the best distribu- tioa, + For large values of V, the log-normal distribution should be adopted. ‘¢ For small yalues of V, the difference between the results of both distributions is small, Note that for the processes governed by extreme values, the data assembly should be reduced to the extreme values before making an assumption about the distribution of the relevant extreme values ‘What should be done when only very few tests are available? Its @ common situation in geotechnical engineering that only 1 or 2 tests are made, tis impossible to apply statistical methods to such small samples. Engineering judgement and complementary information become then of enormous importance. As. first step, one should try to increase the amount of local information hy using values ‘obtained as derived values from other tests performed at the site. If there a large data. hase is available, correlations can be eross-checked and a regional approach or Bayesian techniques applied “Regional” information is often recorded in standard tables, indicating characteristic values (or ranges of values) of the usual soil properties as a function of some sample in-situ or laboratory measurements (q., sounding tests classification tests et). ‘Comparison of the few test results with this complementary information should lead to the selection of the characteristic value. It is, however, impossible to establish definite rules indicating the relative importance of either source of information, and the few test results. Taking the most conservative value for both will probably yield a safe design, although in many cases not the most economic one. 243. Characteristic values in the light of geotechnical categories For geotechnical Category 1 problems there are usually only a few field tests (soundings) ora bore-log with some classification tests and maybe some general geological informa- tion. Characteristic values may then be taken from standardized tables hased on regional ‘experience, with the results of the fleld or classification tests used as input. The values in such tables are of course conservative estimates. ‘The problem of choosing characteristic values is most complicated for geotechnical Cat- egory 2 problems, at least theoretically. Indeed, more sophisticated calculation methods1.2 Determination of characteristic values ca are used requiring “accurate” input values, whilst usually few (or no) appropriate test results ure available. Its clear that the standard charts mentioned for geotechnical Cat- ceory 1 provide a first estimate. However, this usually leads to a conservative design. ‘The use of a more detailed analysis hy comparing the few test results with those of (regional) databases allows for a better estimate of the characteristic value. Normally the extreme assumptions concerning the knowledge of V (known or totally unknown, see Section 2.4.1) aze sulficient to estimate parameters for calculations on Category 2 level problems although scmetimes Bayesian analysis should he used. The specialism however, related to this kind of analysis usually prohibits the application to geotechnical Category 2 problems, For problems in geotechnical Category 3, the extent of field and lahoratory testing is usually such that local knowledge becomes more important than the regional intormation. Comparison of both, however, i always advisable, 244 Conclusions: advantages and pitfalls of statistical methods geotechnical engineering The use of statistical methods without sound judgement might lead to completely erro- rncous results despite the appearance of some accuracy due to the use of mathematical formulae. That is why statistics should never be applied without good understanding of the problem; statistics are not a method that yields automatically a correct result. They are only an objective tool to support sound reasoning, Ifthe reasoning is false, then the statistical methods will not climinate the faults and the results will remain false. On the other hand an engineer who is trained to justify the selection of a characteristic value based on all available information, will have no difficulty in choosing the most adequate statistical approach, 3. Examples 34. Local sampling Assume the data set illustrated in Fig. 6 and calculate the characteristic mean value at a confidence level of 95 %. shearangle © ao" a5 a a; TM poppe 2 a : | 6 Fig. 6. Sheor angles from 10m deep investigation (example) pm)38 Christophe Bauduin (a) All tests considered ‘The analysis is performed on tan: wan = 0.6914; p= 348° s(tang) = 0.060; (sy) = 3.47) Vetanp) = 0.087 tan y= 0.6814 — 0.88 - 0.060 = 0.656544 = 33.3° (b) Less tests considered To illustrate the effect of the number of tests, only some of the test results of Fig. 6 are considered: me [eels] [=e[e | Tees | 009 | aso" | ous? 30° | ons | aa 1237 | 0738 | 363° | oo7m™ 4° | o6as | 328° 123 | oro | 387° | aoser 49° | avs | 299 1278 | 0707 | 352° | pass 5a: | ao | 334° With only a few tests available, the characteristic mean value is rather low when the formula from Case 1 in Section 2.4.1 is used as a method of evaluation. ‘The reasons why and a proposal {o get much closer to the reality is given in Section 3.4 “Analysis of strength tests”, ‘There are also suggestions [9] that a simplified rule X, = X- (1 ~ 0.5 V) might be applied which does not consider explicitly the number of tests In this example this formala would, yield values of q, between 334° and 34.0°. 3.2 Local sampling with V well-known ‘The same test results in Fig. 6 are taken but V is assumed to be known with a value of 0.087 ‘This is the value of the sample. Of course, normally many more tests would be required ‘than ate shown here but for this example it allows easy comparison of results. (2) Two tests are performed. From regional sampling tan = 0.691 ( = 346°) and V'— 0087 are known, Applying the equation ngy = tang[I ~ 1,649 -0087/V3)) the caleulation of the local characteristic value will now be based onthe vatious sets of measured values: [aneety [woe [ow] | 3 and32° | veas | osee | 294° 38 and 345° | 0.788 | 0.709 | 353° a2 and 38° | 0.703 | O32 | 323° sziand 4° | 0680 | ase4 | 303° |1.2 Determination of characteristic values 39 TLis now possible to check that no errors have been made by Of V toa set of only two measurements: rodducing the knowledge «© the characteristic valuc is about 10% lower than the mean value: + except in the second example (38°; 385°) the calculated characteristic value is lower than the regional mean valve of the layer (34.6°). As both tests are close together and. significantly higher than the mean value of the soil layer, the calculated characteristic value would be acceptable if other tests on the site (c.g. CPT, [Link]) indicate that the soil is denser locally. (b) Comparison of the benofit of knowing V by using the results of example (b) in See tion 31 Tests Vales of p Viknown | Vunknown mon ve [amen gk Tos |RSS BS | OBS ae | ows Da soyanss 35s | oss 343° | asst 328° 32°, 38.5" 36 og61 334° | 0578 299 12.7.8] 385532538532" | 055 333" | 0596 aa team be seen that the g values for a known V are 5% to 10% higher than those for an unknown V, The difference increases with decreasing numbers of tests, The simplified formula by Schneider [9] mentioned in Section 3.1 yields a valuc close to the value of gy when Vis known, 3.3. Soil property increasing linearily with depth ‘The next cxample illustrates Case 5, leading to the “characteristic mean value” and to the “point value” as a function of depth. The available data include n = 20 vane test results of ep which clearly show (sce Fig. 7) linear trend versus depth, ‘The characteristic mean value and point value ase calculated by applying the Case 5 equations and are plotted in Fig. 7 together with the measured values. As the fluctuations of the measured values are low, the characteristic mean value is close to the regression line, htt] (Fenaract —| Fig. 7.¢, profi ins normally-consolidated sy opin my T40 Cristophe Bauduin test value Regression | Characteristic values of eax value (P| depth | ee depth | mewn value | fractile value tm] | era) | os | toteray | tml as | 1s | 1509 | woos | oo | an “7 1g | m5 | ase | 1139 | os | s00s 826 as | iso | ossr | azz | 10 ] tas 938 2a | 10 | sos | isos | as | 1273, toss 25 | wo | te} i539 | 20 | 1407 110 30 | 155 | 390 | te | 25 | 1539 1338 3s | iso | oss | isos | 30 | ier 1465 40 | 20 | 101 | war | 3s | isos. 1592 45 | 220 | osse | ane | 40 | 1933 1718 so | 240 | 2253 | 21ap | 4s | 2002 isa ss | 250 | sea | 2318 | so | 2180 190 60 | 220 | 9mn | 2437 | ss) Daas 2095 os | 270 | osss | 2559 | an | 2437 2220 to | 2x0 | az | 2679 | 20 | 2679 oo rs | 260 | 7018 | 2799 | go | Dour 2715 aa | 300 | oom | 2917 | 99 | 3182 2961 ss | 320 | oss | 303% | Wo | 338s 32.05 so | ars fume | ans2 | 120 | Ras. 3.89 os | 340 | 0033 | a6 | 140 | 309) 4168 woo | 360 | o9ss | 3386 | 160 | 4762 4644 528 | 2.25 | ase | Another example, Fig. 8 shows mcasurcd values of the modulus of clasticily versus depth, ‘The linear regression line, an engineering judgement of a cautious estimate of the mean value and a 95 % reliable mean value, as function of depth, are shown, modus of sty (aj oy 0 0, 7 r cd s Da litpemont character so| man ves << rereston ng leptin) g ig. 8. Modulus of elasti (example) ty depth profile12 Determination of characteristic values 41 ‘Test valve Regression valve | _ characteristic values of Ee [MP3] depth | Ezy | se) Ea) epiliz | mean value | fractile value [m} | [MPa [MPa Tm) o | 2 | oar 3.99 0 599 423 1 | ou | oss B56 1 re H19 2 ows | os uve7 2 97 028 S| ois. |uss7 1388 3) 133% 22 4 | w | 074 16.06 4 16.06 450 s | a | 939 130 5 1850 676 6B | 3% 20.88 6 208% 539 7 | as | 306 2am 7 2321 11.00 8 | 2s | 1628 284s 8 25.45 1309 9 | a |iois7 759 9 2759 13.16 w | 4s fates 2964 10 Dose 1720 no | ss. |sesar 3158 n 3158 1922 2 | 38 | 06 3382 2 3342 2122 13 | 36 | 1058 3519 3 35.19 2320 3s. | 3960 soa rr 3689 2515 as | as. | goss aas4 18 3850 27.08 iw | 56 fuzm 1s 16 4015 2899 62 paar 4133 7 4173 50.88 mw | 32 fans22 4328 18 4328 22.75 w a | 62 4482 0 4634 3643 9s | 3210 34 Analysis of shear tests ‘The following applies in principle to all tests used to measure the shear resistance ofa soil as a function of the effective normal stress. For the sake of simplicity triaxial tests have been used to illustrate the analysis 3.41 Cautious estimate of the mean value of shear resistance Using the equations in Section 24.1, Case 1, often leads to characteristic values that are lower than the purely arithmetical mean values. This is especially true when only a few tests are available, which normally happens, and when V is not very small, which seldom happens. When three to five tests are available, the characteristic mean value is frequently as low as the lowest test result. This does not support the adaption of a “cautious estimate of the mean value”. ‘Two main reasons basically cause this and understanding them will lead to a better pro- cedure to cautiously estimate the mean shear resistance: «+ As fow tests ate available, high values of 295 have to be applied (c.g: S tests Vit = 0.953). This means that the characteristic value i less than the arithmetical mean minus about one standard deviation2 (Christophe Bauduin ‘# The procedure for determining effective shear strength parameters is applied toc’ and tang independently. However, itis well known that they are negatively cozzelated (Low ’ values often go together with high «” values and conversely). This favourable effect is neglected when ¢, and qi, are calculated separately, Remembering that the soil hehaviour isin fact not governed by c' and q/ (in ULS) but by the ultimate shear resistance, and that the shear resistance is a linear function of normal stress (in the stressranges of the geotechnical problems), all points (rit: Ou] of the triaxial test results should be treated togetier, to look for a characteristic mean shear resistance as function of the cffective normal stress according to Section 2.4.1, Case 5. For triaxial tests, the easiest method is to plot all the 3n test results in coordinates p’ (0) +05): q = (41 — 02), See Fig 9, The criterion for determining the relevant {p’: ql will be baséd on physical considerations about the geotechnical problem being considered, e.g peak strength. residual strength or strength ata certain strain level to allow for strain, compatibility in multi-layered systems. As most of the calculation models use e' and 1y’, the hyperbolic relationship has to be linearized eventually for the relevant stress in- terval Remark: If the above equations yield results in the range p’ < 0, these shall be omitted Fig. 9, Scheme of plotting measured (qe) and calculated characteristic walues (a) 342 Estimate of the 5% fractile ‘The same can be said concerning the cautious estimate of the mean value holds for the assessment of the point value of the shear resistance, if the equations of Cases 2 and 3 1m Section 2.4.1 result in non-realishic values of e” and «. especially when few tests are available and V is unknown, 343. Shear parameters that are not negatively correlated If the analysis of the test results shows that e’ and g! are not negatively correlated, the ubove> procedure should only be used with extreme eare or not applied at al 344 Numerical examples ‘The procedure described above has been applied to a set of 10 triaxial tests of clay speci- ‘mens out of which one test was rejected as being completely uncelible, In the fist stage, all nine relevant tests are analysed, comparing the “p'; q” approach with the analysis of independent shear parameters e’ and q (local sampling, V unknown).1.2 Determination of characteristic values 6 In a second stage the procedure is repeated for the more usual situation that only four tests are made. The results of the “p’; q” approach are then compared with those from. ‘an analysis of independent shear parameters (local sampling. V knowa, taken from the value obtained with 9 tests), The data of classification of the 9 clay samples were: Sample B18 | B41 | B73 | B748 | BOM | BiOMG | BILMD | BINS? | BIDE w 16) ma] 2) a2] oslo | wo | we | ar | weight density | 191 | 174) 193 | a7 | iva | ir | isa | 2 | [ein] 1, (%) ass | oe | sis | ara | sos | oa | sta | 780 | 969 Vu (I os | 16} 20] 19 | as | .7 | 27) 17 | 23 Vo %] sz | 22) 37] 22] 42] 47 | 17 |) s2 | 32 and the results of CU tests are: Sample [ Buss | par | w7us | erm | nos | Blows | Buna [ Br2s2 | Biz © [kN ~» | 3 | |i) o| « | ss | a | os etl 2 | 2 | 2 2s | ois | i | ie | as From these results the arithmetic mean values and the characteristic mean values (95 % confidence) lor a separate evaluation of and q’ are obtained: Arithmetic mean | Stondard deviation | Characteristic mean © TNF] 383, ell 2095 | be ms | Ist stage of calculation Fig. 10. Results of the Ist stage of calculation# Christophe Bauduin a | Standare aw | aw (Ne) | deviation (evean) | (fractile) 1s | Duo o 236 | 0000 ” 35 | 9000 x7 isi | 0000 5 21 | 0co0 B 2 | oom 2 ist | owe %0 230 | om 8 Se | 0mw0 106 asi | oreo us 21s | 0.000 1B wes | om 18 73 | 00 163 ss | 0001 183 sos | oan 20s iss | ono mm zs | ow at 25 | ooo m zm | i | ooo 312 ast | 259 | oct 36 zs | 308 | oot | 323 | 90 | 379 23 | 1s | o«o | tax | wooo | a3 ass | 07 | on | ae | ram | as sis | 40 | von | asi | 1400 | si 310} 210 oat | ter | t600 | 613 sis | 245 | acco | 248) 1800 | oo soe | arr ou | ame | 20m | 146 ams | 2a 2nd stage of calculation ‘With 4 selected samples having parameter valucs B78 | Bras | Bolas | BIO ten} ] 30 [| is | 10 | 40 ar) | 2% |» [as | ois by separate evaluation of these two parameters the characteristic mean values are deter- mined as: ‘Arithmetic mean | Standard deviation © NF] By 14 8 ¥el a3 om 16.29112 Determination of characteristic values 45 For comparison, the characteristic values of (p': q) are determined as being: Pe alfa |g ‘4 (Mii) Lain? | Nm? tune) | tknin?] | TaN?) 2s | 157 | coo | 120, ° 7 40s | 230 | anor | 190 50 x0 ya | 351 | ome} ais | 100 st 22 | isi | ood} 128 | 200 | 100 30 | 21s | occ] 1 | 300 | tas ox | 303 | ome | 29 | 400 | 188 at 7 |omo) 74 | soo | 229 zs | ase foc) 143 | oo | 256 sos | 305 foo] 290 | 700 | 301 soy | te | acco) 140 | moo | 33s ae) | 25 |oow) 216 | o0 | 30 roo | 286 ooo] 322 | 1000 | a2 450 | 220 ‘The results are shown in Fig. 11 Fig. 11, Results of nd stage of calculation +000 tr) 35 Example: Boulder clay ‘The German Federal Institution of Hydraulic Works has a database to collect test results obtained from regionally typical soils [8]. As an example, data from a boulder clay from. Northern Germany will be evaluated that has been obtained by direct shear tests. Figure 12, ‘shows histograms of shear parameters c’ and g’. 35 Region: le ‘The procedure according Case 8 in Section 2.4.1 is based on established experience col- lected in the database. A cautious characteristic mean value wil therefore be determined to be applied to the stability analysis of an embankment. sampling; wo local tests av46 Christophe Baxdin ese 8 Se Fig. 12, Histograms of e and wf measured by act shea cats of boulder clay [} oe 0 eM ww ~epair! From n = 131 tests one obtains the arithmetic mean values tang = 0.627; @ = 9kPa with V 32.1° with V = 0.09; 96. Standard deviations are assumed as follows ~ for each vertical section op (tan q) = 0.07(4°);on(c) = 15kPa; ~ for the variation over the whole area (ta ean) = 0.045 Bc(Cmean) = 9 KPA. Therefore (tang) 0.07? /0.08 + 0.07) = 0.75; we) S/S +9 0.73 = take 07, ‘Then by applying the equations in Section 2.4.1: fT Bt g-9 [i-tos 5 (Gt | one rownd, mn? Bi tong = 0607 [1-165-00» | 0546 and ‘These characteristic values are valid for the whole region in locations without tests. IF the confirmation of stability fails using these values, local testing should be performed, as there will be a good chance that the local value of shear resistance will be higher1.2 Determiaution of characteristic values a 35.2 Regional sampling; 4 local tests ‘The local soil investigation gave the following results Simple Gay | Sid TSand PGmel | a | Weekaemay |e] 2] Venn?) [kNim'] FL | teNm?y | 1 1% o 02s co | 207 2B 55 2 | ie se |oa7 | s wo fal as > | a ix 020) a | ae] te 3 [ins oar om | ome os] Figure 13 shows the results of the shear tests and a failure line determined by engineering judgement, | ‘ses ress pum 3.8 | = ssthine | Fig. 13. Molu-Cowlomb diagram with ole Biher |_| __L. ess ofdireetsneartestsofa boulder eloy o SSCS tect oma! sess Hr) (a) Statistical method, local sampling, V unknown Assuming a statistically homogeneous soil, in the sense that the shear strength has @ random variability around a “constant” mean value and that the ULS considered is gov- ceed by the mean values ofthe shear parameters’ and y the equations from Case 1 in Section 2.4.1 give the following characteristic values tan y’ = 0.534 (28°); standard deviation 0.068 3.9°); V = 0.127 4 8KPa: standard deviation 20.2kPa; V = 0.81 ay is 085, = 1.176. Thus the characteristi value of ¢ becomes tang = 0534 — 1176-01068 = 0.451; + yj = 243° 24.8 1176-20220 ‘The characteristic values are low, especially for the value of ¢,. This is duc tothe very large standard deviation originating from onc sample with very high cohesion. As there is no reason to disregard this sample and the other three samples have c’ values close together ‘but much larger than ef, the validity of a normal distribution for this set of test results ‘might well be questioned. Since in this example no other information is Known about48 Christophe Bavduin the soil, the log-normal distribution should be used to find a better fit. For the cohesion intercept this gives the following: Text | © (kN!) | ose y) 1 fiue 2) as | 1176 3} 6 | r208 af oss [ita Mean value of loge’ 1.300; standard deviation of loge 0.29 Charaeteristi value of loge’: 0.968 cj, = 9.28KPa (b) Statistical method; loca sampling; V known Starting With the same four tests, the elements of the database are now introduced (see Section 2.4.1, Case 3). In Section 3.5.1 the values were ‘¢/ =32.1° with a standard deviation of 2.86° and V = 00089 ‘9.4kPu witha standard deviation of 9.0kPa and V = 0.95 Using the mean values determined in (a) the characteristic values then become van gh = 0.548 [1 ~ 1.685 -(/025) -0.089] = 0.50: qj, = 25.7 24.8- [1 — 1.645 (0-25) - 0.95] = 5.4kN/m* [Note that the local coefficients of variation are close to the regional ones (© Statistical method using the o! /vrelationship ‘The calculation is based on n = 3-4 = 12 tests: er] + | standaré | tses | of [a tmean) | (fractile) Lenin] | [RNim?] | deviation | (eNien?) | (him?) | [kNim!) | [kN] 1 | 100 7” os | 2 | 0 | us | —28 2} 100 % ws | 562 | 25 53 -87 5 | 180 ws | oes | 993 | 5 m4 73 a | as | 10 o2 | w3 | 9s | 303 21 s | 150 | 15 | iso / soa | 1m | S02 387 6 | 20 | 125 us | wo02 | ps | ne S41 7 | 200 | 130 25 | 12 | 150 | 893 602 8 | 20 | am | 332 | s475 | am | 1202 987 9 | 20 | 10 sz | urs | 20 | ws | pn 10} 30 | 16s | ars | az | am | ima | ise nu} sm | 193 | 783 | m4 | a5 | 1964 1808 12 | 30 | 210 | soso | ra | an | 2200 | 2067 202 | 13081L2 Determination of characteristic values 49 3.583. Comparison of results = vi: & [kNim’] | Regional | Local. Vunknown | Local, V known | ofa = 12 wound | 243590 267554 (ean) ‘ora function of o'[kNm]~ 0) y=10 90 34 6 | “299 316 305 298 woo | 587 5a 587 505 10 | 876 767 308 893 200 | 1165 993 1050 1202 20} 1453 1219 au ars 300 | 1742 1445s 1363 wna 380 | 2031 1670 sia 1964 400 | 2318 1396 206.6 2200 Note that considering the linear dependency of shear strength against the effective stress yields values that closely lit those of the database. 4° References 1] De Beer E, Lousberg, B, Wallays M, Carpenter, R, De Jaeger J, Paguay.J: Beating capacity ‘of displacement pile i still fasured clays IRSLAWONL, Comptes Reads de Recherches — ‘Verslagen over Navorsingen No. 39 (1977), Brussel. (2) Calle, F.0.F: Probabilistic analysis of stability of earth slopes. Proc. 11th ICSMEE, 11, 1985, p. 809-812. [3] Denver, H., Detessen, O,, Tarr-Fohansen, NL: Grove properties derived from censored data Proc. Mth ICSMEB. Hamhurg 1997, Lp. 465-468 [4] Pewtekom, 1, Calle, EOL, Terma, RJ: Local strength parameters, calculation model and testing results. Deltt Geotechnies, Delf 1994 [5] Dewickor, 1, Calle, .0.8, Termaut, R Eeonexnical optiaization of soil investigations Proc 14th ICSMFE, Hamburg 1997, 1, 469-472 [6] Hanisch, Suck, W-harakteristischer Wert einer Boden-oder Matevialeigenschatt aus Stich- [robenergebnissen und zusatlicher Information. Bautechnik 10 (1985), p. 338-348, [7] anise, £, Struck, J: Estimation of the characteristic value sei property based on random ‘sunpling results and additional information. Proc. 4th 1CSMFE, Hamburg 1997, 1p. 503-06. [8] Kiekdusoh, M: Beziehung 2wischen der Konsistenzzahl und der undrinierten Scherfestigheit. Bautechnik 76 (1999), p. 795-184, ) Sotmeider Ht: Definition and dete Hamburg 1997, 1V, (20) Schuppencr, B. wri mation of characterise soil properties. Pros. Mth ICSMFE. jon to Working Group L of CEN/TC2S0/SC7 (1998).1.3 Geotechnical field investigations Klaus-Jitrgen Melzer and Uif Bergdahl 1 Basics 1A Standards Section 3 of Eurocode EN 1997 Part 1 (see also Chapter 1-1) covers geotechnical inves- tigations. Section 3.1 contains the requirement that field investigations are to be carried ‘out according to internationally recogniscd stanclards and recommendations. Regarding the requirements for equipment and test procedures for laboratory and field investiga tons, reference is made to Parts 2 and 3 (ENV 1997-2; ENV 1997-3); these documents also demonstrate possibilities and examples for deriving geotechnical parameters from the test results. Besides investigations related to soil and rock mechanics properties, the field investigations have to include explorations releting to the engineering hydrology and hydrogeology and also consider aspects relevant to the environment. The scope of the investigations should be adjusted to the geotechnical category (sec Chapter 1.8, See- tion 44). This has to be supplemented in case unforesccn conditions are encountered. ‘Tne geotechnical investigation shall provide all data necessary for determining the ground- structure-system dependent characteristic geotechnical parameters and those relevant to the planning and design of a structure or to determining construction materials, Only general sequirements were given in EN 1997-1 regarding the most commonly used field tests: Thus, preparing Part 3 became dificult because only a very limited number of internationally acknowledged standards for equipment and test procedure exist. For this reason, ENV 1997-3 was prepared not only (o describe means of deriving values of ‘geotechnical parameters from the results of fleld investigations (the original purpose of Part 3 of the vaxic) but alse to define essential requirements for the corresponding equip- ‘ment, test procedures and evaluation (differences to the German status of standardisation are reported in [1, 2)). Existing gaps are filled by complementary national standards in, different countries, This has been done in Germany by adjusting the existing established DINStandards to the corresponding ENV 1997-3 procedures, ‘The following German standands are relevant to this chapter: ‘« DIN 4020 Geotechnische Untersuchungen fUr bautechnische Zwecke (Geotechnical investigations for civil engineering purposes) DIN 4021 Baugrund ~ Aufschlu8 durch Schiirfe und Bohrungen sowie Entnahme von Proben (Ground - Exploration by excavation, boring and sampling) ‘¢ DIN 4022 Baugrund und Gruncwasser (3 Teile) (Subsoil and groundwater, 3 Parts)32 ‘laus-Jurgen Meer and UW Bergdahl # DIN4023 Baugrund- und Wasserbohrungen; Zeichnerische Darsiellungder Ergebnisse (Subsoil and water borings, graphic presentation of the results) ‘» DIN4030 Beurteilung betonangreifender Wasser, Boden und Gase (2 Teile) (Assessment of water, soil and gases for their aggressiveness to concrete) In particular DIN 4094, Baugrund ~ Erkundung durch Sondicrungen (Ground ~ Explo- ration by penetration tests) was re-written as DIN 40%4, Baugrund~Felduntersuchungen (Ground — Field investigations): ‘* DIN4094-1 Drucksondierungen (CPT) (Cone penetration tests) ‘* DIN4094-2 Bohrlochrammsondierung (BDP) (Borchole dynamic probing) ‘¢ DIN.4094-3 Rammsondierungen (DP) (Dynamic probing) + DIN 4094-4 Fligelscherversuche (FVT) (Field vane test) + DIN 4004.5 Bohriochaufweitungsversuche (PMT) (Borehole deformation tests) In the meantime, the CEN Technical Committee 341 on Geotechnical Investigation and ‘Testing has been established to develop European Method Standards, 1.2. Preliminary investigations Preliminary investigations are necessary to decide: © whether a proposed structure can be constructed at all, at the intended location and to aan acceptable cost, with regard to the ground conditions; # which technical and economie requirements for the design of the foundation, the struc- ture and the construction have to be considered In Germany, such preliminary investigations are the basis of the legal procedures for development planning. This means that these preliminary investigations have to also show what influences there are on the vicinity of the construction site, what environmental effets have to be considered and to what extent the ground in the vicinity of the planned structure can be loaded (e.g, by anchors). ‘The extent of the investigation depends on the existing information available, which espe- cially in densely populated areas, may consist of geological maps, pround maps, ground expert opinions in the vicinity, acrial photography (important to the assessment of war damage), hydrological and geotechnical assessments, historical knowledge ((illed cavi ties, quarries, underground air raid shelters, caverns, cavities in lime stone formations, ‘old slopes or erceping slopes, mining activities etc.) and so on. In all other cases, ground ‘and groundwater conditions have to be determined at least in a conrse grid. Hydrological data should be available for a significant period, generally, at least a full year. The same is applicable for meteorological data if construction in open waters is considered.13 Geotechnical field investigations 33 Preliminary investigations of soil and rock for the purpose of obtaining construction materials should give information on whether, where and to what amount suitable material is available, considering the economic aspects Design investigations Design investigations are the topi of this chapter. They consist of: «+ carrying out excavations, drilling, penetration tests and other tests forthe determination Of geotechnical parameters (see Chapter 1.2); «determining the ground strata and all relevant geotechnical properties of the soil and rock necessary forthe desig, the invitationtobid, the construction and forthe geotech- nical observation of the behaviour a structure or for deciding on the suitability of materials lor construction purposes; « dctermining potential difficulties during construction of the chosen foundation: « recovering soil and water samples from excavations and drilling (especially special samples for laboratory tests for the determination of geotechnical parameters). Field investigations include, in 9 wider sense: ¢ load tests of foundation elements, for example spread foundations (ENV 1997-3, 11}, of piles (Chapter 32 and ENV 1997-1, 7) or of anchors (Chapter 2.5 and ENV 1997-1, 8). These esis re not covered by this eater « measurements of settlements and deformations which are treated in Chapters 1.11 and 12 Additionally, reference is also made to DIN 4020, B Its in the hands of the engineer with geotechnical experience to design the ground investigation program and to sclect the tests to be carried out in such & way that the selection of tests, equipment or an intelligent combination of different methods results in the best technical and economical solution for the intended purpose. Iis not always the “best” test equipment that ensures the most appropriate solution for given boundary conditions and circumstances. upplement 1, and relevant references 2 Ground investigation by excavation, dri ing and sampling 24 General ‘Trial pits. including headings (horizontal or with slight inclination) and shafts (vertical or With steep inclination), drilling and so called small-scale drilling are direct investigation methods which allow an inspection of soil and rock, their sampling and their performance evaluation in the field. Table 1 gives an overview of the suitability of some of the direct investigation methods for soils and rocks, ‘Trial pts give the best investigation results because details of the ground strata and the soil condition can be clearly identified and high quality sampling is possible. However, the investigation only reaches moderate depths and isin general only possible above the ‘groundwater level. The cost ries considerably with increasinginvestigation depth because Of the need to retain the ground or possible groundwater lowering,54 ‘Klaus Jurgen Melzer and Uit Bespdahl “Table L. Suitability of some direct investigation methods (fllowing DIN 4020, Supplement 1, Table 5) 1 z 3 + ‘Suitability of direct investigation methods Investigation Type of silvock Weathering, | Diontinulties methods strata, density state of loosening, | (stata, cleavage, joints) (in rock) 1 | Existing inspectabie| ++ + + explorations 2 | Excavation om a4 4 down to moderate also wiih of joints, depth and above fing, roughness, groundwater level smoothness, direction 3 | shat oa + oa ifhcutt in the presence Also width of joints ff groundwater snd if 8, roughness immediate lining ie smoothness, direct necessary 4 | Heading ra as 4 3 | Rotary ore driling | + + + inrock tojudge rock | in diveetional diling, + material and | known strata ox cont institfeohesivesois | filingofjoints | bination of different tiling directions, with TV probing 6 | Percusivecore | 4+ - = ring (aso with | only in sos: narrow tube of hese) sate also detectable, often changes in density and structure 7 | Grab dling ry) | + = = {in soils at strata thick fess of = 90m, in admixtures of cnarse rave, stones and boulders 8 | Flush driing = = = in conjunction with borehole geophysics: + “FF very suitable, partly optimum investigation method + suitable, genetallysuficent results 4 party sufficient, suficient only if supplementing by other investigation methods and for special problems = not suficient,p jal results to be expected in exceptions only13 Geotechnical field investigations 55 3 6 iG 5 Suitability of dcoot investigation methods Geological faulis | Taventgation of | Borehole? Remarks groundwater | feldstests + + = on + + ‘ptinum sampling, especially recommendable for investigal- ing weatheredloosened zones inrock ra = For deep foundations in often difficulties | difficult ground, eg subways due to water poser plants and lack of wall stabiiyy as + a ‘Caverns large tunnels, cen heading level | all ests possible | reservoir dams feld tests cnly + + + ‘Most frequent investigation ‘fen core loss in| in roek water pressure | method, Incase of complex faults + tests PBP tests, | geological conditions and iasoil SPT, BDP. dificult structures, completed measurements ot | byshatis and headings primary streses + = + ‘High quality deiling method for only by comparing permeability texts, | coarse soilsandchanging strata, adjacent boreholes SPT, BDP appropriate with dificult structures in such soils, = + + ‘Suitable For coarse soils ‘only by comparing permeability tests, adjacent boreholes SPT. BD? = = + Simple deep exploration, only by correlating geophysical bore. | groundwater gauge of boreholes Thole measure56 ‘laus-Jurgen Melzer and UW Beradahl With drilling, soil and rock us well as water samples can be obtained also from greater depths and in addition, tests can be conducted in the borehole. The drilling itself isnot hin- dered in case of groundwater, however, the presence of the groundwater has an influence ‘on the selection of the sampling equipment. Small-scale drilling requires less sophisticated equipment compared fo the normal drilling ‘equipment, however it generally provides only small samples unsuitable for soil mechan: ies investigations. Samples of higher quality (Table 4) can only seldomly be obtained. Therefore, DIN4020 and DIN 4021 require that small-scale drilling is used for prelim- inary investigations under strong restrictions only and the drilling required for design investigations must not be replaced by small-scale driling, The latter primarily serves the purpose of supplementing other investigation methods and for example of examining the ground at the base level of foundations. A combination of small-scale drilling with sampling and high quality penetration testing may be used as well, for example in certain clays. ‘The type and extent of the investigation depends on the laboratory and field investigation programme designed by the geotechnical expert and with this on the type and extent of the planned structure. DIN 4720 (Section 6.24.3) gives guidelines for the spacing of inves- tigation points (¢. ¢ 20-40 m for high-rise and industrial structures) andl for the investiga tion depth for simple structures, large-area structures (e.g. industrial complexes), linear structures (e.g. roads and airfields), special structures (e.g. bridges) and water retaining structures. The reference level for the investigation deptin is the lowest level of the struc- lure or the structural element or of the excavation depth respectively. In cases where the stability of slopes or effects on neighbouring structures have to be considered, the investigations have to be extended beyond the area covered by the structure. DIN4021 describes the investigation of the ground by excavations, drilling, small-scale drilling and sampling. In the following reference will be made to major deviations from ENY 1997-3, especially when essential requirements are not met by DIN 4021 2.2 Investigation of soils In ENV 1997-2, Table 1, soil samples for laboratory investigations are divided into five quality classes according to soil properties, remaining unchanged during the sampling process and the Subsequent treatment (transport etc). This table was also included in ENV 1997-3, 12. The quality classes are described here in Table 2. Undoubtedly, the quality class of a sample for laboratory tests, oblained by using a certain soil sampling, method, will depend on the soil type and also significantly on the design of the sampler and the care taken during sampling, transport, storage and handling in the laboratory. Quality classes 1 to 5 were introduced in DIN 4021 for the frst time in the early 1970's ‘The quality class describes what parameters and what propertiescan be determined from, tone class of samples, The system is based on six parameters and properties: # Particle size Z # Water content w # Density 9 + Permeability k # Linear modulus of elasticity Boos © Shear ength vy13 Geotechnical eld investigations oT ‘Table 2. Quality clases of so samples far laboratory investigations and corresponding sampling categories (after ENV 1997-3, Table 12.1), density, density index, porosity, permeability compressibility, shear steength Sel properties quality dass GPE ays Uachanged sl properties T particle sive x|x|x]x water content |e = dems index peemeaility x} x Smpressiy, hear re [i ‘Properties that canbe determined layers «||| « boundaries of straa, broad xe] boundaries of stat fine : “Arterberg ints, pate density, onganie content |x] e lal Sampling category to be used € Samples of the highest quality class (Class 1) retain all the indicated soil properties, riost desirably unchanged. The state and composition of samples of the lowest quality class (Class 5) have been changed completely, These samples can only be used to draw conclusions regarding the ground layering With the introduction of these quality classes, the selection of a suitable drilling and sampling method has improved. Only samples of a particular quality class are necessary to be sampled to allow the correct determination of the required soil parameters, ‘Table 3 gives an overview of drilling methods appropriate for certain soil types. Table 3 also shows the quality class for laboratory tests that can be reached (column 9) and the soil parameters that can be determined from those samples (column 10). Table 4 shows probable applications of small-scale sampling in soils When drilling methods with non-continuous sampling are applied, one sample has to be taken from each separate layer or each meter for layers of considerable thickness, These samples should reflect the composition and state of the actual soil conditions as much as possible Contrary to above, ENV 1997-3, 12.2.1 uses an equipment related approach by character- ising the sampling methods by means of the following three sampling categories ‘* Category A: By using these methods, the intention is to obtain samples in which no or coly slight disturbance of the soil structure has occurred during the sampling procedure orinhandiing of the samples, The water content and the void ratio ofthe soil correspond. to that in situ, No changes in constituents or in the chemical composition of the soil have occurred. ‘= Category Bs By using these methods, samples contain all the constituents of the soil in situ in their original proportions and the soil has retained its natural water content. The general arrangement of the different soil layers or components can be identified. The structure of the sail has been disturbed.58 ‘Klaus-Jargen Melzer and UM Beredahl ‘Table 3. Drilling methods in soils (after DIN 4021, Table 1) Goran] 7 3 a a 7 Daeg meted Equipment ine [fot [caf [Patton of —[Duling Ding oot ioc Toosseing |Rashing [sample by |tehasqoe Saseter recnmgne | medium ae’ Dring aol ng contin rng 1 ]Romry [No [Dailingtoo! ]Rowniy ky core Sigicwwhevorebarral | 610 200 ing ring Tioowsieened weer | Sto 300 7 Fie [DitingioarRouveoe | Singleabecorshawe | Tro a0 rd Doablewube cer bard 7 Yer [Dallingioal [tory care | Doabiewbe axe panel [10006 200 cee screwed ating hoe 4 [Rammer [No [Driingtoat [Percusive core [Pecasive cay eau with | wie 200 ‘ine rmang Ein eae nea with eewe or howe, or holow onan ber 7 No Dillingiat [Pereusivevoiay [Poreaswe clay conse wih) 501e 300 core citing |eauingedge uses @ fRamy —|¥ee —Dalliagioot —|Perewsive-otry | Sule or doula ove | 0010 200 nanever Joredrig [tel | ine 7 [Pacem [No [Dilla ical [Fncumauecoe [Saou corcbael | Swe ling stieatig eg mse or olew stemmed sper Dring ivoWing continous recovery of bal mmples [Remy [Ne [Ding oot — | Retr cing [Drives el anger 100.6000 csi or woem saber 9 [Percussion [No [Daliagtoul | Lighicable pesca] Wire Une wih peuson [190c0 500 son deling To [Gating [Ro |Datingtoot [Groban | Wireline win wad ano 2 Guideline values, 2 Dg is the internal ameter ofthe ding too 2) ‘The quality lasses given in brackets can only be achieved in particularly favourable ground conditions.1.3 Geotechnical field investigations 99 7 t 5 ww “Applications an itaons Sample yo [mae for Preferred method for) — | Protas quatiy | Sample Remaces elas ft Tale 2) | nafowed fsesolasin | with cempest to eslana i [Coss gavel abbien [Cun ahalivinewnd Tew ]Ztmed [oad eri toate [utc drt ou | cy. sh sam opmiosail wi [Ew = (Bae 8) Ronohevewwik sit |[Link] [h@wa —— zwa) = eomposte eli butters, Reon Zs fe Fon 8 Gravely cote Pouaers Tart Rw Ze = eae) Gaga adsl with —|Cubeaie ik — [Ew pumitesieupto Dy! |.) (aca tt) [eto onthe ave ot aumbsr of Noacoheine |Z) i 332) ines Danse sotk wiaparice | Gravel ode withs panicle 14 z svetigertaanDe/3 |szeuprodess [Cowpea and pure sands | Clay. skin end Cokes v0k |Z, m0, - sith pile sre taper aw) eet Shan 0S, el ae oe eh Rr ana sae ea oud ccs wave, [Soll witha panislese [Cohesive so [Zw (@m.e-k) [= een wiede/s 2) Nos-cobeine [2G =) sal 3.0) [Booties of sarge than [Allok ate water ble, JG) [Link] ~ [Minimum length Dov Ailcohese wil Blow seater ifte (onl ot auget 0.3m water atte From eatnes Sled wil ge FGeavcl above water able [Gay and sit above water #0 sit snd and gravel below |. clay below water ble frateratle Fim, obese se rave, vides ate lse| Above water st) : Fuldesetsizetrger —|itea D2 0b he thin clon sar [@ besa)0 ‘Klaus-Jorgen Melzer and Ulf Bergahl Tae 3 (ontinved) Gaus [7 i 7 3 Ls Dang ving reo oop Sees Tr [aiaey —[¥ee [Direc fehiog [Wonk boring [Deals wihoier iy [0019 30 sine fosuryaing) ete wcpen. @ Ye [Reenetiwat [Ravens Aeinine baroiaow | aio eSlingrind | Secantion Shae Stine 1 Recaan [Ro [rlingical | up cebie Wie wh wave aug ]10019 10 fetcushn ating “ No |bnitingioov | Ding by chet | Wisi od Woon] — say echt | fake » Guideline values 2 Di the intemal diameter ofthe ding tal “able 4. Methods for small-scale drilingin sis (alter DIN 4021, Table 3) am | tL? 3 a 5 o Dritmetha™ Byun tine [Sar Uiwet [Eserctonot [Dein Bring ot Borehole Icorening. Baring lewerle by eckncs Somer teeter renee 1 [Roy —]No lng snags] Sacowacr worm over [oS lig eS ng sense |fiawaer [Ne | wiring —|Smatiaoae ——[Hammeranvnginkage, [000m —] — cone ron emer crving [eo tike scr 3 |Posumaie [No | Whang —|Sralacupnen [Pama ings with "| Sovoaw to radian [ebesuner Guideline values 2 See limitations described in subclnuse 53 ® De isthe internal diameter ofthe drilling tool. ‘+ Category C: Here, the structure of the soil in the sample has been totally changed. ‘The general arrangement ofthe different soil layers or components has been changed so that the in situ layers cannot be identified accurately. The water content may not represent the natural water content of the soil layer sampled. “Table 2 defines which of the three categories A, B or Cof the sampling methods should bbe used in order to obtain a corresponding quality class for laboratory tests, Using this a connection to DIN 4021 has been established.13 Geotechnical fold investigations ol = Asa @ Samples sai ined pene sblefor sol | tmton tree oeshavicstets_[ vant upper sia = Alene sa fa, 7. core 1 eves ae peedueed FRecorserfon above [Gravel und vandin water [5.4 ca Con ako be we feaersae inconesvesoiait fener ade = “ils toremone F Sapien anal [= Shama thetorsa meshes test 9 -The quality classes given in brackets can only be achieved in panticulrly favourable ground conditions 7 = 3 1 a “Applicaions an ations Sanpie ‘Unsabisfor™| Prefered mathod for" [Probable quality [Sarapls unis | Remarks ‘Snes (et Tale 2) |edit repost | forcotsin fio ectnin® Coarseprvelwiba _[Cayiomedium praval [Above var [Zw Foayiobe med scene lrgee than |aboverater tbl cohesie [lies forsale [Deis addonesois — [sois helen wateritie z ]Sait-sitva paniiesie — | Sowa a panioare —] Toe gertnan Da? opto Noneonesse JE) rai) Fion and soar grined | Cast fend se) Ze ie 4) The quality lasses given in brackets ean only be achicved in particularly favourable conditions While DIN 4021 only defines five quality classes that can be obtained, ENV 1997-3, 12 specifies minimum requirements for the sampling equipment — especially for category A ~ 10 be used for taking samples of a required quality. On the other hand, DIN 4021 is generally more strict regarding certain dimensions such as inside diameters, cylinder length etc. [1,2] because the Eurocode states essential requirements only. For cach borehole, a qualified field foreman has to record the results oa site in a bore~ hole log according to DIN 4022 Part 1 which reflects the results of the drilling, using the2 ‘Klous-Jargen Melzer and Ulf Bergdabl ‘nomenclature for the different soil types specified inthis standard. DIN 4022 Part 3has 10 be applied when drilling methods with continuous core sample recovery are used because the sample material can be inspected only after opening the liner or tube. The fine strata also have to be described. 2.3. Investigation of rocks The above quality classes for soils are not applicable for drilling in rock because other aspects are relevant to the assessment of rock properties, e.g. degree of weathering, ‘discontinuities, joint planes, striping and dipping planes (see ENV 19¥7-1, 33.2). These topics are also detailed in DIN 4021. Table 5 shows different drilling methods in rock with, respect to suitability and results. “Table 5. Drilling methods for rock investigations (after DIN 4021, Table 2) [ Cotuma 1 | 2 3 4 s Drilling method Equipment Vine [Breaking [Push | Extraction of Drilling Drilling took the race | medium | samples by fechniyue LDritting involving continuous coring 1 [Rotary [yes | Drilling woot Rotary core | Single-ube core barrel, driling attached to dril rods | drilling ‘usually with hardfaced | 2 [Rotwry [no | Drilling tool Rotary dry | Single-tube core barrel, siting attached to dill rods | core driing. | with haraaced core 3 [Rotary [yes | Drilling toot Rotary core | Doubie-tube core berrel diling attached to dil rods | drilling with hollow bit 4 [Rotary yes | Drilling toot Rotary core | Tiple-tube core barrel dsiling attached to dsit rods | drilling 3 [Rotary [yes | Drilling woot Wirelinecore | Wireline core Bartel lling attached toast | aiding with hollow bit, or ods, with wireline Uripe-tube barreb extractable inner barrel 6 yes | Driling woot Perousswe | Rotary percussion clay attached to drill ads | rotary core | cutter ailing Involving recovery of incomplete samples 7 [Rotary [yes | Driling toot Rotary open Sola bi, roller Ot ailing attached todsiltzods | hole dling + Guidelines1.3 Geotechnical field investigations 6 Frequently, rotary open hole drilling is used in rock and also in soils for preliminary inves- tigations, for example to assess the level of rock surfaces, weathered zones in rock, or the occurrence of cobbles or boulders in soils. Besides the penetration resistance (mea- sured in see/0.2.m of penetration), the following parameters can he recorded using the MWD- technique (Measuring While Drilling): pushing pressure, revolutions/min, applied torque, fuid pressure and fluid volume (V/min). Together with the drill mud flushed up, these parameters give indications of the ground layers penetrated, Based on these results, additional drilling using high-quality drilling methods is planned to determine the ground, strata accurately and for core sampling purposes. Table 6 shows properties of rock materials and rock mass that can be determined by Grilling. Fifteen mechanical properties of rock materials and rock mass respectively, are listed in the table which can, cannot, or can only partly be determined from drilling or from tests in the borehole. é 7 8 9 0 Equipment | Drilling method Sample I Borehole ouer_| (8K fll Creat ‘Dill eatings | Remarks diameter range” 100 10200 Rock of medium | Jeinted, soft rock | Sievevesidue,] Flushing medium may ‘ohigh hardness suspended | cause disturbance of ‘matter | core material 10010200 | Rock of medium | Soft, erosive, water- [None | To prevent overheating thigh hardness | sensitive rack; short ofthe bit, core runs core runs shoult not exceed 0.5 m 010200 | Brosive, water | Alliypescof rock) As = sensitive cock sow20 |= Alliypesofrock [Ay = 5016200 | Erosive, water [Allypesatieck | Ast . sensitive rock 109200 Rock ofmedium| Medium tohard | Ast With drive deviee at thigh hardness | rock the equipment or as In-borehole nammer 3040200 = None Ast =‘Table 6. Chanscteristis of rock mates and rack muss that an be determined hy diling (fer BIN 4021, Table 5) 7 = More rele when ies eeurnes (Be tommy charms ewan Sareage. deformutaity Z) Can be decermined by where worn (Can be deerme for wpe EZAcmrenernnes — [_]Comonreseeranes III Sigil utormaions nena me ™ Monin (asus inchs dling rae ip and cerdiion of dr ed pees Asahi prea and rnahonl oped 2 Taking im awn Be typeof adng eased any ables wet 2 Before the rebate wappered eg Oy behets larg or EWG | 4 fer remind core sce tober 42 weriog 9 pu say uiny-smepy1.3 Geotechnical feld investigations 65 For each borehole, a qualified field foreman has to record the results on site ina borehole logaccording to DIN 4022 Part 2. The log shall contain all the facts and observations made luring the core drilling in rock In general, it has to be stated that ENV 1997-3, 13 is more comprehensive than DIN 4021 regarding rock sampling, especially in view of the requirements for sampling equipment and quality control [1,2]. However, DIN 4021 shows a higher degree of detail in descrip- tions of the drilling methods (Table 5) and the properties of rock materials and rock mass that can be determined from borings (Table 6). Similar fo soil sampling, ENV 1997-3, 13 defines the following methods for rock sampling ‘+ Category A: By using these sampling methods, the intention is to obtain samples in which no or only slight disturbance of the rock structure has occurred during the sam- pling procedure or in handling of the samples The strength and deformation properties, ‘water content, deasily, porosity and permeability of the rock sample correspond to the in situ values. No change in constituents or in chemical composition of the rock mass has occurred. ‘© Category B: By using these sampling methods, the samples contain all the constituents of the in situ rock mass in their original proportions and the rock pieces have retained their strength and deformation properties, water content, density, porosity. The discon- tinuities in the rock mass may be identified. The structure of the rock mass has been Uisturbed and thereby the strength and deformation properties, Water content, density, porosity and permeability ofthe rock mass itself. + Category C: By using these sampling methods, the structure of the rock mass and its discontinuities have been totally changed. The rock material may have been crushed Some changes in constituents or in chemical composition of the rock material may have Occurred. The rock type and its matrix, texture and fabric may be identified. Furthermore, ENV 1997-3, 13.23 defines the following parameters forthe degree of rock recovery from rotary core drilling that should be evaluated in context, not individually + Rock quality designation (ROD):"The sum length of all core pieces that are 10cm and longer, measured along the centre line of the core, expressed as a percentage of the total length of the core run. « Solid core recovery (SCR): The sum of the length of all core pieces, expressed as a percentage of the total length of the core run, A core piece must possess one [oll diameter bat not necessarily a ful circumference. + Total core recovery (QR): The total length of core sample recovered, expressed as a percentage of the total length of the core run. ENV 1997.3, 13.3.2 recommends the following methods as sampling techniques for the categories A-B that are inevitable depending on the structure and the decomposition trade of the rack and on the requirements of the Iaboratory testing to be performed: + Category A or B: Rotary core samplingin which a tube with a cutter at its lower ends rotated into the rock mass thereby processing 2 core sample. + Category A or B: Drive sampling in which a tube or a split-tube sampler having @ sharp cutting edge at its lower end is forced into highly or completely weathered rock mass either by a static thrust or by dynamic impact. Drive samplers are usually piston samplers or open tube samplers66 Kuus-Turgen Meer and UM Bergh © Category C: Shell or auger sampling where the sample is taken from the actual drilling tool # Category C: Cuttings sampling in which the rock mass, remoulded or crushed, by cable or rod handled percussion or cutting tools is brought up to the surface by means of bailer or cizculation of a transporting substance. ‘* Category C: Block sampling made by hand cutting from 4 tral pit, shaft or heading or by using specially made block samplers. ‘The selection of the appropriate method is to be made in accordance with the required sample quality for the classification of the rock mass and for the laboratory tests to be performed. Furthermore, precise requirements are defined for core barrels for sampling according to category A and for sampling with rotary core drilling for the categories A and B: ENV 1997-3, 13.3.3 and 13.4, Regarding rotary core drilling, special attention is drawn to the different requirements on equipment checks and control before and during sampling, operation: ENV 1997-3, 13.4.1 This move towards improvement of quality assurance is continued in the Eurocode in the requirements for the documentation (ENV 1997-3, 13.5). Here, the requirements of DIN 402] and of ENV 1997-3 are in agreement regarding the labelling of the core samples However, in the latter, information on the sampling category and the sampling equipment are added. In addition, a sampling log is required that must contain the usual information also detailed in DIN 4021 and DIN 4022 Part 2 butin addition, the signature of the qualified fleld foreman or the project manager. ‘The following details (ENV 1997-3, 13.5.2) ha ~ date of sampling: position and elevation of drilling location; ~ borehole direction, inclination and orientation: whenever possible the depth of the free groundwater level, ~ the method of pre-driling if used, ~ the use of casing and depth of casing tip; ~ the use of drilling fluid and the level of the drilling fluid in the borehole: ~ colour and colour shifts of drilling fluid; ~ loss if any, of drilling fluid: ~ drilling uid pressure and circulated volume: ~ the specification and type of sampler used: = the diameter or the size of the saraple; = the depth (top and bottom of the sample) and the length of the sample; = the core run interval; ~ pressure on the cutting edge: ~ the rock mass type, discontinuities and grade of decomposition based on the visual inspection of the sample by the field foreman and his judgement of the sampling category: ¥y obstructions and cifliculties encountered during the sampling operation (including unsuccessful sampling attempts). to be reported:1.3 Geotechnical el investigations oa 24 Obtaining special samples Methods for taking special samples are included in category A. 24.1 Soils Special samples of fine-grained soils and sands can be obtained quite simply from the base of construction excavations and roads, foundation base levels, slopes and trial pits by means of thin walled cylinders with sharp cutting edges. This method is particularly suitable in cohesive soils of firm consistency and.n fine sands of medium density. The test is standardised in DIN 18125 Part 2. In loose and dense cohesionless and cohesive soils of stiff and very stiff consistency, the equipment for obtaining special samples from trial pits according to DIN 4021 should be used (Fig. 1). Cubes with side length of 10 to 30cm «can also be cut out from cohesive soils L =m 0 a) 2 Fig. 1. Obtaining special samples from tial pits (after DIN 4021) 1) Arrangement of sampler b) Sampler tube, c) Sampling process 1 Percussion dnillrods 6 Guide hood 2 Dropweight 7 Sampler tube 3 Aavil 8 Guide plate 4 Driving device 9 End caps (sealed with adhesive tape) Rig mark 10 Metal plate for limiting depth of penetration68 laus-Juzgen Meler and UW Bengal Obtaining undisturbed samples from boreholes is more difficult and time consuming ‘because the normal drilling operation has to he interrupted. Nevertheless, itis necessary because only in this way will laboratory investigations of soil propertics yield reliable results, However, it is not always possible fo obtain completely undisturbed samples from cohesionless soils. In this case, penetration testing is suitable and gencrally sufficient as a complementary investigation Table 6 of DIN 4021 contains details about obtaining special samples, the required equip- ‘ment, the suitability of various equipment and the achicvable laboratory quality classes of the samples obtained with the corresponding equipment. 242 Rocks In gencral, only rotary core driling is suitable forthe ground investigation in rock because only with this method it is possible to obtain sufficiently large and undisturbed core samples, avcurate identification of the rock and the determination of the rock properties, by strength tests (ENV 1997-3, 13). With rotary open hole and percussion drilling, cuttings, are only obtained which arc just suitable for the identification of the rock type. In water sensitive strata or in rock with strong discontinuities, double and triple-tube core barrels have to be used to avoid the flushing medium disturbing the core sample. 2.8 Investigation of groundwater conditions ENY 1997-3. 1 contains the correspondingrequirementsfor groundwater measurements Furthermore, DIN 4021, 8 describes the different types of water in the ground and the problems with groundwater obscrvations during drilling operations It stresses the point that groundwater gauging stations are necessary to obtain reliable data, and describes their arrangement for short and long-term observations. DIN402I also contains guidance for ‘measuring the dircction of flow and the flow velocity of the groundwater and describes, how to obtain water samples (for pumping tests sce Chaptcr 2.9). It describes the test arrangements using single and double packers necessary for drilling in rock to measure the water pressure in different aquifers, and the associated packer test for determining the permeability of the rock mass. ‘The following Figs. 2 to 7 show some examples In the case of more than one aquifer and the borehole being drilled with a single run of casing, itis only possible to get an approximate measurement of the groundwater level or piezometric level in the uppermost aquifer (Fig. 2a-d). In general, an aclequate seal along the casing through cach aquifer cannot be achieved. Therefore, the measurement of the piezometric level in the lower aquifer can be distorted (Fig, 2c and d). Ifthe piezometric level of a second, lower aquifer is to he measured, the frst run of casing has to be sealed by drillingiinto the equiclude. A sccond rua of a casing isbrought down inside the first and the drilling continued until the lower aquifer has been reached (Fig. 2h): the piczometric level of the lower aquifer can then be determined in the second casing, Packers also have to be installed for measuring the pressure head of groundwater in fissured rock. A single packcr seals off the measuring section c, that reaches down to the bottom of the borehole (Fig. 3). Double packers can be used to define the measuring section e between the two packers (Fig 4). If pressure heads in different joint systems are to measured within one borehole, multiple packers must be used.13 Geotechaical field investigations eo a Fig. 2. Possible effect on water level measurement when drilling through an aquiclude (otter DIN 421) a) Correct measurement of groundwater level b) Correct measurement of the piezometrc level of the lower aquifer ©) and d) Exroncous measurement of the piezomettc level ofthe lower aquifer 1 Groundwater level 2 Piesometric level of lower aquifer 3 Aguiter “4 Aquiclude (clay layer), measured water level ection of flow Spreading deviee Inner tube of packer 3 Outer tube of packer 4 Annular space 1 3 Rubber sleeve 6 Piezometer 7 Clamps 8 § Observation jar 9 Recording pressure gauge 10 Compressed aie brie © Measuring section Fig. & Arrangement of single packer and sir pressure gouge for water pressure rmeasueemonts (after DIN 4021) ‘The arrangement of groundwater gauging stations obviously has to take into account the ground conditions, the hydrological requirements, the engineering task and the length of the observation period, An installation plan for each groundwater gauging station has to be documented (Figs. 5 to 7). The piezometer for a gauging station consists of a sump pipe. a filter pipe and extension pipes that can be closed off atthe top whilst allowing for ventilation. The iter pipe is surrounded by filter sand (Fig. 5). Figs.6 and 7 show examples0 ‘Ktous-Jargen Melzer and Ulf Betgdahl 1 Spreading device 2 Inner tbe of packer 3 Outer tube of packer 4 Annular space 5 Rubber sleeve 6 Perforated section of inner and outer tube 7 Clamps ‘© Measuring section 2 $ g rangement (after DIN 4021) 1 cap 2 Extension pipe 3 Filter pipe 4 Sump pipe 5 Concrete cover 6 Frostrsistont soil material 7 Seal 4 Dri cuttings 9 Filtergravel Fig. §. Arrangement of a piezometer wi For example above ground level wth precautions a lice groundwater in the uppermost aquifer. inst frost heave (after DIN 4021) of various arrangements of groundwater gauging stations (top below and above ground level ete.) Contrary to DIN 4021, where mainly ground water measurements with open system are treated, ENV 1997-3, 14 covers in addition measurements of groundwater pressures with, closed systems, i.e. the measurement of pore pressure in fine-grained soils. ‘The requirements for records and the presentation of groundwater gauging station results are given in ENV 1997-3, 14.5 and 14.6 (see also DIN 4020, 8.1). DIN 4023 is relevant (or the presentation itself1.3 Geotechnical field investigations a 1 cap 2 Fxtension pipe 3 Filter pipe 4 Sump pipe 5 Cover 6 Below. 7 Sleeve 18 Frost-resistant sol 9 Seal 10 Drall cuttings 11 Filter geavel 12 Aquiclude 1B Aquifer round access pit ig. 6, Arrangement of a single piezometer below ground le (etter DIN 4021) ‘witha group of aquifers 1 Cap (ight hing) 2 Cising 3 Fatension pipe 4 Concrete cover 5 Anchor 6 Frost-reitunt soi 7 Frost ine 5 Seal 9 Dill cuttings Fig. 7. Arrangement of » groundwater gauging station with the top above ground level and protection against st heave (after DIN 4021) 3 Ground investigation by penetration testing 31 General For a penetration test, @ thin rod is pushed or driven into the ground or turned around its longitudinal axis. From the magnitude of the penetration resistance and/or from its, variation with depth conclusions can be drawn regarding the strength or sequence of the strata, Compared to rial pits, shafts, headings and drillings, penetration tests are regardedn Klaus Jicgen Meter and UIC Bergdaht 4s indirect investigations, je. dreet visual inspection or sampling of the strata is generally not possible Penetration tests are indirect investigations whieh always have to be supplemented by direct investigations (e.g, Key boreholes with sampling) for an accurate identification of the ground because the measured value of the “penetration resistance” hy itself does not allow any conclusions regarding the soil type. On the other hand, the penetration resistance diagram ean he used as additional information to allow the selection ofsumpling, depths ‘The derivation of geotechnical parameters has to be viewed carefully. Many investiga- tions on the topic of establishing reliable relations between penetration resistance and geotechnical parameters, .4, cohesion, angle of shearing resistance, modulus of elasticity either directly or indizeetly (via consistency or relative density, ett) have been made. Approaches to find direct rclations between heating capacity of foundation elements, 8; the skin friction and the pile resistance are also well known. However, the validity and the suitability of such relations has to he evaluated critically for each ease and area because of potential superimposing influences. For instance in cohesive soil the penetra tion resistance atthe penetrometer tip can be telatively eonstant; itmaybe, however, that this result is falsified by skin frietion along the rods. Difficulticscan also occur in the interpretation of results obtainedin cohesionless soils. For instance, the penetration resistance depends not only on the relative density hut also on the degree of uniformity and the compactibility of the soil. In this ease, the determination of the relative density is valuable only if the grain size distribution or the maximum and minimum voids respectively, are known [6-10] Especially in silty cohesionless soils, the measured penetration resistance can be higher than the one corresponding to the actual relative density, due to false cohesion. Peaks also occur in the penetration resistance measured in gravelly soils because of cobble ‘admixtures, These peaks should be disregarded in the evaluation. ‘The widespread use of penetration testing in practice and numerous research programmes hhave throuigh the years ed to equipment rated improvements giving reproducible results at compatible conditions and to reliable relations for the derivation of geotechnical para- meters, for example [11-13]. However, it has to be pointed out that all possibilities to derive geotechnical parameters shown in the following sections are examples that are valid only for the corresponding conditions investigated (c.g. soll types ete), because it is not possible to establish relations which are valid world-wide. Furthermor lual examples has to be observed. For instance, all equations regarding dynamic probing, cone penetration tests and borehole dynamic prob- ings quoted from DIN 4094 in the following sections, are deterministic relations taken as conservative estimates. Other examples have been taken from statistical repression analy- sis or are just tables with a range of geotechnical parameters, Therefore, different safety concepts ave to he considered to suit the application. For this reason, itis recommended that the original source is checked for a closer review of the corresponding examples and that any local experience is collected. In the meantime, the development of some penetrometers and the presentation of the test results are being coordinated on international level [14, 15] and were initially harmonised ‘on European level in the ENV 1997-3. Among other tests, this document contains the essential requirements for the following tests:1.3 Geotechnical fila westigations| B ‘© Cone penetration test (CPT) # Standard penetration test (SPT) # Dynamic probing (DP) © Field vane test (FVT) Weight sounding test (WST) ‘The German standardisation work in the newly edited DIN 4094 is consistent with these international efforts, 3.2. Dynamic probing 32. Equipment and test procedures Dynamic probing as mentioned in ENV-1, 133.102, and in accordance with DIN 4094 is the in situ measuremeat of the penetration resistance from driving a cone vertically into the ground, A hammer ofa given mass at constant height of falls used to dive the cone while the number of blows Nio fora penetration depth of 10cm is counted (ENV 1997-3 6 also allows Nay), The dynamic penetrometer consists of a cone and preferable hollow rods. Common penetrometers are listed in Table 7. In the new edition of DIN 4094-3, only the light penetrometer DPL, the heavy penetrom- eter DPH and the superheavy penetrometer DPG (hammer mass = 200kg, eight of fall = Sem, cone cross section = 50cm? [16, 17]) appear in the standard itself, The light Penetrometer DPL-S and the medium heavy penctrometers DPM, which are used on regional level only, appear in an informative annex. ENV 1997.3, 6ogrees generally with DIN 40s4 except in Table 7 above, which contains a DPSH with the dimensions of the standard penetration test instead of the DPL-S. The trend to penetrometers with higher hammer masses can be ohserved also more recently in Japan, Canada and the USA [18}; the background to this is the desire to he able to also investigate strata of very high Strength eg. till, gravels soft rock ete. The diameter of the cone is somewhat larger than that ofthe rod to reduce skia fiction, allowing the penetration resistance of the cone to he measured more accurately (Fig. 8). Retricving the penetrometer from the ground is easier if itis equipped with a sacrificial cone that isnot fixed tothe rod instead ofa retainable conc. The rods have to be turned Atleast 15 revolutions after cach meter of penetration to the reduce skin frietion and to censure thatthe rod threads are kept tight. Ifa torque measuring wrench is used, the skin Frition ean be estimated from the measured torque. To avoid skin friction,» uid medium (preferable water of drinking quality) canbe injected through horizontal or upwards holes in the hollow rods near the cone. Sometimes, a casing is used for the same purpose zi Fig. 8, Cone for dynamic probing (a= Latter DIN 4096-3)‘Table 7. Types and suitability of equipment for poneteation testing (after DIN 4004, Table 1) i EO 7 E 30 ]esaoe Case Eqipment = ‘stip [Tipe "Wiese Tigh] ODI [Mv Messed [Wa tt] Oflu [Rami fees |rtee Rammer [ota ateaP |dving devi] alae” | dep bow | (ona tier |presuscoder Avex? |Com —mite [ha fmm [axe searing pit | INCA? Pat) famme? =” re te a Xe |e Vaan andes Re provi, fs [nn diet fm yey [LAS 10 Ls sity ss Tue oasis fa ee a Gaye ana ARR yanie se yan (Som ‘cthand deme [inceran roms, renee | Sepals | realy SS 3 [wank [BRM pI anos aT Ke | Denieraves [Peony roe sia ft MRS. meio 7 pra io —— ist J Jas Jane me [5 ‘Dame gav in | Apiary : is fos | om tne ant aaty [nena gs pooner sal recy RS A 7 ]Bymanie [OR fis} a — Joss — Ja Ke |S = Fesonly RSS rae 3 [as ft Kes © [pesaaed [St 30 fais Tas Jams wa bo a Fenceason Ss 5 Shin [re ow 7 ]ee0e err fra EE Ce Toiketb aes |Eerare peoaraton Bi feme germ |(CPTE) ur Ss ipevaaday”” [eta coe = (Gets 5 Manufacturing tolerances 2 Manufacturing tolerances need not to be specified 5) This consis of the driven parts (anvil and guide rod) but excludes the penetrometer Moving puts for ralsing and releasing the hammer aze also excluded *) Where Njp is the number of blows per 10cm penetration depth, Nyy the number of blows per 3dem penetration depth, 4. is the cone penetration resistance in MPa fs the local unit skin friction in MPs 5) Approximate values for soil conditions of medium strength The starting point is the respective bottom ofthe borehole te yep8i99 Jun paw sqoHW USENE SHEL,1.3 Geotechnical eld investigations 8 322 Evaluation 322.1 General ‘The results of dynamic probing can be evaluated qualitatively if strata are investigated by drilfing and sampling; ‘ the homogeneity or inhomogeneity, respectively, of the ground, or of a fil, is to be cvaluated, ‘¢ especially loose or lirm layers in fills or the rock surface (with heavy equipment) are to be investigated: ‘¢ compaction controls are to he performed, by comparing the penetration resistances before and after compaction (see also Chapter 2.12 of Volume 2 of this Handbook), The following investigation depths can normally be reached using the different dynamic probing methods: DPL: 10m; DPM: 20m; DPH: 25 m; DPSH: 25 m; DPG: 40m, In DIN 4094-3 examples are given of equipment and geotechnical related influences to be obscrvedin the evaluation of the test results, One of these, isthat the penetration resistance in cohesionless soils with the same relative density, is lower below the groundwater level than above at the same conditions, Corresponding relations to correct for this influence, are given in DIN 4004-3, 3222 Deriv Shear strength ‘The results from dynamic probing tests are used mainly to derive the strength and com- prowsibility of primarily cohesionless soils, First, an example is shown on how to derive indirectly the angle of effective shearing resistance q’ from results of dynamic probing (see also ENV 1997-3, Annex E.1 and DIN 4094.3). Extensive investigations have demonstrated [7] that the following general equation represents the best relationship between the penetration resistance (in this case the number of blows Njo) and the relative density of cohesionless soils: of geotechnical parameters Ip =a1 + ap logNio a) Table & contains examples of the coefficients shown in Eq. (1) for different cohesionless soils for both the light (DPL) and heavy (DPH) dynamic penetrometers. The equations are valid for penetration tests performed above the groundwater level and for a depth larger than about 11m where this is the critical depth from which under the same conditions, the cone penetration resistance becomes almost constant. Above this depth the cone penetration resistance increases considerably with depth. ‘The angle of effective shearing resistance can then be determined from tests or by proven relationships using the relative density 1p, predieted from the dynamic probing test results, with the above equations. ENV 1997-3, Annex D.3 contains an example of the relation between Tp and q/ forsilica sands, which arc differentiated qualitatively by the degree of uniformity and grain size. A practical example for deriving the angle of shearing resistance of gravelly soils by means of this indirect method, in conjunction with the design of harbour sheet pile walls, is described in (9.1 laus-Jargen Melzer and UM Decgdah ‘Table 8. Examples of coeftciemts in Eqs (1), (3) and (4) for deriving relative density Tp and stifness coeflicient v from results of dynamic probing above groundwater level (after ENV 198T-3 aad DIN 8094-3) Soil “T Conditions Relative density Ip Silfness coefficient y lasifetion «pinisis) [UP | a DPL DPH DPL’ DPH ape fa fe fh [be SE = — | eas | ozm | oro [oss | 7 | 21a | to | 29 swaw = = [= [ou [oss [- = [- ] - TL ~ ori] — | ~ fel a] wo] 6 Degree of uniformity, d/o. Consistency, unit 1 Valid ranges: For the relative density: 3 = Nyo $50. For the stiffness coefficient in SE: with DEL: 4 = Nig = 50; with DPH:3 = Nu = 10, For te stiffness coethicent in TL, TM: with DPL: 6 < Nip $ 19: with DPEE 3. Nip 13 Soil classification according to DIN 18195: SE: poorly graded sands: SW: well graded sands: GW: well graded sand-gravel mixcures: "TL: ow plasticity clays; TM: medium plasticity clays Compressibility ‘The following is an example of deriving directly the stress dependent modulus of linear elasticity from results of dynamic probing tests above the groundwater level (ENV 1997-3, Annex E.3 and DIN 4094-3), ‘The definition of the modulus of lincar clasticity Eyes derived from oedometer tests and used for the calculation of the settlement of spread foundations, is the basis for the determination of compressibility Pal(o, +0.505)/pa]” v= stitiness coefficient w= sitfness exponent; for sands and sand-gravel mixtures: w = (LS: for slightly plastic clays with low plasticity index (wp < 10; < 35): = 06 = effective vertical stress at the huse of the foundation or at any depth below it dus to the overburden of the s of, = effective vertial stress caused by the strueture atthe base ofthe foundation or at any depth below it Po = atmospheric pressure ‘we = plasticity index wr, = liquid tims Irsoil shear deformations during the settlement process are to he considered, the corre~ sponding modulus of linear elasticity can be assumed to be approximately 0.75 Eyed.1.3 Gvotechnical eld investigations 1 Corresponding investigations in cohesionless and cohesive soils [7, 19] resulted in the following equations for the determination of the stiffness exponent v of Eq. (2) above, # For sands and gravelly sands: v= bi +b2 log Nio @) by +be-Nio “ The stress dependent modulus Eye. aecording to Eq. (2), can then be derived directly using the coefficients from Table 8 for determining v from Eqs. (3) and (4) and with w = 015 for cohesionless sols and w = 0.6 for cohesive soils, « For slightly and medium plastie clays: v 3.2.23 Bearing capacity of piles Results from dynamic probing tests have Deen used for some time to predict the drive ability of piles and shcet piles, as well as of the bearing capacity of piles (see EN 1997-1, 7 and also [16, 17, 20-22]). This is due to similarities in the driving and testing techniques used. 32.2.4 Relations between the results from different penetration tests It should also be noted that a number of relations have been established hetween the results from different dynamie probing tests and betwen these and the results of standard penetration and cone penetration tests, see DIN 4094 and e.g. [7, 19} It has to be stated that the various types of penetrometers have different penetrability and sensitivity for variations in soil types. It can therefore he appropriate to use different types of penetrometers in parallel for a certain project to obtain the best information about the ground to be investigated in the most economical way possible. 33. Standard penetration test 3341 Equipment snd test procedures ‘The standard penetration test mentioned in EN 1997-1, 33.10.2. covers, according to ENV 1997335, the determination ofthe resistance ofthe soil at the bottom of a borehole tothe dynamic penetration of a split barrel sampler and the recovery of disturbed samples for soil identification purposes The test consists in driving the sampler (outer diameter: S1 mm, inner diameter: 35mm) by dropping a hammer of 63.5 ky mass from a height of 76cm on to an anvil. The number of blows necessary to achieve a penetration of the sampler of 30¢m (after its penetration under gravity and below a seating drive of 15 cm) is defined as the penctration resistance N (blows!30 em penetration). ‘The standard penetration testis the oldest form of dynamic probing 11,23} Itsfirst known use goes back to beginning of the 20th century. The original attempts to standardise the ‘equipment stem from the early 1930's in the US.A. Even today, the standard penetration test is the most widely used in situ test for bearing capacity and stability investigations [12, 24]: ref. [11] contains a very good survey. The hest known standards for SPT are ASTMD 1586 in North America and BS 1377 in Great Britain, which are referred to ‘on a world-wide basis. National standards are also available, for example in Australia, Brasilia, Denmark, India, Japan and Sweden, With the “Intemational Test ProceduresmR laus-Jargen Melrer and Ulf Bergh for SPT" [14], the Technical Committee TC 16 of ISSMEF succeeded for the first time in harmonising the test on an international level. This document was the basis for ENV 1997-3, 5 However, difficulties occurred in interpreting the results because the actual value of the ‘energy which is induced in the rods has to be known, In addition, energy losses can occur due 10 the rods in the borehole not being supported. Today, methods for determining these energy losses or corresponding values from experience are availabe [11, 24-26}, and are induced in various standards, e.g. ASTM D4633 and ENV 1997-3, 5 Recent extensions of the equipment and the test procedures include devices for measut= ing the torque at the rods (23, 27] to obtain additional information about the soil types encountered. Inthe early 1950's in Germany, this uncertainty about the energy losses led to an essential modification of the cquipment, whilst maintaining the original technical specifica (height of fall etc), with the following aims: + tcansmission of us much of the ull energy as possible on to the anvil; + essential reduction of the rod influence. ‘The equipment was improved [3, 28,29} by the drive mechanism being encapsulated in a water Ught casing directly above the penetrometer (Fig. 9) -The equipment as a whole is lowered into the borehole. The hammer is released by means of an automatic release mechanism. The sampler is elosed by a cone (apex angle = 60°) because disturbed or 1 Rope 2 Stutfing bexe 3 Automatic release smechenisn 4 Hammer 3106 Driving device 5 Water proof casing 6 Anvil 17 Penetrometer ig. 9. Borehole dynamic probing BDP (after DIN 4004)1.3 Geotechnical field investigations 9 undisturbed samples (depending on the soil type) can be obtained from the borehole itself between penetration tests. ‘The use of a closed sampler or solid penetrometer (of about 90cm length) with a cone (apex angle: 60°) for performing tests in gravelly soils and in soft weathered rock is also current practice in countries like Australia, Great Britain, Portugal, Spain and South Arica (11). The abbreviation for this testis generally SPT(C) or SPT (cone). Since the early 1950's, the equipment described in Fig. 9 was standardised in DIN 4094 and also covered by ENV 1997-3, 5. ft is defined as follows ~ Borehole dynamic probing (BDP) is a penetration test where the penetrometer is driven into the ground from the Dottom of a borehole for defined penetration depth, Asin the case of SPT, the number ‘of blows Nig is determined for a penetration depth of 30cm after the penetration under gravity and an initial drive of 15cm. Recently, the use of additional weights, mounted directly above the penetrometer, are recommended for investigation depths of > 20m Delow water level (see DIN 4094-2 and [30]) Special care has to be taken when performing the test in cohesionless soils below the groundwater level ~ for example, the soil below the bottom of the borehole could be disturbed by the drilling. Using drilling tools causing suction, should be avoided. Tt is also possible that the penetration test is performed with the casing in soil subjected to bbuayancy. The soil would then be constrained between the penetrometer and the casing, leading toan increased number of blows. Therefore, a lowered water leveli the casing has to be avoided by for example, maintaining the water or drilling fluid level in the borehole ata sufficiently high level at all times. ‘The standard penetration testis primarily performed in key boreholesto obtain indications about the strength and deformation properties of the ground. 33.2. Evaluation 33.2.1 General ‘The opportunities to applying SPT results for different design purposes is considerable. ‘The testis mostly used for the determination of strength and deformation characteristics of cohesionless soils, however, valuable data can be also determined for other types of soil under certain circumstances, g, [31], Table 9 gives an overview of the current application Of SPT results on an international level for geotechnical design. ENV 1997-3, 5 and [11] sive examples of corresponding applications. {In applying relations betweea the SPT results and geotechnical parameters, the following conditions should be considered in addition to the effects of the different performance of the test and the equipment used. The soil type to which a relationship was established has to be deseribed because relative density not only influences the number of blows in ccohesionless soils but also the compactibility, the yrain size and possible cementing [7.22] ‘Thisof course affects the derivation of geotechnical parameters. The same is also valid for the other penetration test methods covered by this chapter, ¢. z, [6-9]. It is also necessary to know whether, and by which method, the number of blows used in the relation, has been corrected in respect of said energy losses. As for the dynamic probing tests (Section [Link]), the following has to be considered in evaluating the SPT results obtained in cohesionless soils, at the same relative density, the penetration resistance below the groundwater level is smaller than above the groundwater80 Klaus-Jurgen Melzer and UW Berga Table 9. Examples ofthe application of SPT results in international geotechnical design (ellowing t)) Derivation of geotecanical parameters ‘Angle of shearing resistance of conesionless $0 Undlrained shear strength of lays ‘Unconliaed compressive strength of weak rocks Modulus of elasticity orsifness coefficient. respectively. of cohesionlessand cohesive soils Maximum shear modulus Direct calculations Settlements of spread foundations on sand ‘Acceptable beating pressure of foundations on sand ‘Acceptable bearing pressure of rafts on sane Liquefsction potential ot sands Shaft and end resistance of piles Sheet pile drive ability level. DIN 4094-2 gives some relationships to correct for this effect (see also Section of geotechnical parameters Shear strength, ‘The following exampleshows a possible method of deriving indircelly the angleof effective shearing resistance y! for cohesionless soils. Similarly to Fg, (1), the following general relation between number of blows Nag and relative density Tp applies Ip =e) +62 log Nay 6) ‘Table 10 shows examples for the coelficients e, ande in Eq. (5) for BDP results obtained in different cohesionless soils above the groundwater level Using the relative density Ip, determined from SPT/BDP results, the angle of effective shearing resistance q’ can be derived. For instance, DIN 1054 and ENV 1997-3, Annex D3 contain corresponding estimations of q for different cobesionless soils. For more detailed investigations of the relation between the penetration resistance of dynamic penetrometers and cone penetromcters in cohesionless soils on the onc hand and their relative density and angle of shearing resistance on the other hand, reference is made to [6-11, 28, 33-25]. A good overview o! the options to derive the shear parameters for limestone and soft rock can be found in (11, p. 83 Compressibility Similarly tothe evaluation of dynamie probing results, the stiffness coefficient vin Eq. (2) ccan be derived directly from the number of blows Nao as shown in the following example 1 Tohe fllowing emt cf [11] thesecondary seferences the page numbers refer tothe orignal sour.13 Geotechnical eld investigations al ‘Table 19, Examples of oneficients in Eqs. (8) 10 (7) for deriving relative density Tp and stiftoess coefficient v {rom EDP results (ates DIN 4094) Soil Conditions| Relative Density ‘Sttiness tlassification by Lweficent ¥ DIN 18196 ‘ > Fy? [1e® [atove [under |e, 4, & ‘ow | ow se s=[-|[*/- 010 | 03a 146 207 SE sl-|-[~« ois | 0370 - swaw [26] - | x | - | om | oass = faLam ons-| x 50 4 130 Degree of woiformity, duo /dia, Conssteney. units Valid ranges: For the elaive density: 3 = Nat = 50. For the stifiness coofiient in SE: 3 < Nay < 25;in TL,TM:3 < Nyp < 23 Soi clasificaton according to DIN 18196: SE: poorly graded sands; SW: well graded sands; GW: well graded [Link] mixtures ‘TL: low plasticity clays; TM medium plasticity clays. Investigations into cohesionless and cohesive soils [7, 19] resulted in the following cqua- tions to determine directly the stiffness coefficient in Eg. (2) # For sands: ved, +e; logNay ©) «© Forslightly and medium plastic clays: v= dy + d2 Nao io) With the coefficients d) and d2 from Table 10, the stiffness coefficient v can be derived and by applying w = 0.5 for sands and w = 0.6 for the cohesive soils considered, the stress dependent modulus of elasticity Ege is determined. ENV 1997-3, Annex D.4 gives an example for determining directly the settlement of, spread foundations in cohcsionless soils from SPT results, 33.23 Bearing capacity of spread foundations and Spread foundations Numerous attempts have been made since the late 1940's to determine the bearing eapae- ity of spread foundationsin cohesionless soils from SPT results. However, these have tobe accepted as methods that result in rough estimates only. On the other hand, some micthous, developed during the last 25 years, use statistical evaluations of settlement observations of structures as a basis for determining the relationships between allowable bearing pres- sure, settlements, foundation geometry and SPT results [11, p. 95 ff]. Even in these cases however, large deviations can occur. Because of these uncertainties, international prac- tice prefers to derive the geotechnical parameters for shear strength and compress82 lous Jurgen Melzer and UM Bergdahl from SPT results and use these as input to the design methods when only SPT results are available Piles Boundary conditions are more favourable for determining the bearing capacity of piles (pile base resistance, shaft resistance) from SPT results, Methods are available for cohesive and cohesionless soils limestone and soft rocks [11, p. 101 ff]. These are mainly based on ‘the results from pile load tests on Various pile types, The approach is similar (o that used in Germany (Section 3.4.23), 33.24 Relations between the results from different penet Finally, reference has to be made to relationships established between SPT/BDP results and those from dynamic probing and cone penetration tests in DIN 4094 and refs. [7, 19, 36-38] (see also Section [Link]) jon tests 34 Cone penetration test 34.1 Equipment and test procedures ‘The cone penetration test (CPT) - mentioned in EN 1997-1, 33.1021 and according to ENV 1997-3, 3 ~ consists of a penetrometer being pushed vertically into the soil at a relatively constant rate of penetration of 2em/sec. The penetrometer comprises a series of rods ending in a penetrometer tip, consisting of @ cone and a cylindrical shaft, During, the penetration, the resistance of the cone and, if possible, the local friction on a sleeve (friction sleeve) located in the cylindrical shaft are measured, The cone resistance qe (penetration resistance Qe divided by the cross sectional area of the cone Ac) and the local unit skin friction f, (frictional force Q. acting on the sleeve divided by its area A,) are used for further evaluation ‘Today the elecirical cone is the most used equipment on a world-wide basis. One example of this is shown in Fig. 10. Generally the cone has a cross sectional area of 10cm? During the recent 10 years, a cone with a cross sectional area of 15cm? (followed by a series, of rods with a cross sectional area of 10cm?) has also come into use [12] to increase the penetration depth and measurement accuracy but also tollow the incorporation of other measuring deviees into the cone. Compared to the electrical cone, other equipment [12] for example the mechanical (“Dutch”) cone penetrometer is now only seldomly used. At the beginning of the 1970's, the additional measurement of the pore water pressure using the s0 called piezocone was introduced. According to ENV 1997-3, 3, the cone penetration test CPTU is a CPT which includes the measurement of the pore water pressure generated at the base of the cone during the penetration. Lig. 11 shows an electrical cone, and Fig, 12 shows the corresponding definitions. Other equipment allows the measurement of the pore water pressure in the middle of the cone and at a defined distance above the friction sleeve (12). Corrections and the methods of interpreting these test results are also given in reference [12]. ‘The widespread use of the cone penetration test also outside Europe, which started in the 1970's increased the need for intemational harmonisation. Initially, recommendations for CPT were made by the Technical Committee TC 16 of the ISSMEE [14] which were13 Geotechnical fel investigations & Gap and coal 1 cone, A, = Ie? Fton sloove apex angle = 6 2 Loadcell 3 Strain gauges 4 Friction sieeve, Ac= 150en" 5 Adjustment ing 6 Waterproof cable bushing Pnntomate 8 Gapand soa! Poss Cynical, ‘iter par! Cone ‘Conical pa. 7 Signal cable 8 Rog connection ze Fig. [Link] of the cone penetration test _ Fig. 1-Scheme of apievocone for thecone penetration CPT (alter DIN 4004) test CPTU (alter ENV 1997-3) “Tolalaa Ac a tgemnren ye wip a= rire = ciAe Fig 12 GeGincscesat-ay — CPLU alt tical dimensions for a pievocone test ENV 1997.3) followed recently by recommendations for the CPTU [15]. These were also the basis for ENV 1997-3, 3. In addition, there exist a number of comprehensive national standards for example in the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the US.A. [12]. As the content of DIN 4094 was less comprehensive, it made its new edition, DIN 4094-1, even more important, During the last 30 years, the cone penetration test has gone through anenormous develop- ment not only because of its widespread use outside Europe, but also because of changes to the equipment. Ret, [12]? gives an excellent overview of the current situation and [39] summarises the state of the art for aspects like earthquake and environmental engineer- ing. Today the standard penetration testis perhaps still the leading test used world-wide, 2 tp the following text, (22s the secondary seference: the page num ofers tothe orginal source84 ‘slaus-Jorgen Melzer and Ulf Berpdahl However, the cone penetration test has reached or even passed it for many applications because ofa higher accuracy inthe interpretation of the test results and the numerous pos- sibilities it offers in equipmeat and operations, This has also intensified the investigations ‘on comparisons of the results from the two tests methods [40], to transfer the SPT know how to the evaluation of the cone penetration test results (and vice versa). Inthe Jong run, the application ofthe two test methods will most probably follow the trend in Germany ig the last SU years: Within a ground investigation project, the cone penetration test applicable, a corresponding dynamic probing test) will be used as the main test, and the SPT will be used as valuable supplement in the key borcholes, including sampling, as for example required by DIN 4094 or EN 1997-1, 3 ‘The state of development of the technical equipment is as follows: Generally, « dead: weight of up to LOUKN is sullicient to overcome the total penetration resistance, The dead weight is usually obtained by self-propelled thrust machines (mostly trucks). For light weight machines the counterweight can be increased by using screw anchors. A corresponding, m of the cone of SOMPa is usually sufficient to measure the cone penetration resistance. There is also off-shore equipment now available, with ddead-weights up to 200 KN, for penetrations of very stiff and very dense grounds (tertiary clays, glacial sands soft rock). The corresponding cones possess measuring capacities of up to 120 MPa [12, p.8ff,41]. By comparison. the cone penetration resistance is usually low in cohesive soils; a value of S MPa eun already characterise a soil of very stiff eonsisteney [42] and values of qe < 1.5 MPa could indicate a fitm to stiff consistency [33]. This means, however. that an “all-purpose cone” [41] would need to have a measuring capacity from 15-120 MPa which is hardly feasible. Therefore, [15] recommends cone classes of different measuring capacities depending om the required use. While the electrical cones with and without the capability to measure pore water pressure, belong to today’s standard equipment, the following acditional measuring devices mace possible by fast sensor development, were introduced for practical applications during the last ten years: ‘© Cones for measuring lateral stresses [12, p.1724.] Cones with pressuremeters[12, p. 175 43, 44] Cones for seismic measurements (12, p. 17911, 45] Acoustic cones [12, p. 190, 46, 47] Cones for measuring permeability [12. p. 80, 48] Cones with liquid samplers to obtain pore fluid for chemical investigations (12, p. 1991, 49, 50] Cone for measuring electrical eonductivity/resistivity [12. p. 193, 49, 50] Cones for radiometric measurements [12, p. 186 ft, 51-53] Cones with build-in cameras [54, 55] Vibratory cones (12, p. 132] 34.2. Evaluation 342.1 General ‘The sim of the evaluation of cone penetrometer test results is that for the results from the dynamic probing and the standard penetration test. The primary aim is « qualitative evaluation of the ground strata (together with the results from key boreholes). However, inthis case the sensitivity is larger than from the dynamic penetrometers cipally the same as13 Geotechnical field investigations 8s The ability to measure the local unit side friction f. on the friction sleeve, in addition to the cone penetration resistance qe, has alrcady led early to the use of the parameters 4a and f, a5 a means to classify the penetrated soil strata [S6, 57]. Fig. 13 shows such an example. Further investigations demonstrated [12, pI f..58, 59] that the accuracy of the prediction can be improved by using the corrected cone penetration resistance qi (Fig. 12) and/or the pore water pressure itself instead of qz. This had Ied to the recommendation in ENV 1997-3, 3to use the results from investigations with the CPTU for soil classification purposes. Further improvements were obtained using refined statistical evaluations [59 Additional evaluation methods (e. , Fuzzi logic) [60] or by using cameras in the cone. ‘There is no doubt that classification systems, as the example in Fig. 13 shows, can be a valuable tool in idemtifying the penetrated soil strata. However, it must be stated that such a system established for a certain geographic/geological region cannot necessarily be applied in other areas without additional calibration [61]. This fact was confirmed by recent comparisons of different classification systems [58]. Therefore, DIN 4054-1 and. ENV 1997-3 insist that in addition to indirect ground investigations (here: cone penctra- tion tess), direct ground investigations (e key boreholes) with sampling and laboratory investigations are also performed ‘Thanks to the variety in available measuring techniques, a considerable number of para eters representative of different soil properties can now be quantitatively determined Table 1 in [12] presents a good overview of what can be obtained with common field testing. Besides the consolidation ratio, sensitivity, permeahility etc. the following eval uation options should be mentioned: the description of in situ stress conditions including the coefficient of carth pressure [12. p. 61f, 880, 172{F] seismic properties [43], soil liquefaction [12, p. 1664. 39. 62-64), porewater pressure distribution 12, p. 74 ff] and with increasing investigations of soil contamination, the quality of pore liqui resistivity and conductivity [12, p. 194 ff 49, $0]. The application of cone penetration test co penton eon, MPa os oz oot 2 3 4 58 6 7 @ © Ww eto at Fig. 13, Example of a setislogarichae relation beoween the cone penetration resistance and the Irition raio in Various soils (Gesignation after DIN 4022) ‘rom measurements by the GEOSOND company86 ‘Klaus-Jargen Melzer and Ul Betgdab results in geotechnical design has, on an international level, atleast reached and maybe ‘even passed, the application of SPY results (see Table 9). Advanced measuring techniques and numerous basic investigations in test chambers [12, p. 291, 65, 66] have both con- tributed to this fact, In these tests, the influences of individual parameters, such asin sito sireys conditions, have been investigated systematically. This has contributed essentially, a least qualitatively, to the clarification of the penetration processes around the cone. However, the results cannot he directly transferred to reality because of limited test con: ditions (partially too small chambers, “aon-grown” soils) [12, p. 291 ff, 39] although the transfer was possible in some isolated eases as described i [67 34.22 Derivat Shear strength Inthe following seetions, some examples are presented for driving geotechnical parame ters from CPT results Firstly, there are two examples of the indirect determination ofthe angle of effective shearing resistance q’ of eohesionless soils. In these eases, the relative density Ip is intially desived and, by the means of this parameter, y’ can be determined from a corresponding relationship. From Eqs. (1) and (5), confirmed by recent investigations [12,p. 8Lff.], DIN 4094 gives the following general equation as an example of the derivation ofthe relative density Ip Irom the cone penetration resistance ge: of geotechnical parameters Ip =e, +e logge ®) Table 11 containsexamplesof the coefficients, and e, for sandsand sand-gravel mixtures for CPT with a 10-m? cone. ‘These relations are valid for CPT performed above the groundwater level and for a depth larger than about 1 m where this is the critical depth ‘Table 11, Examples of coefficients in Es. (8), (13) and (24) for deriving relative density Ip and stiffness eoefiient ¥ from vone penetration resistance g. (in MPa: 10-em-cone) above groundwater level (after DIN 4094) So Conains [Relive desis ip] Sines onsen y tov ton) a = [= fs b SE 2 = —o8 | on M3 167 sw - - ~ |e] ie swiGw = a > 1™ ~ [ers | | isa "Degree of uniformity do/Jin.”? Consistency unit: L Valid ranges (in MPa) For the relative density: 3 © qe < 30 Fox the stiffness coefficient: in SE, SW: 5 = gy = 30:in TL, TM: 06 = ge = 35. Soll classification according 10 DIN 181%: SE: poorly graded sands: SW" well graded sands; GW: well graded sand-gravel mintures; ‘low plasticity lays; TM: meditin plasticity clays1.3 Geotechnical eld investigations 87 ‘Table 12, Example of a relation between cone penetration resistance q:(I0-emn?-cone) ‘and relative density Ip for naturally moist medium sands (after [S8-70]) ‘Cone penetration esitance go MPa Relative density bb <0 Varyloose oas-oas Loose 03s-065 Medium dense 065-085 Dease > 08S very from which under the same conditions, the cone penetration resistance becomes almost constant. Above this depth, the cone penetration resistance inereases considerably with, depth, The second example (Table 12) shows in tabular form, the relation between cone pen- etration resistance qe and relative density ly for moist uaiform medium sands (“Berlin Sands") based on numerous tests [68-70], With comparable boundary conditions, this relation could be used also for deriving indirectly from 4¢ via Ip. Comparative penetration tests have shown that the cone penetration resistance in non- uniform cohesionlcss sols is smaller than in uniform soils at the same relative density [6,7]. This is due to the higher compactibility = (@aus ~ Cnin)/Cmia of the non-uniform soils, Additional investigations [7,8] revealed that not only the compactibility, but also the average grain size, influences the cone penetration resistance at the same relative density (Section 3.1). This means that an absolute determination of the relative density from the cone penetration resistance itself is not possible. For this, the grain size dis- tribution and the maximum and minimum void ratios must be known. In addition, the existence of groundwater has a certain influence on the penetration resistance. Conse- quently, DIN 4094 differentiates between cases of “with and without groundwater” in the correlations for deriving Ip (see alo Tables 8, 10 and 11). The tables also show the boundary conditions (soil types etc.) for Which the correlations have been established. In case of the CPT however, the influence of the ground water may often be negligible A number of theoretical and empirical investigations of the relationship between the relative density Ip and the angle of effective shearing resistance g’ are also available in (9,12,p.90ff, 35,39] and ENV 1997-3, Most of these relations are dependent on the type ‘of cohesionless soil investigated. The stress dependency of gis also increasingly being considered Some examples for deriving the angle of effective shearing resistance directly. are given below. The similarity of a cone penetration test with a deep foundation led to attempts to derive @ empirically as well theoretically from the cone penetration resistance, as can be seen from a number of investigations [12, p. 901f, 39]. Some of the references refer ‘again to the stress dependency of q. The dependency on the type of cohesionless soil is, ako mentioned. ‘Table 13 shows 2 tabular relationship between cone penetration resistance de and the angle of shcaring resistance 4 for natural quartz and feldspar sands according, to [71] which was also included in ENV 1997-3. Another example is the approximated relation between ge und qf for different sands according to [72] which was additionally confirmed for a sand (U = 2.2) and a sand-88 ‘Klaus Jorgen Melzer and Ur Berga ‘Table 13. Example of a relation for deriving the angle of shearing resistance q” and the drained Young’s modulus Ey from cone penetration resistance ge for natural cohesionless soils (quarta- and teldspar sands) (after [71]) Aspe ofsteaing | Dasined Youngs adsl | Tesistance'? ', deg. ‘Cone penetration existance eo MPa os 25-50 50-100 100-200 200 The values are vali for sands For silty soils a reduction of3° shouldbe made, Tor gravels 2 should be added. By isupproximated by the stress and time dependent secant modulus Values given fr the drained ‘modulus correspond fo settlements for 10 years. They are obtained assuming that the vertical stress uistribation follows the 2-1 approximation (71, p. G4], Furthermore, some investigations indicate {hat those values can be 50% lower in silty soils and 50% higher in gravely soils In overconsolidated colesiontes sols the modulus can be considerably higher. When calculating setlements for ground pressures greater than 2/3 of the desiga bearing pressures i ultimate lint state the modulus should beset ta lf ofthe values given in this table gravel mixture (U = 5.7) [10, 70, 73, 74]. Ihis relation can be described by the following equation with a valid range of 6.9MPa < qe = 42.5MPa: o'=268+45 Inget? o with qc in MPa, ‘The trend and order of magnitude agree with the deterministic equation in DIN 4004-1 for narrowly graded sands (SE, U = 3) withia the range of |MPa = qe < 28 MPa: = 234135 logge (10) with qe in MPa. Theoretical and empirical investigations are also available for the derivation of the tundrained shear strength cy in cohesive soils [12, p. 63 ff, 33, 39, 75]. As examples, the two following equations are mentioned, which were also included in ENV 1997-3, 3. With qs from CPT: 4 = @e~ H,0)/Ni a) But preferably with q from CPTU: cu = (4 o00)/Nux (2) where: Oxy = total vertical stress (due to overburden) Nu, Nie = factors to be estimated from local experience Nj can take values between 1] and 19 and Ny, between 8 and 20 respectively depending on the actual cohesive soil and its plasticity index [12, 8. 64fE, 75]1.3 Geotechnical eld investigations 89 Compressiil Especially in international practice, the Young’s modulus Ey is irequently used as a geotechnical design parameter, Investigations under controlled luboratory conditions indicate that Ein sand under drained conditions depends primarily on the relative den- sity, the consolidation ratio and the actusl stress condition. Consequently, the methods for the determination of En from the cone penetration resistance qe refiect this fact [12, 1-93}. A simple example is given in Table 13 [71] (see also FNV 1997-3, Annex B1). The Eurocode contains further examples for settlement calculations of spread foundations in sands (ENV 1997-3, Annex B2 and [12, p. 1581). For similar investigations in cohesive soils reference is raude to [12, p. 711] and [33] In Germany, the modulus Eye from oedometer tests is primarily used for settlement calculations. The same type Of investiyations, as used for the dynamic penetration tests in cohesionless and cohesive soils [7.19] resulted in the following equations for deriving, the stiffness coefficient v in Eq. (2) directly from the cone penetration resistance qe (in MPa): » Forsands: v= fy + fy -log qe (13) i +f -ge (aay + Forslightly and medium plastic clays: v Examples of the coefficients f and fz are given in Table 11, Using w = 0.5 for the investigated sands and w = 0. for the corresponding cohesive sols, the stress dependent s can be derived directly On the other hand, 2 direct correlation between the modulus of elasticity Eaa from settlement measurements (e.g. from plate loading wsts with model foundations) and the cone penetration ae is not possible because parameters such as loading conditions, shape and size of the foundation and thickness of the compressible layer bencath the foundation, have an additional influence (10), The well known relation Eyey = ade (for values of « see [33] und ENV 1997-3, Annex B33) should therefore be considered as rough approximation only. 34.23 Bearing capacity of spread found: Spread foundations As already mentioned when discussing the relation between cone penetration resistance and angle of shearing revistance (Section [Link]), it was obvious to correlate theoretically the coefficients in the equation for calculating the bearingresistance of spread foundations with ge because of the similarity of « cone penetrating the ground. In practice however, early successful attempts were made to estimate the bearing resis- tance of sprcad foundation directly from CPT results [12, p. 157 £]. In Germany, the eval- uation of numerous large-scale load tests showed that cone penetration resistance and bearing resistance are directly proportional to each other [10, 70, 73,74]. This method for direct application in the design of spread foundations is refieeted in the standardisation (see DIN 1054). sand piles90 Klaus Jurgen Melzer and Ulf Berga Piles The determination of pile bearing resistance (sce also EN 1997-1,76.2.3) can be viewed as the original intention of quantitative evaluation of the cone penetration test results because the transferability of the results appeared to be obvious Consequently. there are morte empirical approaches, mainly validated by pile load tests, available today than theoretical methods. State of the art metinods are detailed in [12, p. 151, 76] respectively ‘There are, however, indications that the empirical use of CPTU results is more accurate [77]. ENV 1997-3, Annex BA gives an example of a common method that stems from the carly use of deriving pile bearing resistance from CPT. ‘Germany primarily followed! the approach (o correlate the results from pile load tests with the CPT results, This was based on a large number of related parameters (ultimate pile base bearing resistance, normalised settlement =settlementpile diameter) [rom pile load test results in cohesioniess soils with known cone penetration resistances qe from which conservative estimates were taken [78]. These comprehensive investigations are reflected inthe German standardisation codes (DIN 1054, DIN EN 1536). These standards contain required minimum values of cone penetration resistances in the ground in the case of the bearing resistance of driven displacement piles. For bored piles, values for pile base resistance and skin friction are given as a function of the cone penetration resistance from CPT within a range of 10 MPa < q: < 25 Mpa. For the pile base resistance, the normalised settlement of the pile head is given as additional parameter, 34.24 Relations between results from differ ‘The opportunity to derive the bearing capacity of foundations directly from the results of cone penetration tests, hus Ted {0 numerous relationships between the results from dillerent penetration test methods (e.g. SPT and CPT), see [7. 12, p. 149ff., 36-38, 40} ‘These efforts were enforced to utilise and to complement the comprehensive existing knowledge for the future. Table 14 shows examples of some of these relationships. 3.5 Field vane test 35.1 Equipment and test procedures ‘The field vane test (FV) is an in situ test (ENV 1997-3, 8): itis performed with a ree {angular vane, consisting of four plates fixed at 90° angles to each other, pushed from the bottom of @ borehole (or excavation pit) tothe desired depth and then rotated (loaded by torque). The ratio of the height H of the vanes to the diameter D must be 22. The vane should be equipped with a device that allows the torque of the vane to be separated from that of the extension rods. A casing or a slip coupling can be used for this purpose. ‘The testis used in very solt to very stiff cohesive soils to determine the undrained shear strength and sensitivity. It maybe used also to determine the undrained shear strength of silts and clayey glacier deposits. The reliability of the test results varies with soil type. In Germany, the ficld vane test has been standardised in DIN 4096, wihich was adapted to suit ENV 1997-3, 8 by the new edition DIN 4094-4, The equipment consists of the vane ‘apparatus ice, the vane and shaft (with protective sleeve, if appropriate), the rotating device, the extension rods (if appropriate) and the measuring device for measuring the torque and the13 Geotechoeal field investigations a Table 14, Framples of the average ratios of cone penetration resistance qy (in MP2) to mumber of blows Nip and Nip, respectively, for some cobesionless and cohesive soils above groundwater level (ollowing DIN 4094 and (19}) Sei alos of eetaton aaa “sein Cones ll Gahesie a sop | pen | oe) app | pen | oP Ge/Nw | de/Nio | a/Niw | de/Nav | ge/Nio | de/Niw owsi pe [es | | Gr,[Link] Ww 1s - - ‘TL,TM” - - - 055 100 036 | For le = 0.75 ~ 1.30, Valid ranges: BDP. in SP:9 = Nw = 50:in SW,SI:3 = Nyy = 40; in GR, GW,GL 3 = Nay 530; MTL, TME3 © Na 14 DPI: in SE, $W, SI: 3 = Nyy < in TL, TM:3 < Nig = 19. DPL: in SE!3 = Nip < 60 in SW, SE'3 < Nip <25;in TL, TM:9 © Ny < 60 Soll elassification according to DIN 18196: SF: poorly rade sands; SW: well graded sands; Sl: poorly graded sands with some grain diamseter missing: (GE: poorly graded sand and gravel; GW: well graded sand and gravel, Gt poosly graded sand and gravel with some grain diameter missing; TL: low plasticity lays; TM: medium plasticity clays tam rot bet EF rotmteet Ea eran ve eo 4s Fig 1 Scene ls tava92 laus-Jurgen Melzer and Ulf Bergdahl The vane height/diameter ratios are H/D = 100mm/S0mm (FVT 50) and H/D 150 ma/75 mm (FVT 75). The selection of the vane dimensions depends on the strength of the soil. For example FVT 75 is for low consistency and FVT 50 is for higher consistency, ‘The vane apparatus is pushed into the soil until the required depth is reached; driving, vibrating or rotating are not allowed during the push-in process. When a caning is used 10 reduce skin friction, the apparatusis pushed into the soil only after the casing has reached 4 required depth then, the apparatus is rotated: the required depth should be > SD but at least 0.3m below the bottom of the boreholepit. ‘The rate of rotation should be 0.5*/sec in soft soils at low sensitivity and 0.1-0.2°isee in soils with high sensitivity respectively. The maximum torque Twnaxy Fequited to shear the soil along the undisturbed cylindrical soil surface for the first time, is meusured (the angle of rotation is also recorded on occasions to obtain additional information about the shear behaviour of the soil). After the initial shearing process and the recording of Tras.0- the vane is rotated at least ten times with a rate of rotation of 10"/sec. Alter that, the above shearing procedure is repeated and the maximum torque Tru for this remoulded ‘condition is recorded, 35.2 Evaluation 35.21 General ‘The maximum shearing resistance is determined by the following formula from the mea- sured torque, with D as vane diameter, assuming a simplified stress distribution along the failure surfaces of the sheared soil eylinder [3, 79} oy = 0.273 Treen /D? (as) where: cj = maximum shearing resistance of the soil during the initial shearing process Tonox.a = Maximum torque during the initial shearing process D- = vane diameter For the determination of the shearing resistance for the remoulded condition ey, Traxx is replaced by Tinea! Gy = 0273 Tipex/D* (16) ‘The sensitivity Syy determined from the field vane test is defined as the ratio ew/ers 38.22 Deri on of geotechnical parameters ‘The measured shearing resistance cannot be separated into effective friction and cohesion because the effective horizontal stress conditions in the soil being investigated are not known. Therefore, the field vane test can only be applied where the soil can be assumed tobe frictionless for undrained conditions i.e. in saturated normally consolidated cohesive soilsof sot to stiff consistency. The shearing resistance ¢;, can then be determined lrom the FVTas equivalent to the shear strength cj, during soil failure under undrained conditions (Gor normal clays). At low shear stresses — for example creep movements in slopes — the shear strength of high plasticity claysis smaller [80]. Therefore, the shearing resistance obtained from FVT. has to be corrected by means of empirical factors: ey = Hey ay1.3 Geotechnical field investigations % ‘The correction factor p has to be determined from local experience. In general, it is correlated to the plasticity index or the liquid limit and perhaps to the effective normal stress. The corrcetion factor increases in the ease of overconsolidated clays with inercasing plasticity index [81-83] or in the case of normally consolidated clays with decreasing liquid timit [84]. In other eases — for example earth pressure calculations ~ the derived ‘fy values are considered as minimum values because they Were measured primarily 10 tical failure planes, where they are under normal conditions smaller than in horizontal oor inclined planes. In these cases, cj ean be increased [81] Examples of the correction factor ware given in ENV 1997-3, Annex G and in DIN 4004-4 In fissured clays and in heavily silty or sandy clays, the correction factor p has sometimes to be reduced to as low as 0.3 ‘The undrained shear strength cj derived from the results of field vane testsis mainly used. for the calculation of bearing resistance of spread foundations and piles or for stability analyses of slopes using analytical methouls. The use of common ficld tests in environmen: tal investigations (see also Section 3.4.1) has also led to the first applications of the field vane test in this area of site investigations [85]. 346.1 Equipment and test procedures ‘The weight sounding test (WST) mentioned in EN 1997-1, 33.1013 was developed by the geotechnical department of the Swedish Railway Administration in about 1915 and became a national standard by 1917, Today, the method is the most commonly used penetration test in Scandinavia and Finland. The weight sounding testis normally used for preliminary investigations in differing soils. The test results could also be used for design and inspeetion investigations in most common soils but are primarily applied in very soft to stiff cohesive soils and very loose to dense cohesionless soils In very dense sand and gravel and tills pre-drilling could be necessary. The results are generally used to evaluate the thickness and extent of different soil laycts but also forthe asscssment of the design parameters for spread foundations and piles, ‘Tae frst international harmonisation of the weight sounding test took place in 1989 [14]. ‘The method was also included in the European standardisation (ENV 1997-3, 7). ‘The weight penetrometer in its original form consists ofa serew shaped point (diameter: 25mm), a set of weights (1 x Ske, 2x 10kg and 3 x 25ks), a number of rods (diameter: 22mm) and a handle (Fig, 15). The point is manufactured from a 25mm square sel bar ‘with 2 total Length of 200 mm, Tae bar has an 80 mm long pyramidal tip andis twisted one {urn to the left over @ length of 130 mm (see ENV 1997-3, Fig. 7.1). It is used in general asa static penetrometer in very soft and very loose soils where the penetration resistance is less than 1KN (corresponding to @ total load of 100kg). The weight sounding test can bie performed manually or mechanically. Today, most tests are performed mechanically (by hydraulic mzchines) and the recording of loads and number of halfturns is made Automatically by means of eleetiesl sensors. In the static phase of the test, the penetrometer should be loaded in stages as follows: DOSKN, 0.15 EN, O.25KN, [Link], 0.75KN and 1.00KN. The load is then adjusted from these standard loads to keep the penetration rate at about 5 mavsee. If the penetration resistance is greater than 1,00KN or the penetration rate is less than about 20mmisce theoa ‘Klaus Jargen Melzer and Ulf Berpdahl TES weighs 250 100m Se Weights 10g o WST 22 = Gimp 5s o _— Wood 1 fo($p660) ~ Seraper 3 100m = * ‘ 4 3. 5 ; et oom ' Ree, 7 KL | ~~ Bbcer 22 mm 5 = Seow shaped ‘ aH ° jo Se of oa We Jom ny toon nam 1g. 18 fest cguipment foreman Fig 16, WSF results resentation weight sounding est |WST 22: Weight sounding test, Rod diameter: 22mm o.2m: Revolution per 0.2m penctration {h(Spe80}: Pre- boring to the desianated depth (encrusted surface layer) iaincter: 80. eum penetrometer has to be rotated, The load of 1O0KN is then maintained and the number ‘of halfiurns required to give a 0.2m of penctration is recorded. The weight sounding testis terminated at a depth when a certain penetration resistance is reached or when the penetrometer cannot be driven any deeper, ie. the socalled “firm ‘bottom for the weight penetrometer is reached. The erteria chosen for the termination of @ weight sounding test depends on the ground conditions and the purpose of the investigations, When the so called “firm bottom” criteria is used, the final resistance should be checked by sledgehammering on top of thc penetrometer, by blows using the ‘weights or by percussion machine to ensure the “firm bottom” has actually been reached The chosen procedure must be recorded in the test report. ‘The results from a weight sounding test are presented in diagrams showing the penetration resistance versus depth (Fig. 16). 36.2 Evaluation 36.2.1 General When considering the evaluation of the weight sounding diagrams, both the magnitude of resistance and its variations are used, One has to remember that the variations of the resistance can also depend on the variations in the soil layer sequence. In very soft to firm1.3 Geotechnical field investigations 95 clays the penetration resistance is often less than 1 kN or the resistance against turning is rather constant and low with less than 10 halfturns/0.2 m of penetration. As the sensitivity of the clay also influences the penetration resistance, the strength of the clay cannot be determined dircetly from the penetration resistance without & separate calibration from cach site. In very loose to loose sediments of silt and sand rather low and constant penetration resistances are also obtained. In medium dense to dense silts and fine sands higher (0-30 haliturns/0.2:m of penetration) resistances arc obtained, which remain rather con- stant with depth. In sand and gravel sediments, the variation in penetration resistance increases with the grain size, When evaluating the weight sounding test results from silty sands and coarse gravel, one should note that 2 high penetration resistance does not always correspond to higher density or strength and deformation properties. The soil layer sequence evaluated from the weight sounding tests and any additional sampling on a site, including the “firm bottom” criteria, is used for the evaluation of the suitability of a site for a certain structure, for the evaluation of the type of foundation (spread or pile foundation) and for the derivation of geotechnical parameters [Link] Derivation of geotechnical parameters Weight sounding test results are used as the basis for the design of foundations in cohe- sionless soils. In [71], it is shown how shear strength and deformation properties can be derived from weight Sounding test results and can be used as input for the design methods used for spread foundations (Table 15). Infine-grained silts and clayey cohesionless oils, geotechnical parameters should be deter- ‘mined by specific tests ~ for example by in situ pressuremeter tests or in the laboratory using good quality samples. Table 15, Example of a relation for deriving the angle of shearing resistance «and the drained Youne’s modulus By, for natural cohesionless soils (quarz- and feldspar sands) from the results of ‘weight sounding tests (after [71]) ‘Weight sounding test, ‘Angle of shearing Diained Young's modulus half rovolutionsi0 en resistance! 4, deg. Enn MBa O10 2032 Ty 10-30 32.35 1-20 20-30 38.37 20-30 40-50 37-40 30-60 “90 0-42 61-90) "W-the values ate valid for sands. For silty soils a reduction of 3° should be made. For gravels 2° should be added. 2m isapproximated by the stress and time dependent secant modulus Values given forthe drained modulus correspond to settlements for LU years. They are obtained assuming thatthe vertical stress, distribution fellows the 2:1 approximation (71, p. G8iC], Furthermore, some investigations indicate that these values cam he Ml % lower in sity soils and 0% higher in gravelly seis. Im overcomsoliated cohesionless soils the modulus can be considerably higher. When calculating settlements for ground pressures greater than 2/3 of the design bearing pressures ip ultimate limit stare, the modulus should be set to half of the values given inthis able.96 ‘laus-Turgen Melzer and UIC Rergdahl 36.2.3 Bearing capaci of piles The weight sounding test results can also he used directly for pile design [86] ‘The required length of end bearing concrete piles can be determined from the se called 'm bottom” criteria where the tests have been terminated, Normally, the required end bearing pressure is achieved at the “firm bottom” or up to2m deeper. However, dynamic probing is considered fo be 9 more accurate method in determining the length of such piles, Norwegian experience with friction piles indicates how the average weight sounding resis tance along the pile length can also be used to calculate the magnitude Of the skin friction (caring capacity of the pile) ia sands. 4. Lateral pressure tests in boreholes 41 Equipment and test procedures ‘The equipment for lateral pressure tests in boreholes (see also ENV 1997-3, 10.4) can generally be defined as follows [87 The equipment normally consists of a eylindrical device that can apply 9 uniform pressure to the pocket wall in soil and rock; the pocket is created specially for the test. The term “pocket” isintentionally used rather than borehole to distinguish between the pocket created specially for the lateral pressure test and the borehole created for advancing between test positions. The borehole diameter should be either equal or larger than the pocket diameter. Methods for creating the pocket are summarised in Table 2 of [87]. During the test, the volume change and the radial or lateral displacement of the eylindrical device are measured. From the results strength and deformation properties of soils and rock, as well as for fills (quality control), can he erived ‘The first investigations of this type were deseribed by Kdgler (88, 89]. In the 1930's, he developed a iateral pressure device (horehale jacking probe) where two eylindrical halt shells are pressed mechanically against the pocket wall. This device was later replaced by a cylindrical probe closed on all sides by a rubber membrane with steel plates at the top anu the bottom ofthe eylinder. The probe wasiinlated by air pressure [90,91]. In the 1950's, this method was developed further by Menard into the three-cell pressuremeter {est (upper guard eel, test cel, ower guard cell). Te lateral pressure device developed by Goodman for application in rock [92] should also be noted. ‘After this, the world-wide dissemination of the “prebored pressuremeter” (PBP) of the Ménard type and of other devices began. In France [93] and Great Britain [94] “self- boring, pressuremeters” (SBP) for applications in soil and rock were developed independent of ‘each other, to reduce, as far as possible, the disturbance of the pocket walls during drilling and lowering of the probe, with the drilling device integrated into the probe. Finally, offshore application initiated a third generation of lateral pressure tests: the “pushed-in” or “full displacement pressuremeter” (FDP) |43, 44, 95]. In this ease, the pressuremeter is incorporated with the cone in a cone penetrometer, In the broadest sense, the NGT dilatometer, as further development of the flat dilatometer (DMT) by Marchetti, belongs. to this group of tests [96, 97]. An overview of the present state of development of lateral pressure tests in boreholes can be found in [87]1.3 Geotechnical field investigations ” A number of countries have now standardised certain devices such as the prebored pres suremeter. The best known are probably the French Standard NF P94-L10 and the Amer. ican ASTM D 4719. Other standards for sclf-boring pressuremeters arc in preparation. ‘The frst international harmonisation on an European levelis described in ENV 1997-3, 4 where the essential requirements for the equipment and test procedurcs arc defined, Sub- sequently, DIN 4094-5 was written to cover the equipment commonly used in Germany (PBP). Whilst intornationally the equipment is divided into the three methods of bringing the probes into place (see above), DIN 4094-5 describes the equipment commonly used in Germany (PBP) as follows: ‘The dilatometer (Fig.17)isa cylindrical device where a flexible rubber membranc is used to apply uniform pressure (by gas oF fluid) to the walls of the pocket (borehole). The displacement of the pocket is measured by displacement transducers in selected radial directions. The applied pressure is measured at the same time, ‘The pressuremeter (Fig. 18)is aylindrical device where flexible rubher membraneis also used to apply uniform pressure to the walls of the pocket (borehole). The displacement of the pocket is determined by measuring the volume of fluid injected into the test cell The applied pressure is measured at the same time ‘The borehole jacking probe (Fig. 19) is a device where two half-shells made of steel are pressed diametrically against the pocket walls (borehole) by hydraulic pressure. The expansion between the half-shells is measured by displacement transducers. The applica pressure is measured at the same time, The types and operational possibilities for these pressuremeters are summarised in Table 16. Recent experiences with some of the equipment are published in [19, 98-101]. Table 17 gives an overview of some data for sclf-boring and full displacement pressurcmeters For instance in [164-107] and [43, 44] comparable investigations with these two types of equipment are presented. at scone Proce ence ue 0 eeiearer | spore) Presmeeconrs Of Fig. 17. Scheme of the dilatometer ‘equipment (after DIN 4094-5)98 Klaus-Jurgen Melzer and Ui Berpdahl $8 Means ent OQ Fig. 1 Scheme ofthe pressuremeter ‘equipment (alter DIN 4004-5) Date acauistion _Proseuro conte! Hysraute pump Cate Sediment catehor Boretotajtcking probe [Link] of the borehole jocking {est equipment (fter DIN 4994-5) The special case of the flat dilatometer (DMT) ~ see also ENV1997-3, 9 and [96, 97] = includes the determination of the ground strata (supplemented by key boreholes), in sita stress conditions the shear strength and deformation propertics af cohesive soils and sand with a blade-shaped probe (Fig, 20). The flat clatometer has a thin circular steel membrane mounted of the outside of one side of the blade. The test is especially suitable {or use in soils where particlesare small compared to the size of the membrane (e. clays, silts, sand).‘Table 16. Types and suitability of dilatometer, pressuremeter and borchote jacking tests (ater DIN 40945) or 7 z y a z @ 7 z 7 Tet] Cade) Desi for ‘Typeot | Mewurementot | Te | Wecommendsd_| Recommended use | Timed esgnation Doreole fondling berate ret | borehole dameer| “ata madeas af ‘ole (ntematoea) expomion eapasion Soares eee MPa Twa | RT| Once aa Wikeleare | Dinter = Upto Rakwi siatmeter tet ‘mentraze’ | syrmevic | diplacement | modulus m1 sa tra transdocorest =D scones the peket wal wn Coens soit is ¥ | Soldiomeer | SDT | Onevenail, | — Rada With alec | Dito 3 pe Tem rock st ‘membrane | symmeie | dapiaeament | mel von soa wethout ‘eens Ep tacos itethe eranbeame | Crcepinder Mead [MPF] Onewetcsi | Radi | Wolomeiisaly | — Mn e Fen prooremeter broguardccl | syste rats ' ‘iow te op ansbaton) Ew 10 dacotties ‘membraner Li pesere ‘ofthese T]fovshole | RAT) Oneestee, | Dineen) withateiae | Hovebats 5 Firmoek sacking test wa syinaies! Aispicoment | "jeking to ont Sa seils wwunsdoces | odulis to slaconiites Ty Cooper fp suorrensonur poy eONUSOHOSD eT 66‘Table 17. Overview of some commercially available slt-boring and pushed-in pressuremeters following [87), oor Groep, crmaional | Retercase | Device for “Mexsrcment of —] Dismeter | Lengiancter Wee Intemans code | dgnation poder expansion | bore dopacement | cm Steering, | Combriveseleoring | [e Oaeteteel | Eheatievonsiucers | S 6 ‘Also coaing Be ‘SBP ‘resaemeter ‘mentrone | shee rail drecuns ‘ornogrine (ese) PAPE Dae waka Vanumetaly TH z “Asad coating be einfered seria ‘rpogrinel | Wea rock cbr ‘Onc estes, | Elearicinmaiooes | 7 EE | Har ays vey dense ‘esureneter ‘membrane | vee adil dreetome ‘ands andrea rooks ‘(HSBP) Paaked ‘amore cone | 117 ‘Doce Tiesieinooas | ry “Avoca waver "DP emareneter ‘membrane’ | deers dzccoms Penest cc Doe tet il Volume 3 z “Ai wikewept paved Prosiremeler rrembrane Foro Milind ‘Onewesteed, | Elveie wansioces Tae Aisa ewe pve cone preseronet riembuane’ | the nia dretons APEAGO mini | TT Doce e Vaturetcaly | "2 Ww Ria eee OT ‘westomsre membrane POE HIN Pure Fazyayy woBzOE-sTETY13 Geowchnical Dold investigations 101 Control and Caltration unt re Pressure Pneumatic elcctle cable Pressure tube Push rods Ground cable Membrane ig. 20, Scheme of the DM equipment and the measuring principle (ater ENV 19973) ‘The hasie the test methou is as follows, The blade is pushed vertically into the soil by a thrust machine (for example, as used in cone penetration tests). At the selected test depth, the contact pressure pp is initially measured while the membrane is just about to lift off the blade, Subsequently. the pressure p; (applied by eas) which is necessary to deform the membrane for 1.10 mm is measured, Fig. 20 shows the equipment and the measuring. principle. Recent examples of investigations are published in [108-112] ‘The parameters obtained from these lateral pressure tests, such asthe modulus of elasticity By4 from the MPT (Table 16 and Section 42), are not real geotechnical parameters but equipment specific parameters. Therefore, it should be noted that the tests have to be performed and evaluated exaetly in accordance with the standard procedures Lor each {est in order to obtain reproducible and reliable results [87 In addition, it is impostant to gain local experience with the test to he able to use the results for design purposes. Depending on the particular equipment, the main steps of the test procedures are: 1. Calibration hefore the test (pressure or measuring system, volume or displacement transducer system, system compliance, correction factor tor membrane stiffness).woz ‘Rlaus-Jargen Melzer and UIt Bergdahl 2. Preparation of the test pocket (pre-drlling, special drilling of the pocket or pushin) and insertion of the probe minimising the disturbances of the pocket walls. 3. Performance of the test and the corresponding data acquisition, pressure application in constant load steps (stress control) or the creation of stages of constant pocket deformation (strain contro), inital load and unload-seload cycles 4, Recording of the test results (raw data). 5. Evaluation and conection of the measured values (hydrostatic pressure, membrane stiffness system compliance, pore water pressure). 6. Reporting (number of the borchole and the test, equipment and component types used, borehole log etc, see also ENV 1997-3, 46). 7. Calibration after each test series (see step 1). 4.2 Evaluation 42.1 General The determination of equipment specific parameters from each testis far more complex than in the case ofall other field tess treated in this Chapter. For example, the evaluation of the test data of a pressuremeter test (MPT) are summarised below (see also ENV 1997- 3, 4and DIN 4094-5), ‘The Ménard modulus of elasticity Ey and the limit pressure pat are determined from the corrected test results according to Fig, 21. The diagram shows the injected fluid volume V versus the applied pressure p (upper part of Fig. 21) and AV/Ap versus p (lower part of Fig. 21, Determination of Ey and pie from the results of a pressuremeter test {alter DIN 40945)13 Geotechnical field investigations 103 Table 18, Examples of the determination of the modulus of elasticity Fyas from different Tateral pressure tests “est “est rel Modulus of elasticity Explanations ia Ew Eq no. RDT | Modulus ofehstay Ep= (+0 -d/ad: aps Env» ENV 19974 Creep index Bee= es | | Dinan ko = (dr dh)/logte/t) MPI | Modulus of oat Ey = 2660 p/aV ENV 1997-3 iit presut Eset = Ew/a us) | pinaows uss fom Fig, 21 or Pun = 179.0 BIE | Modulus of casi Epaf-d-apyad Foul s et s0985 Creep index: Eel Gyr ay | A) | DINADES | ko | pwr Materia index: Tour = (pi—pod/tBo —w) | Boxe = RoEowrr | @y | ENVIN9TS Horintal sues inden Kr = (Bost Fig. 21). The limit pressure prac is defined as the pressure required to double the volume of the test cell and corresponds to the injected fuid volume of V = Ve + V; where Vc is the deflated volume ofthe probe and V; isthe injected volume measured at p, the latter being the pressure where AV /Ap is a minimum. ‘Table 18 contains the essential test results from somte types of equipment. For further details reference should be made to the relevant standards. Due to the wide variety ofthe types of equipment, which enables the user to test soils and rock, and due to the almost 50 years of experience in this area, a number of parameters, can nowadays be derived from the test results which represent certain soil properties, (see Table 1.1 in (12], Table 10in [87)). Among others, these are: the consolidation ratio, relative density, sol liquefaction , horizontal stress conditions, stress-strain relations, pore water pressure and permeability ‘The results of lateral pressure tests a international level ate applied to the geotechnical design for spread and pile foundations. Series of large-scale tests and rigorous standardi- sation, e-g. [98] and Fascicule 62, together with detailed laboratory investigations, ie [113], have contributed to this fact. The applications of the test results in the design of sheet pile walls in slope stability analyses and in tunnel design are also well knowa [87} Principally, one has to distinguish, as in the case of penetration test results, between two methods of application [87|: on the one hand empirical or theoretical derivation of geotechnical parameters serving as input to design methods or on the other hand empirical for semi-empirical methods, where the test results serve directly as input into the design methods. However, ithas to be noted that for ofall empirical and semi-empirical methods local experience plays a decisive role.104 Klaus-Jirgen Melzer and UW Bergdahl 42.2 Derivat Shear strength For the determination of the angle of effective shearing resistance 4! of sands using these methods, the approach is generally to develop a model for the behaviour of the sample soil and adjust it according to the test results. q’ then can be derived from this semi empirical model. Examples for empirical and semi-empirical methods are given in [44 87, 113, 114}. Only results from SBP tests are generally used for this approach and not ‘many examples are available today (87. In addition, the SBP methods strongly depend fn the local conditions for which they were specifically developed. ‘The undrained shear strength ey in cohesive soils can be determined directly from the upper part of the pressure-deformation diagram of an SBP test. However, empirical and semi-empirical methods are used in the case of results from PBP tests. For instance, the limit pressure pia is correlated with cy from laboratory tests or in situ field vane tests [87, 99, 101], Eq. (22) from ref, [99], where further relations are given, is an example for deriving ex from MPT results in clays: y= 25+ (pum ~ om)/10 (22) where: PLM. = limit pressure according 10 Fig. 21 ‘om = horizontal stress at the tested depth Eq. (23) is an example of the derivation of ¢, from DMT results according to ENV 1997-7, 9: ey = 0.2204, (0.5 Kner)? where Bq average normal stress at the tested depth before insertion of the probe Kpwr = horizontal stress index (Table 18) Pressuremeter tests are suitable for the determination of the shear modulus for soils and also for rocks during initial and cyclic loading [43, 44, 100, 101, 106]. According to the relevant evaluations procedures (¢.. NF P94-110, ASTM D 4719), the shear modulus for the initial loading condition is determined from the middle, almost linear elastic part of the curve of the test results (Fig. 21): Gy = (Vo + Ven) Ap/AV 4) where: Vo. = volume of the test cell before loading, Vin = average value of the volume in the almost linear elastic part of the test curve ‘A modified evaluation metho SBP tests compatible is suggested in [100] to make the results from MPT and Compressibi In Table 18, equations for deriving the modulus Foes from the results of tests are sum. marised (Eqs. 18-21). Eqs. (19) and (21) for MPT and DMT are empirical relations. The values for @ in Eq. (19) and Ry in Eq. 21) are given in ENV 1997-3, 4.1.3 Geotechnical Geld investigations 105 While deriving the modulus Egea from RDT and BIT results (Table 18), the following. should he noted (see DIN 4094-5, Fig. D.1). Experience shows that the moduli for unload: ing conditions Epy and Egy, respectively, determined as the secant modulus from the middlesection of the unloading eurve,are close to the Young's modulus Eq, of the material being investigated. The middle section is defined as the part of the pressure-deformation, curve from 30 to 70% of the pressure hetween the upper turning point of the cycle and the full unloading pressure (representing.0 %). Assuming that rock and soil exhibit linear clastic, homogeneous and isotropic behaviour, Eoeg can be derived from Eqs. (18) and (20), respectively. 42.3, Bearing capacity of spread foundations and piles Spread foundations ‘The direct application of MPT results in the calculation of the bearing resistance of spread foundations is an excellent example of how a semi-empirical calculation method can be systematically converted into a standard method, see Fascicule 62 and (98. For instance, the hearing resistance under vertical loads can be determined in accordance with ENV 1997-3, Annex C1 by the following equation: R/A’ = ove + K(PLM — Po) (25) where R- resistance of the foundation to vertical loads A’ = effective base aren w= total initial vertical stress atthe level ofthe foundation base Dim = representative value ofthe Ménard limit pressures beneath the foundation base Po = Ky(oy—u)-+u; with Ky normally equal 05,0, asthe total vertical stress attest level and w asthe pore pressure at the same depth k= bearing resistance factor pending on soil type and pe siven in ENV 1997-3, ‘Table C. asa function of B,L and De ‘width of the foundation Tenth ofthe foundation Dy = equivalent depth ofthe foundation ENY 1997-3, Annex C2 also gives an example for MPT results serving as input to a method for calculating settlements, which is of special importance for spread foundation design ‘The bearing resistance O of piles can also be determined based on MPT results as follows (ENV 1997-3, Annex C3): Q=A-kipLa — po) + PDlqs-z) (26) where: A = base area of the pile equal to the actual arca for closed ended piles and part of that area for open ended piles im = representative value of the limit pressure atthe bas weak layers below of the pile corrected for any106 ‘Klaus Jurgen Melzer and UM Beredahl Po = Koloy — u) +4; with Ky normally equal to 0.5, oy as the total vertical stress atthe test level and u2s the pore pressure at the same depth k = bearing resistance factor depending on soil type, puw and pile type: given in ENV 1997-3, Table C4 P= pile perimeter qui = unit shaft resistance for the soil layer i, given by Fig, C.1 and Table C5; for both see ENV 1997-3, Annex C3 2 = thickness of soil layer i ‘There are also methods available for estimating the settlement of pile foundations [87, 115}, Furthermore, itis important to note that a series of well-tried methods is available for determining the horizontal resistance of piles [87, 116]. 424 Comparison with the results from other field tests If the results from lateral pressure tests in accordance with Tables 16 and 17 (including DMT) areused in conventional design, it has to be shown that the geotechnical parameters derived from these results correspond to those parameters used in traditional design methods. This has led to series of investigations to compare geotechnical parameters from lateral pressure tests with those determined from common laboratory tests (e.g triaxial tests) and from other field tests (e.g. DP, SPT, CPT). Examples are given in [43 99-109, 111). 5 Determination of density 5.1 Sampling methods Field tests for determining the density are important, especially in cohesionless soils, because it is not possible fo obtain undisturbed samples from boreholes (see Section 24). In Germany, the required tests are standardised in DIN 8125-2. Essentially all tests follow the same principle: defined volume of soil is measured in situ and its mass weight is determined, From this the density is given by: p=mv Qn where: m = mass weight of the sample (moist or dry) V = volume of the sample Whilst the determination of the mass by weighing is relatively simple, the selection of the method for determining the volume depends on the soil type encountered. For instance, recovering undisturbed samples is possible with sampler tubes from rial pits and the base of excavations, roads, foundations ete, ifthe soil does not contain gravel, i.e. particles a diameter larger than 2mm. In this case, the replacement methods should be used, i. the cavity produced by the sampling procedure is filled with a standarcised replacement material in a standardised way. The volume of the cavity is then determined by the volume of the replacement material necessary to fill the cavity. The different tests are defined by the means of determining the volume of the cavity, Table 19 contains an overview of the different methods1.3 Geotechnical fed investigations 107 ‘Table 19. Designation and suitability of tests for volume determination (following DIN 18125-2) Code | Method | Designation of test | Applicable in after DIN 181252 | Cohesive soils | Cohesionless I | sits ‘A | Cuming | DINISI2S2-F A | Without name] Fine medium sands | enlinder grain B | Balloon | DINISIZ52FB Al [Finetomedumsands | — ‘gravelsand mixtures, tuavel with litle sand F | Replacement! piNisi2s2-FF | An | Finevomediumsands | — by fluid G | Replacement | IN 181254 all | Bineto medium sands, |= by gypsum ravel-sand mixtures, { rave wth Title sand po —t {| Replacement | DIN [Link] All | Fine 1o medium sands, | ‘hy sand ravel-sand mixtures Sch | Thalpit | DINIKZ52-FSch| AU | Fine tomediumsaads,| All gravel sand mixtures with ile admixtures In cases where soils have to be investigated in depths that cannot be reached by the above close to surface methods, the density could be determined by radiometric methods (see Section 5.2), by dynamic probing (including SPT) or by cone penetration tests (see Sections 3.2 to 3.4) 52 Radiometric methods In radiometric methods, the radiation of radioactive isotopes is measured by Giciger coun- ters and the results are correlated to the density and the moisture content of the soil (it was for thisreason that the method was formerly called the “isotope penetrometer test”). Two types of radiation methods arc used: 1. Gamma radiation (+ radiation), consisting of electromagnetic waves of high energy or sgamma particles (y-» penetrometer). 2. Neutron radiation (1 radiation), consisting of electrical neutral particles with the mass number 1 (neutron penetrometer), ‘The equipment consists ofa radiation source, a detector for measuring the radiation inten- sity and an impulse counter. The combination of the radiation source and the detector is called a radiometric probe. Two main types of equipment are used: devices for dose to-surface operations, e.g. compaction control (“close-to-sutlace probes”), and probes108 ‘Klaus-Jorgen Melver and UM Bergtabl Dimensions in mm _ h i r “t j & | counter 3 8 4 3 TfL Lead shots | IF | Bane aa 8 ase source—|_ | [#2 TL tateenee TE LW tl a0 Jk Fig. 22. Example of ayy penetrometer (lft hand side) and 2 neutron penetrometer (right band side) ‘without radiation protection (attr [7}) used for deep investigations of the ground (“depth-probes"). Fig. 22 shows the arrange- ‘ment of the components for ay-y penetrometer and of a neutron penetrometer as depth- probes The use of radiometsic methods is subjected to legal regulations and legal permission has to be obtained. Regulations for radiation protection control, transport, storage and calibration ofthe radiometric probes apparent stil esriet their use. DIN 18125-2 refers to 117] where the methods are described in detail (definitions, terminology, equipment, calibration, performance of measurements, radiation protection et) Radiometric devices for use at greater depths are sometimes already integrated within the cones of cone penetration penetrometers [12,p. 186ff.,51-S3, 118]. Por the evaluation, the density p, the water content w and the dry density pg are plotted against depth (Fig. 23). ‘Their application for the compaction control of fills is well established. The combination with key borings and for example, cone penetration tess [119] results in valuable informa- tion about the ground strata of natural soils and their properties. This type of application1.3 Geotechnical field investigations 109 asso pont fa ier coment 9 0192030059 0102030408. Fy bmsive | sayy eo 811) 4] and Qe 14 | 1 Gravelly sand Strongly compacted 1 Fig, 23, Results of gamma radiation ‘and nevtron measurements for deter: ‘mining the natural density p, the water ‘content wand the dy dersity py Denim 3 hhas gained importance revently by combining the radiometric device with CPTU equip ‘ment, In general, radiometric methods are suitable for yse in cohesionless soils [54, 118}, Examples of their use in clayey soils are reported in {53} 6 Geophysical methods 61 General Geophysical investigation methods can he used in conjunction with key horcholes « in preliminary investigations of large-scale projects for determining the stratification of the top layers; in design investigations, to complement the geotechnical investigation; for locating geological joints, discontinuities and anomalies in the strata for locating historical or unknown objects and cavities in the ground, for locating seepage and gradients in the groundwater low: for determining geophysical parameters; for controlling contaminated groundwater fronts, salt water fronts ete Tables 6 and 7 of Supplement 1 of DIN4020 give overviews of surface and borchole methods and their characteristics, The interpretation of the test results requizes experience and special knowledge, In numerous practical applications it has proven appropriate to combine different independent methods to avoid misinterpretations [120-123] the cost remains justifiable because the requirements for equipment and personnel are relatively small for most of the available methods. In Germany, common geophysical methods were investigated on a scientific basis within the framework of an extensive research programme "Methods for the ground investiga tion and description of landfills and toxic waste deposits”. The results were published in [124]. A theoretical study is also available from Finland [125],uo Klaus Jurgen Melzer and UW Bergdahl jeophysics” on the Internet # Deutsche Geophysikalische Gesellschalt (DGG): http:/iwww-seismo-hannover [Link]/dge html © DMT-Gesellschaft fiir Forschung und Prifung, Essen: hitp:/[Link] # Harbour Dom, Kéin: hitpi/wwwharbourdom de + GeoPager: httpi/[Link] © Deutsche WWW-Server Liste der Geologie Clausthak huips/[Link]/geo-serverigeoserver- germany html 6.2. Brief descriptions of some methods 126] Gravimetric methods: the measurement of anomalous deviations, unit is mgal, to explore underground close-to-surface hidden objects or cavities in sufficiently Tevel terrain. The application of gravimetries should always be combined with other geo- physical methods Radiometric methods: see Section 5.2 Geo-electric methods: by pushing two cleetrodes into the ground at a set distance a, a direct current field is created in the soil. Using this field, the specific electric resistivity in [Sm] is determined from the potential difference in a soil mass reaching to a depth ‘of about ai. Approximate values for the resistivity are given in [127 rock, solid: > 5000.2m, rock, weathered: 100-1000 2m, sand, moist: > 100 2m, sand, wet: > 502m, silt, moist: > 20m, fresh water: 209m. An extension of this method consists of pro- gressively increasing the distance of the electrodes outside the measuring probes. «© Soil dynamics and soil seismic testing: see Chapter 1.8 and [12, p.17 Geo-radar: Uses a transmitterireceiver antenna (Iransducer) pulled over the ground surface inducing electromagnetic impulses into the ground. The sigaals reflected from, for example, the strata boundaries inthe ground, are registered, The wave propaga tion depends primarily on the dicletrie properties and conductivity ofthe ground. AL iscontinuities, the signal is spread, reflected, inflected and partially absozbed. Approx- imate values for penetration depths in soils: up to 10m [127] ‘* Geomagnetic methods: The measurement of anomalies in the ground’s magnetic Feld, caused bya ferromagnetic rock mass or other objects (for example, unexploded bombs, cablesete.). With magnetometers (sensors set at two different heights above the ground: Forster probe or proton-magnetometer) the intensity and gradient in a vertical plane re measured, A depth of only about 4m can be reached hecause measurable values caused by objects decrease with the third power of the depth. +» Flectromagnetic methods (TEM): Using a mobile probe, an artificial (reacting to all metals) electromagnetic fcld is created, After turning off the transmitted current, the voltage induced into a receiver spool is registered. The method is characterised by high ‘measuring speed and insensitivity against technical disturbances. Obtainable measuring, depths are similar to those for geomagnetic methods13 Geotechnical field investigations m1 « Soil thermionies: The measurement of temperature anomalies below a depth of 1.5m with temperature sensors (at depth increments of about 1 m) placed in driven hollow rods. Measuring accuracy is to + 0.1° [128, 129]. The primary application of this method is the location of leakages in the ground. 7 References [1] DIN Deutsches tnstitut fie Normunge. V:Baven in Europa -Felduntersuchungen und Laborver: suche for die peotechnische Bemessung. Beuth Verlag GunbH, BerlinuWien/Zirich 2001 [2] Siotben, &, Eimer, V: Wesentishe Antorderungen hei der Probenentnahme in Boden und Fels ‘nach Eurocode 7. bbr 11 (1999), 30-33, [3] Schutze, Ey Muks, Hs Bodenuntersuchungen fir Tagenieurbauten, 2nd. Edition, Springer: ‘Verlag, Berlin Feidelberg/New York 1967 [4] Sweaish Geotechnical Society: Geotesnsk Falthandhok, SGF Rapport 1:9, Velent AB, Stock holm 1996, [5] Bakke, 7, Braathen, O.A., Eilertsen, 0, Mylebus, I: Quality assurance of eldwork. Nordiska Ministerradet, TemaNord 1997-590, Kopenhagen 1997, [6] Kani, 12, Muls, 1, Meyer, W: Ermitiung der Grobe und des Verlaufs des Spitzencrucks hei rucksondiorungen in unaleichtemigem Sand, in Sand Kies-Gemischen und im Kies, Mtteilun gen der Degebo, No. 21, 1968, Melzer. Kod: Sendenuntersuchungen in Sand. Mit Inst. fi Bodenmechanik ander TH Aachen, No. 43,1968. [S| Melzer, K-J: Measuring soil properties in mobility research; relative density and cone penetra tioa esistace, Technical Report No, $652, Report 4, US.A.E, Waterways Expeciment Station, Vieksburg 1971 Melzer, K-J: Relative density ~ "Three examples from research and practice Special Technical Publication 523, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 1973, 463-477. [10] Mus, 71:50 years of deep sounding with static penetrometers, In: A hall eentury in geotech is. Jubilsumshet vu Ehren von Professor A. Hamdi Peynirciogla, Tech. Univ, Istanbul, 197, 40-54 [11] Clayton, CL: The Standecd Penetration Test (SPT), methods and use. Construction Industry Research Tnformation Assexiation, Report 43, London (995 12] Line, T, Roberson, PK. Powel, LM. Cone penetration testing in geotechnical practice E & FNSpon/Routledge, London, New York 1997. [13] Roberton, PK, Mayne, PW: Prox. ist 1C on Site Characterization, AMlanta, A.A. Batkema, Rotterdam, Brookfield 1998 [14] Int. Soe. Soil Mech. Found. Eng: Report of the Techaical Committee on Penetration Testing of Soils - TC 16 with Reference Test Procedures CPF-SPT-DP-WST. Swedish Geotech. Inst, Information 7, Liakoping 198. [15] tnt. Soe. Soil Mech, Geol. Fng: International Reference Tes Procedures for Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and Cone Penetration Test with Poce Pressure (CPTU). Report of the Techaical ‘Commitee 00 Ground Characterisation from InSity Testing TC 16, Proc. 12th Europ. CSMGE, Amsterdam 1999 (corrected 2001), Vo. 1, 2196-2222. [6] Kramer HJ: Untersuchung der bearbeitungstechnischen Bodenkennwerte mit schwerem Ramen-Druck Sondier-Geril zur Beurteilung des Maschineneinsatves i Erdbau. Verb. Inst [-Maschinemwesen im Baubetrich der Universitit Karlerube, Reine F / No. 14, 1976, [17] Kramer, H-1: Gerttetechnisehe Einflspacameter bei Ramm und Drucksondierungen und ihre Ausirkungen auf den Eindengwierstand. Veroll. Ine. Maschinenweeen im Baubetrieb der Universitit Karlsrube, Reihe F/ No. 26, 1981 ni skehrswasserbeu, Grandbaw und i42 ‘Klaus Jurgen Melzer and Ul Berga Us] Koester JP, Daniel, C, Anderton, M.: a situ investigation of liquiled gravels at Sewar, ‘Alaska. Prot. Cont on Innovations and Applications in Geotechnical Site Characteriations, Geo Denver 2000- ASCE Spec. Publication No, 97, Denver 2000, 33-18. (u9] Biedermana, B: Vergleichende Untersuclungen mit Sonden in Scblufl. Forschungsberichte aus Hadenmechnik und Grondhay, published hy Prot. Dt-Ing. E. Schulze, Heit 9, Anchen 1°84, [20] Relibers, D: Bestimmung der Tragtihigkeit und des Rammwiderstands von Ptablen und Soncierungen. Forschungsberiehte aus Bodenmechanik und Grundbau, published by Prot Dr-Ing. E, Schultze, No, 3, Avchen 1977, [1] Magnusson, O, Anderson, H. Aste, B, Holm, G The devability of siction piles based on penetration testing, Proc. 4th ICSMGE, Hamburg 199?, Vol 1, 589-S12. | Schumacher, LSpitzendruck bei Soncicrungen, FinfluljgrdBen ung Prognose. Bautechik 76 (1999), 568-80, 23] Deconrt, L.: A mote rational utilization of some old in situ tests, Pre. Ist IC on Site Character zation, Atlanta, 188, Vol 2, 913-918 [24] Buiter, £4, Caliendo, .A., Goble, G.G- Comparison of SPT energy measurements methods Proc Ist IC on Site Charneterization, Atlanta 1998, Vo. 2, 901-90. [25] Farrar As Summary of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) energy measurements experience Proc. Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vo, 2, 919-928. (25) Abou-Maur. H., Goble, G.G.:SPT dynamic analysisand messurements ASCE, Journ, Geoted- nical and Geoensiconmental Bngineering (23 (1997), 921-928, [29] Liwenegger, A, Kelley, § P: Standard Penetcation Tests with torque aieasucensents, Pros. Ist IC ‘on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol 2, 939-945 [28] Menzenbach, E- Die Anwendbarkeit von Sonden zur Prufung der Festigketseigenschaften des ‘Baugrundes Forschungsbericite des Landes Nord-Rhein-Westialen, No. 713, Westdevtscher Verlag, Kon 1959, [29] Schulze, £.: Diskussionsbeitza, Sth ICSMFE, Paris 1961, Vl. 3, 183-184, [0] Kickbusch, M, Siebenkorn, Gi: Det Standard Penetration Test (SPT) bbr 8 (1999), 2-7. [BI] Bares, LM.C, Pisa, CS: Estimation of maximum shear modulus of Brazlien tropical soil from Standard Penetration Test. Proc. ath ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vol 1, 2-20. [22] Kokusho, Z: Formulation of SPT N-value for gravelly soils with diferent particle gradings Proc. lath ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vol. 1, 523-526 133] Sanglerat, Gs The penetrometer and seil exploration. Interpretation of penetration dia- trams ~ theory and practice. Elsevier Publication Company, Amsterdam/LondoniNew York 1972 [38] Sonlze, E, Melzer, K-L-The determination ofthe density and the modulus of compressibility ‘of non-cohesive soils by sounding. Proc. 6th ICSMFE, Montreal 1965, Vol. 1, 384-358. [35] Teferra, A. Betiehuagen 2wischen Reibungswinkel, Lageruagsdicte und Sondierwiderstinden nichthindiger Boden mit verschiedener Kornverteslung Forschungsberichte aus Bodenmechamik tung Grundbau; published by Prof. Dr-Ing. E. Schultze, No.1, Aachen 1975 [36] Comtinko, RQ. Oliveira, JT-R. Geotechical characterization ofa Recife soft clay ~ Laborora tory and in-situ tests, Proc, 18th ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vl. 1, 69-72 [BT] Danziger. A.B, Pohano, CF, Danziger, B: CPTSPT correlations for some Brazilian residual soils Proc Ist ICon Site Characterization, Atlants L998, Vo. 2, 907-622, [8] Vianna da Fonsece, A, Fernades, MM, Cardoso, aS" Conclations between SPT, CPT, and Croos-Hole testing results over granite residual Sol of Porto. Proc. lath ICSMGE, Hamburg. 10997, Vo. 1, 619-622, [29] Michel .K, Branden, TL: Analysis and use of CPVin earthquake and environmental engines ling. Proc. IS IC on Site Characterzation, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 69-97, [40} Susukt, ¥, Sanemarsu, 7, Fokimatsn, K- Corcelation between SPT andseismic CPT. Proc. Ist IC fon Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 1375-1380, [1] Peuchen J: Comercial CPT profiling in sft rocks and hard soils Pros st TC on Site Character ination, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 1131-1137, I13 Geotechnical etd investigations 43 [2] Wai, [Link] Haupthodenarten in Berlin als Baugrund, Vorteage Bauprandtagung Berlin S21 Deuttche Gesellschaft fur Erd- und Grundbau, Esten 1978, [43] Poss, ML, Sits M-TH, Kolk, H.1-: Comparison of cone pressuremeter data with results from ‘other insitu and laboratory tests Proc. 4h ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vol. 1, 369-572 [44] Powell, 17M, Shields. CH. The cone pressuremeter ~ A study of its interpretation in Holmen snd, Poe. Mth ICSMGE, Hamurg 1997, Vol, 573-575. [45] Mayne, PW, Robertson, PK, Lunne, T: Clay history evaluated from seismic piezocone tests Proc. Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 1113-1118. [M6] Houlthy, GT, Ruck, RAM. Interpretation of signals fom an acoustic cone penetrometer. Proc Ist1C on Site Characterization, Aunt 1988, Vol, 2, 1075-1080, [47] Mensé, P: Acoustic emissions cone penetration testing (AB-CPT). Proc Ist ICon Site Charac. terization, Atlanta 1998, Vol 2, 1119-1124 [a] Burns, S£, Mayne, PW: Penetwometers for soil permeability and chemical detection. Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Report GIT-CEEGEO: 98-1, Atlanta 1998 [49] Campaneli. RG, Davies MP: Insite testing for ge0-environmental site characterization; ‘ine tailing example. Proc. Ith ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vol. 1, 43-46 [50] Campanella R.G., Kristiansen, H., Daniel, C, Davies, M.P: Site characterization of sil deposits using recent advances in piezocone technology. Proc. Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol 2, 95-1000. [SI] SRE: [Link] cone penotrometers, Brochure, Soil and Rock Engineering 5,.Ltd., Osaka 1999, [s2] Manure, M, Shrivesuva, A.K. Application ot RI-cone penetrometers in sandy foundations Proc, ath ICSMGE, Hamthurg 1997, Vol 1 57-590. [53] Miura, M., Shrivasiana, A.K, Shiba, T, Nobuyama, ML Insity measurements of wet density and natural water content with RI-cone penetsometers Proc. 5th Int. Symp, Field Measurements, Singapore 1999, 559-564 [S4] Raschke, SA. Hrycon, RD. Vision cone penetrometer for direct subsurface soil observation ASCE, Journ. Geotechnical and Geoen vironmental Engineering 123 (1997), 1074-1076. [55] Hryeim; RID, Raschke, $A. Insta sol characterization using vision cone penetrometer (Vis. CPT), Proc. Ist IC on Site Charseterization, Atlanta 1998, Vo. 2, 1081-1086 [56] Begemann, H.X.S: Improved method of determining resistance to adhesion by sounding through loose sleeve placed bend the cone. Proc. 3rd ICSMPE, Zarit 1953, Vol. 1, 213-217. [57] Begemann, ILK.S: The friction jacket cone as an aid in determining the soll profile Proc. 6th ICSMFE, Monweal 1965 Vol. 1, 17-21 [58] Berry, KUM, Olson, SM, Lamie, M Cone penetration testing in the Mid Mississippi River Valley: Ist ICon Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 983-987, [99] Fegazy, ¥A., Mayne, PW: Delineatine gecstratigraphy by cluster analysis of piczocone data, Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol 2, 1069-1074, [80] Zangh, Z, Tamay, MT: Statistical to fuzzy approach toward CPT sol classification. ASCE, Jouan, Geotechnical and Geoeavironmental Enginecring 125 (1999), 179-186, [ot] Metzen KZ: Uner Erfatwungen mit der Tegemann-Spitze. Bauingenier 43 (1968), 340- 392, [©] Roberson. PK, Wride, CE: Evaluating cycle liguitaction potential using cone penetration (Canadian Geetchnical Journal 35 (1998), 452-459. [62] Salgado, R, Boulanger, RW, Michell, LK : Lateral stress effects on CPT liguifaction resistance corelations. ASCE, Journ. Geotechaical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 123 (1997), 725- 75, [64] Zangh, 1: Aswessment of liquifaction potential using optimum seeking, ASCE, Journ, Geotecl nical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 124 (1998), 730-Ta8, [65] Konrad, LAM: Sand state from cone penetrometer ests: a framework considering grain erubing stress, Geotechnique 48 (1998), 201-215.4 ‘laus-Jcgen Melver and UM Bergdahl {6} Solgta Ry, Machel 1K, Jamiotowski. A Calibration chamber 7 effets on penetration resistance in sand. ASCE, Journ, Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 124 (1998), on ak (67] Tanaka, 1, Tanaka, M-Charateriaton of sandy scilsusing CPT and DMT. Soils and Founda tions 35 (1988). 35-68 [68] Kahl, H., Muis, H.: Uber die Untersuchung des Baugrundes mit einer Spitzendrucksonde. Bautechnit 29 1952), 81-88 [03] Mut, 2 Die Prag ccs Baugrondes und dec Bien, Handbuch der Werkstotprfons, oe Feaiion, Kaptel XXII, p 819-08 Springer Versa, Berlin Gottingen Heidelbers 1957 I70] Muks, Ht: Neve Erkenntise her die Tragshigkcit won Qaehgegrindeten Fundementen a Grofiversuchen und ine Bedeutung fr die Berocimune. Bawtechmk 46 (1989), 181-19 [71] Bergdaht, O, Onosson, E., Malmborg, B.S. Platigrundligning, AB Svensk Byzgtjinst, Stockholm 1395 [72] Meyerhol 6 General Report. Pros. EuropeanSymposiam on Penetration Testing Stackholm 1974 Vol 21, 41-48 (03) Mats, Wei, Ke Untersuchung von Grenztraytahigkei¢ und Setzangsverltendachgegrn dtr Eivefundsmente in unglelchormigen nichbindigem Roden. Miteilungen der Degen, No-26.1911 {741 Ms #1: On te elation ofthe bearing capacity factors the moduli of elasticity and he cone resistance Proc Europ [Link] Penetration Testing. Sickholm 1974, Vol 2-1 141-142 [03] #ids #07, Stark, 7D. Undeained dear tengt fom cone penetration est, Pro. et Com Sie horateriation, Atlanta 198, Vo. 2, 1021-100. (761 Bandi, P, Salo, R: Methods of pik design based on CPT and SPT resus. Proc. st Con Site Characieriration, Aan 198, Vl. 2, 987-97, [77] Bali a, Feller, RAC Pile opacity eximated from CPT data-Siz methods sompared. Proc {th ICSMGE, Hambury 197, Va 191-94 (79) Grundiagen zur Festegung von Sicherhsitsanforgerunge fr balche Anlagen, Beuth Verlag Dat (09] Zeck H Bougrondustersuchungen durch [Link] Prax No, 71. Ernst & Sohn, Beri’ Manchen 1969, {80] Hetenchin, KV: Methods tor reducing undrsined shear stength of sft clay. Secith Geot Inst, Report No.3 Linking 1977 (81) Bjerrum L.=Embankment on ott ground State-ot the art Report, Proc ASCE Cont, Purdue, Indiana 1972, Wo. 2, 1-58 [82] Byer, Probiens of soi mechanics and construction of soft lays State-oahe-art Report Pro. th ICSMHRE, Moscow 1973, Vol. 3, 111-193 [83] Norwegian Geo, nts Veiledning for utlorels o vngehorr Melding No.4, Oslo 1982, Rox 1 1989, {#4] Swedish Geotechnical Society Recommended standard fo eld shear est. SCF Report 2938, Velen Af, Stockoim 196 {85} Zaterks Kon, Sldk 1, Halas, Vy Karn, B Horst Vs Van es aes or very sotsiike inateraischarasterization, Pr Is ICon Site Characterization, Adan 998.2, [201-1208 {88} Bergdon,U, Broms. B, Muromadh, Weight sounding tx (WS): international reference testprovedure Pro. Tat Int Symposium on Penetration Testing, SOPTI, Otando 198, Vol. 1, 7m (87) I. Soc. it Mech. Geot. Eng: Pressimeter testing in onshore ground investigations, Report of the Technical Commitee on Ground Characterisation fom In Sta Testng TC 18, Pro at Con Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vo 2, 629-1468 (88) Kogler B Bavgrandprufuna ie Bokloch,Basingenicut 14 (1933), 266-20 (89) Koen F, Soins, Bavgrundund mere Ernst Sohn, Bern 1938, th Feiion 194. [0] Menard, Le Mesures i itu dee propites phyiqucr dex ok Ann. des Pont ct Chouseées 127 (095), 387-37713 Geotechnical field investigations us [91] Gibson, RE, Anderson, WF: In si measurement of sol properties withthe presssrementer. (Civ Engng. and Publ. Works Review 56 (1961), 615-618 [92] Goodman, R.£ : Measurement of rock deformability in boreholes. Proe. 10th Symposium Rock Mechanics, Austin 1968, University of Texas [93] Buguelia, F,Fezequel, JP, Shields, DLL: The pressuremeter and foundation engineering, Lab (Central des Fonts et Chaussees, Paris, and K-M. Hardy & Ass, Kanada 1978 [v4] Wrovk, CP, Hughes, IAf.O. An iosteumeat for the insita measurement of the properties of sot clays. Bub ICSMFE, Moscow 1973, Proc, Vol. 12, 487—494. [95] Reid, WAL, St John, H-D., Foffe, 8, Ridgen, WL The pust-in pressiometer. Proc. Symposium ‘on the pressiometer and its marine application. Parig 1982, 247-261 [96] Aarchem, 5. tn situ tests by Nat dilatometer, ASCE Journal of Geotechaical Engineering, No. 106, (1980), 299-321 [97] Schmertmann, J H.-Suggested method for performing the a dlatometertest. ASTM Subcom inter 1802. ASTM Geotechaical Testing Journal 9 (1986) 99-101, [98] Amer $, Buguelia, F, Canépa ¥, Prank, RNew design tales or the bearing capacity ofshallow foundations based on Ménard pressuremeter tests Proc. Ist 1C on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1988, Vol, 2, 727-733, [99] Bahar, R Prepenies of clays from Ménard prestusemeter test results Proc. Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 735-740, [100] Gambin, M.P, Jézequel, LF: A new approach to the Menard PMT parameters Prac. st [Con Site Characterization, Atlanta 199R, Vol 2, 777-182, [N01] Hughes, 16.0, Geni, H, We, M.L: Pressuremeter testing for drilling shafts in gravelly clays, roe Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 789-798, [102] Clarke, 8G, Allen, PG. Selt-boring pressuremeter for testing weak rock. Proc. 12th ICSMFE, Rio de knesro 1989, Vol 1,211-213 [103] Whiter, NJ, Howie, LA, Hughes, LM.O, Roberson, PX.: The development of a full dis placement pressuremetes. Special Tecncal Publication $50, American Seciety for Testing and ‘Materials Philadelphia 1986, 38-86 [104] Cunha, R:P: Quantification of the soil disturbance generated by seliboring pressuremeters Proc. Ist Con Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vo. 2, 753-758 [05] Hughes, EMO, Campanella, RG, Debasis Rs A simple understanding of the liquitsction potential of sands from sei-horing pressuremeter tests Proc. lath ICSMGE, Hamburg, 1997 VoL. 1515-518, [106] Mackin, SR, Yinsiri, 8, Soga, K-: Assessinent ofthe surength and stifnessof the London Clay Formation at Crown Wharf, Landon. Proc. Sth Int. Symp. Field Measurements, Singapore 1999, 565-570. [107] Pinto, CS, Abramento, M: Pressuremeter tess on gneissig residual soil ia Sse Paulo, Brazil Proc. lth ECSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vol. 1, 15-176 (08) Medio Vieira, MVC, Danziger, BAB, Almeida, MSS, Lopes, BCC: Dilatometer tests 2" the Sarapui soft clay site, Proc. 14th ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vo. I, 161-162, 109} Afutebdic, M.: Comparison of piezocone, Marchett: dilatometer and vane test results for the Danube-Sava canal. Prog. Mth ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vol. 1,361 563, [110] Redet C, Blechmann, D, Feferbaum, §: Flat dilatometer testing in Israel, Proc. 14th ICSMGE, Hamburg 1997, Vo. 1, 581-584, [111] Tanaka, A, Bower, G-E:Dilatometer tests “zation, Atlanta 1998, Vol 2, 877-882 [112] Torani, 8, Calabrese, To sta determination of o, by Hat dilatometer (DMT). Proc. 18t1C ‘on Site Charseteriation, Atlanta 1998, Vo. 2, 883-888 3] Biaree, I, Gambin, M, Gomes-Correa, A, Flavigny, E, Brangue, D: Using pressuremeter 10 ‘biain parameters to elastic-plastic madels for sand. Ist IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 1998, Vol. 2, 747-752, ‘Leda clay rust Proc, Ist IC on Site Character116 laus-Jurgen Melzer and UM Bergdahl (119) Fukugawa, R, Muro, 7, Hata, K., Hino, N: A new method to estimate the angle of inter- pal fetion using a pressuremeter test, It IC on Site Characterization, Atlanta 198, Vol. 2, m5. [115] Payjtvasn, ¥, Ovihera, K-Blastic modulus of weathered rock of Jurong Formation in Singapore ros. Sth Int, Symp Field Measurements, Singapore 1999, 183-185. 1126) Seeger K: Beitrag zur Ermittung des horontalen Bettungsmoduls von Boden durch Seiten Udruckversuche im Bohrloch, Baugrundinstitut Stattgart, 1980, Miteslung Nr. 13. [117] Forschungsgeselschatt fr das Stralenwesen: Anwendung radiometescher Verfahren zur Bes timmung der Dichte nd des Wastergehaltes Von Roden. Technische Prufvorscheft TP R-STR, Part B43, Koln 1909, (118) Shrivastava, A. Mimure, M: Radio-isotope cone penetrometers andthe assessment of foun dation improvement, Is IC on Site Characterization, Auta 1998, Vol. 1, 1-706, [119] Homitns. 2, Lorch, S, Mus, H.: Vergleich von Melergebnissen det Isotopensonde und dee Drucksonde. Berichte aus der Bauforschung, No. 37, T-14, 1968 [120] Niedermeyer,S, Rahn, W, Effenberger, K. Ingenieurgeophysikalische Untersuchungen fir Tan nelhauwerke an der Neubaustrecke Hannover-Wir7burg der Deutschen Bundesbahin, DGEG- Symposium Messtechnik im Grundbav, Machen 1993, 43-48 (1211 Lehmann, B: Einblick in unbekannte Tefen — Geophysikalische Erkundungsmethodea, Geospektrum 4, 1998, 11-15. [122] Gelbke, C, Raker, F., Swoboda, U: Hochaufosendle Baugruben-und Havgrunderkundung mit ombiaierten geophysikalischen Verfahron im zentralen Bereich Berlin. Vortrige Baugrund: lagung Stuttgart 1998, 167-177. Deutsche Gesolschsf far Geotechnik, Essen, [123] Lehmann, B, Falk, C, Dickmann, 1: Neve Entwicklungen zur Baugrunderkundung far die 4 Robe Eibtunnel -Rericht uber ein Forschungsvorhahen, Vortedge Baugrundtagung Stultgart 1908, 189-200. Devlsche Gesellschaft fur Geotechnik, Essen, [124] Knoset, :, Krummel, H,, Lange, G: Handbuchaur Eskundung des Untergrundes von Deponien und Altlasten, Vol. : Geophysik. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 1997, [128] Saks, 2, Korkealaakso, J: Application of geophysical methods in eavironmsental and municipal engineering. Research Report S05, ESPOO 1087, Technical Research Centre of Finland, (126) Sohiee, B-M., Tie, G- Neve Eotwicklungen in det Seismik 2ur Erkundung des oberflichen- paahen Untergrundes DGEG-Symposium Mestechnik im Erd- und Grundbau, Manchen 1993, 1519, [127] Gesellschaft fu Geophysikaltche Untersuchungen (GGL): Informationseaappe, Ek Karlsrube 2000. [128] Bomstaler, Sensitive monitoring of embankment dams “Repair and Upgrading of Dams” ‘Symposium, Stockholm 1996, [129] Domatideer, £, Huppert, F: Thermische Leckorlung an Trogbauten mit tiefiegenden Soblen. Vortrage Baugrundtogung Stutigsrt 1998, 179-187. Deutsche Gesellchatt fur Geotechnik, Essen tion 2a, 8 Standards ASTM D 1586-84: Standard test method for penetration test and split barrel sempling of soils Amer iean Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia 192. ASTM Dais33-86: Standatd test method for sitess wave energy measurements for dynamic penetsom- ter testing systenss. American Society for Testing and Matetials, Philadelphia 186, ASTM D 4719-04 Standard test method fir pressucemeter testing insole American Society for Test ing and Materials, Philadelphia 199413 Geotechnical field investigations "17 [BS 1377: Par. 9: British standard methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes Part 9: Tn situ {ests British Standards Insitution, London 1990, DIN 1054: Baugrund ~ Sicherheitsnacheise im Erd+ und Grundbau. Draft, 2000, DINEN 1536: AustUbrung von besonderen geotechaischen Arbeiten (Speciahifhau) -Bohrptahle, 2000, DIN 4020: Geotechnische Untersuchungen fur bautechaische Zwecke; einscl. Beiblatt ts Anwen- dungsbilfen, Eliuterungen, 1990 (New edition in preparation), DDIN 4021: Baugrund - AufschluS durch Schurfe und Bohrungen sowie Entnahme von Rodenprobea, 1994 (New edition in preparation) DIN 4022-1: Baugrund und Grund wasser ~ Benennen und Beschreiben von Boden und Fels Scie ‘eaverveichnis far Botrungen ohne ducchgehendle Gewinnung von gekersten Proben im Boden und Fels, 1987 DIN 4022.2; Baugrund und Grundwasser ~ Benennen und Beschreiben von Boden und Fels; Schicht- ‘eaverveichnis far Bohrungen im Fels (Fesigestein), 1981 DIN 4022.3; Baugrund und Grundwasser ~ Benennea und Beschreiben voo Boden wad Fels; Schieht ‘eaverveichnis fir Bohrungen mil durchgehender Gewinnung wor gekeraten Protea im Boden (Lack ergestein), 1982, DIN 4023: Baugrund — und Wasserbohrungen; Zeicinerische Darstellung der Ergebnisse, 1984 DIN4030- Beurtelung betonangreitender Wasser, Boden und Case (2 Teil, 1991 DIN 4094: Baugrund ~ Erkundung dureh Sondieruagen, einsthl, Beiblatt L; Anweudungshilen, Evklarungen, 1990, [DIN 4094-1: Bauprund ~Felduntersuchungen, Teil: Drucksondierungen, Draft. 2001, DIN 4004-2: Baugrund ~Fehlumtersuchungen, Teil 2: Bohelochrammsondierung, Draft,2002 DDI 40943: Baugrund ~ Felduntersuchungen. Teil 3 Rammsondierungea. Draft, 201 DIN 4004-4: Bausrund ~ Feitunterruchungen, Til 4 Fligelscherversuche. Draft, 2001. DIN 4004-5: Baugrund — Feldumtersuchuagen, Teil 5: BobslochautWweitungsversuche, 2001 ng, 1980. DIN 18125 2: Baugrund ~ Untersuchung von Bodenproben, Bestimmung der Diehte des Bodeas, Part 2: Feliversucte 1999, DIN 18196: Erd- und Grundbay~ Bodenklassfvierung fr hautechnische Zwecke, 1988. EN 1997-1: Furocode 7, Geotechnical Design —Part I: General Rules (inpreparation for 2002,German edition: DINEN 1997-1) DIN 4096: Baugrund ~ Plogelsondierung: Mate des Gerites, Arbeitsweise, Auswert ENV 1997-2: Euroede 7, Geotechnical Design ~ Part 2: Design Assisted by Laboratory Testing. 1999 (German evition: DIN V ENV 1997-2) ENV 1997-4: Eurovode 7, Geotechnical Design ~Part 3: Design Assisted by Field Testing, 1999 (German evition: DIN ENV 1997-3), Fascicule 62 Régles sur techniques de conception et de caleul des foundation des ouvrages du genie ‘vi, Fascivule 62 Tiue V, 1993. Ministéze de Equipment, du Logement et des Transport, Paris NF P94-110: Essai pressiometrigue Ménard, AFNOR, Parisla Defense, 1998,1.4 Properties of soils and rocks and their laboratory determination Paul von Sous and Jan Bohéé 1 Soils and rocks ~ origins and basic terms In the civil engincering context, soil means the sedimentary material of the upper part of the Barth's crust, which is relatively loose, not strongly cemented or highly compressed. Generally, soil ean be worked without drilling or blasting Rock, on the other hand, is the hard, rigid deposit with strongly cemented constituents. is propertivs are governed by the cementation, and by any joint system (discontinuities), along which the cohesive effect of cementation would be lost. Products due to the weathering of solid rocks that have not been transported are called residual soils. If transported by wind, water or ice, they form deposits (sediments). In organic soils, along wita the mineral constituents, remnants of organic matter are present, Solid rocks are classified according to their mode of formation into three main cate. zories: jeneous rocks (c.g. granite) derived from molten material, sedimentary rocks (c.g sandstone) formed by sediments settling in water, and metamorphic rocks formed by the e-crystallization of gncousor sedimentary rocks duc to high pressure and/or temperature, ‘The soil and rock forming processes, expressed in the eycle of weathering — transport ~ deposition and rock-forming, can be interrupted or renewed at any stage. Differences in the origins and histories of soils and rocks therefore result, which can explain the vast diversity and hetcrogencity of their geotechnical properties. Soil and/or rock within the influenee zone of structural loading i Frequently called subsoil, despite different usage of the term in the pedology. Besides this role of supporting struc ‘ures, soil or rock often represent building matcrials when the structure is constructed of them, 2 Properties of soils 24 Soil layers Soils deposited under constant conditions form practically continuous homogeneous strata — layers. In engineering practice, heir properlics may be considered constant within individual layers. However, even in apparently homogeneous layers the properties of soils change from point to point, The extent of the fluctuation depends on the origin and the nature of the property in question: moraines tansported by ice are less homogeneous than clays deposited in stationary water and, for example, the seatter in density of the solid particles in a given soil is very much smaller than the variability of its coefficient of permeability120 Paul von Soos and Jan Bohat Inhomogeneity of soils becomes obvious only alter studying a larger number of sci samples, This inhomogeneity stems either from a random variation of soil properties, oo from a systematic one which depends on direction, or from the combination of the two. ‘A good representation of the variation of soil properties can be obtained by sounding (see Chapter 1.3). Statistically satisfactory descriptions of the properties may require a large number of samples. However, lor economic reasons the intervalol variations often determined only for basic parameters that can be easily obtained (water content, particle size distribution, Atterberg limits), Established correlaiions then allow us olimit the determination of more costly parameters to statistically significant intervals. Generally, expertise is required for effective choice of samples. Moreover, the results should be critically examined (0 find whether sampling or testing could cause any systematic or random errors. Fora reliable assessment of the characteristic values for ground parameters used in design, all aspects of ground conditions should be thoroughly investigated (DIN 4020 [25, 47). 22. Soil samples In German practice, distinction is made between “individual samples” (elements cut from the soil, for example wadisiurhed samples), samples taken, for example. from the face of ‘an excavation and linally samples procured alter the soil was excavated, for example from a dump. ‘The sampke to be tested in the laboratory must satisty the following criteria: 1. The properties investigated must be changed as little as possible (see also Chapter 1.3). Fulfilling this requirement depends on the means of sampling, handling and transporting, storing and processing in the laboratory, as well as on the nature of the particular soi. Gravel without fines, for example, can hardly be sampled successfully for density testing. Where there isany doubt about the applicability of lahoratory testing for a particular prop- erty (e. g., permeability, compressibility etc.) supplementary field investigation should be carried out (Chapter 1.3). 2. The mass and dimensions of samples to be tested in the laboratory must be sufficient for all necessary testing, ‘The required mass and dimensions of samples depend on the maximum grain size and the size of the apparatus, or on specific recommendations (Table 1). Some properties can exhibit anisotropy (e.g. permeability. compressibility stiffness and strength) and testing, ‘of oriented specimens may therefore be required (c.g. setting up specimens perpendicular to the direction of sampling). “Testing procedures may change soil properties, so material which has been used for an analysis, e.g. for determining the water content, may not be appropriate for further testing, for say, particle size distrihution, The size of the samples should therefore correspond to ‘the sum of all the required specimens. 23 Laboratory investigation — performing and evaluating Inthe laboratory, physical properties (e.g. grain size) or conventional characteristics (e.¢ Atterberg limits) are determined. To guarantee compara results, unification of testing procedures and of dataevaluationis necessary. In Germany, standardizationisrepresented by the DIN Codes of Pracice (DIN I8121 to DIN 18137 [46a] by the regulations ofthe14 Properties of soils and rocks andl their laboratory determination 121 Road Research Society (TPBE - StB (59, b]), by recommendations of the German Soci- ety for Geotechnies (DGGT, [53aq}). ete. Internationally, the most common references are the documents by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM [3-5)) and the American Ascociation of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, (1), ‘or British Standards (BS 1377 (25, 26). Recommendations for laboratory testing have also been produced within the International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE) by different Technical Committees of the Society (e.g. the doc- uument by the regional European Technical Committee ETCS issued in 1998 [83]) and by the International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM)} Despite the codification of testing techniques and equipment, there is generally a scatter of the results. Repeasabitty ofthe results Obtained by a single operator is generally better than comparability of the results from dillerent laboratories. An experimental determi nation of the variation by comparative studies may involve a further error, induced by the distribution of the samples to individual laboratories, portioning/subdividing of the samplescte Variations due to individual testing techniques (sce column ¢ in Table 1) are markedly smaller than the variations exhibited by natural soils in sta (coluran fin Table 1). Never- theless, they should still be considered in data evaluation and quality control [144], ‘Testing variations result in random errors, while systematic errors may be related to the testing procedure and can be caused, for example, by wal Iriction, or by the influence ‘of end platens. Ifthe testing technique cannot be improved, systematic errors should be taken into account in evaluating the tests (See also EN 1997-1,2.43) 24 Soil properties and laboratory testing Soils consis of solid particles nd voids ~ pores ~ filled by liquid (water) andor gas (ait), forming two-phase ot three-phase systems. Some soil properties and characteristics either depend only on the nature of the solid particles (c.. particle size distribution, mincral composition, density of solid partic shape and roughness of particles and limit densities) or express some interaction between the solid and liquid phases (c.g, Atterberg limits, water absorption, or water content compaction relationships). For the testing of these properties, the only sampling require- ‘ment is to preserve the shape of particles and their size distribution (sample quaticy 4 according t6 DIN 4021, see Chapter 1.3) Other properties and characteristics depend on the proportion of solids in the total volume ofthe soil, and also party on the arrangement of pastiles (fabric) and the proportion of the Fiquid and gascous phases (c-g- density, water and ai permeability, eapilarity swelling pressure or slake-durability). Semple quality 2is required to test them. Stress-strain relations and strength properties depend on the fabric and on the forces, interacting between the solid particles. They can be measured only approximately, even with sample quality J, sine all sampling cause changes in stresses. ‘The tests for particle size distribution, Atterberg limits and organic content are called classification ests. The water content together with the consistency limits, or the current density with the maximum and minimum limit densities, represent the tests identifying the soil stave. An overview of the typical characteristics of different types of soils is given in Table 2.122 Paul von Soos and Jan Boldt ‘Table 4 List of important laboratory texts on sails 2 b Le a tet Miaican ase 1 Beaigs | — Chen oR Fargas | Sal Gad 1 | Sieving = 4 Grading curve | enn 2 {samen | 08 7 angie (ser 7] Sp) Wa fap * Time Si) oie poor fa ve oo 5 |ewtonae iO got wound le 7 va 6 [Density em? 4onem? [ >2200em* 2 2,04; With}: ny eS, 1] mpi T0958 ee sa mene 2 man [ars a, density A 9 | Aaerberg: 200g = = ef WL We I 1 ise - - 7 se Weim | Ata ase 7 ta — eens pee Peper pom eet Sony [Sa | Be | Bee | Dae Sasi | 30, | moor | % Mneiny [Sa | Blew | Sida © [Gapion— Sosigens | Sea" |S omew? | 4 ror 1s (Procter «3 w I2ke | 71 12ke| 6 wo OK ¢ a Man a 1 16 | Oxdowee Sines e Kine] Spine | 1 | soho Enon ee some Span? Bae we an i ete, 28 17 [mated [Seine | ony or i =e erates, |Site? | “eae a BONE cmt 8h aa20) Bastin | teasers | St Stes rt Shee 1000em* | 1000 em? won | 4 BEE ater Lamb {L07) Tater Tedernang [151.2 fee ASTM, FF ater"Ringaatystn Ronenungszeslischat fr das Stratenesen*, Kain14 Properties of sls and rocks and ther lboratory determination 123 ba prvoaie tert ce (tu fat Ca Teni sige id s2e0@, aren”) vay | pivisia Ziti on wy Bio | BINT HEE a 13%) te teen] yt ee ive 02 w | _ tay | mvs ce Mig | Ron mareci3% «] OTe a Te 2 aay | DIN RE mali fl mB T w: 10 to 22% Iday DIN 18121 pees mae @ ue Tovan| ow wm mse B 13 ®) I Pant 1 wears | Bie _ : pe Tous TN Cs - am [Toitis | one _ | Te 3 days = | ae : | 1 3days | DIN 18127 Bein’ att : fees tase 0 [ - TE] ets a Preroa | vavseos = cae BG Rage a EE oot | qe ise Tay BT | ‘Sand, Sitt Clay: D-Test tan@': 2% (1)[ tang’ coarse | 2t0 14days | DIN 18137 SB wy eae Basan me corre $15 EE sand om 1] ea, DoTaas | DIN aT me a sag Be Pans ‘The vale corresponds patil etained on sieve A ln Loner nt sal class OL: upper in so cass OW.124 Paul von Soos and Jan Bohst “able 2, Soil charactexsties 7 ¥ . Sol designation Grvep | Grading | Uniformity | anerbor iis of . | Sith "= | etic | esc wm pint Tsi96 -<0.06) < 20 i ‘om | mm i b | % 1 | Grmcioalerm or 5 2 | Gapel spay awa fesfem> om f= - [- Scihamall smountof Free 109 ¥ [rv sandy cer] # =o)» [mm |e Sats a liy 5) x | as | ss Somat t | fo ding shleton 4 |Gimel, andy sat wit'ines | GOLGT | 20 /<@| 100 | 2% | i] < ‘vic sekton 2 soo | 50) 38 | 0 3 [Suited “PE Pes jam] ae) norm 3 Seanead} SE) <5) mo] 12] — | | : 6 | san, wett grates swH f] ete 7 [etd etn 8 | | sts San with ines saat | alse, so | |e] « Siting elton a 3m| wo | % | 0 | 0 9 | Silt of tow plasticity [UL |= so) 80 s as | 4 4 4 | o | is |e ln | UM,UA T= 80 | 100 s 3 | a | 7 cr pate os | w|i | it [Clayoflowolstcy > —-TES« sO} Iw | 6 | as] is | 7 { » | s| 2 lw | Clay of ermedine m™ {ssi [ s | #| «| platy pe |e | | ss [cay etna atcy or | o [sls is 14 Sioa. oor [>a mls) as | | panic Pee | ms |e 15 [Pew [Link] - |- 16 /Mod a ee I a0 | a | 1m ‘Note The suis designated in colum (a) should Be interpret more propery than jot according to the group symbols In column (Thai iit are define in erm ofthe parameters given a column (e)-114 Properties of soils and rocks und thet Isboratory determination 125 ‘ ° ' soa Tawa a enum | Ee, "Sis arena race” | Seach coe tte at a ti rl vw | ow | me Boreal S)"| fe pe fs | & . loom] me | | em wef | a femal foal ate eat ose yap ay PP tos] toe | S| om | oe Bl 3s ao | us |e} zn a) wn for fy [asp te po |B BE Sp Tae [ak Bo BT its aia us| sf 20 7 2 7 wo [er | w [son pa] uot mous | of ae | 2 Tse Pe Pe Ps poe ees ws | asf w 7 1 Toa fy, | fom [2 | to 130 6 los 400 | 07 | 35 0.008 | 30 | 1.407 | ! oS 2| 1s) 130 O75 o [2] - ag |e | 38 [82 [o [R] : as[ ae ae Pan], Te] no i] [88 [oa]: ino ig 7 mw Tew] pal te | 8 fe [88 fo [al tas | is 10] ose] Pat [am Bo | s ci | 38 [3 [+ [a7 30 | 30 3) | 09 | yy a [eos ae RP se LB Lak | sR Loe aaa os | ok @ | ow |, | foo wl raed Sats ast ae om |, fas tom ms | th) ++] 3 [ooh 9s | | oa | om to 120 14 15 ET aso | ++ 0.015, as [om a] Tam 1 ,, [0 feos wo | HL 8 [OR foe 18 [ees 70 | a a |e [im [ey4] 2 fou ao | 3 5 | os [ie a ss | @ 7 {sf 100 [44] 1 foas Bs Bl oa [a [ee oa | woo] - = 7 P4071, | |ons sf] of 3] ip T+ [less 2s || - - 4] um | cpa ams so | 0 wo | 030 [***| 26 | o008 "The exo linet In ean (6 indicat Upper and! lower value forthe characterises of the gals in colaenn) Further, values in ar ae oly valid fr columas Baked under a haadliae later nih as for example “The values ven in} (2) abd) depend only on the physical behaviour ofthe solid pails. “The value inthe her calunas depend also onthe consteny inde I ron the reaive deity hy.126 Paul von Soos and Jan Bohé® 3. Properties of rocks [Link] muss composed of intact blocks of rock material divided by joint. Consequently the permeability, stress-strain behaviour [Link] of rocks are governed by the nature, history, geometry and frequency of joints as well as by any filling material ‘The geometrical and physical properties of joints and ther influence on the properties of the rock have usually to be determined in situ since the effective volumes to be tested are generally very large, typically many eubie metres Only in the case of relatively soft, thin-bedded o fissured sedimentary rocks, core samples of adequate dimensions can be sufficiently representative. Rock samples [Link] the laboratory ean gencrally yield only properties ofthe rock material itself, which are independent ofthe joints. and cannot give the properties of the rock mass. However, the roughness of the joints and the propertis of the filling material can be determined in the laboratory In rocks, the bonds between particles arc so strong that splitting them into individual particles is impossible in the laboratory. Therefore, texture and structure are examined on joints and density, permeability, strain and strength properties on the most intact cores possible “The anisotropy of rock is usually even more important than in soils. Morcover, the axes of anisotropy of the roek material and of the rock mass do not have to coincide. Recommendations for the laboratory testing of rocks were published by the German ational Society of ISRM (“Deutsche Gesellschaft fir Geotechrik”) 4 Characteristics and properties of solid soil particles 4.1 Particle size distribution Particle size distribution is one of the most important physical characteristics of sol. It expresses the percentage by mass of individual size ranges. Many geotechaical properties are closely related to particle size, which is therefore a convenient indicator of the prob- able soil behaviour, and serves as « main classification attribute for soil description and classification (See Sections 11.1 and 11.2). The size of sol particles varies roughly from (0.0001 to200 mm. Table shows the individual partice sizeclasses usedin the geotechnical description and classification of si Silt, sand and gravel sized particles are further subdivided into the subclasses of Ane, tum and coarse (sce aso Fig. 3). Although the divisions betwecn individual elasses, ‘Table 3. Detnition of particle sie proups (Grain size range ‘Name Smaller than 000mm Clay: pom 19 06smm D063 t= 20 mm Sand 20 | 63mm Gravel 630 9 200mm Cables, greater than 200mm ‘Boulders = Fig. 1. Dettnitinn of particle size é14 Properties of soils and rocks and ther laboratory determination 127 ‘especially between sand, sit and clay, are rather arbitrary, they have proved useful for ‘engineering purposes. In practice, the term “clay” may be used to express either mineral- ‘ogy oF particle siz, or type of sol, which may sometimes be Confusing Clay, silt and sand fractions can be represented ay a single point in a triangle diagram (Fig. 2), A similar diagram may be used for fines (<().063 mm), sand and gravel, ie. all particles smaller than 63 mm. ‘The distribution of clay, silt, sand and gravelscobble fractions can altern: expressed by the so called grain size distribution index, in which the percent individual fractions is rounded to tens and then stated, starting with the clay fraction. For example, the soil in Fig. 2, with 33% of clay particles, 32 % of silt and 15 % of sand would have the grain size distribution index 3520. Particle sires over 0.06 mm are determined by sicving, the fines, smaller than 0.06 mm, are subdivided by sedimentation (DIN 18123 [d6e]; ISSMGE., 1998 [83}: AASHTO 88 [1]; BS1377 [26], ASTM D422, etc.) 002 f 056300" sit Fig. 2, Representation of partite size classes ig. 3, Particle size distribution curves inthe triangle diagram, Example: Sand 15% Sit 52% Cay 33% 4.1.1 Sioving In sieving, particle size classes are separated by the usc of sieves constructed of metal ‘wire cloth or of perforated metal plate in accordance with an appropriate standard (c.g, DIN 4187), An adequate number of sieves shouldbe wed to gain a continuous grading Curve in the range from 0.063 to 125 mum. The individual particle size classes are classi by the aperture of the last siove passed, Therefore, because of the tolerance of the sieve aperture and the large variety of shapes of particle, the size intervals determined are nominal values rather than strict physical dimensions of the particles (Hg. 1). The resulis are plotted as cumulative percentages of the dry weight passing each sieve against particle size, asa semi-logarithmie grading curve. A steep portion ofthe grading curve indicates the prevalence of the corresponding interval of particlesize, while a lat part shows a lack of particles, The shape of agradingcurve can be:128 Paul von Soos and Jan Bohse quantified using its three characteristic points Dyo, Dap and Dgy, defined as the maximum size ofthe smallest 10 %, 30 % and 60% of the sample. Both uniformity coefficient Cy Déo/Dig and coefficient of curvatare (ot coefficient of gradation) Cz = Diq/ Da x Dis) reflect the shape of the grading curve, Cy = Ce = I represents « single-sized soil. Cy <5 indicates e uniform (poorly yraded) soil,5 < Cy = 158 non-uniform soil and Cy > 15 a strongly non-uniform sol, Cz expresses the relative position ofthe characteristic points A small value indicates that Do lies close to Djp, and a high value that Dy lies close to Dep. Most well graded soils have a C- in the range from 0.5 to 2 In preparing specimens for sieving, particles smaller than 0.06 mm (i-e. nes) should be washed (the so called wet method). Specimens without fines can however be subjected to ‘oven drying at 105°C prior to sieving. According vo the maximum particle size, epresen- tative specimens can he prepared from samples by riffing or quattering. The minimum dry masses required for sieving are given in Tig. 4 3 i Fig. 4 Recommended sample mass with respect to particle size ww ne 538 xyes parce darter Glare 12 Baw lg ‘minimum samp mss ms 4.12 Sedimentation ‘The procedure for sedimentation is based on Stoke's law, which states that in a suspen- sion (Soil-water in this case) the larger particles sink more quickly than the small ones. Stoke's law assumes the particles to be spherical. The diameter of the spheres that settle 4 particular distance in & measured time interval may then be obtained. The soil-water suspension is placed in a glass eylinder and at @ number of suitable time intervals the density of the suspension is measured at a reference dept using a hydrometer (Fix, 5). Corresponding equivalent diameters of spheres that would ink at the same velocity a8 the soil particles are then computed from Stoke's law. Using equivalent diameters as particle sizes. a grading curve of fines can be drawn [34] This method is applicable for particles from 0,001 mm to about 0.100 mm, using 20 to 50g of soil in I Titre of water, A dispersing agent is added to the suspension fo prevent flocculation, Haas [68] has suggested the use of less than 20 g of soil to keep flocculation under control and to measure the density of the suspension by the uplift force acting on the hydrometer to avoid errors connected with the hydrometer readings. 4.13 Sieving and sedimentation Soils composed of a substantial fraction of both fine and eoarse particles are analysed by a combination of sieving and sedimentation, The fraction of particles larger than 0.125 mmis1.4 Properties of soils and cocks and their laboratory determination 129 Fig. 6, Density bottle Bouyoucow/Casagrande obtained by washingand then sieved separately, while fines arc subjected toa hydrometer analysis. The resultsare then presented none graph. Ifa discontinuity arises in combining the data, priority is given to the results ofthe sieving [83] Britle particles (c-g,of residual sols) are susceptible to breakage by an intense mechan ieal ueatment during specimen preparation. Fines produced by abrasion of the particles may also distort the results of the analysis. The time required for separation of fines from coarse-grained particles for hydromcter analysis may be redueed by using the sedimentation technique after Haas and by using small amounts of fines (TPBF-StB Part B 52 (596)). 42 Density of solid particles ‘The density of solid particles p, is their mass My divided by their volume Vsip, = Mu/Vs Soil particles sometimes contain enclosed voids which are included in the volume Vz Therefore an apparent density of solid particles is determined, The standard procedure for determination of density makes use of the density bottle (pycnometcr) to determine the volume of the soil specimen by the water displacement method (Fig. 6; DIN 18124 (46f]). With particles up to 4mm, about 30g of dry mass of soil is placed into the density bottle. Distilled water is added and the content de-aired, From the measured masses and the known density of water, p, is calculated, For soils with, constituents that react with water (e.g., anhydrite, organic soils), different control liquid may be used, for example richlorethylen, kerosene, toluene ete To inercase the accuracy of measuring particle density on larger specimens in pycnometers, Haas’s or Neuber’s methods can be used (TPBF-StB Part B3.2 [59a] and DIN 18124 [461], respectively). In the Newber method the dry specimen is de-aired before de-aired water is added in the pycnometer. The procedure has proved effective especially in testing rocks. ‘Typical values of particle density, which depends primarily on mineralogy, are given in Table 4130 Paul von Soos and Jan Bobie Table 4 Particle density ofsome minerals in Mem 3 (gem) Gypsum 2.32 Montmorilionite — 2.75-2.78 Feldspar 255 Mica 28.20 Kaolinite 2.64 Dolomite 25-295 Quartz 265 Biotite 28-32 Nefeldipar 262-2.76 Amphibole Bika Cakite 2.72, Barite 48 Mite 200-280 Magnesite suv 4.3 Mineralogical composition of soits Mineralogy is a decisive factor controlling the size and shape of the soil particles the soil- water interactions and the mechanical behaviour of sols (plasticity, fluid conductivity compression, strength). It is governed mainly by the origin of the particular soil. Two main groups of soils can be distinguished: coarse-grained soils consisting primarily of rnon-clay particles, and fine-grained soils composed of a substantial proportion of clay minerals. Coarse-grained soils originate from mechanical weathering, They are therefore primarily formed by reck-forming minerals, for example quartz, feldspar, mica, calcite and dolomite and are mostly of bulky shape. Clay-sized particles of fine-grained soils are primarily composed of clay minerals which are the products of chemical weathering of rocks. Clay particles are platy, some are needle-shuped or tubular. Dominant clay minerals are hydrous aluminum silicates, whose structure is constructed from two simple structural units the silicon tetrahedron and the aluminium octahedron. Individual clay mineral groups, €.g. kaolinite, halloysite, montmorillonite, ilite. chlorite etc, are formed by sheets orchains ofthe basic structural unitsand are characterizedby the ‘manner in which two successive (v0- or three-sheet layers are stacked and held tozether [113], In Table 5 for example it ean be seen that montmorillonite does not exhibit a constant distance between layers, which enables water to enter the structure and cause swelling. In clay minerals, some of the tetrahedral and octahedral positions are occupied by other cations than those in the ideal mineral structure, For example silicon can he replaced by aluminium, aluminium by magnesium, and magnesium by iron, Asa result of this socalled isomorphous substitution the clay particles obtain a net negative charge.‘To maintain elee- trical neutrality, other cations, most of which are exchangeable cations, e.g, Na, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, are attracted and kept within the particles (113). The quantity of exchangeable cations, cation exchange capacity, of typical clay mineralsis given in Table 5 in milliequivalents per 100g of dry clay. The exchange capacity and the nature of exchangeable cations strongly influences the engineering properties of clay minerals, ‘The bulky particles of coarse-grained soils can be distinguished with the use of a mageity. ing glass or an optical microscope. For studying clay particles and their mineralogy, X-ray diffraction analysis, thermal analysis (DTA ), optical (polarizing) and electron microscopy can be used, The X-ray dlfraction method makes use ofthe typical dfferencesin the angles of reflection of different crystals. The X- ray diffraction is particularly well suited forthe identification of elay minerals The common non-clay minerals of soils are also detectable114 Properties of soils and rocks and their laboratory determination 131 Table & Structure of clay minerals ‘Saucurl model ‘Symbol ofthe sheet rn ne EF) cramonsoe ores No Sa mmm © APY or Mg?* unica] Sana | om Yeaigegune| ovwe | Sow a ‘Kaatnte | FEA | oor song] 30 18 | phe FA amen Feb, | oom | swat | am | aw emo i a wow vag, | =%_— | co | mee fonance] mais ‘momlonite| 95S tom | very week Eas soe |X | veytmng | so 0 | it Saat [et art by this method. DTA is based on the phenomenon that endothermic and exothermic reac- tions are triggered at different temperatures, and that individual minerals exhibit typical characteristic thermograms. The carves obtained in the analysis arc compared with those for known material so that the soil composition can be determined [113].132 Paul von Soos and fan Bohs 44° Shape and roughness of particles ‘The shape of soil particles describes their geometric form, which reflects their origin, history and internal latice structure. The form varies widely and in particles precipitated by organisms may be exceedingly complex. The measure of particle shape is sphericity, ‘defining the degree (o whieh particle approximates the shape of asphere (see, e.g. [62]. ‘However, for engineering purposes the following shapes of particles may be distinguished spherical, semispherical prismatic flat tubular or needle-shaped and platy (Fig 7). According (0 their roundness, particles can be very angular, angular, subangular, sub- rounded, rounded, and well rounded (Fig. 8). Roundness is related t© the sharpness of curvature of the edges and comers, Therefore, roundness may be viewed as a measure of the macroscopic roughness of particles, Roundness is geometrically independent of sphericity: particles of both high and low sphericity can exhibit any class of roundness On the micro-scale, roundness can be studied by seanning electron microscope. In coarse-grained soils, bulky particles prevail. Their shape and roundness depend on the parent rock and on the history of weathering and transport. The more transportation has ‘occurred the higher roundingof the edges and breaking of asperities However, weathering that can follow may incrcase the roughness again. With fine-grained soils the shape of particles is controlled by the mineralogy. Most clay minerals are platy, halloysitisneedle~ shaped, and quartz, calcite and dolomite are bulky to prismatic (see Section 4.3). “The shape of particles influences soil fabric and anisotropy and their roundness (rough- ness) affects siress-strain behaviour and strength, ‘The roughness of grains in a sand can be determined from the exit velocity when poured through a nazzle. Roughness coefficient + is computed from the comparison of the exit times of the investigated sand and of a reference material. For the reference material (crushed quartzite) = 1.0, for ideally smooth spheres r = 0. Correlations have been suggested between r and shear strength and stiffness ((88, 89]; sce Section 10), E2279 28889 ig, 7. Shape of particles ig. 8. Roundness of particles I. spherical, 2. semispherical, 3. prismati, 1. very angular, 2. angular, 3. subangular, 4. fat, 5. tubular, needle-shaped, 6. pl 4 subrounded, 5 rounded well rounded 4S Specific surface ‘The specificsurface As is the arca ofa particle expressed with respect to 1 gof its dry mass A_ a A= my Cope where shape factor « becomes = for bulky grains (e. g. quartz) « ~ for platy particles up to depth’diameter ratio 0.1 (e.g. kaolinite, illite) a =24 ~ for platy particles up to depth‘diameter ratio 0.01 (e.g, montmorillonite) a = 2041.4 Properties of soils and rocks and their laboratory determina 133 ‘ona, oo” gr te ; Ino Ginn > tun Mn SEPT iat om mee NT i Fig. 9. Particle sive and spect surface of oon 0) 81 1 BD BOOmMIg — some minerals. oe Dependence of the specific surface of some common minerals on the particle diameter is shown in Fig. 9 The specific surface obviously increases with reducing the particle size, since the vol- lume and area are proportional to the particle diameter cubed and squared, respectively: Therefore, as the soil solids dimensions are decreased, the proportion of surface arca to weight hecomes larger. The same applies for bonds, unbalanced surface electrical forces. ete. Thus specific behaviour and properties studied by colloidal and surface chemistry become more pronounced with smaller clay particles. ‘The amount of water that can be adsorbed by the surface of minerals i also proportional to surface area. In the luhoratory, specific surface area can be estimated by the amount of, ¢.g., ethylene alycol or glycerol, adsorbed on the clay surface [113]. 46 Organic content Even 2 small admixture of organic matter can bind a substantial amount of water into the soil, increasing porosity and influencing deformation and strength properties. Organie matter contentin soils isresponsible for high plasticity and shrinkage, high compressibility, ow permeability and low strength, Organic content is very well determined by treating the soil with hydrogen peroxide solution. The most common laboratory method determines the loss on igition of mass of an oven-dried specimen at 550°C (DIN 18128 [46j}; 450°C according to AASHTO T267- 86 [1]. The results are expressed as a percentage of the dry original mass ofthe specimen. They may easily be distorted however by the additional loss of water bound by clay minerals and by other chemical reactions, Wei combustion can be used for organic carbon content determination, especially for soils with the humus-like easily oxidized organic material other than fresh plant and similar undecayed vegetative matter (AASHTOT194 87 [1, 132).134 ‘Paul von Soos and Jan Bohs 4.7 Carbonate content Carbonate minerals, calcite and dolomite, can be present in soils in the form of part: cles, shells, precipitates and seeregations. According to the form of occurence, they can ‘markedly influence plasticity, compressibility, strength, collapsible behaviour ete. The carbonate content can be indicated qualitatively by treating the soil with dilute hydrochloric acid (HCI), which results in strong effervescence if carbonates are present (DIN 4022-1 (48). For quantitative analysis, Scheibler's device can be used (Fig. 10), in which the amount of carbon dioxide produced during the testis measured, Since the reaction of dolomite to His delayed in comparison to the reaction of calcite, the carbonate content of the two constituent parts can be approximately distinguished in the test (DIN 18129 [46k]}. ‘ing ‘a > ig. 10, Apparatus for carbonate content ater Scheibler ) initial water level ) water level after CO2 development faa poss ©) water level at volume reading, 5 Characteristics and properties of soil aggregates 5. Fabric of soils ‘The nature and behaviour of soils depends not only on the properties of individual par ticles, but also on the properties controlled by the arrangement of the particles in the soil fabric. Its nature depends primarily on the origin, nature and size of the particles With gravel, sand and silt the influence of molecular attractions and electrical charge is relatively small and the particles can freely occupy soil voids and arrange themselves in single-grain fabric (Fig. 11-1). These are rare however in soils with elay-size particles, Where interparticle forces induce typical associations of particles: aggregated (face-to-face associated) or dispersed (with no face-to-face association). Particles usually associate in ‘edge-to-edge or edge-to-tace flacculared fabries, ot ean remain defloccutated. Dispersed edge-to-lace or edge-to-edge flocculated arrangement, cardhouse fabric, Fig. 11-2, is commonly found in freshwater sediments, In salt water however, due to high electrolyte concentrations and lower ion concentrations, aggregated and flocculaied cardhouse fabric occurs, which is even more open (Fig. 11-3). In residual soils, an open fabric can develop as a result of leaching. In compression, the particles or their parallel aggregations of the cardhouse fabric tend to re-arrange themselves perpendicular to the loading (oriented compression fabric), in1.4 Properties of soils and rocks and thir laboratory determination 135 Fig. AL Fabric of soils shearing they take the direction of the shear load to form shear planes or shear bands (oriented shear fabric), During kneading or other kinds of dynamic compaction the inter particle bonds deteriorate and flocculated aggregations get broken. This is manifested generally by loss of strength (see sensitivity in Section 7.3). On the macroscopic scale, a more homogeneous fabric is built up, in which large pores are generally eliminated, although some macropores may still be present (see Section 5.8). Fabric can be studied by direct observations using an optical or electron microscope, by X-ray diffraction, electrical or thermal conductivity and magnetic susceptibility. Indirectly fabric can be described using phase relations, e.g. by pore size distribution. Other indirect methods are represented by (phenomenological) studies of the mechanical behaviour, which can yield an indication of the soil texture and structure. Fabric can ther estimated on the basis of the soil permeability, compressibility, strength ete. (113], 52. Porosity and voids ratio The ratio of the volume of voids to the total volume of soil, porosity n, can be depicted in a phase diagram where each of the three phases (Solid particles, liquid and gas) are represented separately as shown in Fig. 12. The portion of voids filed with water and air are Dy and na, respectively, where n = ny + Dy, ‘The ratio of the volume of voids to the volume of solid particles is called the votds ratio ¢. From the phase diagram it can be easily shown that Toa Tah Tea "Tre I masses and volumes are considered in the phase diagram, a relationship between voids ratio, ratio of mass densities p/p (See Section 53). and water content w (Section 55) can be expressed cow Pm A ist of phase relations is given in Table 6. The degree of saturation 8; = ny/t = eq/6 = Vu/Vo expresses the portion of the voids fled with water (often siven as percentage) et tty Lye ys Fig. 2 Definition of porosity and void ratio‘Table 6, Phase relations Koon Uskoown Topi ae Seneation . reise Dy deste nv Demi of parties ne Weer conet ‘Sal derek ‘Water prety Wasa Paria sateate Sol dnt 0-04 9 toes pe = 1.019 = 10 gm? Tis TON fay aN re LACH seas © Relations hicolans are val or water conoat of stratedsal (= wi) get eyo VET pu soos wos pegTable 6 (continued) Kon | Samied =) ony need Unsaos * su A ¢ — a = =o = = : Stor ae Er i g) vein Tue aoe = F[ te he ie Soe =| Saturadon ~ EL * ‘ ‘ Bs S [Dyas | pre ee Tope we sate oe Smtr Dar tee mre fear aonae rns | pawn torre) | BOW whieh Osea : | | ers : Te 5) Stacy | een es oan | nario m ceases | ET Water porosity . . oo en Barrera = be ile : nf & * L P ~ 7 witb (aah pti ite 9 Io prasive y= stm = 10m! to tstow pa agand pare know asead op, © Reliant colim ae Ya on for weer coatest of stated ol = wa) oneunmnap Goveogey aaip par so. pur sos yo somsedong FL te138 Paul von Sos and Jaa Bhat In the capillary zone above the groundwater table (the tree water surface), two zones with capillary water can be distinguished. Below the capillary saturation level there is full saturation, 8; = 1. Above the capillary saturation level. there is a partially saturated zone. Is extent depends on the nature of the soil, predominantly on the particle size Nevertheless, for simplicity full saturation is often considered in ground investigations and in design, Therefore, for most of the laboratory testing full saturation is required in practice. Even on the samples procured deep below the ground water table, 8, < Lis often found, since sampling results in a decrease of pore pressures, which can cause the release of gas bubbles from the pore water of the sample, 53° Density mass per unit volume. However, several denvitics are used in geomechanies the total (wet, bulk) density p, the dry density pg, the saturated density py). the density of particles (solid density, Section 4.2) py and the density of water py My Mu+My Ve Ve Ma = y, p= Ma aay My may ‘where Mismass, Vis volume, and subscripts » and g denote mass or volume of water and dried specimen (skeleton), respectively; subscripts gy: and y mean saturated and total In measuring p and pq in the laboratory, the total volume of the specimen must be deter- ‘mined. With specimens of regular shape. the dimensions can he measured directly. The volume of an inregular specimen can be determined by immersing the specimen in water and either weighing its mass (immersion in water method), or measuring the volume of displaced water. Prior immersing into water, the surface of the specimen must be treated: all the surface air voids must be filled by a suitable material insoluble in water (plastcine, putty) and then the surface coated by paraffin wax ({73, 83}, DIN 18125 [46g]). From the phase diagram, useful relations for densities can then be derived, for example ~ pals Bae pe + Pa 5.4 Relative density In its loosest state an ideal packing of spheres of an equal diame porosity n = 0.476 ( (Eig. 13a) will have 0.908), while the densest packing (Fig. 13b) will resultin n= 0.2591.4 Properties of soils and rocks and thei laboratory determination 139 ‘Fig. 13 Loses (2) and densost(b) packing of spheres (e = 0.350), With typical particle density of soils p. = 2.65Mem™, the minimum and ‘maximum dry densities 0 spherical particles would be minps ~ 1.35 and maxpa 1.96Mem™ Minimum and maximum densities of poorly graded (uniform) coarse-grained soils will, not be very much different from these theoretical values lor the packing of equal spheres. However, if platy particles are present, c.g, mica, both the limit values can inetease sub- stantially. For well graded mixtures of gravel, sand and silt sized fractions, both the values, especially minn can drop considerably below the valves for the packing of spheres. Relative density Da (ASTM D 4254 [5]: density index Ip according to ISSMFE. rules (see Chapter 1.1, Section 2) is defined using minimum and maxinium voids ratio maxe~e Daal axe — mi ‘The density index lg (ASTM D 4254 (3]) is defined using density or porosity maxa— a p¢__ 1+ mine, s ba = minps +mines pa, — D= ID maxa= mina maxpg—minpg Te max pa y=D Index of soils Inthe laboratory, the densest packing, max pg, of coarse-grained soils with particles larger than 0.06 mm (no silt fraction) can be achieved by a tapping method. After being flooded with water, the soil is compacted in layers by tapping the test mould with a tool as shown, in Fig, 14. The details of the method are given in DIN 18126 [46h], After the preseribed compaction, the height of the specimen is measured to 0.1 mm and from the mass and volume of the soil max pa is calculated. For soils with a silt fraction of up to 15 % a vibrating device (shaking table, Fig. 15} can be used. The specimen is compacted in a cylindrical mould under prescribed vertical normal stress applied via a plunger (DIN 18126 [46h)). (max e~ min e}/mine was defined by Terzaghi [150] to describe compactibility sone asin ' 2 ee FE sutrome Fig. M4 Moximom density Fig, 15, Maximum density test using shaking table140 Paul von Soos and Jan Bohst ‘To determine min pg, the same mould as used for the densest packing testi carefully filled with oven-dried soil using a spoon or a funnel (DIN 18126 [46h Five relative compaction states of soils distinguished hy the value of the density index are aiven in Table 7 ‘Table 7 Relative compaction states Density index y= D[%] 0-15 r State of compaction veryloose loose medium dense very dense 30-50 50-80 80 5.5. Water content Water content wis defined as the ratio of the mass of water My to the mass of solids My My Ma From the gravimetric water content w, the volumetric water content Oy (Ow = mw, see Section 5.2) can be defined a$ the ratio of the volume of pore-water to the total volume of the soil, Its used mainly in pedology and hydrogeology and is also quite often used in the mechanics of unsaturated soils, ‘The most common laboratory method for determining water content is oven-drying at 105°C until 2 constant mass of the specimen is achieved (e.g, DIN 18121-I [46a, 83) Adsorbed or chemically bound water may not evaporate at 105°C, and in evaluating its mass this is added to the mass of solid particles. Generally, quartz sands are almost completely dry after tte procedure, while clayey soils containing significant amount of ‘montmorillonite, gypsum or organic matter would lose more water in further drying at, temperatures higher than 105°C. More rapid methods of drying can he used, for example the sand hath method, infra-red ‘or microwave drying, Where appropriate, methods other than drying can be applied. e. density hottle, pyenometer,air-pyenometer, or theindirect method using the development Of gas pressure after treating the specimen with calcium carbide (DIN L8121-2 [46b)), However these methods all exhibit different accuracies. When rapid drying or indircet methods are used, a check by the standard method of oven-drying is recommended [83}. 5.6 Limits of consistency — Atterberg limits In the case of fine-grained soils, any change in water content brings about 2 change in enginecring propertics. With the decreasing water content, deformability (plasticity) of clayey soils becomes lower, while strength increases. Four consistency states may be distingu'shed: solid, semi-plasticsolid, plastic and liquid state. Soilsof different mineralogy and grading pass from one of these states into the next one at different water contents, that are typical for the particular soil. These water contents can therefore be used for description and classification of soils. Although the transition between the statesis gradual, three arbitrarily determined consistency limits ~ Aterherg limits — are used in practice: liquid timic w at the transition from the liquid state to the plastic state, plastic limit wp ‘where soll becomes a semi-plastic Solid, and shrinkage limit ws, which is the water content14 Properties of soils and rocks and their laboratory determination Mi at which the soil ceases to shrink with further drying. The Atterberg limits are measured (on remoulded soil [8], Nevertheless, they are useful parameters of clayey soils ‘The liquid limit wt, and plastic mit we represent the upper and lower bounds of water content within whieh the sol isin the plastic state. This range of water content is called plasticity index Ip = w, ~ wp. The plasticity index depends on the sol’ grading and on its mineralogical composition and exhibits good correlation with some of the engineering properties of soils. Therefore it serves as an important classification attribute ‘The relationship between the natural water content of the soil and its consistency limits is expressed by its consisiency ines Tc ww wi WP cor by its liquidity index I, Ie we wp WL wp where Io Using the value of its consistency or Tiquidity index, the in-situ consistency of the soil can be classified according to Table & Since the Atterbery limit tests are carried out on a remoulded soil. cementation and any other kind of bonding are lost. Liquidity or consistency indexes cannot therefore correlate with the peak strength of soils. ‘The Atterberg limits represent the plasticity of the aggregate clay and silt particles of the soil and depend on both the type and the amount of the clay fraction. Te dependence of the plasticity (Ip) of the aggregate on the amount of the clay fraction is represented by activity A (activity index 14) after Skempton (137) Tn(S%) ‘by weight of pac A < 0.5 characterizes inactive clay minerals (e.g. kaolinite), 0.75 < A < 1.25 suggests normal and A > 1.25 high activity (e.g. montmorillonite). Typical values of activity A of some clay minerals are given in Table ®. The Atterberg limits w, wp ands are determined by laboratory test procedures, that are specified in detail by individual standards (e.g, DIN 18122 [46c]; BS 1377 [26]; AASHTO. 1D T80.90, T90-87, T92-88 [I]; ISSMGE, 1998 [83] ete “Table & Consistency of $0 Ie he Consistency: dentiication by observation in hand samples esignation =o >I Liquids sary ‘Cannot be worked, flows asa slurry dros TtoDS Plastic: very soft Extrades between fingers D5t0075 519025 Plastics soft Can be easily moulded 07501 025100 Plastic: firm Can be moulded with substantial pressure threads 3mm in diameter ean be moulded <0 Semi-sotis stiff 3 min di threads eannot be made, the sol ‘rumbles, con be re-worked into imps142 Paul von Soos and kia Bose able. Ligui limi, setvity, and water absorption capability Ws. {Section $7) of typical minerals Minceals Activity 8 ‘Quartz Nour — ° Kaolinite o os ite 10 09 CaMontmorillonite 560 4s 300 7 700 Casagrande devi in DIN 18122 [46e]. AASHTO D 189.90 [1], ete (Fig. 16). The second technique uses fall-cone apparatus, either the British version (BS 1377 (26)). oF the Swedish one (Swedish Standard $$ 02 71 20; Fig. 17). The two fall-cone apparatuses ate based on the same principle, the only major difference between them being the geometry and mass of the cones. Prior to determining the Atterberg limits the sol should not be dried, sinee the properties of clay minerals ean change on drying, Wherever possible, the natural water content should be preserved in preparing the sample. If necessary, the sample may be air-dried prior sieving on a 0.4 (0:5) mm sieve. Fob oe yoo eae urter abo so eS oy pon ot Fig. 16. Lui ii ~ Casagrande method. 2) Casagrande apparatus. b) data evaluation austen Falleone14 Properties of soil and rocks and thet luhoratory determination 143 Inthe Casagrande method according to DIN 18122 [46e], remoulded soil of an adequate water content is placed in the cup of the apparatus and a groove of standard shape is cut through it, It is then subjected to shocks by repeated lifting and dropping the cup. The sample has the water content at the liquid limit when the groove closes at a length cof 10mm (in accordance with DIN) after 25 shocks. Normally the liquid limit is deter ‘mined by interpolating between at least 4 measurements made at different water contents (Fig, 166). When appropriate, a one-point method based on only one measurement and (on an empirical rclation may be adopted (DIN 18122-1 [46c), In the fall-cone method, the sample is placed under the cone, which is then released and allowed to penetrate the soil for five seconds. The soil has the water content at the liquid) limit if the depth of penetration is 10 mm or 20mm in the case of the Swedish and British apparatus, respectively. Similarly 0s with Casagrande devi, tne liquid limit is determined by interpolating between at Icast 4 measurements made at different water contents. A. one-point method has also been developed (¢.8., (83). In genera, the Casagrande method is more operator sensitive, offers worse repeatability and comparability. The apparatus isalso more difficult to standardize. Therefore, the fall- cone method is preferred [83]. A comparative study by Farrell ot al. showed that there is no practical difference between the results obtained by Swedish and British fall-cone apparatus (58) Prior to determining the plastic limit, the sieved scil is remoulded at an adequate water content. A small amount of the prepared soil is moulded by hand into a small bal. which is then rolled on a flat surface using one’s fingers and a light pressure until the thread reaches 3mm diameter. If the soil just crumbles at this diameter, it has the water content at the plastic limit, I not, the moisture content is lowered by re-working the sample by hand and repeating the procedure until rumbling at’3 mm diameter occurs and the water content of the sample atthe plastic limit wp is determined. To avoid manual rolling of the soil threads and to minimize subjectivity of the method, a device has been developed by Kiser and Gay (92) The liquid and plastic limits correspond to characteristic strengths of the soils. At the liquid limit the undrained shear strength sy is about 2Pa: values of sy = 2.3KPa and sa = 14 were found for soils at their liquid limit of 35 % and 150%, respectively [161] Harrell etal, [58] arrived at 54 = 1.6 for London Clay at its liquid limit, using both the itish and Swedish fall-cone methods. Despite the plastic limit test being less consistent than the liquid limit, it isalsoa type of strength, test and the approximate average value of soil strength at the plastic limit is 200 kPa. It has been suygested that determination of the plastic limit asthe state where the undrained strength occurs is 1O0times the strength at {the Fiquid limit [160], The relationship of the soi strengths atthe Fiquid and plastic limits justifies, within the framework of the critical states, the correlations between Atterberg limits end soil strength and compressibility [159] ‘When soil is slowly dried after being remoulded at high water content (at or above w1). its volume gradually decreases The sol then has the water content at the shrinkage limit when a further dcercase in water content does not enuse any substantial decrease of the soil volume (Fig. 18) If the residual shrinkage between the shrinkage limit and full drying (oven-drying) is, neylected, the shrinkage limit can be computed using the dry mass of the specimen, ws = (amg ~ 1/p0p (DIN 1812-2 [46d]}. During this procedure, reaching the shrinkage limit is obvious, due to a change in the colour of the soil. The volume of the specimenlas Paul von Soos and Jan Bohit Fig. 18 Shrinkage inst after drying can then be determined by any appropriate method, for example, according, to DIN 18125, Pat | [46g] Asa rule, an open soil fabric produces a high shrinkage limit, while an oriented fabwie results in low ws, Due to remoulding at high water contents, samples prepared for shrink- age limit determination can be expected to exhibit a random, dispersed fabrie. Thercfore natural soils with an undisturbed compression fabric can shrink at w ~< ws. Rolling the threads in the plastic limit test induces more aggregation of platy clayey particles und produces a fabric which is again more oriented than in shrinkage limit specimens. For low plasticity soils the difference in the fabric can lead to wp «= Ws as determined in the laboratory. ‘The volume strain of a specimen due to drying from the natural state to the shrinkage limit, Vs = (Vo ~ Vu)/Vo, is measure of its susceptibility to shrinkage (Vo is the ini volume, Vg is the final volume after drying), Linear (one-dimensional) shrinkage larly defined asx = (Lo—La)/Lo,and Ls = $V. This linear shrinkage can be deter by direct measurement ofa longitudinal specimen before and after drying. 5.7 Water adsorption ‘The water adsorption capability wa indicates the nature of the clay minerals that are present in the tested soil. It also provides a good correlation with some soil properties, ‘especially with the swelling potential Laboratory determination (DIN 18132 46m, L17) is carried out on particles smaller than (0.4mm using the apparatus by Enslin and Neff (Fig. 19). The apparatus is filled with water up to the filter platen and a small amount of the oven-dried ground soil is placed on the platen, At suitable time intervals, he amount of absorbed water is measured on the ‘graduated capillary. The water adsorption capability wa is the ratio of the final mass of absorbed water to the dry mass of the specimen. Typical values for some minerals are shown in Table 9, Fig. 19, Water adsorption after Ensfin and Neffjon 145 laboratory determi 1.4 Properties of sols and rocks and the 5.8 Compaction; moisture - density relations ‘Compaction is a process associated with an increase in dry density and a decrease of voids, ie. of soil porosity. It does not imply however any change in volume of soil water. Actually, compactibility of a given soil is geometrically limited by the volume of its pore water. Soils 2re usually compacted either by static compression, or by dynamic load ~ tamping oF vibrations. Which of the method would be more effective depends on the type and nature ofthe soil ‘The dry density is a convenient measure of compaction. Ifthe dependence of dry density pa on water content w is plotted after the soil has been compacted at different water contents, 2 typical compaction curve py = f() as shown in Fig. 20 is obtained. In the figure, two such compaction curves are shown, the upper one being produced by a higher compaction effort. Obviously, the dry density depends also on the compaction effort E, pa = fiw, E). The maximum dry density mex pg for the given compaction effort occurs at an optimum water content Woy. For Ey > Ey, max pz > max put. and Woo < Wor. The maximum attainable dry density max py increases approximately with the logarithm of the compaction effort, In Fig. 20, the curve for full saturation (zero air voids) is also shown, Its equation can be readily obtained from the mass-volume relations of the phase diagram for saturated Soil: pa = py/(1 + Wpe/ps). The “wer of optimum” sides of compaction curves run roughly parallel with the saturation line. The saturation line and compaction curves do not merge, since full saturation cannot be achieved by compaction. For unsaturated soil, the dry density is a function of water content and the degree of saturation (or air voids) Ps py) 14 Ps 1s Families of curves for a constant degree of saturation and constant air voids are plotted in Fig. 21 om water conto w — = Fig. 20. Compaction curves Fig 21. Contours of §; = const and146 Paul von Soos and Jan Bobse ALW © Wogt (“dry of optimum"), compaction is hindered by capillary effects. The attain- able dry density decreases with decreasing water content. At w ~» 0 (dry soil) however. ittean inerease again, depending on the nature of the soil (Fig. 20). As shown in Fig. 20, for soils at w’ < w < w the required dry density pg can be achieved with a compaction effort A < Ay. For w < w’ with an inereased elfort A> Ay, and for w > w" itcannot be achieved by increasing the compaction effort. Finc-grainedsoils get adifferent fabrie when compacted wet or dry of optimum. Generally, oon the wet side, pores and solids are more uniformly distributed and the soil exhibitslower permeability and higher shrinkage. Dry of optimum, the pores between larger lumps of solids are greater and therefore have higher permeability and also higher swelling potential. Soils compacted dry of optimum are prone to subsidence on saturating Laboratory determination of compaction behaviour of fine-grained soils was developed by Proctor [124]. DIN 18127 [46i] gives 2 procedure appropriate for all soil, including coarse-grained soils Before the test, the soil is air-dried to a water content lower than wp, ic. lower than opt. Coarse-grained soils without plastic constituents are oven-dried at 105°C. The choice of the mould diameter depends on the langest particle in the specimen. The small- est eligible diameter should be used. In testing coarse-grained soil, grains larger than 31.5 mm, or 63mm, are removed. When large particles are excluded, a correction for them has to be applied in computing water contents and dry densities Details of this procedure can be found in DIN 18127 [46i] or in, for example, AASHTO D 199-90 and ‘T180-90 [1] ‘The soil is placed in the mould in layers and each layer is subjected to the specified compaction effort. Three layers are made in the standard test and five in the so called modified test, where a higher compaction effort is applied. Aiter compacting the last layer, the bulk density is determined, and samplesare taken to measure the watcr content from which the dry density py = p/(1 + w) can be calculated, The soil is then removed from the mould, re-mixed with additional water added to increase the water content and, the procedure is then repeated. Using at least five measurements @ smooth compaction curve can be plotted to determine the optimum water content (Wope = Wry after DIN) and maxinuon dry density (termed the Proctor density per) for a compaction energy of Ay = 0.6MNm/m®, or the modified Proctor density mod pe for Az = 27MNan/ar’ (in DIN 18127 [46i), The size of soil pores iy important primarily for filler design and in soil capillarty. The design of such filters is based on several criteria. For soils with a uniformity coefficient Cy less than 2 the fiter criterion by Terzaghi can be uscd. It requires D3s of the coarser soil to be smaller than 4Dg5 ofthe finer soil, Dys < 4Dgs (Fig. 22). For gap-graded soils it is possible to apply the iter criterion to the idealized grading curves of the two constituent parts ofthe original sil in estimating their susceptibility to piping. ‘The requirements for Dap and Cy of filter for soils of 2 < Cy < 20 (filter criterion by Cistin and Ziems) are shown in Fig 23. For soils of Cu > 20, the filter eriterion can be represented by the ratio ofthe permeability coefficients ofthe soil, whieh should be Tess than 100.1.4 Properties of soils and cocks and their laboratory determination a7 * “6 = | wat ee) & 3 oe a {@ | al S40! h., he x a tn Hs q 4 | | aa tes [20am 3 5 ty Bes Cys, 6) Py Fig, 22. Fter criterion by Yerzaght iy me 4 po tips} Fig. 28 Filter exterion by Cistn and Ziems a {Ui as reported in [158] SITE Pte YD There is no routine method for determination of absolute sizeof sel pores, not even in the case of the most simple single-grainfabrie. Pore size ean be estimated, for exampl from the soil grading, by mercury intrusion, or by the capillary condensation method [96, 113}, For uniform, poorly graded sil the pore size can reach approximately 4 to 4 of the particle size. . S10 Capillarity Ina glass capillary of diameter d, water can rise toa height of he above the water table due to surface tension T, in the contractile skin (air-water interface) and due to the tendency of water to wet the glass surface (solid-liquid interface). Therefore: _ 4st Tw where ais the contact angle (Fig. 24). For JOkNm-*, surface tension of water Ty = 0.074 Nm”, and for soits with an approximation of a = ©, the capillary height hig{m) ~ 3 x 10-*/d{m). This approximate capillary rise however may not be achieved in real soils In natural soils, the dimensions of pores vary similazly to the capillary action shown in Fig.25. The non-uniform openings prevent the full evelopment ol the capillary height and the water can rise only to the active capillary height hy, governed by the larger capillary diameter dy. On lowering the water level (on drying) however, a passive (drying) capillary height h, will develop, which may correspond to the full capillary rise for diameter d3 shown in Fig. 25. ‘The capillary rises h values of capillary 1 he and by depend primarily on the pore size distribution. Some typical e hy can be found in Table 10.148 aul von Soos and fan Bohat ay anh venset, T aoa, aig oe Ora ae se Fig 24 Coplay rise i. 25. Active ond pase capi ste Able 10. Empirical values of capil ebay Iype ofscit festive portsleepil size de [mm] Senay graver 07mm 008m Medium tocousesond 035mm 020m Fine tomediumsand O10. mm 030m sity sane aausmm Lom sit oat en Som chy oot mm som The negative capillary pore pressure induced by a capillary height he creates the pore water capillary suction which corresponds with the matric sucifon Wy — Uy component of the total suction in soils: (uy ~ Uy) = ywhe = 41; /d, where a = 0 for water (e.g. (61) According to the principle of effective stress, the tensile stress of the pore water acts as a compressive stress in the soil structure. With a decrease of water content it causes, shrinkage and contributes to the shear strength. The strength increase is independent of external load and may be dealt with as a form of eohesion ~ capillary cohesion, InFig, 26, line ABCD shows a schematic representation of the dependence of the capillary height on the degree of saturation fora lowering of the water table (drying path). Capillary height hep corresponds to the rise in the saturated soil below the capillary saturation tevel and is markedly lower than maximum capillary rise max he. The ir entry vale (4 — Uy) the matric suction which must be exeocded for air to start entering the soil pores, is reached at hep. Above max he, when the residual degree of saturation Sry was reached, the remaining soil water is retained by surface tension at the contacts of particles, and there is practically no change in saturation and no flow of water. Line EFG in Fig, 26 represents the process of saturating a soil [rom its cry state. At equilibrium, the maximum saturation (Gc = 1) reaches the height minh above the free water surface, In the laboratory, hep and the air entry value of sandsand silts can be determined using the apparatus developed by Beskow (Fig, 27). Water saturated soit is placed in the container A. which isconnected with the vessc! B by a flexible tubing. Initially, the sample is flooded by lifting the water level above the base of the sample, Capillary suction is then produced in the sample by slowly lowering the vessel B. As the airentry valuc ofthe soil isexcceded, air bubbles can be observed in the sample, The corresponding height difference is equal to hep. ‘The active capillary rise Inc: can be estimated by another simple laboratory test. The deied soil is placed in contact with water and the capillary rise can be determined as the height at which the colour of the soil changes1.4 Properties of sols and rocks and their laboratory determination 19 eight above water tale + (tet) ———> Fig. 26. Capillary height and saturation Fig. 27, Determination of hy after Beskow The matric (capillary) suction of partially saturated soil samples can be studied in a pres- sure plate apparatus shown schematically in Fig 28. A sample of unsaturated soils placed. on ahigh air entry ceramic disk, which [Link] the interface, preventing pore air from enter- ing the measuring system in the pore-waler pressnre, On setting up the samaple the suction in the soil induces negative pore pressure readings of the pore-water pressure transducer. ‘To avoid any increase of suction, which conld lead to cavitation in the pore water system, a zero water pressure reading is maintained by increasing the air pressure in the cell. Once ‘equilibrium is achieved, the matric snetion in the sample is determined a8 ty — Uw (OF tu, im the case Of uy = 0). Jn the test, the reference valuc for the pore-water pressnre is {ranslated from the atmospheric state (o the final pressure in the cell. The procedure is, therefore called the axis translation technique [77]. 1. is commonly used in the mechanics Of unsaturated soils fo avoid cavitation, ‘The apparatus shown in Fig. 28 can also be used to determine the soil water characteristic curve, the relation between suction and water content (or satnration) of the sample. From the soil water characteristic curve enginecring properties of nnsatnrated soils, for example their strength, water permeability etc. can be estimated [61] ak possire e ee specimen high etry asi Fig. 28. Principle of pressure plate it apparatas150 Paul von Soos and Zan Bohe 5.11 Water permeabil ty In saturated soils, the laminar flow of water is governed by Darcy's law ah al where q is the quantity of water flowing in unit time (flow rate), A is the area through which the flow occurs, vis the apparent flow velocity, iis the hydraulic gradient, Alvis the Uifference in pressure head, Alis the flow path, and kis coefficient of permeability. Laminar flow occurs, and Darey’s law is valid, if the hydraulic gradient is lower than a critical value i < 01/63 = i, [119], where dy. is the effective particle size, which generally lies between Dyo and Dzs. For a hydraulic gradient of i> ig, kis not linear (post-linear range) and decreases with increasing i, However, before the inital gradient is ‘overcome, there isalsoa pre-tineas range of low, where kincteases wit (¢.g., DIN 18130 (461). Permeability is @ highly anisotropic soil property. In the case of the oriented fabric of clayey soils a higher k may be expected in the direction parallel to the platy particles. ‘The ratio of horizontal to vertical permeability ka/ky of apparently homogencous soils, commonly reaches 2 to 10, In stratified sediments, permeability parallel to stratification {assumed to be horizontal) ky = (kid; + kod) + ... + koda)/d is greater than in the perpendicular direction (serial drag) ky = d/(d hy + do/k; +... + dk) For water flow through unsaturated soils Darcy’s law also applies, the coefficient of per meability however is not constant. It is a variable, depending on the water content, or the matric suction. Several expressions for prediction ofthe coefficient of permeability of unsaturated soils ky from the matric suction have heen proposed. For example, Brooks ‘and Corey [28] (as reported in [61]) suggested that the coetficient of water permeability of saturated soil should be taken as ky = Ky forsuctions helow the air entry value of the Soil. For higher suctions ky = Ky((Sy ~ Sy) /(1 ~ Sy))®, where Sy is he residual degree of saturation (see Section 5,10) and 8 is an empirical constant, related to the pore size distribution of the soil, According to Kézdi 6 = 3 [95] Coefficients of permeability of coarse-grained soil can be measured using a constant head permeameter as shown schematically in Fig. 29. The water is allowed to flow through the specimen from a tank where a constant water level is maintained. ‘The flow rate is measured. The coefficient of permeability is then given by: Q al Ast Aly where A is the specimen’s cross section and tis the time interval. For testing fine-grained soils with k < 10-5 ms“!, 2 constant head apparatus as shown in Fig. [Link] be adopted. The cell is similar toa triaxial apparatus, where cell pressure, top and bottom drainage and axial load can be applied. The hydraulic gradient is given by the back pressure difference between the top and bottom ends and is controlled by suitable instrumentation, for example by a ram connected to the drainage leads 2t the base of the specimen (e.g. (2). Another way of measuring the coefficient of permeability of fine-grained soils is the falling head est arrangement, shown in Fig, 31. The quantity of water Rowing through the14 Properties of soils and rocks and their laboratory determination 151 , P A et all 7 DL | specimen hy | qi] . ss ‘ oto nee ot a tater specimen in time ¢ is measured by a standpipe of diameter a, and 1h why The testing procedures are described in, for example, DIN 18130 [461 or 83]. ‘The coefficient of permeability ean also be evaluated from the consolidation data obtained by # one-dimensional compression in an dedometer (see Section 62) Determination of the coctfcient of permeability in the laboratory results in @ number of difficulties Firstly, there is the problem of reliability ofthe laboratory equipment. For example variutions of suluration und possible occurrence of air in the pore water, or fluctuation of temperature, which changes the viscosity of the permeating fuid (water). Saturation of the pore-water system can he faciitated by the application of back pressure ‘To limit changes in viscosity, the codes of practice requize that the ambient temperature ring laboratory testing is constant +2°C. Also, for comparability of the results, mea- sured coefficients of permeability are converted to the reference temperature of 10°C. using a correction factor (e.., DIN 18130 [461]). Similarly to other laboratory tests, any ‘porous stones should be prevented from clogging, since this may cause erroneous data itr ses ‘Specimen of ‘os ecto a bros Secton a Fig. 3. Falling head permeameter