04 - Planning SI and Interpretation of Results PDF

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.
Planning of Subsurface Investigation and Interpretation of Test Results for Geotechnical Design
by : Ir. Dr. Gue See Sew & Ir. Tan Yean Chin
22-23 September 2000
Planning of Subsurface Investigation and Interpretation of Test

Results for Geotechnical Design
Ir. Dr. Gue See Sew
Managing Director, Gue & Partners Sdn Bhd
Ir. Tan Yean Chin
Associate Director, Gue & Partners Sdn Bhd
ABSTRACT: There have been many case histories of cost overrun and construction failures related to
insufficient, mis-interpreted and unreliable geotechnical information acquired from subsurface investigation and
laboratory tests used in the design of the geotechnical works. In view of the importance of subsurface
investigation, this paper presents the planning and selection of subsurface investigation works, including field
tests, sampling and laboratory tests, with emphasis on the practical aspect of the work. The interpretation of
the test results either from field or laboratory tests for foundation design is also discussed.
We are all familiar with the cartoon of the leaning

tower of Pisa, Italy with the engineer saying I
skimped a bit on the subsurface investigation, but
no-one will ever know.. Despite so many case
histories of failures reminding us of the importance
of proper subsurface investigation and correct
interpretation of test results, until today, engineers
are still squeezed by insufficient budgets and
impossible programmes for subsurface investigation.
Some engineers still lack the understanding or have
indifference attitude towards subsurface investigation
and interpretation of the test results.
During planning of the subsurface investigation,
Engineer shall always remember that majority of the
unforeseen costs and failures are associated with
construction are geotechnical in nature. Additional
costs are often attributed to inadequate planning of
subsurface investigation and improper interpretation
of the factual information and results of the field and
laboratory tests. In view of the importance of
subsurface investigation, this paper presents the
planning and selection of subsurface investigation
works, including field tests, sampling and laboratory
tests, with emphasis on the practical aspect of the
work. The interpretation of the test results either
from field or laboratory testing for geotechnical
design is also discussed.
In most projects, subsurface investigation (S.I.) is

generally carried out in two stages namely
Preliminary and Detailed S.I..
Stage 1 : Preliminary S.I.
Preliminary S.I. aims mainly to confirm a
proposed layout and its formation levels in relation to
safety, cost and time for geotechnical work. Hence,
a general subsoil profile together with its preliminary
soil parameters and water table are obtained for
preliminary designs and cost estimates.
Stage 2 : Detailed S.I.
Detailed S.I. is usually carried out after optimum
layout has been selected and confirmed. It aims to
obtain refined soil profile and properties for safety
and optimum designs.
The detailed S.I. is
concentrated in critical areas of concern such as :
- Areas with difficult ground conditions such as
very soft soils, suspected limestone cavities and
pinnacles.
- Areas of major cut and fill.
- Locations with structures having high retaining
walls and major columns.
The planning of the subsurface investigation can be
divided into four major sections as follows :
- Desk Study
- Site Reconnaissance
- Extent of Subsurface Investigation
- Selection of Types of Field Tests and Sampling
Methods.
3.1 Desk Study
INTRODUCTION
PLANNING
OF
INVESTIGATION
SUBSURFACE
Desk study includes review of the following

information :
Page 1

(a) Geological Maps and Memoirs

Reviewing geological maps and memoirs
together with an understanding of the associated
depositional process can enable a preliminary
assessment of ground conditions to be made.
(b) Topographic Map
Use topographic map to examine the terrain,
access and site conditions. The topographic
map should be checked through site
reconnaissance.
(c) Aerial Photographs
Aerial photographs give an indication of
geomorphology features, land use, problem areas
and layout arrangement especially for highways
and hill-site development.
(d) Site Histories and Details of Adjacent
Development
The knowledge of the site histories like land use
before the current development, tunnels,
underground services are very important
information to have before planning the field
tests. Information of adjacent development like
types of structures and foundation system is also
very useful for design and to prevent the
proposed project affecting the serviceability of
adjacent structures. If the subsoil information
of adjacent site is available, it will also help the
design engineer to optimise the S.I. required for
the project.
(e) Requirements of the Proposed Structures or
Foundations
In order to plan proper and cost effective S.I.,
the design engineer should have sufficient
information on the requirements of the completed
structures and their tolerance of differential
movements.
3.2 Site Reconnaissance

The purpose of the site reconnaissance is to confirm
information obtained in desk study and also to obtain
additional information from the site. This includes
examining adjacent and nearby development for telltale signs of problems and as part of the predilapidation survey. Site reconnaissance allows the
design engineer to compare the surface features and
topography of the site with data and information
obtained from the desk study. The checking of the
presence of exposed services and cut and fill areas is
also essential. It is also very important to locate
and study the outcrops to identify previous slips or

collapse that will act as an indicator of stability of
the site.
The study on the vegetation would give tell tale
signs of localised very soft areas where additional
subsurface investigation should be carried out.
Very often failures occur in localised soft areas as
reported in Gue & Chen (2000).
3.3 Extent of Subsurface Investigation

The extent of subsurface investigation depends on :
- Available subsurface information
- Geological formation and features
- Variability of subsoil and groundwater
- Proposed structures and platforms
- Adjacent properties and their conditions
Preliminary S.I.
(a) Number / Spacing (Minimum Requirements)
- boring and probing in fill area of a formation
- boring and probing in a line for one of a
typical cluster or cross-section of similar
topography (more lines are needed for a large
area)
(b) Structures
- Up to depth of soils where the pressure
induced by structure has little or no influence.
(c) Depth
- In fill area, up to a depth with SPTN 50
- In cut area, up to a depth exceeding potential
slip surface or when hard material is
encountered.
- For deep foundation in soft clay, up to a depth
with SPTN 50 for at least 7 times
consecutively and at least one borehole coring
into rock. In limestone area, continuous
coring into solid rock for 10m is required to
detect cavities.
- boring and probing in fill area of a formation
- Figures 1 and 2 show some theoretical
guidelines for the extent of S.I. work.
However in an actual field work depth of
boreholes is usually deeper because the
foundation system is yet to be decided and the
cost of going deeper is not significant as
compared to cost of mobilisation.
(d) Geophysical Survey
Geophysical survey should be used for large area
and to determine the general bedrock profile and
characteristics
Page 2

Detailed S.I.
(a) Spacing
- There is no hard and fast rules but generally
10m to 30m for structures. The spacing can
be increased for alluvial subsoil with more
consistent layers (as interpreted from
preliminary S.I.) or where geophysical survey
is used to interpolate or identify problem areas.
- Intensified ground investigation for problem
areas and structures with heavy loading for
safe and cost effective designs.
- At bridges generally one borehole at every pier
or abutment.
from the desk study and site reconnaissance. The

commonly used field testing methods in subsurface
investigation are :
- Light Dynamic Penetrometer
(JKR or
Mackintosh Probes)
- Boreholes with Standard Penetration Tests
(SPT), collection of disturbed and undisturbed
soil samples.
- Field Vane Shear Tests
- Piezocone (CPTU)
- Pressuremeter Test
3.4.1 Light Dynamic

Mackintosh Probe)
Penetrometer
(JKR
or
JKR or Mackintosh probe is usually used in

preliminary S.I. to supplement boreholes and to
identify subsoil variation between boreholes
particularly in areas of very soft soils. It assists in
interpolation between boreholes or piezocones.
Figure 3 shows the probe details. This method is
also effective in identifying localised soft or weak
materials or slip plane.
However the major
limitation of the method is shallow depth.
Figure 1 :
Analysis
Depth of Field Tests for Stability
Figure 3 :
Figure 2 :
Design
Depth of Field Tests for Foundation
Mackintosh and JKR Probes
Human errors are also prone in this method such

as wrong counting, non-consistent drop height or
exerting force to the drop hammer giving misleading
results. When using light dynamic penetrometer,
some of precautionary measures to prevent errors in
testing are :
- drop of hammer should be a free fall and
consistent drop height
- components and apparatus properly washed
and oiled
3.4 Selection of Types of Field Tests and

Sampling Methods
The selection of types of field tests and sampling
methods should be based on the information gathered
3.4.2 Boreholes with Standard Penetration Tests

(SPT), collection of disturbed and undisturbed soil
samples and rock coring.
Page 3

Boreholes is sometime called deep boring. The

details of boring, sampling and testing are described
in BS5930: 1981. Rotary open hole drilling by
circulating fluid (water, bentonite or air foam) is the
most common method. The other commonly used
method is wash boring which utilises the percussive
action of a chisel bit to break up materials and flush
to the surface by water pumping down the hollow
drill rods. Percussion method is not normally
recommended due to large disturbance caused by the
technique of advancing. Borehole usually includes
boring through soil, coring through rock, sampling,
in-situ testing and water-table observations. The
depth usually do not exceed 100m. Figure 4 shows
the typical drilling rig for borehole.
increased. The SPT test is simple and rugged,

however certain care are required:
- Dented driving shoe should not be used.
- Depth of test is important and no test shall be
carried out inside the casing.
- Base of borehole must be properly cleaned.
- Use counter to prevent counting error.
- Mark the penetration depth clearly.
- Always keep borehole water level as close to
the natural ground water as possible (if the
approximate ground water level is known) or
else keep the borehole full of water.
- Prevent water level in the borehole dropping
too fast and below natural ground water level
during changing of assembly for SPT in silty
and sandy soils to prevent boiling in the soils.
- Require close supervision.
Figure 4 : Typical Rotary Drilling Rig (from

Geoguide 2, 1987)
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is the most
commonly used in-situ test in Malaysia. As per
BS1377, the hammer weight is 65kg, with drop
height of 760mm. Sampler is driven a total
penetration of 450mm into soils and the number of
blows for the last 300mm of penetration is the
SPTN value. The disturbed soil samples can be
collected from the split spoon sampler. Figure 5
shows the equipment for Standard Penetration Test.
SPT is generally carried out at 1.5m depth
interval. At greater depth, the interval can be
Figure 5 : Equipment for Standard Penetration

Test (after Clayton 1995)
Soil samples collected from the borehole are as
follows :
- Wash Samples : from soil washed out from the
borehole for soil strata description.
- Disturbed Soil Samples : from split spoon
samplers after SPT.
- Undisturbed Soil Samples : using piston
sampler, thin wall sampler, continuous
sampler, mazier sampler, etc.
Page 4

Piston sampler shown in Figure 6 is used for

very soft to soft cohesive soil which is easily
disturbed. Usually this layer has SPTN < 2 or
hammer weight. For cohesive soils from soft to
firm consistency (SPTN<10) and free from large
particles (e.g. marine deposits), thin wall sampler as
shown in Figure 7 can be used. The piston and thin
wall samplers are commonly 75mm or 100mm
diameter by 1m long. Continuous sampler is
usually used for identifying sand lenses, description
and classification tests in soft marine deposits.
Figure 6 :
Piston Sampler
When the subsoil is stiff, mazier sampler shall be

used to obtain the undisturbed soil samples. Mazier
Sampler (Triple-tube core-barrels) as shown in
Figure 8 contains detachable liners within the inner
barrel and is ideal for collecting undisturbed soil
samples for triaxial tests as the diameter of core
sampler is about 72mm. Most of the hill-site
development or foundation in stiff soils require the
use of Mazier sampler. For best recovery of
samples, foam drilling should be used.
When sampling soil from the boreholes, the
following checklist shall be followed :
Distorted or blunt cutting edge or dirty tubes

should not be used.
Check sizes of components and condition
Sampler must be properly cleaned and greased.
The soil samples collected should be properly
sealed and labelled to prevent loss of water
when preserving moisture content is required.
Undisturbed soil samples should be sealed with
a layer of grease, follow by non-shrink wax
and tape to prevent loss of moisture (excess
grease by the side of tube for wax placement
must be removed to ensure good contact
between wax and the inner side of sampler)
Samples should be properly stored and packed
for transport to prevent disturbance during
transportation.
Figure 7 :
Thin Wall Sampler
For rock coring, rotary core drilling is commonly

used to advance the borehole and provide core
samples for examination and testing. Some of the
definitions related to rock core are :
Core recovery (%) = (Length of Recovered Core /
Length of Run) X 100%
RQD (%) = ([Sum of recovered core in pieces >
100mm] / Length of Run) X 100%
Where RQD = Rock Quality Designation.
Normally for the design of foundation into
bedrock (other than limestone), the minimum rock
coring is 3m. In granitic formation or large
Page 5

boulders are suspected, coring of 5m may be needed.

In limestone, borehole usually terminate after 10m
coring into cavity free rock or about maximum 15m
coring into rock. If there is thick hard / dense
overburden overlying the limestone, the maximum
coring into rock may be reduced.
tested as delays may lead to overestimation of

strength by 10% to 20%.
- Standard rate of rotation is 6 degrees per minute.
- Correct calibration chart for the torque and
different vane size for shall be used.
Figure 9 :
Figure 8 :
Field Vane Shear Devices
Mazier Sampler
3.4.4
3.4.3
Field Vane Shear Tests (in borehole or
penetration type)
Field Vane Shear Test is suitable to obtain in-situ
undrained shear strength of very soft to firm clay.
However the results will be misleading if tested in
peats or in clays containing laminations of silt, sand,
gravels or roots. The field vane shear test is used to
obtained undisturbed peak undrained shear
strength, and remoulded undrained shear strength
thus sensitivity of the soil. Figure 9 shows the
equipment details.
Following are some reminders when using field
vane shear tests :
- The vane must be rotated soon (within 5
minutes) after insertion into the depth to be
Piezocone (CPTU)
Figure 10 shows the detailed terminology and design

features for a piezocone. The cone is the coneshaped end piece of the penetrometer tip on which
the end bearing is developed. The cone normally
has a diameter of 35.7mm, area of 10cm2 and cone
angle of 60o. The friction sleeve is the section of
the penetrometer tip upon which the local side
friction resistance is measured. In order to measure
the pore water pressure and its dissipation, porous
filter (e.g. porous plastic, ceramic or sintered
stainless steel) which allow rapid movement of
extremely small volumes of water is used to activate
the pressure sensor.
The porous element is usually placed
immediately behind the cone neck. It is very
important that the pore pressure measurement system
should always be fully saturated and deaired so that
Page 6

reliable pore pressure measurement can be obtained.

All the data are captured electronically on computer
therefore reduces human error. Figure 11 shows
the rig for piezocone testing.
Piezocone (CPTU) has three main applications :
- To determine subsoil stratigraphy and identify
materials present.
- To estimate geotechnical parameters.
- To provide results for direct geotechnical
design.
Figure 10 : Detailed Terminology of Piezocone
the ground surface. The aim of a pressuremeter test

is to obtain the stiffness, and in weaker soils on the
strength by measuring and interpreting the
relationship between radial applied pressure and the
resulting deformation. Figure 12 shows the typical
pressuremeter.
Pressuremeter has two main purposes :
- To estimate in-situ earth pressure at rest, Ko
- To estimate geotechnical parameters for
strength and stiffness.
Figure 11 : Typical Piezocone Rig
The advantages of piezocone are as follows :

Rapid and continuous (rather than intermittent)
measures of soil profile and strength.
Faster than other S.I. tests.
Very suitable for soft soil (especially soft
clay).
Allow dissipation of excess pore water
pressure and obtain consolidation parameters.
Has been widely used and many correlations
available.
3.4.5
Pressuremeter
Pressuremeter tests can be carried out both in soils

and in rock. The pressuremeter is a cylindrical
device designed to apply horizontal uniform pressure
to the ground via a flexible membrane. It is
connected by tubing or cabling to a control unit at
The borehole pressuremeter (commonly called

Menard Pressuremeter), originally developed by
Menard is commonly used in Malaysia. A borehole
is formed using drilling rig capable of producing a
smooth-sided test hole in the stiff soils. The
pressuremeter which has a slightly smaller outside
diameter than the diameter of the hole, can be
lowered to the predetermined level in the borehole
before being inflated for testing.
When drilling of the borehole for pressuremeter
test, rotation of the drill bit should be very slow (less
than 60rpm). The circulation of the drilling mud
should also be very slow (no bubbles or big ripples
on the return to the mud pit). Because of the slow
mud flow, some of the cuttings will not come back
up all the way to the mud pit and will settle back at
the bottom of the borehole once the mud flow is
stopped. Therefore, it is recommended to drill 1m
past the selected depth of testing to allow the cuttings
to settle at the bottom of the hole without filling the
Page 7

portion of the hole where the test is to be carried out.

It is very important to calibrate the pressuremeter
before use. The details of this test can be found in
Clarke (1995) and Briaud (1992).
Figure 12 :
Definition of a Pressuremeter
Figure 13 :
3.5
Determination of Groundwater
The
information
of
groundwater
level,
groundwater pressure and potential flooding is
important in soft clay as they will affect the effective
stress of the subsoil and also the design. The
groundwater level for cut slopes also plays a very
important role in influencing the factor of safety
against slip failure.
Water level observation in completed boreholes
and existing wells (if any) should be taken daily
during the ground investigation, particularly in the
morning. Rain in the preceding night must be
recorded and the borehole protected against surface
in flow of water that could cause misleading results
to be obtained. However, in order to obtain a
representative ground water level, measurement and
monitoring of longer period of time is required and
should include seasonal variation and tidal changes
(if applicable).
The main disadvantages of
measuring groundwater level from the boreholes are
slow response time and collapse of hole if not cased.
Therefore, the use of proper piezometer is
recommended.
For cut slopes, standpipe
piezometers can also be installed in the slope to
monitor the long term ground water level so that the
slope stability design can be validated.
Typical Standpipe and Open-Hydraulic Piezometers (after Geoguide 2, 1987)
Page 8

Standpipe and open-hydraulic piezometers

installed in borehole are shown in Figure 13.
During installation, porous elements must be fully
saturated and filled with deaired water or fluid such
as glycerine. Response test is required by carrying
out falling head test. If two piezometers are placed
in a single borehole, proper seal is important to
prevent confusing or misleading results. In order to
measure the quick response of pore water pressure
changes, vibrating wire piezometer can be used.
Usually vibrating wire piezometers are installed
in basement excavation works to measure the
changes of pore water pressure during excavation
and in long term after completion of the basement.
It is particularly useful where automatic recording of
readings is needed.
4
PLANNING
TESTING
OF
LABORATORY
The types of laboratory test commonly used in

Malaysia to determine soil classification, chemical
and mechanical properties are summarised in Table
1.
The total stress strength parameter like
undrained shear strength, su is required for short term
undrained stability analysis of embankment on
cohesive soils and for foundation design (e.g. footing,
pile, retaining wall) in cohesive soils. The effective
strength parameters like c and are for long term
stability analysis of foundation, retaining wall,
embankment and slopes, particularly cut and fill
slopes. Consolidation parameters allow engineer to
evaluate deformation of the subsoil when there is
changes of stress in the subsoil.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION TEST

1. Particles Size Distribution : - Sieve Analysis (for
content of sand and gravels) and Hydrometer
Tests (for content of silt and clay)
2. Atterberg Limits :- Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit &
Plasticity Index (to be used in Plasticity Chart
for soil classification)
3. Moisture Content
4. Unit Weight
5. Specific Gravity
CHEMICAL TEST
1. pH Test
2. Chloride Content Test
The main purpose of chemical tests on the subsoil

except organic content is to detect any chemicals that
are detrimental to concrete and other materials used
and buried inside the ground.
5
INTERPRETATION OF FIELD AND

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
The interpretation of field and laboratory test results

is usually a neglected topic and only briefly covered
in universities. It is very dangerous for engineer to
use field test results directly without interpretation,
and understanding of the usage and limitation of each
test. The selection of design parameters and choice
of values depend on knowledge and experience of the
engineer. The objectives of this paper are to
illustrate the importance of correct interpretation
and show methods of compiling results and
recognising errors. The following section will cover
the brief interpretation of commonly used field and
laboratory tests in Malaysia and they are :
(A) Field Tests :
- Light Dynamic Penetrometer
(JKR or
Mackintosh Probe)
- Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
- Field Vane Shear Test
- Piezocone (CPTU)
- Pressuremeter
(B) Laboratory Tests :
- Unconfined Compression Test
- Triaxial Test (UU, CIU and CID with pore
pressure measurement)
- Consolidation Test
- Compaction Test
TEST FOR MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

1. One Dimensional Consolidation Test (Oedometer Test) :to obtain compressibility and consolidation parameters
for settlement analysis.
2. Shear Strength Test :
(a) For Total Stress :- Laboratory Vane, Unconfined
Compression Test (UCT), Unconsolidated
Undrained Triaxial Test (UU), Shear Box Test.
(b) For Effective Stess :- Isotropic Consolidated
Undrained Triaxial Test (CIU), Isotropic
Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test (CID). (Note :
Side Drains shall not be used on samples to
accelerate consolidation to prevent errors) (Gue
(1984) and Tscheboutarioff (1951))
3. Sulphate Content Test

4. Organic Content Test
3. Compaction Test
Table 1 : Laboratory Testing
Page 9

It is very important to interpret the results and

compile the results in order that errors can be
recognised.
5.1
INTERPRETATION OF FIELD TESTS
5.1.1
Light Dynamic Penetrometer (JKR or

Mackintosh Probe)
JKR or Mackintosh probe is used for :

- Detection of weak or shear plane at shallow
depth
- Determination of shallow bedrock profile
- Preliminary design of shallow foundation on
natural ground with no recent fill and for
structure of low risk.
If in doubt use
borehole instead.
Figure 14 shows the allowable bearing capacity
versus JKR probe resistance. The ratio of JKR
probe to SPTN values are about 8.8 based on
energy per unit area.
For shallow depth (less than 4m), the ratio of
JKR probe to undrained shear strength in kPa is
about 1. For larger depth, the ratio reduces
significantly and often unreliable.
5.1.2
Damage
tip
of
sampling spoons
Loose
joints
on
connecting rods
Not using guide rod
() N
() N
() N, eccentric blows
Water
level
in () N especially sand at
borehole
below bottom of borehole,
ground water level
piping effect
Note : Where N = SPTN values,
() = Giving misleading lower value,
() = Giving misleading higher value,

(X) = Wrong Results
Table 2 : Some Common Errors of SPT
5.1.3
Field Vane Shear Test
The field vane shear tests are widely used to obtain

the representative su profile of cohesive soils. The
sensitivity, St of the material can also be obtained.
The most common errors are wrong computation of
spring factor and if the clay contains organic
materials (e.g. sea shells, decayed woods, peat, etc).
Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is the most popular

field test in Malaysia. The common errors of SPT
are shown in Table 2. In cohesive soils, SPTN
values are usually used to correlate with undrained
shear strength, su and some of the correlations
commonly used in Malaysia are as follows:
For SPTN > 5,
(where N = SPTN)
su = 4N to 6N (kPa) (Stroud & Butler, 1975)
For SPTN < 5
su = 5 + 7.5N (kPa) (Japanese Road Association,
1980)
The correlations above should be used with care
and correlations with su obtained from field vane
shear can be performed to verify the correlation used
for each site.
ERRORS
CONCEQUENCE
Inadequate cleaning (X) N, sludge trapped in
of borehole
sampler
Casing driven bottom () N in sand &
of the borehole
() N in clay
Figure 14 :
Correlation of JKR Probe
Resistance to Allowable Bearing Capacity (after
Ooi & Ting, 1975)
5.1.4
Piezocone
Other than obtaining the continuous subsoil profile,

commonly used soil parameters can be obtained from
piezocone testing using correlations are as follows :
Undrained shear strength, su
-
Page 10

Horizontal coefficient of consolidation, ch

through dissipation tests.
Relative density (Dr) for granular soils
Effective Angle of Friction,
Secant Youngs Modulus, Es
Maximum Shear Modulus, Gmax
Soil classification can be carried out using the
Robertson (1990) chart as shown in Figure 15. The
undrained shear strength of cohesive soils can be
estimated from piezocone data with reasonably
accuracy.
-
su =
q c vo q T vo
=
Nk
NkT
where :
vo
= total overburden pressure
qc
= cone resistance
qT
= corrected cone resistance
Nk or NkT = cone factor
Generally the cone factor, Nk is 14 4 for Malaysian
Clay (Gue, 1998). Robertson and Campanella
(1988) recommended using Nk = 15 for preliminary
assessment of su. Since Nk is sensitivity dependent,
Nk should be reduced to around 10 when dealing with
sensitive clay (8<St<16). In practice, the Nk or NkT
is determined empirically by correlation of cone
resistance to undrained shear strength measured by
field vane shear tests or laboratory strength tests.
Horizontal coefficient of consolidation, ch which

is an important parameters for vertical drain design
can be assessed from the dissipation of pore pressure
with time after a stop in penetration during testing.
Houlsby and Teh (1988) propose an interpretation
using a modified dimensionless time factor, T* as
given in Table 3, and is defined as follows :
T* =
ch t
r2 Ir
where
ch = horizontal coefficient of consolidation
r = radius of cone, typically 17.8mm
Ir = rigidity index, G/su
G = shear modulus
su = undrained shear strength
Figure 16 shows a simplified diagram that can
be used to estimate ch using the Houlsby and Teh
(1988) solution.
The normalized excess pore
pressure, U, at time t, is expressed as :
U=
u t uo
ui u o
where
U = normalized excess pore pressure
ut = the pore pressure at time t
ui = initial pore pressure at t=0
uo = insitu pore pressure before penetration
Figure 15 :
Page 11
Soil Classification Chart (

be extrapolated to 50% pore pressure reduction if

short dissipation periods are used in the field and
measured data to longer period are not available.
Figure 16 :
Normalized Pore Pressure
Dissipation vs T* (after Teh & Houlsby, 1991)
Degree of Consolidation
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Table 3 : T* values
T*
0.038
0.078
0.142
0.245
0.439
0.804
1.600
Dissipation tests carried out in overconsolidated soils

have shown that the pore pressures on stopping the
penetration do not decrease immediately, instead they
show an initial increase over a definite period of time
before finally beginning to dissipate. If this occur,
time correction methods proposed by Sully and
Campanella (1994) can be used to carry out time
correction for dissipation tests.
The two time correction method proposed are :
Log-time plot correction
The maximum pore pressure is taken as the peak
value that occurs during the post-penetration
increase and the time at which this peak occurs is
taken as the zero time of the dissipation record and
all other times adjusted according.
Root-time plot
In the root-time plot, the dissipation that occurs
after the initial peak caused by redistribution of
pore pressure, depicts a straight line which can be
back-extrapolated to t=0 in order to obtain a ui for
the corrected dissipation curve. Figure 17 shows
the details. The advantage of the root-time
method is that the initial straight line portion can
Figure 17 : Correction for Overconsolidation

with Root Time Plot
5.1.5
Pressuremeter
The soil parameters normally obtain from the

pressuremeter tests are as follows :
Coefficient of earth pressure at rest, Ko
Undrained shear strength, su of cohesive soil
Effective Angle of Friction, for cohesionless
soil
Youngs Modulus, Es
Shear Modulus, G
In view of the extensiveness of the methods to
obtain these parameters, they will not be discussed in
this paper. For details please refer to Clarke (1995)
and Briaud (1992).
5.2
Interpretation of Laboratory Tests
The soil design parameters to be obtained from the

laboratory tests can be divided into two (2) major
categories :
Page 12

(A) Strength parameters for stability and bearing

capacity analyses of foundation.
(B) Stiffness and deformation parameters for
prediction and evaluation of settlement, heave,
lateral deformation, volume change, etc.
5.2.1
Strength Parameters
Total Stress
Total stress strength parameters of undrained shear
strength, su for cohesive soils can be obtained
directly or indirectly from laboratory tests. The
laboratory tests that can provide the su directly are:
- Unconfined Compression Test (UCT)
- Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test (UU)
- Laboratory Vane Shear Test
If not enough undisturbed soil samples are
collected, preliminary estimation of su can also be
obtained indicatively by correlating to results of
Atterberg Limit Tests as follows :
a)
su/v = 0.11 + 0.0037 PI
For normally consolidated clay, the ratio tends to
increase with plasticity index (PI) (Skempton, 1957).
b)
su(mob)/p = 0.22;
su(mob) is the undrained shear strength mobilised on
the failure surface in the field, and p is the
preconsolidation pressure (yield stress) (Mesri,
1988).
Effective Stress
Effective stress strength parameters (e.g. c and )
for cohesive soils can be interpreted from the Mohrs
Circle plot either from CIU, CID or shear box tests.
However there are advantages of obtaining the
effective stress strength parameters through
interpretation of stress paths. This stress paths
method enables the field stress changes to be
presented more realistically indicating the
characteristic of subsoils and are generally plotted in
total stress (Total Stress Path, TSP) and effective
stress (Effective Stess Path, ESP).
There are two types of plot, namely MIT stress
path plot and Cambridge stress path plot. The
conventions used for these two stress path plot are as
follows (see Figure 18):
Figure 18 :
Plot
MIT and Cambridge Stress Path
(a) MIT Stress Path Plot, (t - s Plot)

Developed by T.W. Lambe of Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (1967), USA.
The vertical axis :
t = (1 - 3)/2 = (1 - 3)/2
The horizontal axis :
s = (1 + 3)/2 & s = (1 + 3)/2
(b) Cambridge Stress Path Plot (q - p Plot)
Developed by Roscoe, Schofield and Wroth (1958)
at the University of Cambridge, England.
The vertical axis :
q = 1 - 3 = 1 - 3
The horizontal axis :
p = (1 + 2 + 3)/3 & p = (1+ 2+3)/3
for triaxial test, two of the principal effective stress
are equal to the horizontal effective stress, therefore
can be expressed as :
p = (1 + 23)/3
& s = (1 + 23)/3
Figure 19 shows the interpretation of Mohr-Coulomb
failure envelope in compression from the MIT and
Cambridge stress path plots respectively.
Tan = t / s
Tan = Sin
K = c Cos
Tan = q / p
Sin = (3 Tan) / ( 6 +Tan )
r = c (6 Cos ) / (3 Sin )
Figure 19 : Interpretation of Mohr Coulomb

Failure Criteria
Page 13

Stress path and Critical State Soil Parameters

Critical state concept introduced by Roscoe,
Schofield & Wroth (1958), relates effective stresses
and void ratio. From the stress field, the surface
where all effective stress paths reach or approach a
line/surface, the Critical State Line (CSL) which is
ultimate condition of soil (as in critical concept) in
which the material deform (plastic shearing) at
contact volume under constant effective stresses.
For highly overconsolidated material (as from
Point A of the Figure 20), the failure (peak strength)
follow the relationship found by Hvorslev (1937) and
can be termed as Hvorslev Failure Surface/Line
Figure 21 shows the stress path of consolidated
triaxial undrained test on normally consolidated (NC)
and overconsolidated (OC) materials respectively.
It is observed that for normally consolidated
material, pore pressure increases as the deviator
stress is applied. As the overconsolidation ratio
(OCR) of the material increases, the increase in pore
pressure would reduce to a state where there is a
reduction of pore pressure due to the effect of
dilatancy (stress path curves to the right).
Therefore, from the direction of stress path, the
likelihood of material to be NC or OC can be known.
Correlation of Effective Angle of Friction ()

For preliminary assessment of the effective angle of
friction, correlations shown in Figures 22 and 23 can
be used.
Figure 21 : Stress Path for CIU Tests on

NC & OC Soils
Figure 22 : Values of for Clays of Var ious

Compositions as Reflected in Plasticity Index
(from Terzaghi et. al.,1996)
Idealised stress paths related to critical state line for undrained

and drained tests on over-consolidated clays :
(a) Stress paths in MIT field,
(b) Stress-strain curves
(t aginst strain)
(c) Voids ratio against mean effective
stress, s, with project stress paths .
(d) voids ratio against
strain
Figure 20 :
Stress Path Interpretation
Page 14

investigation, however this does not necessary means

there is an increase in understanding of what
subsurface investigation can achieve. Hence clients
need to be made to understand that insufficient and
unplanned subsurface investigation will lead to poor
design and subsequently means higher cost and
sometimes unsafe design for a project.
Without Proper S.I.,
Ground is a Hazard !
You Pay for S.I. whether You Carry it Out

Properly or Not !
Figure 23 : Variation of ult with Percentage
of Clay Content (after Skempton, 1964)
REFERENCES
5.2.2
Stiffness and Deformation Parameters
The most commonly used deformation parameters

for soft clay are obtained from consolidation test
(Oedometer Test). The parameters are used to
predict deformation (vertical) of the ground due to
load , unload, water level changes, etc. and also the
rate (time) required to achieve equilibrium
(completion of settlement).
There is also indirect estimation of the
consolidation parameters from Atterberg Limit tests
as follows. However the parameters for detailed
design should be obtained directly from consolidation
tests.
a)
Cc = 0.007 (LL-10%)
For normally consolidated clay, (Skempton, 1944).
b)
Cc = 0.009 (LL-10%)
For clays of low and medium sensitivity, (Terzaghi
& Peck, 1967).
Where Cc = Compression Index
LL = Liquid Limit.
The recompression index, Cr, is typically ranges
from 0.015 to 0.35 (Roscoe et. al. 1958) and
for
preliminary assessment, often assumed to be 5% to
10% of Cc
CONCLUSION
A well planned and full-time supervised subsurface

investigation (S.I.) is necessary to obtain reliable
subsoil information and parameters for safe and
economical designs.
Although there may be an
increase in awareness of the need for subsurface
Briaud,
Jean-Louis
(1992)
The
Pressuremeter. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Clarke, B.G. (1995) Pressuremeters in
Geotechnical Design. Blackie Academic &
Professional, London.
Geotechnical Engineering Office (1987) Guide
to Site Investigation. Geoguide 2. Hong
Kong Government Publication Centre.
Gue, S.S. (1999) Selection of Geotechnical
Parameters for Design. Short Course on Soil
Investigation and Design for Slope
(SCOFG99), 11 & 12th May, 1999, Kuala
Lumpur
Gue, S.S. & C.S. Chen (2000) Failure of a
Reinforced Soil Wall on Piles. Proc. Of the 2nd
Asian Geosynthetics Conference, Kuala Lumpur,
pp. 37-42.
Gue, S.S. & Tan, Y.C. (2000) Subsurface
Investigation and Interpretation of Test Results
for Foundation Design in Soft Clay. Seminar
on Ground Improvement Soft Clay (SOGISC2000), UTM, Kuala Lumpur.
Houlsby, G.T. and Teh, C.I. (1988) Analysis of the
Piezocone in Clay. Proc. of the International
Symposium on Penetration Testing, ISOPT-1,
Orlando, 2, pp. 777-783, Balkema Pub.,
Rotterdam.
Hvorslev, M.J. (1937) (English Translation
1969) Physical Properties of Remoulded
Cohesive Soils (Vicksburg, Miss. : U.S.
Waterways Experimental Station), No. 69-5
Lambe, T.W. (1967) Stress Path Method.
Proc. ASCE, Journal of the Soil Mechanics
Page 15

and Foundations Division, 93(SM6), pp.309331.

Mesri, G. (1988) A Reevaluation of
su(mob)=0.22p using Laboratory Shear
Tests. Can. Geotech. J., Vol.26, pp.162164.
Mesri, G. (1973) Coefficient of Secondary
Compression.
ASCE, JSMFD, Vol.99,
No.SM1, pp.123-137.
Raj, J.K. & Singh, M. (1990) Unconsolidated
Holocene Sediments along the North-South
Expressway.
Proc. of the Seminar on
Geotechnical Aspects of the North-South
Expressway, Kuala Lumpur, pp.159-166.
Robertson, P.K. (1990) Soil Classification using the
Cone Penetration Test. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 27(1), 151-158.
Roscoe, K.H., Schofield, A.N. & Wroth, C.P. (1958)
On the Yielding of Soils, Geotechique 8(1),
pp.22-52.
Skempton, A.W. (1964) Long-Term Stability of
Clay Slopes. Geotechnique, Vol. 14, p.77.
Skempton, A.W. & Bjerrum, L., (1957) A
Contribution to the Settlement Analysis of
Foundation on Clay Geotechnique, 7, pp.168178.
Stroud, M.A. & Butler, F.G. (1975) The Standard
Penetration Test and the Engineering Properties of
Glacial Materials. Proc. Symp. On Engineering
Properties of Glacial Materials, Midlands
Geotechnical Society, Birmingham, pp.117-128.
Sully, J.P. and Campanella, R.G. (1994)
Evaluation of Field CPTU Dissipation Data in
Overconsolidated Fine-Grained Soils.
Proc.
th
13 ICSMFE, New Delhi. Vol.1, 201-204.
Tan, Y.C. (1999) Piezocone Tests and
Interpretation.
Short Course on Soil
Investigation and Design for Slope (SCOFG99),
11th & 12th May, 1999, Kuala Lumpur.
Teh, C.I. and Houlsby, G.T. (1991) An Analytical
Study of the Cone Penetration Test in Clay.
Geotechnique, 41(1), 17-34.
Terzaghi, K., Peck, R.B. & Mesri, G. (1996) Soil
Mechanics in Engineering Practice.3rd Edition,
Johy Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Tschebotarioff (1950) Discussion of Effect of
Driving Piles into Soft Clays by Cummings,
A.E., Kerkholf, G.O. and Peck, R. Transactions
ASCE Volume 115 p 296-310.
Wroth, C.P. & Wood, D.M., (1978) The
Correlation of Index Properties with some Basic
Engineering Properties of Soils.

Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 15, pp.137-145.
Page 16

04 - Planning SI and Interpretation of Results PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

04 - Planning SI and Interpretation of Results PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

04 - Planning SI and Interpretation of Results PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

22-23 September 2000

Planning of Subsurface Investigation and Interpretation of Test

We are all familiar with the cartoon of the leaning

In most projects, subsurface investigation (S.I.) is

3.1 Desk Study

Desk study includes review of the following

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

(a) Geological Maps and Memoirs

3.2 Site Reconnaissance

22-23 September 2000

and study the outcrops to identify previous slips or

3.3 Extent of Subsurface Investigation

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

22-23 September 2000

from the desk study and site reconnaissance. The

3.4.1 Light Dynamic

JKR or Mackintosh probe is usually used in

Depth of Field Tests for Stability

Depth of Field Tests for Foundation

Mackintosh and JKR Probes

Human errors are also prone in this method such

3.4 Selection of Types of Field Tests and

3.4.2 Boreholes with Standard Penetration Tests

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

Boreholes is sometime called deep boring. The

22-23 September 2000

increased. The SPT test is simple and rugged,

Figure 4 : Typical Rotary Drilling Rig (from

Figure 5 : Equipment for Standard Penetration

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

Piston sampler shown in Figure 6 is used for

When the subsoil is stiff, mazier sampler shall be

22-23 September 2000

Distorted or blunt cutting edge or dirty tubes

Thin Wall Sampler

For rock coring, rotary core drilling is commonly

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

boulders are suspected, coring of 5m may be needed.

tested as delays may lead to overestimation of

22-23 September 2000

Field Vane Shear Devices

Figure 10 shows the detailed terminology and design

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

reliable pore pressure measurement can be obtained.

22-23 September 2000

the ground surface. The aim of a pressuremeter test

Figure 11 : Typical Piezocone Rig

The advantages of piezocone are as follows :

Pressuremeter tests can be carried out both in soils

The borehole pressuremeter (commonly called

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

portion of the hole where the test is to be carried out.

22-23 September 2000

Typical Standpipe and Open-Hydraulic Piezometers (after Geoguide 2, 1987)

IEM Seminar on Geotechnical Engineering 2000, Penang.

Standpipe and open-hydraulic piezometers

The types of laboratory test commonly used in

SOIL CLASSIFICATION TEST