CIVL6077 Ground Investigation and Soil Testing

Lecture 4 In-situ Tests

Dr. Fiona Kwok
Room 521, Haking Wong Building
The University of Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2859 2655
Email: fiona.kwok@hku.hk

4.1 Introduction

In-situ Testing
The physical survey is that part of site Investigation which aims to determine

1.
2.

1.
2.
3.
4.

the physical properties of the ground.

These are required:
to classify the soil into groups of materials which will exhibit broadly similar
engineering behaviour; and
to determine parameters which are required for engineering design
calculations.
Sampling is difficult for the following soils, in-situ tests are generally required:
Very soft or sensitive clays
Stoney soils
Sands and gravels
Weak, fissured and fractured rocks

Information may be obtained in-situ in at least three ways:

1.
2.
3.

by using geophysical techniques; in particular, seismic techniques may be

used to obtain valuable estimates of the stiffness of the ground;
by using in-situ soil testing techniques, and
by making measurements using field instrumentation
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Types of In-situ Testing (1)

(http://geosystems.ce.gatech.edu/Faculty/Mayne/Research/devices/)

Types of In-situ Testing (2)

Empirical interpretation
No fundamental analysis is possible. Stress path strain levels, drainage

conditions and rate of loading are either uncontrolled or inappropriate

(Example: SPT)
Semi-analytical interpretation
Some relationships between parameters and measurements may be developed,

but in reality interpretation is semi-empirical, either because both stress paths

and strain levels vary widely within the mass of ground under test, or drainage
is uncontrolled, or inappropriate shearing rates are used.
(Example: Vane shear test based on Limit Equilibrium)
Analytical interpretation
Stress paths are controlled (although strain levels and drainage are not)

(Example: Self boring pressuremeter based on Cavity Expansion)

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Types of In-situ Testing (3)

In-situ tests are generally based on 3 technological principles:
1. penetration resistance
2. strength and/or compressibility
3. In-situ permeability

Drainage conditions during in-situ testing

It should be noted that drainage conditions are virtually impossible to control
during in-situ testing.
Tests carried out very slowly can be presumed to be drained, but may be
relatively expensive because of the time taken to carry them out.
Tests in clays are typically carried out rapidly, in an attempt to ensure that the
soil remains undrained this is difficult to ensure with any certainty, because
the presence of thin layers of silt or sand within the test section will have a very
great effect upon rates of pore pressure dissipation during testing.
Tests carried out in clay soils are typically analysed to give undrained
parameters (such as undrained shear strength, Cu), while in granular soils
drained parameters (such as the peak effective angle of friction ) are
determined.
(Clayton et al, 2007)

List of parameters determinable by in-situ tests

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Penetration Testing
Penetration Testing can be divided into two broad groups
1. Dynamic penetrometers. They consist of tubes or solid points driven by

repeated blows of a drop weight. e.g. SPT

2. Static penetrometers are more complex, being pushed hydraulically into the

soil. e.g. CPT

(Clayton et al, 2007)

4.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (1)

(Mayne, 2001)

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (2)

Mostly used for cohessionless soils to collect disturbed samples and its in-situ

strength (Provides very good correlation for angle of internal friction of

cohessionless soils). Also used for cohesive soils to have an estimation of its insitu strength.
A 63.5 kg (140 lb) hammer is used to be fallen on the drill rod and maintain a
drop of approximately 762 mm (30 in)to create a blow on the drill rod.
Due to the blow on the drill rod, the Split Spoon (or Split Barrel) Sampler
attached to the tip of the drill rod penetrates into the soil, and is driven a
distance of 450 mm.
The test is conducted for 3 consecutive penetrations each consisting of 150
mm. The first 150 mm penetration is ignored to avoid soil disturbances.
The number of blows required to drive the sampler a distance of 300 mm after
an initial penetration of 150 mm is considered as the SPT (Standard
Penetration Test) N value.
This N value reflects degree of densities (Relative Density) for cohesionless
soils (reliable) and also degree of firmness (Consistency) for cohesive soils (not
always reliable).
If 50 blows are reached before a penetration of 300 mm, no further blows
should be applied but the actual penetration should be recorded.
By the end of the test, the sampler is withdrawn with the disturbed soil sample
extracted from the Split Spoon.

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (3)

SPT hammer

Split Spoon Sampler

Disturbed sample collected by Split

Spoon Sampler
Area ratio =

104%

Measured N-value (blows/300 mm)

(Binns, 2007)

Equipment for Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Corrections made to SPT Blow Count

Corrections are normally applied to the SPT blow count to account for
differences in:

a)

energy imparted during the test: During the free-fall of the hammer,
there will be energy loss due to heat and noise dissipations, as well as
bending of the elements at collisions. It is recommended that the
correction factor for hammer efficiency (CE) is adopted as below:
75% for rod length < 10m
60% for rod length 10m

b)

the stress level at the test depth: Effective overburden pressures cause
a fictitious increase in N values with increasing depth (see graph).
.
where
100/
(Liao & Whitman, 1986)

c)

borehole diameter: It is found that lower N values are obtained in 150

and 200 mm diameter boreholes than in those less than 115 mm
diameter
borehole diameter correction factor
1.0 for borehole dia. 65-115 mm, 1.05 for dia. 150 mm,
1.15 for dia. 200 mm
rod length: The rod length affects the time of transmission of stress
waves from SPT hammer to split spoon sampler.
rod length correction factor
0.75 for rod length < 4 m, 0.85 for length 4-6 m, 0.95 for
length 6-10 m, 1.0 for length 10 m

d)

Collectively, we can combine all above to yield a general correction factor

equation for SPT:
(Craig, 2004)

Correlations of SPT for Cohesionless Soils

Soil type

SPT,

Relative Density,
Dr

Angle of internal friction,

Peck et al (1974)

Meyerhof (1956)

Very loose sand

<4

< 0.02

<29

< 30

Loose sand

4-10

0.2-0.4

29-30

30-35

Medium sand

10-30

0.4-0.6

30-36

35-40

Dense sand

30-50

0.6-0.8

36-41

40-45

Very dense sand

> 50

> 0.8

> 41

> 45

Correlation between
, N and v0 in
graphical form
(Schmertmann, 1975)

(Craig, 2004; Fang, 1991)

Correlations of SPT for Cohesive Soils

Soil type

Hand test

SPT,

Saturated
unit weight,
sat (kN/m3)

Unconfined
compressive
strength, Uc
(kPa)

Undrained
shear strength,
Cu (kPa)

Very soft clay

Extrudes between fingers

0-2

14.1-15.7

0-24

< 12.0

Soft clay

Molded by slight pressure

2-4

15.7-17.3

24-48

12.0-23.9

Medium (firm) clay

Molded by strong pressure

4-8

17.3-18.9

48-96

23.9-47.9

Stiff clay

Indented by thumb

8-16

18.9-20.4

96-192

47.9-95.8

Very stiff clay

Indented by thumbnail

16-32

20.4-22.0

192-384

95.8-191.5

Hard clay

Difficult to indent

>32

> 19.6

384

> 191.5

Correlation between N
and Uc of cohesive
soils of varying
plasticity in graphical
form (NAVFAC, 1982)

1 tsf = 96 kPa
1 blows/ft = 1.016 blows/300 mm

(Hunt, 2007)

SPT Reporting (1)

(Lehane, 2011)

SPT Reporting (2)

(GEO, 2010)

Is One Number Enough????

Cu = undrained strength
T = unit weight
IR = rigidity index
' = friction angle
OCR = overconsolidation
K0 = lateral stress state
eo = void ratio
Vs = shear wave
E' = Young's modulus
Cc = compression index
qb = pile end bearing
fs = pile skin friction
k = permeability
qa = bearing stress
Georgia Tech

CLAY

SAND

Dr = relative density
T = unit weight
LI = liquefaction index
' = friction angle
c' = cohesion intercept
eo = void ratio
qa = bearing capacity
p' = preconsolidation
Vs = shear wave
E' = Young's modulus
= dilatancy angle
qb = pile end bearing
fs = pile skin friction

(Mayne, 2001)

Is it Time for SPT to retire?

It is impossible to use 1 number (the SPT N value) to give satisfactory

correlations to a large number of soil parameters for present day design.

Time for CHANGE for geotechnical community!

1909: Telephone

1903: Wright plane

1902: SPT- Colonial Charles Gow of

Raymond Pile Company

2012: SPT!?!?!?
2012: Iphone 5

2005: Airbus A380-800

(Mayne, 2001)

Example 1
A Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was performed at 6 m depth of sand layer.
For the first, second and third 15 cm increments, the blow counts were reported
as 7, 8, 9 blows, respectively. The borehole diameter was measured as 150
mm and the SPT sampler used was a standard sampler with constant inside
diameter. The length of the rod from the bottom of the safety hammer to the
sampler at 6 m depth was measured as 8.2 m.
Estimate the corrected SPT blow counts for 300 mm penetration of the sampler
(water table depth is at 2 m and the unit weights of soil above and below water
tables can be assumed as 18 and 19 kN/m3, respectively)

Example 1 Solutions
Correction for hammer efficiency:
Rod length = 8.2 m

75%

Correction for overburden pressure:

18

100/

19

10

W.T.
6m

SAND

4 72 kN/m
100
72

dry = 18 kN/m3

2m

sat = 19 kN/m3

1.18

The principle of effective stress is fundamentally important in all soil mechanics problems.
The effective stress represents the average stress carried by the soil skeleton, which is
calculated as the difference between the total stress and the pore water pressure. You will
learn more about this in Topic 4.

Correction for borehole diameter:

Borehole diameter = 150 mm
Correction for rod length:
Rod length = 8.2 m

1.05
Only the last two
SPT results should
be included.

0.95

Corrected SPT blow count:

0.75

1.18

1.05

0.95

15 blows/300 mm
Medium sand

4.3 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) (1)

(Mayne, 2001)

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) (2)

Various configurations of cones (ASTM D3441)

Example of a piezocone with fixed

cone and friction sleeve

(http://geosystems.ce.gatech.edu/Faculty/Mayne/Research/devices/)

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) (3)

Developed by the Dutch, CPT is a fast and reliable means of

measuring continuously soil properties in-situ.

The continuous nature of CPT readings permit clear delineations
of various soil strata, their depths, thicknesses, and extent,
perhaps better than conventional rotary drilling operations that
use a standard drive sampler at certain vertical intervals. CPT
can be very effective in site characterization, especially sites with
discrete stratigraphic horizons or discontinuous lenses.
A cylinder probe with an area of 10 cm2 (36 mm diameter), tipped
with a cone that has a 60 degree apex. There are several
configurations of cones that vary mainly the position of the pore
pressure element (see figure earlier).
The cone is pushed into the soil at a continuous rate of 10-20
mm/s.
The cone penetrometer is instrumented with load cells to
measure point stress and friction during a constant rate of
advancement. These are measured separately at the tip of the
cone (cone resistance, qc) and along the sides (sleeve friction
resistance, qs).

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) (4)

Piezocells are also equipped to measure in-situ pore

pressures, u, in either dynamic (while advancing the cone)

or static (holding the cone stationary) modes. Those cone
penetrometers equipped with piezocells are called
piezocones.
Additional sensors can be readily incorporated with data
logged electronically, including resistivity, inclination, and
shear wave velocity, as well as a number of environmental
measurements (gamma, pH, salinity, temperature, etc.).
The apparatus can be mounted on a variety of platforms,
including truck or track mounts, small portable units, and
barges or drill ships.
Cone resistance can be used to calculate bearing capacity
and density but the results are badly affected if the
penetrometer impinges on particles larger than the cone.
Therefore, the equipment is unsuitable for the weathered
rocks of Hong Kong but is highly suitable for marine
sediments.

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) (4)

The Fugro truck for mobile CPT testing

Cylinder probe exposed beneath truck

Automatic data logging and reporting

Instrumentation room inside the truck

Mechanical Cones

Mechanical
cone
penetrometers

(Geoguide 2)

Electrical Cone Testing (1)

Because the Delft and Original Dutch friction cones are mechanical, they are

rugged, simple to use and to maintain.

Against this, however, they have a system of measurement which can lead to

serious errors (Begemann, 1969).

Because friction develops between the inner rods and the inside wall of the

outer rods the cone resistance should always be measured whilst the inner rods
are moving relative to the outer rods, in order to keep this friction to a minimum.
Pushing the inner and outer rods at the same time as measuring cone

resistance will result in large irregular variations in rod friction, and noticeable
decreases in the measured cone resistance after the penetration is stopped to
allow the addition of rods.
To eradicate this problem, electrical cone testing are developed. Electric cones

are more expensive, both in terms of cone manufacture and data logging and
recording.
They have advantages of being capable of measuring forces close to their point

of application (and therefore without the frictional and rod-shortening effects

described above), and of providing almost continuous data with respect to soil
depth.
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Electrical Cone Testing (2)

Cone resistance is measured as standard, and side friction measurement is also

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

extremely common. In addition, the following measurements can be

incorporated in the electrical cone:
cone inclination, to check that the cone is not drifting out of vertical
pore pressure (see piezocone in the following section)
soil resistivity (used, for example, in pollution studies)
ground vibration, using three-component geophones (in the seismic cone)
gamma-ray backscatter (for density determination);
pressuremeter values
sound (the acoustic penetrometer)

Meigh (1987) lists the advantages of the electric penetrometer as including:

improved accuracy and repeatability of results, particularly in weak soils
better delineation of thin strata (because readings can be taken more frequently)
faster over-all speed of operation
the possibility of extending the range of sensors in or above the tip (see above)
more manageable data handling
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Electrical Cone Testing (3)

Electrical cone
penetrometers

(Geoguide 2; Clayton et al, 2007)

Piezocone (CPTu) Testing

The measurement of pore water pressure during cone testing is particularly suited to

testing in soft, primarily cohesive, deposits. A porous element is included in the

apparatus, with an electronic pore pressure transducer mounted in a cavity behind it.
Piezocones are usually referred to in short hand by 'CPTu (u is the symbol for pore

water pressure).
There are 3 popular positions for the installation of porous elements. The major

applications of the piezocone include:

1.

Profiling. The inclusion of a thin pore-pressure-measuring element allows the

presence of thin granular layers to be detected within soft cohesive deposits. Such
layers are of great importance to the rate of consolidation of a soft clay deposit.

2.

Identification of soil type. The ratio between excess pore pressure and net cone
resistance provides a useful (although soil-type specific) guide to soil type.

3.

Determination of static pore pressure. Measurements of the static pore pressure can
be made in granular soils (where dissipation is rapid), and estimates can be made in
clay, either when the cone is stopped to add rods, or by deliberately waiting for full
dissipation of the excess pore pressures set up by penetration.

4.

Determination of in situ consolidation characteristics. In clays, the horizontal

coefficient of consolidation, Cy , can be determined by stopping the cone and
measuring pore pressure dissipation as a function of time.
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Piezocones (CPTu)

Piezocone

Position of porous elements on piezocones

(Clayton et al, 2007)

CPT Measurements
1.

Cone resistance, qc:

where Fc is the force required to push the cone into ground,
Ac is the plan area of the cone (100 cm2)
Corrections:
a) Because of the geometry of the cone, where pore water pressure acts downwards on
the back of the cone end (see Figure), the cone resistance will be under-recorded.
The corrected, total cone resistance, qt is:
1
where is the ratio of area of shaft to the area of cone (typically 0.70-0.85)
u is the pore water pressure at the top of the cone
b)

In soft cohesive soils, at depth, much of the cone resistance may be derived from the
effect of overburden, rather than the strength of the soil. In these circumstances the
net cone resistance, qn may be calculated:

Cone area ratio

= Fb/Fa

where v is the vertical total stress at which qn is measured

2.

Sleeve friction resistance, qs:

where Fs is the shear force on friction sleeve
As is the area of the friction sleeve (150 cm2)

3.

Friction ratio, fR:

Wroth (1984) argued that, to compensate for increasing overburden stress with depth, cone penetration test data
should be presented in normalised cone resistance (Q), normalised friction ratio (F) and normalised pore water
pressure (B):

where u is the excess pore water pressure generated during driving

(Clayton et al, 1995)

General Diagnosis of CPT Measurements

Soil type

Cone resistance, qc

Friction ratio, fR

Excess pore pressure, u

Organic soil

Low

Very high

Low

Normally consolidated
clay

Low

High

High

Sand

High

Low

Zero

Gravel

Very high

Low

Zero

Soil Classification by
CPT (1)
Simplified soil classification chart relating
impacts of age, consolidation and
induration (Robertson & Campanella,
1986)
Corrected total cone resistance (qt)
Vs
Friction ratio (fR)

(http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6067.htm/)

Soil Classification by
CPT (2)
Normalised soil classification chart
relating impacts of age, consolidation
and induration (Robertson, 1990)
Normalised cone resistance (Q)
Vs
Normalised friction ratio (F)

%
Soil behaviour type index (Ic) is given by:
3.47

log

log

1.22

(Clayton et al, 1995)

Normalised soil classification chart

relating impacts of age, consolidation
and induration (Robertson, 1990)
Normalised cone resistance (Q)
Vs
Normalised pore water pressure (B)

Normalized cone resistance, Q

Soil Classification by
CPT (3)

Normalized pore water pressure, B

Soil behaviour type index (Ic) is given by:
3.47

log

log

1.22
(Clayton et al, 1995)

CPT to SPT Conversion Chart

Useful when attempting to

correlate between CPT and
older SPT data

(Olsen, 1988)

Correlations of CPT for Cohesionless Soils

Empirical correlations are widely used to obtain estimates of effective angle of
shearing resistance ('). It should be borne in mind that empirical correlations are
soil-type dependent, and therefore are of limited accuracy.

Correlation between , qc and v0 for clean,

relatively uniform, uncemented, and unaged
sand (Robertson & Campanella, 1983)

Correlation between and qc for clean,

rounded, uncemented, and unaged sand
(Mayne, 2006)
(Robertson, 2010)

Correlations of CPT for Cohesive Soils

For cohesive soils, CPT is routinely used to determine both undrained shear strength and
compressibility.
In undrained conditions, the cone resistance (qc) can be expressed as an emprical
relationship:

where Nk is the cone factor and Cu is the undrained shear strength

Nk is not a constant. It depends on the geometry of the cone, the rate of penetration, soil
type and method by which Cu is measured (because Cu is sample-size and test-method
dependent).
Typically Nk varies from 10 to 18, with 14 as an average for Cu (average). Nk tends to increase
with increasing plasticity and decrease with increasing soil sensitivity. See table below.
For deposits where little experience is available, estimate Cu using the total cone resistance
(qt) and preliminary cone factor values (Nk) from 14 to 16.
For a more conservative estimate, select a value close to the upper limit.
Average Nk

Range of Nk

Normal consolidated clays

14

10-18

Stiff, fissured clays

27

24-30

Glacial clays

18

14-22

(Robertson, 2010)

(Rogers, 2011)

CPT Reporting

Example 2
The table on the right shows the CPT results on a
construction site. The CPT equipment has a cone
area ratio () of 0.80. Assume an average dry =
16.5 kN/m3 to water table at depth 3 m, and sat =
19.8 kN/m3 for below water table.

Depth, z (m)

qc (MPa)

qs (kPa)

0.5

1.86

22.02

1.5

1.16

28.72

2.5

2.28

24.89

3.5

0.29

12.44

a) Indicate the soil classification by depth.

4.5

0.38

15.32

b) Plot the cone penetration test data given in the

5.5

0.40

14.74

6.5

6.90

28.72

7.5

9.20

26.81

8.5

8.45

43.09

9.5

9.50

34.60

table including friction ratio fR.

c) Estimate undrained shear strength (Cu) at

depth 5.5 m assuming the cone factor Nk = 18.

d) Estimate angle of shearing resistance of the

soil () at depth 7.5 m.

Example 2 Solutions (1)

3m

dry = 16.5 kN/m3

1
0.2

a) Corrected total cone resistance:

sat = 19.8 kN/m3

Total stress:

for z

3
Effective stress:

W.T.

for z

u
Normalised cone resistance:
Normalised friction ratio:

3
10

Pore water pressure:

0
10

for z

for z

for z
for z

3
3

0.2

0.2

Calculations above are performed for each depth level and the results are
summarised in the table on the next page. Having found Q and F, the soil type for
each depth can be determined using the classification chart for CPT.

Example 2 Solutions (2)

Depth,
z (m)

qc (MPa)

qs (kPa)

v0 (kPa)

v0 (kPa)

qt (MPa)

0.5

1.86

22.02

8.25

8.25

1.86

224.45

1.19

6: Sands- clean sand to silty sand

1.5

1.16

28.72

24.75

24.75

1.16

45.87

2.53

5: sand mixtures- silty sand to

sandy silt

2.5

2.28

24.89

41.25

41.25

2.28

54.27

1.11

6: Sands- clean sand to silty sand

(normally consolidated)

3.5

0.29

12.44

59.40

54.40

0.29

4.26

5.37

3: Clays- silty clay to clay

4.5

0.38

15.32

79.20

64.20

0.38

4.73

5.04

3: Clays- silty clay to clay

5.5

0.40

14.74

99.00

74.00

0.41

4.14

4.82

3: Clays- silty clay to clay

6.5

6.90

28.72

118.80

83.80

6.91

81.00

0.42

6: Sands- clean sand to silty sand

7.5

9.20

26.81

138.60

93.60

9.21

96.91

0.30

6: Sands- clean sand to silty sand

8.5

8.45

43.09

158.40

103.40

8.46

80.30

0.52

6: Sands- clean sand to silty sand

(normally consolidated)

9.5

9.50

34.60

178.20

113.20

9.51

82.46

0.37

6: Sands- clean sand to silty sand

F (%)

Soil classification

Example 2 Solutions (3)

b)

Profiles

Example 2 Solutions (4)

Profiles

Example 2 Solutions (5)

Normalised
profiles

Example 2 Solutions (6)

c)

Total stress!

Using the correlation equations for clays:

At depth 5.5 m:

0.40 MPa
99.00 kPa
18
0.40

d) At depth 7.5 m:

1000
18

99.00

16.7 kPa

9.20 MPa
138.6 kPa
96.91

There are two correlation charts relating angle of friction for sands (cohesionless soil).
Either one of them can be used.

Robertson & Campanella, 1983 :

41 degrees

Mayne, 2006 :

39 degrees

Comparisons between CPT and SPT

SPT
Advantages

Disadvantages

Relatively simple to perform

Rugged: few moving parts, no electrical parts
Provides a representative soil sample Provides
useful index of relative strength and compressibility
of the soil
Able to penetrate dense layers, gravel and fill
The SPT is an in situ test that reflects soil density,
soil fabric, stress and strain history effects, and
horizontal effective stress, all of which are known to
influence the liquefaction resistance but are difficult
to obtain with undisturbed samples.

The SPT does not typically provide continuous data,

therefore important data such as weak seams may be
missed.
Limited applicability to cohesive soils, gravels, cobbles
boulders
May not be as standard as it sounds
Can be time consuming
In addition to overburden pressure and relative density
the SPT N-value is also a function of soil type, particle
size, and age and stress history of the deposit.
Due to considerable differences in apparatus and
procedure, significant variability of measured
penetration resistance can occur. The basic problems
to consider are change in effective stress at the bottom
of the borehole, dynamic energy reaching the sampler,
sampler design, interval of impact, penetration
resistance count.
Measures only index properties
Samples that are obtained from the SPT are disturbed.

CPT
Faster than SPT in soft or loose soils
Penetration is interrupted only when additional rods
need to be added.
Continuous measurements of cone resistance,
sleeve friction, and pore water pressure are made.
Inclinometers can be installed to monitor deflection
of the penetrometer.
Elimination of operator error on test result
compared to SPT
Reliable, repeatable test results
No soil sample is recovered (uncertainty about
classification).
Test results are unreliable in gravel and very stiff
soil, where the penetrometer can be damaged.
Thin layers can be "found", but for obtaining
properties need at least 5 diameters of penetration
into layer.
Good for "seeing" layers, not so good for
quantifying (empirical correlations will improve with
time)
Measures only index properties
Mobilization of a special cone rig is expensive.

Strength/ Compressibility Testing

As strength and compressibility parameters are generally required for engineering calculations,
many forms of test have been developed with the specific purpose of determining them in
particular soil or rock types.

1.

The field vane shear test. This is used exclusively to measure the undrained shear strength of
soft or firm clays.

2.

The pressuremeter test. This is used routinely to determine strength and compressibility
parameters for routine design, for all types of soil and weak rock, but (in its self-boring form)
used in the UK for special projects in overconsolidated clays, to determine undrained strength,
shear modulus, and coefficient of earth pressure at rest, K0.

3.

The plate loading test. This is used primarily to obtain the stiffness of granular soils and
fractured weak rocks.

4.

The Marchetti dilatometer. This is not yet used commercially worldwide, but, is becoming
more widely used.

Drainage Considerations

In-situ strength and compressibility tests are sometimes very much more expensive than
laboratory tests. They suffer from the disadvantage that the soil under load has no drainage
control (i.e. the true state of drainage during the test is not normally known because, unlike a
triaxial test, there is no far drainage boundary), but they are often used because of the many
types of soil which do not lend themselves to good- quality sampling.

Tests on cohesive soils are loaded rapidly, in order that they can be assumed undrained. This
gives rise to significant rate effects. Free-draining soils and weak rocks are assumed to be
drained, and are generally loaded more slowly.
(Clayton et al, 2007)

4.3 Vane Shear Test (VST)

Vane Shear Test (VST) (1)

The field shear vane test (VST) is a means of determining the in-situ undrained shear of fully
saturated clays without disturbance.

Erratic results are obtained if the soil contains gravel or any other large particles, and in Hong
Kong the use of the vane should be limited to the marine sediments.

The vane shear test basically consists of pushing a four-bladed (cruciform) vane, mounted on a
solid rod, into the soil and rotating it from the surface. The measured increasing torque is applied
to the shaft until the soil fails as indicated by a constant or dropping torque by shearing on a
circumscribing cylindrical surface. The test is carried out rapidly.

Assuming peak strengths are mobilized simultaneously along all vane edges, the maximum
torque (T) is given as:
D
D 2

T
HCuv Cuh
2
3

where Cuv and Cuh are the undrained shear strength in vertical and horizontal

directions respectively
D is the vane diameter

H is the vane height

This equation in two unknowns, Cuv and Cuh, can only be solved if the torque is
found for two vanes with different height to diameter ratios. It is often incorrectly
assumed Cuv = Cuv = Cu, and hence:
T

D 2

D
H Cu kCu
2
3

where k is a geometrical constant of the vane

Vane Shear Test (VST) (2)

The in-situ shear vane may be used in inspection pits and down boreholes for the
extensive determination of in-situ strength profiles as part of a site investigation
programme.
Some types of shear vane equipment have the extension rods in an outer casing with the
vane fitting inside a driving shoe. This type of vane may be driven to the desired depth and
the vane extended from the shoe and the test carried out. The vane may then be retracted
and driving continued to a lower depth.
It must be emphasized that the in-situ vane provides a direct measure of shear strength
and because the torque application is hand operated, it is a relatively rapid strength
measure, therefore giving the undrained shear strength.

Interpretation of vane shear test (VST):

1. Penetration causes negligible disturbance, both in changes in effective stress and shear
distortion.
2. No drainage occurs before and during shear
3. Soil is isotropic and homogeneous.
4. Soil fails on a CYLINDICAL shear surface.
5. Diameter of the shear surface is equal to the width of the vane blades
6. At peak and remoulded strength, there is a UNIFORM shear stress distribution across the
shear surface.
7. No progressive failure, maximum torque = undrained shear strength

Vane Shear Test (VST) (3)

(Mayne, 2001)

Vane Shear Test (VST) (4)

(Geoguide 2)

Vane Shear Test (VST) (5)

Vane Set-up

Specification of vane size in UK

VST Procedures
1.

Push the vane slowly with a single thrust from the bottom of the borehole or
protected sleeve for the distance required to ensure that it penetrates
undisturbed soil. Ensure that the vane is not rotated during this stage.

2.

Attach a torque wrench, or preferably a purpose-built geared drive unit, to

the top of the vane rods, and turn the rods at a slow but continuous rate. BS
1377:1990 specifies a rate of 6-12/min whilst ASTM D2573 specifies that
the rate shall not exceed 6/min.

3.

Record the relationship between rod rotation (at ground surface) and
measured torque by taking readings of both at intervals of 15-30s.

4.

Once maximum torque is achieved, rotate the vane rapidly through a

minimum of ten revolutions, and immediately (within 1 mm ASTM D2573)
restart shearing at the previous slow rate, to determine the remoulded
strength of the soil.

(Clayton et al, 2007)

VST Measurements
The undrained shear strength of the saturated soil is proportional to the applied

torque and the dimensions of the vane.

The undrained shear strength is calculated by equating the torque to the

moments corresponding to the total shear strength over the sides and the ends
of the cylindrical shear failure surface:
Torque = (1) + (2)
(1): moment of shear resistance force on the side of the cylindrical failure
surface
(2): moment of shear resistance force at the two ends of the cylindrical failure
surface

Corrections made to Vane Strengths (1)

By comparing the stability of embankments which had failed with the predicted stabilities
based on in-situ vane measurements, Bjerrum (1972) derived an empirical correction
factor based on the plasticity index to enable the strength measurements made by
conventional rectangular vanes to be factored to give a realistic forecast of field stability.

Bjerrum (1972) and Simons et al (2002) considered 29 case histories when formulating
the Bjerrums correction factor B where

Cu field
Cu VST

1
FOS VST

(Simons et al, 2002)

Corrections made to Vane Strengths (2)

Menzies (1976) made further corrections to the Bjerrum correction factor by considering
the simplified bearing capacity model below.

The soil was taken to be weightless and to fail on a circular arc. It was assumed that the
difference between the vertical undrained shear strength Cuv and the horizontal
undrained shear strength Cuh may be distributed as the square of the direction cosine,
giving undrained shear strength in any direction as

Cu Cuh [1 ( R 1) cos 2 ]

R Cuv / Cuh
Menzies (1976) obtained a factor A which
corrects for the influence of strength anisotropy
on conventional shear vane measurements used
to predict field bearing capacity as

[( R 1)2 ( R 1) sin 2 ] / sin 2

A
2.37(2 R 0.33)
where
and

tan 2 2k
k

( R 1) [( R 1) sin 2 ] / 2
( R 1) ( R 1) cos 2
(Simons et al, 2002)

Corrections made to Vane Strengths (3)

In order that the conventional shear vane strength (Cu)VST may be used in a traditional
limit analysis, i.e. assuming the soil has a rigid-plastic, shear strength-displacement
relationship which does not vary with direction, it is suggested that (Cu)VST should be
corrected to give the field strength (Cu)field as follows:

Cu field A B Cu VST
where A is the correction factor for strength anisotropy
and B is Bjerrum's correction factor for the effects of testing rate and progressive failure
Some Comments on Vane Shear Tests (VST)

Common in-situ test used for determining the undrained shear strength of saturated
clays

Needs prior calibration before use

Applicable to soft clays

Gives geo-profile at a point

VST has well-established theory basis and is generally reliable

(Simons et al, 2002)

4.4 Pressuremeter

Pressuremeter (1)

The pressuremeter was developed in France in the early

1950s (Menard, 1957). In its earliest form it was (and
remains today) a simple, robust mechanical tool, welladapted to use in routine investigations.

The Menard pressuremeter can be used to obtain strength

and deformation characteristics of soils and rocks.

The equipment consists of a probe which, when placed in a

borehole, can be inflated.

The pressuremeter probe, which is a cylindrical device designed to apply uniform pressure to
the ground via a flexible membrane, is normally installed vertically, thus loading the ground
horizontally. It is connected by tubing or cabling to a control and measuring unit at the ground
surface.
The volume changes of the probe, the expansion of which is limited to that in the radial plane,
can be measured by means of a surface volume meter to which the probe is connected.
A pressure versus volume change graph can be plotted, and this is converted into a stressstrain curve. From the test results, a limit pressure, which reflects the ultimate bearing capacity,
is determined.
A deformation modulus may also be determined, from which a rapid estimation of settlement
may be made.
The aim of a pressuremeter test is to obtain information on the stiffness, and in weaker
materials on the strength of the ground, by measuring the relationship between radial applied
pressure and the resulting deformation.

(Simons et al, 2002)

Types of Pressuremeter
1.

The pre-bored pressuremeter

Borehole is formed using any conventional type of drilling rig capable of producing a
smooth-sided test cavity.

The pressuremeter has a slightly smaller outside diameter than the diameter of the hole,
and can therefore be lowered to the test position before being inflated.

2.

The self-boring pressuremeter (SBP)

Reduce the almost inevitable soil disturbance caused by forming a borehole

Incorporates an internal cutting mechanism at its base; the probe is pushed hydraulically
from the surface, whilst the cutter is rotated and supplied with flush fluid

3.

Displacement (Push-in) pressuremeter

Used only rarely in conventional, on-shore, site investigations

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Pressuremeter (2)

Pressuremeters enter the ground by pushing, by pre-boring a hole into which the probe is
placed, or by self-boring where the instrument makes its own hole.

Once in the ground, increments of pressure are applied to the inside of the membrane
forcing it to press against the material and thus forming a cylindrical cavity.

A test consists of a series of readings of pressure and the consequent displacement of

the cavity wall, and the loading curve so obtained may be analysed using rigorous
solutions for cylindrical cavity expansion and contraction.

Interpretation of the pressuremeter test results must take account of the disturbance
caused by the method used to place the probe in the ground.

The least disruptive of the methods is self-boring where disturbance is often small enough
to lie within the elastic range of the material and is therefore recoverable.

This is the only technique with the potential to determine directly the in-situ lateral stress
h0, the major source of uncertainty when calculating K0, the coefficient of earth pressure
at rest.

The disturbance caused by pre-boring and pushing is never recoverable.

However, for any pressuremeter test it is possible to erase the previous stress history by
taking the material to a much higher stress than it has previously seen, and then to
reverse the direction of loading. The point of reversal is a new origin and the stress-strain
response will be that due to the undisturbed properties of the material.
(Simons et al, 2002)

Pressuremeter (3)

(Simons et al, 2002)

Pre-bored Pressuremeter (1)

A hole is formed in the ground by conventional drilling tools and the instrument is

subsequently placed in the pre-formed hole.

The major drawback of this method is the complete unloading of the cavity wall

that takes place in the interval between removing the boring tool and pressurizing
the probe. The material must be capable of standing open and so the method is
best suited to rock. It is possible to make a test in stiff clay.
Comparing the pre-bored curve with the self-bored curve, however, shows how

much further the cavity has to be expanded before the influence of insertion
disturbance can be erased.
A pre-bored operation will require the assistance of a drilling rig. Unlike the other

insertion methods, however, if the hole is cored then it is possible to make

laboratory tests on material that is directly comparable to that tested by the
pressuremeter.
Pre-bored pressuremeter testing in a vertical hole has been carried out to depths

greater than 500 m and depths of 200 m are routine.

(Simons et al, 2002)

Pre-bored Pressuremeter (2)

(Mayne, 2001)

Pre-bored Pressuremeter (3)

(GEO, 2010)

Pre-bored Pressuremeter (3)

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Pre-bored Pressuremeter (5)

The pressure of both gas and water is increased in equal increments of time, and
approximately equal increments of pressure.

Resulting changes in measuring-cell volume are recorded at 15 s, 30 s, 60 s and 120 s

after each pressure increment is applied. Corrections must be made to rubber
membrane and thin metal cover.

Each test consists of about 10 approximately equal pressure increments.

The results are plotted as:

1.

a pressuremeter curve (i.e. corrected volumetric expansion (at 120 s) as a function of

corrected pressure)

2.

a creep curve (i.e. the measured volume change between 30 s and 60 s, for each
pressure, also plotted as a function of corrected pressure).

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Pressuremeter Curve and Creep Curve

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Pressuremeter Curve (1)

The pressuremeter curve can be divided into 3 phases:

1.

bedding of the probe against the borehole wall, and re-establishment of horizontal in-situ
stress (p < p0)

2.

pseudo-elastic linear stress-strain behaviour, with low levels of creep (p0 < p < pf)

3.

plastic deformation, with increasing amounts of creep measured as the soil approaches failure
(pf < p < pL)

The limit pressure for a borehole pressuremeter test was defined by Menard as the pressure
necessary to expand the probe to twice its original volume. The net limit pressure pL* is defined
*
pL pL h0
as:
where h0 is the in-situ horizontal stress in the ground

The limit is used empirically in providing bearing capacity of foundation.

In clay,

p
Cu L
Np

Np is an empirical factor (5.5 10)

Pressuremeter modulus (Em) is obtained from the gradient of the pressure-volume curve
in the pseudo-elastic linear region.
Em A

p
V

A is the probe size

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Pressuremeter Curve (2)

From elastic analysis,

V 2p (1 )

V
E

E 2(1 )V

p
V

where V is the volume of the measuring cell at the point of measurement (= V0 + Vm)

Typically, then, A = 1500-3000 cm3 for a Menard-type probe with an increase in volume of 200
cm3, because:
A 2(1 )(V0 Vm )

Baguelin et al (1978) give a table of values by which EM should be divided in order to obtain
design values of Youngs modulus, E. varies from 0.25 to 1.0, depending upon EM/pL and soil
type.

The undrained shear strength of clay can also be estimated using the following semi-analytical
solution:
p p0
Kb is typically 5.5 and it depends on Ec/pL
Cu L
2Kb
(Lukas & deBussy, 1976)

Data Interpretation

p0: Seating Stress correlates with total in-situ horizontal stress

pt: Yield Stress

p0 to pr corresponds to the Pressuremeter Modulus (EM)

pL: Limit Stress correlates with strength P

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Self-boring Pressuremeter (SBP) (1)

The instrument is a miniature tunnelling machine that makes a pocket in the ground into
which the device very exactly fits.

The foot of the device is fitted with a sharp-edged internally tapered cutting shoe. When
boring, the instrument is jacked into the ground, and the material being cut by the shoe
is sliced into small pieces by a rotating cutting device.

The distance between the leading edge of the shoe and the start of the cutter is
important and can be optimized for a particular material. If too close to the cutting edge
the ground suffers stress relief before being sheared. If the cutter is too far behind the
shoe edge then the instrument begins to resemble a close ended pile.

In stiff materials the usual setting is flush with the cutting shoe edge. The cutting device
takes many forms. In soft clays it is generally a small drag bit whereas in more brittle
material a rock roller is often used.

The instrument is connected to the jacking system by a drill string. This is in 2 parts an
outer fixed casing to transmit the jacking force and an inner rotating rod to drive the
cutter device.

The drill string is extended in 1 metre lengths as necessary to allow continuous boring
to take place.

All the cut material is flushed back to the surface through the instrument annulus without
erosion of the cavity wall. Normally water is used but air and drilling mud have been
applied successfully.
(Simons et al, 2002)

Self-boring Pressuremeter (SBP) (2)

Self-boring is effective in materials from loose sands and soft

clays to very stiff clays and weak rock. It will not operate in
gravel and materials hard enough to damage the sharp
cutting edge.

In principle the probe can be made to enter the ground with

no disturbance at all. In practice the probe causes a small,
generally recoverable, degree of disturbance that must be
assessed before deciding a value for the in-situ lateral stress.

The SBP requires a modest amount of reaction. On some

soft clay sites it is possible for the self-boring kit to operate
without support from other drilling tools.

The minimum interval between tests is 1 metre. Where tests

are more widely spaced or in materials with occasional
bands of hostile layers the SBP can be used in conjunction
with a cable percussion system or be driven by a rotary rig
using special adaptors.

Self-boring in a vertical hole is routinely carried out to depths

of 60 m or more.

The self-boring method is also used as a low-disturbance

insertion system for other devices such as load cells and
permeameters
(Simons et al, 2002)

Self-boring Pressuremeter (SBP) (3)

Both stress and strain control can usually be applied to SBP, via a computer-controlled
pressure system.

It is normal to adopt a stress-controlled approach in the early part of the test, followed
by strain control once plastic strains commence (p > pf). For clays, Windle & Wroth
(1977) suggest that a strain rate of 1%/mm is suitable. High rates of strain are required
in order to ensure, as far as possible, that the test remains undrained.

During self-boring pressuremeter testing it is normal to include at least one small

unload-reload loop, in order to allow stiffness to be calculated. A final unload curve is
also normally obtained.

As with the pre-bored pressuremeter, the results must be corrected for membrane
stiffness and system compliance before being plotted. But in this case careful additional
calibrations are also necessary for the various electronic instruments (pressure
transducers and displacement strain followers) that are used. Mair & Wood (1987) very
sensibly recommend that the engineer commissioning SBP should require both the raw
data and the calibration data to be reported, in order that the accuracy with which the
corrections have been applied can be checked.

After application of corrections, self-boring pressuremeter test results are plotted as a

curve of corrected pressure (p) as a function of cavity strain (c). Cavity strain is the
radial strain of the cavity,
d d0
d0 = original diameter of pressuremeter
c
d0

d = current diameter of pressuremeter at pressure p

(Simons et al, 2002)

Self-boring Pressuremeter (SBP) (4)

SBP Results (1)

(Simons et al, 2002)

SBP Results (2)

In clays, the pressuremeter curve starts, at least notionally, at the in situ stress. It then
proceeds through an elastic phase, and an elasto-plastic phase. At least one unloadreload cycle is carried out.

The interpretation of self-boring pressuremeter tests can be based upon all of these
phases, in order to obtain in-situ horizontal total stress, stiffness, and undrained
strength.

a) In-situ horizontal stress

In-situ horizontal stress is normally determined
using the lift-off method. The point of lift off is
detected by a break in the initial slope of the cavity
strain-pressure curve. The initial, stiff part of the
pressure strain relationship is a function of
strain-arm and membrane compliance. It is
normal to examine the curves for each of the
three strain arms independently.

The time between the end of drilling and the start

of testing will probably have an influence on the
values obtained. Mair & Wood (1987) note that it
may be desirable to use a rest period of between
1 and 2 hours in order to overcome some of the
mechanical disturbance effects associated with
poor installation procedures.

(Clayton et al, 2007)

SBP Results (3)

b) Stiffness

Stiffness is determined in the form of shear modulus, G (for an isotropic elastic solid G =
E/[2(1 + n)]), from the slope of the unload-reload loops in the loading curve.

If the soil is presumed to behave elastically, as might be expected for an elastic-perfectly

plastic material during a relatively small unload-reload cycle, then the shear modulus is:
1 d dp

G
2 d 0 d c

c) Stiffness

Gibson and Anderson (1961) derived (for the SBP) the expression:

G
p p0 Cu 1 ln
Cu

V
Cu ln

for an elastic-perfectly plastic soil, once yielding commences (at p = p0 + Cu). As pressure
increases the volume of soil undergoing plastic straining increases, and the tangent
stiffness decreases, since the increasing volume of material shearing plastically has no
tangent stiffness.

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Comments of Pressuremeter Testing (1)

Advantages of pressuremeter testing

A large number of fundamental soil properties are obtained from a single test.

To derive these properties, no empirical correcting factors whatsoever are needed.

Measurements are made in-situ at the appropriate confining stress. A large volume of
material is tested a typical test loads a column of material 0.5 m high and extending to
more than 10 times the expanded cavity radius. This is the equivalent of at least 1000
triaxial tests on 38 mm samples!!!

Representative loads are applied.

Results can be obtained quickly as all the data logging and most of the data processing is
carried out by automated systems.

Commercial operation has shown that the instruments, though more complex than
conventional site investigation equipment, are reliable.

There are many materials whose properties can only be realistically determined by in-situ
measurement.

The pressuremeter test is particularly appropriate for predicting the performance of

laterally loaded piles.

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Comments of Pressuremeter Testing (2)

Disadvantages of pressuremeter testing

The instrument will not penetrate gravels, claystones or the like, so generally
pressuremeter testing requires support from conventional drilling techniques.

Failure planes and deformation modes are not usually appropriate to those occurring in
the final design. An estimate of the anisotropy of the material will be required in order to
derive vertical parameters from lateral values.

Many familiar design rules and empirical factors are based on parameters obtained from
traditional techniques. It is not always possible to use them with pressuremeter derived
values, even if the in-situ parameters more accurately represent the true state of the
ground.

Only two stress paths can in practice be followed undrained and fully drained.

The instruments and their associated equipment are complex by conventional site
investigation standards and can only be operated by trained personnel.

Use of an inappropriate analysis to interpret a pressuremeter test can result in seriously

misleading parameters.

(Clayton et al, 2007)

4.5 Dilatometer Test (DMT)

Dilatometer Test (DMT) (1)

The Marchetti Dilatometer is a simple device, shaped in the form of a flat

blade designed to be pushed into the ground. The Marchetti dilatometer was
developed to evaluate the soil modulus Es.
The Marchetti Dilatometer probe consists in a steel blade with a circular
membrane in one of its sides. The membrane has electrical sensors which
can detect its position (flexed to the inside or outside and parallel to the
blade). This blade is pushed into the ground and at desired depths the
membrane is inflated using any kind of compressed gas, normally nitrogen.
The test is carried out by pushing or hammering the blade into the soil, whilst
measuring penetration resistance, and then using gas pressure to expand a
60 mm diameter thin steel membrane (mounted on one side of the blade)
approximately 1.1 mm into the soil.
The operator measures various pressures during the inflation-deflation cycle,
before advancing the blade to the next test depth.
The test is generally well adapted to normally consolidated clays and
uncemented sands, where the force required for penetration is relatively low,
but it is also finding increasing use in overconsolidated cohesive deposits.
Typically a hydraulic CPT rig is used to advance the probe, although
conventional boring equipment, together with an SPT trip hammer can also
be used.
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Dilatometer Test (DMT) (2)

(Mayne, 2001)

Dilatometer Test (DMT) (3)

DMT Measurements (1)

The test is accomplished by advancing the dilatometer to a specified depth and increasing
the nitrogen gas pressure until the membrane is flush with the blade. This pressure is
noted as the A-pressure, the pressure required to begin to move the membrane against
the soil.
The membrane is then inflated further until the centre of the membrane is displaced
1.1mm into the soil. This pressure is noted as the B-pressure.
The blade is then advanced into the ground to the next depth increment and the procedure
is repeated. The A and B pressure readings can be corrected by calibration factors (A,
B) to obtain p0 and p1.
1.05

0.05

A controlled depressurization is then carried out to determine the point at which the
membrane returns to its original position, which is recorded as the C-pressure. Similarly,
the C-pressure needs to be corrected by the calibration factors to obtain p2.

1.05

0.05

The corrected C-pressure can give a measure of the in-situ pore pressure, u, in freedraining granular soils.
Dilatometer testing can also give penetration measurements while advancing. The
instantaneous dilatometer penetration resistance (qD) is determined from:

where PD = measured penetration force, and AD = plan area of the dilatometer (95 mm x
14 mm = 13.3 cm2, as compared with the CPT plan area of 10cm2).
(Clayton et al, 2007)

DMT Measurements (2)

4 DMT indices are calculated from the test measurements to further correlate with soil
properties.

1)

Material Index (a normalised modulus which varies with soil type):

2)

Horizontal stress Index (a normalized lateral stress):

3)

Dilatometer modulus (an estimate of elastic Youngs modulus):

34.7
4)

Pore pressure index (a measure of the pore pressure set up by membrane expansion):

(Clayton et al, 2007)

DMT Reporting

(Mayne, 2001)

DMT Results
Soil Classification
Soil profiling and identification can be
performed with the indices ID and ED
(see chart on the right).
1)

2)

Estimation of undrained shear

strength

0.22

0.5

Determination of in-situ pore

water pressure in granular soils
As mentioned before, the corrected
C-pressure (i.e. p2) is equal to the insitu pore pressure. This is because
for high-permeability soils, in the
minute or so after loading, sufficient
drainage occurs to re-establish
equilibrium pore pressures.
3)

4)

Estimation of effective angle of

friction (in degrees)

28

14.6 log

2.1 log

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Some Comments on DMT

DMT Tests are becoming more and more common these days.
DMT is a useful index and design test.
DMT is reliable in range of finer soils.
DMT gives near-continuous soil profile (less suitable in harder soils).
DMT has well-established theory and empirical basis.
Only one device type, rugged; Simple test equipment
DMT results are operator-independent and repeatable.

4.6 Plate Loading Test

Plate Loading Test (1)

This test is used to estimate the compressibility and ultimate bearing capacity of

soils which are not easily sampled.

The load is applied to the plate in increments of one fifth of the design load. The
next increment is not applied until the settlement rate has reduced to 0.1 inch/min
for a period of 60 mins. The increments are applied until shear failure or until the
loading is 2 to 3 times the design load.
Settlement is fastest in the first few minutes after each new load increment, thus
settlement readings are recorded on a 'integer square' basis, i.e. 1, 4, 9, 16, 25 min
intervals. This enables the collection of more data in the early stages of each load
increment.
Typically, time-settlement and load-settlement curves are then produced. BS
5930:1981 suggests relationships to estimate soil elastic moduli from the test
results.
The Code of Practice for Foundations (published by BD in 2004) Section 8.2 also
outlines the requirements of test standard in Hong Kong.
The number of tests that should be carried out depends on both the soil variability
and the consequences of poor data on geotechnical design. Tests should not
normally be carried out in groups of less than 3, and in order to allow assessments
of variability any plate testing should be carried out at the end of a site investigation,
or as part of a supplementary investigation.
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Plate Loading Test (2)

There are generally 2 types of plate loading test set-up.

1) Gravity loading method

In case of gravity loading method, a loading platform is constructed over the

column placed on the test plate and test load is applied by placing dead weight
in the form of sand bags, pig iron, concrete blocks, lead bars etc. on the
platform. Usually a hydraulic jack is placed between the loading platform and
the column top for applying the load to the test plate the reaction of the
hydraulic jack being borne by the loaded platform.
2) Reaction Truss Method (less common)
In case of reaction truss method, a steel truss of suitable size is provided to

bear the reaction of the hydraulic jack. The truss is firmly anchored to the
ground by means of steel anchors and guy ropes are provided for ensuring its
lateral stability.

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Gravity Loading Method (1)

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Gravity Loading Method (2)

(Geoguide 2)

Reaction Truss Method

(http://www.theconstructioncivil.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/8-Plate-Load-Test-Reaction-by-Truss-Loading.jpg)

Plate Loading Test Reporting

(Clayton et al, 2007)

Plate Loading Test Results (1)

a) Elastic modulus

For plate tests intended to give elastic moduli (E) values for soils or rocks, BS 5930:
1981 recommends the use of the equation for a uniformly loaded rigid plate on a semiinfinite elastic isotropic solid:

4
q = applied pressure between plate and soil, B = plate width, = settlement under applied
pressure q, and = Poissons ratio
b) Undrained shear strength in cohesive soils

Where plate tests are intended to give values of shear strength or bearing capacity in
cohesive soils, the load is not applied in stages. The plate is pushed downwards to give
a constant rate of penetration, and the undrained shear strength (Cu) is deduced from
the ultimate bearing capacity (qult):

= average bulk unit weight of the soil above the test position, H depth at which the test is
made, and Nc = bearing capacity factor, normally 6.15 for a circular loaded area at the
surface
(Clayton et al, 2007)

Plate Loading Test Results (2)

c) Modulus of Vertical Subgrade Reaction
The modulus of subgrade reaction (kt) is a conceptual relationship between soil pressure
and deflection. It is the constant of proportionality between the contact pressure and the
settlement of the foundation:
The value of kt obtained from p-y curve can be used to infer the relative density of sand and
the stiffness of cohesive materials (see tables on next page).

(http://classes.engr.oregonstate.edu/cce/winter2012/ce492/Modules/04_design_parameters/04-2_body.htm)

Plate Loading Test Results (3)

Limitations of Plate Loading Test

The test results reflect only the character of the soil located within a depth of

less than twice the width of bearing plate.

The test is of short duration type (cannot account for time-dependent effects of

soil). It does not give the ultimate settlements particularly in case of cohesive
soils.
For clayey soils, the bearing capacity for a large foundation, is almost the

same as that for the smaller test plate. But in dense sandy soils the bearing
capacity increases with the size of the foundation and hence the test with
smaller size test plate tends to give conservative values in dense sandy soils.
Therefore, the plate load test method of determining bearing capacity of soil

may be considered adequate for light or less important structures under normal
condition. However, in case of unusual soil stratum and for all heavy and
important structures, relevant laboratory tests or field test are essential to
establish the detailed soil properties.

(http://www.theconstructioncivil.org/plate-load-test-determine-bearing-capacity-of-soils)

5. Field Instrumentation

Instrumentation List (1)

(Kwong, 2011)

Instrumentation List (2)

(Kwong, 2011)

Instrumentation List (3)

(Kwong, 2011)

Inclinometer (1)

Inclinometer systems are used to monitor deformation of retaining structures,

embankments, landslides and slopes.

The system includes an inclinometer casing, an inclinometer probe and a control cable,
and an inclinometer readout unit.

The plastic inclinometer casing is typically installed in a near-vertical borehole that passes
through a zone of suspected movement. The bottom of the casing is anchored in stable
ground. The inclinometer probe is used to survey the casing and establish its initial profile.

The inclinometer casing is installed so that one set of grooves is aligned with the
expected direction of movement and the base is securely fixed into position well beyond
the expected zone of movement.

Inclinometer plastic casing

Inclinometer system

(Lankelma)

Inclinometer (2)

Ground movement causes the casing to move away from its initial position. The rate,
depth, and magnitude of this movement is calculated by comparing data from the initial
readings to data from subsequent readings.

(Lankelma)

Inclinometer (3)

(Wienhfer et al, 2011)

Extensometer

Extensometers are used for monitoring displacement between two surfaces that may shift
with respect to each other with time.

Extensometers have major applications in the measurement of lateral strains and

settlement in or beneath earth and rock fill embankments, and in dams. It is used in
measurement of foundation movements and displacement of retaining walls and tunnels.

The soil extensometer uses a vibrating wire sensor for monitoring displacement. The
system consists of a sensor assembly with flanges that is mounted with adaptors,
adjustment unit, sockets and extension rods between two anchors to monitor the
horizontal movement of surrounding soil.

As the push rod is moved out from the housing the spring is elongated causing an
increase in the vibrating wire tension (either compression or tensile strain can be
measured). This tension is directly proportional to movement of the displacement rod.

(itmsoil)

Piezometer Types

Different Groundwater Conditions

Standpipes (1)

Standpipes are used to measure groundwater

level.
A standpipe consists of rigid PVC tubing.
A standpipe tube with a porous piezometer tip
connected at its lower end is installed in a
borehole.
Groundwater can enter the tube only via the tip.
Depth to the water level is measured with a
water level meter. The water pressure
corresponds to the height of the water surface in
the standpipe above the piezometer tip.
In an unconfined aquifer, the water level in the
piezometer would be coincident with
the watertable.
In a confined aquifer under artesian conditions,
the water level in the piezometer indicates the
pressure in the aquifer, but not necessarily the
watertable.
Response to head variations is comparatively
slow, generally used for long term readings in
high permeability ground
Water Level Meter readings are feasible only in
near-vertical downward installations.
(GEO; itmsoil)

Standpipes (2)

(GEO)

Piezometers (1)

Piezometers are used to measure pore water pressure.

It consists of a cavity separated from the soil or rock by a porous element (the tip) and a
device for measuring the water pressure in the cavity.

The choice of piezometer type depends on the predicted water pressures, access for
reading, service life and response time required. Hong Kong soils are normally sufficiently
permeable that response time need not be considered when selecting piezometers.

There are 3 major types of piezometers commonly used for geotechnical works:

1.

Pneumatic piezometer

2.

Hydraulic piezometer

3.

Electric piezometer

(GEO)

Piezometers (2)

Pneumatic Piezometers

Pneumatic Piezometer is mechanically simple,

inexpensive, reliable and robust instrument for the
measurement and control of water pressures in soil and
rock.
Low volume change during measurement, therefore fast
response.
Pneumatic Piezometer consists of a porous tip installed
and sealed at the measuring horizon. The tip transducer
essentially consists of two independent compartments
within a rigid housing separated by a flexible diaphragm
valve.
In the sensing compartment pore water pressure is
transmitted through the pores of the porous filter and
acts on the dividing diaphragm, which is supported on
the reading side by a flat bulkhead that forms part of
the pneumatic section of the instrument.
Pneumatic piezometers are designed to operate in
saturated soils and are capable of measuring short-term
negative pressures.
However, because there is no facility for de-airing of the
tip, this diaphragm type of piezometer is unsuitable for
measuring long-term negative pressures in partially
saturated soils.

(itmsoil)

Hydraulic Piezometers

Hydraulic Piezometers are designed for the accurate

measurement of pore water pressures in fully or partially
saturated soil and rock.

The Piezometer tip comprises a porous ceramic filter

vessel. Twin hydraulic tubes connect each filter tip to a
remote reading terminal where the hydraulic pressure
may be read by either a Bourdon gauge or an electrical
pressure transducer.

The hydraulic system is flushable, so that air or gas

accumulation at the piezometer filter tip producing
reading inaccuracies and time lag can be fully removed
to provide a hard hydraulic circuit.

Can measure both positive and negative pressures

Fast response to pressure changes

Pressure measurement takes place at the terminal

location and not within the piezometer tip.

(itmsoil)

Electric Piezometers

Vibrating wire and electrical piezometers are

used to measure soil pore pressure or water
table level in boreholes.

Electric piezometer, inserted in a well, will

give a directly proportional signal to the
water level is inserted in.

The electric cable, fixed to the piezometer

body can be used for lowering the sensor
as well as for recovering it. Inside the cable
a tube connects transducer with the
atmosphere, allowing barometric shifts to act
contemporarily both on the surface of the
liquid and on the sensor element.

(itmsoil)

(Geoguide 2)

(Geoguide 2)