See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/277353701

Correlations between SPT, CPT, DP, PMT, DMT, CH, SP and PLT Tests Results on
Typical Profiles of Saprolitic Soils from Granite

Conference Paper · January 2001

CITATION READS

1 423

3 authors, including:

Nuno Cruz António Viana Da Fonseca

MOTA-ENGIL University of Porto
88 PUBLICATIONS   119 CITATIONS    183 PUBLICATIONS   861 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Residual Soil Characterization by in-situ testing View project

In situ testing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nuno Cruz on 03 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Parametrical Correlations between SPT, CPT, DPL, PMT, DMT, CH and
PLT Tests Results on a Typical Profile of Saprolitic Soils from Granite

António Viana da Fonseca

(PhD, Assistant Professor, Geot.Lab. Director)
José Fernando Vieira de Sousa
(Madeira Reg. Laboratory of Civil Engineering)
Nuno Bravo Cruz
(MSc in SMGE, CICCOPN and FCT University of Coimbra)
Faculdade de Engenharia – Dep. Engenharia Civil – Rua dos Bragas – 4050-123 Porto - Portugal

ABSTRACT: A typical profile of Porto region residual saprolitic soils from granite has been selected for an
extensive in situ testing research, which included: SPT, CPT, DP, PMT, DMT, CH (cross-hole) and PLT.
These plate loading tests were executed over 30, 60 and 90cm diameter plates.

Identification and classification based on such field testing methods and criteria for interpretation of the re-
sults in order to define mechanical properties (stress state, stiffness and shear strength) and geotechnical de-
sign parameters – mainly for shallow foundations purposes are discussed in this paper. Most attention will be
made on the adaptation of current criteria for evaluation of geotechnical properties, developed for transported
soils with similar physical properties, to the particularities of these residual soils, characterised by singular
fabric and structural (cementation) characteristics. Special emphasis will be made on the following levels:
 At rest stress state (K0) and yield locus or virtual preconsolidation stress state;
 Low and medium stiffness parameters, giving attention to non linear constitutive behaviour; relevance will
be also made on the relative position of deformability modulus on stress-strain levels;
 Shear strength, discussed on the ability of each technique to evaluate the dual importance of cohesive and
friction components, both relevant on these residual soils.
 an average value of 38 (Décourt, 1989). These val-
1 INTRODUCTION
ues agree with those deducted from back-analsys of
PLT and triaxial tests over undisturbed samples (Vi-
Residual saprolitic soils from granite are widely
ana da Fonseca, 1996). Nevertheless, cohesion inter-
dominant in large zones of Portugal. The bonded
cept calculated from these late tests is significant
structure and fabric of these soils have significant in-
(c’=8-12 kPa), which is a characteristic of residual
fluence on engineering behaviour, and several par-
soils and, therefore, strength solely defined by  
ticularities dominate foundation design in these ma-
will be rather conservative.
terials.
Systematic site investigations have been under-
(a)
taken for the last years in a different regional weath-
ered profiles. The experimental work that will be de- (b)
scribed here was carried out at sites in which homo-
geneous residual soil develop down to a significant Fig. 1. In situ test: (a) SPT and CPT; (b) CH and DMT.
depth.
Values of (N1)60 plotted on Skempton (1986) aba-
cus, Fig. 2, would indicate medium to high densities
2 THE EXPERIMENTAL SITE 1. GENERAL while direct evaluation of relative density (Dr0.3)
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROFILE indicates high porosity. It is believed that analysis
ruled by dilatant theories will be conservative. Be-
This site, with a plant of approximately 5030m2, sides, the association of OCR values greater than
presented an homogeneous weathered degree sapro- one, on characterization of these soils from SPT, de-
litic soil 6m thick as previously identified by SPT viates the results towards abnormal low strength
and DP exploring campaign. values.
These residual soils from granite from Porto have Correlations between NSPT and stiffness parame-
been well characterized (Viana da Fonseca et al., ters are very sensitive to different and crossed factors
1994). Details of geological data as well as of grain which raise different difficulties in getting conclu-
size distribution and Atterberg limits of the saprolitic sive models. However, it is reecognised that the rela-
soil can be found in Viana da Fonseca et al. (1997). tions between penetration parameters and maximum
Generally, results obtained with specimens taken shear modulus (G0) best assure some independence
from the SPT sampler and from blocks reveal a fair- on unavoidable misleading factors, such as scale ef-
ly homogeneous ground profile (well graded) classi- fects, non-linearity, etc (Jamiolkowski et al., 1988;
fied as SM (silty sand) or SM-SC (silty clayey sand), Robertson, 1991).
according to the ASTM Classification for Engineer-
ing Purposes. Natural physical properties were eval-
uated from these samples with values of 0.60 to 0.85 Fig. 2. (N1)60 versus Dr (Skempton, 1986).
for the void ratio and 15 to 27% for the water con-
tent, which correspond to degrees of saturation of 70 From the experimental data a linear relation could
to 100%. The natural particle arrangement is charac- be obtained:
terized by open voids on a cemented structure and
G0 (MPa)98 0.42  N 60 (1)
low values of relative density (ID 0.28).
The variation of G0 with effective mean stress
(’m0) is very low when compared with other param-
3 DERIVED PARAMETERS FROM IN SITU eters, such as N60, with the consequence that correla-
TESTS tions between G0 and N60 for the relevant values of
3.1 Resume of the executed tests ’m0 on shallow foundations strongly underestimate
elastic stiffness of the soil (Stroud, 1988).
Definite campaign of in situ tests comprised 46 SPT,
3 DPSH, 15 DPL, 9 CPT, 7 Load Tests (3 PLT with 3.3 Dynamic Probing (DPSH and DPL)
30cm, 3 PLT with 60cm and a real scale footing load
test with 120cm diameter) 5 PMT, 4 SBPT, 32 CH The two regionally most common energies from
and 12 DMT. Part from the analysis that have been ISSMFE standards were used: DPSH e DPL.
made with these results will be briefly described The variation of DPSH parameters with depth is
hereby. Figure 1 presents a trend of the variation of less pronounced than the NSPT and qc (CPT) varia-
some of the derived parameters with depth. tion. Even an analysis based on the specific energy
of penetration (Nixon, 1988), particularly between
3.2 Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) the results of DPSH and SPT, is not conclusive. On
the other hand, the results of DPL tests, executed
The variation of (N1)60 reflects a range of values for aside of CPT and SPT tests, interpreted in terms of
the angle of shearing resistance of 36 to 40, with the dynamic cone resistance in the unit of pressure
(Rd – Dutch formula) are very similar to qc values. steady (critical) state line, are plotted in Figure 3 and
This trend has been regionally verified on sandy compared with the above law.
soils and on saprolitic soils from granite strongly
weathered with mainly sandy matrix in depths down Fig.3. State parameter () deduced from CPT results
to 8–10m. The fact that this trend is undetected on (Been et al. 1986).
DPSH test is associated to its very high energy
which leads to a number of blows rather low and From the observation of that figure, it can be con-
nonsensitive to natural variation of soil characteris- cluded that there is a higher reserve of strength
tics through depth. (higher absolute values on the dry side) than those
determined by the natural void ratio. This last index
3.4 Cone Penetrometer Testing (CPT)
is singularly high as consequence of the porous
Results of CPT (Fig. 1b) denote an approximately leached matrix, as has been previously referred, and,
linear growth of qc with  v0 . It is also observed that when compared with uniquely with the effective
values of sleeve friction grow smoothly with the at stress state, does not reveal the obvious influence of
rest effective stress, with ratios of fs/  v0 7, reveal- fabric and structure of these residual soils.
ing fair homogeneity of friction over this depth. For stiffness evaluation through conepenetration
Soil classification based on K0 , OCR e f s /  'v0 results and for the same reasons referred to before,
values, with reference to proposals developed for values of qc were correlated with G0 and the similar
transported soils (Masood & Mitchel, 1993), indi- low degree of dependency with penetration re-
cates high values of OCR, which are not congruent sistance was detected. The obtained values where
with the genesis of these soils and with the low val- compared with Robertson’s (1991) proposal for
ues of coefficient of at rest earth pressure regionally transported soils with different overconsolidation ra-
observed. Classification by Robertson (1990) chart
tios (Fig. 4). It can be verified that measured values
identifies this material as cemented, aged or very
stiff natural soil, with a grain size distribution typical of G0 are substantially higher than the authors’ corre-
of sands or silt/sand mixtures, although its density lations, revealing higher ratios of elastic stiffness
index values are low (Viana da Fonseca et al., 1998). properties in relation to penetration parameters. This
The evaluation of the angle of shearing resistance is a direct consequence of the non-normalised rela-
by means of Robertson & Campanella’s (1983) pro- tion between stiffness and strength on residual soils,
posal conducted to higher values of ’ ( 44  45º ) when referenced to proposals deduced on transport-
than those obtained on triaxial tests, where the cohe- ed soils.
sive component is non-negligeable. This is conse-
quence of a higher sensitivity of qc to frictional and
cohesive components. Being strictly frictional, that
Fig.4.G0/qc versus qc1=qc/pa(pa/’vo)0.5 (Robertson, 1991).
proposal does not explicitly deduct the cohesive in-
tercept. The value of the angle of shearing resistance Correlations between qc and Young moduli, es-
has, however, to be taken as a secant value on the
stress space and, consequently, this late parameter tablished in different stress-strain levels by triaxial
decreases with the increasing of the vertical effec- tests (CID e CAD) with local strain measurement,
tive stress, fact that is very well defined on the re- confirmed the very strong influence of nonlinearity
sults plotted in the formerly referred abacus. Never- on E/qc ratios (Viana da Fonseca, 1996), as well as a
theless, care should be taken on the adoption of this mostly singular pattern of that variation when com-
exclusively frictional resistance for the evaluation of pared to re-known transport soils proposals
the ultimate load of shallow foundations as it is well
recognised the important influence of the cohesive 3.5 Pressuremeters Testing – Prebored (Ménard -
intercept on the evaluation of qult, as well as the sig- PMT) and Selfbored (Cambridge – SBPT)
nificant non-linearity of the bearing capacity factors
with the variation of ’. Pressuremeter tests are progressively considered as
An interpretation of the CPT results was made by most convenient for soil characterization, as they can
the state parameter concept,  (Been et al., 1986). be consistently modeled by complete constitutive
Considering the value of the critical state index laws. The self-bored (SBPT), allows an insertion of
(  ss  0, 259) deduced in laboratory and substituting the cell with a minimum disturbance, making possi-
in the authors proposal becomes: ble a rigorous theoretical interpretation of the test re-
1 (2) sults and involves the ideal conditions for the eval-
   ln(0.098  QT ) uation of geostatic total horizontal stress
9.45 (Jamiolkowski & Manassero, 1996)
being QT the normalised cone resistance. Values of From a systematic analysis of PMT and SBPT re-
the state parameter, taken as the difference between sults. Viana da Fonseca concluded that the evalua-
the natural void ratio and the correspondent on the tion of the coefficient of earth pressure at rest, K0,
from PMT suffers from the limitations of the pre- Fig.6. SBPT with a Cankometer equipment with inclu-
boring process and its determination has resulted in sion of unload-reload cycle (Viana da Fonseca,
excessively high values (0.58). On the other hand, 1996).
values of K0 determined from very well controlled
SBPT curves (the “lift-off” presssures were taken Taking into account the results of SBPT for eval-
individually from each of the three strain gauges – uation of the deformation modulus, particularly of
see Fig.5), ranged between 0.35 and 0.38, which are the unload-reload modulus, the ratio between G0 and
closer to regional experience and were confirmed by Gur for the same stress levels involved in the several
careful K0 triaxial tests with local strain measure- tests were found to range between 2.6 and 3.0. These
ment. values are substantially lower than the ratio (10),
reported by Tatsuoka & Shibuya (1992) on Japanese
residual soils from granite.
Fig. 5. “Lift-off” defined on three strain gauges (120). Taking the non-linearity hypothesis of Akino –
cited by the previous authors - developed for a high
For stiffness characterization purposes PMT re- range of soil types, including residual soils from
veals some limitations on the definition of elastic granite, and expressed simply by:
components, since Epmdr/Epm ratio is rather lower
(2) than it would be expected from the ratio be- Esec  E0 ,  104 (2)
tween E0/Epm (18-20, with E0 taken from G0_CH),
which will reflect the important disturbance resulting Esec  E0  ( /104 ) 0,55 ,  104 (3)
from the preboring process.
Jamiolkowski & Manassero (1996) remarked in the SBPT unload-reload modulus correspond to se-
the referred closing address to the Conference in Site cant values for shear strain of 5.7-7.410-4 (610-4),
Investigation Practices, that the evaluation of shear which agrees very well with the above indicated
stiffness is specially adequuate by means of self- trends. One of these values is implanted in the rela-
bored pressuremeter tests. The usual approach refers tion of Gs versus c on Figure 7, using Jardine
to the unload-reload loops, determining the corre- (1992) model.
sponding modulus, as it is known that Gi - the shear
modulus taken from the initial part of the expansion
curve – is, even in SBPT, strongly influenced by the Fig.7. Non-linearity - Gdr over relation Gsec versus c
insertion process. The value of Gur is also very de- (Jardine, 1992; Akino, 1990).
pendent on factors such as those related to creep
which is directly associated to the adopted range of The evaluation of strength parameters from PMT
the unload-reload cycle. Since the measuring system by means of yield or limit pressures methods, lead to
is able to overpass limitations of compliance of a rough underestimation of strength, even taken as
strain measurement and enables to implement short exclusively frictional. On the other hand, results
but significant looping stresses, effects of creep are from Cambridge SBPT interpreted by the Hughes-
minimized (hysteresis is very low) and the value of Wroth-Windle method (for purely frictional materi-
Gur represents the drained stiffness at intermediate als), has conducted to very similar values of peak
strain level (110-4    110-3), being relatively in- angle of shearing resistance to the ones obtained by
sensitive to soil disturbance caused by the probe in- CPT interpretation, but still remains the indefinition
sertion. of an explicitly cohesion evaluation. A reinterpreta-
This matter was studied on the pressuremeter test tion of such results by recent cavity expansion theo-
results from PMT and SBPT. It was concluded that ries for cohesive-frictional materials can solve this
even on implementing unload-reload cycles, PMT do indefinition. Besides, a similar analysis on the large
not assure enough precision to overpass limitations deformation levels (=0) – as close as possible to
of strain measurement, which reveals that PMT is critical condition - of the pressuremeter curves has
strongly limited for stiffness characterization pur- enabled to define a value of ’cv=31.6 which is
poses. Their limitations were also very well defined equivalent to the value obtained from specific triaxi-
on the pseudo-elastic versus virgin modulus ratios, al tests (Viana da Fonseca, 1996).
since Epmdr/Epm is rather lower (2) than it would be
expected from the ratio between E0/Epm (18-20,
with E0 taken from G0_CH), proving that important
disturbance resulting from the preboring process also
remains.
SBPT turn to be the opposite as they have proved 3.6 Cross-Hole Seismic Test (CH)
to give a good insight of stiffness properties. Figure
6 represents one of the executed tests, which have The results of cross-hole tests are very homoge-
included careful controlled unload-reload cycles. neous and reveal a very smooth growth of G0 with
depth. In Fig. 7 these variations are compared with
the lines corresponding to Ishihara’s (1986) pro- Recent trends for association of K0 with KD_DMT
posals, for natural alluvial sands, aged and cement- by using the state parameter,  (Bellotti et al., 1994)
ed, corresponding to: were reinterpreted, resulting on a more adjusted law:

G0 (MPa)  (7.9 to14.3)  0.4

2.17  e2  p  103 0.4 (4) 
K0  K D / 46.8 103,82  (8)
1 e
0
Stiffness characterization for shallow foundations
while for the present results the following is found: settlement assessment, having recourse to the corre-
lations between the moduli ED(DMT) and G0 or Es10%
G0 (MPa)  65 
2.17  e
2
  p 103 
0.07
(5) (Baldi et al., 1989), resulted in new correlations with
1 e
0
much higher ratio between those parameters, than
the referenced proposals:
It can be seen that the value of the constant for the
maximum shear modulus expression is much higher G0 / E D  16.7  16.3  log10 ( p0 N ) (9)
than the corresponding for sandy transported soils Es10% / ED  2.35  2.21 log10 ( p0 N ) (10)
while the factor (m) of dependency on the octahedral
at rest effective stresses is far lower. This last correlation, however, is situated between
the laws that define – for those authors – the behav-
iour of NC and OC transported soils.
Fig.7. Comparison of observed trends of G0 versus p0
and Ishihara (1986) proposals.
3.8 Loading tests (PLT and footing load test)

Fig.7. Comparison of observed trends of G0 versus p0 Strength parameters in residual soils are character-
and Ishihara (1986) proposals.
ised commonly by friction and cohesive compo-
nents. These two components are usually determined
From the reinterpretation of the observed trends – directly, in an homogeneous space, by laboratory
see Fig.8 – with reference to the most common cor- tests over undisturbed samples, or indirectly by in
relations between N60 and Vs(CH) for transported situ tests interpretation based on curve-fitting analy-
aged soils (Seed et al., 1986), new values for the sis, such as those apllied on pressuremeter tests, such
constants were found: fixing =0.84 and fb =1.3, one as those described by Schnaid & Mantaras (1998), or
gets fb =1.51. Reinterpreting the same values with by back-analysis of two or more loading tests in dif-
the direct correlations between G0 and N60 (Stroud, ferent sizes, considering a specific failure model.
1988), the following was obtained: The need for the execution of more than one load-
ing test to define failure patterns is complemented by
G0 (MPa)  57  N 600,2 (6) advantage of being able to elaborate an integrated
concluding that it is the distinct dependency of both analysis of the different pressure-displacement
G0 and N60 on ’v0 that explains such a reformula- curves enabling to study the importance of the pair
tion of the correlation between them. of factors “stiffness-depth of influence”. This subject
is discussed elsewhere in this Symposium (Viana da
3.7 Dilatometer Test (Marchetti - DMT) Fonseca & Sousa, 2001).
On this experimental site a set of load test under
Material classification in grain size terms based on different loading areas was executed: a large scale
Marchetti ID index is fairly consistent (SM) opposing footing loading test (D=120cm) and two PLT with
the results based on CPT parameters, which identify 30 and 60cm diameter. The incremental loading
finer groups from f s / qc , probably due to high per- steps have followed the same stress levels. General
centage of laminar particles (mica) which induce curves can be seen in the other paper to this Sympo-
higher sleeve resistances on these soils. sium (Viana da Fonseca & Sousa, 2001).
Campanella & Robertson (1991) proposal for It shall be noted that all these tests, similarly to
strength evaluation gives very accurate values, only the footing tests, do not appear to develop a classical
if the relation between qc/’v0 and KD is changed to generalised failure surface but present a punching
the new trends found on the experimental campaign, shear failure mode. This pattern of behaviour results
i.e.: qc /  v0 =8.4 K D against qc /  v0 =33 K D pro- in monotonously increasing pressure-settlement
posed by the authors for transported soils. With the curves, with smooth curvatures, giving rise to very
same relation the evaluation of the coefficient of little definition of the inflexion zone of that curve. A
earth pressure at rest, K0, by means of K DDMT corre- log-log plotting can be a better way to detect it.
lations, will be adapted to the following law: This has been used to preliminarily interpret the
K 0  0.736  0.024  K D  0.00172 qc /  v0 (7) results of the loading tests (Viana da Fonseca, 1996)
and the following was obtained:
 B = 0.30 m  qrot = 700 kPa residual soil. This, however, corroborated other bra-
B = 0.60 m  qrot = 821 kPa zilian authors (Rocha Filho, 1986) findings in resid-
ual soils. These results demand for more data and
B = 1.20 m  qrot = 950 kPa regional development of specific proposals.
qrot means “punching failure” which can be distinct
from the ultimate equilibrium defined by limit state 4.2 PMT versus CPT/SPT correlations
analysis (Terzaghi-Meyerhof-Vésic).
Note that the last value, respecting the footing, cor- Ratios between PMT and SPT or CPT parameters
(see Table 1) do not have always correspondence, in
roborates the developing signs inferred from inflec- grain size terms, with transported soils. Relevance is
tions in vertical and horizontal displacements - made on the similarity between N60/Epm values and
synthomatic of the appearance of shear bands, lead- those of Martin (1987), for Piedmont saprolitic soils.
ing to failure (Viana da Fonseca et al., 1997).
If we use the values of those failure loads, in the Table 1 - Ratios between SPT, CPT and PMT parameters
bearing capacity formulation (Eurocode 7, 1994), * * *
taking account the water level position, we obtain qc / p L f s / p L N 60 / p L N 60 / E pm E pm / pl* Epmd / Epm
(MPa) (MPa)
three equations. These can be optimised to get the
two strength parameters range. The values obtained 14.3 0.390 14.6 1.4 10.6 1.41.9
were: c' = 6.3–6.9kPa and ' = 36.5-37.0, revealing
a fair agreement with the results obtained in exten- 5.EXPERIMENTAL SITE 2. GENERAL PRO-
sive laboratory testing over undisturbed samples FILE
(Viana da Fonseca, 1998) and in situ testing (Viana
da Fonseca et al., 1998). Located in Maia, surroundings of Porto, in
CICCOPN facilities, experimental site 2 has is part
of the same granitic complex of experimental site 1.
4 CORRELATIOS BETWEEN IN SITU TESTS The site, that has been used for research for quite a
PARAMETERS while, was characterised by 4 DPSH, 8 CPT, 12
4.1 CPT – SPT correlations screw plate (SP) tests performed in 3 main align-
ments, 3 DMT, 2 PMT, plus the laboratory testing.
Danzinger et al. (1998) collected data from tests Identification and physical properties determined by
sites of different parent rocks of residual soils, to laboratory testing fall within the same ranges of site
conclude that correlations between CPT ad SPT pre- 1 (Cruz et al, 1997).
sent a large scatter attributing it to intrinsic hetero- DMT and CPT results identify these soils as silty
geneity. sands and sandy silts, sometimes clayey siltes, which
fits in the ASTM Classification. DMT, on other
hand, showed surprising accuracy evaluating the unit
Fig.7. Ranges of the relation of qc/N versus D50 on re- weight (+1kN/m3)
sidual soils – Danzinger et al. (1997)
Attributing it to intrinsic heterogeneity, they have 5.1. Stress history
concluded that different parent rocks generally pro-
duce different correlations for the same particle size Since OCR has no meaning in this type of soils,
distribution (a pattern of soil type). It is assumed that coefficient of earth pressure at rest (K0) is the stress
from brazilian data, there is a general trend to of de- history parameter that was evaluated.
creasing values of qc/N with D50 and generally lower Following the same path of experimental site 1,
values than the expressed by Robertson et al. (1983) the ratio between qc/’V0 and KD is 12,5. This ratio
average line. Our results, however show the opposite leads to values of K0 of 0,4 – 0,5 that are recognized
as it is expressed in Figure 7 and more clearly in Fu- as typical of the complex.
gure 8. PMT results, by their side, show higher values
(>1) which confirms the general idea of the small ef-
Figure 8. Correlation between qc(MPa) and N60 - refer- ficiency of the test to evaluate K0.
ence to Burland & Burbidge (1985) On the other hand, the ratio P0DMT/P0PMT falls in
Figure illustrates the comparison of the range of the range 2 – 3.
qc/N60 for the experimental site with the chart of
Burland & Burbidge (1985) developed for sandy 5.2. Strength Parameters
transported soils. The results, corresponding to
qc/N60 = 0.7 - 0.8 (qc, MPa), are above the mean Results of DPSH tests show values of dynamic
trends of the charts, which is probably a conse- point resistance, qd, varying between 5 and 15 MPa,
quence of the greater sensitivity of CPT cone re- often between 5 and 6 MPa. This range finds good
sistance to the cohesive strength component of the correspondence with CPT results of qc (4 - 8 MPa).
The other parameter of the test, f(s), ranges between E’i =  qc
0,1 and 0,3. The ratio N20 / qc, vary from 0,6 to 0,8. (11)
The compairison between results obtained from
PMT and CPT show values of qc/PL* and fs/PL* where  was taken equal to three since this value
falling in the ranges 4 – 6 and 0,10 – 0,25, respec- was obtained from comparison with SP tests (ASCE,
tively, which are lower than those obtained in site 1. 1994). In this case, E’i ranges from 12 to 24 MPa.
Concerning to friction angle, CPT results ob- The evaluation of E from the results of SP tests
tained by using Robertson and Campanella chart can be based on three interpretation models: Norwe-
(1993) vary in the range 38º - 42º (Fig. 9), while gian, International (elasticity) and Elasto-plastic in-
DMT’s, determined by Marchetti’s latest correlation terpretations. More detailed data can be found in
(1997) established for sandy soils, assume values Strout (1998). The results of E’i obtained from Elas-
from 37 to 39º. It should be noted that this correla- to-plastic interpretation fall in the interval 20 – 50
tion is assumed to underpredict ’, since it results MPa. It is also relevant to stress the comparison be-
from the lower limit of 3 curves based on the as- tween SP and PLT obtained results in a different ex-
sumptions of K equal to K0nc, to 1 and to the square perimental site, that showed surprising agreement
root of coefficient of passive earth pressure, Kp. (Cruz et al., 2000). In Table 2, results from CPT and
SP tests are presented. DMT data is also included.
Friction Angle

Table 2 – Results of E
qc (bars)

0 50 100 150 200

0
0.1
0.2
CPT SP DMT
0.3
0.4
' = 48º E’i (MPa) 12 - 24 20 – 50 (1) 15 – 40
' v, (bars)

0.5
E’10 (MPa) 13 – 14 (2)


0.6 46º
0.7
0.8 E’r (MPa) 10 – 16 (2)
0.9
44º (1) Elasto-plastic interpretation
1 30 32 34 36º 38º 40º 42º
CPT1.1 CPT1.2 CPT2.1 CPT2.2 CPT3.1 CPT3.2 CPT4.1. CPT4.2
(Robertson e
(2) International interpretation

Figure 9. Friction angle from CPT (Robertson & Cam-

panella, 1993) DMT results were determined following Mar-
chetti’s correlation (1980). Data reduction in DMT
CID and CAD triaxial testing sustains values leads to constrained modulus, M, which was con-
ranging from 37º to 41º. In fact, those results were verted to E assuming Poison’s coefficient, ’ = 0.3.
expected since sampling disturbance has no im- As it can be seen in Table 2, DMT and SP (Elasto-
portant effects on ’. On the other hand, the cohesion plastic interpretation) results fall within the same
intercept give results within 2 – 3 kPa. However, it is range, while CPT values are quite lower and seem to
well known the effect of sampling disturbance in fit the International interpretation results. If one pre-
these results. tends to compare data from CPT and SP (elasto-
Another way of determining c’ is proposed by plastic interpretation) it is find an interval of 5 to 6,
Cruz (1995) following a simple path. In fact, KD re- e.g., double of the  assumed. On the other hand the
flects the resistence of soil, so it is logical to expect ratios between ED/EPMT, E’SP/EPMT and E’SP/qc are
that either c’ and ’ have influence on this parame- 1.5, 2 – 3 and 5 – 6, respectively.
ter. Then, if ’ from triaxial testing is assumed, Finally, results from triaxial testing sustain much
correspondent KD can be back-calculated. The dif- lower values (4 – 6 / 15 - 20 MPa) reflecting the
ference between both KD (measured and back- level of sampling disturbance in this type of soils.
calculated) will reflect effective cohesion. More de-
tailed information can be found in Cruz et al. (1997). 5.4. Correlations between in situ tests parameters
From available data which is not yet considered suf-
ficient to establish reliable correlations, the results In table 3 comparative parameters between in situ
for both experimental sites 1 and 2 are 9 - 12 kPa tests are presented.
and 2 – 4 kPa, respectively. Notice the convergence
of DMT and triaxial values. Table 3 – Ratios obtained from in situ tests
qd/qc 0.75 – 1.25 P0DMT/P0PMT 2–3
5.3. Deformation parameters
N20/qc (MPa-1) 0.6 – 0.8 P1DMT/PfPMT 1
Derived Young modulus, E’i, were taken from qc/PL* 4–6 ED/EPMT  1.5
CPT, DMT, SP and triaxial testing. E’i (CPT) results
fs/PL* 0.10 – 0.25 E’SP/ EPMT 2–3
were based on the general formula oftenly used:
EPMT/ PL* 12 E’SP/qc 5–6
 5.2.1 Typography for references
Last name, First name or Initials (ed.) year. Book title. City:
Publisher.
Last name, First name or Initials year. Title of article. Title of
Journal (series number if necessary) volume number (issue
CONCLUSIONS number if necessary): page numbers.

REFERENCES 5.2.2 Examples

Grove, A.T. 1980. Geomorphic evolution of the Sahara and the
ASCE. Settlement Analysis. American Society of Civil Engi- Nile. In M.A.J. Williams & H. Faure (eds), The Sahara and
neers. ASCE Press, 1994. the Nile: 21-35. Rotterdam: Balkema.
Cruz, N. (1995). Avaliação de Parâmetros Geotécnicos pelo Jappelli, R. & Marconi, N. 1997. Recommendations and preju-
dices in the realm of foundation engineering in Italy: A his-
Dilatómetro de Marchetti. MSc thesis (University of Coim-
torical review. In Carlo Viggiani (ed.), Geotechnical engi-
bra). neering for the preservation of monuments and historical
Cruz, N., Almeida e Sousa, J., Aguiar, A. (2000). Ensaios com sites; Proc. intern. symp., Napoli, 3-4 October 1996. Rot-
Screw Plate. Uma Experiência em Solos Residuais. VII terdam: Balkema.
Congresso Nacional de Geotecnia, pp 123-132. Johnson, H.L. 1965. Artistic development in autistic children.
Cruz, N., Viana, A., Coelho, P., Lemos, J. (1997). Evaluation Child Development 65(1): 13-16.
Polhill, R.M. 1982. Crotalaria in Africa and Madagascar. Rot-
of Geotechnical Parameters by DMT in Portuguese Soils. terdam: Balkema.
XIV Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engi-
neering, pp 77-80.
Marchetti, S. (1980). In Situ Tests by Flat Dilatometer. ASCE 5.3 Notes
Jnl GE, Vol 106, No.3, 229-321. These should be avoided. Insert the information in
Marchetti, S. (1997). The Flat Dilatometer Design Applica- the text. In tables the following reference marks
tions. III Geotechnical Engineering Conference, Cairo should be used: *, **, etc. and the actual footnotes
University. set directly underneath the table.
Strout, J. (1998). Evaluation of the Field Compressometer Test
in Sand. PhD thesis (NTNU).
5.4 Conclusions
Conclusions should state concisely the most im-
portant propositions of the paper as well as the au-
thor’s views of the practical implications of the re-
sults.

5 REFERENCES 6 PHOTOGRAPHS AND FIGURES

Number figures consecutively in the order in which

5.1 CPT – SPT correlations reference is made to them in the text, making no dis-
tinction between diagrams and photographs. Figures
Danzinger et al. (1998) collected data from tests should fit within the column width of 90 mm (3.54")
or within the type area width of 187 mm (7.36").
5.2 References Figures, photographs, etc. should be in black on-
ly. Paste copies of the same size onto the typescript
In the text, place the authors’ last names (without in- where you want them to appear in the text. Do not
itials) and the date of publication in parentheses (see place them sideways on a page; however if this can-
examples in Section 5). At the end of the paper, list not be avoided, no other text (except the figure cap-
all references in alphabetical order underneath the tion) should appear on that page. Figures, etc. should
heading REFERENCES (Reference heading tag). not be centered, but placed against the left margin.
The references should be typed in small text (10 pt Leave about two lines of space between the actual
on 11 pt) and second and further lines should be in- text and figure (including caption). Never
dented 5.0 mm (0.2") (Reference text tag). If several
works by the same author are cited, entries should be
chronological:
Larch, A.A. 1996a. Development ...
Larch, A.A. 1996b. Facilities ...
Larch, A.A. 1997. Computer ...
Larch, A.A. & Jensen, M.C. 1996. Effects of ...
Larch, A.A. & Smith, B.P. 1993. Alpine ...
 Danzinger, F. A. B., Politano, C.F. & Danzinger,
B. R. (1998)

Schnaid & Mantaras (1998)

Jamiolkowski, M. & Manassero, N. (1996). The

role of in situ testing in geotechnical - thoughts
about the future. Closing address. Advances in
Site Investigation Practice. Pp. 929-951. Thomas
Telford, London.

Been, K., Crooks, J.H.A., Becker, D.E.; Jefferies,

M.G. (1986). The cone penetration test in sands:
part I. State parameter interpretation. Géotech-
Figure 1. Caption of a typical figure. Photographs will be nique, Vol.36, Nº 2, pp.239-249
scanned by the printer. Always supply original photographs.
place any text next to a figure. Leave this space
blank. The most convenient place for placing figures
is at the top or bottom of the page. Avoid placing
text between figures as readers might not notice the
text. Line drawings (as well as photographic repro- Always use the official SI notations:
ductions of these) should be in black (not grey) on  kg / m / kJ / mm instead of kg. (Kg) / m. / kJ.
white. Keep in mind that everything will be reduced (KJ) / mm.;
to 75%. Therefore, 9 point should be the minimum  20°1632SW instead of 20° 16 32 SW
size of the lettering. Lines should preferably be 0.2  0.50 instead of 0,50 (used in French text); 9000
mm (0.1") thick. Keep figures as simple as possible. instead of 9,000 but if more than 10,000: 10,000
Avoid excessive notes and designations. instead of 10000
Photographs should be black and white, with  14C instead of C14 / C-14 and BP / BC / AD in-
good contrast and on glossy paper. Photographic re- stead of B.P. / B.C. / A.D.
productions cut from books or journals, photocopies  × 20 instead of 20 / X20 / x 20; 4 + 5 > 7 in-
of photographs and screened photographs are unac- stead of 4+5>7 but –8 / +8 instead of – 8 / + 8
ceptable. The proceedings will be printed in black  e.g. / i.e. instead of e.g., / i.e.,
only. For this reason avoid the use of colour in fig-
ures and photographs. Colour is also nearly always
unnecessary for scientific work. 8 SUBMISSION OF MATERIAL TO THE
EDITOR

The camera-ready copy of the complete paper print-

7 PREFERENCES, SYMBOLS AND UNITS ed on a high resolution printer on one side of the pa-
per as well as two copies of the paper should be sent
Consistency of style is very important. Note the to the editor. Include the original photographs.
spacing, punctuation and caps in all the examples Check whether the paper looks the same as this
below. sample: Title at top of first page in 18 points, authors
 References in the text: Figure 1, Figures 2-4, 6, in 14 points and all other text in 12 points on 13
8a, b (not abbreviated) points line space, except for the small text (10 point
 References between parentheses: (Fig. 1), (Figs on 11 point line space) used in tables, captions and
2-4, 6, 8a, b) (abbreviated) references. Also check if the type width is 187 mm
 USA / UK / Netherlands / the Netherlands instead (7.36"), the column width 90 mm (3.54"), the page
of U.S.A. / U.K. / The Netherlands length is 272 mm (10.71") and that the space above
 Author & Author (1989) instead of Author and the Abstact is exactly as in the sample. Write your
Author (1989) name and the shortened title of the paper in pencil in
 (Author 1989a, b, Author & Author 1987) instead the bottom margin of each page and number the pag-
of (Author, 1989a,b; Author and Author, 1987) es correctly.
 (Author et al. 1989) instead of (Author, Author &
Author 1989)
 Use the following style: (Author, in press); (Au-
thor, in prep.); (Author, unpubl.); (Author, pers.
comm.)
 9 DEADLINE

The above material should be with the editor before

the deadline for submission. Any material received
too late will not be published. Send the material by
airmail or by courier well packed and in time. Be
sure that all pages are included in the parcel.

View publication stats