Relationship between the standard penetration test and the pressuremeter test on sandy silty clays: a case study from Denizli

Original Paper

Abstract

The standard penetration test (SPT) is the in situ test most commonly used to investigate the properties of silt, clay, sand and fine gravel. The Menard pressuremeter test (PMT) can be utilized to obtain the strength and deformation properties of any soil or weak rock. The study investigated the relationship between the corrected SPT blow count (Ncor) and the PMT parameters of elastic modulus (Em) and limit pressure (pL). It is concluded that for the soils tested, Em and pL can be estimated as a function of Ncor values, with r = 0.91 and 0.97, respectively.

Keywords

SPT PMT Denizli (Turkey) 

Résumé

L’essai SPT (Standard Penetration Test) est l’essai in situ le plus couramment utilisé pour analyser les propriétés de silts, d’argiles, de sables et de graviers fins. L’essai pressiométrique Ménard peut être utilisé pour obtenir les caractéristiques de déformabilité et de résistance de tout type de sol ou de roche tendre. L’étude s’est intéressée aux relations entre d’une part, l’indice SPT corrigé Ncor et d’autre part, les paramètres pressiométriques: le module pressiométrique EM et la pression limite pL. On conclut que, pour les sols testés, EM et pL peuvent être estimés en fonction de Ncor, avec respectivement des coefficients de corrélation r = 0,91 et r = 0,97.

Mots clés

SPT Essai pressiométrique Ménard Denizli Turquie 

References

  1. ASTM (1995) Standard test method for pre-bored pressuremeter testing in soils (D4719). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTM (1999) Standard test method for penetration test and split-barrel sampling of soils (D1586). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  3. Akca N (2003) Correlation of SPT–CPT data from the United Arab Emirates. Eng Geol 67:219–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baguelin F, Jezequel JF, Shields DH (1978) The pressuremeter and foundation engineering. Trans Tech Publications, Clausthal-Zellerfeld, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  5. Baguelin F, Bustamante M, Frank, RA (1986) The pressuremeter and foundations: French experience (ASCE Geotech Spec Publ 6: use of in situ tests in geotechnical engineering). ASCE, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  6. Clayton CRI (1995) The standard penetration tests (SPT): methods and use (R143). CIRIA, London, p 144Google Scholar
  7. Einstein HH, Baecher BG (1983) Probabilistic and statistical methods in engineering geology; specific methods and examples—Part 1: exploration (Rock mechanics and rock engineering, vol 16). Springer, Berlin, pp 39–72Google Scholar
  8. Hasancebi N, Ulusay R (2007) Empirical correlations between shear wave velocity and penetration resistance for ground shaking assessments. Bull Eng Geol Environ 66:203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hatanaka M, Uchida A (1996) Empirical correlation between penetration resistance and internal friction angle of sandy soils. Soil Found 36(4):1–10Google Scholar
  10. Hughes JMO, Wroth GP, Windle D (1977) Pressuremeter tests in sand. Geotechnique 27(4)Google Scholar
  11. Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW (1990) Manual on estimating soil properties for foundation design (final report, EL-6800). Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CAGoogle Scholar
  12. Liao S, Whitman RV (1986) Overburden correction factor for SPT in sand. J Geotech Eng ASCE 112(3):373–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mair RJ, Wood DM (1987) Pressuremeter testing: methods and interpretation. CIRIA/Butterworths, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Marcuson WF, Bieganousky WA (1977) SPT and relative density in coarse sands. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 103(11):1295–1309Google Scholar
  15. Menard L (1965) Rules for calculation of bearing capacity and foundation settlement based on pressuremeter tests. In: Proc 6th Int Conf on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, vol 2, Montreal, Canada, 8–15 Sept 1965, pp 295–299Google Scholar
  16. Menard L (1975) The Menard pressuremeter: interpretation and application of the pressuremeter test results to foundations design. Sols–Soils 26Google Scholar
  17. Nuyens J, Barnoud F, Gambin M (1996) The Menard pressuremeter test to foundation–an integrated concept. In: Craig (ed) Advances in site investigation practice. Thomas Telford, London, Sect 4b, pp 547–557Google Scholar
  18. Ohya S, Imai T, Matsubara M (1982) Relationship between N value by SPT and LLT pressuremeter results. Proc 2nd Eur Symp on Penetration Testing, vol 1, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 24–27 May 1982, pp 125–130Google Scholar
  19. Rosenbaum MS, Rosén L, Gustafson G (1997) Probabilistic models for estimating lithology. Eng Geol 47(1/2):43–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schnaid F, Sills GC, Consoli NC (1996) Pressuremeter test in unsaturated soils. In: Craig (ed) Advances in site investigation practice. Thomas Telford, London, Sect 4b, pp 586–595 Google Scholar
  21. Seed HB, Arango I, Chan CK (1975) Evaluation of soil liquefaction potential during earthquake (report no. 75–28). Earthquake Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  22. Skempton AW (1986) Standard penetration test procedures and the effect in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, aging and over-consolidation. Geotechnique 36(3):425–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sonmez H, Tuncay E, Gokceoglu C (2004) Models to predict the uniaxial compressive strength and the modulus of elasticity for Ankara agglomerates. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41(5):717–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. SPSS (2002) Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (v. 11.5). SPSS Inc., Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  25. Thorburn S (1986) Field testing: the standard pentration test. In: Hawkins AB (ed) Site investigation practice: Assessing BS (British Standard) 5930. British Standards Institution, HMSO, London, pp 31–32Google Scholar
  26. Yagiz S (2008) Utilizing rock mass properties for predicting TBM performance in hard rock condition. Tunneling Underground Space Technol 23/3:326–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Engineering Faculty, Geological Engineering DepartmentPamukkale UniversityDenizliTurkey

Personalised recommendations