Skip to main content
Log in

Experimental comparison of triaxial-compression tests performed according to different standards

  • Discussion of Construction Rules and Regulations
  • Published:
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Aims and scope

The requirements of the most frequently employed German (DIN 18137) and English (BS 1377–8) standards on triaxial testing of soils are analyzed and compared. General requirements of the Russian standard (GOST 12248–96) on triaxial testing of soils are considered for their subsequent linking to tests based on the standards of different countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Deutsche Energie Agentur GmbH, Offshore wind potential [on line]. Available from www.offshorewind.de, (posted 13 October 2011).

  2. Budesamt f. Seeschifahrt und Hydrographie, Ground Investigation for Offshore Wind Farms, Hamburg (2008).

  3. J. E. Bowles, Foundation Analysis and Design, Mcgraw-Hill Higher Education (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  4. DIN. Erkundung und Untersuchung des Baugerunds, Beuth, Verlag, Berlin (2008).

  5. British Standard 1377–8. Methods of Test for Soils for Civil-Engineering Purposes (1990).

  6. G. Spagnoli, “A theoretical comparison study between BS and DIN concerning consolidated-drained triaxial tests,” Soil Mech. Found. Engin., 49, No. 1, 24–29 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. R. F. Craig, Soil Mechanics, Chapman and Hall, London (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. Arulandan, H. B. Seed, C. Yogachandran, K. K. Muraleetharan, R. B. Seed, and K. Kabilamany, “Centrifuge Study on Volume Changes and Dynamic Stability of Earthen Dams,” J. Geotech. Engin., Am. Soc. Civ. Engin., 119, No. 11, 1717–1731 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. K. N. Head, Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing, Whittles Publishing, United Kingdom (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  10. G. Spagnoli, C. Hotz, and M. Ginda, A preliminary comparison study on consolidated-drained triaxial tests performed in accordance with BS and DIN, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Offshore and Polar Engineering, Rhodes, 17–23 June 2012, pp. 846–850.

  11. T. D. Pitman, P. K. Robertson, and D. C. Sego, “Influence of fines on the collapse of lose sands,” Can. Geotech. J., 31, No. 5, 728–739 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. D. Kolymbas, Introduction to Hypoplasticity, Taylor & Francis (1999).

  13. I. Holubec and E. D’Appolonia, “Effect of particle shape on the engineering properties of granular soils,” Am. Soc. Test. Mater., STP, 523, 304–318 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  14. C. A. Bareither, T. B. Edil, C. H. Benson, and D. M. Mickelson, “Geological and physical factors affecting the friction angle of compacted sands,” J. Geotech. Geonenv. Engin., 134, No. 10, 1476–1489 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. J. H. Schmertmann, Guidelines for cone penetration test: performance and design, FHWA-TS-78-209 (report), United States Department of Transportation (1978).

  16. GOST 12248–96. Soils. Laboratory Methods for Determination of Strength and Deformation Characteristics [in Russian].

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Translated from Osnovaniya, Fundamenty i Mekhanika Gruntov, No. 1, pp. 17–22, January-February, 2013.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Spagnoli, G. Experimental comparison of triaxial-compression tests performed according to different standards. Soil Mech Found Eng 50, 24–32 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11204-013-9205-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11204-013-9205-0

Keywords

Navigation