6 1 Introduction
Table 1.2 Summary of advantages and limitations of in situ tests covered by this book
Test Advantages
Standard Standardized test that is robust,
penetration inexpensive
test (SPT) Feasible to carry out in a wide
range of materials
Provides a sample (split spoon)
Widely used for many years and
has a large database and correla-
tions for most engineering proper-
ties
Basis of design for foundations and
liquefaction assessment of
materials
Piezocone Robust and easy to use
penetration standardized test
test (CPTu) Continuous profiles obtained
Relatively quick test and a large
number of tests can be done in a
day
No need for a borehole unless
obstructions encountered.
If carried out properly, test
results are accurate and repeat-
able
Different measurements made,
which enhance interpretation
Increasingly used in liquefaction
assessment of materials
Many correlations available for
most engineering properties and
design applications
Avoids disturbance effects
associated with boreholes
Pressuremeter The stress strain curve can be
test and self boring derived; not just a single value of
pressuremeter an engineering property
Boundary conditions are con-
trolled and well defined. Testing
carried out at both small and large
strains
Self boring pressuremeter can be
inserted in suitable soils with
minimal disturbance and avoiding
stress relief effects
Useful for determination of in situ
horizontal stress
Use of loading and unloading
cycles can mitigate borehole and
other disturbances effects and
enhance interpretation
Correlations available for
Limitations
Affected by borehole distur-
bance, such as piping, base heave
and stress relief
Affected by equipment to make
borehole, energy efficiency and
by operator
Results influenced by grain size,
soil structure and stress history
Many corrections required for
interpretation and design
Not suitable for materials with
large particles, which obstruct
penetration. Best suited for uni-
form, fine grained soils
Not easy to penetrate very dense
or hard materials
Problems can develop with rod
buckling when hard material is
suddenly encountered under
softer soils
Needs calibration against other
tests to obtain strength and
stiffness data
No sample is obtained
Instrument relatively expensive
No sample is obtained and test
results should be supported by
other strength data
Sophisticated, relatively expen-
sive instrument requiring experi-
enced, skilled operators
Testing is time consuming and on
a less continuous basis than other
tests such as CPTu
Test results affected by
procedure, and method of inter-
pretation is important. Different
methods of interpretation give
different results
Borehole required for Menard
type pressuremeter and some
soils
Effects of disturbance and stress
(continued)
1.3 Empirical Correlations
Table 1.2 (continued)
Test Advantages
important engineering properties
and design applications
Dilatometer test Robust, simple standardized test,
(DMT) easy to carry out using same
equipment as other tests
Testing on a near-continuous
basis
Results generally repeatable
Avoids disturbance effects of
boreholes
Correlations available for
important engineering properties
and design applications
Good test for interpretation
of in situ horizontal stress and
deformation at small strain
Vane shear test Robust, simple standardized test
(VST) that is easy to carry out
Direct measurement of shear
strength
Only in situ test that provides
direct measurement of residual
strength
In some cases, no borehole is
needed; but rod friction needs to
be eliminated or measured
data. They also came up with their own correlations and simplifications, which are
quite popular among practicing engineers.
Geotechnical data, whether from the field or laboratory, can be quite expensive.
We often have access to very limited field data (e.g. SPT) from a few boreholes,
7
Limitations
relief need to be considered and
taken into account
Not suited for soils with large
particles or that are too dense or
hard or hard to permit penetration
without use of borehole
No sample obtained
Different methods of
interpretation give
different results
Testing more time consuming
and less continuous basis than
tests such as CPTu
Limited strain imposed
during test. Results not suited for
large strain behavior
Generally limited to clays which
shear strength <150 kPa
Not suitable for most other soils
Results affected by sandy/silty
layers and gravel inclusions
Generally corrections required
Results may be misleading in
some soils (e.g. silts)
Gives shear strength in the hori-
zontal direction
May not give operational
strength in fissured soils
Not suitable for materials with
large particles, which obstruct
penetration; Best suited for uni-
form, fine grained soils
Difficult to penetrate very dense
or hard materials
Problems can develop with rod
buckling when a hard material is
suddenly encountered under
softer
soils