Cone penetration testing

• Overview: Common in-situ tests

• Introduction to CPT
• Equipment and procedures
• Standards and specifications
• Interpretation of CPT/Piezocone data
ƒ Soil classification
ƒ Interpretation in fine-grained soil
ƒ Interpretation in coarse-grained soil
• Case study – HK Disneyland reclamation
• Appendices
ƒ I: Calibration chamber testing of sand soils
ƒ II: Cavity expansion theory
ƒ III: ISSMFE international reference test procedure (IRTP) for CPT

CIVL576/Zhang 1
 Soil stratigraphy
• The continuous monitoring of
pore water pressure during
cone penetration helps the
identification of soil
stratification
ƒ Soft to medium stiff clays –
high u
ƒ Very stiff OC clays- very low
or negative u
ƒ Very dense fine or silty sands
- very low or negative u
ƒ Dilative silts - very low or
negative u
ƒ Contractive silts – high u

CIVL576/Zhang 2
 Soil
classification
based on qt
and Rf

Disadvantage:
measurements of fs are
less accurate

SM: Silty sand

SP: Slightly silty sand
ML: Low plasticity silt
CL: Low plasticity clay
CH: High plasticity clay

CIVL576/Zhang 3
 Soil classification based on qt, fs and u

CIVL576/Zhang 4
 Soil classification based on qt, fs and u
considering influence of overburden pressure

CIVL576/Zhang 5
 Example: soil classification
CPTU parameters; qt = 0.9 MPa, fs = 40 kPa and Δu = 72 kPa at a depth
where σv0 = 180 kPa and σ’v0 = 90 kPa. Hence, the normalized CPTU
parameters are:
Qt = (900-180)/90 = 8.0
Fr = 40/(900-180) = 5.6%
Bq = 72/(900-180) = 0.1

• Using these normalized parameters the soil would classify as a slightly

overconsolidated clay (clay to silty clay) on the normalized friction ratio
chart and as a silt mixture (clayey silt to silty clay) on the normalized
pore pressure ratio chart.
• However, if the rate of pore pressure dissipation during a pause in
penetration was very slow this would add confidence to the classification
as a clay. If the dissipation was more rapid, say 50% dissipation in four
to six minutes, the soil is more likely to be a clayey silt.

CIVL576/Zhang 6
 Interpretation in fine-grained soils
• Generally undrained, measurements of u very useful
• State characteristics
• Strength characteristics
• Deformation characteristics
• Flow and consolidation characteristics

CIVL576/Zhang 7
 State characteristics - Soil unit weight

CIVL576/Zhang 8
 State characteristics -
OCR
• For NC clays
(qt-σv0)/σ’v0 = 2.5-5.5
depending on Ip
• If qt is significantly larger,
then the clay is likely
overconsolidated.

CIVL576/Zhang 9
 State characteristics
– OCR based on
CPTU data
u1=pore water pressure on the
cone
u2=pore water pressure behind
the cone

CIVL576/Zhang 10
 OCR based on CPTU data – Example based
on Fig. 5.14

*Follow the specific soil type

CIVL576/Zhang 11
 State characteristics – In-situ horizontal stress

CIVL576/Zhang 12
 Strength characteristics
-Undrained shear strength
• No single undrained shear strength exists. The in-situ su
depends on
ƒ The mode of failure
ƒ Soil anisotropy
ƒ Strain rate and stress history

CIVL576/Zhang 13
 Theoretical solutions
Theoretical solutions available under the following five classes:
1. Classical bearing capacity theory
2. Cavity expansion theory (see appendix)
3. Conservation of energy combined with cavity expansion theory
4. Analytical and numerical approaches using linear or nonlinear stress-
strain relationships
5. Stain-path theory

All the theories result in a relationship between qc and su:

qc = Nc su + σ0
Nc = theoretical cone factor
σ0 = in-situ total pressure, can be σv0, σh0 or σmean

CIVL576/Zhang 14
CIVL576/Zhang 15
 Empirical correlations
It is recommended to evaluate su in fine-grained soils from CPT/CPTU
data as follows:
• For deposits where little experience is available, estimate su using the
total cone resistance (qt) and preliminary cone factor values (Nkt )
from 15-20. For a more conservative estimate, select a value close to
the upper limit. For normally and lightly overconsolidated clays Nkt
can be as low as 10 and in stiff fissured clay can be as high as 30. In
very soft clays where there may be some uncertainty with the
accuracy in qt, estimate su from the excess pore pressure (Δu2)
measured behind the cone using NΔu from 7 to 10, su= Δu2/ NΔu. For a
more conservative estimate, select a value close to the upper value.
• If previous experience is available in the same deposit, the values
suggested above should be adjusted to reflect this experience.
• For larger projects, where high-quality field and laboratory data may
be available, site-specific correlations should be developed based on
appropriate and reliable values of su.

CIVL576/Zhang 16
 su estimation using total cone resistance

qc − σ v 0
su =
Nk
qt − σ v 0
su =
N kt

of the cone
G = shear modulus of soil

CIVL576/Zhang 17
 su estimation using effective cone resistance

qe qt − u2
su = =
N qe N ke
• Senneset et al. (1982):
Nke =9+-3
• Lunne et al. (1982):
Nke =1-13 (function of Bq)

CIVL576/Zhang 18
 su estimation using excess pore water pressure

Δu
su =
N Δu
Δu = u2 – u0
NΔu =2-20 from cavity expansion
theory
NΔu = function of Bq (Karlsrud et
al. 1996)

CIVL576/Zhang 19
 Effective stress
strength parameters
(Senneset et al. 1988)

CIVL576/Zhang 20
CIVL576/Zhang 21
 Deformation characteristics -Soil moduli
• Soil moduli are generally a function of
ƒ Stress history
ƒ Stress and strain level
ƒ Drainage condition
ƒ Stress path direction
• Commonly used moduli for fine-grained soils
ƒ 1D constrained modulus M
ƒ Undrained Young’s modulus Eu
ƒ Small-strain shear modulus G0

CIVL576/Zhang 22
 Constrained modulus M
M = α m qc

δσ,v 0 2.3(1 + e)σ,v 1

M= = =
δε Cc mv

Cc = compression index

CIVL576/Zhang 23
 Undrained Young’s modulus
Eu = n su

where n is a constant that

depends on shear stress level,
overconsolidation ratio, clay
sensitivity and other factors
(Ladd et al., 1977)
• Estimate su from CPT/CPTU
profiles,
• Estimate OCR
• Estimate Eu based on stress
level and plasticity index Ip

CIVL576/Zhang 24
 Small strain shear modulus G0
• The modulus at very small strain <10-3%
• Mayne and Rix (1993)
0.695
( q )
G0 = 99.5( pa ) 0.305 t 1.130
(e0 )
where pa = atmospheric pressure

• G0 = ρ Vs2

CIVL576/Zhang 25
 Flow and consolidation characteristics
• Rate of consolidation
parameters may be assessed by
piezocone test by measuring
the dissipation or decay of pore
pressure with time after a stop
in penetration
• Coefficient of consolidation c
M T50 2
c=k = r0
γ w t50

CIVL576/Zhang 26
 Coefficient of consolidation
The recommended procedure is as follows:
(1) Plot the early part of the dissipation (less than 10% dissipation) at
an enlarged scale, either log or square root time, and evaluate the
initial pore pressure, ui.
(2) Define u0 from available data on ground water level, piezometric
readings or data from piezocone tests in adjacent sand layers.
(3) Plot normalized excess pore pressure U=(ut-uo)/(ui-u0) vs t on log
and/or √t scale.
(4) Define time for 50% dissipation (t50).
(5) Use t50 and curves in Figure 5.39 to predict ch. If no other data are
available use an average Ir between the range in Figure 5.39.
(6) If dissipation has not proceeded sufficiently long to define t50, then
the slope of the straight line from the first part of u vs √t plot (m)
may be used in Figure 5.39 to predict cv.

CIVL576/Zhang 27
 G/su

CIVL576/Zhang 28
 Coefficient of
permeability
• Based on ch
γw
kh = RR ch
2.3σ v 0
,

RR = compression ratio in the

OC range that represents the
strain per log cycle of effective
stress during recompression
0.5x10-2 < RR < 2x10-2

• Based on soil classification

CIVL576/Zhang 29
 Interpretation in coarse-grained soils
• Main feature: generally drained. There should be no excess
pore water pressure generated as a result of cone
penetration.
• Sometimes, equipment-related pore pressures may be
generated on the cone (u1) due to high compressive
stresses. In very dense fine or silty sands negative pore
pressures may be recorded behind the cone (u2) due to
dilatancy effects.
• In the following, fully drained cone penetration is considered,
then only qc and fs are used in the interpretation. However, it
is important to review the recorded pore water pressures to
check if the assumption of fully drained conditions is valid.

CIVL576/Zhang 30
CIVL576/Zhang 31
 Items to characterize
• State characteristics
ƒ Relative density, state parameter, OCR, horizontal stress
• Strength parameters
• Deformation characteristics
ƒ Young’s modulus
ƒ Constrained modulus
ƒ Small-strain shear modulus

CIVL576/Zhang 32
 State characteristics - Relative density

emax − e
I D = Dr =
emax − emin

CIVL576/Zhang 33
 1 ⎛ qc ⎞
Baldi et al. (1986): Dr = ln⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
C2 ⎝ C0 (σ' ) C1 ⎠
C0, C1 and C2 = soil constants
σ’ = either mean stress σ’mean or vertical stress σ’vo
qc = cone penetration resistance, kPa

CIVL576/Zhang 34
 State parameter
Been et al. (1986), based on a study
of calibration chamber tests,
developed a procedure for
estimating the state parameter
from cone penetration tests:
(1) Carry out triaxial test to determine
the steady-state (critical-state)
line
(2) From Fig. 5.50, determine the
parameters m and k for the
steady-state line
(3) Estimate the insitu horizontal
stress σ’ho and obtain σmean and
σ’mean
(4) Compute the state parameter ψ
from
qc − σ mean
= κ exp ( − mψ )
σ'mean
CIVL576/Zhang 35
 In-situ horizontal stress
ƒ Based on geological evidence

J
a
c
k
y
K o ( OC )
= OCR m K o ( NC ) = 1 − sin φ' ( 1944)
K o ( NC )

m = 0.45 (Lunne and Christophersen 1983)

m = 0.65 (Mayne and Kulhawy 1982)

ƒ Based on qc
σ' ( pa / σ'vo ) (qc / pa )1.6
K 0 = ho =
σ'vo ⎡⎛ (q / p ) /(σ' / p ) 0.5 ⎞ 0.5 ⎤
145 exp ⎢⎜⎜ c a vo
0.18
a
⎟⎟ ⎥
⎢⎣⎝ 12.2 (OCR ) ⎠ ⎥⎦
OCR = 5.04 K o
1.54

CIVL576/Zhang 36
 Stress strength parameters
• Empirical–calibration chamber data

CIVL576/Zhang 37
 • Empirical – state
parameter approach
ƒ Find ψ from CPT data
ƒ Find φ from Fig. 5.57
based on ψ.

CIVL576/Zhang 38
 Deformation characteristics
• Young’s modulus
ƒ Depends on Dr, OCR,
current stress etc.
ƒ E’s at an average axial strain
of 0.1% for a range of
stress histories and aging
ƒ Strain level reasonably
representative for well-
designed foundations

CIVL576/Zhang 39
 Constrained modulus M0 (Lunne and Christophersen 1983)
• NC unaged and uncemented silica sands

f
r o
o
qc 1
1 M
0 P
M a
P q
a
M 0 = 4 qc <

M
P
a
f
r
0

5
0
M
P
a
︵
M 0 = 2qc + 20 ︶ < <

c
M
P
a
M 0 = 120

• OC sands f
r
o
q
5
0
M
P
a
M 0 = 5qc c
<
M
P
a

f
o
r
q
5
0
M
P
a
c
M 0 = 250 >

CIVL576/Zhang 40
 Small-strain modulus
• Axial strain <10-3 %
• The wide range of G0/qc at
low values of normalized
cone resistance may be due
to variations in soil
compressibility

CIVL576/Zhang 41
 Appendix I:
Calibration chamber testing of sand soils

CIVL576/Zhang 42
 Background
• Most methods used today for interpreting CPT results in
sands are partly or completely based on calibration
chamber approach:
ƒ Sand density
ƒ State parameter
ƒ Drain shear strength
ƒ Young’s modulus
ƒ Small-strain shear modulus
• Calibration chamber testing is also used for basic research
into effects of boundary conditions, sample diameter,
stress and train history etc.

CIVL576/Zhang 43
 General arrangement

CIVL576/Zhang 44
 Existing facilities

CIVL576/Zhang 45