Definitions

1. Wrijvingsweerstand (fs, MPa)

 Also called local sleeve friction or shaft friction.

 It is the resistance on the friction sleeve of the cone

penetrometer as it is pushed into the ground.

 Measured in megapascals (MPa).

 Reflects soil type and density, especially useful for identifying

clayey or silty layers.

2. Wrijvingsgetal (Rf, %)

 Also called the friction ratio.

 It is a dimensionless percentage that gives the ratio of fs to qc:

Rf=(fsqc)×100%R_f = \left( \frac{f_s}{q_c} \right) \times 100\%Rf
=(qcfs)×100%

 Used to classify soil type:

o Low Rf (~0.5–2%) → sands

o High Rf (>3–4%) → clays or silts

 Helps distinguish between cohesive vs non-cohesive soils.

3. Waterspanning (u2, MPa)

 Also called pore water pressure, measured behind the cone tip (at
the u2 position).

 Indicates the excess pore pressure generated during cone

penetration.

 Important for saturated soils, especially clays.

 Used in corrected tip resistance calculations and undrained

shear strength estimates.

4. Conusweerstand (qc, MPa)

 Also called cone resistance or tip resistance.

 Measures the resistance of the soil at the cone tip as it is

pushed into the ground.

 Reflects the bearing capacity of the soil.

 Typically higher in dense sands and gravels, lower in soft

clays.
🧩 Relationships and Interpretations

Let’s look at how they all tie together:

A. Rf (Wrijvingsgetal) is a ratio between fs and qc:

Rf=fsqc×100%Rf = \frac{fs}{qc} \times 100\%Rf=qcfs×100%

 So if qc increases (e.g. in sand), but fs stays low, Rf becomes

small.

 If fs is high compared to qc (e.g. in clay), Rf increases.

B. u2 (Pore Pressure) affects interpretation of qc and fs:

 In saturated fine-grained soils (like clay), excess pore pressure

builds up during penetration, influencing the measured qc and
fs.

 Used for correcting tip resistance to get qt (corrected cone

resistance): qt=qc+u2(1−a)q_t = q_c + u_2 (1 - a)qt=qc+u2(1−a)
where a is the cone area ratio (typically ~0.8).

 Higher u2 values typically correspond to low permeability soils

(clays), indicating undrained behavior.

C. Combined use in soil classification (simplified):

qc fs u2 Likely Soil
Rf (%)
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) Type

High Low Low Low Dense sand

Low High High High Soft clay

Mediu Mediu Silt or mixed

Medium Medium
m m layer

🧠 Summary

Paramet Uni
Meaning Soil Influence
er t

Cone tip
qc MPa Density/stiffness
resistance

Friction on Cohesion/clay
fs MPa
sleeve content
Paramet Uni
Meaning Soil Influence
er t

Rf = Soil type
% Classification
fs/qc indicator

Pore water Saturation/

u2 MPa
pressure permeability

If you have specific CPT profiles or are working in Dutch soils (e.g.,
Holocene clays, Pleistocene sands), I can help interpret those values too!
CPT Interpretation: Soil Parameters OCR, Dr, ψ
State Parameter (ψ)

The state parameter (ψ) is defined as the difference between the current
void ratio, e and the void ratio at critical state ecs, at the same mean
effective stress for coarse-grained (sandy) soils. Since the Critical State
Line is very flat, in terms of e – log p’, at low to moderate effective stress
(p’ < 3 atm.), there is little difference between defining in-situ state using
either Dr or ψ. Using critical state concepts, Jefferies and Been (2006)
provided a detailed description of the evaluation of soil state using the
CPT. They describe in detail that the problem of evaluating state from CPT
response is complex and depends on several soil parameters. The main
parameters are essentially the shear stiffness, shear strength,
compressibility, and plastic hardening. Jefferies and Been (2006) provided
a description of how state can be evaluated using a combination of
laboratory and in-situ tests. They stress the importance of determining the
in-situ horizontal effective stress and shear modulus using in-situ tests
and determining the shear strength, compressibility, and plastic hardening
parameters from laboratory testing on reconstituted samples. They also
show how the problem can be assisted using numerical modeling. For
high-risk projects a detailed interpretation of CPT results using laboratory
results and numerical modeling may be appropriate (e.g., Shuttle and
Cunning, 2007), although soil variability can complicate the interpretation
procedure. Some unresolved concerns with the Jefferies and Been (2006)
approach relate to the stress normalization using n = 1.0 for all soils, and
the influence of soil fabric in sands with high fines content.

For low-risk projects and in the initial screening for high-risk projects there
is a need for a simple estimate of in-situ soil state. Plewes et al (1992)
provided a means to estimate soil state using the normalized soil behavior
type (SBTn) chart suggested by Jefferies and Davies (1991). Jefferies and
Been (2006) updated this approach using their normalized SBT n chart
based on the parameter Qt (1-Bq) +1. Robertson (2009) expressed
concerns about the accuracy and precision of the Jefferies and Been
(2006) normalized parameter in soft soils, where B q is close to 1.0. In
sands, where Bq ~ 0, the normalization suggested by Jefferies and Been
(2006) is essentially the same as that used by Robertson (1990).

Based on the data presented by Jefferies and Been (2006) and Shuttle and
Cunning (2007) as well the measurements from the CANLEX project
(Wride et al, 2000) for predominantly, uncemented young (i.e., little or no
microstructure) sands, combined with the link between OCR and state
parameter in fine-grained soil, Robertson (2009) developed contours of
state parameter (ψ) on the updated SBTn Qtn – F chart for uncemented,
Holocene-age soils. The contours of ψ, shown on Figure 31, are
approximate since in-situ stress state and plastic hardening will also
influence the estimate of in-situ soil state in the coarse-grained region of
the chart (i.e., when Ic < 2.60) and soil sensitivity for fine-grained soils.
Jefferies and Been (2006) suggested that soils with a state parameter less
than -0.05 (i.e., ψ < -0.05) are dilative at large strains.

Figure 31. Contours of

estimated state parameter, ψ (thick lines), on normalized SBT n Qtn –
Fr chart for uncemented Holocene-age soils (After Robertson, 2009)

Robertson (2010) suggested a simplified and approximate relationship

between ψ and the clean sand equivalent normalized cone
resistance, Qtn,cs, as follows:

The clean sand equivalent normalized cone resistance, Qtn,cs evolved from
the study of liquefaction case histories and details are provided in a later
section on “Liquefaction” (see Figure 48).
This text delves into the concept of the state parameter (ψ), a crucial
factor in geotechnical engineering, particularly when analyzing the
behavior of sandy soils. Here's a breakdown of the key points:

1. Definition of the State Parameter (ψ):

 Foundation: ψ is rooted in critical state soil mechanics.

 Calculation: It's the difference between the soil's current void ratio
(e) and the void ratio at its critical state (ecs) at the same mean
effective stress (p').

o Void ratio (e) is the ratio of the volume of voids to the volume
of solids in a soil sample.

o Critical state (ecs) is the condition where soil continues to

deform at a constant volume and shear stress.
 o Mean effective stress (p') is the average stress carried by the
soil skeleton.

 Significance: ψ indicates the soil's density and its tendency to

contract or dilate (expand) during shearing. A negative ψ suggests a
dense, dilative soil, while a positive ψ indicates a loose, contractive
soil.

2. Relationship with Relative Density (Dr):

 At low to moderate effective stresses, the critical state line (e vs. log
p') is relatively flat.

 This results in a close correlation between ψ and the relative density

(Dr), a simpler measure of soil density.

3. Evaluation of ψ using Cone Penetration Test (CPT):

 The CPT is a valuable in-situ test that provides continuous

measurements of soil resistance.

 Jefferies and Been (2006) developed a methodology to estimate ψ

from CPT data.

 This approach is complex and considers factors like shear stiffness,

shear strength, compressibility, and plastic hardening.

 The method requires a combination of CPT data, laboratory testing,

and potentially numerical modeling.

 The CPT method is used to create a normalized soil behavior type

chart (SBTn).

4. Simplified Estimation of ψ:

 For low-risk projects or initial screenings, simplified methods are

needed.

 Plewes et al. (1992) and Jefferies and Been (2006) proposed

methods using the normalized soil behavior type (SBTn) chart.

 Robertson (2009) refined these methods, developing contours of ψ

on the updated SBTn chart (Qtn-Fr chart).

 Robertson (2010) created a simplified formula to calculate the state

parameter using the clean sand equivalent normalized cone
resistance.

5. Importance of ψ in Soil Behavior:

 ψ is a powerful indicator of soil behavior, especially in sands.

  Soils with ψ < -0.05 are generally considered dilative, meaning they
tend to expand during shearing, which is important for stability.

 The state parameter is also used in the evaluation of soil liquifaction

potential.

6. Limitations and Considerations:

 The accuracy of ψ estimation can be affected by factors like soil

variability, in-situ stress state, and soil fabric (especially in sands
with high fines content).

 The stress normalization used in some methods may not be

universally applicable.

In essence, the state parameter (ψ) provides a more fundamental

understanding of soil behavior than simple density
measurements. It's particularly valuable for analyzing sandy soils
and predicting their response to loading. The CPT, combined with
appropriate interpretation techniques, is a primary tool for
estimating ψ in the field.

Ic

In the context of Cone Penetration Test (CPT) interpretation and the state
parameter (ψ), the Soil Behavior Type index (Ic) stands for a numerical
classification of soil based on its CPT response.

Here's a breakdown:

 Purpose:

o Ic is used to categorize soils into different behavioral types,

ranging from clays to sands, based on their measured CPT
parameters.

o It helps engineers understand the soil's likely mechanical

behavior, such as its compressibility, shear strength, and
drainage characteristics.

 Calculation:

o Ic is calculated using normalized CPT parameters, specifically

the normalized cone resistance (Qtn) and the normalized
friction ratio (Fr).

o The formula is designed to capture the relative proportions of

friction and resistance, which are indicative of soil type.

 Interpretation:
 o Different ranges of Ic values correspond to different soil types:

 Lower Ic values typically indicate sandy soils.

 Higher Ic values typically indicate clayey soils.

 Intermediate values represent silty soils or mixtures.

o Ic is used to define the soil behavior type on the CPT soil

behavior type chart. This chart is used to estimate the state
parameter.

 Significance:

o Ic provides a rapid and continuous assessment of soil

stratigraphy and behavior in the field.

o It is a valuable tool for geotechnical engineers in foundation

design, settlement analysis, and liquefaction assessment.

o It is used to help determine the state parameter.

In simple terms, Ic is a numerical "fingerprint" of the soil, derived from

CPT data, that helps engineers quickly identify and classify soil types.

Quellen und ähnliche Inhalte