Ground investigation

Lecture 3 – Measurement of soil properties and geotechnical Investigation Report

STAGE 3 – MEASUREMENT OF SOIL PROPERTIES
AND GEPTECHNICAL IVESTIGATIONS REPORT
 Investigation stages
Laboratory
testing
Boreholes & trial
pitting

3a

2b

Field testing
Measurement of the
Geophysics Subsurface engineering properties 3b
approach 2a exploration of subsoil

Desk study Site reconnaissance

3
2

Ground Ground
Planning 1 Investigation 4 investigation
report
Introduction
Ground investigation field work (Stage 2)
1. Excavation of trial pits and drilling of boreholes √
2. Profiling √
3. Sampling
4. Field or in-situ testing (3b)
Note
• Results of field activities 1 & 2 yield qualitative
information about subsurface soil/rock
• Qualitative information not directly used in design
calculations
• Designs are based on numbers (e.g. φ = 30⁰, γ = 20
kN/m3)
• Realistic and meaningful numbers obtained from
laboratory and field tests
Laboratory testing
• Most common technique to obtain engineering properties necessary
for design
• Tests classified into two broad categories
• Index tests
• Performance tests
• Chemical tests
• Samples recovered during subsurface exploration
Advantages and disadvantages
• More than one test can be performed on the same
sample
• Can control the stresses to simulate the stress path
for the design
• Control drain conditions
However,
• Must have representative samples to test. These may be
difficult or expensive to obtain
• Changes in the state of stress during sampling
• Structure and fabric of specimens prepared in the lab may
substantially differ from that found in the field
• Laboratory testing is limited to few sampled locations,
therefore can miss a layer or strata that governs the design
Common Laboratory tests
Chemical tests
Test Method for Permeability of Fine Soils
(Falling/Variable Head)

Note: Tests are project specific

 Sampling (see Chapter 10, Section 10.3)
• Laboratory testing requires soil samples
• By convention two broad types of samples are recognized:
―Disturbed
―Undisturbed
• Disturbed sample:
• Sample in which the natural structure of the soil gets partly or fully
modified and destroyed.
―Obtained using equipment that destroy the macro structure of the soil
―But mineralogical composition is not altered
― Specimens used for
 Determination of lithology of soil deposits
 Identification of soil components
 General classification of the soil
 Determination of compaction characteristics
 Correlation to other engineering properties
Obtained from
• Split barrel samplers
• Mechanical and hand augers
• Excavation machines
• Hand tools
• Undisturbed sample
• Sample in which the natural structure and properties remain
preserved (???)
―Recovered from boreholes using metal tubes which are driven or pushed
into the soil.
―Tube sample are normally possible in cohesive materials; sand would fall
out of the sampling tube
―Several sampling techniques available (see Table)
―Undisturbed samples required for determination of engineering
properties
Samplers
Split barrel sampler
Tube samplers
Sample disturbance
• The most important factor controlling the quality of the end result is the
sample disturbance
• Soil disturbance can occur during
• drilling,
• sampling,
• transportation
• storage,
• preparation for testing
• Mechanisms associated with this disturbance can be classified as follows:
• changes in stress conditions;
• mechanical deformation;
• changes in water content and voids ratio;
• chemical changes.
With all these, it is possible to have an undistributed sample?
Note: The above necessitate the application of partial factors or factor
of safety in design
In-situ tests
IN–SITU TESTS
• Ground is tested in-place by instruments that are
inserted in or penetrate the ground,
Advantages
• Tests are carried out in place in the natural environment
without sampling disturbance
• Continuous profiles of stratigraphy and engineering
properties/characteristics can be obtained.
• Methods are usually fast, repeatable and produce large
amounts of information
• Tests can be carried out in soils that are either impossible
or difficult to sample without the use of expensive
specialized methods
• A large volume of soil may be tested than is normally
practicable for laboratory testing. This may be more
representative of the soil mass.
Disadvantages
• Samples are not obtained; the soil tested cannot be
positively identified. The exception to this is the SPT in
which a sample, although disturbed, is obtained.
• The fundamental behavior of soils during testing is not
well understood.
• Drainage conditions during testing are not known
• Consistent, rational interpretation is often difficult and
uncertain
• The stress path imposed during testing may bear no
resemblance to the stress path induced by full-scale
engineering structure
• Most push-in devices are not suitable for a wide range of
ground conditions
• There is usually no direct measurement of engineering
properties. Empirical correlations usually have to be
applied to interpret and obtain engineering properties
and designs
Types of in-situ tests
FIELD STRENGTH TESTS

24
In-situ tests used in Southern Africa
• Standard Penetration Test – SPT
• Dynamic Cone Penetrometer – DCP
• Dynamic Probe Supper Heavy – DPSH
• Cone penetration Test – CPT
• Plate load Test
• Vane Shear Test
DCP
Pit No TP36 Starting Depth:
Date 14-Jul-20
No of Penetration Depth Pen/blow
blows mm m mm
DCP interpretation
0 0 0.00 0
5 155 0.16 31 Description Penetration rate
10 250 0.25 19
(mm/blow)
15 280 0.28 6
20 320 0.32 8 Very loose >75
25 345 0.35 5 Loose 30 - 75
30 380 0.38 7 Medium 12.5 - 30
35 410 0.41 6
dense
40 445 0.45 7
45 490 0.49 9 Dense 5 – 12.5
50 540 0.54 10 Very dense 2-5
55 585 0.59 9
60 630 0.63 9
65 670 0.67 8
70 715 0.72 9
75 750 0.75 7
80 790 0.79 8
85 820 0.82 6
Plate load test

Load Settlement
Load-Settlement curves
SPT and CPT
SPT
Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

35
Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

36
Soil behavior type identification
Correlation with engineering properties (e.g. Cu)
STAGE 4 - Ground Investigation Report
Introduction
• The results of a geotechnical investigation shall be compiled in the
Ground Investigation Report (EN 1997-2).
― Forms a part of the Geotechnical Design Report
• It is the only coherent record that remains after ground investigation
 Investigation stages
Laboratory
testing
Boreholes & trial
pitting

3a

2b

Field testing
Measurement of the
Geophysics Subsurface engineering properties 3b
approach 2a exploration of subsoil

Desk study Site reconnaissance

3
2

Ground Ground
Planning 1 Investigation 4 investigation
report
Main Parts
Two main parts
Part 1 – Factual account/factual report (undisputed facts)
• The factual account should include the following information
―the purpose and scope of the geotechnical investigation
―a description of the site and its topography
―the names of all consultants and subcontractors
―the dates between which field and laboratory investigations were performed
―documentation of the methods and procedures of investigations undertaken
including:
• desk studies;
• field investigations, such as sampling, field tests and groundwater measurements, soil profiles
• laboratory testing data
• provides a vital link between the factual laboratory and site
investigation data and the analyses performed during geotechnical
engineering design.
• the engineering logs, photographs, monitoring and laboratory testing
data can be recorded within a factual report or interpreted by
experienced members of the team
Part 2 – Evaluation/interpretation of data/analysis of resulst
(interpretive report)
a) The evaluation of the geotechnical information shall include
―the tabulation and graphical presentation of the results of field investigation
and laboratory testing in cross-sections of the ground showing the relevant
strata and their boundaries including
―Analysis of the results of the field investigations and laboratory tests
―Detailed descriptions of all strata including their physical properties and their
deformation and strength characteristics, referring to the results of the
investigations
―Comments on irregularities such as cavities and zones of discontinuous
material
Example of presentation of results
Classification
Trial Sample
Pit depth Material Soil composition Aterberg limits GM Activity
ASSHTO TRH 4
Clay
+silt Sand Gravel LL PI

Cream White gravel

1 0.8-1.2 Sand 7 35 58 28.9. NP 2.41 LOW A-1-a -

Cream white gravel

2 0.6-1.0 Sand 9 35 56 29.2 NP 2.33 LOW A-1-a -
3 1.0-1.75 Grey Gravel sand 10 48 42 30.8 NP 2.12 LOW A-1-a G9

Greyish brown
Clayey/silty gravel
4 0.2-0.5 Sand 10 60 30 25.7 21.6 2.03 LOW A-2-4 G10

Greyish Cream white

Clayey/sitly gravel
5 1.0-1.3 Sand 9 39 52 33.4 26.9 2.49 LOW A-2-4 -

Greyish brown gravel

6 0.2-0.9 Sand 13 54 34 32.0 NP 2.03 LOW A-1-b -
b) Conclusions and recommendations
• Clear statement of what is recommended for design and construction
(e.g.)
―Depth to foundation level
―Types of foundation system
―Allowable bearing capacity
―Predicted settlement
―Dewatering
―Temporary support
―Excavatability
Typical table of content Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE ................................................................................... 1
3.0 SITE GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 1
4.0 INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN ..................................................................................................... 2
Factual information Sections
4.1 SITE RECONNAISSANCE ........................................................................................................................ 2
4.2 EXCAVATION OF TRIAL PITS .................................................................................................................. 3
4.3 PROFILING OF TRIAL PITS..................................................................................................................... 3
4.4 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS ................................................................................................. 3
4.5 LABORATORY TESTS ............................................................................................................................ 3
5.0 RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................... 4
5.1 SITE RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY RESULTS................................................................................................. 4
5.2 SUBSURFACE SOIL PROFILE .................................................................................................................. 4
Evaluation/interpretive Section 5.3 GROUNDWATER.................................................................................................................................. 5
5.4 SOIL INDEX TEST RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 5
5.5 COMPACTION AND CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) ............................................................................ 6
5.6 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS AND BEARING CAPACITY ............................................................... 7
6.0 CONCLUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................... 7
6.1 FOUNDATION TYPE AND DEPTH ............................................................................................................. 7
6.2 ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ..................................................................... 7
6.3 TREATMENT OF SOIL BELOW FOUNDATION LEVEL ..................................................................................... 8
Conclusions and 6.4 GROUND FLOOR SLABS ........................................................................................................................ 8
recommendations Part 6.5 TERMITE ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................................ 8
6.6 PAVEMENT SUBGRADES ....................................................................................................................... 8
6.7 EXCAVATITBILITY................................................................................................................................ 8
6.8 USE OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL .............................................................................................................. 8
APPENDIX A – TRIAL PITS PROFILES............................................................................................................ 9
APPENDIX B: INDICATOR TESTS RESULTS ................................................................................................. 24
APPENDIX C – DCP TEST RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 39
APPENDIX D: TRIAL PITS PHOTOS ......................................................................................................... 48