L2

By Ir. Dr. Gue See Sew & Ir.
Chow Chee Meng

http://www.gnpgeo.com.my
G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd ( www.gnpgroup.com.my) (www.gnpgroup.com.my)
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES DESK STUDY SITE RECONNAISSANCE METHODS OF GROUND INVESTIGATION FIELD TEST AND SAMPLING PLANNING OF GROUND INVESTIGATION SPECIFICATIONS SUPERVISION
G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd Quality Services - Our Commitment
INTRODUCTION
Guidance notes to engineers on the practical aspect of site investigation
G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd
Quality Services - Our Commitment
OBJECTIVES
Provide adequate information for - Site assessment, safe and economical designs - Foresee construction difficulties. - Choice of site and layout arrangement.
Scar
SITE RECONNAISSANCE
Confirm and obtain additional information. Examine adjacent and nearby development. Compare the surface features and topography with data obtainable in the desk study. Locate and study the outcrops, previous slips.
METHODS OF GROUND INVESTIGATION
BOREHOLES
Refer to MS2038 Includes boring, sampling, in-situ testing and water table observation. Drill through soils and core through rocks. Two commonly used methods: a) Rotary drilling method b) Rotary wash boring Rock Coring
Care in Boreholes Levels and coordinates Samplers in good condition, clean & greased Samplers sealed, labelled & stored
Sizes of commonly-used Core barrels, Casings and Drill Rods Used
Typical Rotary Drilling Rig
Sampling in Boreholes
Disturbed Samples - Split spoon samples from SPT Undisturbed Samples - Mazier Sampler
Mazier Sampler
- Three-tube core-barrels containing detachable liners within the inner barrel. - Suitable for stiffer soil stratum.
Care in Sampling
Groundwater
Water level should be taken daily during SI (particularly in the morning). Piezometer should be used for accurate and longer time measurement. Good practice : Allow the ground water drop to original level
Boreholes with Standpipe Piezometers
Lockable Cap to prevent vandalism Bright Color (Red + White) to prevent vehicle knocking into it.
Borehole Number Clearly Marked on Concrete
4m
Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

According to MS 1056 Hammer weight = 65kg Drop height = 760mm Total penetration is 450mm and the number of blows for the last 300mm is the SPT N value. Care - depth of test vs casing L *site supervision
Equipment for SPT
PLANNING OF GROUND INVESTIGATION
S.I. In Grid Pattern

Not Recommended
(Total = 32 nos)
Proposed SI
(Total = 32 nos)
Typical Cross-Section
Ground Level Hard Material Level
Very Hard Material Level Bedrock Level
Groundwater Level
CROSS SECTION
BH BH
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL
C1, 1
BH
2, 2 r C T aye dW L e y ey erch P Cla
Seepage
C3, 3
Water Table
Selection of Ground Investigation Methods
Slope and cut areas - use Boreholes - SPT and Mazier samples for triaxial tests - Piezometer
Depth of Investigation
Foundation Design
Stability Analysis
Laboratory Test
a) Classification
Sieve Analysis Clay/Silt Atterberg Limits Moisture Content Unit Weight Specific Gravity
c) Compaction Fill
d) Chemical
SO4 CI Ph Resistivity Redox Potential
b) Shear Strength
Effective
- CIU - CID
G&P- Form6 (Rev3)
G&P GEOTECHNICS SDN. BHD. (Geotechnical Consultants) LABORATORY TEST SCHEDULE

Project No : .. Lab. Schedule No. .. Requested by : Rev iewed by : ...
CONSOLIDAT ION Std. Rapid S.S. TRIAXIAL CIU UU UCT
ORGA NI C CONTE NT
Date : .. Date :
CH EMICAL ANALYSIS PH
SULPH ATE CONTE NT CHLORIDE CONTE NT
Project : ..
Direct She ar Box SIEVE ANALYSIS Mech. Hydro.
BOREHOLE
SAM PLE NO.
DEPTH m
M/C
A.L.
B.D .
S.G.
T OT AL Note : 1) C IU
Requested Performed
I sotro pic Conso lidat ed Undra ined Tr iaxial Te st with por e pressur e measurements Use 70mm diameter samp le (i.e. u ntr immed Mazier sample) Sample should n ot have side filter dur ing consolida tion Shearing str ain sho uld be calculat ed using Cv values ca lculated dur in g consolidatio n stage. M ulti- stage testing not allowe d P- Q Stress Pat h Plotting sh all be submitted. 2) F or CIU T ests, stress path an d other relevant da ta shall be submitted in Ha rd Copy (Plots and Tabu lated Data) and Soft Copy (Co mpu ter files data). Cell confinin g pr essure of 0.5 v , 1.0v, 2.0v shall be ad opted for t he CIU test, whe re v is the total vertical in-sit u stress. 3) U U Unconsolidated U ndr ained Test (at tota l overbu rd en p re ssur e of the sample) 4) UCT Unconfined Com pr ession Test ( untrimm ed sam ple)
5) To determin e Cv from Consolidation Tests :Use Squar e-Root Time Method to deter mine d0 . Then use Log-Time Met hod to dete rmine d10 0 6) Direct shear box test - Three (3) r econ stituted specimens (60mm x 60m m x 20 mm thick) sh all be used. - Applied nor mal stress pressure of 0.5 v, 1.0v , 2.0v shall be adopte d for th e she ar box test, where v is the total vertica l in- situ stress. 7) All specimens for tr iaxial or consolidation tests shall be obtained from center of th e r ecovere d samp les in UD sam pler. 8) 2 moisture content te sts shall be car ried out on soil immediately besides the specimens ret ained for tria xial or co nsolidation tests. 9) Bulk densit y, particle size distribut ion and Atterb er g Limit te sts shall b e carried out o n every specimen afte r the tr iaxial or consolidation tests.
Special Attention
Triaxial Compression Test No/Minimum Trimming No Side Drains No Multistage
SITE SUPERVISION
Full time Engineering Geologists, Engineers or experienced Technicians Briefing (Supervision Checklist) Communication Checklist (http://www.gnpgeo.com.my/RnD_spec_checklist_checklist.asp)
CONCLUSIONS
1. You pay for soil investigation whether you carry out or not. In fact you eventually pay more without a soil investigation.
CONCLUSIONS
Principal conclusions:
1. Delay and escalating construction costs are due to inadequate site investigation Consequences of inadequate SI is not only severe during design and construction stage but even more serious for fulllife costing
2.
CONCLUSIONS (cont)
2. You must know - why you wanted them - where they are to be carried out - how they should be done
CONCLUSIONS (cont)
3. Use proper specifications 4. Full time supervision 5. Ensure QA/QC system.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES SCOPE INTERPRETATION
- JKR PROBE - SPT
DESIGN PARAMETERS LABORATORY TESTS

INTRODUCTION
NEED
- Neglected topic; only briefly covered in universities - Danger of using results directly without interpretation - Decision on choice of values for soil parameters
SCOPE
- Common tests only
PROCESSES
- Specifications, Supervision, Presentation & Interpretation
Proton Iswara
Ferrari
OBJECTIVES
Illustrate the importance of interpretation Show methods of compiling results and recognising errors
SCOPE
- Common field and laboratory tests
FIELD TESTS
- JKR/ Mackintosh probe - SPT (Standard Penetration Test)
LABORATORY TESTS
- Unconfined compression - Triaxial Test (CIU with pore pressure measurement & CD)
JKR PROBE
- Primitive tool - Limited use
Shallow bedrock profile (limestone with slump zone) Weak zone at shallow depth Shallow foundation
No recent fill and future settlement Structure of low risk If in doubt use borehole
Apparatus
Cased hardened steel pointer of 25mm dia. and 60o cone. dia. 22mm outer dia. dia. coupling
Prevent buckling during driving
28
12mm dia. HY dia. 55C steel rod
5kg drop hammer
CONE PENETROMETER
For practical application: - Results of JKR Probe = Mackintosh Probe - Patented in the early days
Termination criteria
Blows/300mm
(maximum 400 blows/300mm)
Max 15m depth
Precautionary measures
Free fall and consistent drop height Components and apparatus properly washed and oiled
Typical test results
Applications
Identifying localised soft/weak or slip plane.

Applications
Identifying localised soft/weak or slip plane.

T T
T = compaction lift
Identifying non-compliance fill.

Comparison between JKR probe and SPT
JKR Blows
0 0 100 200 300 400 0
Depth (m)
12
12
JKR Plot SPT'N' Plot

0 10 20 30 40 50
SPT'N'
0 0
10 0
JKR Blows
200
300
400 0
Depth (m)
10
10
12
12
14
JKR Plot SPT'N' Plot
14
16 0 10 20 30 40
16
SPT'N'
Number of Blows per 300 mm
Depth From Ground Surface In Meter (m)
Limitations
Shallow depth Not for gravelly ground Human errors (e.g. wrong counting, non-consistent
drop height, exerting force to the drop hammer
Misleading results at greater depth
AW Rod
63.5kg Hamme r
760mm Free Fall
450mm
Split-Spoon Sampler
Split-Spoon Sampler
Driving Shoe
Split Barrel
OD = 50mm ID = 35mm Length ~ 650mm
SPT-N Value
Seating drive
Test drive
5 - 10 - 30 - 20/30cm
Seating drive Test drive
(30 + 20) SPT-N = x 300 = 143 (75 + 30)
Soil Soft rock
Maximum blows to be applied In seating drive In test drive 25 50 25 100
MS 1056 : Part 9
? ?
LABORATORY TESTS
- Why? - Types of Tests! - How? - Specifications?

(Load, Pressure, Time)
SPECIFICATIONS
a) Triaxial test
1) For triaxial tests - Strain rate - Back pressure
Special Attention
Triaxial Compression Test No/Minimum Trimming No Side Drains No Multistage
G&P- Form6 (Rev3)
G&P GEOTECHNICS SDN. BHD. (Geotechnical Consultants) LABORATORY TEST SCHEDULE

Project No : .. Lab. Schedule No. .. Requested by : Rev iewed by : ...
CONSOLIDAT ION Std. Rapid S.S. TRIAXIAL CIU UU UCT
O R G A NI C C O N TE N T
Date : .. Date :
CH EMICAL ANALYSIS PH
SU L PH ATE C O N TE NT C H L O R ID E C O N TE NT
Project : ..
Direct She ar Box SIEVE ANALYSIS Mech. Hydro.
BOREHOLE
SAM PLE NO.
DEPTH m
M/C
A.L.
B.D .
S.G.
T OT AL Note : 1) C IU
Requested Performed
I sotro pic Conso lidat ed Undra ined Tr iaxial Te st with por e pressur e measurements Use 70mm diameter samp le (i.e. u ntr immed Mazier sample) Sample should n ot have side filter dur ing consolida tion Shearing str ain sho uld be calculat ed using Cv values ca lculated dur in g consolidatio n stage. M ulti- stage testing not allowe d P- Q Stress Pat h Plotting sh all be submitted. 2) F or CIU T ests, stress path an d other relevant da ta shall be submitted in Ha rd Copy (Plots and Tabu lated Data) and Soft Copy (Co mpu ter files data). Cell confinin g pr essure of 0.5 v , 1.0v, 2.0v shall be ad opted for t he CIU test, whe re v is the total vertical in-sit u stress. 3) U U Unconsolidated U ndr ained Test (at tota l overbu rd en p re ssur e of the sample) 4) UCT Unconfined Com pr ession Test ( untrimm ed sam ple)
5) To determin e Cv from Consolidation Tests :Use Squar e-Root Time Method to deter mine d0 . Then use Log-Time Met hod to dete rmine d10 0 6) Direct shear box test - Three (3) r econ stituted specimens (60mm x 60m m x 20 mm thick) sh all be used. - Applied nor mal stress pressure of 0.5 v, 1.0v , 2.0v shall be adopte d for th e she ar box test, where v is the total vertica l in- situ stress. 7) All specimens for tr iaxial or consolidation tests shall be obtained from center of th e r ecovere d samp les in UD sam pler. 8) 2 moisture content te sts shall be car ried out on soil immediately besides the specimens ret ained for tria xial or co nsolidation tests. 9) Bulk densit y, particle size distribut ion and Atterb er g Limit te sts shall b e carried out o n every specimen afte r the tr iaxial or consolidation tests.
Interpretation of Laboratory Tests
Strength Parameters :
- Stability Analyses of Slopes & Embankment.
Bearing Capacity Analyses for Foundation.
Strength Parameters
(A) Effective Stress :

For Long Term & Permanent Conditions. Fully Drained Conditions.
Typical Set-up of Triaxial Test
b d
a)Base b)Removable cylinder and top cap c)Loading ram d)Rubber membrane
Effective Stress Strength

Parameters c &
Interpretation from
(i) (ii)
CIU + U CID
rate)
Isotropic Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Test, Isotropic Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test,
(iii) Laboratory Shear Box Test (at v. slow
MohrCoulomb
STRESS PATH INTERPRETATION

Two types of Plot
(i)
The vertical axis :
MIT Stress Path Plot

&
(T.W. Lambe of MIT, 1967)
t = ( 1 - 3)/2 s = ( 1 + 3)/2
= ( 1 - 3)/2 s = ( 1 + 3)/2
The horizontal axis :
(ii) Cambridge Stress Path Plot

q = 1 - 3 = 1 - 3 &
(Roscoe, Schofield and Wroth (1958) at the Cambridge, England) The vertical axis : The horizontal axis :
p = (1 + 2 + 3)/3
p = ( 1+ 2+ 3)/3
Terminology & Interpretation
MIT & Cambridge Stress Path Plot

Tan = t / s Tan = Sin K = c Cos K C = Cos Tan = q / p Sin = (3 ) / ( 6 + ) r = c (6 Cos ) / (3 Sin ) C = r (3 Sin ) 6 Cos
Scattered CIU Results

0 500 BH1 UD2 BH2 UD1 BH2 M1 BH3 UD2 BH4 UD1 BH5 M1 BH6 M1 BH6 M2 BH9 M1 BH10 UD1 BH10 UD3 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 500 450
= sin-1 m c = a / (cos )
450
400
400
350
350
Proposed Design Line
t' = (1' - 3 ')/2
300
250
c = 3.5 kPa, = 32
m 1
300
250
200
150
Upper Bound c = 5 kPa, = 39
200
150
100
50
Lower Bound c = 0 kPa, = 29
100
50
a
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
s' = (1'+3 ')/2

Correlations for Preliminary Assessment of
Values vs Clay Content (Skempton, 1964)
vs % of Fines
35 30 25
Figure 3 : peak versus Percentage of Fines in Residual Soils
c vs % of Fines
Figure 4 : c versus Percentage of Fines in Residual Soils
Ring Shear test on sand-bentonite mixtures (after Lupini, Skinner & Vaughan, 1981)
YOU PAY FOR SOIL INVESTIGATION WHETHER YOU CARRY OUT OR NOT
References
ASTM, (1986)
Standard Test Method for Deep Quasi-static, Cone and Friction Cone Penetration Tests of Soil, D3441-86, ASTM Committee D-18 on Soil and Rock, USA
Dobie, M.J.D., & Wong, J.T.F. (1990)

Piezocone testing; Interpretation in Malaysia Alluvial Clays Geotechnical Aspects of the North-South Expressway, PLUS & PL, Kuala Lumpur
Fleming, W.G.K. et al (1985)

Piling Engineering Survey University Press, Glasgow
Gue, S.S. & Tan, Y.C. (2003)

Current Status & Future Development of Geotechnical Engineering Practice in Malaysia, 12th ARC on Soil Mechanics & Geotechnical Engineering, Singapore
References
Gue, S.S. & Tan, Y.C. (2006) Landslides: Abuses of the Prescriptive Method, International Conference on Slopes, Malaysia
Head, K. H (1984)
Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing
International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation (1988)

International Reference Test Procedure, ISSMFE Technical Committee on Penetration Testing, Proposal to ISSMFE, Orlando, USA
Meigh, A.C. (1987)

Cone Penetration Testing: Methods and Interpretation, Construction Industry Research and Information Association, CIRIA Ground Engineering Report: In-site Testing, London
Proceedings of 1st International

Symposium on Penetration Testing/ ISOPT I/Florida, USA, 1988
References
Proceedings of 2nd European
Symposium on Penetration Testing/ ESOPT II/ Amsterdam/ May 1982
Robertson, P.K. and Campanella, R.G. (1988)

Guidelines for using the CPT, CPTU and Marchetti DMT for Geotechnical Design, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Special Studies, Report No. FHWAPA-87-023+84-24
Sanglerat, G, (1972)
The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Teh, C.I. and Houlsby, G.T. (1991)

An Analytical Study of the Cone Penetration Test in Clay, Geotechnique, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp: 17-34
References
MS 2038: 2006 Code of Practice for Site Investigations MS 1754: 2004 Code of Practice for Earthworks MS 1756: 2004 Code of Practice for Foundation MS 1056: 2005 Method of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes Clayton, C.R.I. Simons, N.e. & Mathews, M. C. (1982) Site Investigation, A Handbook for Engineers, Grenada London, 424P European Group Subcommittee (1968) Recommended method of Static and Dynamic Penetration Tests 1965 Geotechnique Vol. 1 No. 1 Head, K. H. (1984) Manual of Soil Laboratory testing GCO (1984) : Geotechnical Manual for Slopes, Geotechnical Control Office, Hong Kong
References
GCO (1980) : Geoguide 2 : Guide to Site Investigation, Geotechnical Control Office, Hong Kong Gue, S. S. (1985) Geotechnical Assessment for Hillside Development Proceedings of the Symposium on Hillside Development; Engineering Practice and Local By-Laws, The Institution of Engineers, Malaysia Neoh, C. A. (1995) Guidelines for Planning Scope of Site Investigation for Road Projects, Public Works Department, Malaysia Ooi, T.A. and Ting, W.H. (1975) The Use of a Light Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in Malaysia. Proceeding of 4th Southeast Asian Conference on Soil Engineering, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 3-62, 3-79 Ting, W.H. (1972) Subsurface Exploration and Foundation Problems in the Kuala Lumpur Area, Journal of Institution of Engineers, Malaysia, Vol. 13, pp. 19-25

L2

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

L2

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

By Ir. Dr. Gue See Sew & Ir.

Chow Chee Meng

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd ( www.gnpgroup.com.my) (www.gnpgroup.com.my)

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

METHODS OF GROUND INVESTIGATION

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd ( www.gnpgroup.com.my) (www.gnpgroup.com.my)

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

Sizes of commonly-used Core barrels, Casings and Drill Rods Used

Typical Rotary Drilling Rig

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

Boreholes with Standpipe Piezometers

Borehole Number Clearly Marked on Concrete

Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Equipment for SPT

PLANNING OF GROUND INVESTIGATION

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

S.I. In Grid Pattern

Ground Level Hard Material Level

Very Hard Material Level Bedrock Level

EXISTING GROUND LEVEL

2, 2 r C T aye dW L e y ey erch P Cla

Selection of Ground Investigation Methods

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P- Form6 (Rev3)

G&P GEOTECHNICS SDN. BHD. (Geotechnical Consultants) LABORATORY TEST SCHEDULE

SAM PLE NO.

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

Triaxial Compression Test No/Minimum Trimming No Side Drains No Multistage

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment

G&P Geotechnics Sdn Bhd

Quality Services - Our Commitment