SOIL MECHANICS PRACTICAL REPORT

MODULE 8
Cone Penetration Test

GROUP PI 1
Asti Diar Syafitri 1206292414
Christopher Kevinly 1206223846
Wednesson Lawijaya 1206230593

Date of Practicum : 3rd of May 2014

Laboratory Assistant : Ahmad Syihan
Date Approved :
Grade :
Assistants Signature :

Laboratory of Soil Mechanics

Department of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
University of Indonesia
Depok
2014
8.1. Introduction:
8.1.1. Objective of the Field Test:
To know the cone resistance (end bearing) and shear resistance of
the soil in a certain depth, so the determination of the soils bearing
capacity can be determined.

8.1.2. Apparatus:
Hydraulic Dutch Penetrometer
2 Manometers, ones capacity is 0-60 kg/cm2 and 0-250 kg/cm2
Penetrometers tube along with the bar inside
Standard biconus which area is 10 cm2 and mantels area of 150 cm2
2 anchors with locks
4 channel steels
Screwdriver
Oil, brush, and castrolie

8.1.3. Brief Theorem:

Cone penetration test is one of some methods available to
determine the bearing capacity of the soil tested. This test is taken by
penetrating the soil with a cylindrical penetrometer, the lower end of
which is fitted with a cone having an apex angle of 60 o. The penetrometer
is attached to the lower end of a string of hollow boring rods which is
connected to a rig.
 Figure 8.1. (a) Electric Penetrometer, (b) mantle cone and (c) friction jacket cone.
(Source: Craig Soil Mechanics)
There will be two resistance values which can be determined; the
cone resistance and the mantle resistance. In order to determine the
correlation between them, this formula is used:

Ft qt=Fc qc+ Fm f

( Ft qt )(Fc qc)
f=
Fm

By substituting the values of Fm, Ft, and Fc;

10 qt10 qc
fs=
150

qt qc
fs=
15

Where:
Ft = Fc = the cross-sectional area of the biconus (10 cm2)
qt = total earth pressure which is read at the manometer due to
cone and friction pressure (Kg/cm2)
qc = cone pressure read at the manometer (Kg/cm2)
Fm = Area of the mantle (150 cm2)

Sticking resistance (HP)

HP=l f

Where:
l = the length of sticking = 20cm (the cone is pressed in every 20cm
Interval)

The sum of sticking resistance (JHP):

JHP= li fi
 The Friction Ratio of this experiment can be determined by using:

FR= ( qcfs ) 100

8.2. Procedure:
8.2.1. Preparations
a. Prepare a 30cm-sided square hole with a depth of 20cm or to a depth
where no soil layer containing grass or roots exists.
b. Install the anchor at the two sides of where the CPT rig wanted to be
erected.
c. The CPT rig is then placed on channel-shaped steel so the rig is stable,
then anchor the rig with the anchor prepared before. Make sure that the
rig is perpendicular with the land profile. It is important to lock the
anchor properly to prevent any rotation or translation occur during the
CPT.
d. Both of the manometers should be calibrated.
e. The cone should be checked, CPT pipes and the bars inside should be
oiled in order to minimize the friction effect

8.2.2. Practical Activity:

a. Connect the cone with a CPT pipe, then install it to the CPT rig, lock
the gap between the manometer and the centre bar of the CPT pipe.
b. The handle of the CPT rig is rotated, so the cone goes down until it
penetrates the first 20cm of the soil.
c. Release the lock between the manometer and the CPT tube, do the
readings afterwards by reading the manometer to get the qc. qt is gained
by penetrating the soil consistently until the manometer reading
jumps.
d. When the manometer reading has exceeds 50kg/cm2, do the reading on
the larger manometer.
e. Penetration is ceased if the qc has exceeds 150kg/cm2.
 De q q
pth (m) c t
(Kg/cm (Kg/cm
2) 2)
0.2 0 0
0
0.4 1 2
0 4 5
0.6 2 3
0 0 0
0.8 1 2
8.3.
0 Experimental
9 Data 4
1.0 After doing 1 the cone penetration
2 test, the result of the test:
0 0 2
Table 8.1. Data Tabulation
1.2 1 3
0 7 q 0 qt
1.4 c 1 (Kg/cm2) 2
0 (Kg/cm2)
9 7
1.6 1 2
0 2 4
1.8 1 2
0 3 8
2.0 1 2
0 2 7
2.2 1 2
0 5 8
2.4 1 2
0 2 3
2.6 1 2
0 8 5
2.8 1 2
0 0 9
3.0 1 2
0 5 2
3.2 1 2
0 8 8
3.4 1 2
0 6 8
3.6 3 4
0 0 0
3.8 1 2
0 2 3
4.0 1 2
0 2 0
4.2 1 2
0 0 0
4.4 1 2
0 0 0
4.6 1 1
0 0 8
4.8 1 1
0 0 8
5.0 1 1
0 0 5
5.2 1 1
 D
epth (m)
8.0 2 2
0 0 6
8.2 1 2
0 2 0
8.4 1 2
0 2 0
8.6 1 2
0 2 0
8.8 1 2
0 0 0
9.0 1 2
0 5 0
9.2 9 2
0 0
9.4 2 2
0 0 2
9.6 2 3
0 2 0
9.8 1 2
0 5 0
10. 1 1
00 3 8
10. 2 3
20 0 0
10. 2 3
40 8 0
10. 2 3
60 0 0
10. 2 3
80 2 4
11. 2 2
00 0 5
11. 2 3
20 2 2
11. 2 4
40 0 0
11. 2 3
60 0 0
11. 2 2
80 0 9
12. 4 6
00 0 3
 12. 1 2
20 2 4
12. 1 2
40 0 2
12. 1 2
60 8 8
12. 2 2
80 0 5
13. 1 2
00 6 0
13. 1 2
20 6 5
13. 1 3
40 8 0
13. 2 2
60 5 8
13. 2 2
80 5 7
14. 1 3
00 8 2
14. 2 4
20 3 5
14. 4 4
40 0 3
14. 3 5
60 0 5
14. 2 3
80 5 0
15. 2 4
00 0 0
15. 1 2
20 50 00

8.4. Data Processing

Each of the parameters of every depth tested should be considered.
Since the depth considered is too many, only one depth (depth = 0.40 m) is
calculated manually as an example. The rest of the depths are computed by
computer.

At depth = 0.40 m:
qc = 14 kg/cm2
 qt = 25 kg/cm2

qt qc 2514
fs= = =0.733
15 15

HP=l f =20 0.733 = 14.667

JHP=0+14.667=14.667

FR= ( qcfs ) 100 =( 0.733

14 )
100 =5.24

Table 8.2. Calculation result.

D q q f H JH F
epth c t s P P R (%)
(m) (Kg/c (Kg/c (Kg/cm (Kg/cm2 (Kg/cm2)
m2) m2) 2) )
0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.
.00 .000 .000 00 00%
0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.
.20 .000 .000 00 00%
0 1 2 0 1 1 5.
.40 4 5 .733 4.667 4.67 24%
0 2 3 0 1 2 3.
.60 0 0 .667 3.333 8.00 33%
0 1 2 0 6 3 1.
.80 9 4 .333 .667 4.67 75%
1 1 2 0 1 5 8.
.00 0 2 .800 6.000 0.67 00%
1 1 3 0 1 6 5.
.20 7 0 .867 7.333 8.00 10%
1 1 2 0 1 7 2.
.40 9 7 .533 0.667 8.67 81%
1 1 2 0 1 9 6.
.60 2 4 .800 6.000 4.67 67%
1 1 2 1 2 1 7.
.80 3 8 .000 0.000 14.67 69%
2 1 2 1 2 1 8.
.00 2 7 .000 0.000 34.67 33%
2 1 2 0 1 1 5.
.20 5 8 .867 7.333 52.00 78%
2 1 2 0 1 1 6.
.40 2 3 .733 4.667 66.67 11%
2 1 2 0 9 1 2.
.60 8 5 .467 .333 76.00 59%
2 1 2 1 2 2 1
.80 0 9 .267 5.333 01.33 2.67%
D q q f H JH F
epth c t s P P R (%)
(m) (Kg/c (Kg/c (Kg/cm (Kg/cm (Kg/cm2
m2) m2) 2) 2) )
3 1 2 0 9 2 3.
.00 5 2 .467 .333 10.667 11%
3 1 2 0 1 2 3.
.20 8 8 .667 3.333 24.000 70%
3 1 2 0 1 2 5.
.40 6 8 .800 6.000 40.000 00%
3 3 4 0 1 2 2.
.60 0 0 .667 3.333 53.333 22%
3 1 2 0 1 2 6.
.80 2 3 .733 4.667 68.000 11%
4 1 2 0 1 2 4.
.00 2 0 .533 0.667 78.667 44%
4 1 2 0 1 2 6.
.20 0 0 .667 3.333 92.000 67%
4 1 2 0 1 3 6.
.40 0 0 .667 3.333 05.333 67%
4 1 1 0 1 3 5.
.60 0 8 .533 0.667 16.000 33%
4 1 1 0 1 3 5.
.80 0 8 .533 0.667 26.667 33%
5 1 1 0 6 3 3.
.00 0 5 .333 .667 33.333 33%
5 1 1 0 5 3 2.
.20 1 5 .267 .333 38.667 42%
5 9 1 0 4 3 2.
.40 2 .200 .000 42.667 22%
5 1 1 0 5 3 1.
.60 4 8 .267 .333 48.000 90%
5 1 1 0 1 3 5.
.80 0 8 .533 0.667 58.667 33%
6 1 1 0 8 3 3.
.00 2 8 .400 .000 66.667 33%
6 2 2 0 1 3 2.
.20 0 8 .533 0.667 77.333 67%
6 1 2 0 8 3 2.
.40 8 4 .400 .000 85.333 22%
6 9 1 0 1 3 6.
.60 8 .600 2.000 97.333 67%
6 1 1 0 9 4 4.
.80 1 8 .467 .333 06.667 24%
7 1 2 0 5 4 1.
.00 8 2 .267 .333 12.000 48%
7 1 2 0 1 4 4.
.20 5 6 .733 4.667 26.667 89%
7 1 2 0 5 4 1.
.40 8 2 .267 .333 32.000 48%
7 1 2 0 1 4 6.
.6 0 0 .667 3.333 45.333 67%
7 1 2 0 6 4 2.
.8 5 0 .333 .667 52.000 22%
8 2 2 0 8 4 2.
0 6 .400 .000 60.000 00%
8 1 2 0 1 4 4.
.2 2 0 .533 0.667 70.667 44%
8 1 2 0 1 4 4.
.4 2 0 .533 0.667 81.333 44%
8 1 2 0 1 4 4.
.6 2 0 .533 0.667 92.000 44%
8 1 2 0 1 5 6.
.8 0 0 .667 3.333 05.333 67%
9 1 2 0 6 5 2.
5 0 .333 .667 12.000 22%
9 9 2 0 1 5 8.
.2 0 .733 4.667 26.667 15%
9 2 2 0 2 5 0.
.4 0 2 .133 .667 29.333 67%
9 2 3 0 1 5 2.
.6 2 0 .533 0.667 40.000 42%
9 1 2 0 6 5 2.
.8 5 0 .333 .667 46.667 22%
1 1 1 0 6 5 2.
0 3 8 .333 .667 53.333 56%
1 2 3 0 1 5 3.
0.2 0 0 .667 3.333 66.667 33%
1 2 3 0 2 5 0.
0.4 8 0 .133 .667 69.333 48%
1 2 3 0 1 5 3.
0.6 0 0 .667 3.333 82.667 33%
1 2 3 0 1 5 3.
0.8 2 4 .800 6.000 98.667 64%
1 2 2 0 6 6 1.
1 0 5 .333 .667 05.333 67%
1 2 3 0 1 6 3.
1.2 2 2 .667 3.333 18.667 03%
D q q f H JH F
epth c t s P P R (%)
(m) (Kg/c (Kg/c (Kg/cm (Kg/cm (Kg/cm2
m2) m2) 2) 2) )
1 2 4 1 2 6 6.
1.4 0 0 .333 6.667 45.333 67%
1 2 3 0 1 6 3.
1.6 0 0 .667 3.333 58.667 33%
1 2 2 0 1 6 3.
1.8 0 9 .600 2.000 70.667 00%
1 4 6 1 3 7 3.
2 0 3 .533 0.667 01.333 83%
1 1 2 0 1 7 6.
2.2 2 4 .800 6.000 17.333 67%
1 1 2 0 1 7 8.
2.4 0 2 .800 6.000 33.333 00%
1 1 2 0 1 7 3.
2.6 8 8 .667 3.333 46.667 70%
1 2 2 0 6 7 1.
2.8 0 5 .333 .667 53.333 67%
1 1 2 0 5 7 1.
3 6 0 .267 .333 58.667 67%
1 1 2 0 1 7 3.
3.2 6 5 .600 2.000 70.667 75%
1 1 3 0 1 7 4.
3.4 8 0 .800 6.000 86.667 44%
1 2 2 0 4 7 0.
3.6 5 8 .200 .000 90.667 80%
1 2 2 0 2 7 0.
3.8 5 7 .133 .667 93.333 53%
1 1 3 0 1 8 5.
4 8 2 .933 8.667 12.000 19%
1 2 4 1 2 8 6.
4.2 3 5 .467 9.333 41.333 38%
1 4 4 0 4 8 0.
4.4 0 3 .200 .000 45.333 50%
1 3 5 1 3 8 5.
4.6 0 5 .667 3.333 78.667 56%
1 2 3 0 6 8 1.
4.8 5 0 .333 .667 85.333 33%
1 2 4 1 2 9 6.
5 0 0 .333 6.667 12.000 67%
1 1 2 3 6 9 2.
5.2 50 00 .333 6.667 78.667 22%

Graph 8.1. qc vs depth graph:

 qc vs Depth
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
.000

2.000

4.000

6.000

Depth (m) 8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

qc (Kg/m2)

Graph 8.2. FS vs depth graph:

 fs vs Depth
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
.000

2.000

4.000

6.000

Depth (m) 8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

fs (Kg/m2)

Graph 8.3. JHP vs depth graph:

 JHP vs Depth
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
.000

2.000

4.000

6.000

Depth (m)
8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

JHP (Kg/m)

Graph 8.4. FR vs depth graph:

 FR vs Depth
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
.000

2.000

4.000

6.000

Depth (m)
8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

FR (%)

8.5. Analysis
8.5.1. Experimental Analysis
In this experiment, there are several steps which are necessary to
be done in order to get an accurate result. In the preparatory step of this
experiment, it is necessary for us to prepare a small square hole on the
field. This step is done in order to ensure that the CPT cone directly
penetrate the soil without being covered with any roots or plants. The next
step is putting the two anchor between the spot which wanted to be tested.
The anchors are necessary to be established because they act as the
stabilizer and support for the rig, so the rig do not rotate or translate during
the CPT test. The channel steel acts as stabilizer, since putting the rig over
the steel will provide more support to the rig, compared to the soil support.
The steel itself will connect the rig with the anchor. Manometers are
required to be mended because the manometer itself should be easy to
read, so setting their initial values to zero will ease the readings. The last
step of the preparation is oiling the connections and bars inside the CPT
tubes. This step is done to reduce the friction at both the connections and
the bar inside the tube. Slippery connection between tubes will ease the
installation, while slippery internal bar will ensure the accuracy of the
manometer readings, since the manometer readings are taken through the
internal bars.
The main part of the experiment is the data collecting process. The
very first step of the main part is installing the cone in the rig. In this
installation, there must be a gap between the bar inside the first tube and
the manometer, so that the manometer reading is not disturbed. In order to
maintain this gap, a lock is required. This lock may only be released when
the readings are being done, which allows the tip of the manometer to
contact rod inside the tube. The readings are taken once in 20 centimetres
because it provides an adequately accurate interval while the samples are
not too many so the experiment can still be done quickly. When doing the
readings, note that there will be two values; the qc and the qt. The qc is a
value of pressure beard by the cone, while the qt is the pressure beard by
both the cone and the mantle. The jump of the readings is caused by the
 gap between the cone and the mantle. After each metre, the tube should be
extended, because the length of each tube is only 1 metre. In the
procedure, it is said that the readings can be done by two manometers, but
in the experiment, the small manometer was out of service, so the
manometer being used was only the large manometer, which gives
relatively inaccurate readings in small scale. The penetration should be
stopped when the qc has exceeded 150 kg/cm2 because the rock bed has
been reached, so continuing the CPT may damage the apparatus. In fact,
the pipe was inadequate so the penetration did not reach the rock bed, so it
is assumed that the rock bed was located at depth = 15.20m.
After the test, all the tubes should be extracted carefully. If the
extraction is not done neatly, it is possible for the cone to fall into the soil.
In this case, the extraction will be much more difficult. After extracting the
cone, returning the rig should be done carefully, since it is very heavy. The
anchors should also extracted, so it can be used next time.

8.5.2. Result Analysis

After gaining the data, the soil classification can be done. Soil
classification according to the result of cone penetration test can be
correlated with the following graph:
Graph 8.5. Soil Type based on CPT result
(extracted from Principles of Foundation Engineering by Braja M. Das)
 According to this result, the area which was tested possess qc
which ranges between 9 to 150 kg/cm2, where most of the result lies in the
value of 10 to 30 kg/cm2, while the f varies well throughout the depth,
with a range of 0.133 to 3.333. from the table, it is known that the most
dominant component of the soil is clay or silty clay. After analysing all the
layers, it is possible for us to know the layers of the soil:

Table 8.3. The classification of the layers of tested soil

Depth Type of Soil
(m)
0.40- Clays
0.80
0.80- Silty clays
1.00
1.00- Clays
1.40
1.40- Silty clays
3.80
3.80- Clays
6.20
6.20- Silty clays
6.60
6.60- Clays
7.00
7.00- Silty clays
7.20
7.20- Clays
7.40
7.40- Silty clays
7.60
7.60- Clays
8.00
8.00- Silty clays
8.20
8.20- Clays
9.40
9.40- Silty clays
9.80
9.80- Clays
10.20
10.20- Silty clays
 10.60
10.60- Clays
11.00
11.00- Silty clays
11.20
11.20- Clays
12.00
12.00- Silty clays
12.20
12.20- Clays
12.80
12.80- Silty clays
13.20
13.20- Clays
13.60
13.60- Silty clays
14.00
14.00- Clays
14.40
14.40- Silts
14.60
14.60- Clays
15.20
15.20 Sands
and below

8.5.3. Error Analysis

During the execution of this cone penetration test, there are some
errors that may affect the result of the CPT. In the preparation of the test,
not all the pipes were oiled. Only the older pipes were oiled, and these
pipes were not very smooth even after oiling. This made the distribution of
stress along the internal bar into the pipe. This may result in inaccuracy of
the manometer readings.
When installing the CPT rig, the rig itself may not very
perpendicular with the soil. This may cause inaccuracy of the depth
measured, since the depth may actually shallower than the readings (due to
an angle exists).
 When penetrating the soil, sometimes mistake was done. One or
two points were over-penetrated by two or three centimetres, while the
readings may also not accurate in some of the depth due to inconsistency
of the penetration rate during the reading. The large manometer being used
was not suitable for this experiment, since the scale was too large, so the
value obtained was based on interpolation of its scales.
The most influential error was the inadequacy of the CPT pipes.
Due to this inadequacy, the next reading depth after the last pipe was
assumed as the bedrock, which made this experiment inaccurate.

8.6. Conclusion
This experiment is aimed to determining the type of soils per layer and
knowing the depth of the bedrock.
The qc of the soil layers lies between 9 to 150 kg/cm2, while the fs lies
between 0.133 to 3.333 kg/cm2
The soils being tested consists of clay, silty clay, silt and sand.
Most of the layers of the soil tested were clay or silty clay.
According to this experiment, the bedrock is located at depth = 15.20m
with a qc of 150kg/cm2

8.7. Reference
Budhu, Muni. Soil Mechanics. John Willey and Sons. New York.
2011
Craig, R.F. Craigs Soil Mechanics. Spon Press. New York. 2004
Das, Braja. Principles of Foundation Engineering. Thomson.
Toronto. 2007
Lambe T.W. Soil Testing for Engineers. John Willey and Sons.
New York. 1951.
8.8. Attachment

Installing the cone into the rig