Geo - PPM - Nevada Dot

i
GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND

PROCEDURES MANUAL
2005
02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL i
Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

Published by:
Nevada Department of Transportation
Materials Division
Geotechnical Section
1263 South Stewart Street
Carson City, Nevada 89712
(775) 888-7520 phone
(775) 888-7501 fax
Contributors:
NDOT:
Parviz Noori P.E., Assistant Chief Materials Engineer
Jeffrey A. Palmer, Ph.D., P.E., Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Dana A. Boomhower, P.E., Senior Geotechnical Engineer
Consultants:
Donald L. Woods, J.D., C.P.M., Project Manager
Earl Hawkes, Jr., Senior Consultant
International Consulting & Contracting
1501 Frandosa Lane
Las Vegas, Nevada 89117-1191
(702) 254-6606 phone
(702) 254-7067 fax
dlw@anv.net email
ehawkes@lvcm.com email
[Chapters 1-4]
and
Lawrence A. Pierson, C.E.G., Senior Associate
George Machan, P.E., Senior Associate
Landslide Technology
10250 S.W. Greenburg Road, Suite 111
Portland, Oregon 97223
(503) 452-1200 phone
(503) 452-1528 fax
lawrencep@landslidetechnology.com email
georgem@landslidetechnology.com email
[Chapters 5-14]

GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL ii
FOREWORD
This Geotechnical Section Manual is primarily designed to provide appropriate

policies, procedures and practices to be used by Geotechnical Engineering staff in the
successful accomplishment of their duties. Also, an important function of this Manual is to
provide Consultants with valuable information about working with the Nevada Department
of Transportation Geotechnical Section. Materials contained in the Manual are meant to be
useful for both the training of new employees and as a reference to be utilized as needed
throughout the course of work.
This is a resource document. It is not intended to override or replace the necessary
use of good judgment, common sense and research of current best practices.
This Manual is organized by chapters and general subjects. Pages and attachments
are numbered according to chapter location. Page numbers are located in the upper right-
hand corner of the page and the date of issue is located in the lower left-hand corner.
The preparation of the Manual was accomplished under the direction of Parviz
Noori, P.E., Assistant Chief Materials Engineer, Geotechnical Section. Mr. Noori
generously gave his time, knowledge and suggestions to successfully complete this
Manual . Mr .Noori’s staffwas al so r esponsibleforpr oviding needed mat eri
als and
information. Recognition is given to Jeffrey A. Palmer, Ph.D., P.E., Principal Geotechnical
Engineer, and Dana A. Boomhower, P.E., Senior Geotechnical Engineer, for their
contributions. The consulting firm of International Consulting & Contracting, Donald L.
Woods, J.D., C.P.M., Project Manager, and their subcontractors, Landslide Technology,
and Earl Hawkes, Jr., Senior Consultant, developed this Manual.

GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL iii
MASTER TABLE OF CONTENTS
CREDITS...........................................................................................................................................i
FORWARD ....................................................................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................... iii
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................CHAPTER 1
ORIENTATION ...............................................................................................................CHAPTER 2
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES..................................................................................CHAPTER 3
WORK BY CONSULTANTS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS..........................................CHAPTER 4
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PLANNING GUIDELINES......................................CHAPTER 5
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES .....................................................CHAPTER 6
IN SITU TESTING ..........................................................................................................CHAPTER 7
LABORATORY TESTS...................................................................................................CHAPTER 8
MATERIALS DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................CHAPTER 9
FIELD INSTRUMENTATION ........................................................................................CHAPTER 10
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN .............................................................................................CHAPTER 11
PRESENTATION OF GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION .............................................CHAPTER 12
CONSTRUCTION PHASE ............................................................................................CHAPTER 13
MAINTENANCE PHASE...............................................................................................CHAPTER 14
DEFINITIONS................................................................................................................. GLOSSARY

GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION 1-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE............................................................................................................ 1
2. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1
3. HISTORY ............................................................................................................. 2
4. PHILOSOPHY, MISSIONS AND GOALS ............................................................ 2
5. OVERVIEW.......................................................................................................... 2
6. EXCEPTIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS........................................................... 3
7. MANUAL UPDATES ............................................................................................ 3
8. RESPONSIBILITY OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS ...................................... 3
9. TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................. 3

INTRODUCTION 1-1
1. PURPOSE
This Manual provides direction for the accomplishment of work in the Geotechnical
Section of the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). Specific tasks are described
which relate to the geotechnical aspects of investigation, design and construction of roadways
and roadway structures. General direction and policies are also included in this Manual. It is
intended that areas covered herein will offer the new employee, particularly Geotechnical
Engineers in the Geotechnical Section, a basic understanding of the Department, Division and
Section, and most importantly, the general requirements to accomplish the assigned tasks.
This Manual can be useful for parties external to the Geotechnical Section. These
parties may include other Divisions, other State employees, Consultants, contractors, and the
public.
General requirements and directions are given to provide a framework of minimum
expectations of Engineers in the Geotechnical Section. No attempt is made to provide
comprehensive procedures and practices, a design handbook, or the scope of services for
individual projects. This Manual is not intended in any way to limit the individual employee from
exercising their valuable professional judgment and common sense, and should not be
considered a standard to be met regardless of impacts.
This Manual was developed to help serve the very necessary function of facilitating
accurate, timely and appropriate communication. This is important when considering the
complexities of the many tasks in the Geotechnical Section. This Manual should be utilized to
improve communication by providing an understanding of basic task components, functional
relationships and Division requirements.
Thet it
le“
Geot echni calEngi neers”isusedt hr oughoutt hi
sManual .Fort hepurposeof
clarification, Geotechnical Engineers refers to Staff III Registered Professional Engineers, and
anyposi ti
onunderf i
ll
i
ngSt affI
II’
si ntheGeot echnical Section. Other titles commonly used in
this Manual are Principal Geotechnical Engineer that refers to the Manager I, and Assistant
Materials Engineer that refers to the Administrator I, both of the Geotechnical Section.
Any questions about the content of this Manual are to be referred to the Principal
Geotechnical Engineer.
2. INTRODUCTION
This Manual is organized into chapters, which discuss various subjects of importance in
the accomplishment of work for the Geotechnical Section. A Table of Contents, Appendices,
and various Figures, are found in the chapters. Each chapter also includes descriptions of the
sections of the chapter.
Each page contains the issue date in the lower left-hand corner and a page number in
the upper right hand corner. Pages, figures and tables are numbered according to the chapter
sections in the Manual.

INTRODUCTION 1-2
Various materials and publications are noted as references, and often included as
figures in the individual chapters. When publication dates are given, they are for reference
purposes only, as revisions may have been made at a later date. The reader is responsible to
verify the most recent material or publication is used.
3. HISTORY
The Department was created as the Nevada Department of Highways in 1917. Prior to
this time, the State did not have a role in road improvements. However, in 1917 the Legislature
mandated that the State Engineer would have general supervision of roadwork. This work was
performed by convict labor when funds were made available.
Currently, the Department is a large department of the State government, having
l
egisl
at iv
eaut hor i
tyandf undingtomai ntainandimpr oveNev ada’ sHi ghways.Infor
mat i
on
about the Department may be found on the Department website at http://www.nevadadot.com.
4. PHILOSOPHY, MISSIONS AND GOALS
The Department and Divisions have philosophies, missions, and goals; new hires and
Consultants should contact the Administrative Assistant of the Materials Division to obtain the
most current verbiage.
5. OVERVIEW
The Department has the responsibility for construction, operation and maintenance of
the highways and bridges, which are part of the State highway system. The Department also
oversees various allied projects. Included are projects ranging from the Adopt-A-Highway
program to the maintenance of State Historical Markers.
TheDepar tment’sheadquar ter s,includingmostdesi gndiv i
sions,i slocatedi nCar sonCit
y.
The Department is organized into three districts for administrative purposes, as follows:
 District 1 covers southern Nevada, with main offices in Las Vegas.
 District 2 covers northwest Nevada, with main offices in Reno.
 District 3 covers northeast Nevada, with main offices in Elko.
These districts supervise all State transportation activities within their local areas. Major
maintenance stations are located in Ely, Tonopah and Winnemucca.
The Materials Division is a major organizational unit of the Department. Headquarters
for the Materials Division is located at the Carson City Laboratory Facility. The Division also
operates an auxiliary testing facility in Las Vegas. The Geotechnical Section is located within
the Materials Division, Carson City.

INTRODUCTION 1-3
6. EXCEPTIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS
This Manual is written to offer clear direction to the reader. However, it is recognized
that policies and procedures may be subject to differing interpretations and that the Manual
would be too lengthy for practical use if all areas were covered definitively. It is also
understood that occasions will arise, which may warrant the consideration of exceptions to
items described in this Manual. Any properly authorized exceptions to this Manual are to be
consi der edas“ onet imeonl y”changes,unl essot her wisedi rect
ed.
7. MANUAL UPDATES
Policies, procedures and practices will change from time to time. This Manual is
updated as necessary and all users should assure themselves that they are using the latest
version.
8. RESPONSIBILITY OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
It is the responsibility of all Geotechnical Engineers to become familiar with the

materials presented in this Manual and apply them appropriately while performing work for the
Geotechnical Section.
9. TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Commonly used terms, definitions and abbreviations may be found in the Glossary.

CHAPTER 2
ORIENTATION

ORIENTATION 2-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................ 1
2. ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS ................................................................ 1
3. MATERIALS DIVISION ........................................................................................ 1
3.1 Administration Section.......................................................................................... 1
3.2 Las Vegas Facility ................................................................................................ 1
3.3 Structural And Chemical Section .......................................................................... 2
3.4 Roadbed And Pavement Design Section ............................................................. 2
3.5 Bituminous Section............................................................................................... 2
3.6 Geotechnical Section............................................................................................ 2
4. WORK REQUIREMENTS OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS ........................... 2
5. WORK BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS ......................................................... 2
5.1 Geotechnical Reports ........................................................................................... 3
5.2 Geotechnical Project Files .................................................................................... 3
5.3 TEMPORARY STAFF ASSIGNMENTS ............................................................... 4
5.4 Other Tasks.......................................................................................................... 4
6. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .............................................................. 5
7. OUTSIDE SERVICES .......................................................................................... 5
8. NEW HIRE PROCESSING................................................................................... 6
8.1 Safety in the Workplace........................................................................................ 6
8.2 Hazardous Materials............................................................................................. 6
8.3 Emergency Procedures ........................................................................................ 6
9. FIGURES ............................................................................................................. 7
2-1: Organizational Chart - NDOT ........................................................................ 7
2-2: Organizational Chart –Materials Division ..................................................... 8
2-3: Entry Permit................................................................................................... 9
2-4: New Hire Processing Documents Checklist ................................................ 10
10. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 11

ORIENTATION 2-1
1. PURPOSE
This Chapter summarizes the organization of the Department and function of the
Geotechnical Section. It also discusses responsibilities and processing of newly hired
employees and includes information regarding policies and documents that new employees
should be aware of and could use to understand and verify that all in-processing
procedures have been followed. Information in this Chapter is helpful as a reference to all
Geotechnical Section employees and outside parties seeking knowledge of current
responsibilities and organizational relationship of the Geotechnical Section.
2. ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
The Department is divided into divisions which are further divided into sections. The
chief executive of the Department is the Director. The major organizational areas of the
Department include the Divisions of Administration, Operations, Planning and Program
Development, and Engineering. Support offices include Human Resources and Equal
Employment Opportunity (EEO), Internal Audit, Programs and Budget, Legal Services, and
Special Assistant to the Director. District offices are located in Las Vegas, Reno and Elko,
Nevada.
The Director of the Department reports to the Transportation Board. The
Transportation Board is composed of the Governor (Chair), Lt. Governor (Vice Chair),
Comptroller, Attorney General, and three individuals appointed by the Governor. The
functions of the Transportation Board include such items as approval of right of way
actions, condemnations and selling of properties, budget review, and the naming of
highways. A typical organization chart of the Department is included as Figure 2-1. For a
current chart, see the Administrative Assistant of the Materials Division.
3. MATERIALS DIVISION
The Materials Division reports to the Assistant Director, Operations, of the
Department. This Division is composed of six sections, consisting of Administration, Las
Vegas Facility, Structural and Chemical, Roadbed and Pavement Design, Bituminous, and
Geotechnical. A typical organization chart of the Materials Division is included as Figure 2-
2. For a current chart, see the Administrative Assistant of the Materials Division.
3.1 Administration Section
This Section is responsible for the administrative matters of the Division, such as
payroll, new employee processing, records management, etc.
3.2 Las Vegas Facility
The Las Vegas Facility is organized into three labs. These labs consist of Concrete
and Steel, Asphalt, and Bituminous.

ORIENTATION 2-2
3.3 Structural And Chemical Section

The offices of this Section consist of the Concrete and Steel Lab, Concrete
Specialist, and Chemical.
3.4 Roadbed And Pavement Design Section
This Section is organized into the two offices of Pavement Analysis and Roadbed
Design.
3.5 Bituminous Section
Offices of this Section are organized into Bituminous Operations, Roadbed
Aggregates, Asphalt Lab, and Bituminous Lab.
3.6 Geotechnical Section
This Section is organized into the offices of Field Exploration and Geotechnical
Engineering (which includes the Geotechnical Lab).
4. WORK REQUIREMENTS OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
The job performed by Geotechnical Engineers requires a high level of skill,
knowledge, competency, and judgment. Geotechnical Engineers are expected to
successfully interpret and apply Federal and State regulations, as well as existing policies
and procedures. They are also required to apply their skills to solve difficult problems,
involving the analysis of complex data. Geotechnical Engineers conduct investigations and
collect soil samples for submission to the laboratory for testing. They review plans and
specifications, and work with individuals at all levels, both within and outside of State
government.
Typical duties of Geotechnical Engineers include exploring, sampling and testing
soils underlying new and existing roadbeds and structures, special studies, geotechnical
analyses and design, reviewing and writing documents, composing reports, and attending
meetings. The official job requirements for Geotechnical Engineers may be found in the
State of Nevada, Department of Personnel Class Specifications. The Administrative
Assistant of the Materials Division has a copy of the appropriate job requirements. The job
requirements included in this document are meant to provide a general framework.
Specific details of all duties required of the position are not included.
5. WORK BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
Following is a discussion of typical work produced by Geotechnical Engineers. It is
noted that the items described do not represent an all-inclusive list. This discussion is not
intended to provide comprehensive detail, but rather to offer a general discussion, which
provides an orientation.

ORIENTATION 2-3
5.1 Geotechnical Reports

Geotechnical Reports are probably the most important and significant work
produced by Geotechnical Engineers. This is especially true considering the potential for
construction disputes, claims and litigation over varying site condition issues. Disputes,
claims and litigation occur commonly in spite of contract language, which attempts to
assign responsibility to the contractor for site condition verification. The information
contained in Geotechnical Reports is typically utilized during project design, construction,
and in the resolution of claims and litigation. Careful and comprehensive documentation of
the site investigation findings of the Geotechnical Engineer is essential for projects that
involve complex geotechnical issues.
Geot echni
calEngi neer
sshoul d not et hataccor ding tot heFHWA,“ Chec kli
stand
Guidelines for Review of Geotechnical Reports and Preliminary Plans and Specifications,”
FHWA-PD-97-002, 1985, all Geotechnical Reports should contain at least the following
information:
 Summary of all subsurface exploration data, including subsurface soil profile,
exploration logs, laboratory and/or in situ test results and ground water information
 Interpretation and analysis of the subsurface data
 Specific engineering recommendations for design
 Discussion of conditions which may be encountered during construction, including
recommendations for solution of anticipated problems
 Recommended geotechnical special provisions
The recommendations for solution of anticipated construction problems are an area

which needs to be treated with caution due to the potential of claims and litigation, which
can result from such recommendations. Geotechnical Engineers should discuss
recommendations with the Principal Geotechnical Engineer prior to including them in the
Geotechnical Report.
5.2 Geotechnical Project Files
Geotechnical Engineers are required to maintain Geotechnical Section project files.
These files may contain such items as calculations, laboratory results, fieldwork notes, site
investigation results, correspondence, minutes of meetings. It is necessary that the project
files be complete and well organized. Materials are organized in these files by
category/subject of material, in chronological order. A project file is complete when:
 It contains documentation of all geotechnical efforts
 It is organized in a logical manner (this means other persons can easily and quickly
find information they are seeking)
 The project is constructed and closed

ORIENTATION 2-4
Geotechnical Engineers must provide pertinent information regarding completed projects to

the Principal Geotechnical Engineer prior to placing the project files in the appropriate
location of the Geotechnical Section file storage area. The Principal Geotechnical Engineer
enters this information into a Project Files Database.
5.3 TEMPORARY STAFF ASSIGNMENTS
Geotechnical Engineers may occasionally have other individuals temporarily
assigned to them for guidance and training. The most common positions assigned are:
 Rotational Engineers
 Student Interns
 Highway Construction Aides
The Geotechnical Engineer needs to maintain a positive and professional
relationship with temporarily assigned individuals. Geotechnical Engineers must also
provide necessary direction, encouragement and training to the temporarily assigned
individuals. The Geotechnical Engineer needs to provide input to these temporary staff
regarding the following items:
 Policies and regulations
 Proper conduct
 Objectives of the job
 Duties to be performed
 Accepted methods of performing duties
 Work performance standards
 How improvements can be made and capabilities are developed
The successful training and development of temporarily assigned individuals have positive,
long-term impacts on the entire organization.
5.4 Other Tasks
The services provided by the Geotechnical Section vary, depending on such things
as project size, complexity and environmental conditions. Following is a list of general tasks
required of Geotechnical Engineers. It is noted that tasks other than those listed are also
assigned.
 Attending meetings to discuss the nature and scope of the project (these meetings
may include Department employees, Consultants and other outside parties such as
cities staff, counties staff , State staff, elected officials, and interested citizens)
 Conducting exploration
 Conducting laboratory testing
 Performing analysis and design

ORIENTATION 2-5
 Providing notes for Special Provisions

 Providing notes and details for, and reviewing Construction Plans
 Performing calculations
 Responding to comments
 Reviewing documents pertaining to geotechnical issues
 Providing technical support to the Resident Engineer (RE) during construction
 Writing Right of Entry memorandums to obtain a right of entry permit to a property
When it is necessary to obtain a right of entry permit to a property, a memorandum
to the Right of Way Division must be prepared. This memorandum must indicate the
specifics of the request, including the following:
 Project Identification
 Specific property location –attach plan sheets, with boundaries and drill locations
marked
 Why access is needed (example –to drill boreholes)
 When access is needed –(provide sufficient lead time)
 Method and detailed description of exploration
 Your name and phone number
An example of an Entry Permit form, developed by Right-of-Way Division, is
included as Figure 2-3.
6. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Geotechnical Engineers must be familiar with the development process of projects.
They are required to keep track of deadlines so that schedules are maintained.
7. OUTSIDE SERVICES
The duties of Geotechnical Engineers, with respect to Consultants, are mainly
concerned with the review of the work performed by these firms. Geotechnical Engineer
duties may include tasks such as reviewing Geotechnical Reports, Construction Plans,
specifications, calculations, and review comments regarding shop drawings to verify
completeness and accuracy. Some reviews are comprehensive,whi leothersr equir
e“ spot
checks”ofConsul tantwor k.
When it is determined that further work is needed, or errors or omissions need to be
corrected in work performed by a Consult, the Geotechnical Engineer shall not make any
changes in the work product of the Consultant. Applicable comments are to be forwarded to
the Consultant, and the Geotechnical Engineer is to verify that necessary actions are taken
by the Consultant, and that the Consultant meets required time frames. Consultants are

ORIENTATION 2-6
responsible for their work product, and must, therefore, perform all tasks using their own
staff.
8. NEW HIRE PROCESSING
It is incumbent upon the new hire to read and understand all of the documents
provided and to insure completion of all necessary paperwork. Figure 2-4 is a checklist
including some of the items that each new employee should have received. This checklist
is useful as a quick reference to the various documents. All employees should review the
items in this list periodically for the purpose of insuring a comprehensive understanding of
policies and procedures. Employees should note that many documents described herein
require a signature, indicating understanding and acceptance of the materials, and that the
documents will become a permanent part of their personnel file.
8.1 Safety in the Workplace
Workplace safety is the responsibility of everyone in the workplace. It is the duty of
all employees to insure their workplace is safe. This means everything from wearing
approved safety equipment to reporting an unsafe work condition or practice. When a work-
related injury does occur, the employee must report it promptly to their immediate
supervi sor.Thedocument ,“ Empl oy eeResponsi bil
it
ies,”descr i
best heneedt oi mmedi ately
report all accidents, where to go for medical treatment, and what procedures are in effect
during the recovery and rehabilitation periods. Safe work habits and practices are required
of all employees. Geotechnical Engineers must maintain safe work habits and practices at
all times, especially in the potentially more hazardous areas, such as drilling sites or other
field-related work. Any potential safety issues or safety training needs are to be brought to
the attention of the Principal Geotechnical Engineer.
8.2 Hazardous Materials
It is common to work with and around potentially dangerous materials. Knowledge
about these materials, including their proper use and characteristics, assists employees to
remain unharmed. The Department has developed an extensive program to help protect
empl oy ees.Thi spr ogr am isdescr ibedi nt hemanual ,“Haz ardCommuni cat i
onPr ogr
am. ”
Areas covered in this manual include the health and physical hazards of chemicals, product
labeling, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), and protective equipment.
8.3 Emergency Procedures
Det ailed emer gency pr ocedur es ar e pr ov i
ded i nt he “ Emer gency Pr ocedures”
booklet distributed to each new employee, and all employees when revised. These
procedures cover situations such as fires, medical and first aid, bomb threats, earthquakes,
and explosions. Evacuation maps are on the walls in each area of the Division.

ORIENTATION 2-7
9. FIGURES
2-1: Organizational Chart - NDOT

ORIENTATION 2-8
2-2: Organizational Chart –Materials Division

ORIENTATION 2-9
2-3: Entry Permit

Project
E.A.
Owner
Date
ENTRY PERMIT
Permission is hereby granted to the STATE OF NEVADA, acting by and through its Department of
Transportation, and its employees, authorized agents and contractors to enter upon OWNER'S land,
described as for the purposes checked:
[ ] Appraisal [ ] Soil Sampling [ ] Materials [ ] Surveying [ ] Other
[ ] Environmental Survey - The property owner is advised that if hazardous wastes are found to exist on the
property the Nevada Department of Transportation is required to notify the Nevada Department of
Environmental Protection.
This permission is granted with the understanding that travel will, when practicable, be made on
existing trails or roads; upon completion of said entry, the STATE will leave this tract of land in as neat and
presentable condition as existed prior to said entry; all fences, structures and other property belonging to the
OWNER which the STATE may find necessary to remove or relocate in order to conduct said entry, will be
replaced in as nearly their original condition and position as is reasonably possible.
It is further understood that the STATE, as provided in Nevada Revised Statutes Section 408.493, will
be responsible for the actual damages, if any, caused by the actions or nonactions of its officers, employees
or agents in the entry of OWNERS land for the purposes set forth in this permit.
This permission is effective from through .
Vehicles will not enter into agricultural fields except on existing roads. Care will be exercised by
employees or agents of the STATE to not disturb or damage crops, ditches, landscaping or other property of
OWNER.
Property Owner Date
Property Owner Date
Phone number and best time to call

[ ] This property is not leased/rented
[ ] This property is leased/rented to:
Tenant's name
Address
Phone
DOT
030-523
rev. 01/01 Prepared by:

ORIENTATION 2-10
2-4: New Hire Processing Documents Checklist
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION
“
Messagef
rom t
heDi
rect
or,
”Memor
andum,NDOT
“
Super
visor
’sRepor
tonEmpl
oyeeOr
ient
ati
on,
”NDOT(
updat
ed2/
4/99)
“
Empl oy mentEl i
gibili
tyVeri
fi
cati
on, ”U.S.Depar tmentofJus tice,I
mmi gr
ati
onand
Naturalization Service, OMB No. 1115-0316, Form I-9 (Rev. 11/21/91)
W-4 Form (2002)
“
GroupI
nsur
anc
eBenef
it
s”Memor
andum,NDOT,Account
ingDi
vi
si
on
“
Requestf
orEmpl
oyeeBenef
it
sOr
ient
ati
on,
”St
ateofNev
ada(
7/02)
“PhotoI DBadge,St
atePer
sonalPr
oper
tyandEqui
pmentRequest
,”NDOT,076-
052 (6/02)
Commercial Driver –“Al

cohol
andDr
ugTes
ti
ngPol
i
cy,
”TP1-6-21, NDOT
(September 29, 1998)
“EmployeeAck nowl edgementofVal

i
dDr
iver
’sLi
cens
eRequi
rement
,”NDOT,
0076-001 (Rev. 4/96)
“
Dri
vi
ngRecor
dCar
d,”NDOT,078-003 (Rev. 8/99)
“
MotorVehicleOper at i
ngPoli
cy,
”Memorandum,datedOct
ober1,1996,NDOT,
At
tachment,“Empl oy eeResponsi
bil
i
ti
esf
orOperat
ingaVehicl
e,”TP1-6-22,
NDOT (Rev. 4/2/01).
“
Acknowl
edgement
,”f
orAl
cohol
/Dr
ugFr
eeWor
kpl
ace,TS-58 (7/98)
“
DrugFr
eeWor
kpl
ace,
”Memor
andum dat
edMay15,1996,NDOT.
“
AboutSubst
anceAbuseatWor
k,”Channi
ngL.Bet
eCo.(
1987)
“
Nev
adaWor
kpl
aceSaf
ety
,”Di
vi
si
onofI
ndust
ri
alRel
ati
ons,
Department of Business and Industry.
“
Empl
oyeeRes
ponsi
bi
li
ti
es,
”St
ateofNev
ada.
“
Wor
kPl
aceVi
olence,
”TP1-6-30, NDOT (August 16, 2002).
“
Haz
ardCommuni
cat
ionPr
ogr
am –Empl
oyee’
sChemi
cal
Gui
de,
”NDOT
“Comput
erAccessFor
m”–SeeChapt
er3oft
hisManual“
Comput
erSof
twar
e
Tool
s”

ORIENTATION 2-11
10. REFERENCES
FHWA,“Checkl i
stand Gui deli
nesf orRev i
ew ofGeot echnicalRepor
tsand Prel
i
minary
Plans and Speci fi
cat i
ons,” Publ
i
cation No. FHWA-PD-97-002, October 1985,
Reprinted 1988
NDOT,“
Br i
dgeDesi gnandPr ocedur
esManual ,
”Publ
ishedAugust1991
NDOT,“
Mat erial
sDi vi
si
onTest i
ngManual ,
”Rev isedDecember28,2000
NDOT,“Mater i
alsDi vi
si
on Pav ement,Structur
alDesign and Poli
cyManual,”Publi
shed
January 1996
NDOT,“
Standar dSpeci f
icati
onsf orRoadandBr i
dgeConstructi
on,
”Publi
shed2001
NDOT,“
Trans portat
ionPol i
cies”

CHAPTER 3
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES 3-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE............................................................................................................ 1
2. WORK AUTHORIZATIONS ................................................................................. 1
3. APPROVAL PROCESSES .................................................................................. 1
4. PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS..................................................................... 2
4.1 Technical Expectations......................................................................................... 2
4.2 Nontechnical Expectations ................................................................................... 2
5. GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................... 3
6. EMERGENCY WORK.......................................................................................... 3
7. TIME USAGE ....................................................................................................... 4
7.1 Time Sheets ......................................................................................................... 4
7.2 Breaks and Lunch Periods ................................................................................... 4
7.3 Overtime ............................................................................................................... 4
7.4 Requests for Leave .............................................................................................. 5
8. CLIENT SERVICE................................................................................................ 5
9. CARE AND INVENTORY OF EQUIPMENT......................................................... 5
10. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ........................................................................ 6
10.1 LETTERS ............................................................................................................. 7
10.2 MEMORANDUMS ................................................................................................ 7
10.3 MEMORANDUM AND LETTER DISTRIBUTION ................................................. 7
10.4 TRANSMITTAL FORMS....................................................................................... 7
10.5 Facsimiles ............................................................................................................ 8
10.6 Email .................................................................................................................... 8
11. PRINTING REQUESTS ....................................................................................... 8
12. SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT REQUESTS ........................................................ 8
13. BUDGET REQUESTS ......................................................................................... 9
14. TRAVEL ............................................................................................................... 9
15. TRAINING .......................................................................................................... 10
16. EMPLOYEE APPRAISALS ................................................................................ 10
17. ETHICAL GUIDELINES ..................................................................................... 10
18. JOB SITE SAFETY ............................................................................................ 11
19. JOB SITE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS .............................................................. 11
20. JOB-RELATED INJURIES ................................................................................. 12
21. VEHICLE ACCIDENTS ...................................................................................... 12
22. LOSS REPORTING ........................................................................................... 12
23. COMPUTER SOFTWARE TOOLS .................................................................... 13
24. REFERENCE MATERIALS................................................................................ 13
25. GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY ..................................................................... 13

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES 3-ii
26. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 14

3-1: Memorandum ............................................................................................. 14
3-2: Memorandum ............................................................................................. 15
3-3: Transmittal Log .......................................................................................... 16
3-4:Wr i
teI
t… Don’ tSayI t!................................................................................ 17
3-5: Computer Software Tools........................................................................... 18

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES 3-1
1. PURPOSE
General job requirements and processes are provided in this Chapter. Areas discussed
include such items as financial processes and approvals, general duties and expectations of
Geotechnical Engineers, safety, accidents, travel, and various commonly utilized forms and
procedures. This Chapter does not provide information concerning the technical requirements
and processes encountered by Geotechnical Engineers, which are discussed in Chapters 5
through 14 of this Manual.
2. WORK AUTHORIZATIONS
Work performed by NDOT is the result of a fairly lengthy and complex budget process,
which involves planning for future transportation system needs. Additionally, projects in
construction may be assigned a contract charge number. This process includes the
prioritization of needs, cost estimates for the various projects and, finally, budgetary approvals,
culminating in final legislative approval. Consequently, fiscal year monies are earmarked for
specific projects. Work which is not included in the budget is not authorized and should not be
performed unless a specific exception is granted by the Principal Geotechnical Engineer, or
higher level within the organization. It is important for Geotechnical Engineers to always be
cognizant of the need to have proper authorization prior to commencing substantial work
efforts.
3. APPROVAL PROCESSES
As a general rule, Geotechnical Engineers need to follow the normal chain of command
for items requiring approval at a higher level. The chain of command for Geotechnical
Engineers begins with the Principal Geotechnical Engineer, and then follows with the Assistant
Chief Materials Engineer, the Chief Materials Engineer, the Assistant Director of Operations,
the Deputy Director and finally, the Director.
While Geotechnical Engineers must get initial approval for most matters from the
Principal Geotechnical Engineer, some items require specific ultimate approval by the Chief
Materials Engineer. A partial list of these items follows:
 Training
 Permanent specification changes
 Research –must include a work plan
 Policy changes
 Change in duties
 NDOTDi rect
or’sOf ficer equest s
 Nonrental equipment
 Budget augmentations
 Computer and software
 Contract change orders

 Out-of-state travel
 Written correspondence to FHWA and front office staff
 Proprietary products and specifications
 Money handling procedures
 Overtime
Approval processes and proper use of the chain of command are put in place to
facilitate the uniform application of policies and procedures, and to insure proper
communication and appropriate responsibility and accountability. Geotechnical Engineers are
advised to adhere strictly to these policies.
4. PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS
Performance expectations, for Geotechnical Engineers to be successful and productive,
fall into the two categories of technical and nontechnical performance. This Section provides
some direction for the expectations in those areas.
4.1 Technical Expectations
Technical expectations can be described broadly as: Being responsible for providing
accurate and timely geotechnical work. This includes verifying that the final contract
documents are correct, that applicable Department approved materials are included, and that
the job is constructible from a geotechnical point of view. Other technical expectations include
plan review, on site design and support as needed and any necessary construction and post-
construction support. The majority of material in this Manual provides assistance in various
technical areas typically encountered, and should be used as a resource whenever necessary.
4.2 Nontechnical Expectations
Complete success on the job cannot occur unless both the technical and nontechnical
aspects of the work are performed well. Probably the most important nontechnical area is
professional and effective communication. Poor communication can ruin relationships and
jeopardize projects. Geotechnical Engineers must exert the efforts needed to make sure
communication, verbal and written, is handled appropriately.
Other important nontechnical areas, which need to be consistently demonstrated in the
behavior of Geotechnical Engineers include:
 Reliability
 Courtesy
 Honesty
 Self-Motivation and Discipline
 Team Building/Support
 Decisiveness
 Professionalism

5. GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Geotechnical Engineers are responsible for a number of work products, as described in
other chapters of this Manual. This Section outlines some of their general responsibilities:
1. Obtaining all background information from designers, including plan sheets showing
bridge abutment and pier locations.
2. Coordinating and performing field investigation, including:
a. Obtaining Entry Permits.
b. Marking borehole locations in the presence of the Field Crew Supervisor. If the
Field Crew Supervisor cannot be present, then he/she is to be consulted
regarding the borehole location.
c. Obtaining utility clearance.
d. Verifying that appropriate traffic control arrangements are made.
e. Insuring needed sampling tools and equipment are available for drilling work.
f. Coordinating activities with Field Crew staff.
g. Participating in drilling and/or test pit excavation activities including field testing,
soil sampling, logging, and surveying. Insuring drilled holes are properly
backfilled after completion.
h. Making individual travel arrangements.
3. Requesting tests to be conducted in the laboratory.
4. Analyzing the data from field and laboratory tests.
5. Preparing the Geotechnical Report.
6. Attending meetings.
7. Reviewing Construction Plans and Special Provisions. Making appropriate comments
and recommendations by memorandum to necessary parties.
8. Providing construction support to Resident Engineers.
9. Assisting District Engineers in maintenance issues, such as rockfall, slope stability, and
soft subgrade problems.
6. EMERGENCY WORK
Emergencies can generally be described as those occasions which threaten the life,
health, safety or welfare of the public, or State employees. The resolution of the legitimate
emergency may involve the Department staff, outside contractors, or a combination thereof.
From the perspective of the Geotechnical Engineer, emergency situations are extremely rare,
and any expenditure of monies or significant effort in an emergency situation will require the
prior approval of the Assistant Chief Materials Engineer.

7. TIME USAGE
The contract between the Department and its employees for time usage can generally
be described as the requirement for employees to make productive and sensible use of their
time, and the Department pays the contracted amount of the monies and benefits to the
employee for that time. This contract requires employees to hold all nonproductive time to a
minimum.
Cost tracking cannot occur unless time is accounted for correctly. Cost tracking is
necessary and important to measure project performance to account for expenditure of
monies.
Budgeted and authorized projects are assigned an Engineering Authorization (EA)
number. Geotechnical Engineers may only perform project work which has one of these
numbers, or authorized overhead. It is also necessary for Geotechnical Engineers to carefully
and accurately account for all project work performed by the appropriate EA number. If
Geotechnical Engineers are asked to perform work on a project which does not have an
approved EA number, they are to refer the matter to the Principal Geotechnical Engineer. If
work comes in, the Geotechnical Engineer needs to refer it to the Manager for proper
assignment.
7.1 Time Sheets
Biweekly time sheets must be completed by all Geotechnical Engineers. Timesheets,
and Application and Authorization for Leav ecar dsar ecov eredi ntheEmpl oy ee’sPay rol
l
Manual. Time sheets are to be completed in a manner, as directed, which accounts for time
primarily associated with EA numbers. The need for accurate accounting on projects is
twofold. First, it provides the means of determining project costs. Second, it facilitates proper
reimbursement to the Geotechnical Section. These are important for documentation, budget
preparation, and personnel allocation decisions. NOTE: Each employee is assigned an
internal identification number to be used on time sheets.
7.2 Breaks and Lunch Periods
All Geotechnical Engineers are required to take a one-half to one hour break for lunch
when they are working in the field. However, when working in the office, the lunch break will be
one hour. This lunch break, depending on the needs of the job is to be taken between the
hours of 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. Breaks are to be taken twice during each shift, and consist
of two fifteen-minute periods.
7.3 Overtime
The use of overtime is not at the discretion of the Geotechnical Engineer. Overtime
must be approved prior to its use. When overtime is needed, the reason for the need, and the
estimated amount of time needed, are to be submitted to the supervisor. When overtime
needs are encountered in the field, approval is also to be requested of the supervisor. If the

supervisor cannot be reached and the use of overtime is absolutely necessary, it should be
held to a maximum of two hours per day, or eight hours per week.
7.4 Requests for Leave
Allrequest sforl eave(annual , si
ck,etc.)ar et obemadebycompl et
ingthe“Appl ication
andAut hor izati
onf orLeav e”car d,andsubmi t
ti
ngt hecar dt ot hePrincipal Geotechnical
Engineer for approval. Leave will be granted at the convenience of the Geotechnical Section,
and requests must be submitted as far in advance of the time requested as is practicable.
8. CLIENT SERVICE
Geotechnical Engineers must always keep in mind that meeting client needs, and
providing a high level of client service, are key factors in successful job performance. Satisfied
clients are the main element in achieving usefulness to the organization and personal job
security.
A listing of clients with the typical requests/needs follows:
 Resident Engineers –During construction, assistance with construction and inspection
problems
 Construction –Assistance with claims from contractors
 Bridge –Provide foundation recommendations
 Attorney General –Right-of-way issues, claims resolution
 Traffic –Provide signal, sign and light foundations recommendations
 Roadway –Provide cut and fill slope inclinations recommendations
 Hydraulics –Revetment, rip rap, and geotextile
 Maintenance –Recommendations for slope and rockfall, roadway/subgrade problems
 Right-of-Way –Permits, analysis of land use
 Field Crews (including contracted crews) –Drilling
 Laboratories –Material analysis issues
 Surveyor –Mapping areas, including aerial photographs and topographical maps
 Environmental –Groundwater
 Other State Organizations/General Public/Consultants – Provide information as
requested
Helping customers will require formal and informal methods of correspondence,
depending on the nature of the assistance provided. Service of a high level should always be
the goal of the Geotechnical Engineer, but this service should also be tempered with the need
to account for productive time, as outlined in Sections 2 and 7 of this Chapter.
9. CARE AND INVENTORY OF EQUIPMENT
Geotechnical Engineers will have some equipment assigned to them on a full time
basis. Examples could include such items as a personal computer, camera, or cellular
telephone. Other equipment items, such as State vehicles, may be utilized as required, when

available. All equipment is to be cared for and maintained appropriately.

The drilling support truck will be used in this Section as an example of the proper care
and inventory of equipment. However, all equipment, whether assigned permanently or on a
temporary basis, will be given the proper care described here.
The drilling support truck will be operated in a safe, courteous manner, in accordance
with the policies described in Chapter 2,“ Oper ati
onofNDOTMot orVehi cles.”Thet ruckand
its included equipment are to be returned clean and ready for the next assignment. If the fuel
tank is less than three-quarter full, the truck is to be fueled. Any maintenance or safety issues
with the truck are to be reported immediately to Motor Pool. Likewise, any items of equipment
stolen or broken are to be reported immediately. If the truck is dirty, it is to be washed.
Of particular importance is the requirement to order inventory items for the truck, when
such items are consumed or damaged in the course of work. Notes should be taken as such
items need replacement, and these items are to be ordered immediately upon returning the
truck. Thefor mt obeusedt okeept r
ackofi nv
ent oryi t
emsi sthe“ Inv ent
or yLi st”form.
10. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE
The various forms of written correspondence, along with policies governing their use,
are discussed in this Section. Different types of correspondence and their appropriate use for
given situations are also covered.
As a general rule, written correspondence should be as brief as possible, but also
needs to deal comprehensively with the subject matter. This means beginning the writing by
explaining the purpose of the correspondence. An example would be to indicate that certain
information was requested, and that the information is given in the correspondence. Also
included should be the necessary facts, such as a description of the problem and the solution,
if requested. The solution or recommendation should normally also include the various other
options, when possible, along with their respective advantages and disadvantages, and how
effective each option would be.
Not all correspondence requires a specific recommendation. However, sometimes a
recommendation is necessary. An example of where a recommendation must be provided
would be when one is specifically requested by a Resident Engineer on a problem
encountered on a project which has a contract number.
Written correspondence falls into the categories of formal and informal. Letters,
memorandums, some emails, and reports are formal correspondence. Transmittal forms,
some facsimiles and most emails are informal correspondence. Formal correspondence must
be placed in a computer file, backed up on an intranet server, and placed as a hardcopy in the
Project file.
Color copying, and all other copy work done by the Section in large quantities, or if
charged to an EA or Contract number, is to be facilitated by the author of the correspondence
thr
oughRepr oducti
on( seet hi sChapt er,Sect ion11,“ Printi
ngRequest s” ).

Finally, all correspondence should be processed in a timely manner.

With the exception of reports, which are dealt with in other sections of this Manual,
policies regarding the various types of written correspondence are detailed below.
10.1 LETTERS
Letters are used as formal, written correspondence to parties outside of the
Department. All letters are to be composed utilizing official letterhead under the name of the
Principal Geotechnical Engineer or Assistant Chief Materials Engineer.
10.2 MEMORANDUMS
Memorandums are the most common form of formal, written correspondence utilized
when the correspondence is internal to the Department. All memorandums will be formatted
using the standard memorandum template, as approved by the Chief Materials Engineer,
Materials Division. See Figures 3-1 and 3-2 at the end of this Chapter.
10.3 MEMORANDUM AND LETTER DISTRIBUTION
All memorandums are to be prepared for signature by the Assistant Chief Materials
Engineer or Principal Geotechnical Engineer. All project managers are to receive a copy of
these memorandums. After signature by the Assistant Chief Materials Engineer or Principal
Geotechnical Engineer, the original of the memorandum or letter is to be sent to the
Administration Section of the Materials Division for filing and distribution. Typically, this is
satisfied by placing the original copy in the Administrative Professional Secr etary’
sin-basket.
The Professional Secretary will make four copies and send the original to the addressee. The
copies will go to the Department central file, the Materials Division file, the Carson City docket
and the Las Vegas docket.
The author of the correspondence is then to make and distribute five copies of the letter
or memorandum as follows:
 Assistant Chief Materials Engineer
 Principal Geotechnical Engineer, two copies
 Geotechnical Section Project file
 Personal file of the Geotechnical Engineer
The proper distribution of letters and memorandums is critical in achieving necessary

documentation, getting information to the appropriate parties, and for ease of research at a
later date.
10.4 TRANSMITTAL FORMS
The Transmittal log, Figure 3-3, is a copy of a transmittal form that can be used for
sendi
ngdocument st ot heot herdi visi
ons.TheWr i
teItDon’ tSayI tfor
m,Fi gur
e3-4, can be

used for internal or Department information communications, but must not contain any
geotechnical recommendations. These two types of forms are available for use when very
little information needs to be stated. Formal communications and those containing
geotechnical recommendations are discussed in Section 10.1 above.
10.5 Facsimiles
Facsimiles (faxes) are an informal method of written correspondence which are
appropriate to use when the number of documents being sent is small, and speed of submittal
is of benefit. It should be remembered that facsimiles do not provide a record of receipt and
action other than a confirmation of delivery. However, if needed, the Geotechnical Engineer
can request that the recipient return the cover sheet acknowledging receipt and noting the
number of pages received. A printout of the first page showing successful delivery is printed by
the fax and needs to be kept in the Project file. All memorandums, recommendations and
approvals need to be followed up with a hard copy through the mail.
10.6 Email
Email is another common form of written correspondence. Examples of appropriate use
of email for written correspondence are setting up meetings and answering simple requests,
where a recorded recommendation is not necessary. When email is used as a type of formal
correspondence, the same rules apply as for other forms of written correspondence. Emails
with formal correspondence need to be followed up with a hard copy through the mail.
11. PRINTING REQUESTS
Pri
ntingrequest sar ehandl edwi t
ht heuseoft he“ Repr oduct ionJobRequestFor m.”
This form must be completed in detail, including a full job description, to make sure the request
is fulfilled accurately and in a timely manner.
The most significant printing requested by Geotechnical Engineers will be Geotechnical
Reports. Prior to submitting these reports for printing, they must be approved by the Principal
Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer is required to make certain these reports
are formatted properly and that necessary items are included, such as the State seal.
12. SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT REQUESTS
All new and replacement supplies and equipment provided by the Department are for
business use only, and may not be utilized for personal use.
Before ordering any supplies or equipment, a thorough check of the stockroom and the
office supplies cabinet is necessary to make sure the item is not in stock. If the item is not in
stock, but is needed in the performance of the job, the first step is to communicate with the
Principal Geotechnical Engineer to receive approval to request the item.
After Principal Geotechnical Engineer appr
oval
,t
he“ Combi nationReques tforSupplies ,
Equi
pmentandShi ppi ngRecor d”f ormi stobecompl et
ed. This form must contain specific

information, to include accounting information, quantity, stock or model number, detailed

description, proposed supplier information (if known), etc.
The form is then given to the Administrative Professional Secretary for completion.
Sufficient time must be given for the request to be ordered and delivery accomplished. If
equipment is needed, and the price exceeds $1000, it must be approved in the budget prior to
completing this form. Such requests are first to be discussed with the Principal Geotechnical
Engineer.
13. BUDGET REQUESTS
It has been emphasized in various places in this Chapter that monies can only be
expended when they are specifically authorized in the budget. Therefore, the budget process
is a very important tool which is utilized to plan programs, activities, and specific supplies and
equipment needs.
Budget requests are normally due to be finalized in the Geotechnical Section very early
in the calendar year. Consequently, planning for requests needs to occur by the end of the
preceding calendar year. Each year, specific due dates will be given for budget requests.
Typical budget request categories include computer equipment and software, training,
equipment, highway construction aids, summer intern students, and Consultants.
When Geotechnical Engineers identify potential budget requests, they should discuss
them with the Principal Geotechnical Engineer.
14. TRAVEL
The Department provides travel for employees to facilitate the accomplishment of their
work, and to allow training to improve productivity which cannot be obtained in another
manner. With few exceptions, travel must have prior authorization.
There are two primary written policies to follow concerning travel.
The first is NRS 281.160. This Statute provides various policies, reimbursement rates
and details on travel advances.
The second is TP 1-5-12. This TP establishes detailed procedures for travel. The TP
also discusses the various authorizations required for in-state and out-of-state procedures,
travel advances, reimbursement rates (note: these rates will be modified on occasion), various
forms required, use of private vehicle, air transportation, motor pool and rental vehicles.
In addition to complying with the above, the Geotechnical Engineer, when requesting
travel, must provide the following to the Administrative Assistant:
 A justification for the request
 The account to charge, such as EA number
 The schedule
 Any vehicle arrangements
 Travel Advance Form, if desired.

 Travel Claim Form (including applicable receipts)

When local travel is required, a vehicle may be checked out from the Motor Pool. All
Motor Pool procedures must be carefully followed. Since there are a limited number of
vehicles, availability is not guaranteed.
In some instances, the use of a personal vehicle will be allowed. Mileage
reimbursement will be provided when a personal vehicle is utilized for necessary Geotechnical
Section travel. Use of a personal vehicle, under these circumstances, must have prior approval
of the Principal Geotechnical Engineer, and comply with all applicable policies and procedures.
Reimbursement for personal vehicle mileage is processed after the travel.
15. TRAINING
The Geotechnical Section management supports the continued training of Geotechnical
Engineers to provide for professional growth and to keep pace with technical and technological
changes.
Geotechnical Engineers are responsible for helping management identify needed
resources for training opportunities, and to take full advantage of any training attended.
16. EMPLOYEE APPRAISALS
Employee appraisals, or employee development reports, are an important method of
formalized communication between the supervisor and employee. The appraisals process
provides for necessary evaluation and feedback. Geotechnical Engineers may be called upon
to mentor junior engineers, and provide assistance in preparing employee appraisals.
The appr aisalf orm,usedf oral lregul arempl oy eesofNDOT,i st he“ Depar tmentof
Personnel Employee Appraisal & Dev el opmentRepor t.”Thi sfor m prov i
desf ortheappr ai
sal
to be modified for individual job duties, and is formatted to describe the principal assignments
of the employee, and rate them, to provide a summary rating of related factors, to provide
comments related to the ratings, and for the supervisor to provide a developmental plan and
any other suggestions. The form is also used to provide for merit increases and to accomplish
the completion of probationary periods. Appraisals of employees are required at three, seven,
and eleven months, during probationary periods, and once per year thereafter. All appraisals
are to be discussed between the supervisor and employee, and become part of the
empl oy ee’
sper sonnelr ecor d.
The policies and procedures relating to appraisals can be found in TP 1-6-17.
As noted, Geotechnical Engineers may be a mentor to three categories of employees.
The first of these is the Rotational Engineer. The second category is that of Highway
Construction Aide. The last category is that of Student Intern.
17. ETHICAL GUIDELINES
NDOT currently has no formal policy covering the matter of ethical considerations. Also,
no ethics policy could be written to deal with all possible situations. Nor does this Section

attempt a comprehensive discussion of ethics matters. Rather, the purpose is to make the
Geotechnical Engineer aware that decisions regarding ethics have to occasionally be made in
the work environment. Such decisions must be made with an understanding of, and
appreciation for, the need to always demonstrate the very highest ethical behavior.
While there is no detailed ethics policy, a few common sense rules will always apply:
 Accept no gifts from anyone doing business with, or seeking to do business with NDOT
 Avoid any real or potential conflicts of interest
 Always be professional and honest in personal contacts, and written reports and
recommendations
Finally, if any situation occurs where the decision on what to do is not clear, in terms of
ethical considerations, always make the decision based on the assumption that there is a
possible ethics breach.
18. JOB SITE SAFETY
Policies and procedures relating to the general aspects of safety are discussed in
Chapter 5. However, particular attention should be given to the various job sites, where
unsafe conditions tend to more commonly occur. These conditions may relate to the job site
conditions, or the practices of individuals working at the job site.
When unsafe job site conditions are encountered, the Principal Geotechnical Engineer
and the appropriate on site individual are to be notified immediately. If the unsafe conditions
relate to maintenance issues, such as a large rock in the roadway, the Maintenance Division is
to be immediately notified.
The reporting of unsafe job site conditions does not end upon proper notification. The
Geotechnical Engineer should also document these incidents. This documentation should be
placed in the Project file, depending on the nature of the incident.
Geotechnical Engineers should also be vigilant in following appropriate safety practices,
and wearing necessary protective gear, particularly during drilling operations. More information
on drilling safety is pr
ovi
dedi
nChapt er5,“ Saf etyGui del i
nes. ”
19. JOB SITE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The procedures, policies and training for the general aspects of hazardous materials
maybef oundi nChapt er2,“
Haz ardousMat erials,”andal soChapt er5, “ ContaminatedSi tes.”
It is the policy of the NDOT Geotechnical Section to not perform hazardous materials drilling,
testing or evaluation. When contaminated conditions are encountered, the normal practice is
to employ a Consultant to provide the needed services.
When Geotechnical Engineers know of, or suspect, hazardous materials contamination
at the job site, they are to inform the Principal Geotechnical Engineer immediately and cease
any further drilling, testing or evaluation.

20. JOB-RELATED INJURIES

If an injury occurs while on the job, it must be reported as soon as possible to the
Principal Geotechnical Engineer, or a higher level. There are also specific procedures and
forms required concerning job-related injuries. These are discussed in Chapter 2, “ Safety in
theWor kplace. ”It is the responsibility of Geotechnical Engineers to comply with all policies
and procedures regarding job-related injuries, including required reporting time frames. Failure
to do so can have significant impacts, including the possibility of being ineligi
bl eforwor ker ’
s
compensation, or other job benefits.
Current telephone numbers are available at the Materials Division office to call for
approved occupational medicine providers and pharmacies, should a job-related injury occur.
However, in the event of a medical emergency, help should be sought at the nearest medical
facility.
21. VEHICLE ACCIDENTS
This Section deals with the procedures to follow in the event of an accident while driving
an NDOT vehicle. Additional discussion regarding NDOT vehicle operation may be found in
Chapter2,“ Oper ationofNDOTMot orVehicles. ”
If an accident occurs, while operating an NDOT vehicle, the first responsibility is to
provide for assistance to any injured parties, and to seek immediate help for yourself, in the
event of injury.
The second responsibility is to notify the Principal Geotechnical Engineer, or a higher
level, about the specifics oft
heacci dent ,andcompl etea“ Vehicl
eAcci dentRepor t”f
or m. This
form requires information about you, your vehicle, other persons and vehicles involved in the
accident, witnesses, and persons injured. The glove compartment of NDOT vehicles should
contain copies of this form.
Anotherf or
m ut i
lizedi nc onjunc ti
onwi t
hanNDOTv ehicularac cident i
sthe“Super visors
Vehicle Accident Inv est igation.”Thi sformi scompl etedbyt heempl oy ee’ ssupervisor,andi s
an investigation and listing of action taken. Comments and recommendations are made by the
District Operations Instructor. Any actions taken are noted by the District Engineer or Division
Head, with the requirement that the employee sign the form. There is also a review and
findings made by the General Safety Committee.
22. LOSS REPORTING
In the event of loss or damage of NDOT materials or equipment by theft, pilferage or
vandalism, it is the responsibility of the Geotechnical Engineer to notify the Principal
Geotechnical Engineer, or higher level immediately. When appropriate, local police authorities
will also be notified by the Geotechnical Engineer, and full and complete details given of the
items missing or damaged, along with any other pertinent facts concerning the incident.

23. COMPUTER SOFTWARE TOOLS

Various forms of computer software tools are made available in the Geotechnical
Section. It is the responsibility of the Geotechnical Engineers to become familiar with the
different types of software provided, and to utilize the software to increase productivity and
communicate effectively. The software tools currently available are included as Figure 3-5. All
new employees must have a processed “ NDOT Request for Computer Access”form.
24. REFERENCE MATERIALS
Various reference materials are available in the Geotechnical office. These materials
are valuable to the Geotechnical Engineer when seeking additional information. Some
reference material is provided to the Geotechnical Engineers when they first start the job. The
Geotechnical Section has a library with many reference books and literature.
25. GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY
Laboratory testing is performed by the Geotechnical Laboratory. The Geotechnical
Engineer is responsible for requesting appropriate laboratory tests, while being mindful that
unnecessary testing is a waste of assets, resources, and personnel time, and could delay
projects.
Requests for laboratory work are accomplished through the use of a two-part form,
“Nev
ada Depar tmentofTr ansportati
on Geot echnicalLab Task Sheet ,”which i st o be
completed for each project. More information on laboratory tests, and samples of the form,
maybef oundi nChapt er8,“ LaboratoryTests.”

26. FIGURES
3-1: Memorandum
STATE OF NEVADA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MEMORANDUM
December 27, 2002
To: Tim Ruguleiski, Resident Engineer

_____________________________________
From: Jeff Palmer, Principal Geotechnical Engineer

Subject: Contract 3110, US 95 Widening at Valley View in Las Vegas, Review of CSL, Reports No. 3 and 4
The Geotechnical section has reviewed the Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) Reports No. 3 & 4, for the Valley View Bridge over US 95.
Report No. 3 presented CSL, test information for five drilled shaft foundations (piers): Piers 1, 2, 4, and 7 in Abutment 1; and Pier 4 in
Abutment 2. Of these five piers, all showed test results indicative of good quality concrete, except for Pier 2. This pier showed a velocity
reduction of 18% in two spots of one tube pair (between 33.5 and 34.0 meters; and between 27.0 and 37.5 meters).
Report No. 4 presented CSL, test information for six drilled shaft foundations (piers): Piers 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 in Abutment 2. Of these six
piers, only three piers showed test results indicative of good quality concrete throughout the shaft. Pier 1 showed velocity reduction of between
12% and 29% in five pairs of tubes between 34.5 and 36.5 meters. Pier 3 showed velocity reductions of between 23% and 30% in two pairs of
tubes between 36.0 and 37.0 meters. Pier 5 showed a velocity reduction of 16% in one tube pair between 34.5 and 37.0 meters.
These zones of reduced velocity are indicative of anomalous zones within the concrete shaft. Because of these anomalous zones, both the skin
resistance and the end bearing capacity of these shafts have been reduced. It is difficult to determine the actual amount of capacity reduction
such anomalies produce and the resulting reduction in the design safety factors. Based on previous experience and conversation with the
Consultant designer, Walter Vanderpool of Terracon, Inc., the reduction in capacity and factors of safety are determined to be acceptable. We
recommend accepting the shafts.
It is our strong recommendation to notify the contractor(s) responsible for the shaft construction of the existence of these anomalies and
further, to examine and improve their technique for ensuring the cleanliness of the excavations. This step is needed to ensure compliance with
the specifications as set for the in the NDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.
If you have any questions or require further information, please call Dana Boomhower at 888-7870, or me at 888-7873.
JP:DB:db
c: John Terry, Project Manager

3-2: Memorandum
STATE OF NEVADA
MEMORANDUM
February 12, 2002
To: Nancy Kennedy, Principal Bridge Engineer
_____________________________________________
From: Jeff Palmer, Principal Materials Engineer - Geotechnical
Subject: Geotechnical Report –Preliminary Recommendations
Pembroke Drive Bridge (B-1691) over Steamboat Creek –Washoe County
EA 72648
The following design recommendations are provided for the Pembroke Drive Bridge Project prior to the completion
of the Geotechnical Report.
Analysis of the subsurface site conditions and laboratory test results enabled us to calculate bearing capacities for
the 460 mm steel pipe piles shown in the 60% plans. These capacities are shown on the following chart.
Construction control methods shall include dynamic testing with wave equation analysis, which provides a
recommended factor of safety of 2.25. The required pile capacity of 468 kN, provided by the bridge division, is met
by using pile 10 meters in length. Pile uplift capacity is 105 kN per pile, and 735 kN per pile group.

3-3: Transmittal Log
Date:
To From
Telephone Number:
For Action Approval Information

Your Comments Signature Review FYI
As We Discussed
Per Your Request
Please Return Attached Material
Please Prepare a Reply to be signed by
Please See Me
Remarks:

3-4: Wr
iteI
t… Don’
tSayI
t!
STATE OF NEVADA
WRI
TEI
T… DON’
TSAYI
T!
INTERDIVISION COMMUNICATION
To: Date:
From: Reply Wanted:
Subject: No Reply Wanted:
Message, without recommendations:

3-5: Computer Software Tools
Microsoft Word
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Binder
Microsoft Outlook
Microsoft PowerPoint
Microsoft Access
Mathcad
Xstabl
Comp 624P
GRL WEAP
gINT
GEOSYSTEM for Windows
Grapher
ProShake
Rock Database Management Program
Goldnail
Driven
CBEAR
Microstation
LPILE Plus
Group
Apile
TZPile
Shaft
MSEW
Civil Tech Suite (Epres, Heave, Lpres, Shoring)
Rockpack: Rock Slope Stability Analysis
3DTOPOQUADA: Quads for Nevada
FOSSA

CHAPTER 4
WORK BY CONSULTANTS & LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

WORK BY CONSULTANTS & LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 4-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................ 1
2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
3. GEOTECHNICAL INVOLVEMENT PHASES ....................................................... 2
4. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY DEPARTMENT .................................................. 2
5. SCOPE/OVERSIGHT OF GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ..................................... 2
5.1 Checklists of Geotechnical Work ......................................................................... 3
5.2 Department Review of Consultant Investigations................................................. 3
5.3 Department Review of Consultant Reports .......................................................... 4
5.4 Construction Phase.............................................................................................. 4
6. REVIEW OF CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE.................................................... 6
7. FIGURES ............................................................................................................. 7
4-1: Geotechnical Activity Chart ........................................................................... 7
4-2: Checklist of Geotechnical Work .................................................................... 8
8. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 13

WORK BY CONSULTANTS & LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 4-1
1. PURPOSE
This Chapter defines the engineering process responsibilities of any Consultants

performing geotechnical services that affect Department projects, as these individuals become
an extension of the Department and therefore must comply with the guidelines and
responsibilities as set forth in this Manual. However, this Chapter only describes the
processest obeused,anddoesnotdel vei ntot het echni cal“how to”t oaccompl i
sht he
geotechnical engineering technical tasks and procedures. This Chapter also describes the
responsibilities of the Geotechnical Engineers, as they relate to Consultants, as well as their
interrelationships and roles with those hired to provide services on behalf of the Department.
It is not the intent of this Chapter or the Manual to discuss the procedures on how
Consultants are selected or enter into a contract with the Department. Employment of
Consultants is typicallyincludedi ntheAdmi nist
rati
veSer vicesDi vi
sion’sresponsibilities and
covered by TP 1-2-3. That procedure also covers amendments to existing Consultant
agreements, and the issuance of Task Orders for On-Call agreements.
I
nt hisManual ,thet er m“Consultant”r efer
s to local governments, developers, and
Contractors that perform their own geotechnical work, and/or their Consultants. Construction
Plans, specifications, and Special Provisions are r
eferredt ogener al
l
yas“ Plans”.
2. INTRODUCTION
All geotechnical related issues for transportation work must be reviewed and approved
by the Geotechnical Section. The nature and extent of the involvement by the Geotechnical
Section depends upon the nature of the project. Geotechnical services provided by
Consultants for the design and construction of roadway projects that affect any of the
Department right-of-way are subject to the same geotechnical engineering requirements as for
engineering services performed by the Department.
Consultants might be retained where the Department does not have necessary
equipment, expertise, or manpower. In a few instances, geotechnical services may also be
performed by local governments, Consultants or Contractors. Most geotechnical work is
conducted before and during the design phase of a roadway project, but services are also
provided during the construction phase of the project. In rare instances, services are provided
for non-roadway projects.
The Department may utilize an On-Call Consultant, for specific tasks. Each Consultant
will execute an agreement with a list of services they are to perform. If any of these services
are needed, the appropriate Consultant will be issued a Task Order, typically approved by the
Assistant Chief Materials Engineer who supervises the Geotechnical Section. Geotechnical
Engineers do not select or assign tasks to Consultants under contract to the Department;
rather, they contact the Principal Geotechnical Engineer, and request Consultant-provided
services.

The Geotechnical Section is responsible for evaluating the geotechnical investigation

and geotechnical design submitted by Consultants for compliance with Department and FHWA
policies and standards. Consultants are responsible for coordinating all activities related to
accomplishing the geotechnical investigation, which may involve obtaining permits and/or
having an approved traffic control plan. Fieldwork, laboratory testing, analyses, and design
recommendations must be in accordance with the procedures and guidelines listed in this
Manual.
3. GEOTECHNICAL INVOLVEMENT PHASES
Any person or firm providing geotechnical services for the Department must be aware of
the design and construction phases a project passes through and the involvement periods for
those services. Figure 4-1i sa“ Geot echnicalAct ivi
tyChar t”des c r
ibi
ngthosephas es.The30,
60, and 90 percent events correspond to the amount of progress completed on the design.
4. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY DEPARTMENT
The Geotechnical Section can provide information upon request, which may be useful in
the design of a project. The information could include items such as previous Geotechnical
Reports, boring logs, laboratory test results, geologic mapping, and as-built plans and
construction notes. As-built information should be sought on all rehabilitation projects to
obtain knowledge of the existing construction prior to commencing fieldwork. For rehabilitation
projects, pavement test data and related information may also be available.
5. SCOPE/OVERSIGHT OF GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
All geotechnical services provided for Department projects are reviewed by the
Geotechnical Section for comments and approval. Therefore, the procedures and methods
described in this Manual are important in standardizing and expediting the information, reports,
and techniques utilized by all involved in geotechnical services.
Consultants are expected to work independently and keep all parties informed the same
as if they were Department Geotechnical Engineers. At all times, Geotechnical Engineers
should act in an advisory role as compared to a management role. The Geotechnical Section,
and more specifically Geotechnical Engineers, do not manage or supervise Consultants
retained by other Divisions. Consultants most likely report to and are responsible to the
Project Manager (PM), when working for the Department. During construction, the Resident
Engineer (RE) is the coordinator of all communications, including those to and from any
Consultants and Department staff.
The Geotechnical Section must be contacted prior to commencement of the
geotechnical investigation. A Geotechnical Engineer is assigned as the primary contact.
Communications between Consultants and Geotechnical Section personnel should be
maintained to ensure that investigations meet the requirements of the Department. This will
reduce unnecessary delays during the review process, which could affect scheduled
construction dates. Geotechnical requirements of the project shall be agreed to by all parties
prior to the start of the work.
Roadway and/or Bridge Divisions typically have the initial responsibility to provide the
Geotechnical Section and other Department Divisions all information concerning a particular
project.
The Roadway and/or Bridge Divisions are responsible for preparing contract documents
after being provided the information described in this Manual. Typically, bids and/or contracts
include the following items:
 Geotechnical Report
 The latest version of Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction
 The latest version of Standard Plans for Road and Bridge Construction
 Special Provisions (this includes recommendations made in the Geotechnical Report)
 Construction Plans
The Department currently maintains Construction Plans and Special Provisions in
several locations. Three of these are the Materials Division, Central Records, and
Administrative Services during the time of project advertising.
5.1 Checklists of Geotechnical Work
Consultants must prepare and submit a list of all services they are expected to perform
prior to providing those services. These items are covered in the Scope of Services of their
agreement. Basic services are included in Figure 4-2 as a simplified nonexclusive Checklist.
Also,r efertot heFHWApubl icati
on“Checkl istandGui del i
nesf orRev iew ofGeot echni cal
Repor tsand Pr el i
minaryPl ansand Speci f
icat i
ons”( 1985) . Whi l
et hesear eusef uland
convenient references, other requirements must be met and guidelines must be followed.
5.2 Department Review of Consultant Investigations
On Department projects, Geotechnical Engineers and/or Consultants must adhere to

the work described in the Scope of Services, and not exceed those requirements without
documented instructions from the Principal Geotechnical Engineer and/or Assistant Chief
Materials Engineer. Geotechnical Engineers are expected to respond to formal and informal
requests for information submitted directly to the Geotechnical Engineer or passed down from
upper management on projects the Geotechnical Engineer has been assigned. All requests
should be responded to expeditiously, even if the response is only a promise to locate the
information, or to refer the requestor to the proper party for a reply, or to let the requestor know
ther equest isout sidet heGeot echnical Engineer’sres pons i
bi l
it
y.I ffol l
owupi spr omis ed, t
hen
the Geotechnical Engineer is expected to act in a timely manner.
Consultants must submit a quarterly status report on each project. In addition, during
the design phase they must provide submittals as outlined in Figure 4-1. Geotechnical
Engineers and Consultants are expected to attend status meetings on each of their projects,
respond verbally to appropriate questions, and then follow up these conversations with written
document ati
on.I t i
stheGeot echnical Engi neer’srespons i
bil
it
yt omoni t
orandadmi nistereac h
of these pieces of correspondence to make sure Consultants respond to those
communications and take the appropriate action. Noncompliance will be reported to the
Principal Geotechnical Engineer, and the appropriate Project Manager in writing.
In-house correspondence between Geotechnical Engineers and their supervisor can be
informal, but written records must be maintained. Conversations and meetings must also be
documented.
5.3 Department Review of Consultant Reports
Consultants should utilize internal QA/QC procedures that are appropriate for the work
performed. Analyses and computations should be checked by an independent geotechnical
engineer working for the Consultant. Original analysis computations should be documented
and filed. I
tistheGeot echni cal Engi neer ’sr
esponsibil
i
tyt omoni torandf oll
owupt oseethat
recommendations are acknowledged, acted upon, and documented. In cases where there
may be disagreements, the Chief Materials Engineer or Assistant Chief Materials Engineer is
responsible for ensuring that disagreements are resolved to the satisfaction of the Department,
and that such decisions are accurately documented.
All geotechnical documents such as calculations, reports, memorandums, and logs of
borings prepared by the Consultant must be provided to the Department in digital format on
compact data disks in addition to copies on paper. Report text must be submitted in Microsoft
Word, and logs of borings in the gINT program format.
When errors, omissions, or questions are encountered, formal correspondence is made
to maintain a permanent record for the files. The Geotechnical Report prepared by the
Consultant shall be signed, dated, and stamped by a Nevada Registered Professional
Engineer.
5.4 Construction Phase
Once the Consultant’ sser vi

ceshav ebeenprovided and their recommendations have
been accepted by the Geotechnical Section and incorporated into the Department documents,
Geotechnical Engineers are expected to understand the documents, and be able to explain
and justify them in later meetings and correspondence.
Geotechnical information included as part of Construction Plans generally consist of
items such as project boring logs, foundation notes, excavation and drilling notes, special
embankment details, and drawings. Consultants are responsible for reviewing Contractor’ s
(such as wall suppliers) submittals for accuracy and completeness. Communications with
Contractors and suppliers follow formal processes routed through the Resident Engineer,
unless the Resident Engineer has provided authorization allowing direct contact with the

supplier. Normally, the Resident Engineer would communicate directly with the construction
Contractor who contacts the supplier.
Shop drawings and calculations are typically submitted by Contractors prior to
commencing portions of the affected work in order to define how they intend to construct the
project. Occasionally, additional shop drawings and calculations may be required during the
construction phase. Consultants are responsible for checking and approving the geotechnical
items in submittals, such as:
 Calculations
 Shop Drawings and Plan Details
 Applied bearing pressures shown on the drawings
 Materials specifications
 Construction methods and procedures regarding geotechnical issues
 Compliance with specification requirements and Special Provisions
The Geotechnical Section performs a cursory review after Consultants have completed
their review. For Consultant-Designed Projects that Consultants have not been retained for
construction support, the Geotechnical Engineer performs the above review. Consultants
might be requested to review the following:
 Change of site conditions
 Change order request
 Construction recommendations
The following is a condensed summary representing the process a Contractor’st
ypi
cal
submittal follows. (The Bridge Division is used as an example for clarity only.)
 ssubmi
The Resident Engineer sends seven copies of the Contractor’ tt
alt
otheBr
idge
Division
 The Bridge Division sends one copy of the submittal to the Geotechnical Section
 Submittals must to be stamped by a Nevada Registered Professional Engineer
 If it is necessary, the Geotechnical Engineer may contact the Resident Engineer to
verify if he/she is authorized to contact the Contractor or subcontractors directly
 The Geotechnical Section reviews the submittal within time frames specified in Special
Provisions or the Standard Specifications (but not stamp the submittals)
 The Geotechnical Section sends Bridge Division documentation that the submittals
were reviewed and approval or rejection is recommended
 Consultants review work must be stamped by a Nevada Registered Professional
Engineer.

 sr
The Geotechnical Section evaluates the Consultant’ ev
iew wor
kandappr
ovesor
sr
rejects the Consultant’ ev
iewwor k.
Prior to approving the shop drawings and/or calculations, the Geotechnical Section
coordinates with the Bridge Division on a joint review. If the shop drawings and/or calculations
need to be returned for corrections, one memorandum is written to the Resident Engineer by
the Bridge Division incorporating all needed corrections.
6. REVIEW OF CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE
While Geotechnical Engineers have no supervisory role with Consultants, they are the
primary contact and have close relationships with these parties, especially Geotechnical
Consultants. Geotechnical Engineers may be requested to provide comments about
Consultant’sper f
ormancedur i
ngpr oj
ects.Ther efore,theyshoul dbecomef ami li
arwi tht he
forms and procedures utilized in these processes. More details can be obtained from other
Department manuals. Geotechnical Engineers providing material or comments for any
evaluation processes should use the formal correspondence methods and route the
information through the Assistant Chief Materials Engineer.

7. FIGURES
4-1: Geotechnical Activity Chart

Event Activities
Start The project development process begins.
The project coordinator will coordinate the mapping and right-of-entry needs of the project team members
and submit all-inclusive requests to Location and Right-of-Way. The right-of-entry at this time is for project
personnel to perform noninvasive appraisals of the site conditions, including roadway, hydraulics, structural,
geotechnical, and environmental.
ADFS During the ADFS the team will determine the needs and locations for invasive explorations. A supplemental
request by the project coordinator will be issued to Right-of-Way to obtain the rights to perform these
investigations. The request must address the exploration methods and the means to access the locations
for both environmental and geotechnical personnel.
During development of the project alternatives geotechnical information will be obtained and provided to
Roadway, Bridge and Hydraulics at the appropriate time to assist in the selection process.
ROD The FHWA renders a decision on whether the project can proceed to final design.
The design team prepares the plans and supporting information for the selected alternative for conducting
the PDFS.
PDFS During the PDFS the team will determine the needs and locations for the explorations necessary to
complete the design of the selected alternative. A supplemental request by the project coordinator will be
issued to Right-of-Way to obtain the rights to perform these investigations. The request must address the
exploration methods and the means to access the locations.
Geotechnical exploration will commence when the necessary rights have been secured. The Geotechnical
Engineer will provide approximate completion dates of the initial investigation results to the project
coordinator in order to adjust the project schedule.
30% The Geotechnical Engineer will issue a memorandum regarding geologic hazards and preliminary design
recommendations as part of the submittal.
Geotechnical information will be obtained based on the 30-percent plan set and estimated loads. Additional
field investigation will be conducted, if applicable, based on the 30-percent plan set and estimated loads.
The Geotechnical Engineer will issue data and recommendations to the Road, Bridge and Hydraulic
engineers as needed for achieving their 60-percent design requirements. The Geotechnical Engineer will
provide approximate completion dates to the project coordinator in order to adjust the project schedule.
The Road, Bridge and Hydraulic engineers will provide updated design information (calculated loads and
revised geometry) to the Geotechnical Engineer as it becomes available. Additional field investigation will
be conducted, if applicable, based on the updated design information.
60% The Geotechnical Engineer will issue a draft Geotechnical Report as part of the submittal, based on the
updated design information. This information must be sufficient to the purpose of developing designs used
for establishing the final right-of-way requirements.
The project design is developed sufficiently to establish the final right-of-way requirements.
SET R/W The final right-of-way requirements are established and forwarded to the chief Right-of-Way agent for
acquisition.
The Road, Bridge and Hydraulic engineers will provide updated design information, if applicable. Additional
field investigation will be conducted, if applicable, based on the updated design information.
90% The Structural Design and Right-of-Way Divisions perform 90-percent plan reviews. The Geotechnical
Engineer issues the final Geotechnical Report, based on the updated design information.
QA/QC TheDepar tment ’
squal ityassur ancepr ocessi scompl et edont
he100-percent plans and estimate. The
Geotechnical Report is included as a part of this submittal.
PS&E The final specifications are issued and reviewed in conjunction with the plans and estimate.
Advertise The plans, specifications and estimate are forwarded to administrative services for bid and award.
4-2: Checklist of Geotechnical Work

This is a simplified checklist for easy reference. Additional requirements apply as
described in this Manual. Geotechnical services may include, but are not limited to the
following:
A. Preliminary Meeting
1. Meeting with Principal Geotechnical Engineer before the geotechnical
investigation begins. This will allow the Department to provide information for
the field investigation, and provide any special criteria to the Consultant in
advance. Discuss boring locations, field sampling, laboratory testing, and design
methodology.
2. Meet ing wi th Depar t
ment ’
sRoadbed Design Section before the pavement
analysis and design begin. This will allow the Roadbed Design Section to give
the Geotechnical Engineer or the Consultant special design criteria required by
the Department.
B. Exploration
1. Research available information
2. Conduct field reconnaissance
3. Mark boreholes and request utility clearance
4. Request Entry Permits
5. Provide traffic control in accordance with Department policies and procedures
6. Conduct subsurface/rock investigation
a. Obtain soil samples for testing
b. Log the profile
7. Conduct geophysical investigation
8. Survey the explored area (boreholes) for location and elevation
C. Laboratory Testing. (laboratory tests and technician duties, must be certified by
AASHTO). Tests could include:
1. Gradation
2. Atterberg limits
3. Moisture content
4. Direct shear
5. Unit weight
6. Consolidation
7. Swell
8. Triaxial
9. R-value
10. Compaction
11. Specific gravity
12. Chemical (sulfates, chlorides, pH, resistivity)
13. Permeability
14. Organic content
15. Unconfined compression
16. LA abrasion
17. Sulfate soundness
D. Analysis and Design. Common designs include, but are not limited to:
1. Geosynthetic specifications and installation procedures
2. Slope stability for temporary and permanent conditions, static and seismic
loading
3. Shallow foundation designs
a. Allowable and ultimate bearing pressures for varying cases of
embedment depth, footing width, and eccentricities
b. Total and differential settlement and expected time to occur
4. Retaining Walls
a. Cantilever Walls
1) Footing design: overturning, bearing capacity, sliding, and
settlement
2) Soil strength parameters
3) Eccentric loading
b. Soil Nail Walls
1) Spacing
2) Hole diameter
3) Nail length
4) Proof test and verification, sequence and procedure of tests
c. Tie Back Walls
1) Spacing
2) Hole diameter
3) Bonded and unbonded lengths
4) Prestressing load
d. Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls
1) External stability
2) Global stability
3) Strap length and location
4) Settlement
5) Allowable and ultimate bearing capacities
e. Soldier Piles and Lagging
1) Pile spacing
2) Pile diameter
3) Embedment depth
4) Lateral capacity
5. Deep Foundations
a. Driven Piles
1) Axial capacity versus depth
2) Uplift capacity
3) Pile size and type
4) Pile spacing
5) Settlement
6) Drivability analysis: Wave equation using GRL Weap
7) Lateral loading analysis: L-Pile, Strain Wedge Model
b. Drilled Shafts
1) Axial capacity versus depth
2) Uplift capacity
3) Shaft diameter and depth
4) Shaft spacing
5) Settlement
6) Lateral loading analysis: L-Pile, Strain Wedge Model
6. Structural Section
a. ACC or PCC thickness
b. Type and thickness of Base
c. Thickness of Borrow
E. Geotechnical Report
1. General Report Content
a. Geologic hazards including seismic evaluation using AASHTO response
spectra curves
b. Analysis and design material (including structural section, if requested)
c. Design recommendations (including structural section, if requested)
d. Material specifications
e. Construction recommendations (include anticipated construction
difficulties)
f. Project location sketch or map (include location of borings, existing and
proposed structures)
g. Boring logs, similar to Department (gINT) form, including the following
information:
 Start and end dates
 Job description
 Location (of project)
 Boring number
 EA number
 Ground elevation (of borehole)
 Hammer drop system
 Station (of borehole)

 Offset (of borehole)
 Engineer (present during drilling)
 Equipment (drill rig used)
 Operator (of drill rig)
 Drilling method
 Backfilled (of borehole, yes or no, and date)
 Groundwater level (date measured, depth and elevation)
 Incremental elevations
 Depths at incremental elevations
 Sample number
 Blowcounts (three SPT values) at 6-inch increments
 Blowcounts (one SPT value) for last foot
 Percent recovery (percent length of soil sample recovered per total
driven sampler distance)
 Lab tests performed
 USCS group (Unified Soil Classification System) designation can be
based on test results or visual method, if no tests were conducted. It
must be stated on the boring logs if the visual method and ASTM
D2488 Description of Soils (Visual Manual Procedure) was used
 Material description (soil sample and subsurface descriptions)
 Remarks (drilling rates, downward pressure, rotational pressure,
drilling difficulties, etc.)
 Bottom of hole depth or elevation
 Names for both the persons responsible for supervising the field study
and certifying the boring log
h. Soil test results (triaxial, direct shear, consolidation, gradation, etc.)
2. Report Format [above sections E.1.a through E.1.h typically should be no more
than 2 pages each]. The typical outline is as follows:
a. Title page
b. Table of contents
c. Executive summary (when necessary)
d. Report introduction (scope of project)
e. Project description (including general site conditions)
f. Geologic conditions and seismicity
g. Field investigations
h. Laboratory analyses
i. Discussion of subsurface conditions
j. Engineering analyses(including structural section, if requested)
k. Design and construction recommendations (including structural section, if

requested)
l. References
m. Figures (topographic site plan, geologic mapping, photographs, geologic
cross-sections, typical sections, and recommended design details)
n. Appendices
1) Subsurface explorations data (boring logs with boring log key)
2) Laboratory test results
3) In situ test results
4) Instrumentation results
3. General requirements for reports:
a. The Geotechnical Report shall include only material in addition to, and/or
modificationtot heDepar t
ment ’
s“ StandardSpeci fi
cat i
onsf orRoadand
Bri
dge Const ruct
ion”forr ecommended mat erials speci f
ication and
construction procedures
b. Recommendations shall be brief, concise, and definite. These should
include recommendations for solving anticipated design and construction
problems
c. The Geotechnical Report shall be considered as a bidding document
supplementing the Construction Plans and Special Provisions
F. Plans and Specifications
1. Special Provisions
a. Required materials specifications
b. Required construction procedures
2. Construction Plans
a. Project location sketch or map (include location of borings, existing and
proposed structures)
b. Boring logs
G. Calculations
1. Submit all reports and calculations to the Department for review and comment
2. These items should be separated from the Geotechnical Report
H. Reviews and Comments
1. Respondt
oal
lDepar
tment
’scomment
s
2. Review the Construction Plans and Special Provisions

8. REFERENCES
FHWA,“ Checkli
standGui deli
nesforRev iewofGeot echni calReportsandPr el
iminaryPl ans
andSpeci f
icati
ons,”FHWA-PD-97-002, 1985
FHWA, “Geotechni calDif
feringSiteCondi ti
ons,”Engineering Notebook Issuance GT-15, May
1996.
Nevada Department of Transportation, Various documents on Policies and Procedures.
Nevada Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction.
Nevada Department of Transportation, Standard Plans for Road and Bridge Construction.

CHAPTER 5
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PLANNING GUIDELINES

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PLANNING GUIDELINES 5-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ........................................................................................................... 1
2. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
3. GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS ................ 1
4. ROADWAY ALIGNMENT INVESTIGATIONS...................................................... 2
5. ROADWAY CENTERLINE CUT AND EMBANKMENT INVESTIGATIONS......... 3
5.1 Embankments Over Soft Ground ......................................................................... 4
5.2 Bridge Approach Embankments........................................................................... 5
5.3 Rock Slopes ......................................................................................................... 5
6. LANDSLIDE INVESTIGATIONS .......................................................................... 6
7. BORROW AREA INVESTIGATIONS................................................................... 7
8. STRUCTURE INVESTIGATIONS........................................................................ 8
8.1 Bridges ................................................................................................................. 8
8.2 Earth Retaining Walls........................................................................................... 9
8.3 Buildings............................................................................................................... 9
8.4 Drainage Structures (Culverts)............................................................................. 9
8.5 Large Load Light and Sign Structures ................................................................ 10
8.6 Tunnels .............................................................................................................. 10
8.7 Detention Basins ................................................................................................ 10
9. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 11
5-1: Guidelines for Boring Layout....................................................................... 11
5-2: Minimum Requirements for Boring Depth ................................................... 12
5-3: Guideline Sampling and Testing Criteria..................................................... 13
10. REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 14

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PLANNING GUIDELINES 5-1
1. PURPOSE
A subsurface investigation may need to be performed at the site of all roadway
construction projects, including: widening, extension, modification and rehabilitation. This
Chapter presents guidelines to plan the scope of a geotechnical investigation, including a
subsurface exploration and testing program. However, as the requirements and conditions
vary with each project, engineering judgment is essential in tailoring the investigation to the
specific project. The Manual for FHWA,“ Subsur f
ace I nv est i
gations,”NHI Course No.
132031, (module 1 1997) and the AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations (1988)
provide extensive information on planning and conducting a geotechnical investigation.
2. INTRODUCTION
A comprehensive investigation program starts with a series of preliminary office
studies, such as; a study of project objectives and preliminary plans, review of existing
information, identification of geotechnical design issues, formulation of a preliminary
exploration and testing plan, and a list of anticipated analyses. Following the office studies,
a field reconnaissance should be performed and modifications made, if necessary, to the
exploration plan to provide the most useful information.
The subsurface exploration program might include both conventional borings and
other specialized investigative or in situ testing methods. Subsurface exploration programs
should be conducted using a phased approach. This allows the results from critical design
areas, or with the most uncertainty, to be performed early in the project. If subsurface
information shows materials to be significantly different from those assumed in the planning
stages, modifications could be made to the scope of the investigation. Modification to the
scope may include boring depths, number of samples, and type of samples.
The planning of a geotechnical investigation also includes identification of
appropriate laboratory testing and engineering analyses to support geotechnical design
needs for the specific project. The results of the investigation are commonly documented in
a Geotechnical Report.
The amounts and types of data obtained during a geotechnical investigation are
often constrained by limitations of time, manpower, equipment, access, or funds. One goal
of the investigation program should be to provide sufficient data for the Geotechnical
Engineer to recommend the most appropriate and efficient design. Otherwise, more
conservative designs with higher factors of safety would be required, which may cost
considerably more than a properly conceived exploration program. Another goal should be
providing sufficient information for the contractor to bid appropriately and reduce change
orders and claims.
3. GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
An important step in geotechnical analysis and design is to have an adequate
subsurface exploration program. The number, depth, spacing, and type of borings,

sampling, and testing in an exploration program are so dependent on site conditions and
the project, that no uniform rule can be established.
The Geotechnical Engineer should develop an overall program that addresses the
geotechnical issues to the extent justified by the significance of the project elements. The
required investigative effort is also dependent on the type and complexity of the design.
Therefore, investigation programs are commonly modified as additional information
become available. A phased investigation approach may be most beneficial for large
projects and/or projects with difficult geotechnical problems. The planning guidelines
presented in Tables 6-1 through 6-3 are considered reasonable for obtaining the minimum
subsurface data needed for a cost-effective geotechnical design.
Table 6-1, Guidelines for Boring Layout, lists the number and location of borings
recommended for various types of facilities. Changes in geological stratigraphy could
necessitate additional borings. Table 6-2, Minimum Requirements for Boring Depths,
details recommendations for planning the depths of exploration holes. Actual geologic
conditions could change exploration depths (such as the actual depth to bedrock or hard
strata). In some cases, the presence of unsuitable materials such as highly compressible
soils or peat deposits could necessitate additional number and depth of borings, possibly in
a grid pattern to identify the lateral extent and depth of these deposits. Planning of
exploration programs should take into account the data required for the anticipated
engineering analyses.
The guidelines contained in Tables 6-1 and 6-2 consider only the use of
conventional borings. The Geotechnical Engineer may include cone penetration tests, plate
load bearing capacity tests, trench excavation tests, geophysical tests, and/or any other
appropriate tests as supplementary to or as substitutes for some, but not all, of the
conventional boring exploration tests. Table 6-3, Guideline Sampling and Testing Criteria,
describes the types and frequency of samples and tests recommended for various
applications and subsurface conditions. The following sections provide additional guidelines
for specific project phases and design elements.
4. ROADWAY ALIGNMENT INVESTIGATIONS
In the early stages of a project, the Geotechnical Engineer may be requested to
perform an evaluation of several possible roadway alignments or structure locations. The
purpose of this effort is to identify geologic conditions or constraints that could affect the
selection decision. This project phase generally does not require extensive subsurface
explorations. It is typically limited to preliminary office studies and field reconnaissance
where anticipated surface materials are identified and some sampling is performed.
General observations should be recorded, including areas of soft soils, organic materials,
exposed rock, unstable areas, and other important details. The person performing the field
reconnaissance work should be experienced in geological mapping and evaluations.
Where time is available, some geotechnical issues may benefit from an extended
period of instrumentation and monitoring to measure critical geotechnical parameters, such
as fluctuations of groundwater levels and, in the case of slope stability, the location and
shape of the failure surface. A properly conducted study of alignment options can
potentially result in significant cost savings, especially if there is flexibility given to the
designers to locate the new roadway and structures in the most geotechnically favorable
locations.
5. ROADWAY CENTERLINE CUT AND EMBANKMENT INVESTIGATIONS
Soil explorations are conducted along the proposed roadway alignment for the
purpose of defining the geotechnical properties of foundation materials. This information is
used to define the limits of potential Borrow materials or unsuitable foundation materials
that could contribute to settlement or slope stability problems. If poor materials are
encountered, the subsurface data can assist designers in developing remedial measures
and designing stable cut or fill slopes. This information also aides the designer of the
pavement section. Roadbed Design Engineers should be consulted to determine locations
where soil samples are needed for design of structural section.
Criteria for centerline investigations vary substantially, depending on the location of
the proposed roadway, the anticipated subsurface materials, and the type of roadway. It is
important that the Geotechnical Engineer visit the site to make sure that all portions of the
investigation are planned thoughtfully and are accomplishable so duplication of effort does
not occur. The overall investigation costs can be reduced significantly if, for example, the
information for a structure and the centerline can be obtained from a single boring.
In general, borings should be placed at 200- to 500-foot intervals along the
alignment, depending on whether the subsurface conditions are variable or uniform,
respectively. Borings could be located along centerline or staggered left and right of the
centerline, depending on the locations of maximum cuts and fills as well as the interpreted
geology. Borings may be spaced further apart if the project does not have significant
earthwork or structures and available information indicates the presence of uniform
subsurface conditions. Additional borings may be required to define the limits of any
undesirable materials or changes in soil stratification that could affect design and
construction.
In areas of highly variable soil conditions, additional borings should be included in
the transverse direction to determine the three-dimensional variability of subsurface
materials.
For roadway widening projects that provide additional lanes, borings should be
placed at the outer edge of the new lane alignment, which may require difficult mobilization
on existing slopes.
In areas of significant cut or fill, where stability analysis is anticipated, a minimum of
two borings should be placed at critical cross-sections to identify the stratigraphy within and
above the crest of cuts and beneath and beyond the toe of embankments. In situ testing
and instrumentation may be necessary to determine shear strength and groundwater levels
over time. Where slope stability is a concern, inclinometer instruments could be installed
during the design phase and used later as a baseline for monitoring slope stability during
construction.
In all cases, a minimum of three samples per mile, or three per project, whichever is
greater, should be obtained for each stratum encountered. Each of the samples
representing a particular stratum should be obtained from a different location, with sampling
locations spread out over each mile. Samples should be of adequate size to permit
classification, moisture content testing, gradation testing, R-Value testing, and Atterberg
limits tests. Undisturbed samples should be obtained for any anticipated strength,
consolidation, or other specialized testing needs.
Borings in areas of little or no grade change should extend to 5 to 10 feet below
grade, or drainage pipe or culvert invert level, whichever is deeper. In some cases,
including an occasional boring that extends 20 feet below grade is helpful. These deeper
borings assist to better define overall geology that could potentially affect design and
construction. Deeper borings also apply to projects with deep construction items, such as
proposed buried storm sewer systems. Borings typically should include Standard
Penetration Tests (SPT).
In areas of cuts, borings should extend 5 to 10 feet below the proposed ditch grade.
If potentially unstable conditions or materials are encountered at this depth, borings should
be extended an additional 10 feet. SPT samples, cuttings samples, undisturbed samples
and core samples should be obtained as appropriate for testing and analyses. Strength
testing (triaxial tests with pore pressure measurements), consolidation testing, and
groundwater instrumentation should be considered to develop parameters for stability and
settlement analysis. Some borings for cut slopes in residual soils and slide debris may be
drilled to obtain a continuous soil profile for detailed examination of potential weak zones.
Materials to be excavated should be evaluated for shrink/swell and for use (R-Value
testing) on either the project or disposal. Suitable disposal sites may need to be identified.
In areas of fill, borings should extend until all unsuitable materials have been
penetrated and the predicted stress from the foundation loading is less than 10 percent of
the original overburden pressure.
Additional borings may be included to investigate the conditions at the toe of the
proposed fill or for in situ tests or speed-drilled instruments installations. A speed-drilled
instruments installation boring is a hole that is drilled solely for installing a geotechnical
instrument such as vibrating wire piezometer. Although most borings are sampled while
being drilled, a speed drilled boring is an unsampled boring used where the stratigraphy is
already defined. Because no sampling occurs, the boring is completed much quicker.
Probe holes for tests, such as the cone penetrometer, may also be included as needed.
5.1 Embankments Over Soft Ground
Investigations for embankments that will be constructed over soft ground comprised
of muck, peat, or other very weak deposits, should include deeper and/or additional borings
to determine the limits of the deposit, as necessary, in order to properly analyze and
mitigate their effects on embankment settlement and stability. SPT, cuttings, and
undisturbed samples should be retrieved in order to classify materials and determine
strength and consolidation properties. Some very soft and highly organic materials should
be tested in situ with vane shear equipment because retrieving undisturbed samples could
be very difficult, and testing disturbed samples typically produces unreliable results. If time
allows, groundwater instruments should be installed and monitored to determine how
groundwater levels fluctuate throughout the year.
5.2 Bridge Approach Embankments
At least one boring should be taken at the point of highest fill. Usually borings taken
for bridge abutments are adequate as long as appropriate samples are obtained for both
structure and embankment applications. If settlement or stability problems are anticipated,
as may occur due to the height of the proposed embankment and/or the presence of poor
foundation soils, additional borings should be taken in the longitudinal and transverse
directions. The first of these borings should be no more than 15 feet from the abutment.
The remaining borings should be placed at 100-foot intervals until the height of the fill is
considered insignificant. Borings should be completed at the toe of the proposed
embankment slopes and at the embankment centerline.
Borings should be continued to a depth at which the proposed stress increase due to
the new embankment load is less than 10 percent of the original overburden pressure and
unsuitable founding materials have been penetrated.
5.3 Rock Slopes
Some road alignments may require cut slopes in rock. The geotechnical
investigation should be planned to provide the data and geologic interpretations for the
analysis and design of stable rock cuts and an evaluation of the constructability of the
proposed cuts. A geologic reconnaissance is essential to map geologic conditions and rock
structure, which includes office studies of the geology and aerial photographs, quadrangle
maps, etc., as well as the field work. The Rockfall Hazard Rating (RHRS) database should
be researched for information concerning past and potential rockfall hazards. If rock slopes
currently exist on the project, they should be examined for rockfall evidence and unstable
rock structure features. Discontinuities and, to a lesser extent, the intact rock strength
control rock slope stability at various cut slope angles. Stereonet projections of structural
discontinuities (including rock fractures, joints, bedding planes, faults, foliations, etc.) are an
extremely useful technique for evaluating the potential for various types of rock slope
instabilities.
Subsurface investigations should utilize rock-coring methods where appropriate,
using double or triple core barrels to obtain a high percentage of core recovery. The core
should be carefully logged, noting all discontinuities and unique features and determining
the Rock Quality Designations (RQD). Consider whether to obtain oriented core or utilize
in-borehole photography to determine the alignment of rock structure. Borings should

extend a minimum of 15 feet below the planned excavation depths. Deeper borings may be
required if potentially unstable strata are encountered near the base of the proposed cuts.
Geotechnical parameters for rock include the orientation of discontinuities, the
spatial relationship between proposed cut slopes and mapped discontinuities and the
resistance to movement (shear strength) along the discontinuities, as well as the overall
rock strength and hardness. The strength along discontinuities can be estimated, or
specialized tests could be performed. Discontinuity strength is rarely the same in all
directions, since even small variations along the joint surface (steps or undulations), known
as asperities, strongly influence the potential for sliding along that surface. This affect is
most pronounced when the asperities are oriented perpendicularly to the direction of
sliding. Since it is difficult to reproduce field conditions in the laboratory for some
applications, in situ direct shear tests may be needed. Intact rock strength/hardness can be
estimated by point load tests, or determined by performing unconfined compression tests.
Groundwater conditions could affect slope design and stability, and therefore should be
measured in boreholes. Critical applications may require observation wells or piezometers.
Springs and perched water zones should also be mapped.
6. LANDSLIDE INVESTIGATIONS
Landslide areas should have been detected in the early stages of the project by
means of research and reconnaissance. It is important to conduct a thorough geologic
reconnaissance in terrain that might include landslides; otherwise, a landslide may go
undetected and not investigated during the field exploration and drilling phases. One
landslide reference is the TRB publication on Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation,
Special Report 247.
To design a landslide remediation, the size and depth of the slide must be known.
Inclinometers and piezometers should be installed to accurately define the depth of
movement and existing piezometric levels. When monitored over several months or years,
this instrumentation can be very valuable in determining the behavior of the landslide and
the relationship between periods of active slide movement and seasonal groundwater
levels.
As a minimum, two instrumented borings should be drilled along the cross-section
(axis of movement) of the slide. Larger slides will usually require four or more borings to
adequately define the failure shear zone. Borings should extend through the full depth of
landslide material, terminating at least 15 feet into underlying stable material. Generally, the
boring depths for at least one or two borings should be made even deeper to ensure that
an accurate interpretation of the depth of the failure was made and to identify any
underlying zones of weakness that could affect the mitigation design. Shallow slides
(approximately less than 20 feet deep) can sometimes be effectively evaluated using test
pits or trenches, which can expose and allow positive identification of the failure shear
zone, its shape and inclination.

Monitoring slide movement can be augmented with a line of survey hubs, referred to
as a tagline. The hubs should be placed along the axis of the slide and extend beyond the
interpreted limits of movement. A cross line, perpendicular to the slide axis, can also be
used. The hubs should be surveyed on a regular basis. Movements should be recorded in
the X, Y and Z directions. The results can help define the type of slide, the rate of
movement, changes in the slide limits, and areas of greatest activity. The vector sums of
the X, Y, and Z movements can be plotted and used to help model the actual shape of the
failure surface.
Piezometer instrumentation should be designed to accurately record specific
groundwater heads that act on the failure shear zone and within the slide mass. It is
preferable that several piezometers be installed at different depths to accurately model the
groundwater conditions. It is common for the crushing and grinding of materials along the
failure zone to create a less permeable zone (aquitard), which can lead to the buildup of
artesian water pressure acting on the failure surface. This can dramatically decrease
stability. A piezometer should be installed in that zone to determine if this condition is
present.
Placement of piezometers at specific target areas demands an understanding of the
slide geometry, which may require a second mobilization once the inclinometers have
shown the actual depth of movement. Simply increasing the depth range covered by the
slotted portion of an observation well will not provide good results. In fact, the water level
readings will tend to be ambiguous and unusable. This can be avoided if the slotted zone is
more targeted and controlled by appropriate seals or if vibrating wire piezometers are used.
The benefit of vibrating wire piezometers is that the lag time in response to water level
changes is very small and continuous readings can be recorded with a data logger to show
groundwater spikes that otherwise might be missed due to their short duration.
Sampling in landslide areas often do not follow standard procedures because of the
difficulty of identifying shear zones and need of unique types of strength and correlation
testing. Often, continuous sampling is desirable to locate the slide shear zone and to obtain
ample soils for testing. Undisturbed samples are obtained for shear strength testing (such
as triaxial undrained peak shear tests on overburden materials and repeated direct shear
tests on shear zone material). If undisturbed samples are not possible to obtain from the
suspected shear zones, disturbed samples could be remolded in the laboratory prior to
testing.
7. BORROW AREA INVESTIGATIONS
Test pits, trenches, and various types of borings can be used for exploration of
potential Borrow areas. Samples should be obtained to permit classification, gradation, R-
value, compaction, and chemical testing of each material type, as applicable. The extent of
the exploration will depend on the size of the Borrow area, the amount of Borrow needed,
and the amount of sample required to complete a full suite of specific tests.

8. STRUCTURE INVESTIGATIONS
The purpose of structure borings is to provide sufficient information about the
subsurface materials to design the structure foundations and to provide construction-
related recommendations. All structure borings should include Standard Penetration
Testing (SPT) at regular intervals unless other sampling methods and/or testing are being
performed. Undisturbed samples are often obtained to determine shear strengths in
addition to material properties (such as moisture contents, unit weight, Atterberg limits,
gradation). The borings can sometimes be supplemented with in situ test borings, such as
the pressuremeter if field-developed p-y curves are needed for lateral pile analysis. Usually
the groundwater level encountered during drilling will suffice for subsequent analysis.
8.1 Bridges
Complete at least one borehole at each pier or abutment location. The hole pattern
should be staggered so that borings occur at the opposite ends of adjacent piers. Wide pier
foundations or abutments that are over 100 feet wide transverse to centerline (roadway
width) may require at least two borings, preferably at the extremities of the proposed
substructure. For widening of existing structures, the total number of borings may be
reduced, depending on the available information for the existing structure. Approximate
locations of piers and abutments may be deduced based on experience and a preliminary
design concept for the structure when exact support locations are unknown. Borings
should be placed at no more than 100-foot intervals along the alignment when exact or
approximate support locations cannot be determined.
Borings should be continued to a depth that the predicted stress from the foundation
and approach embankment loading is less than 10 percent of the original overburden
pressure, or until all unsuitable foundation materials have been penetrated and the
underlying competent bearing zone penetrated a minimum distance (i.e., 10 to 15 feet into
competent bedrock). This depth should be increased, when existence of boulders are
possible, to confirm that the rock is bedrock and not a large boulder. If no data is available
for predicting the foundation stress, extend the boring until at least 20 feet of bedrock or
other competent bearing material (N-values of 50 or greater) is encountered. Additionally,
borings should be performed to a depth that the design takes into account scour and lateral
loading requirements.
When using the Standard Penetration Test, SPT split-spoon samples should be
recovered continuously within the upper 20 feet of any boring, and then every five feet
down to 60 feet. For deep foundations, an additional zone of sampling every ten feet from
60 feet deep to 100 feet deep is included where SPT samples can be recovered.
When cohesive soils are encountered, undisturbed samples should be obtained at 5-
foot intervals in at least one boring. Undisturbed samples should be obtained from more
than one boring where possible. In situ vane shear tests are recommended where soft
clay, peat or other soft or highly organic materials are encountered. Representative
undisturbed samples should be obtained in these materials for index testing and possible
laboratory shear strength testing. Chemical tests are required on all new bridge projects. As
a minimum, one test should be conducted on each soil that will be in contact with structural
steel elements.
When rock is encountered, successive core runs should be made with the objective
of obtaining the best possible core recovery. The RQD should be determined from rock
cor es.SPT’ s should be performed between core runs in soft rock, typically at 5-foot
intervals.
In the case of a water crossing, samples of streambed materials and each
underlying stratum should be obtained for determination of the median particle diameter,
D50, for scour analysis. In addition, samples should be obtained to determine Plasticity
Index (PI) and particle size distribution for design of filter fabrics.
8.2 Earth Retaining Walls
The following are general investigation requirements for retaining wall design:
 At retaining wall locations, borings should be taken at a maximum interval of one per
100 feet of the wall with a minimum of 2 borings and as close to the wall alignment
as possible.
 Retaining structures with tiebacks or soil nails will need an additional row of borings
where the anchor load zone is anticipated.
 Borings should be continued to depths that all unsuitable founding materials are
penetrated, and the proposed stress increase due to the retaining wall structure will
be less than 10 percent of the original overburden pressure.
 Sampling and in situ testing criteria are the same as for bridges.
8.3 Buildings
In general, one boring should be made at each corner and one in the center. This
may be reduced for small buildings. For large buildings or highly variable site conditions,
one boring should be taken at each support location. Refer to building foundation texts for
additional guidance in planning the geotechnical investigation.
8.4 Drainage Structures (Culverts)
Borings should be taken at proposed locations of box culverts. Trenches or hand
augured borings may suffice for smaller structures. For box culverts, borings should extend
a minimum of 15 feet below the bottom of the culvert, or until 5 feet of firm, competent
material is encountered, whichever is deeper. For smaller structures, exploration holes
should extend at least 5 feet below the bottom of the structure, or until 5 feet of firm,
competent material is encountered, whichever is deeper. Chemical testing must be
performed for each site. Material from each stratum above the invert elevation should be
tested. For drainage systems parallel to roadway alignments, tests should be performed at
1,500-foot intervals along the alignment.

8.5 Large Load Light and Sign Structures

One boring should be made at each designated location. Borings should extend
approximately 40 feet into suitable soil, or 5 feet into competent rock. Deeper borings may
be required for cases with higher torsional loads, or if large boulders are anticipated. Other
criteria are the same as for bridges.
8.6 Tunnels
Due to the extreme variability of conditions under which tunnels are constructed,
investigation criteria for tunnels should be established for each project on an individual
basis. Refer to tunneling texts for detailed guidance, or consult with an expert in tunneling.
8.7 Detention Basins
Test pits and trenches typically are adequate for the investigation of proposed
detention basins. Samples should be obtained to permit classification, gradation, Plasticity
Index, unit weight, moisture content, R-value, compaction, permeability test, and/or
chemical testing of each material type, as applicable. The extent of the exploration will
depend on the size of the detention basin area. Field tests may include infiltration tests, as
applicable.

9. FIGURES
5-1: Guidelines for Boring Layout
Geotechnical Features Boring Layout
Bridge Foundations For piers or abutments less than 100 feet wide, provide a minimum of
one boring with the hole pattern staggered so that borings occur at the
opposite ends of adjacent piers.
For piers or abutments over 100 feet wide, provide a minimum of two
borings, one at each end of the pier or abutment.
Additional borings should be provided in areas of erratic subsurface
conditions.
Retaining Walls A minimum of two borings should be performed for each retaining wall.
For retaining walls more than 100 feet in length, the spacing between
borings should be no greater than 200 feet.
Retaining structures with tiebacks or soil nails will need an additional
row of borings where the anchor load zone is anticipated to estimate
lateral loads and anchorage capacities.
Include additional borings outboard of the wall line to define conditions
at the toe of the wall as needed.
Roadways The spacing of borings along the roadway alignment generally should
not exceed 200 to 500 feet.
The selected spacing and location of the borings should be based on
the geologic complexity and soil/rock strata continuity in the project
area, with the objective of defining the vertical and horizontal
boundaries of distinct soil and rock units within the project limits.
Cuts A minimum of one boring should be performed for each cut slope. For
longer cuts, the spacing between borings along the length of the cut
should generally be between 200 and 400 feet, as needed, based on
the complexity of the geology.
At critical locations and high cuts, provide a minimum of two borings in
the transverse direction to model the existing geological conditions for
stability analyses.
Embankments Use criteria presented above for cuts.
Culverts A minimum of one boring at each major culvert. Additional borings
should be provided for long culverts or in areas of erratic subsurface
conditions.
Note: This table is based on the Subsurface Investigations Manual (FHWA/NHI 01-031). Also
see FHWA Geotechnical Checklist and Guidelines (FHWA-ED-88-053).

5-2: Minimum Requirements for Boring Depth

Areas of Investigation Recommended Boring Depth
Bridge Foundations* All borings should be extended below the estimated scour depth.
Spread Footings For isolated footings of breadth Lf and width 2Bf, where Lf 2Bf,
borings should extend a minimum of two footing widths below the
bearing level.
For isolated footings where Lf 5Bf, borings should extend a minimum of
four footing widths below the bearing level.
For 2Bf Lf 5Bf, the minimum boring length should be determined by
linear interpolation between depths of 2Bf and 5Bf below the bearing
level.
Deep Foundations In soil, borings should extend below the anticipated pile or shaft tip
elevation a minimum of 20 feet, or a minimum of two times the maximum
pile group dimension, whichever is deeper.
For piles bearing on rock, a minimum of 10 to 15 feet of rock core should
be obtained at each boring location to verify that the boring has not
terminated on a boulder.
For shafts supported on or extending into rock, a minimum of 10 to 15
feet of rock core, or a length of rock core equal to at least three times the
shaft diameter for isolated shafts or two times the maximum shaft group
dimension, whichever is greater, should be extended below the
anticipated shaft tip elevation to determine the physical characteristics of
rock within the zone of foundation influence.
Retaining Walls Extend borings to depth below final ground line between 0.75 and 1.5
times the height of the wall or to where the net increase in soil stress is
less than 10% of the existing effective stress in the soil at that depth.
Where stratification indicates possible deep stability or settlement
problem, borings should extend to hard stratum.
For deep foundations, use the criteria presented above for bridge
foundations.
Roadways (minimal Extend borings a minimum of 10 feet below the proposed subgrade
grading) level.
Cuts Boring should extend a minimum of 15 feet below the anticipated depth
of the cut at the ditch line. Boring depths should be increased in
locations where base stability is a concern due to the presence of soft
soils or weak zones, or in locations where the base of the cut is below
groundwater level to determine the depth of the underlying pervious
strata.
Embankments Extend borings a minimum depth equal to twice the embankment height,
unless a hard stratum is encountered above this depth. Where soft
strata are encountered which may present stability or settlement
concerns, the borings should extend to hard material.
Culverts Use criteria presented above for embankments.
Note: This table is based on the Subsurface Investigations Manual (FHWA/NHI). Also see FHWA
Geotechnical Checklist and Guidelines (FHWA-ED-88-053). Requirements for highway bridges are based
on AASHTO Standard Specifications for Design of Highway Bridges.

5-3: Guideline Sampling and Testing Criteria
Sand-Gravel Soils SPT (split-spoon) samples should be taken at 5-foot intervals or at significant changes in soil strata.
Continuous SPT samples are recommended in the top 15 feet of borings made at locations where spread footings may be placed in natural soils.
SPT jar or bag samples should be sent to lab for classification testing and verification of field visual soil identification.
Rock Continuous cores should be obtained in rock or shales using double or triple tube cone barrels.
In structural foundation investigations, core a minimum of 10 feet into rock to insure it is bedrock and not a boulder.
Percent core recovery and RQD value should be determined in field or lab for each core run and recorded on boring log.
Silt-Clay Soils SPT and undisturbedthin wall tube samples should be taken at 5-foot intervals or at significant changes in strata. A sufficient number of samples, suitable for the types of
testing intended, should be obtained within each soil layer.
Take alternate SPT and tube samples in same boring or take tube samples in separate undisturbed boring.
SPT jar or bag samples should be sent to lab for classification testing and verification of field visual soil identification.
Tube samples should be sent to the lab for consolidation testing (for settlement analysis) and strength testing (for slope stability and foundation bearing capacity analysis).
Field vane shear testing is recommended to obtain in situ shear strength of soft clay, silt, and well-rotted peat.
Ground Water Water level encountered during drilling, at completion of boring, and at 24 hours after completion of boring should be recorded on boring log.
In low permeability soils, such as silts and clays, a false indication of the water level may be obtained when water is used for drilling fluid and adequate time is not permitted
after hole completion for the water level to stabilize (more than one week may be required). In such soils a plastic pipe water observation well should be installed to allow
monitoring of the water level over a period of time.
Seasonal fluctuation of water table should be determined where fluctuation will have significant impact on design or construction (e.g. Borrow source, footing excavation,
excavation of toe of landslide, etc.).
Zones of artesian water and seepage should be measured and recorded.
Soil Borrow
Sources Exploration equipment that will allow direct observation and sampling of the subsurface soil layers is most desirable for material site investigations. Equipment consisting of
backhoes, dozers, or large diameter augers is preferred for exploration above the water table. Below the water table, borings can be used. SPT samples should be taken at
5-foot intervals or at significant changes in strata. Samples should be sent to lab for classification testing to verify field visual identification. Groundwater levels should be
recorded. Piezometers or observation wells should be installed to monitor water levels where significant seasonal fluctuation is anticipated.
Quarry Sites
Rock coring should be used to explore new quarry sites. Use of double or triple tube core barrels is recommended to maximize core recovery. For riprap source, spacing of
fractures should be carefully measured to allow assessment of rock sizes that can be produced by blasting. For aggregate source, the amount and type of joint infilling should
be carefully noted If assessment is made on the basis of an exiting quarry site face, it may be necessary to core or use geophysical techniques to verify that the nature of the
rock does not change behind the face or at depth. Core samples should be sent to lab for rock quality tests to determine suitability for riprap or aggregates.
Note: This Table is based on FHWA Geotechnical Checklist and Guidelines (FHWA-ED-88-053).

10. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
Manual
onSubsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions,
”1988
ASCE,“
Subsur faceI nvesti
gationf orDesi gnandConst
ruc
ti
onofBui
l
dings,
”Manualand
Report on Engineering Practice No. 56, 1976
Depar
tmentoft heNavy ,“ Soil
sMechani csDesi
gnManual
,”7.
1,NAVFAC DM-7.1, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command, 1986
FHWA,“
Adv
anc
edCour
seonSl
opeSt
abi
l
it
y,”Vol
.1,FHWA- SA-94, 1994
FHWA,“
Checkl
istand Gui
deli
nesf
orReview ofGeot echni
calRepor
tsand Pr
eli
minar
y
Pl
ansandSpeci
fi
cati
ons,
”FHWA-PD-97-002, 1985
FHWA,“
Dri
l
ledShaf
tsf
orBr
idgeFoundat
ions
,”FHWA-RD-92-004, 1993
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
cal
Engi
neer
ingNot
ebook
,”(
Sect
ionsaddedwhenneeded)
FHWA,“
Soi
l
sandFoundat
i
onsWor
kshopManual
,”2ndEdi
ti
on,FHWAHI
-88-009, 1993
FHWA,“
Subsur
fac
eInv
est
igat
ions,
”NHI Course No. 132031, FHWA-HI-97-021, 1997
FHWA,“
Subs urf
aceInv esti
gations –Geot
echnicalChar act
eri
zat
ion,
”Ref
erenceManualf
or
NHI Course No. 132031, FHWA-NHI-01-031, 2002
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
calI
nst
rument
ati
on,
”FHWA-HI-98-034, 1998
FHWA,“ManualonDesignandConst
ruct
ionofDr
ivenPi
l
eFoundat
i
ons,
”FHWA-HI-97-013
and 014, 1996
FHWA, “
Rock Sl
opes: Desi
gn, Excavat
ion, Stabi
l
izat
ion, Tur
ner
-Fairbank Highway
Resear
chCent
er,
”FHWA-TS-89-045. 1989
NCHRP,“
RecommendedGuidel
i
nesforSeal
ingGeot
echni
calExplorat
oryHol
es,Nat
i
onal
Cooper
ati
veHi
ghwayResear
chProgr
am,”NCHRPReport 378.
Peck,R.B.
,Hanson,W.
E.,& Thor
nbur
n,T.
H.,“
Foundat
ionEngi
neer
ing,
”2ndEd.
,Wi
l
ey,
1974.
Ter
zaghi,K,and Pec
k,R.
B.,“
Soi
lMec
hani
csi
n Engi
neer
ing Pr
act
ice,
”2ndEd.
,Wi
l
ey,
1967
TRB,“
Landsl
i
des:I
nvest
igat
ionandMi
ti
gat
ion,
”Speci
alReport 247, 1996

GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
CHAPTER 6
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES 6-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................ 1
2. REVIEW OF PROJECT REQUIREMENTS.......................................................... 1
3. OFFICE REVIEW OF AVAILABLE DATA ............................................................ 2
3.1 Topographic Maps................................................................................................ 2
3.2 Aerial Photographs ............................................................................................... 2
3.3 Geological Maps and Reports .............................................................................. 2
3.4 Soil Surveys.......................................................................................................... 3
3.5 Adjacent Projects ................................................................................................. 3
3.6 Rockfall Hazard Rating System ............................................................................ 3
3.7 Hydrogeological Surveys and Well Logs .............................................................. 3
3.8 Remote Sensing Data .......................................................................................... 3
4. FIELD RECONNAISSANCE................................................................................. 4
5. FIELD MAPPING AND MEASUREMENTS OF ROCK DISCONTINUITIES ........ 5
6. FIELD-DEVELOPED CROSS-SECTIONS ........................................................... 6
7. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION METHODS........................................................ 6
7.1 Test Pits and Trenches ........................................................................................ 7
7.2 Hand Auger Probes .............................................................................................. 7
7.3 Exploration Drilling Techniques ............................................................................ 7
7.3.1 Solid Flight Auger Borings .................................................................................... 8
7.3.2 Hollow-Stem Auger Borings ................................................................................. 8
7.3.3 Wash Borings ....................................................................................................... 8
7.3.4 Mud Rotary Drilling ............................................................................................... 9
7.3.5 Air Drilling ............................................................................................................. 9
7.3.6 Percussion Drilling................................................................................................ 9
7.3.7 Coring................................................................................................................... 9
7.4 Soundings ............................................................................................................ 9
7.5 Geophysical Methods ......................................................................................... 10
7.5.1 Seismic Refraction and Reflection...................................................................... 10
7.5.2 Electrical Resistivity............................................................................................ 11
7.6 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) ...................................................................... 11
7.7 Nondestructive Testing - Evaluation of Existing Structures ................................ 11
8. SOIL SAMPLING................................................................................................ 11
8.1 Disturbed Sampling ............................................................................................ 12
8.1.1 Bag (Bulk) Samples............................................................................................ 12
8.1.2 Cuttings Samples ............................................................................................... 12
8.1.3 Split Spoon Sampler........................................................................................... 12
8.1.4 California Modified Sampler ............................................................................... 13
8.2 Undisturbed Block Sampling .............................................................................. 13
8.3 Undisturbed Sampling Using Thin Wall Samplers.............................................. 14
8.3.1 Shelby Tube Sampler......................................................................................... 14
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES 6-ii
8.3.2 Stationary Piston Sampler .................................................................................. 14

8.3.3 Floating Piston Sampler ..................................................................................... 15
8.3.4 Retractable Piston Sampler................................................................................ 15
8.3.5 Hydraulic (Osterberg) Piston Sampler ................................................................ 15
8.4 Partially Disturbed Sampling .............................................................................. 15
8.4.1 Denison Sampler................................................................................................ 15
8.4.2 Pitcher Sampler.................................................................................................. 15
8.4.3 Sprague & Henwood Sampler ............................................................................ 16
9. ROCK SAMPLING.............................................................................................. 16
9.1 Double Tube Core Barrel.................................................................................... 16
9.2 Triple Tube Core Barrel ...................................................................................... 16
9.3 Oriented Core ..................................................................................................... 17
9.4 Borehole Television Camera .............................................................................. 17
10. EXPLORATION DIFFICULTIES......................................................................... 17
10.1 Improper Drilling Techniques.............................................................................. 17
10.2 Sample Recovery ............................................................................................... 18
10.3 Sample Disturbance ........................................................................................... 19
10.4 Obstructions ....................................................................................................... 19
10.5 Problematic Geologic Conditions ....................................................................... 19
10.6 Groundwater Conditions..................................................................................... 20
10.7 Contaminated Sites ............................................................................................ 20
11. INSTRUMENTATION ......................................................................................... 21
12. BOREHOLE SEALING/BACKFILLING............................................................... 21
13. FIELD EXPLORATION LOGS............................................................................ 22
14. PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD.............................................................................. 22
15. SAMPLE PRESERVATION AND SHIPPING ..................................................... 22
16. GUIDELINES FOR INSPECTIONS OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS........ 23
17. EQUIPMENT FOR FIELD EXPLORATIONS...................................................... 24
18. SAFETY GUIDELINES....................................................................................... 25
19. SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS .............................................................. 26
20. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 27
6-1: Core Sizes (from Boart Longyear, 2000)..................................................... 27
21. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 28

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES 6-1
1. PURPOSE
Due to the varying complexity of projects and subsurface conditions, it is difficult to
establish a rigid format to be followed in conducting geotechnical investigations. However,
there are fundamental required data that should be obtained and basic steps that should be
followed for any project investigation. The collected field data and assessments are the basis
for all subsequent engineering decisions and, as such, are of paramount importance to the
design and success of a project. By outlining and describing these requirements and steps, it
will be possible to standardize procedures and considerably reduce time and expense that
would be required to return to the project site and obtain important information not obtained
during the initial investigation. The following are fundamental required data that should be
obtained during a geotechnical investigation:
 Identification and delineation of existing soil and rock strata
 Condition and performance of existing transportation structures
 Qualitative and quantitative information on the character and engineering properties of
the soil and rock strata
 Groundwater levels and environmental concerns
 Slope stability condition, faults and other geologic hazards or constraints
The Manual for the NHI course on Subsurface Investigations (No. 132031, 2001) and
the AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations (1988) provide extensive information on
conducting a geotechnical and subsurface investigation.
2. REVIEW OF PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

The first step in performing a geotechnical investigation is a thorough review of the
project requirements. It is important that geotechnical investigations be carefully planned, and
coordinated between those who will obtain the field data and the end-users of the information.
The Geotechnical Engineer should thoroughly understand the following project details and
limitations before planning and performing the geotechnical investigation:
 Project location and size
 Project type (realignment, improvement, bridge, embankment, rehabilitation, etc.)
 Project criteria (alignment, approximate structure locations, approximate structure
loads, approximate bridge span lengths and pier locations, cut and fill area locations,
etc.)
 Project constraints (ROW, environmental and biological assessments, permitting, etc.)
 Project design and construction schedules and budgets
Depending on the stage of project development, the Geotechnical Engineer should
have access to typical section, plan and profile sheets, and cross sections with a template for
the proposed roadway showing cuts and fills. This project specific data aids the Geotechnical
Engineer in planning the investigation to meet the project requirements. One goal of properly

planning a geotechnical investigation is to minimize exploration costs and the number of site
visits needed to obtain vital design information. Prior to performing any fieldwork, the
Geotechnical Engineer needs to initiate a request to obtain Entry Permits to the site through
the Right of Way Division and be prepared to address any environmental concerns or
limitations associated with the project. Following the identification of proposed exploration
areas, utility locations and clearances need to be obtained.
3. OFFICE REVIEW OF AVAILABLE DATA

After gaining a thorough understanding of the project requirements, all relevant
available information on the project site should be collected and reviewed. Available data may
consist of reports, maps, journal articles, aerial photographs, previous as built Plans, or even
personal communications with individuals with local knowledge. Review of this information can
provide a basis for understanding the geology, topography, and geomorphology of the area.
An initial understanding of the engineering properties of subsurface materials and groundwater
characteristics can often be obtained from this available data, which can help in developing the
investigation program.
3.1 Topographic Maps

These maps portray physical features, configuration and elevation of the ground
surface, and surface water features. Interpretations of these maps can aid the Geotechnical
Engineer in determining: changes in relief and slope angles, landform and drainage
characteristics, identification of potential landslide terrain, accessibility for field equipment, and
possible problem areas. These maps are prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and
are readily available. Topographic maps are sometimes prepared on a larger scale by the
Department during early planning phases of a project. In addition, a review of existing data
can yield information on the availability of nearby benchmarks that could be used in the field
as control points for locating exploration borings.
3.2 Aerial Photographs

Aerial photographs are available from the Department and other sources. They are
valuable in planning the site reconnaissance and, depending on the age of the photographs,
show manmade structures, excavations, or fills that affect accessibility and the planned depth
of exploration. Historical photographs can also provide a better understanding of how the
project site has been modified throughout the years.
3.3 Geological Maps and Reports

Considerable information on the geological conditions of an area can be obtained from
geological maps and reports. These reports and maps show the location and relative position
of the different geological strata and present information on the characteristics of these
materials. This data can be used directly to evaluate the rock conditions to be expected and
indirectly to estimate possible soil conditions, since the parent material is one of the factors

controlling soil types. Geological maps and reports can be obtained from the USGS, Nevada
Geological Survey, Nevada Bureau of Mines, university libraries, the Geotechnical Section,
and other sources.
3.4 Soil Surveys

Soil surveys are compiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (Soil Conservation
Service) usually in the form of county soils maps. These surveys can provide valuable data on
surface soils including mineralogical composition, grain size distribution, and depth to rock,
water table information, drainage characteristics, geologic origin, and presence of organic
deposits.
3.5 Adjacent Projects

Data may be available on nearby projects from the Department, or from county or city
governments. The Department may have soils data on file from State projects, as built
drawings and/or pile driving records for existing structures. Existing boring information and
well drilling logs, if available, can contain relevant information. This data can be useful in
setting preliminary boring locations and depths and in predicting problem areas. Maintenance
records for nearby roadways and structures can provide insight into subsurface conditions.
For example, indications of differential settlement or slope stability problems can provide the
Geotechnical Engineer with valuable information on the long-term characteristics of the site.
3.6 Rockfall Hazard Rating System

The Department ’
s Rockf allHaz ard Rat ing Sy st em ( RHRS)dat abase shoul d be
reviewed to identify rockfall concerns in or near a project site location. Information obtained
from this database provides the Geotechnical Engineer quantitative data in this area of project
development.
3.7 Hydrogeological Surveys and Well Logs

Hydrogeological surveys typically focus on the presence, depth, amount, and condition
of groundwater. These resources can aid the Geotechnical Engineer by giving some
indication about the presence and depth of groundwater in terms of its effect on construction
conditions and its control over shear strength of soil and rock masses. The availability of water
well logs produced by private drilling contractors that may be recorded by other State agencies
should also be researched. In addition to groundwater information, such logs can serve as
useful tools in providing general subsurface information.
3.8 Remote Sensing Data

Remote sensing data can effectively be used for large-scale regional interpretations of
geologic structure, regional lineaments, drainage patterns, general soil and rock
characteristics, and recognition of geologic hazards. Remote sensing methods, including such
techniques as Landsat and Lidar, can be used to identify and evaluate topographic,

bathymetric, and surface features. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Manual
EM-1110-1-1804 and the AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations (1988) provide a
more detailed discussion on the types and limitations of remote sensing methods. Remote
sensing techniques generally have limited value for site-specific studies; however, they can be
very useful for a regional or large-scale setting. The Geotechnical Engineer needs to be
familiar with these methods, as well as their limitations and capabilities to determine if they are
applicable for their project.
4. FIELD RECONNAISSANCE
It is necessary for the Geotechnical Engineer to perform a field reconnaissance to
develop an appreciation of the topographic, geologic and geotechnical concerns at the project
site and become knowledgeable of access and working conditions. A reconnaissance should
be performed only after an understanding of the project requirements has been reached, a
review of the existing data has been completed, and applicable right-of-entry permit(s) have
been obtained. The Geotechnical Engineer should perform the field reconnaissance with the
final objective of being able to brief the project team on the key issues that will influence
project design. Pertinent project information (project development documents) and other
conceptual information should be obtained from the Project Designer before performing the
site visit. As part of the reconnaissance, key site locations and conditions, and exploration
equipment access routes should be photographed. The following factors should be defined by
the field reconnaissance:
 Stratigraphy –Compare stratigraphy to information obtained from available data.
Subsurface explorations and laboratory testing will ultimately define the soil and rock
units.
 Key Outcrops –Delineate outcrops or exposures that warrant further investigation in
terms of structural mapping.
 Existing Slopes –Assess the stability factors of major slope-forming geologic units.
Natural slopes and any existing soil or rock slope failures should be evaluated and
documented. Cut slope angles and orientations should be measured and their relative
performance evaluated.
 Ground and Surficial Water –Estimate the general nature of surface water and
groundwater regimes at the project site. Develop concepts for future investigations.
 Geologic Constraints –Identify geologic conditions that may tend to adversely affect
project development plans (landslides, faults, flooding, erosion, etc.). Devise methods
of investigating the degree of potential impact.
 Explorations –Based on the information and the kinds of samples that may be
required, determine the type(s) of exploration that would best accomplish the project
needs.
 Drilling Logistics –Define the type, approximate locations and depths of geotechnical
borings. Determine approximate routes of access to each drilling location. Make note
of any feature that may affect the boring program, such as accessibility, structures,
overhead utilities, evidence of buried utilities, or property restrictions. Evaluate
potential water sources for use during drilling operations. Evaluate potential concerns
that may need to be addressed while planning an exploration program (permits,
overhead utilities, equipment security, private property, etc.). If possible, exploration
locations should be located with a Field Crew Supervisor. If this is not possible, a Field
Crew Supervisor should be consulted regarding the use of borehole location feasibility.
The Underground Services Alert (1-800-227-2600) (USADIG) must be called a
minimum of two working days (preferably four days) prior to conducting subsurface
explorations. It is desirable to review the proposed boring locations following utility
locations to determine if any borings need to be relocated to avoid buried utilities. The
presence of utilities may need to be rechecked for the adjusted boring locations.
 Environmental Considerations –Identify potential impacts the exploration program and
the project may have on: subsurface materials, landforms, and the surrounding area.
Determine if project areas are governed by special regulations or have protected status.
5. FIELD MAPPING AND MEASUREMENTS OF ROCK DISCONTINUITIES

Field mapping should begin by observing road cuts, drainage courses, and bank
exposures. A site plan or large-scale topographic map of the project area is essential for field
mapping. The main objective of these observations is to confirm the general types of soil and
rock present. Note any features that may assist in the engineering analysis, such as the angle
and performance of existing slopes, or the stability of open excavations or trenches. The type
and condition of vegetation may give an indication of ground and surface water regimes, as
well as an indication of landslide or slope stability concerns.
In addition, structures should be inspected to ascertain their foundation performance
and their susceptibility to damage from construction-related ground vibrations or settlement
due to embankment placement.
For rock slopes, performance of slopes and the rockfall history are important indicators
of how a new slope in the same material will perform. More detailed rock structural mapping
entails observing and measuring lithologic contacts and the engineering characteristics and
orientation of rock discontinuities that make up the rock mass. The measurements are
typically made with a Brunton or Clar compass and consist of determining the strike and dip
(dip and dip direction) of rock discontinuities such as faults, joints, foliation, shear and bedding
planes, and contacts with other rock units. These measurements can be presented graphically
on a spherical projection such as an equal area stereonet. A more detailed discussion on rock
structur almappi ngi sgi veni nt hePar ticipant’
sManualf ort heNHIcour se“ RockSl opes”
(Module 5: No. 132035, 1998).
The AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations (1988) describes the procedures for
engineering geological mapping. It also provides suggestions for preparing geologic maps for
different applications, such as Project Area Geologic Maps, ROW Geologic Maps, File

Geologic Maps, Site Geologic Maps, and other special mapping.
6. FIELD-DEVELOPED CROSS-SECTIONS
Field-developed cross-sections are useful to nearly all types of site-specific
geotechnical investigations. Their use can be applied to excavation and placement of
materials; foundations and slopes; specific development of groundwater and aggregate
resources; and for the graphic portrayal and analysis of significant features related to slope
stability, seismicity, drainage, or other characteristics. Although these cross-sections lack the
precision of high order engineering surveys, preparing them provides an excellent opportunity
to observe the project area and apply the scientific method in resolving surface and
subsurface relationships and other field observations.
Standard cross-sections prepared by survey crews or taken from digital terrain models
do not depict the interpreted geotechnical relationships and other features that may prove very
important during the design process. Another advantage is that the sections are developed
and plotted during the reconnaissance, so discrepancies can be identified and resolved
immediately. This provides a high level of confidence when used later in the office.
The cross-section field gear typically includes a field notebook, cloth tape, hand
clinometer, calculator, and Brunton compass. Laser range finders can simplify measurements,
particularly for steep inaccessible slopes. Measurements include all slope breaks and other
identifiable, geological features such as landslide cracks and groundwater features. The
significance of each feature is described in the field notebook. Since slope breaks commonly
occur as the strength characteristics of the subsurface material changes, many times the slope
breaks represent contacts between different soil and/or rock units. Measurements of the
contact orientation (strike, dip and surface trace) are normally denoted where appropriate in
the field notebook.
The points comprising the cross-sect i
onshoul dbeplot
tedongr aphpaperas“ x”and“ y”
coordinates while in the field. The coordinates can be readily calculated from the slope
distance and angle between each point with the aid of a calculator. Include the interpretations
of the surface and subsurface materials and relationships on the section along with relevant
estimates of engineering parameters. The section should show the distribution of soil and rock
units, estimated location/elevation(s) of surface and subsurface water, and original ground
lines prior to any previous excavation, filling or slope movements. As these interpretations are
developed, plan any explorations that may be needed to confirm the subsurface model that will
be used in the analysis and design phase. For a reference of this field technique, refer to
USDA, Forest Service Publication EM-7170-13,1994,ent i
tl
ed“ SlopeSt abili
tyRef erence
Gui def orNat i
onalFor est
si ntheUni t edSt ates” ,Volume1.
7. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION METHODS

The information obtained from the steps discussed above is used to develop a
subsurface exploration program. Field exploration can commence when right-of-entry permit
and utility clearances have been issued. Many methods of field explorations exist. The
subsections below contain brief descriptions of the most common methods.
7.1 Test Pits and Trenches

Test pits and trenches are the simplest methods of observing subsurface soils. They
consist of excavations performed by hand, backhoe, or dozer. Hand excavations are often
performed with posthole diggers or shovels. They offer the advantages of speed and ready
access for sampling. They are severely hampered by limitations of depth; and they cannot be
used in soft or loose soils, boulders or below the water table.
Upon completion, the excavated test pit should be backfilled with the excavated
material or other suitable soil material. The backfilled material should be compacted to avoid
excessive future settlements. Tampers or rolling equipment may be used ot facilitate
compaction of the backfill. Excavations within existing roadways should be backfilled with
granular material and compacted in lifts to restore subgrade support and the pavement should
be properly patched. Any test pit or excavated area located near planned structure footings or
pavement must be surveyed to determine the precise location of the excavation. This
information must be presented in Construction Plans and Special Provisions to ensure the
area will be re-excavated and properly compacted to the extent required. In the case of test
pits excavated through existing pavements, the pavement should be properly patched. The
backfilled material should be compacted to avoid excessive future settlements. Tampers or
rolling equipment may be used to facilitate compaction of the backfill. Excavations within
existing roadways should be backfilled with granular material and compacted in lifts to restore
subgrade support.
Where pits are located in agricultural areas or other areas used to support plant growth,
the backhoe operator should be instructed to keep the topsoil (or at least the finer upper-layer
of the profile) and overburden separate from any gravel encountered in the pit. Upon
completion of the pit, the operator should backfill in a sequence (generally with the coarsest
material in the bottom of the pit) such that the backfilled pit area is reestablished to support
vegetation.
7.2 Hand Auger Probes

Hand auger probes are manually operated. Solid or hollow stem augers can be used to
quickly and cheaply observe shallow (less than 15 feet) subsurface conditions. They cause
minor disturbance to the ground surface, but are difficult to advance in rocky or dense
material.
7.3 Exploration Drilling Techniques

Borings are the most common method of exploration. They can be advanced using a
number of methods. Discussions of drilling methods are described in the following manuals:
1) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Soil Sampling Engineering Manual, 2) AASHTO, Manual on
Subsurface Explorations, and 3) FHWA, Subsurface Investigations, NHI Course No. 132031.
The most common methods are discussed below:
7.3.1 Solid Flight Auger Borings

Auger borings are advanced into the ground by rotating the auger while simultaneously
applying a downward force using either hydraulic or mechanical pressure. The auger is
advanced to the desired depth and then withdrawn. Samples of cuttings can be removed from
the auger; however, the depth of the sample can only be approximated. These samples are
disturbed and should be used only for material identification. This method is generally used to
establish shallow soil strata and water table elevations, or to advance to the desired stratum
before Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) or undisturbed sampling is performed. However, it
cannot be used effectively in soft or loose soils below the water table. In addition, this method
has limited capabilities in dense, rocky material where it may encounter refusal. See ASTM D
1452 (AASHTO T 203).
7.3.2 Hollow-Stem Auger Borings

A hollow-stem auger consists of a continuous flight auger surrounding a hollow drill
stem.Acent ral“plug”,or“ but terfly”bit
,att heendofadr illrodi susedt opr ev entsoi lfr
om
entering the hollow stem as the hole is advanced between samples. The hollow-stem auger is
advanced in a manner similar to Solid Flight Auger; however, removal of the hollow stem auger
isnotnec essar yf orsampl ing. The“ pl
ug” ,or“ butterfly”bi t
,i sremov edand samples are
obtained through the hollow drill stem, which acts like a casing to hold the hole open. This
increases usage of hollow-stem augers in soft and loose soil. Usually no drilling mud is
required, which could otherwise interfere with accurate groundwater level readings. In
addition, this method of drilling is extremely fast, cost effective, and requires little to no water.
Bel ow thewat ertable,remov aloft hecent er“ plug”,or“ but t
er fl
y”bit,candi st urbsandand
affect the validity of the SPT. One option that can be considered, when this condition
develops in leading to questionable SPT results, is to add water or drill mud to the inside of the
stem to create a reverse head of water and prevent heaving. Water should also be added to
thebor ehol ewhi leaugur i
ngcl ay eysoilstohel ppr ev ent“ baki ng”oft hemat er ialduet othe
heat generateddur i
ngr api dadv ancementoft heauger s. Thi s“baking”ofcl aysoi l
scan
adversely affect the permeability of the subsurface material. Another disadvantage of this
method is that refusal may prematurely be encountered in boulders or dense rocky soils. See
ASTM D 6151 (AASHTO T 251).
7.3.3 Wash Borings

In this method, the boring is advanced by a combination of the chopping action of a light
“f
isht
ail”bitandt hej ett
ingact ionofwat erf l
owi ngt hrought hebi t.Thi smet hodisusedonl y
when precise soil information is not required between sample intervals in loose, fine granular
material. Generally, casing is required to stabilize the walls of the borehole. Large quantities
of water are required for this method of drilling. Generally, there are better, more efficient
methods available to drill a borehole.

7.3.4 Mud Rotary Drilling

This method consists of using a rotary drill with rotating thick-walled, hollow, drill rods
usually attached to a tri-cone bit. Drilling mud is circulated from a mud tub, and then through
the drilling rods as the drill rod is advanced. The drilling mud lifts the drilling cuttings out of the
borehole while maintaining hole stability. The drill cuttings are screened and separated from
the drilling mud, which is then recirculated. To collect a sample, the drill rods and bit are
pulled out of the hole and are replaced with drill rods and the required sampling device. This
method is fast, and provides excellent sampling and in situ testing data due to minimal
disturbance to the soils at the bottom of the borehole prior to sampling. It is effective in all soil
types except for very gravelly material with cobbles and boulders. No information can be
reliably obtained about groundwater levels during the drilling operation, and the soil material
between sampling intervals is difficult to observe from the drilling mud return.
7.3.5 Air Drilling

This type of drilling uses compressed air to remove cuttings from the borehole as the
drill bit is advanced. Both rotary or percussion techniques can be utilized and either open hole
(rotary reverse circulation) or underreamed casing advancement (ODEX) can be used in the
drilling process. SPT samples can be obtained; however, the materials between samples are
highly disturbed. This type of drilling is generally fast, but expensive, and is most useful when
drilling deep holes in dense gravels and boulders where traditional Hollow Stem Auger and
Mud Rotary techniques cannot drill or sample.
7.3.6 Percussion Drilling

In this method, the drill bit advances by power chopping with a limited amount of water
in the borehole. Slurry must be periodically removed. The method is not recommended for
general exploration because of the difficulty in determining stratum changes and in obtaining
undisturbed samples. However, it is useful in penetrating materials not easily penetrated by
other methods, such as those containing boulders.
7.3.7 Coring
A sampling barrel is advanced through rock by the application of downward pressure
during rotation. Circulating water removes ground-up material from the hole, while also cooling
the bit. The rate of advance is controlled to obtain the maximum possible core recovery. A
continuous rock core sample is sometimes obtained from this drilling method. Core drilling is
the most widely used method to explore subsurface rock formations. It is preferable to
perform rock coring with as large a core barrel as possible in order to optimize core recovery
and minimize core damage due to drilling action. An HQ-Size System is recommended. Refer
to ASTM D 2113 (AASHTO T 225). A list of core barrel sizes is shown in Figure 5.1.
7.4 Soundings
A sounding is a method of exploration in which either static or dynamic force is used to
cause a rod tipped with a testing device to penetrate soils. This method can be useful to
determine the depth to harder strata or rock from the resistance to penetration. Cone
penetrometers are the most common equipment that uses the sounding method. The cone
penetrometer is utilized to obtain a measure of the soil resistance for the entire depth of the
penetration. It is generally used for fine-grained cohesionless and cohesive soils. The
disadvantage of this investigation method is that no samples are usually obtained. The
resistance to penetration can be measured and correlated to various soil properties.
7.5 Geophysical Methods

Geophysical exploration methods can sometimes provide general subsurface profile
information, such as the depth to bedrock, depth to groundwater, and the extent of
granular/rock areas, peat deposits, or subsurface anomalies. Geophysical methods of
exploration can provide a rapid and economical means of supplementing subsurface borings
and test pits. These exploration techniques are most useful for extending the interpretation of
subsurface conditions beyond what is determined from small diameter borings. A limitation of
these techniques is that no samples are recovered. It must be emphasized that geophysical
exploration methods might not be successful in all situations and should be carefully evaluated
to determine whether any are appropriate for the specific project requirements and site
conditions.
The reliability of geophysical exploration results can be limited by several factors,
including the presence of groundwater, nonhomogeneity of soil stratum thickness, gradation or
density, and the range of wave velocities within a particular stratum. Subsurface strata that
have similar physical properties can be difficult to distinguish with geophysical exploration
methods. Because of these limitations, for most design applications, geophysics should be
considered a secondary exploration method to drilling, and should generally be accompanied
by conventional borings. An experienced professional should interpret the field data. For
additional information, see ASTM D 6429 and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering
Manual EM-1110-1-1802.
Geophysical exploration techniques can be grouped into two categories: 1) methods
conducted from the ground surface, and 2) methods conducted in or between boreholes.
Passive methods include the use of gravimetric, electric, magnetic, thermometric, and nuclear
techniques. Active methods include the use of seismic, acoustic, electric, electromagnetic,
and nuclear techniques. Geophysical exploration methods commonly used for transportation
engineering purposes include:
7.5.1 Seismic Refraction and Reflection

These methods rely on the fact that shock waves typically travel at different velocities
through different materials. The times required for an induced shock wave to travel from the
energy source to vibration detectors (geophones) after being refracted or reflected by the
various subsurface materials are measured. The measured seismic velocities are used to
interpret certain material properties and the thickness of the units that comprise the subsurface
profile. Seismic refraction is limited to profiles in which velocities increase with depth. Seismic
investigations can be performed from the surface or from various depths within borings. For
cross-hole seismic techniques, see ASTM D 4428. For the seismic refraction method, see
ASTM D 5777.
7.5.2 Electrical Resistivity

This method is based on the differences in electrical conductivity between subsurface
strata. An electric current is passed through the ground between electrodes and the resistivity
of the subsurface materials is measured and correlated to material types. Several electrode
arrangements have been developed, with the Wenner (four equally spaced electrodes) being
the most commonly used in the United States, see ASTM D 6431.
7.6 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)

The velocity of electromagnetic radiation is dependent upon the material through which
it is traveling. GPR uses this principle to analyze the reflections of radar signals transmitted
into the ground by a low frequency antenna. Signals are continuously transmitted and
received as the antenna is towed across the area of interest. The interpreted results yield a
profile of the subsurface material interfaces. The depth of signal penetration is limited in finer
grained soils, see ASTM D 6432.
7.7 Nondestructive Testing - Evaluation of Existing Structures

Occasionally, the Geotechnical Engineer is involved in evaluating an existing structure
foundation for new loading conditions. This typically occurs as part of a seismic or scours
vulnerability assessment. An important part of the assessment is the type, depth, and
condition of the structure foundation. The sources for this information may be as-built
drawings, construction records, and Construction Plans for the structure. If no information is
available, the Geotechnical Engineer may need to use Nondestructive Testing techniques
(NDT) to characterize the foundation elements.
All NDT methods are classified in two general categories, surface methods and
downhole methods. Surface methods are generally less expensive, but are limited by
foundation geometry and subsurface conditions. Surface methods typically cannot yield any
information below the point where there is a sharp change in the impedance of a foundation
element. For instance, if NDT methods were used on a bridge column, the test would not tell
the Geotechnical Engineer anything about the pile or shaft elements below the pile cap.
Downhole methods provide more definitive information regarding foundation geometry, but the
costs are generally higher due to drilling requirements.
8. SOIL SAMPLING
Common methods of soil sampling during field explorations include those listed below.
All samples should be properly preserved and carefully transported to the laboratory to
maintain sample integrity, see ASTM D 4220.
8.1 Disturbed Sampling

Disturbed sampling refers to methods of retrieving samples that incidentally cause the
material to be remolded or at least partially altered. It should be understood that disturbed
samples are generally not suitable for specialized tests requiring undisturbed soil specimens.
However, disturbed samples have value for many geotechnical tests and are usually easier to
obtain.
8.1.1 Bag (Bulk) Samples

Bulk samples can provide a large amount of representative soil for compaction and
subgrade testing. Bag samples are usually obtained from test pits. In some cases, bulk
samples can be obtained during auger drilling, collecting materials as they come to the surface
in the flight of the auger. The auger method is less desirable because the depths of the
sample cannot be accurately defined and some mixing of the soil occurs. A preferred
approach when using an auger is to drill a shallow hole, then to remove the auger and collect a
sample from the sidewall of the hole (after first clearing the smear zone). The quantity of a
bulk sample depends on the type of testing to be performed, but can range up to 50 pounds or
more. Testing performed on these samples could include classification, moisture
content, compaction maximum density, R-value and pH and resistivity (corrosivity). A portion
of each sample should be placed in a sealed container in order to accurately determine the
natural moisture content. The size of bulk samples obtained for testing rock quality for
aggregate purposes can be significant in order to process and select representative materials.
8.1.2 Cuttings Samples

In limited cases and as a last resort, samples of cuttings can be obtained from drilling
operations to augment materials collected in sampling tubes. Cuttings samples can be used
to try to identify major changes in lithology during drilling operations, particularly when normal
tube sampling methods do not recover sufficient materials for this purpose. Examples of
cuttings samples include material ejected from air rotary drilling, material that is pushed to the
surface on the flights of an auger, and material that is screened from the drill mud return (mud
rotary method). Cuttings samples are highly disturbed, contaminated, and sometimes altered
(in size), and therefore caution and judgment must be exercised when selecting, evaluating
and classifying such samples. The depths from which cutting samples are obtained can only
be roughly estimated, but these estimates can be aided by noting the depths where changes in
drilling action occur.
8.1.3 Split Spoon Sampler

Split spoon samplers, also known as split barrel samplers, are used in conjunction with
the Standard Penetration Test. The sampler is a 2-inch (O.D.) split spoon, which is driven into
the soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped 30 inches. The split spoon sampler is withdrawn
and the sample is removed after the sampler has been driven 18 inches. The sum of the
number of hammer blows, required to drive the sampler the second and third six-inch
increments is the standard penetration value referred to as the N-value (blows per foot). N-
values can be correlated to a number of different design parameters including relative density,
angle of withdrawal, friction and shear strength. The sample should be immediately examined,
logged and placed in sample jar or bag for storage. These samples are disturbed and are not
suitable for strength or consolidation testing. They are suitable for moisture content,
gradation, and Atterberg limits tests, and are valuable for visual identification, see ASTM D
1586.
8.1.4 California Modified Sampler

California Modified Sampler (CMS) or Dames and Moore Sampler are two names for
the same sampler. The split barrel samples are similar to split spoon samples used with the
SPT test. The CMS is a 3-inch (O.D.) split barrel, which is driven into the soil typically with a
300-pound hammer, but the Department currently uses a 140-pound hammer, dropped 30
inches. The CMS is threaded at both ends for accepting inner rings that are 2.36-inches I.D.
by .98-inches high. These ring samples can be used for various soil property tests; however,
they are considered disturbed samples. Generally, this sampler is used to facilitate sample
recovery in coarser-grained material due to its larger diameter as compared to the split spoon
(SPT) sampler. N-values obtained from the penetration of this sampler are sometimes
correlated to SPT values. However, these correlations are not standardized, and engineering
judgment should be applied when they are used.
The CMS can be configured many different ways. With various barrel bodies, the
sampler typically ranges from 12 to 30 inches in length. Several different types of shoes
(sampler tips) allow for additional accessories to be used with the sampler. Among these are
brassl iners,soi lretai
ner s,andt ubeex tensions.Theseaccessor iesenhancet hesampl er ’
s
capabilities to collect samples. The CMS can be used with a tube extension in fine-grained
soils, typically clays or silts, to obtain relatively undisturbed samples. It acts similar to a Shelby
Tube sampler. When the tube extension is used, the sampler is pushed into the ground with a
smooth and continuous thrust.
8.2 Undisturbed Block Sampling

Samples can be carefully carved from test pits for special testing in the laboratory. The
advantage of block samples is that the test pit offers a broad area to detect critical materials
and ability to obtain the exact amount of the desired material. The size of the sample should
be large enough to perform planned laboratory testing. The block samples should be carefully
handled and should be protected with a moisture-proof barrier (i.e., plastic wrap and wax) and
placed within a sturdy and stable container so the sample is fully supported/constrained.
For block samples, the dimensions of the sample are controlled by the thickness of
specimen of interest and by the size of the box used to hold the sample. A column of the soil
is carefully exposed so that, when the sample box is centered over the column, a one-inch
open space is left on all sides of the sample and a half-inch space is left at the top. The empty
areas are then filled with microcrystalline wax. After the wax congeals, the top of the box is
attached and the sample is carefully detached from the underlying ground with a spade. The
sample is inverted and a half-inch of material is removed. This area is filled with wax. After it
congeals, the bottom of the box is attached and the sample is ready for transport to the
laboratory.
8.3 Undisturbed Sampling Using Thin Wall Samplers

Undisturbed samples are required for certain tests such as peak shear, consolidation,
swell potential, permeability, and density tests. There are several methods available for
obtaining undisturbed samples, and would depend on the investigation equipment being used
and the state of the soils in situ. Care of the samples is also critical to maintaining undisturbed
conditions between drilling, transportation, storage and testing.
8.3.1 Shelby Tube Sampler

A Shelby Tube is a thin walled steel tube, usually 3 inches (O.D.) by 30 inches long.
The beveled cutting edge of the Shelby tube is slightly smaller in diameter than the inside of
the tube, which allows the sample to slide easily in the tube with little disturbance. The thin
wal l sampl eri
ssui tableforsampl i
ngal lcohesiv esoi l
s.Thet ubei spushed24”wi thasmoot h,
continuous thrust. Difficulty may be encountered in sampling very soft and wet soils that tend
to drop out of the sampler. Damage to the sampling tube (resulting in a poor sample)
sometimes occurs when sampling hard, cemented, or gravelly soils. Good samples must have
sufficient cohesion to remain in the tube during withdrawal. Cohesionless soils will likely need
improved sampling methods, as described below. If sample recovery becomes difficult, i.e.,
the sample stays in the ground, the tube should be left in place for roughly 10 to 15 minutes.
During this waiting period, the sample will swell slightly to fill the sampler, increasing the
likelihood of retaining the sample when the tube is retracted. This produces a relatively
undisturbed sample. Care should be taken to not over push the sample to avoid disturbance.
The ends of the Shelby Tube should be properly sealed immediately upon withdrawal. Refer
to ASTM D 1587 (AASHTO T 207). The sample is suitable for unit weight, triaxial, direct
shear, simple shear, and consolidation tests.
8.3.2 Stationary Piston Sampler

This sampler has the same standard dimensions as the Shelby Tube described above.
A piston is positioned at the bottom of the thin wall tube while the sampler is lowered to the
bottom of the hole, thus preventing disturbed materials from entering the tube. The piston is
locked in place on top of the soil to be sampled. A sample is obtained by pressing the tube
into the soil with a continuous, steady thrust. The Stationary Piston is held fixed on top of the
soil while the sampling tube is advanced. This creates suction while the sampling tube is
retrieved, thus aiding in retention of the sample. This sampler is suitable for soft to firm clays
and silts. Samples generally have a better recovery ratio than those obtained by use of the
Shelby Tube. Care should be taken to not overdrive the sampler to avoid disturbance.

8.3.3 Floating Piston Sampler

This sampler is similar to the stationary piston sampler, except that the piston is not
fixed in position but is free to ride on the top of the sample. The soils being sampled must
have adequate strength to cause the piston to remain at a fixed depth as the sampling tube is
pushed downward. If the soil is too weak, the piston will tend to move downward with the tube
and a sample will not be obtained. This method should therefore be limited to stiff or hard
cohesive materials.
8.3.4 Retractable Piston Sampler

This sampler is similar to the stationary piston sampler. However, after lowering the
sampler into position, the piston is retracted and locked in place at the top of the sampling
tube. A sample is then obtained by pushing the entire assembly downward. This sampler is
used for loose or soft soils.
8.3.5 Hydraulic (Osterberg) Piston Sampler

This sampler is especially suitable for sampling soft to very soft clays and silts, and is
sometimes effective in obtaining samples of cohesionless, silty sands and sands. In this
sampler, a movable piston is attached to the top of a thin wall tube. Sampling is accomplished
as hydraulic pressure pushes an inner sampler head and attached sample tube until it
contacts a stationary piston positioned at the top of the soil sample. The distance over which
the sampler is pushed is fixed. It cannot be overpushed.
8.4 Partially Disturbed Sampling

Partially disturbed sampling refers to methods of retrieving samples that incidentally
cause the material to be partially altered. Hard soil conditions might make undisturbed
sampling impossible, and therefore several methods were developed to obtain specimens of
better quality. It should be understood that partially disturbed samples do not represent in situ
conditions and generally do not provide reliable results for specialized tests such as peak
shear, consolidation, swell potential, and permeability.
8.4.1 Denison Sampler

This sampler is a large diameter, double tube core barrel, which is effective in obtaining
5-7/8-inch diameter samples of hard cohesive soils, soft rock, cemented soils, and soils
containing gravel that cannot be obtained with push-type samplers. This sampler consists of a
rotating outer barrel with cutting teeth on the bottom and an inner barrel with a smooth cutting
shoe. The sample is captured in a very thin inner liner, which facilitates retrieval and handling.
Core catchers should not be used unless absolutely necessary to retain the soil sample. Care
should be taken not to overdrive the sample to avoid disturbance.
8.4.2 Pitcher Sampler

This sampler is a double tube core barrel and is effective for the same soils as the
Denison sampler. The primary advantage the Pitcher sampler has over the Denison sampler
is that the Pitcher sampler automatically adjusts the amount by which the inner barrels lead the
cutting bit as the hardness of the soil varies. The Pitcher sampler can also accept a standard
thin wall sample tube in lieu of the inner barrel/liner.
8.4.3 Sprague & Henwood Sampler

This is a triple tube sampler designed for sampling overburden materials, and is an
improvement over the Denison and Pitcher samplers.
9. ROCK SAMPLING
Rock samples can be obtained from outcrops, test pits, or rock cores using drilling
oper at
ions. Sampl esobt ainedf r
om outcr
opsort est pi
tsar et
er med“ grabs ampl es” .Ty pically,
the sample sizes should be small enough to carry, but large enough to be tested in a point
load device or utilized as hand specimens. These samples should be labeled, and the location
where they were obtained should be identified on a site map.
Rock cores are obtained using core barrels equipped with diamond or tungsten carbide
tipped bits. There are three basic types of core barrels; single tube, double tube, and triple
tube. Use of double and triple tube core barrel systems are preferred since single tube core
barrels generally provide poor recovery rates, see below. To protect the integrity of the core
from damage (minimize extraneous core breaks), a hydraulic ram should be used to extrude
the core from the barrel. See ASTM D 2113 (AASHTO T 225). Refer to ASTM D 5079 for
practices of preserving and transporting rock core samples.
9.1 Double Tube Core Barrel

The double tube core barrel consists of an inner core barrel tube and an outer tube that
serves as the drill rod. The cutting end of the core barrel is equipped with a diamond or
tungsten carbide drill bit. As coring progresses, fluid is introduced downward between the
inner and outer tubes to cool the bit and to wash ground-up material to the surface. The inner
tube protects the core from the highly erosive action of the drilling fluid. In a rigid type core
barrel, both the inner and outer tubes rotate. In a swivel type, the inner tube remains
stationary while the outer tube rotates. Several series of swivel type core barrels are available.
The size of core that can be recovered is governed by the size of the drill bit. For standard
applications, these vary from 1.062-inch up to 3.270-inch O.D. Larger diameters generally
obtain better core recovery in softer, highly erodible or highly fractured materials. The
minimum diameter core obtained should be no less than A-size (1.062- to 1.185-inch O.D.).
As a rule, it is recommended that a core size of H (2.406- to 3.000-inch O.D) be routinely used.
Commonly used rock core sizes are included in Figure 5-1.
9.2 Triple Tube Core Barrel

Triple tube core barrel systems are similar to the double tube system, but include an
additional inner liner. Two types of inner liners are used to retain the core, a clear plastic solid

tube or a thin metal split tube. This barrel best preserves recovered fractured and poor quality
rock cores in their in situ state.
9.3 Oriented Core

In some rock slope applications, it is important to understand the precise orientation of
rock discontinuities for the design. Orienting recovered rock core so it can be properly
mapped and evaluated, as though it were still in place, requires special core barrels. In the
past, core barrels were weighted on one side and used in an inclined boring. The heavier side
of the barrel generally stayed on the down side of the hole allowing the core to be properly
oriented when removed. Other techniques, such as using clay to make an impression of core
run ends, have also been used for this purpose. Currently, specialized core barrels that scribe
a reference mark (line) on the side of the core as it is drilled are more routinely used. Special
recording devices within the core barrel relate known azimuth orientations to the reference
mark so that when the core is subsequently removed from the core barrel, it can be oriented to
the exact position it existed in situ. These specialized core barrels are relatively expensive,
and require additional training for proper use and interpreting the results.
9.4 Borehole Television Camera

Boreholes can be accessed to visually inspect the condition of the sidewalls and
distinguish gross changes in lithology by using specialized television cameras. These down-
hole cameras can also be used to identify fracture zones, shear zones, and joint patterns in
rock core holes. Refer to AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations, Section 6.12.
10. EXPLORATION DIFFICULTIES

As discussed in the AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations Section 7.8,
limitations and difficulties may be encountered during explorations, which are common to all
exploratory techniques. They are usually a result of site-specific geologic conditions and/or a
function of the improper equipment or technique being utilized. Several of these limitations
and difficulties are described below.
10.1 Improper Drilling Techniques

All Geotechnical Engineers and field supervisors need to be aware of potential drilling
problems and to avoid them in order to properly obtain field information and samples. See
AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations, Section 7.12 and FHWA, Subsurface
Investigations, NHI Course No. 132031, Section 3.5. The following is a partial listing of
common errors:
 Not properly cleaning slough and cuttings from the bottom of the borehole. The driller
should not be allowed to sample through slough. Preferably the driller should reenter
the boring and remove the slough before proceeding.
 Jetting should not be used to advance a split barrel sampler to the bottom of the boring.
 Poor sample recovery due to improper use of sampling equipment or procedures.
 When sampling soft or noncohesive soils with thin wall samplers (i.e., Shelby Tube), it
may not be possible to recover an undisturbed sample because the sample will not stay
in the barrel. The driller should be clearly instructed not to force recovery by overdriving
the sampling barrel to obtain a sample.
 Improper sample types or insufficient quantity of samples. The driller should be given
clear instructions regarding the sample frequency and types of samples required. The
field supervisor/driller must keep track of the depth of the borings and the materials
being recovered at all stages of the boring to confirm the sampling interval and obtain
appropriate samples of changing soil and/or rock formations.
 Improper hole stabilization. Rotary wash borings and hollow-stem auger borings below
the groundwater level require a head of fluid to be maintained within the drill stem at all
times to prevent materials from surging up into the holes, casings, or augers. When the
drill rods are withdrawn, or as the hollow stem auger is advanced, this fluid level will
tend to drop, and must be maintained by the addition of more drilling fluid.
 Sampler rods lowered into the boring with pipe wrenches, rather than hoisting plug.
The rods may be inclined and the sampler can hit the boring walls, filling the sampler
with debris.
 Improper procedures for performing Standard Penetration Tests. The field supervisor
and driller must assure that the proper weight and hammer drop are being used.
 Catheads cannot be used on any Department projects. All hammers to be used on
Department projects must be automatic, and calibrated within the last two years using a
pile driving analyzer.
10.2 Sample Recovery

Occasionally, sampling is attempted and little or no material is recovered. In cases
where a split barrel or some other type of sampler is used to recover a disturbed sample, it is
appropriate to make a second attempt to recover the material immediately following the first
failed attempt. In such instances, the sampling device may be modified to include a retainer
basket, a hinged trap valve, or other measures to help retain the sample.
In cases where an undisturbed sample is desired, the Geotechnical Engineer should
direct the driller to drill to the bottom of the attempted (disturbed) sampling interval and repeat
the sampling attempt. The sampling method should be reviewed, and the sampling equipment
should be checked to understand why no sample was recovered (such as a plugged ball
valve). It may be appropriate to change the sampling method and/or the sampling equipment,
such as waiting a longer period of time before extracting the sampler, or extracting the sampler
more slowly and with greater care, etc. If recovering a sample at a specific depth is necessary,
a second boring may be advanced to obtain a sample at the prescribed depth using the
improved technique.
Generally, sample recovery less than 10% is considered inadequate for representative
sampling. However, this criteria may be waived for the specific situation (i.e., in thick, uniform
deposits).
Various sampling devices equipped with check and pressure release valves, sample
retaining springs, baskets, and lifters should be used. Occasionally, sample recovery may be
enhanced by modifying the equipment or the drilling techniques.
10.3 Sample Disturbance

Therei snowayt oobt ainat r
uly“undisturbed”sampl eusingav ailabl esoilsampl i
ng
techniques. Block sampling continues to be the most reliable method for minimizing sample
disturbance. However, because gaining access to the zone to be sampled can be limited by
the depth of overlying material and because the sampling process is fairly rigorous and time
consuming, most samples are obtained via drilling.
The selection of the correct sampling tool, drilling technique, and borehole stabilization
method should be based on the soil type being sampled and the subsurface conditions. The
incorrect preservation and shipment of samples may further disturb the specimens to the point
where they are no longer usable.
10.4 Obstructions
The termination of an exploration above the required design depth due to boulders, fill
material, excessively dense materials, and other obstructions may occur during any
investigation. When this occurs, it usually implies that the correct exploration method might
not have been selected for the anticipated subsurface conditions. Specialized tools and
equipment are available to enhance the capacity of conventional drilling equipment. In some
cases when obstacles are anticipated, a solution is to redrill the boring a few feet away.
10.5 Problematic Geologic Conditions

More thought and care should be given in selecting proper sampling equipment and
sampling techniques when conducting subsurface exploration in problematic geologic
conditions. Following is a list of some of problematic geologic conditions:
 Organic Soils
 Metastable Soils (loess, alluvial deposits & mudflows )
 Expansive Soils or Rocks
 Sensitive Clays
 Hydrocollapsible Soils
 Moving Ground (slides)
 Meander Loops & Cutoffs
 Abandoned Mined Areas
 Normally Consolidated Clays
 Caliche
 Loose, Granular Soils
 Noxious or Explosive Gases

 Artificial Fill
 Weathered Shale Rocks
 Wet or Saturated Soils
10.6 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater can affect the stability of boreholes, especially in cohesionless soils
(sands and silts). Water flowing into the hole could cause caving and quick (liquefying)
conditions, which would artificially reduce the SPT blow counts being measured, as well as
make drilling and sampling progress difficult. Drill fluids are typically used to stabilize the
borehole in such situations.
Where precise water level data is important, the affects of drilling water additives
(bentonite) on the permeability of certain soils should be evaluated. In soils with lower
permeability and flow rates, such as in silt or silty sand, the use of bentonite mud can
dramatically limit the movement of water by coating the walls of the boring. A bentonite
coating can reduce the likelihood that piezometer readings will represent true ground water
levels or that the water levels in the boring will respond accurately to natural groundwater
changes. In these situations, alternative drilling techniques, such as using a casing advancer
or hollow stem auger, should be considered to produce a stable borehole without relying on
additives that can affect permeability. Following drilling, especially whenever low permeability
conditions exist, the Geotechnical Engineer should wait an adequate period of time for the
water level to reach equilibrium within the borehole before initiating groundwater
measurements.
It is preferred that a groundwater measurement be taken 24 hours after completing the
boring to allow the water level to reach equilibrium. In fine-grained soils, depending on the
permeability, this period may not be adequate. The installation of permanent or temporary
observation wells, which provide access for measuring the groundwater table over a longer
period, can be used in this case. Observation wells are generally an inexpensive safeguard
against erroneous data regarding the presence and behavior of the groundwater conditions.
10.7 Contaminated Sites

When an investigation is to be performed, acquisition records for newly obtained right-
of- way indicate the most recent land use for the area. On rehabilitation projects, where the
only planned activities are shown on the existing right-of-way, the information available may
vary from very complete to none. The Geotechnical Section does not perform HazMat
explorations, testing, or evaluations. If contaminants are suspected, the Department may hire
a Consultant with expertise in this field.
There are many problems and issues inherent in sampling and handling contaminated
soils. However, it is necessary for all involved in geotechnical investigations to be aware of the
salient points of these procedures. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
document number 625/12-91/002t

it
led“Descr
ipt
ionandSampli
ngofCont ami natedSoi ls–A
fi
eldPocket Gui
de”cont
ainsgui
del
i
nes,backgr
oundinfor
mat
ion,
andalist of useful references
on the topic.
During an investigation, if unexpected contaminants are encountered, the Field Crew
staff should immediately cease explorations and inform the Geotechnical Engineer. Initial
actions may require demobilization from the site. Some signs of possible contamination are:
 Prior land use (e.g., old fill, landfills, gas stations, etc.).
 Stained soil or rock.
 Apparent unnatural lack of vegetation or presence of dead vegetation and trees in the
local site context. While in some places this could indicate contamination, in others it is
just normal desert conditions.
 Odors. Highly organic soils often could have a rotten egg odor that should not be
construed as evidence of contamination. However, this odor may also be indicative of
highly toxic hydrogen sulfide. Field Crew staff should be instructed as such.
 Presence of liquids other than groundwater.
 Marks of prior ground fires (at landfill sites). Established landfills emit methane gas,
which is colorless and odorless, and in high concentrations in the presence of sparks or
fire, explode.
 Presence of visible elemental metals (i.e., mercury).
 Low (<2.5) or High (>12.5) pH.
11. INSTRUMENTATION
Geotechnical instrumentation may be required, depending on the scope of the project,
the design elements, and the site conditions. Selecting and installing the proper instruments
correctly are important. A discussion of installation procedures for selected instruments is
provided in Appendix A of the AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigation, 1988. An in-
depth discussion on the installation of Inclinometer Casings is provided in Section 4.1.5 of
Chapter 11 of the TRB Special Report 247, Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Such
summaries are not intended to be a strict guideline, nor are they all inclusive of the variety of
methods and procedures that may be used for the installation of instruments. The installation
techniques may need to be customized to address particular subsurface issues.
12. BOREHOLE SEALING/BACKFILLING

All borings should be properly backfilled at the completion of the field exploration. This
is typically required for safety and to prevent contamination/commingling of groundwater.
Boring closure is particularly important for tunnel projects, since an open borehole exposed
during tunneling may lead to uncontrolled inflow of water or escape of compressed air.
All boreholes are required to be grouted on the Department projects unless directed by
the Principal Geotechnical Engineer. Holes in pavements and slabs should be filled with quick

setting concrete, or with asphalt concrete, as appropriate. Backfilling of boreholes is generally

accomplished using a grout mixture. The grout mixture is normally pumped through drill rods
or other pipes inserted into the borehole. In boreholes filled with water or other drilling fluids,
the tremied grout will displace the drill fluid. Provisions should be made to collect and dispose
of all displaced drill fluid and waste grout. National Cooperative Highway Research Program
ReportNo.378( 1995)t it
led“RecommendedGui deli
nesf orSeal i
ngGeot echni c alHol es”
contains extensive information on sealing and grouting.
13. FIELD EXPLORATION LOGS

A clear and complete record of field exploration activities and findings is essential. This
should include the location of the boring, relative to the nearest Department benchmark. A
station and offset from the benchmark as well as a top of the boring elevation is required.
14. PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD

Sites should be photographed to better describe the existing surface and surrounding
condition of the project area. Photographing more details of the features of the site would
better document the existing condition of the site. These photos should be included in the
Geotechnical Report and the project file.
Rock cores, and certain types of drive samples, are usually the only physical sample
evidence of the subsurface profile that remain available for a site. In order to maintain the
integrity of this record, it is useful to photograph the samples before parts are removed for
testing purposes, or drying, or other disturbance occurs. Photographs assist to preserve the
sampling record in the event that vandalism, negligence, or natural calamity causes loss or
destruction of the physical sample. It also may be desirable to photograph specific sampling
techniques and equipment for future reference. Care should be given to optimize the size of
the core within the photograph in order to show as much detail as possible. Color photographs
are recommended. For more details, refer to AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations,
Section 7.10.
15. SAMPLE PRESERVATION AND SHIPPING

Samples of soil and rock are obtained for classification and subsequent testing to
determine their various engineering properties. Rock and soil samples represent essential
physical information concerning the subject site. In general, these samples can be expensive
to obtain. Samples must be preserved, stored, and shipped under conditions that minimize
chances of disturbance or loss. More details are provided in AASHTO Manual on Subsurface
Investigations, Section 7.9.
All soil samples and rock cores must be clearly, accurately, and permanently labeled to
show all pertinent information which may be necessary in identifying the soil samples or rock
cores, and in determining the character of the subsurface condition.
The preserving, protecting and transporting of samples may be accomplished using the
guidelines described as follows ; but, any method that satisfactorily protects the sample from
such things as shock, detrimental temperature changes (such as freezing), and moisture loss
can be used.
 All samples should be collected from the borehole sampling sites on a daily basis and
transported to the field project office or a suitable alternate location.
 Rock core and thin wall tube soil samples should never be transported away from the
field site in other than specially constructed wood, metal, plastic, or fiberglass shipping
containers specially designed to protect them from shock and vibration.
 Samples should never be left unattended in vehicles. Any undisturbed sample which is
permitted to freeze, even partially, should be replaced.
 Samples intended for laboratory testing should not be held at the site in excess of one
week.
 All sample containers should be identified as to borehole, depth interval, box number of
total sequence, and project number.
16. GUIDELINES FOR INSPECTIONS OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS

The following guidelines are summarized from the Subsurface Investigation Manual
(NHI-01-031) and AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations (Section 7.11):
 Thoroughly comprehend the purpose of the fieldwork in order to properly characterize
the site for the intended engineering applications.
 Be thoroughly familiar with the scope of the exploration program. Maintain a copy of
the boring location plan.
 Be familiar with site, access conditions, and any restrictions.
 Review existing subsurface and geologic information before leaving the office.
 Constantly review the field data obtained as it relates to the purpose of the
investigation.
 The field person should maintain daily contact with the Geotechnical Engineer
regarding work progress, conditions encountered, problems, etc. Geotechnical
Engineers log the boreholes for projects conducted in-house by the Department.
 Fill out forms regularly. Obtain a sufficient supply of boring and test pit logs and any
other necessary forms to cover the expected explorations.
 Cl
osel
yobser
vet
hedr
il
l
er’
swor
katal
lti
mes,pay
ingpar
ti
cul
arat
tent
iont
o:
o Current depth (measure length of rods and samplers)
o Drilling and sampling procedures
o Any irregularities, loss of water, drop of rods, etc.
o SPT counts
o Depth to groundwater and degree of sample moisture
 Do not hesitate to question the driller, or to provide direction to ensure proper
procedures are being followed.
 Classify soil and rock samples. Place soil samples in proper containers and label them.
Make sure rock cores are properly boxed, photographed, stored, and protected. In
handling all samples, the Geotechnical Engineer should follow the appropriate ASTM
Standards. See ASTM D 4220-95, Standard Practices for Preserving and Transporting
Soil Samples.
 Verify that undisturbed samples are properly taken, handled, sealed, labeled, and
transported.
 Bring necessary tools to job.
 Do not hesitate to stop work and call the Principal Geotechnical Engineer if in doubt, or
if problems are encountered.
 Remember field data are the basis of all subsequent engineering decisions, and as
such, are of paramount importance.
The Geotechnical Engineer has the responsibility of notifying the Field Crew Supervisor
when drill holes no longer need to be kept open (usually when final water table depths have
been measured) and can be sealed/backfilled. The Geotechnical Engineer needs to follow up
to verify that holes have been sealed/backfilled. If the holes are not sealed/backfilled within an
appropriate time, the Geotechnical Engineer needs to notify the Principal Geotechnical
Engineer.
17. EQUIPMENT FOR FIELD EXPLORATIONS

The followinglistisf r
om t
heManual“
FHWA,Subsur faceInvestigat
ions,NHICour se
No. 132031. Geotechnical Engineers need to determine which of the listed items are
applicable for each project.
Paperwork/Forms Site Plan
Technical specifications
Field Instructions Sheet(s)
Daily field memorandum forms
Blank boring log forms
Forms for special tests (vane shear, permeability tests, etc.)
Blank sample labels or white tape
Copies of required permits
Field book (moisture proof)
Health and Safety plan
Field Manuals
Subcontractor expense forms

Sampling Equipment Samplers and blank tubes, etc.

Knife (to trim samples)
Folding rule 100-foot tape with an attachable weight so it can also be
used for water level measurements
Hand level
Rags
Proper containers and core boxes
Five-gallon bucket
Wire brush
Safety/Personal Equipment Hard hat
Safety boots
Safety glasses
Rubber boots (in some instances)
Rain gear (in some instances)
Work gloves
Miscellaneous Equipment Clipboard
Pencils, felt markers, grease pencils
Scale/straight edge
Watch
Calculator
Camera
Compass
Wash bottle or test tube
Pocket Penetrometer and/or Torvane
Communication equipment (two-way radio, cellular phone)
Small white board and dry erase markers to make photo-labels
18. SAFETY GUIDELINES

All field personnel, including geologists, Geotechnical Engineers , technicians, and Field
Crew staff , should be familiar with the general health and safety procedures, as well as any
additional requirements of the project or governing agency.
Typical safety guidelines for drilling into soil and rock are presented in the Manual
“FHWA, Subsur faceInvestigations,NHI Cour seNo. 132031, Appendi xA.Mi ni
mum pr ot
ect
iv
e
gear for all personnel should include hardhat, safety boots, eye protection, and gloves.

19. SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS

SUBJECT ASTM AASHTO
Site Characterization for Engineering, Design, and Construction D 420 T 86
Purposes
Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Borings D 1452 T 203
Penetration Test and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils D 1586 T 206
Thin Walled Tube Geotechnical Sampling of Soils D 1587 T 207
Diamond Core Drilling for Site Investigation D 2113 T 225
Preserving and Transporting Soil Samples D 4220 -
Cross-hole Seismic Testing D 4428 -
Subsurface Liquid Levels in a Borehole or Monitoring Well D 4750 -
(Observation Well)
Preserving and Transporting Rock Core Samples D 5079 -
Field Logging of Subsurface Explorations of Soil and Rock D 5434 -
Seismic Refraction Method for Subsurface Investigation D 5777 -
Hollow-Stem Augers for Geotechnical Exploration and Soil Sampling D 6151 T 251
Field Measurement of Soil Resistivity Using the Wenner Four- G 57 T 288
Electrode Method
Provisional Guide for Selecting Surface Geophysical Methods PS 78 -
Descriptive Nomenclature for Constituents of Natural Mineral C-294 M-146
Aggregates
Test Method for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes D-2487 M-145
Practice for Ring-Lined Barred Sampling of Soils D-3550 -
Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual D-2488 -
Procedure)
Selecting Surface Geophysical Methods D-6429 -
Direct Current Resistivity Method for Subsurface Investigation D-6431 -
Surface Ground Penetrating Radar Method for Subsurface D-6432 -
Investigation

20. FIGURES
6-1: Core Sizes (from Boart Longyear, 2000)
Core Barrel Type and Size Rock Core Diameter (in) Bore Hole Diameter (in)
Conventional
AWG, AWM, AWL 1.185 1.890
BWG, BWM, BWL 1.655 2.360
NWG, NWM, NWL 2.155 2.980
HW 3.000 3.875
Wireline
AQ 1.062 1.890
BQ 1.433 2.360
BQ3 1.320 2.360
NQ 1.875 2.980
NQ3 1.775 2.980
HQ 2.406 3.783
PQ3 3.270 4.828

21. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
ManualonSubsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions,
”Washi
ngt
on,D.
C.,1988
Fang, Hsai-Yang,Foundat
ion“Engineer
ingHandbook,
”2ndEdi
ti
on,
”VanNost
randRei
nhol
d
Company, New York, 1990
FHWA,“
Geot echnicalEngi neeri
ngNot ebook
,”FHWARegi
on10,Compi l
ati
onofGeotec
hni
cal
Guidelines, November 1986. Recent notebook issuances can be viewed at
www.fhwa.dot.gov/ridge/geo.htm
FHWA,“ManualonDesignandConst
ruct
ionofDr
ivenPi
l
eFoundat
ions,
”FHWA-HI-97-013
and 014, 1996
FHWA,“RockSlopes,Nat
ionalHi
ghwayInst
it
ute Tr
aini
ng Cour
se in Geot
echni
caland
Foundat
ionEngi
neer
ing,
”NHICour
seNo.132035–Module 5, 1998
FHWA,"
Soi l
sandFoundat i
onsWor kshop,
”Ref
erenceManual seNo.132012,3rd
,NHICour
Edition, FHWA NHI-00-045, 2000
FHWA,“
Subsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions
,”NHICour
seNo.132031,FHWA-NHI-01-031, 2001
Nat
ionalCooperat
iv
eHighwayResear
chPr
ogr
am,“RecommendedGui
del
i
nesf
orSeal
i
ng
Geotechni
calEx
plor
ator
yHol
es,
”NCHRPReport378,1995
esEngi
Naval Faciliti neer
ingCommand,“
Soi
lMechani
cs,
”NAVFACDM-7.1, Department of
the Navy, 1986
OSHA,“
CodeofFeder
alRegul
ati
ons,
”Sect
ion29,OSHASt
andar
ds
TRB,“
Landsl
i
des:I
nvest
igat
ionandMi
ti
gat
ion,
”Speci
alRepor
t247,I
SBN 0-309-06151-2,
1996
U.S. Army CorpsofEngineers,“
Geophysi
calExpl
orationforEngineeri
ngandEnv i
ronment
al
Invest
igat
ions,Engineeri
ngManual
,”1110-1-1802, Department of Army, 1995
U.
S.Ar
myCor psofEngi neer s,“
Geot echni
calI
nvest
igat
ions,Engi
neer
ingManual
,”1110-1-
1804, Department of Army, 2001
U.
S.Army Cor ps ofEngi neers,“
Soi
lSampl
i
ng,Engi
neer
ing Manual
,”1110-1-1906,
Department of Army, 1996
U.
S.D.
A.,“
SlopeSt abili
tyRef er enceGuideforNati
onal
For
est
sint
heUni
tedSt
ates,
”Vol
.1,
Forest Service Publication EM-7170-13,
”1994
U.
S.EPA,“Descript
ionandSampl ingofCont
ami
nat
edSoi
l
s–AFi
eldPocketGui
de,
”EPA
Document No. 625/12-91/002

CHAPTER 7
IN SITU TESTING

IN SITU TESTING 7-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE .......................................................................................................... 1
2. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
3. CORRELATION TESTS ..................................................................................... 1
3.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)........................................................................ 2
3.2 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test (DCP)........................................................... 3
4. STRENGTH AND DEFORMATION TESTS........................................................ 3
4.1 Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) and Piezocone Penetrometer Test (PQS)........ 3
4.2 Pressuremeter Test (PMT) ................................................................................. 4
4.3 Dilatometer Test (DMT) ...................................................................................... 5
4.4 Field Vane Test................................................................................................... 6
4.5 Borehole Shear Tests (BST)............................................................................... 6
5. PERMEABLILITY TESTS ................................................................................... 6
5.1 Pumping Test...................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Slug Test............................................................................................................. 7
5.3 Water Pressure Tests (Packer Tests)................................................................. 7
5.4 Hydraulic Conductivity Tests............................................................................... 8
5.5 Infiltration Tests .................................................................................................. 8
6. SPECIALIZED TESTS ........................................................................................ 8
6.1 Bearing Capacity Plate Test (PLT) ..................................................................... 8
6.2 In Situ Direct Shear Tests On Rock Discontinuities ............................................ 8
6.3 Other Tests ......................................................................................................... 9
7. FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 10
7-1: Specifications and Standards ................................................................... 10
8. REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 11

IN SITU TESTING 7-1
1. PURPOSE
The testing described in this Chapter allows the Geotechnical Engineer to determine
various soil and rock parameters under natural in-place conditions. This type of testing is
useful for projects, where obtaining representative samples suitable for laboratory testing is
difficult, such as those involving soft clays, loose sands and/or soils below the water table.
Some benefits of in situ testing include avoidance of soil disturbance (and changes in stress)
and large scale testing when size requirements exceed common sample dimensions. The
discussion for each test includes a brief description of the test method, the equipment and the
uses of the data. Diagrams, photographs, and example test results are included in the:
AASHTO Manual on Subsurface Investigations; and FHWA Manual on Subsurface
Investigations (NHI Course No. 132031).
Some in situ tests are performed in conventional drilled borings, whereas other more
specialized tests require a separate borehole or different insertion equipment.
2. INTRODUCTION
Common in situ tests are performed in conventional drilled borings, whereas

specialized tests require a separate borehole or different insertion equipment. Field in situ
borehole tests can be grouped into three categories:
 Correlation Tests
o Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
o Dynamic Penetration Test (DPT)
 Strength and Deformation Tests
o Penetrometers, such as Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) and Piezocone
Penetrometer Test (PQS)
o Pressuremeters (PMT), such as Menard, Self-Boring, and Dilatometer
o Stress or Shear Devices, such as Vane Shear and Borehole Shear Tests
 Permeability Tests
o Pump Tests and Slug Tests
o Water Pressure Tests
o Hydraulic Conductivity Tests
o Percolation Tests
3. CORRELATION TESTS
Data obtained through these tests may be correlated to a number of different design
parameters, such as, relative density, angle of internal friction, and shear strength.

IN SITU TESTING 7-2
3.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
This test is probably the most widely used field test in the United States. It has the
advantages of simplicity, the availability of a wide variety of correlations for its data, and that a
sample is typically obtained with each test.
The test involves advancing a standard split-barrel sampler a total of 18 inches into the
bottom of a borehole by dropping a 140-pound hammer from a height of 30 inches. The
number of blows required to advance the sampler for each of three 6-inch increments is
recorded. The sum of the number of blows for the second and third increments is the
Standard Penetration Value, or more commonly, N-value (blows per foot). Standard
Penetration Tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586.
SPT values are sensitive to materials encountered and variations in individual drilling
practices and equipment used, such as the type of hammer (hammer efficiency), diameter
and length of drill rods, presence of a liner in the sampler, and diameter of the drill hole.
Correction values are used to standardize the test results. Studies have indicated that SPT
results are more reliable in sands than clays. Although this technique is extensively used in
subsurface exploration, depending on the application, the test results should be augmented
by other field and laboratory tests, particularly when dealing testing clays.
Depending on the type of project, N-values can be correlated to a number of different
design parameters including relative density, angle of internal friction, and shear strength.
There are several methods available that use corrected N-values in the design of driven piles,
embankments, spread footings, and drilled shafts. For foundation design and liquefaction
studies, N-values are typically corrected for overburden pressure. This correction normalizes
the N-value to an effective overburden pressure of one tsf. Testing conditions and data
should be accurately recorded during exploration operations so the appropriate correction
values can be applied.
Noting the type of hammer used during the investigation is required on the boring logs,
since this affects the actual input driving energy (hammer efficiency correction) transferred to
the sampler. Because the rope and cathead method is not as consistent, only hammers
using an automatic drop system are allowed on Department projects. The required method to
measure the energy transfer from the hammer to the sampler using a dynamic Pile Driving
Analyzer (PDA) is detailed in ASTM D 4945, which is the testing standard used in conjunction
with pile driving. Since there is a wide variability in the performance of various SPT hammers,
calibrations of all hammers used on Department projects are required. Calibration factors for
the hammers, along with correction factors for nonstandard sized samplers, are required to be
included in the boring log key in the Geotechnical Report. The procedure used to determine
the hammer efficiency and resistance to pile driving is governed by stress wave propagation.
Bymeas ur i
ngt hehammer ’sfor ceandv elocit ydur ingat est,thetransmi tt
edener gycanbe
determined. Once the transmitted energy (Emeasured) is known, the N-values can be modified
to the standard N60 equation.

IN SITU TESTING 7-3
3.2 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test (DCP)
This Manual test consists of manually driving a cone shaped probe by dropping a 15-
pound hammer 20 inches. The blow count results provide an indication of the uniformity or
consistency of soils. Since no samples are recovered, dynamic cone penetrometer tests
should only be used as a supplement to profile interpretations determined from standard
borehole sampling techniques.
As the cone is driven into the soil, the number of blows required to advance the cone
through a 6-inch increment is recorded. A single DCP test consists of two 6-inch increments.
Tests can be performed continuously to the depth desired with an expendable cone, which is
left in the ground upon drill rod withdrawal, or at specified intervals by using a retractable cone
and advancing the hole by auger or other means between tests. Experience has shown that
the DCP can be used effectively up to depths of 15 to 20 feet. It is extremely important to
provide the full 20-inch hammer drop, per each blow, but care must be taken not to strike the
weight against the handle on the upward motion. Doing so would cause the instrument to
withdraw and results would be in question. If a test is performed at the bottom of an open
boring, the blow counts in granular soils tend to be larger for the second 6-inch increment
than for the first. In cohesive soils, the blow counts from the two increments tend to be about
the same.
While correlations between DCP blow counts and engineering properties of the soil
exist, they are not as widely adopted as SPT values. A relationship has been developed
where the blows required to drive the embedded DCP cone a distance of 1-3/4 inches yields
roughly the same density/consistency values as SPT N-values. DCP results have also been
correlated to California Bearing Ratio (CBR) values for use in pavement design.
4. STRENGTH AND DEFORMATION TESTS
In situ tests for measuring strength and deformation properties include cone
penetrometer, piezocone penetrometer, pressuremeter, dilatometer, vane shear, and
borehole shear devices. These tests provide different methods to measure strength
parameters.
4.1 Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) and Piezocone Penetrometer Test (PQS)
The Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) is a specialized quasi-static penetration profiling

test performed independently of drilled borings. A disadvantage of this device is that no
samples are obtained, so there is no positive identification of soil types. This method should
only be used to supplement sampled borings, not to replace them.
A cylindrical rod with a conical point is pushed through the soil at a constant rate and
the penetration resistance is measured. A series of tests performed at varying depths at one
location is called a sounding. Several types of penetrometers are in use, including mechanical
(mantle) cone, mechanical friction-cone, electric cone, electric friction-cone, and piezocone

IN SITU TESTING 7-4
penetrometers. Although many different cone configurations have been used, the current
standard was developed through work performed in the Netherlands, so it is sometimes
referred to as the Dutch cone.
Cone penetrometers measure the resistance to penetration at the tip of the
penetrometer, or the end-bearing component of resistance. Friction-cone penetrometers are
equipped with a friction sleeve, which provides the added capability of measuring the side
friction component of resistance. Mechanical penetrometers have telescoping tips allowing
measurements to be taken incrementally, generally at intervals of 8 inches or less. Electric (or
electronic) penetrometers use electric force transducers to obtain continuous measurements
with depth. Piezocone penetrometers are electric penetrometers, which are also capable of
measuring pore water pressures during penetration. Cones can also be equipped with time-
domain sensors that allow the cone to measure shear wave velocity.
For all types of penetrometers, cones with a 60-degree tip angle and a projected end
area of 1.55 square inches are standard. The outside diameter of the friction sleeve is the
same as the base of the cone. Penetration rates are maintained between 0.4 to 0.8 inches
per second. Tests are conducted in accordance with ASTM D 3441 (mechanical cones) and
ASTM D 5778 (piezocones).
The penetrometer data is plotted showing the end-bearing resistance, the friction
resistance and the friction ratio (friction resistance divided by end bearing resistance) as
functions of depth. Pore pressures, if measured, can also be plotted with depth. The results
are presented in tabular form, indicating the interpreted results of the raw data.
There are published correlations relating CPT data to soil type and several engineering
properties. CPT data can be used in some design methods for spread footings and piles. The
penetrometer can be used in sands or clays, but not in rock, dense sands, or soils containing
appreciable amounts of gravel.
The piezocone penetrometer can measure the dissipation rate of excessive pore
water pressure. This type of measurement, is useful in characterization, subsurface materials,
such as fibrous peat or muck that are very sensitive to sampling techniques. The cone should
be equipped with a pressure transducer that is capable of measuring the induced water
pressure. To perform this measurement, the cone is advanced into the ground at the standard
rate. Pore water pressures are measured immediately and at several time intervals thereafter.
The recorded data is used to develop a plot of a pore pressure versus log-time graph. This
graph can be used to directly calculate the rate of pore water pressure dissipation, which
directly relates to the rate of soil settlement.
4.2 Pressuremeter Test (PMT)
The pressuremeter measures stress/strain properties of soils by inflating a probe

placed at the desired depth in the borehole. The PMT provides much more direct
measurements of soil compressibility and lateral stresses than do the SPT or CPT. Test

IN SITU TESTING 7-5
results are interpreted based on semiempirical correlations from past tests and observation.
In situ horizontal stresses, shear strength, bearing capacities, and settlement can be
estimated using these correlations. The pressuremeter test is a delicate tool, and the test is
very sensitive to borehole disturbance. The data may be difficult to interpret for some soils,
but it provides the advantage that due to the large size of the pressuremeter cell it is less
likely to be adversely affected by gravel in the soil. The test has the advantage of less likely to
be adversely affected by gravels in soils due to the large size of the pressuremeter cell. This
test requires a high level of technical expertise to perform, and is time consuming. Typically,
6 to 8 tests are conducted per day.
The Menard type pressuremeter requires predrilling of the borehole. The self-boring
type pressuremeter advances the hole itself, which reduces soil disturbance. The Menard
probe contains three flexible rubber membranes. The middle membrane provides
measur ement s,whi l
et heoutertwocel l
s,t he“
guar dcel ls,
”pr otectthemeasur i
ngcell from
end effects. When in place, the guard cell membranes are inflated by pressurized gas, while
the middle membrane is inflated with water by means of pressurized gas. The pressure in all
cells is incrementally increased or decreased by the same amount. The measured volume
change in the middle membrane is plotted against applied pressure. Tests are completed in
accordance with ASTM D 4719.
4.3 Dilatometer Test (DMT)
The dilatometer is a 3.75-inch wide and 0.55-inch thick stainless steel blade with a thin
2.4-inch diameter expandable metal membrane on one side. While the membrane is flush
with the blade surface, the blade is advanced into the soil. Rods carry pneumatic and
electrical lines from the membrane to the surface. Tests are typically conducted at 8-inch
intervals. Pressurized gas is used to expand the membrane. Both the pressure required to
begin membrane movement and that required to expand the membrane 0.04 inches into the
soil are measured. Additionally, upon venting, the pressure corresponding to the return of the
membrane to its original position, which correlates to the pore water pressure in the soil, may
be recorded. Each test typically requires 1 to 2 minutes to complete for each interval.
The dilatometer test uses pressure readings from the inserted flat plate to determine
stratigraphy and obtain estimates of at-rest lateral stresses, elastic modulus, and shear
strength of sands (and to a lesser degree, silts and clays). The dilatometer test is not widely
used, and the analysis and design methods based on DMT results are not yet as thoroughly
developed as other techniques. However, the test provides consistent results when repeated,
is useable in soils ranging from soft to moderately stiff; and provides several direct
measurements of stress-strain properties. The plate can be difficult to advance into dense
and hard materials. Calibration is needed to correlate to local geologic environments.
Because of its relatively low cost, versatility, and compatibility with the CPT, its use may
increase in the future.

IN SITU TESTING 7-6
Through developed correlations, information can be deduced regarding material type,

pore water pressure, in situ horizontal and vertical stresses, void ratio or relative density,
modulus, shear strength parameters, and consolidation parameters. Compared to the
pressuremeter, the dilatometer has the advantage of reduced soil disturbance during
penetration. The DMT and CPT are complementary tests where the DMT is used to assess
compressibility and in situ stresses and the CPT is used to evaluate soil strength.
4.4 Field Vane Test
This test consists of advancing a four-bladed vane into cohesive soil or organic
deposits to the desired depth and applying a measured torque at a constant rate until the
material fails in shear along a cylindrical surface. The torque measured at failure provides the
undrained shear strength of the soil. A second test run immediately after the soil has failed at
the same depth provides the remolded strength of the soil and, thus, information on soil
sensitivity. Tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D 2573.
This method is primarily intended for soft clays, and should not be used in stiff or hard
soils. Vane diameters vary depending on the consistency of the soil, with larger vanes used in
softer materials. Test results can be affected by the presence of gravel, roots, or sand layers.
Shear strength may be overestimated in highly plastic clays, and a correction factor should be
applied. Vane shear test results may be invalid for varved clays, fibrous peats, and other
deposits with a high degree of anisotropy. The Geotechnical Engineer should consider the
potential for shear strength anisotropy when using the test results, since the test forces a
shear failure along a surface that does not represent the actual case in most geotechnical
applications.
4.5 Borehole Shear Tests (BST)
Borehole shear strength tests are performed in an uncased borehole. The apparatus is
positioned within the material of interest and then expanded to apply horizontal pressure
against the sides of the hole. The main components of the borehole shear device are: the
shear head, the pulling assembly, and the console (which contains the bottled gas and
pressure gauge. The pulling assembly is hand operated by turning a worm gear to provide a
uniform rate of strain, which is monitored by a strain gauge. The shear strength is determined
by measuring the resistance while pulling up on the shear device. The test is repeated at
increasing horizontal pressures to develop a plot of maximum shear stress to normal stress.
The Mohr envelope is plotted, andshearst r
engt hpar amet ersФ andcar edet ermined.
Thist estisdependentonachi ev i
ng“drained”condi t
ions, and is more reliable on sand
and silt soils. Tests on clay soils are possible if sufficiently long consolidation times are
allowed and strain rates are applied.
5. PERMEABLILITY TESTS
Hydraulic conductivity, also referred to as permeability, is the measure of the rate of

IN SITU TESTING 7-7
flow of water through soils, usually measured when the soil is saturated. The hydraulic
conductivity value is corrected for the hydraulic boundary conditions, such as the hydraulic
gradient. In situ hydraulic conductivity tests results are more representative of the actual soil
property than test results obtained in the laboratory, since they are performed on the entire
hydraulic system, with all its variables including joints, sand seams, and small fissures.
Laboratory tests are performed on a small sample that may not be truly representative of field
conditions. Several methods to perform in situ hydraulic conductivity tests have been
developed with the most commonly used being the pumping test and the slug test.
5.1 Pumping Test
The pumping test requires one test well to pump water and one to four adjacent
observation wells to monitor the changes in water levels as the pumping test is performed.
Frequently, existing wells of opportunity (preexisting wells) are used for this test, but their
depths and efficiency should be determined to properly use the results of the test. Often,
there will be other wells within the vicinity that are not part of the test program. In this case,
the influence of these wells, if they are operated during the test, must be taken into account.
Pumping continues until a steady-state water level is obtained in the observation wells.
The hydraulic conductivity, (k), is then computed based on the flow rate from the pumped
well, the steady-state water level (total head) in the observation wells, and the configuration of
the test hole relative to the observation wells, according to the principles of groundwater flow.
(refer to ASTM D 4050)) Pumping tests are typically used in large-scale investigations to more
accurately measure the permeability of an area for the design of dewatering systems.
5.2 Slug Test
The slug test, although less representative of the larger area typically represented by a
pumping test, is quicker to perform and much less expensive because observation wells are
not required. It consists of affecting a rapid change in the water level within a well by quickly
injecting or removing a known volume of water or a solid object known as a slug. The natural
flow of groundwater out of or into the well is then observed until equilibrium in the water level
is obtained. The flow rate to equilibrium is used to compute k (refer to ASTM D 4044).
5.3 Water Pressure Tests (Packer Tests)
This test is performed in a borehole by placing packers above and below the soil/rock
zone to be tested. The time rate of water flow into the isolated test zone, at a constant
pressure, is recorded for 5 to 30 minutes. This procedure is repeated at higher pressure with
care not to cause hydraulic fracturing. The coefficient of permeability that is calculated
provides a gross indication of the overall mass permeability (refer to FHWA, “ Rock Slopes:
Design, Excavation, Stabilization” ).

IN SITU TESTING 7-8
5.4 Hydraulic Conductivity Tests
There are several methods of determining the hydraulic conductivity of water bearing
materials. The tests may be performed with packers in place to isolate a specific zone;
however, the test is not run with the borehole sealed or under pressure. One method is to
remove water from the material being tested (Rising Water Level Method). Another method is
to add water to the borehole (Falling Water Level Method and Constant Water Level Method).
(refer to AASHTO,“ Manual on Subsurface Investigations” ).
5.5 Infiltration Tests
The movement of water from the surface into the soil or rock is called infiltration. Two
types of infiltrometer systems are available: sprinkler type and flooding type. Sprinkler types
attempt to simulate rainfall, while the flooding type is applicable for simulating runoff
conditions. These methods measure the vertical flow of water, expressed in inches per hour.
Applications for these tests include the design of subdrainage and dry well systems. The most
common application is the falling head test, performed by filling (flooding) a test pit hole in
concentric rings and monitoring the rate the water level drops (refer to ASTM D 4043).
6. SPECIALIZED TESTS
Specialized tests are those that are not commonly used, but may have application on
unique or complex projects. These tests are listed for reference, along with brief
descriptions. If these tests are to be used, the Geotechnical Engineer should perform
research on test details and applicability.
6.1 Bearing Capacity Plate Test (PLT)
This test is performed to determine field bearing capacities on circular plates that are
subsequently used to estimate bearing capacity of shallow spread footings. The loads are
applied to the bearing plates by either jacking against a dead load or against a reaction beam
attached to several piles. The bearing plates vary in diameter from 12 to 30 inches, are made
of steel or concrete, and are placed at the proposed footing embedment level (refer to test
method ASTM D 1194).
6.2 In Situ Direct Shear Tests On Rock Discontinuities
This test is used to measure the peak and residual direct shear strength along an in
situ rock discontinuity as a function of the stress normal to the sheared plane. Because of the
complicated nature of the test, it is typically restricted to slope, tunnel, dam, or bridge
foundation projects, where a failure along a particular discontinuity can have a significant
impact. In general, the in situ test is performed on a larger specimen than the one used in a
laboratory testing and is, therefore, more representative of actual conditions such as surface
irregularities along the discontinuity.

IN SITU TESTING 7-9
The test requires several pieces of equipment that typically Consultants specializing in
rock mechanics would have on hand. The equipment includes rock saws, drills, hammers and
chisels, formwork, and materials for reinforced concrete encapsulation for preparing the test
specimen; jacks or rams and a reaction system for applying normal loads; a pump and
hydraulic ram, and a reaction system for applying the shear force; and appropriate load cells
and gauges for measuring the applied shear and normal forces and shear displacements.
The test includes a consolidation stage during which the pore pressures within the rock
and any infilling material adjacent to the shear plane are allowed to dissipate under full normal
stress before shearing is initiated. During the test, corrections to the normal load may be
necessary to hold the normal load constant. As in the more traditional soil shear strength
testing, once the peak shear strength is obtained additional readings can be taken to
determine the residual shear strength along the discontinuity (refer to ASTM D 4554).
6.3 Other Tests
 Large Penetration Test (LPT) –This test is a modification of the Standard Penetration
Test, which uses a larger diameter sampler for use in gravelly soils.
 Becker Penetration Test (BPT) –This test is used to investigate coarse-grained
materials (gravel, cobbles) by using an instrumented steel pipe pile.
 Iowa Stepped Blade Test (ISB) –This test attempts to directly measure the in situ
lateral stress state (Ko) in soils.
 Total Stress Cells –(TSC) –This test attempts to directly measure the in situ lateral
stress state (Ko) in soils.
 Push-in Spade Cells –This test attempts to directly measure the in situ lateral stress
state (Ko) in soils.
 Hydraulic Fracturing Test (HF) - This test attempts to directly measure the in situ lateral
stress state (Ko) in rock formations.

IN SITU TESTING 7-10
7. FIGURES
7-1: Specifications and Standards

SUBJECT ASTM AASHTO
Dilatometer - -
Chloride Content - Soil (Retaining Wall Backfill) - -
Chloride Ion In Water D 512 -
Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity of Water D 1125 -
Bearing Capacity of Soil for Static Load on Spread D 1194 -
Footings
pH of Water D 1293 -
Penetration Test and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils D 1583 -
Field Vane Shear Test in Cohesive Soil D1586 T 223
Mechanical Cone Penetration Tests of Soil D 3441 -
Selection of Aquifer Test Method in Determining D 4043 -
Hydraulic Properties by Well Techniques
Instantaneous Change in Head (Slug Test), for D 4044 -
determining Hydraulic Properties of Aquifers
Withdrawal and Injection Well Tests for D 4050 -
Determining Hydraulic Properties of Aquifer
Systems
Sulfate Ion in Brackish Water, Seawater, and D 4130 -
Brines
In Situ Determination of Direct Shear Strength of D 4554 -
Rock Discontinuities
Pressuremeter Testing in Soils D 4719 -
Subsurface Liquid Levels in a Borehole or D 4750 -
Monitoring Well (Observation Well)
High Strain Dynamic Testing of Piles D 4945 -
Preserving and Transporting Rock Core Samples D 5079 -
Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone D 5778 -
Penetration Testing of Soils
Hydraulic Conductivity of Porous Materials Using D 6391 -
Two Stages of Infiltration from a Borehole
Flat Plate Dilatometer D 6635 -
pH of Soil for Use in Corrosion Testing G 51 T 289
Soil Resistivity (ASTM –Field Procedure Using the G 57 T 288
Wenner Four-Electrode Method and AASHTO –
Laboratory Procedure)

IN SITU TESTING 7-11
8. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
ManualonSubsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions,
”1988
ASCE,“Use ofI n-Si
tu Test si
n Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ing,
”ASCE Speci
alTechnical
Publication No. 6, 1986
Depar
tmentoft heNav y,“ Soil
sMechani csDesi
gnManual7.
1,”NAVFAC DM-7.1, Naval
FHWA,“
ConePenet
romet
erTest
,”FHWA- SA-91-043, 1991
FHWA,“
Det
ermi
nat
ionofHor
izont
alSt
ressi
nSoi
l
s,”FHWA- RD-81-118, 1981
FHWA,“
Eval
uati
onofSel f
-boringPr
essur
emet
erTest
sinBost
onBl
ueCl
ay,
”Int
eri
m Repor
t,
FHWA- RD-80-052, 1980
FHWA,“
Eval
uationofSoi landRockPr
oper
ti
es,
”Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ingCi
rcul
arNo.5,
FHWA-IF-02-034, 2002
FHWA,“
FlatDi
l
atomet
erTest
,”FHWA- SA-91-044, 1991
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ingNot
ebook,
”(sect
ionsaddedwhenneeded)
FHWA,“
GroundAnchor sandAnchor
sSy
stems,
”Geot
echni
cal
Engi
neer
ingCi
rcul
ar,No.4,
FHWA IF-99-015, 1999
FHWA,“
Pressur
emet
erTestf
orHi
ghwayAppl
i
cat
ions,
”FHWA-IP-89-008, 1989
FHWA,“
RockSl
opes:Desi
gn,Ex
cav
ati
on,St
abi
l
izat
ion,
”1989
FHWA,“Sensi
ngSystemsforMeas uri
ngMechani
calProper t
iesi
nGr
oundMas
ses
,”Vol
s. 1 to
5, FHWA-RD-81-109 through FHWA-RD-81-113, 1981
FHWA, “
Soils and Foundations Workshop Reference Manual,”NHI Course No. 132012,
FHWA NHI-00-045, August 2000
FHWA,“Subsur f
aceInv esti
gati
ons–GeotechnicalSiteChar act
eri
zat
ion,
”Ref
erenc
eManual
for NHI Course No. 132031, FHWA-NHI-01-031, 2002
NCHRP,“Treat
mentofPr
obl
em Foundat
ionsf
orHi
ghwayEmbankment
s,”Sy
nthesi
s147,
1989
TRB,“
Landsl
i
des:I
nvest
igat
ionandMi
ti
gat
ion,”Speci
alRepor
t247,1996

CHAPTER 8
LABORATORY TESTS

LABORATORY TESTING 8-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................ 1
2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
3. SOILS................................................................................................................... 1
3.1 Atterberg Limits Tests........................................................................................... 2
3.1.1. Liquid Limit ........................................................................................................... 2
3.1.2. Plastic Limit .......................................................................................................... 2
3.1.3. Plasticity Index...................................................................................................... 2
3.1.4. Shrinkage Limit..................................................................................................... 3
3.2 Grain-Size Analysis (Gradation) Tests ................................................................. 3
3.2.1. Sieve Analysis Test .............................................................................................. 3
3.2.2. Hydrometer Test................................................................................................... 3
3.3 Moisture Content Test .......................................................................................... 4
3.4 Compaction Tests ................................................................................................ 4
3.4.1. Standard Proctor .................................................................................................. 4
3.4.2. Modified Proctor ................................................................................................... 4
3.4.3. Relative Density Tests.......................................................................................... 5
3.4.4. Maximum Index Density ....................................................................................... 5
3.4.5. Minimum Index Density. ....................................................................................... 5
3.5 Unit Weight Test................................................................................................... 5
3.6 Specific Gravity Test............................................................................................. 5
3.7 Chemical Tests..................................................................................................... 6
3.8 Visual Classification Tests.................................................................................... 6
3.9 Organic Content Test ........................................................................................... 6
3.10 R-Value Test ........................................................................................................ 7
3.11 Strength Tests ...................................................................................................... 7
3.11.1. Unconfined Compression Test ............................................................................. 8
3.11.2. Triaxial Compression Tests .................................................................................. 8
3.12 Consolidation Tests ............................................................................................ 10
3.12.1. One-Dimensional Test........................................................................................ 11
3.12.2. Constant Rate of Strain Test .............................................................................. 12
3.13 Collapse Potential Tests..................................................................................... 12
3.14 Swell Potential Tests (Clays).............................................................................. 12
3.14.1. Soil Suction Test ................................................................................................ 12
3.14.2. Oedometer Swell Test ........................................................................................ 13
3.14.3. Shrinkage Limit Test........................................................................................... 13
3.15 Permeability Tests .............................................................................................. 13
3.15.1. Constant Head Test ........................................................................................... 13
3.15.2. Falling Head Test ............................................................................................... 13
3.15.3. Triaxial Permeability Test ................................................................................... 13
3.16 Dynamic Properties ............................................................................................ 14

LABORATORY TESTING 8-ii
4. CORRELATIONS of Soil Properties................................................................... 14

5. ROCK ................................................................................................................. 15
5.1 Visual Classifications.......................................................................................... 15
5.2 Absorption and Bulk Specific Gravity Tests........................................................ 15
5.3 Durability Tests................................................................................................... 15
5.3.1. Jar Slake Test .................................................................................................... 16
5.3.2. Slake Durability Test (2-cycle) ............................................................................ 16
5.4 Soundness Test ................................................................................................. 16
5.5 Permeability Test................................................................................................ 17
5.6 Rock Strength Test............................................................................................. 17
5.6.1. Point Load Strength Index Test .......................................................................... 17
5.6.2. Unconfined Compression Test ........................................................................... 17
5.6.3. Triaxial Compressive Strength Test ................................................................... 17
5.6.4. Elastic Moduli –Uniaxial Compressive Test....................................................... 18
5.6.5. Splitting Tensile Strength Test............................................................................ 18
5.6.6. Direct Shear Test ............................................................................................... 18
5.7 Unit Weight Test................................................................................................. 18
6. CORRELATIONS OF ROCK PROPERTIES...................................................... 18
7. SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS .............................................................. 20
8. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 23
8-1: Geotechnical Lab Task Sheet ..................................................................... 23
8-2: Geotechnical Lab Task Sheet, continued.................................................... 24
8-3: Summary of Results .................................................................................... 25
8-4: Line Sampling Data ..................................................................................... 26
8-5: Plasticity Index ............................................................................................ 27
8-6: Particle Size Distribution Report.................................................................. 28
8-7: Chemical Analysis ....................................................................................... 29
8-8: Consolidation Test Report........................................................................... 30
8-9: Hydrocollapse Test Report.......................................................................... 31
8-10: Direct Shear Test Report........................................................................... 32
9. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 33

LABORATORY TESTING 8-1
1. PURPOSE
The laboratory testing must be planned in advance but flexible to be modified based on
subsurface findings and test results. The ideal laboratory testing program provides the
Geotechnical Engineer with sufficient data to complete an economical design, yet not tie up
laboratory personnel and equipment with superfluous testing. The complexity of testing
required for a particular project may range from simple moisture content determinations to
specialized strength testing. Chapters 7 through 10 of the Participants Manual for the NHI
course on Subsurface Investigations (Module 1: No. 132031, 1997) provide an overview of
testing and correlations.
2. INTRODUCTION
For each project, a testing request form must be completed in order to plan the
laboratory testing program and to convey the plan to the Geotechnical Laboratory. The form
consists of two sheets, which are shown on Figures 8-1 and 8-2. Engineering judgment must
be exercised in setting up a testing program that produces the information required to resolve
the technical issues for each specific project. The Geotechnical Engineer should develop a
prioritized and cost-effective testing program. The project budget should be verified to ensure
that the recommended testing program can be accomplished, and determine if adjustments
are necessary to either the budget or the testing program. Test results are provided in the
Summary of Results table, shown in Figure 8-3.
When planning the laboratory testing program, the Geotechnical Engineer should first
examine all samples, and verify the descriptions provided in the field logs by performing visual
classification tests. The following information should be considered when planning the
laboratory testing program:
 Project type (bridge, embankment, roadway, buildings, etc.)
 Size of the project
 Loads to be imposed on the foundation soil and rock materials
 Types of loads ( static and dynamic cases)
 Critical tolerances for project (i.e., settlement and lateral deflection limitations)
 Vertical and horizontal variations in the soil profile as determined from field logs and
visual identification of soil types in the laboratory
 Known/suspected peculiarities of soil and rock materials at the project location (i.e.,
swelling soils, collapsible soils, organics, faults, erosion, degradation)
 Presence of intrusions, slickensides, fissures, concretions
 Project schedules and budgets
3. SOILS
Soil tests are performed to determine specific soil properties and how the soil responds
to imposed conditions. Types of behavior depend on the strength, compressibility,
permeability, corrosivity, and index properties. There are a number of tests that can be used

to determine the desired properties, depending on the soil type and application. The
Geotechnical Engineer should observe the quality of undisturbed samples when they are
extruded from the sampling tubes in the laboratory. The Geotechnical Engineer determines the
number, types, and requirements (such as site-specific confining stress levels for triaxial tests)
of needed tests. The Geotechnical Engineer should be familiar with each test procedure and
should verify that the tests are being performed according to his/her directions. Familiarity with
testing procedures and the soil samples helps the Geotechnical Engineer to appropriately
apply the test results in his/her subsequent geotechnical analyses.
3.1 Atterberg Limits Tests
Atterberg Limits Tests are index tests used to confirm visual descriptions. They are
performed on fine-grained soils (clays, silts) to determine the amount of water necessary to
achieve a range of behavioral states. Atterberg limits tests should be performed on each
representative soil, and additional tests are advisable to confirm grouping of apparently similar
soils and where project complexity justifies additional testing. These test results have been
correlated with other soil properties/parameters.
The liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL) and shrinkage limit (SL) are Atterberg limits.
However, for classification purposes, the term Atterberg limits generally refers to the more
common liquid and plastic limits only. The shrinkage limit test is less often included in common
laboratory programs. The shrinkage limit test is performed when swelling behavior in soils are
suspected that could influence design and construction.
3.1.1. Liquid Limit
The LL is the moisture content of a soil at the boundary between the liquid and plastic
states. The liquid limit is determined by ascertaining the moisture content at which two halves
of a soil cake will flow together for a distance of 0.5 inch along the bottom of the groove
separating the halves, when the bowl they are in is dropped between 15 to 35 times from a
distance of 0.4 inches at the rate of 2 drops/second. A plot of the relationship between the
water content and the number of drops is made using the results of the tests. The water
content corresponding to the intersection of the line with the 25-drop abscissa is the liquid limit
of the soil. Tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D 4318 (AASHTO T 89).
3.1.2. Plastic Limit
The PL is the moisture content at the boundary between the plastic and semisolid
states. The plastic limit is determined by ascertaining the lowest moisture content at which the
material can be rolled into threads 0.125 inches in diameter before crumbling. Tests are
performed in accordance with ASTM D 4318 (AASHTO T 90).
3.1.3. Plasticity Index
The Plasticity Index (PI) is the difference between the LL and PL. The results are
generally reported as LL and PI values on the Summary of Results table, Figure 8-3, and on
the Line Sampling Data sheet, Figure 8-4. Results can also be plotted on a Plasticity chart,

which provides a visual representation of the degree of plasticity and primary soil type (silt or
clay). See Figure 8-5.
3.1.4. Shrinkage Limit
The shrinkage limit test is performed on clay soils suspected to have swell potential.
Thet est det
ermi nesthel i
mi tsofasoi l’
stendencyt ol
osev olumedur ingdec reasesi nmoi sture
content. The shrinkage limit is defined as the maximum water content at which a reduction in
water content does not cause a decrease in volume of the soil mass. Tests are performed in
accordance with ASTM D 4318 (AASHTO T 92).
3.2 Grain-Size Analysis (Gradation) Tests
The gradation tests are performed to determine the particle size distribution of the soil
which could be used for soil classification. The particle size distribution information enables an
evaluation of engineering properties such as permeability, filter compatibility, erosion, scour,
and frost susceptibility, and also determines material suitability for earthwork construction and
backfill. The tests consist of two types: sieve analysis for coarse-grained soils (sands, gravels)
and hydrometer analysis for fine-grained soils (clays, silts). Materials containing both types of
soils are tested by both methods and the results are merged to create one particle size
distribution result. The results can be shown on the Line Sampling Data sheet (Figure 8-4). A
sample of Particle Size Distribution Report is shown on Figure 8-6.
3.2.1. Sieve Analysis Test
This test provides a direct measurement of the particle size distribution of a soil by
causing the sample to pass through a series of wire screens with progressively smaller
openings of known size. The amount of material retained on each sieve is weighed. See
AASHTO T 87 and 88 for discussion of preparation and testing of soils containing fine-grained
materials. See AASHTO T 27 for testing of coarse-grained materials including construction
aggregates. When knowing the amount of fines contained in a construction material (i.e., base
aggregate, drain rock, free-draining backfill) is desired, the test should be performed using a
wet-sieve analysis, which entails first weighing a dry sample and then washing the sample over
a No. 200 sieve prior to running over a sieve stack. Preparation of the sample for this
procedure is described in AASHTO T 11. For soil classification purposes, determining the
percentage of material finer than the No. 200 sieve may be desired. This simple test (often
called a P200 or Wash 200) is described in ASTM D 1140.
3.2.2. Hydrometer Test
The hydrometer test is based on Stokes Law. The diameter of a soil particle is defined
as the diameter of a sphere which has the same unit mass and which falls at the same velocity
as the particle. Thus, a particle size distribution is obtained by using a hydrometer to measure
the change in specific gravity of a soil-water suspension as soil particles settle out over time.
Hydrometer test results are sometimes needed to complete classification of soils. The
resulting gradations can provide data for determining several parameters, such as effective

diameter (D10) and coefficient of uniformity (Cu). Results are reported on a combined grain
size distribution plot as the percentage of sample smaller than, by weight, versus the log of the
particle diameter. Tests are performed in accordance with AASHTO T 88.
3.3 Moisture Content Test
The moisture content, w, is defined as the ratio of the weight of water in a sample to the
weight of solids. The moisture content is valuable in determining the properties of soils which
can be correlated to strength, settlement, and workability. The wet sample is weighed, and
then oven-dried to a constant weight at a temperature of about 230° F (110° C). The weight
after drying is the weight of solids. The change in weight, which has occurred during drying, is
equivalent to the weight of water. For organic soils, a reduced drying temperature of
approximately 140 F (60 C) is recommended. Tests are performed in accordance with
AASHTO T 265.
3.4 Compaction Tests
Compaction testing determines the optimum moisture content to achieve the maximum
dry density under a designated compactive effort for a specific soil. If appropriate, the results
are used in Construction Plans as the criteria necessary for the contractor to achieve a dense,
competent soil mass. If needed for statistical analysis, compaction tests should be performed
for each soil type likely to be used for embankment construction. The compaction testing is
performed using a specified compactive effort on a soil sample in a test mold of known
volume. The water content and the weight of the sample required to fill the mold are
determined. Results are plotted as dry density versus water content. By varying the water
content of the sample, several points on the moisture-density curve are obtained.
The compactive effort used is dependent on the proposed purpose of the site and the
loading to which it will be subjected. The Department requires the Harvard Miniature
compaction test method. Other types of compaction test methods can be performed, if
needed. The most commonly performed laboratory compaction tests are Proctor tests, with
twol evelsofcompact iveef fort
,asdescr ibedbel ow.TheSt andar dPr octort estusesa4”
diamet ermol d and t he modi fi
ed Pr octorusesa 6”di amet ermol d. Review the project
requirements and specifications to determine which test(s) should be performed. Relative
Density testing may be more appropriate for granular (sand) soils.
3.4.1. Standard Proctor
This test uses a 5.5-pound rammer dropped from a height of 12 inches. The sample is
compacted in three layers. Tests are performed in accordance with AASHTO T 99.
3.4.2. Modified Proctor
This test uses a 10-pound rammer dropped from a height of 18 inches. The sample is
compacted in five layers. Tests are performed in accordance with AASHTO T 180.

3.4.3. Relative Density Tests

Proctor tests often do not produce a well-defined moisture-density curve for
cohesionless, free-draining soils. Additionally, maximum densities from Proctor tests may be
less than those obtained in the field or by vibratory methods. For these soils, it may be
preferable to perform tests, which determine standard maximum and minimum densities of the
soil. The density of the in situ soil can then be compared with these maximum and minimum
densities and its relative density and/or percent compaction can be calculated.
3.4.4. Maximum Index Density
This test requires that either oven-dried or wet soil be placed in a mold of known
volume, and that a 2-psi surcharge load be applied. The mold is then vertically vibrated at a
specified frequency for a specified time. The weight and volume of the sample after vibrating
are used to calculate the maximum index density. Tests are performed in accordance with
ASTM D 4253.
3.4.5. Minimum Index Density.
This test is performed to establish the loosest condition, which can be attained by
standard laboratory procedures. Several methods can be used, but the preferred method is to
pour a steady stream of oven-dried soil into a mold of known volume through a funnel. Funnel
height should be adjusted continuously to maintain a free fall of the soil of approximately 0.5
inches. Tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D 4254.
3.5 Unit Weight Test
The purpose of unit weight determinations is for use in several types of engineering
analyses, such as settlement, shrink/swell, and stability. The unit weight is determined by
dividing the weight of the undisturbed sample by its volume. It is preferable to use specimens
with a uniform shape (such as cylindrical from a tube sample), because the volume can be
more reliably based on measurements of diameter and length. The unit weight results are
included in the Summary of Results table (Figure 8-3).
3.6 Specific Gravity Test
The specific gravity of soils (Gs) is used to relate the weight of the soil to its volume.
Typically, an assumed Gs of 2.65 to 2.70 is sufficient to use in laboratory computations and
geotechnical analyses. Therefore, this test is usually performed for special cases such as
particle size analysis (hydrometer test) and unusual soil materials. Gs is defined as the ratio of
the mass in air of a given volume of soil particles to the mass in air of an equal volume of gas
free distilled water at a stated temperature (typically 60° F). The specific gravity is determined
by means of a calibrated pycnometer, by which the mass and temperature of a de-aired
soil/distilled water sample is measured. Tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D 854
(AASHTO T 100). This method is used for soil samples composed of particles less than the
No. 4 sieve. For particles larger than this sieve, use the procedures for Specific Gravity and
Absorption of Coarse Aggregate, AASHTO T 85. Test results can be shown on the Line
Sampling Data sheets (Figure 8-4).

3.7 Chemical Tests
Chemical tests are performed to determine the corrosion classification of soil and water.
This information is necessary to determine corrosion protection requirements for buried
structures such as culverts, piles, footings, and ground anchors. A series of tests should be
performed for each stream crossing and culvert location. The tests are performed to determine
the pH, resistivity, chloride content, and sulfate content. The Geotechnical Laboratory
performs the pH and resistivity tests. These tests require samples weighing about 15 pounds.
Results are shown on the Line Sampling Data sheets (Figure 8-4). A sample chemical analysis
test report is shown on Figure 8-7.
3.8 Visual Classification Tests
Visual classification tests are performed to determine primary soil constituents and
material behavior, which could affect the design and construction. The Geotechnical Engineer
gains a greater knowledge of the soil types and their behavior by personally performing the
classification tests. The visual classification test is used to verify soil types and corresponding
influence on the design. Visual classification tests assist the Geotechnical Engineer in
finalizing the laboratory testing program. Refer to ASTM D 2487 and D 2488 (refer to Tables 1
through 12 in ASTM D 2488 for a quick summary of terms and categories that can be
interpreted from these tests). Information that is determined by these tests includes:
 Degree of organic content (odor and visual content)
 Primary constituent and the soil classification based on coarse or fine grained soil
categories
 Dry strength (indicates relative clay content and plasticity)
 Dilatancy (indicates whether the soil is cohesive or cohesionless)
 Toughness (indicates the plasticity behavior of the soil when the water content is
near its plastic limit)
3.9 Organic Content Test
Organic soils demonstrate undesirable engineering characteristics, most notably low
strength, high immediate compressibility, and continued long term settlements. The behavior
of soils with organic contents less than 20% by weight is generally controlled by the mineral
component of the soil. When organic contents are in excess of 20%, the behavior is governed
by the organic component of the material. In the field, these soils can usually be identified by
their dark color, musty odor and low unit weight. The most performed laboratory test for design
pur posesi stheI gniti
onLosst est,whichmeasur eshowmuchofasampl e’ smassbur nsoff
when placed in a muffle furnace. The results are presented as a percentage of the total
sample mass. Tests are performed in accordance with AASHTO T 267.

3.10 R-Value Test

Pavement subgrade tests are performed for the Department Roadbed Design Section.
The R-value test is used by the Department to measure subgrade strength. Other tests such
as the Resilient Modulus (MR) and the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) are used by other
states’ tr
anspor tati
ondepar tment s.Thi stestisusedt odet er minet heabi l
it
yofasoi lt
or esist
lateral deformations under a vertical load. The resistance is identified as the R-value. R-values
are measured with a stabilometer, which is a triaxial type device. A vertical load is applied and
the lateral pressure is transmitted to the fluid filled chamber, which is measured with a
pressure gauge. The test results are shown on the Line Sampling Data sheet (Figure 8-4).
Currently the Department uses this test to determine suitability of material to be used as fill
material. This test is also used to determine swell pressure of expansive soils. The data is
used to determine the thickness of overburden necessary to prevent expansion. Refer to
AASHTO T 190.
3.11 Strength Tests
Geotechnical design of embankments, cuts, walls, and foundations requires a thorough
understanding of the strength properties of soils. The level of effort used to determine soil
strength parameters varies, depending on the size and complexity of the project elements and
consequences of failure. The shear strength of a soil is the maximum shearing stress the soil
structure can resist before failure. Soils generally derive their strength from friction between
par ticl
es( ex pressed ast he angl e ofi nt
ernalf r
ict
ion,Ф)orcohesi on bet ween par ti
cl
es
(expressed as the cohesion, c in units of force/unit area), or both. These parameters are
ex pr essedi nt heform oft otalst ress(c,Ф)oref fectivest ress( c,Ф).The total stress on any
soil layer is induced by the overburden pressure plus any applied loads. The effective stress
equals the total stress less the pore water pressure.
For simple projects, sufficient strength information can be obtained from strength
correlations using field and laboratory index tests. However, strength testing may be needed
when there is uncertainty in the knowledge of material properties, or if design loads/stresses
are significant. The type of tests needed depends on whether the analysis is performed using
total or effective stresses. Chapter 7, of the Participants Manual for the NHI course on
Subsurface Investigations provides guidance on the selection of test types and the
determination of applied loads/pressures. The general design cases and applicable stress
categories are summarized below:
Design Case Analysis Type and Strength Parameters
Foundations Total Stress –Undrained Strengths
Excavation Effective Stress –Drained Strengths
Natural Slope Effective Stress –Drained Strengths
Typically, at least three strength tests are performed to obtain a strength envelope and

identify any obviously erroneous test results. The confining pressures for each test should be
estimated by the Geotechnical Engineer, which should be based on the range of stress levels
to be experienced during various stages of construction (including the initial overburden
pressures). Typically, the first test has a confining stress similar to the existing overburden
pressure, and the second andt hi
rdt est swoul dhav ehi gherc onfi
nings tr
es s est odet ermineФ.
Testing pressures are commonly about 10, 20, and 40 psi (effective stresses). In cases where
the Mohr envelope is not linear (because of past preconsolidation) or the project is complex,
additional tests should be conducted in the lower stress range to better model the Mohr
envelope and to better define the cohesion intercept.
All laboratory test data and results should be scrutinized for quality of test procedures,
and soil samples. In selection of strength parameters, the Geotechnical Engineer should
realize that test results are indicative of a very small percentage of the soil mass, and the
natural variability of these materials at the site should be considered. The results are shown on
the Summary of Results table (Figure 8-3), and the detailed test specifics are often presented
on graphical figures.
The common methods of ascertaining shear strength parameters in the laboratory are
discussed below:
3.11.1. Unconfined Compression Test
The Unconfined Compression Test determines approximate undrained shear strengths
due to the slightly relaxed in situ pressures of the sample. The lack of confinement introduces
a relatively large error range. This test is a fast and economical means of approximating the
shear strength at shallow depths, but the reliability decreases with increasing depth. Triaxial
testing is recommended when more reliable values of cohesive shear strength are desired.
The test is performed on a cylindrical sample without any confining pressure, subjected to an
axial load until failure occurs. A simple hand- or motor-operated compressive load test frame is
commonly used, although use of triaxial apparatus can achieve the same results. This test is
typically performed on cohesive soils. Total stress parameters are obtained, which are only
applicable for the sampled depths. The cohesion is taken as one-half the unconfined
compressive strength, qu. Tests are performed in accordance with AASHTO T 208.
3.11.2. Triaxial Compression Tests
Triaxial tests provide controllable stresses and reliable measurements, which are
necessary for critical analyses. In this test, a cylindrical sample is subjected to an axial load
until failure occurs while also being subjected to confining pressures approximating a range of
in situ stress levels. Various types of triaxial tests are conducted as summarized below:
 Unconsolidated-Undrained (UU), or Q Test
This test is an improved means of determining undrained shear strengths compared to
the Unconfined Compressive Test, and is recommended for geotechnical analyses for
short-term stability. Test results are used primarily in the calculation of immediate
embankment stability as short-term (quick-loading) conditions. The test specimen is

prevented from changing its initial water content before or during shearing. Results are
total stress strength parameters, and are only applicable for the sampled depths. (Refer
to ASTM D 2850, AASHTO T 296.)
 Consolidated-Undrained (CU), or R Test
This test differs from the UU test by applying confining stresses to reconsolidate the
specimen before testing. If the goal is to determine short-term undrained shear
strengths, then no pore water pressure measurements are made, which simplifies test
procedures. However, the advantage of using this test type is to determine effective
stress parameters for both short-term and long-term design cases, which requires the
measurement of pore water pressures and more effort in test set-up. The Geotechnical
Engineer should determine the type of data needed for the design analyses and the
locations and numbers of tests required. The CU test specimen is allowed to
consolidate under the confining pressure prior to shearing, but no drainage is permitted
during shearing. This test takes longer and is more expensive than a UU test because
the sample must be backpressure saturated (to accurately measure pore water
pressures and specimen response), which may take a few days. A minimum of three
tests at different confining pressures is required to develop the Mohr envelope over the
applicable stress range. Often a 3-stage test can be performed on one specimen, which
saves time and reduces cost, as well as eliminates inconsistency between specimens.
A 3-stage test might not be possible where soft/compressible soil specimens
experience large deformations in the first or second shearing stages. (Refer to ASTM D
4767, AASHTO T 297.) The Bishop and Henkel reference is recommended for planning
and performing this test.
 Consolidated-Drained (CD), or S Test
This test is not as common as the CU test because the test may require a potentially
longer time to run and is primarily applicable for relatively cohesionless soils. This test
is similar to the CU test except that drainage is allowed during shearing and the rate of
shearing is very slow to prevent the buildup of excess pore water pressure. This test
may take days to perform, making it expensive. These tests are not performed often
because similar results can be obtained with the quicker CU tests. As with the CU test,
a minimum of three tests (or stages) is required. Effective stress strength parameters
are obtained without the need for pore water pressure measurement. Test results are
used for calculating long-term stability of embankments where relatively cohesionless
materials exist along potential failure surfaces. (Refer to the Corps of Engineers
“Labor ator ySoi l
sTest ingEngi neer i
ngandDesi gnManual ”.
)
 Direct Shear Test
This is a low cost test that provides reasonable strength values for undisturbed or re-
compacted specimens of cohesionless soils. Direct shear test apparatus is used to
determine residual (remolded) shear strengths of landslide shear zone materials. To

conduct the test, a thin soil sample is placed in a shear box consisting of two parallel
blocks, and a vertical force normal to the shear surface is applied. One block remains
fixed while the other block is moved parallel to it in a horizontal direction. The soil fails
by shearing along a plane that is forced to be horizontal. A series of at least three tests
with varying normal forces is required to determine the shear strength parameters for a
particular soil. This test is typically run as a consolidated-drained test on cohesionless
materials. Where the soils are cohesive, the strain rate will need to be calculated and is
usually very slow to prevent the build-up of pore water pressures. Tests are performed
inaccor dancewi t
hASTM D3080( AASHTOT236) .Anex ampl eof“ Di r
ectShearTest
Repor t
”isshownonFi gur e8-10. (Refer to the Corps of Engineers “ LaboratorySoi ls
Test i
ngEngi neer ingandDesi gnManual ”.)
 Simple Direct Shear Test
This test is conducted to measure undrained (constant volume) strength and stress-
strain characteristics of cohesive soils using a constant rate of simple shear
deformation mode of loading after completion of one-dimensional consolidation. This
test is applicable for undisturbed and remolded soil samples. Tests are performed in
 Miniature Vane Shear and Penetrometer Tests
These inexpensive tests are used as an index of the undrained shear strength (Su) of
clay materials. These tests are applicable for projects that are relatively simple and low-
risk. Both tests consist of hand-held devices that are pushed into the sample and either
a torque resistance (Torvane or other vane apparatus) or a tip resistance (pocket
penetrometer) is measured. They can be performed in the laboratory or in the field,
typically on the ends of undisturbed thin-walled tube samples, as well as along the
sides of test pits. Miniature vane shear tests are performed in accordance with ASTM
D 4648.
3.12 Consolidation Tests

When large loads (such as embankments and spread footings) are applied on cohesive
soils, the soils consolidate, i.e., settle over time, through a combination of the rearrangement
of the individual particles and the squeezing out of water. The amount and rate of settlement is
of great importance in construction. For example, an embankment may settle and create a gap
between the approach slab and the bridge abutment. The calculation of settlement involves
many factors, including the magnitude of the load, the change in stress at the depths where
compressible soils exist, the water table, and characteristics of the soil itself. Consolidation
testing is performed to determine soil properties that are used in settlement analyses.
Consolidation tests are conducted when embankments or structure loads are applied
over deposits of relatively soft/loose or compressible fine-grained soils. Test samples should
be selected after boring logs are reviewed, and subsurface cross-sections are developed. At
least one consolidation test should be performed for each distinct soil unit developed in the

cross-section. Additional tests may be needed if the soil layers are thick and sub-layers are
required for the analyses. The test samples should be obtained from the middle of the subject
soil layers and sub-layers.
Tests should preferably be performed on undisturbed samples obtained from samplers,
such as Shelby Tubes or Osterberg samplers. Samples obtained by SPT, Dames & Moore,
and Sprague & Henwood samplers are sometimes used for consolidation testing, but results
include error because of sample disturbance. When conducting tests on disturbed samples,
the preconsolidation pressure is difficult to interpret because the soil structure has relaxed
towar dsther emol dedor“ nor mal lyconsol i
dated”state.
The Geotechnical Engineer must determine the range of test loads (pressures) based
on overburden pressures and anticipated loading conditions. This includes whether a
rebound/reload cycle should be performed, and if so, at what stress levels. Soils that are
organic have secondary consolidation characteristics that should be determined by continuing
certain stress levels well into the secondary range (which might take hours or days in some
cases). The Geotechnical Engineer needs to identify which test load levels should be applied
with longer durations to determine secondary consolidation coefficients (corresponding to
actual stress levels critical in the long term).
3.12.1. One-Dimensional Test
The most often used method of consolidation testing is the one-dimensional test. In this
test, a specimen is placed in a consolidometer between two porous stones, which allows flow
of water. Specimen size can vary depending on the equipment used. Various loading
procedures can be used during a one-dimensional test with incremental loading being the
most common. With this procedure, the specimen is subjected to increasing loads; typically
beginning at approximately 1/16 tsf and doubling each increment up to 48 tsf. After each load
application, the change in sample height is monitored incrementally for 24 hours, generally. To
evaluate the recompression parameters of the sample, an unload/reload cycle can be
performed. To better evaluate the recompression parameters for overconsolidated clays, the
unload/reload cycle may be performed after the preconsolidation pressure has been defined.
After the maximum loading has been reached, the load is removed in decrements. Tests are
performed in accordance with AASHTO T 216. An example summary graph, with calculated
consolidation parameters and soil moisture/density, is shown on the Consolidation Test Report
in Figure 8-8.
The data from a consolidation test is usually present
edonanε -log p curve, which plots
per cent agest rain(ε)asaf unct i
onoft hel ogofpr essure(p).Thepar amet ersnecessar yf or
settlement calculation can be derived from the curve: compression index (Cc), recompression
index (Cr), and preconsolidation pressure (po or Pc). A separate plot is prepared of change in
sample height versus log of time for each load increment. From this, the coefficient of
consolidation (Cv) and coefficient of secondary compression (Cα) can be derived. These
parameters are used to estimate the rate of primary settlement and amount of secondary
compression.

3.12.2. Constant Rate of Strain Test

Other loading methods include the Constant Rate of Strain Test (ASTM D 4186) in
which the sample is subjected to a constantly changing load while maintaining a constant rate
of strain; and measuring the pore water pressure of the soil sample, for an undrained test. A
direct analogy is drawn between laboratory consolidation and field settlement amounts and
rates.
3.13 Collapse Potential Tests
This test is often called a Hydrocollapse Test and is used to estimate the collapse
potential of soils (under the influence of saturation). This test is primarily used on loess and
loess type materials that have low dry unit weights, have low or no plasticity, have a high void
ratio,andc ant oler at
enearv er t
icalcutswhendr y.Thesemat er i
alshav ea“ cardhouse”t ype
structure and collapse when saturated. Structures founded on these soils could experience
serious damage if the soil becomes saturated.
Collapse potential of a soil is determined by placing an undisturbed sample into a
consolidation ring at its natural moisture content. Appropriate loads are applied to the sample
to achieve the planned stress levels. The soil sample is saturated at the desired stress level
and load is held constant to monitor the collapse before applying the next load increment. The
vertical displacement is measured at each stress level, similar to performing a consolidation
test. The results are graphically presented as shown on Figure 8-9.
The Geotechnical Engineer needs to identify the soil samples that may be impacted by
exposure to water during or after construction. The Geotechnical Engineer must determine the
stress level at which the specimen should be saturated, based on expected conditions during
or following construction. (Refer to ASTM D 5333 for performance of this test.)
3.14 Swell Potential Tests (Clays)
Some soils, particularly those containing montmorillonite clay, tend to increase in
volume when their moisture content increases. These soils can be highly problematic resulting
in costly damage to structures being supported by them. Test types include:
3.14.1. Soil Suction Test
The soil suction test provides a characterization of the behavior of expansive soils and a
reliable estimate of anticipated volume change. This is the preferred test method, according to
FHWA-RD-79-51 (1979). However, conducting this test is not common and equipment
needed to perform this test is typically not available in laboratories. Soil suction is the pulling
force exerted on the soil-water by the soil mass and is typically measured in tons per square
foot. The tendency for soil suction is directly related to the relative humidity of the soil. The
simplest and most reliable technique for measuring the relative humidity of a sample is to use
a thermocouple psychrometer. Undisturbed soil samples at in-place, dried and wetted
moisture contents are placed in separate airtight containers fitted with a rubber stopper
through which the tip of the psychrometer is inserted. The purpose of wetting and drying is to

establish a range of moisture contents over which the soil suction can be measured. The
samples are allowed to stabilize for approximately 48 hours after which the psychrometer
measurements are taken. The natural moisture content of each sample is then determined
using the volume displacement method.
3.14.2. Oedometer Swell Test
The swell potential of a soil can be approximated from the consolidometer test methods
described in ASTM D 4546 (AASHTO T 258). It is more convenient to perform this test than
Soil Suction test since the Geotechnical Laboratory is equipped with the needed apparatus to
conduct this test. (Refer to FHWA-RD-79-51 (1979) for guidance on the procedure and use of
the test.)
3.14.3. Shrinkage Limit Test
This Atterberg limit test is easily performed and the obtained data can be correlated to
swell potential of the soil. It does not measure swell, but rather the degree a sample shrinks
when dried. Therefore, the correlation is an indirect approach to measure swell potential.
FHWA-RD-79-51 (1979) describes the application of this test data, as well as its limitations.
3.15 Permeability Tests
. Soil permeability can be measured either directly from field testing or indirectly from
laboratory tests, although not as accurately. The Geotechnical Engineer should evaluate
whether geotechnical design for the project needs permeability data. The following are typical
laboratory tests:
3.15.1. Constant Head Test
To conduct this test, a permeameter into which the sample is placed and compacted to
the desired relative density is used. Water (preferably de-aired) is introduced by an inlet valve
until the sample is saturated. Water is then allowed to flow through the sample while a
constant head is maintained. The permeability is measured by the quantity of flow of discharge
over a specified time. This method is generally used only for coarse-grained soils. Tests
should be performed in accordance with ASTM D 2434 (AASHTO T 215). Alternatively, a
constant head test can be performed on a compacted specimen in a compaction mold
following the procedures of ASTM D 5856.
3.15.2. Falling Head Test
To conduct this test, an apparatus and a procedure similar to the constant-head test
above are used. The test is applicable for fine-grained soils. The soil is compacted into a mold.
The permeability is measured by the decrease in the head of water for a specified time. Tests
are performed in accordance with ASTM D 5856.
3.15.3. Triaxial Permeability Test
For fine-grained soils, tests using a triaxial cell are generally preferred, because
Constant and Falling Head tests take too long to perform. In situ conditions can be modeled
by application of an appropriate confining pressure. The sample can be saturated using back-
pressuring techniques. Water flows through the sample under pressure and measurements
are taken until steady-state conditions occur. Tests are performed in accordance with the
Flexible Wall test procedures described in ASTM D 5084.
3.16 Dynamic Properties
Tests are performed to assess ground motion amplification parameters and
liquefaction susceptibility of soils. Many dynamic properties can be obtained through in situ
tests that limit sample disturbance, which is inherent in laboratory samples. (Refer to Kramer
(1996) for more information.) The most common tests are listed below:
 Resonant Column Test
This is a low strain test used to determine the shear modulus, shear damping, and
Young’ smodul if
ordy nami cl
oadi ngs.Theset est sareusual l
yper formedoncohesi v e
soils to determine the ground motion amplification parameters. This test is discussed in
ASTM D 4015.
 Cyclic Triaxial Test
This test is usually performed on sands to determine liquefaction susceptibility although
it can also be used to obtain ground motion amplification parameters. Refer to ASTM D
3999 and D 5311.
 Cyclic Direct Simple Shear Test
This test models large strains similar to the Cyclic Triaxial Test. This test is considered
to model the earthquake stress conditions more accurately than Cyclic Triaxial Tests.
See ASTM,“ Geot echni calTest ing Jour nal
,”Vol .16,No.1,pp.36-45,and “ An
Evaluation of Direct Simple Shear Tests on Clay, Geotechnique, Vol. 37, No.1, pp 25-
35.
4. CORRELATIONS OF SOIL PROPERTIES
Nonhomogeneous nature of soils, finite exploration and laboratory testing budgets,
sample disturbance, and the inherent empirical nature of geotechnical design procedures all
make correlations essential tools for Geotechnical Engineers. Correlations are used to
approximate engineering properties and to check the reasonableness of test results and
assumptions. The use of correlations enables greater application of data obtained from the
geotechnical exploration program. Many correlations are based on common tests, such as
moisture contents, Atterberg limits, SPT values, and general soil descriptions. The Participants
Manual for the NHI course on Subsurface Investigations provides a discussion of the most
commonly used correlations. Common correlations include the following:
 Unit weights as a function of void ratios for typical soil types
 Relative density of cohesionless soils as a function of SPT values
 Consistency of cohesive soils as a function of SPT values
 Consolidation parameters based on general soil classifications

 Consolidation parameters based on moisture contents, liquid limits, and Plasticity

Indices
 Permeability parameters based on general soil classifications
 Permeability parameters based on soil gradations, void ratios, and unit weights
 Cohesive shear strengths based on SPT values for silt and clay soils
 Classifications of cohesive soils based on Atterberg limits and SPT blow counts
 Angl
esofshear
ingr
esi
stance,Φ,basedonSPTval
uesf
orcohesi
onl
esssoi
ls
 Angl esofshear i
ngr esistance(
peakandr
esi
dual
),Φ,andΦr
,basedonPl
ast
ici
ty
Indices for cohesive soils
 Shear strengths of compacted soils, based on general soil classifications
 Compaction optimum moistures, based on Plastic Limits
5. ROCK
Laboratory testing on rock samples is for determining certain properties such as
strength, elasticity, and degradation potential. The results are applied to the design of rock
slopes and foundations. Typically, the properties of in situ rock are determined by the
presence of joints and bedding planes. These features cannot be modeled in the laboratory,
since laboratory tests are performed on samples of limited size. Therefore, the application of
the laboratory test results should be used only with a thorough understanding of the affects the
in situ characteristics of the rock mass, especially the structural discontinuities, have on the
design performance. Test descriptions are briefly described in the following sections:
5.1 Visual Classifications
The Rock Quality Designations (RQD) is determined in the field when core barrels are
opened. In the laboratory, a closer examination can be made of joint surfaces and infilling
conditions, as well as a confirmation of RQD and Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC) values. In
some cases, soil-like zones may exist within the rock unit (i.e., decomposed rock, gouge
zones, interbed contact zones, or poorly indurated material). When soil-like materials are
encountered, consideration should be given to performing soil tests to properly characterize
these zones, such as moisture contents and Atterberg limits.
5.2 Absorption and Bulk Specific Gravity Tests
Absorption is a measure of the amount of water a dry specimen can absorb during a
48-hour soaking period. The amount of absorbed water is indicative of the porosity of the
sample. Bulk specific gravity is used to calculate the unit weight of the material. Tests are
performed in accordance with ASTM C 97.
5.3 Durability Tests
Durability tests are conducted to determine the relative durability of rock, which are
useful for evaluating whether the rock potentially degrades when exposed to alternating cycles
of wetting and drying.
5.3.1. Jar Slake Test

This is a simple, qualitative test used to assess durability of weak rocks, such as shales
or mudstones, when exposed to atmospheric conditions. Performance of a rock sample in this
test determines if a rock is relatively nondurable. More quantitative tests may need to be
performed depending on the environmental conditions and application. To conduct the Jar
Slake Test, a rock sample is immersed in water for a minimum of 24 hours. If degradation in
the form of fractures, chips, flakes occurs, the condition is described, including the
approximate percentage of material that sloughed. There is no ASTM or AASHTO procedure
for this test. The following are rock durability categories based on the results of the Jar Slake
Test (per Wood and Deo, 1975):
Jar Slake Value Behavior
1 Degrades to a pile of flakes or mud
2 Breaks rapidly, forms many chips, or both
3 Breaks slowly, forms few chips, or both
4 Breaks rapidly, forms several fractures, or both
5 Breaks slowly, develops few fractures, or both
6 No visible change
5.3.2. Slake Durability Test (2-cycle)
This test is performed on shales, mudstones, or other weak rocks that may be
susceptible to degradation when exposed to atmospheric conditions. This test is useful for an
assessment of degradations of rocks after the first-time atmospheric exposure. Examples
would be exposed rock surfaces of excavated holes when socketing a drilled shaft, or exposed
newly constructed rock cut surfaces. Degradation assessments are also used to evaluate
long-term performance of embankment fill materials. This test consists of rotating oven-dried
rock fragments submerged in water in a drum. Two cycles of rotation/submersion are
performed and the final oven dried mass is compared to the initial oven dried mass. This mass
ratio along with the size and shape of the remaining sample are used to determine the Slake
Durability Index (SDI). Low SDI values indicate that the sample is susceptible to degradation.
This test is described in ASTM D 4644. The SDI values are grouped into the following
categories:
Slake Durability Index, SDI Material Classification
0 to 60% Soil-like
60% to 90% Intermediate
90% to 100% Rock-like
5.4 Soundness Test
This test is used to determine the suitability of aggregate for use as MSE backfill. The
test consists of four or five cycles of drying and immersion of rock slabs in a sodium or
magnesium sulfate solution (AASHTO T-104). The percent of weight loss is expressed as
percent soundness. Refer to ASTM D 5240.
5.5 Permeability Test

The permeability of rock masses is depended on quantity of fluid flowing through
discontinuities. It is therefore most appropriate to determine permeability by in situ tests such
as variable head tests or pumping tests. Laboratory permeability tests can be performed by
methods using flowing air. The test is performed on a small sample in accordance with ASTM
D 4525.
5.6 Rock Strength Test
Laboratory tests, except for Point Load tests, to determine strengths of rocks are
relatively uncommon for most highway applications. In most highway designs, the strength of
intact rock pieces is usually not a controlling factor. Point Load test data helps to characterize
strength of the rock, which is useful for evaluating excavatability. Compressive strength tests
may be needed for design of tunnels and highly loaded structure foundations on rock.
Typically, the Department sends rock samples to the University of Nevada, Reno, to have
these tests performed.
5.6.1. Point Load Strength Index Test
This inexpensive test can be performed in the field or the laboratory. Numerous tests
can be performed in a short time. Estimates of uniaxial compressive strengths using the point
load strength index test results are approximate and should be used with engineering
judgment when making general rock strength classifications. Point Load strength index is an
indicator of intact rock strength and hardness. The test subjects the rock specimen to an
increasing concentrated point load, applied through a pair of truncated, conical platens, until
failure. The failure load is used to calculate the size corrected point load strength index (Is(50)),
and to estimate the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock core specimen. Rock core
samples are typically tested diametrically (load applied along the axis of the diameter).
Irregular rock fragments and lumps can also be tested, with some preparation. Tests can be
performed both parallel and perpendicular to inherent planes of weakness within the rock
mass. Tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D5731 and the International Society for
Rock Mechanics (ISRM).
5.6.2. Unconfined Compression Test
This test is performed on intact rock core specimens, which preferably have a length of
at least two times the diameter. The specimen is placed in the testing apparatus and loaded
axially at an approximately constant rate such that failure occurs within 2 to 15 minutes. Tests
are performed in accordance with ASTM D 2938.
5.6.3. Triaxial Compressive Strength Test
This test is performed to measure the ultimate compressive shear strength and elastic
properties, such as Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio, of rock under a confining
pressure. The application of confining pressure to the rock sample to be tested is to simulate
the stress conditions under which the rock existed in the field. Tests are performed in
accordance with ASTM D 2664 (AASHTO T 226).

5.6.4. Elastic Moduli –Uniaxial Compressive Test
This test is performed to determine the stress-deformation characteristics of rock,
calcul
atet heYoung’ sModul us,andt oev al
uat ethesui t
abili
tyofther ock to support structure
foundations. (Refer to ASTM D 3148.)
5.6.5. Splitting Tensile Strength Test
This is an indirect tensile strength test similar to the Point Load Strength Index test.
However, the compressive loads are line loads applied parallel to the core’ sax isbyst eel
bearing plates between which the specimen is placed horizontally. Loading is applied
continuously such that failure occurs within one to ten minutes. Tests are performed in
5.6.6. Direct Shear Test
This test is performed to determine the shear strength of a rock discontinuity, such as
joints and bedding contacts. Test results are used for stability analysis of rock slopes. The test
is similar in concept to the direct shear test for soils. The rock sample is grouted in the lower
platen of the shear box. The line of force is directed to act along the discontinuity in the rock.
Irregularities in the surface of the discontinuity can create misleading results because the
mode of failure may vary to that in the field. An asperity in the discontinuity surface results in
either shearing or overriding of the asperity, depending on the normal load applied. (Refer to
ASTM D 5607.) Depending on the application, an in situ direct shear test may be
warranted/preferred (see Figure 8-10).
5.7 Unit Weight Test
This test is performed to measure the total/moist or oven-dried unit weight of a rock
core sample. The total/moist or oven-dried unit weight is directly determined by dividing the
total/moist or oven-dried weight by the cylindrical volume of the intact sample respectively.
The volume measurement includes any voids or pore spaces in the sample. Samples should
be preserved and tested at the moisture content representative of field conditions. Moisture
contents are performed in accordance with ASTM D 2216.
6. CORRELATIONS OF ROCK PROPERTIES
Rock property correlations utilize limited databases and the rock formation used to
develop the correlation likely differs from the mass being studied. Therefore, experience and
engineering judgment is necessary when correlating test results to rock properties. The
controlling factors in the behavior of a rock mass are the structural discontinuities. The NHI
course on Subsurface Investigations, Chapter 10, provides a discussion of the most commonly
used correlations. Common correlations include the following:
 Compressive strength based on rock types
 Uniaxial compressive strength based on Point Load tests

 Modulus of elasticity based on rock types

 Shear strength based on rock types
 Joint Roughness Coefficients based on visual examination of specimen


The appropriate test method (ASTM, AASHTO, or Nevada) is determined by the
Principle Geotechnical Engineer.
SOIL TESTS
Test
Tests ASTM AASHTO NDOT
Category
Visual Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes D 2487 -

Identification (Unified Classification System
Description and Identification of Soils (Visual- D 2488 -
Manual Procedure)
Index Specific Gravity of Soils D 854 T 100
Properties
Materials Finer than No. 200 Sieve in Mineral C 117 T 11
Aggregates by Washing
Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregate C 136 T 27 T 206F
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils D 421 T 87
D 422 T 88
Materials Finer than No. 200 Sieve in Mineral D 1140 -
Aggregates by Washing
Resistance R-Value & Expansion Pressure of D 2844 T 190 T 106B
Compacted Soils T 115D
T 166A
Resilient Modulus- Soil - T 292

Shrinkage Factors of Soils by the Mercury Method D 427 T 92
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of D 4318 T 89 T 210F
Soils T 90 T 211F
T 212F
Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard D 698 T 99

Effort (12,400 ft-lbf/ft3 [600 kN-m/m])
Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified D 1557 T 180
Effort (56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 [2,700 kN-m/m3])
Harvard Miniature Compaction Device T 272 T 101E

Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock D 2216 T 265 T 112D
Maximum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils D 4253 -
Using A Vibratory Table
Minimum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils D 4254 -
and Calculation of Relative Density
Crumb Test to Identify Dispersive Clays D 6572
pH of Peat Materials D 2976

Chemical
Tests pH of Soils D 4972 T 238A
pH of Soil for Use in Corrosion Testing G 51 T 289
Sulfate Content D 4230 T 290

Resistivity D 1125 T 288 T 235B
& G 57
Chloride Content D 512 T 291
Moisture, Ash, and Organic Matter of Peat and D 2974 T 267
Other Organic Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soil D 2166 T 208

Strength
Testing Unconsolidated, Undrained Compressive Strength D 2850 T 296
of Cohesive Soils in Triaxial Compression
Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Compression Test D 4767 T 297
for Cohesive Soils
Consolidated Drained Triaxial Compression Test - -
Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidated D 3080 T 236
Drained Conditions
Miniature Vane Shear Test for Saturated Fine- D 4648 -
Grained Clayey Soil
Consolidated Undrained Direct Simple Shear D6528
Modulus and Damping of Soils by the Resonant- D 4015 -
Dynamic Column Test
Properties
Modulus and Damping of Soils by the Cyclic Triaxial D 3999 -
Apparatus
Load Controlled Cyclic Triaxial Strength of Soil D 5311 -
Consolidated Undrained Direct Simple Shear D 6528 -

Permeability of Granular Soils (Constant Head) D 2434 T215
Permeability
Hydraulic Conductivity of Saturated Porous D 5084 -

Materials Using a Flexible Wall Permeameter
Hydraulic Conductivity of Porous Materials Using a D 5856 -

Rigid-Wall, Compaction-Mold Permeameter
One-Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils D2435 T 216

Compression
Properties
One-Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils D 4186 -

Using Controlled-Strain Loading
One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of D 4546 T 258

Cohesive Soils
Measurement of Collapse Potential of Soils D 5333 -

ROCK TESTS
Test Category Tests ASTM AASHTO
Index Properties Absorption and Bulk Specific Gravity C 97 -

of Dimension Stone
Specific Gravity and Absorption of C 127 T 85
Coarse Aggregate
Preserving and Transporting Rock D 5079 -
Core Samples
Point Load Point Load Strength Index of Rock D 5731 -
Strength
Compressive Triaxial Compressive Strength of D 2664 T 226
Strength Undrained Rock Core Specimens
Without Pore Pressure Measurements
Unconfined Compressive Strength of D 2938 -
Intact Rock Core Specimens
Direct Shear Laboratory Direct Shear Strength D 5607 -
Tests – Rock Specimens Under
Constant Normal Stress
Tensile Strength Splitting Tensile Strength of Intact D 3967 -
Rock Core Specimens
Permeability Permeability of Rocks by Flowing Air D 4525 -
Durability Slake Durability of Shales and Similar D 4644 -
Weak Rock
Rock Slab Testing – Riprap D 5240 -
Soundness, By Use of
Sodium/Magnesium Sulfate

8. FIGURES
8-1: Geotechnical Lab Task Sheet

8-2: Geotechnical Lab Task Sheet, continued

8-3: Summary of Results

8-4: Line Sampling Data

8-5: Plasticity Index

8-6: Particle Size Distribution Report

8-7: Chemical Analysis

8-8: Consolidation Test Report

8-9: Hydrocollapse Test Report

8-10: Direct Shear Test Report

9. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
ManualonFoundat
ionI
nvest
igat
ions,
”1988
AASHTO,“
ManualonSubsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions,
”1984
ASTM,“
Geot
echni
calTest
ingJour
nal
,”Vol
.16,No.1,pp.36-45, 1993
Airey, D.W. and Wood, D.M. “ An Ev aluat
ion ofDir
ectSi
mpl
e ShearTest
s on Cl
ay,
”
Geotechnique, Vol. 37, No.1, pp 25-35, 1987
Bi
shop,A.
W.,andHenkel
,D.
J,“
TheTr
iax
ialTest
,”2ndEd.
,1962
Boul
anger,R. W. ,Chan,C. K.,Seed,H. B.,Seed,R.B.,and Sousa,J.
,(1993)
.“Alow
Compl i
ance Bidi r
ect i
onalCy cli
c Si mple ShearAppar
atus,
”Geotechni
calTest
ing
Journal, ASTM, Vol. 16.No.1, pp 36-45, 1993
Canadian Geotechni
calSoci
ety
,“Canadi
anFoundat
ionEngi
neer
ingManual
,”1985.
Cor
psofEngineers,“
LaboratorySoil
sTest ing, Engineer
ingandDesi
gnManual
,”No.
1110-2-
1906, Waterways Experiment Station, 1970
FHWA,“DesignandConstr
ucti
onofCompact edShal eEmbankments”,Vol s.1to5,FHWA-
RD-75-61, FHWA-RD-75-62, FHWA-RD-77-1, FHWA-RD-78-140, and FHWA-RD-78-
141,”1978
FHWA,“
Eval
uationofSoilandRockPr
oper
ti
es,
”Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ingCi
rcul
arNo.5,
FHWA-IF-02-034
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ingNot
ebook”
.
FHWA,“
Soi
landBaseSt abil
izat
ionandAssoci
atedDr ainageConsi
der
ati
ons,
”Vol
s.1and2,
FHWA-SA-93-004 and FHWA-SA-93-005, 1993
FHWA,“
Soi
l
sandFoundat
ionsWor
kshopManual
,”FHWA-HI-88-009, 2nd Ed., 1993
FHWA,“Subsurface Investigations, Participants Manual for Geotechnical and Foundation

Engineer
ing,”Modul e1,NHICour se13221,FHWA-HI-97-021, 1997
FHWA,“Techni
calGui
del i
nesforEx
pansi
veSoi
l
sinHi
ghwaySubgr
ades,
”Fi
nalRepor
t,
FHWA-RD-79-51, 1980
Kr
amer
,S.
L.,“
Geot
echni
calEar
thquakeEngi
neer
ing,
”1996.
NAVFAC,“
Desi
gnManualDM-7:Soi
lMechani
cs,
”1982.
TRB,“
GuidetoEar t
hwor kConst
ruct
ion:St
ateoft
heAr
tRepor
t,
”TRBRepor
tNo.8,I
SBN0-
309-04957-1, 1990

CHAPTER 9
MATERIALS DESCRIPTION

MATERIALS DESCRIPTION 9-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1
2. SOIL ..................................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Soil Type .............................................................................................................. 2
2.2 USCS Designation ............................................................................................... 3
2.3 Color..................................................................................................................... 3
2.4 Plasticity ............................................................................................................... 3
2.5 Moisture ............................................................................................................... 3
2.6 Relative Density and Consistency........................................................................ 3
2.7 Texture ................................................................................................................. 4
2.8 Cementation......................................................................................................... 4
2.9 Structure............................................................................................................... 4
2.10 Other Constituents/Characteristics....................................................................... 4
2.11 Origin.................................................................................................................... 5
3. ROCK................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Intact Character.................................................................................................... 5
3.1.1. Rock Name .......................................................................................................... 6
3.1.2. Color..................................................................................................................... 6
3.1.3. Degree of Weathering.......................................................................................... 7
3.1.4. Relative Hardness ................................................................................................ 7
3.1.5. Structure/Discontinuities ...................................................................................... 7
3.1.6. Core Recovery and Rock Quality Designation (RQD).......................................... 9
3.1.7. Other Rock Characteristics ................................................................................ 10
3.1.8. Formation Name ................................................................................................ 10
3.2 In Situ Character ................................................................................................ 11
3.2.1. Discontinuity Orientation .................................................................................... 11
3.2.2. Roughness ......................................................................................................... 11
4. EXPLORATION LOG ......................................................................................... 12
4.1 Field Log ............................................................................................................ 12
4.2 Drilling Remarks ................................................................................................. 13
4.3 Final Exploration Log ......................................................................................... 13
5. SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS.............................................................. 14
6. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 14
9-1: Soil Constituents –Definitions ................................................................... 14
9-2: Silt and Clay Characteristics ...................................................................... 15
9-3: Examples of Fine-Grained Soil Field Identification .................................... 16
9-4: Fine-Grained Soil Subclassification ........................................................... 16
9-5: Coarse-Grained Soil Subclassification....................................................... 17
9-6: Unified Soil Classification Summary .......................................................... 18
9-7: Degree of Plasticity .................................................................................... 19

MATERIALS DESCRIPTION 9-ii
9-8: Moisture Designations................................................................................ 19

9-9: Consistency of Cohesive Soils................................................................... 20
9-10: Relative Density for Granular Soils .......................................................... 20
9-11: Gradation Categories ............................................................................... 21
9-12: Criteria for Describing Structure............................................................... 21
9-13: Common Igneous Rocks.......................................................................... 22
9-14: Pyroclastic Rocks..................................................................................... 22
9-15: Igneous Rock Textures ............................................................................ 22
9-16: Common Sedimentary Rocks .................................................................. 23
9-17: Common Metamorphic Rocks.................................................................. 23
9-18: Scale of Relative Rock Weathering ......................................................... 24
9-19: Scale of Relative Rock Hardness............................................................. 25
9-20: Stratification Terms .................................................................................. 26
9-21: Joint and Bedding Spacing Terms ........................................................... 26
9-22: Standardized Volume Percentage Chart.................................................. 27
9-23: Graduation Chart ..................................................................................... 28
9-24: Measurement of Joints............................................................................. 29
9-25: Field Log Form......................................................................................... 30
9-26: Example, Final Exploration Log ............................................................... 31
9-27: Key to Boring Logs................................................................................... 32
7. REFERENCES................................................................................................... 33

MATERIALS DESCRIPTION 9-1
1. INTRODUCTION
Consistency when describing materials is essential so that users of the information can
properly understand and interpret the subsurface conditions. Material descriptions are based
on the visual-manual method, which uses visual observations and simple manual index tests
to estimate the physical and behavioral properties of the material (ASTM D 2488). Material
classifications are based on more detailed, visual-manual observations and inspections, as
well as the results of specific laboratory tests (ASTM D 2487). Physical and engineering
properties of materials are considered in classifications of soils and rocks. The detail of the
classification should not be dictated by the complexity or objectives of the project.
Classification should always be as complete as possible and based on factual information.
Interpretive information should be kept to a minimum and always put in parentheses.
Discussions of interpretive information can be provided in the text of Geotechnical Reports.
Material classifications, and information obtained during the subsurface explorations are
heavily relied on throughout the remainder of the investigation program and during the design
and construction phases of a project. They also have significant importance in resolving
claims disputes. It is therefore necessary for the method of reporting this data to be
standardized. Records of subsurface explorations should follow the format presented in this
Chapter.
2. SOIL
Soil classifications are based on the distribution and behavior of fine-grained (passing
No. 200 sieve) and coarse-grained (retained No. 200 sieve) soil constituents, as described in
ASTM D 2487 and D 2488. These procedures employ visual examination and simple manual
tests to identify soil characteristics, which are then included in the material description. For
example, estimates of grain-size distribution by visual examination indicate whether the soil is
fine-grained or coarse-grained. Manual tests for dry strength, dilatancy, toughness, and
plasticity indicate the type of fine-grained soil. Organics are generally identified by their color,
odor, and spongy feel. The general descriptive sequence for soil materials is listed below. As
a minimum, the first seven items should be included on the exploration logs.
 Soil Name
 USCS Designation
 Color
 Plasticity
 Moisture
 Consistency/Relative Density
 Texture
 Cementation
 Structure
 Other Constituents/Characteristics (unit weight, sensitivity, etc.)
 Origin

2.1 Soil Type
Definitions of various soil constituents are presented in Figure 9-1. To describe a soil,
the Geotechnical Engineer should determine whether the soil is predominantly fine or coarse-
grained. A mixed-grained soil, which contains both fine and coarse-grained constituents, is
categorized by determining its predominant engineering behavior. The procedures for
describing and classifying fine-grained and coarse-grained soils are as follows:
 Fine-grained Soils - Fine-grained soils are described by their engineering behavior
considering characteristics such as dilatancy, dry strength, toughness, dispersion, and
plasticity, as summarized on Figure 9-2. The index tests used to determine these
characteristics are described in ASTM D 2488. Examples of soil descriptions based on
index tests are shown on Figure 9-3. Figure 9-4 summarizes the subclassification order
for fine-grained soils. For example, a soil that contains 80% fine-grained constituents
(medium dry strength, slow dilatancy, medium toughness, low plasticity) and 20% sand
woul dbedescr i
bedas“ clayeysi l
twithsomesand. ”
 Coarse-grained Soils - Coarse-grained soils are described based on an estimation of
particle-size distribution, as shown on Figure 9-5. Where no constituent exceeds 50%
of the total sample, the coarse-grained constituent having the largest percentage
becomes the primary constituent. If the soil contains no discernable fines, then the soil
isdescr ibedas“ clean. ”Wher ethe secondary or additional constituent is fine-grained,
thet erm“ cl
ay”or“ sil
t”issel ectedbasedont hepr edomi nantpl asti
cit
ychar acterist
ics
from index tests. For example, a soil with 48% sand, 42% gravel, and 10% fine-grained
constituents (nonplastic,l owdr yst r
engt h)woul dbedescr i
bedas“ gr
av el lysandwi th
somesi lt.
”
 Organics - Organics can generally be identified by their distinctive dark color and by
their spongy feel. Fresh, wet organic soils usually have a distinctive odor of
decomposed organic matter. This odor can be made more noticeable by heating the
wet sample. The estimated percent and type of organic material present should be
included as part of the visual sample description. The percentage of organics or any
other constituent in a sample can be estimated visually by comparing the sample to
standardized volume percentage charts, Figure 9-22. Based on the percentage of
organics present, the material classification is as follows:
Peat 50 to 100% Primary Constituent

Organic (Soil Name) 15 to 50% Secondary Organic Constituent
(Soil Name) with some organic 5 to 15% Additional Organics Constituent
Secondary soil constituents should be described for peat. For example, a soil
containing greater than 50% organics by volume and more than 12% silt by weight would be
describedasa“ si
ltypeat .
”Thet y peofor gani cmat erial (peat,woodf i
bers,r oot
s,carboniz ed
wood, grass, leaves, etc.) should be identified if at all possible. Organics may range from

fibrous to amorphous and, at times, it may be very finely divided and hard to identify if a strong
organic odor is not present. If the presence of organics is suspected, the natural moisture
content or liquid limit of samples before and after oven drying can be determined and used to
verify the assumption. However, Atterberg limits tests are not applicable for peat.
2.2 USCS Designation
The USCS (Unified Soil Classification System) designation should be determined by

following the procedures specified in ASTM D 2487. The USCS designation, as reported on
exploration logs, will be an approximation based on the visual-manual soil description (ASTM
D 2488). Where classifications are based on grain-size and Atterberg limits tests, the USCS
designation will be more precisely defined. Figure 9-6 is a summary of the Unified Soil
Classification System.
2.3 Color
The color of a soil is of minor importance except to provide a clue as to its origin,
presence of organics, or for correlation with adjacent boreholes. The Geotechnical Engineer
should use the Munsell Soil Color Chart to describe soil colors.
2.4 Plasticity
Plasticity is a significant indicator property for cohesive soils. Field estimates of

plasticity should be based on dry strength and toughness tests (as described in Figure 9-2 and
discussed in ASTM D 2488). The relationship between these index tests and plasticity are
shown on Figure 9-7. An accurate measurement of plasticity is typically made in the
laboratory by means of the Atterberg limits test. A series of Atterberg limits tests should be
performed on representative samples to confirm visual-manual soil descriptions.
2.5 Moisture
A visual estimation of the relative moisture content of a soil sample should be included
as part of the field description (refer to ASTM D 2488). The in situ moisture content of a soil
should be described as dry, damp, moist, or wet (Figure 9-8). Natural moisture contents
should be determined in the laboratory for all soil samples.
2.6 Relative Density and Consistency
Consistency refers to the stiffness of a fine-grained soil. Relative density refers to the
degree of compactness of a coarse-grained soil. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-values
(blows per foot) are typically used to define the relative density and consistency (Tables 9-9
and 9-10). Nonplastic silt soils that exhibit the general properties of a granular soil are given a
relative density description. Consistency is an important index property of cohesive (plastic)
soils and is an indicator of the shear strength (Su). If SPT data is not available, consistency
can be estimated based on visual-manual examination of the material. (Refer to ASTM D
2488 for consistency criteria).

2.7 Texture
Texture refers to the actual size, shape, and gradation of the constituent grains. The
maximum coarse-grained size recovered in soils should be noted. The gradation definitions
are presented in Figure 9-11, and a gradation chart is included as Figure 9-23. Coarse-
grained soils with less than 12 percent passing the No. 200 sieve require gradation
descriptions (i.e. well-graded, poorly-graded, uniformly-graded, or gap-graded).
2.8 Cementation
Cementation is the bonding of grains by secondary minerals (e.g., calcium carbonate,

iron oxide) or degradation products (e.g., clay). The presence of calcium carbonate
cementation can be detected by its reaction to hydrochloric acid. The relative degrees of
cementation of undisturbed soil samples are defined as:
Weak Crumbles or breaks with handling or light finger pressure and rubbing
Moderate Crumbles or breaks with considerable finger pressure and rubbing
Strong Will not crumble or break with finger pressure and rubbing
2.9 Structure
Structural features include stratifications, varves, lenses, fissures, seams, slickensides,

striations, blocky structure, relict rock structure, and voids (root or worm holes, cavities). The
thickness, frequency, and inclination of these features should be noted. Figure 9-12 presents
criteria for describing structures.
2.10 Other Constituents/Characteristics
 Other constituents/characteristics include the following:
 Unit Weight. The total and dry unit weight should be determined on undisturbed soil
samples.
 Sensitivity. Sensitivity refers to the significant loss of strength when a fine-grained soil
is remolded. A sensitive soil may be highly compressible, andt he soi l’
snat ural
moisture content often is above its liquid limit. Sensitivity is a function of the primary
structure of the soil (i.e., dispersed, dense or flocculated), strength of grain bonding,
and water content. A measure of the sensitivity (St) is the ratio of the undrained shear
strength (Su), or unconfined compressive strength (qu) of the undisturbed sample to the
remolded sample. When it is noticed in the field that a fine-grained soil might be
sensitive, it should be noted on the field log as“ pot ent i
all
ysensi t
ive.”
 Quality of Coarse-grained constituents. Where the soil is predominantly coarse-
grained, the nature, such as for the parent rock type(s) and hardness (soft or hard), and
condition, such as weathering (fresh, weathered, or decomposed), of the coarse grains
should be described.

2.11 Origin
The origin of the soil is generally interpreted based on knowledge of geologic site
conditions and the soil description. A generic name for soil origin may be provided at the end
of the soil description in parentheses, such as (Alluvium), (Colluvium), (Terrace Deposit),
(Decomposed [rock name]), and (Fill). All soils should be examined to see if they contain non-
native materials indicative of man-made fills. Undocumented fills often cause problems. Man-
made items such as glass, brick, dimensioned lumber, concrete, metal, plastics; plaster in fills
should be listed in each of the soil descriptions. Other items that could suggest existence of fill
include buried vegetation mats, tree limbs, and stumps. The soil description for a fill material
shoul dbef oll
owedbyt het erm“ (Fi l
l
)”.Forex ampleacl ayeysiltfil
lwithsomebr i
ckf ragment s
woul dbedescr ibed“ clay eySi lt
,ML,wi thbr ickfragment s(Fi l
l
).”Thesi zeanddi stribut
ionof
miscellaneous items should be noted. The limits (depth range) of fill material should be
determined and identified at each exploration location.
3. ROCK
Rock descriptions for engineering purposes consist of two basic assessments: intact
and in situ characters of the rock mass (FHWA HI-88-009, 1993). Both characteristics are the
basis for rock slope design and excavation.
 Intact character: Description of the intact rock, such as hand specimens or core, in
terms of its origin, mineralogical makeup, texture, degree and nature of chemical and
physical weathering or alteration, and strength.
 In situ character: Description of in-place rock masses that includes the nature and
orientation of its constituent interlocking blocks, plates, or wedges formed by bounding
discontinuities such as bedding, foliation planes, fractures, joints, shear planes, shear
zones and faults.
3.1 Intact Character
The general descriptive sequence for intact rock materials is listed below, as they
should appear on the exploration logs.
 Rock Name
 Color
 Degree of Weathering
 Relative Hardness
 Structure/Discontinuities (joints, stratification, faults, separation, infilling, continuity,
vesicularity)
 Core Recovery and RQD
 Other Characteristics, as applicable (mineralization, slaking, field unit weight,
discontinuity surface condition, voids)
 Formation Name

3.1.1. Rock Name
Rocks are classically divided into three general categories: igneous, sedimentary and
metamorphic (Figures 9-13 through 9-17).
Igneous rocks form from magma (molten rock) and are classified based on mineralogy
and genesis (intrusive, extrusive or pyroclastic). Names of common igneous rocks are
included on Figure 9-13. Pyroclastic rocks form when magma is ejected into the atmosphere,
and includes cinder, tuff and volcanic ash materials. Characteristics of pyroclastic rocks are
included on Figure 9-14. Texture is the most conspicuous feature of genetic occurrence
(Figure 9-15). Due to the length of time available for crystal growth, intrusive rocks tend to be
phaneritic (contain coarser crystals visible with the naked eye), such as granite, while extrusive
rocks are commonly aphanitic (contain fine-grained crystals not distinguishable with the naked
eye), such as basalt or glassy like obsidian.
Sedimentary rocks include those formed through the induration (hardening) of
accumulated sediments or clastic (sandstone, siltstone), chemical rock (rock salt, gypsum)
formed by precipitation from solution, or biogenic rock (limestone, dolomite) consisting of the
remains or secretions of plants and animals. Sedimentary rocks are classified based on grain
size, mineralogy and on the relationship between grains (Figure 9-16). A modifier may be
necessary to describe a sedimentary rock formed from a combination of different grain sizes
only if the modifier has engineering significance. For example, “ sil
tysandst one”woul dbe
predominantly composed of sand grains with a lesser amount of silt grains. The term
mudstone could be used when the composition of a fine-grained sedimentary rock is uncertain
or variable.
Metamorphic rocks have been derived from mineralogical, chemical, and/or structural
changes of rocks (predominantly while in the solid state) in response to significant changes in
temperature, pressure, or the chemical environment. The most conspicuous features of
metamorphic rocks are typically the aligning of minerals that cause distinctive fissile or platy
structure (splits easily along closely spaced planes) as in slate or phyllite, or the visible
banding of minerals as in schist or gneiss (Figure 9-17).
The complete name of a rock specimen or rock unit should include texture and lithologic
name. The rock name should be in simple geologic terms and should be written in capital
letters.
3.1.2. Color
Rock color is not in itself a specific engineering property, but may be an indicator of the
influence of other significant conditions such as groundwater (e.g., mottling indicating wetting
and drying cycles), and alteration/weathering. Color may also be an aid in subsurface
correlation between soil layers. The color should be determined from fresh samples. Describe
the“ net ”coloroft her ockmass.Wet tingt her ocksampl emaybenecessar yi fdryinghas
occurred. Use the Munsell Rock Color Chart to describe rock color.

3.1.3. Degree of Weathering
Weathering is the process of mechanical and/or chemical breakdown of rocks through

exposure to the elements, which include rain, wind, plant action, groundwater, ice, and
changes of temperature. In general, the strength of rock tends to decrease as the degree of
weathering increases. In the early stages, weathering is manifested by discoloration of intact
rock and only slight changes in rock texture. With time, significant changes in rock hardness,
strength, compressibility and permeability occur, and the rock mass is altered until the rock is
decomposed to soil. For determining stages of weathering for rock, use Figure 9-18, Scale of
Relative Rock Weathering. For example, granite that is more than 50 percent decomposed
(butnotcompl et el
y )woul dbedescr i
bedas: “ gr ani
te;pr edomi nant l
ydecomposed. ” The
degree of weathering should be determined for each rock core sample. Multiple designations
would be required for variable rock conditions.
Inselect cases, thet erm“ al terati
on”maybeus ed, whi chappl i
ess pecif
icall
ytoc hanges
in the chemical or mineral composition of rock due to hydrothermal or very low grade or
localized metamorphic activity. Alteration may occur as zones and pockets and can be found
atdept hsfarbel ow thatoft ypicalr ockweat her i
ng.Separ atet het erms“ weat hering”and
“alterati
on”,sincealterat i
ondoesnotst r
ictl
yinferar educt ioni nr ockstrength.Forex ampl e,a
gray basalt that is closely jointed with extensive hydrothermal alteration and secondary
mineralization, may exhibit only slight weathering along joint surfaces and would be described
as“ basalt
;gr ay ;sl
ightlyweat her ed;cl osej oint
ed;ex tensi vehy drothermalal ter
ationwi th
secondar ymi nerali
zation.”
3.1.4. Relative Hardness
Differentiating between rock and soil, for engineering purposes, is based primarily on
values of unconfined compressive strength. Rock hardness is a measure of rock strength, and
is controlled by many factors including degree of induration, cementation, crystal bonding,
and/or degree of weathering. Rock hardness may be estimated through manual field tests,
y i
eldi
nga“ f
iel
ddescr ipti
on, ”whi chcanber efi
nedt hr oughl abor at orytest
ing.Thes cal
eof r ock
hardness to be used is presented on Figure 9-19. The relative hardness of rock should be
determined for each rock core sample. The methods given in Figure 9-19 can be used to
describe rock hardness and is suitable for use on core and hand specimens. If samples were
recovered as part of an SPT sampling program, a hardness description based on blow count
would be used. This would include situations where materials like caliche are recovered. In
some instances, these intermediate materials behave like soil, while in other deposits they
exhibit properties similar to rock. In these cases, it is principally the method of sampling that
governs how the hardness is described.
3.1.5. Structure/Discontinuities
Discontinuities refer to large-scale (megascopic) planar or non-planar features of

various orientations, which are significant to the overall strength, permeability, and breakage
characteristics of the rock unit. Structural features (discontinuities) include rock breaks

(fractures), joints, bedding planes, and faults. Structural features, properties, and descriptive
terms are defined below.
 Joints - Planar breaks or fractures where no movement has occurred parallel to the
fracture surface are defined as joints. They may range from perpendicular to parallel in
orientation with respect to bedding. Repetitive patterns of relatively parallel joints are
called a joint set. A joint system is defined by two or more joint sets. The number of
joint sets is most reliably obtained from rock exposures.
 Stratification - Rock stratification is evidenced by changes in texture, composition, age
or unique forms. Bedding applies primarily to sedimentary and pyroclastic rocks. For
other stratigraphic terms, refer to Figure 9-20.
 Faults - Planar breaks or fractures, where displacement has occurred parallel to the
fracture surface are defined as faults. The presence of gouge (pulverized rock),
bedding offset, and/or slickensided surfaces (commonly with mineral or clay coating),
may be indicators of fault movement. However, not all slickensides are caused by
faulting. Slickensides can be caused by deformation (i.e., folds, flows) or landsliding.
 Spacing - In determining the range of distances between individual joints or beds, keen
observation must be made to distinguish between joints and mechanical breaks that are
caused by handling or drilling. Mechanical breaks are more likely to be rough and
irregular, showing a fresh rock surface and are disregarded for description. Some
mechanical breaks, caused by handling or drilling, may occur along existing joints or
fractures, and should be described accordingly. Joint/bedding spacing terms are shown
on Figure 9-21.
 Separation - The separation or openness of joints may be described as:
a. Open: an existing planar surface that is separated or separates easily when
handled, and may have mineralization or staining/weathering on the joint
surfaces. Where measurable, identify the opening width (aperture). Open joints
typically act as conduits for groundwater.
b. Closed: an existing planar surface that separates with greater difficulty than
“Open”t ype separ ati
on,seen as a “ hairline”t r
ace on t he out side oft he
sample/core, and usually does not have soil or mineral surface coating.
c. Healed: an existing planer surface that breaks open easily or with difficulty, seen
either as a hairline trace or a seam of some thickness on the outside of the
sample/core, and usually contains soil or minerals as a filling between joint
surfaces.
 Infilling - This term refers to the material separating the adjacent walls of discontinuities
in rock. The filling material may consist of weathered or hydrothermally altered
products, secondary mineralization or precipitates, or fault gouge (ground up rock). The
wide variety of conditions and types of fillings that may occur can significantly influence
the strength of the discontinuity and the stability of the rock mass. For structurally
important discontinuities, the infilling observations may be a critical aspect of the

analytical model and the stability analyses. The extent of the infilling description should
be consistent with the project design and the significance of the feature.
 Continuity - The extent of continuity (or persistence) of a discontinuity is an expression
of the lateral extension of the structural feature as measured or projected along its
plane. Continuity is a very important property of the rock mass, as a single continuous
joint may actually control the behavior of the entire mass. Commonly, the only clue to
the persistence of a discontinuity is the trace of the discontinuity on the surface of a
rock exposure. Where deemed important, continuity can be verified using test pits (if
practical) or additional boreholes. The description of joint continuity should include an
indication of certainty and the method of observation. The degrees of continuity should
be reported according to the following:
Discontinuous 0 – 5 ft. in length
Slightly continuous 5 –10 ft. in length
Continuous 10 –40 ft. in length
Highly continuous > 40 ft. in length
 Vesicularity - Small to large rounded cavities in volcanic rocks (vesicles) are created by
gas bubbles in the molten lava that become incorporated in the cooled rock. Cavities or
openings in other rocks, such as intergranular space, should be described by other
terms, such as porosity. The occurrence of vesicles is to be reported using the
Comparison Chart (Figure 9-22) to estimate the relative percent of area occupied by
vesicles and the following corresponding descriptive designations:
Some Vesicles 5 - 25%
Highly Vesicular 25 - 50%
Scoriaceous > 50%
3.1.6. Core Recovery and Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
Core recovery measurements and Rock Quality Designations are indicators of the
quality and structure of rock. Both the percent core recovery and the RQD should be
determined and recorded on the boring log for each core run. The core recovery is calculated
by dividing the length of core retained (recovered) in the core barrel by the total run length
expressed as a percent. The RQD provides a subjective estimate of rock mass
quality/structure. The RQD is a modified core recovery percentage in which only pieces of
intact core 4 inches or greater in length (average length) are included in the measurement.
Pieces smaller than 4 inches are considered a result of close jointing, fracturing or weathering
in the rock mass, and are excluded from the RQD determination. The RQD is defined as the
cumulative total length of all pieces 4 inches long or longer divided by the total run length,
expressed as a percentage. Mechanical breaks, caused by handling or drilling, should be
noted as such and not included in the RQD calculations.
Where significant soil is encountered at one end of the core run, the soil portion is
excluded from the run length measurement and should be clearly described on the log. The
RQD is based solely on that portion of the run where rock was encountered. RQD is not

applicable to fissile rocks such as shales. Difficulties such as distinguishing natural fractures
in the rock core from mechanical breaks and the insensitivity of the RQD to the tightness of
individual joints may limit the use of the RQD in evaluating in situ rock properties.
3.1.7. Other Rock Characteristics
Other physical characteristics of rock should be described, depending on the scope and
objectives of the project. These may include the following:
 Mineralization - Secondary mineralization is the introduction of new minerals to a rock
mass from an outside source, or through alteration of existing minerals. Mineralization
may occur in voids, along joints or within the groundmass. The presence of Iron oxide
staining typically indicates the static groundwater level may be fluctuating within the
discolored zone. The iron oxide may only be a discoloration of surfaces, or an
accumulation of bright orange material several inches thick and varying in hardness.
Sulfide or carbonate minerals, such as pyrite or calcite, may be present and could
denote groundwater of high mineral or bicarbonate content. Alteration products may
indicate an increase in hardness or brittleness if high strength minerals such as quartz
have formed, or reduction of rock strength if soft clay minerals have developed along
joints or have replaced major constituent minerals (e.g., the feldspar crystals in basalt
altered to clay).
 Slaking - Slaking is the tendency for rock to disintegrate under conditions of wetting and
drying, or when exposed to air. This behavior is related primarily to the chemical
composition of the material. It may be identified in the field if samples shrink and crack,
or degrade upon drying, or upon being exposed to the air for several hours. If
degradation occurs, and slaking is suspected, an air-dried sample may be placed in
clean water to observe the reaction. The greater the tendency for slaking, the more
rapidly degradation or disintegration occurs. This tendency should be expressed on
fiel
dl ogsas “ potent ialf orslaking, ”and,i fcr i
ti
cal,shoul d be conf i
rmed t hr ough
laboratory testing. The Slake Durability Index of shales and similar weak rock can be
determined using ASTM D 4644.
 Field Unit Weight - Unit weight of rock can be important in the stability analyses. Unit
weight of rock is determined from multiplying the weight of the sample in air by the unit
weight of water and dividing the product by the difference between the weight of the
sample in air and in water.
 Voids - Open spaces in sedimentary and metamorphic rock are generally caused by
chemical dissolution or running water. Since most of these voids result from
groundwater, the openings are commonly elongated in the horizontal plane. The size of
voids, where significant, should be measured and recorded with the rock classification.
3.1.8. Formation Name
Various rock units are typically known by formational names, which can be identified
within project boundaries by examination of core samples, rock outcrops, and geologic

literature. Where the formation name is determined or known, it should be included at the end
of the rock classification in parentheses.
3.2 In Situ Character
While the intact character of a rock is what is used to classify a rock material as to type
or origin, it is the in situ character that primarily controls how a rock performs in most
engineering applications. The intact character is defined in terms of the structural
discontinuities that divide nearly all rock bodies into discrete planar, wedge or block-shaped
pieces. The orientation of and the resistance to move along these discontinuities are what
control the stability of rock. The intact strength rarely controls stability. Most structural
information is obtained from outcrops since it is easier to observe and measure these features
on larger samples that are more representative of the rock structure. However, important in
situ information can be obtained from borings, especially if the borings are oriented so
recovered rock cores can be aligned, evaluated and described as though they were in place.
3.2.1. Discontinuity Orientation
The orientation of a discontinuity is described by the dip and dip direction of the plane
representing the discontinuity. The dip is the maximum downward inclination angle on the
plane measured from the horizontal. The azimuth paralleling the direction of maximum dip is
the dip direction and is measured from north. In addition to dip and dip direction, there are
additional joint features that should be identified/measured, as shown in Figure 9-24. The
angle that striations( sl
ickensi des)makewi t
hahor i
z ontalli
nei sknownast he“ rake. ”
Both primary and secondary joint sets should be defined where possible and
appropriate. Typically, one joint set may yield slabs, two intersecting joint sets may yield
wedges, and three or more intersecting joint sets may yield blocks or highly fragmented rock.
The orientation of discontinuities as they relate to adjacent engineering works, such as
excavations or, in some cases, structure foundations, predominantly controls the potential for
developing an unstable condition.
3.2.2. Roughness
Roughness significantly contributes to the shear strength along discontinuities,

particularly if the rock is undisplaced or has interlocking features. Roughness is divided into
two main categories based on the scale of the roughness relative to the size of the
discontinuity. Small-scale features (asperities) and the surface texture are referred to as micro
roughness, while large-scale features (such as steps or undulations along the discontinuity
surface) are referred to as macro roughness.
Micro roughness provides resistance to sliding along discontinuity contacts and is the
principal contributor to sliding resistance along planar contacts. As the micro roughness
increases, the friction between adjoining surfaces increases. This frictional resistance must be
overcome before movement can occur. Typically, once movement occurs, the micro
roughness( fri
ct i
on,Φ)i sdecr easedt or esi
dual (reduced)shearst rengt hduet ot hegri
ndi ng

action. If the applied loads are large enough, a visibly polished or slickensided surface can
develop.
For larger roughness features (macro roughness), dilation (movement normal to the
contact between the rock surfaces forming the discontinuity) or a failure through intact rock,
which is relatively unusual for near surface loading conditions, must occur for movement to
take place. This condition applies to discontinuities that have interlocked steps and to
undulating surfaces. When estimating the effects of macro roughness, it is important to
determine the alignment of the features relative to the potential direction of movement.
Although stepped or undulating surfaces may be present, these macro features do not
increase sliding resistance if they are oriented parallel to the direction of movement, so no
dilation or failure of intact rock is required for movement to occur. Conversely, these
roughness features provide the greatest sliding resistance when they are oriented
perpendicularly to the potential direction of movement.
Surface roughness can be defined in terms of a Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC),
which requires estimation or measurement of the surface unevenness. The JRC should be
determined in the direction of anticipated block movement. Surface roughness is best
determined on in-place discontinuities, rather than core samples.
4. EXPLORATION LOG
An“ Ex pl
orationLog”shoul dbemadef oreachex pl or
at oryboring,hand-auger hole,
probe hole and test pit. The log can also be used to describe inspected cut slopes. Soil and
rock descriptions/classifications and terminology should be consistent with this Manual.
Abbreviations are to be avoided unless they are defined in this Manual.
The logs for drillhole borings must contain basic reference information at the top of each
sheet, including project name, project location, boring ground surface elevation, boring
number, boring location (station and offset), groundwater level with date measured, start and
end dates, drilling equipment, drilling method, on-site Engineer, drill rig operator, and if
backfilled (including date).The boring location relative to the roadway alignment can be
determined by measuring from the nearest Department benchmark. Benchmarks are typically
located on Department bridges. Each sample should be fully described. Referencing a
previous sample is not recommended since rarely are any two samples identical. The depth of
each stratum contact, discontinuity, and lens should be recorded. The reason for terminating
an exploration hole and a list/description of instrumentation installed should be written at the
end (bottom) of each exploration log.
4.1 Field Log
The field log is a record, which should contain all of the information obtained from an
exploratory hole, whether or not it may seem important at the time of exploration (see Figure 9-
25). It is important to record all information in an accurate manner. All soil and rock samples
are to be fully described immediately on recovery. Depths of samples, top and bottom of each
stratum/layer, discontinuities, field tests, and groundwater level(s) should be measured to the

nearest 0.1-foot. The depth(s) of drilling, the date of drilling, and the times that drilling began
and ended should be recorded.
4.2 Drilling Remarks
The material that is not recovered is frequently significant in the design of foundations,
excavations, performance of fills, and other geotechnical applications. Subsurface conditions
are not always fully described based solely on material descriptions. Therefore, any
comments with regard to the character of drilling and difficulties encountered while advancing
the boring should be included on the exploration log. Drilling remarks may include:
 Obstruction
 Difficulty in drilling (caving, surging sands, caverns, heaving, etc.)
 Estimated drilling fluid return and applied water pressure
 Color of drilling fluid return
 Return fluid constituents
 Relative drilling down-pressure and exact depth of major pressure changes
 Drilling action (drill chatter, smooth, bouncy, etc.)
 Drilling rate and the length of time for each core run
 Explanation for incomplete recoveries regardless of sampling method (SPT, Shelby
tube, core, etc.)
 Artesian water pressure or elevation head, and depth where encountered
 Reason for using drilling muds, casing, or special drill bits
4.3 Final Exploration Log
The final log is prepared from the field log after completing laboratory tests. Information
provided on the logs should be typed. Compare soil classifications obtained from the results
of lab testing with the original field classifications (Figure 9-26). The final log includes
descriptions of all materials, conditions, drilling remarks, and results of field tests and any
instrumentation. Where groundwater observation wells or piezometers are installed, several
measurements are usually necessary following drilling to verify that measured groundwater
levels or pressures have achieved equilibrium. For instance, if drill water is used in fine-
grained soils, and the exploratory hole is not bailed, then the observation well levels are initially
high, dropping with time to the actual groundwater level. It is desirable for final logs to include
measurements of groundwater levels during different seasons in order to establish the range
of groundwater fluctuation. An explanation key (Figure 9-27) should always accompany
Exploration Logs whenever they are presented.

Subject ASTM AASHTO

Standard Classification of Soils for Engineering
D 2487 -
Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System)
Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual
D 2488 -
Procedure)
Standard Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate
D 3282 M 145
Mixtures for Highway Construction Purposes
Slake Durability of Shales and Similar Weak Rock D 4644 -
Field Logging of Subsurface Explorations of Soil and
D 5434 -
Rock
6. FIGURES
9-1: Soil Constituents –Definitions

Boulders Particles of rock that will be retained on a sieve with a 12-inch square
opening
Cobbles Particles of rock that will pass a sieve with a 12-inch square opening, but
be retained on a 3-inch sieve.
Gravel Particles of rock that will pass a 3-inch sieve, but be retained on a No. 4
sieve.
Sand Particles of Rock that will pass a No. 4 sieve, but be retained on a No. 200
sieve.
Silt Soil passing a No. 200 sieve that is nonplastic or very slightly plastic and
exhibits little or no strength when air dry.
Clay Soil passing a No. 200 sieve that can be made to exhibit plasticity (putty-
like properties) within a range of water contents and has considerable
strength when air dry.
Organic Soil A soil with sufficient organic content to influence the soil properties.
Peat A soil composed primarily of vegetable matter in various stages of
decomposition usually with an organic odor, a dark brown to black color,
spongy consistency, and a texture ranging from fibrous to amorphous.

9-2: Silt and Clay Characteristics

Characteristics Silt Clay
Dilatancy Rapid reaction. Water Sluggish or no reaction. Surface
(Movement of water appears on the surface to of the samples remain lustrous.
in voids due to give a livery appearance Little or no water appears when
shaking.) when shaken. Squeezing the hand is shaken. Sample remains
 None soil causes water to disappear lustrous during squeezing.
 Slow rapidly.
 Rapid
Dry Strength None to low. Even oven-dry High to very high. Exceptionally
(Cohesiveness in strength is low. Powder easily high if oven-dry. Powder will not
dry state.) rubs off surface of the rub off the surface. Crumbles
 None sample. Little or no cohesive with difficulty. Slakes slowly.
 Low strength –will crumble and
 Medium slake readily.
 High
 Very High
Toughness Plastic thread has little Plastic thread has high strength.
(Plasticity in moist strength. Dries quickly. Dries slowly. Usually stiff and
state.) Crumbles easily as it dries tough as it dries below plastic
 Low below plastic range. Seldom range. Can easily be rolled to
 Medium can be rolled to 1/8thread 1/8thread without cracking.
 High without cracking.
Dispersion Settles out of suspension in Settles in several hours or days,
(Settlement in 15 to 60 minutes. (Sands unless it flocculates (rapidly
water.) settle in 30 to 60 seconds.) precipitates out in small clumps).
Visual Inspection Only coarsest individual silt Individual grains cannot be
and Feel grains are visible to the naked observed by the naked eye.
eye. Feels slightly gritty when Feels smooth and greasy when
rubbed in fingers. Dries rubbed in fingers. Dries slowly
quickly and dusts off easily. and does not dust off; must be
scraped off.
Bite Test Gritty feeling between the No gritty feeling between the
(Caution: Eating teeth, does not stick to the teeth; tends to stick to the teeth.
contaminated soil teeth.
may be hazardous
to your health.)

9-3: Examples of Fine-Grained Soil Field Identification

FIELD INDEX TESTS
Dilatancy Toughness of
Typical Name Dry Strength Plasticity
Reaction Plastic Thread
Silt none, low rapid low nonplastic, low
Silt w/some clay low, medium rapid, slow low, medium low
clayey Silt medium slow medium low, medium
silty Clay medium, high slow, none medium, high medium
Clay w/some silt high none high high
Clay very high none high high
organic Silt low, medium slow low, medium nonplastic, low
organic Clay medium to very high none medium, high medium, high
9-4: Fine-Grained Soil Subclassification

Terms Percent of Total Sample by Weight
Silt, Clay Primary Constituent*
clayey, silty Secondary fine-grained constituents*
with some silt, some clay Additional fine-grained constituents*
sandy, gravelly 30 –50% Secondary coarse-grained constituents
with some sand, some gravel 15–30% Additional coarse-grained constituents
with trace sand, trace gravel 5–15% Additional coarse-grained constituents
* The relationship of clay and silt constituents is based on plasticity and
normally determined by performing index tests. Refined classifications are based on
Atterberg limits tests and the Plasticity Chart (ASTM D2487).

9-5: Coarse-Grained Soil Subclassification
Terms Percent of Total Sample by Weight
Gravel, Sand Predominant constituent Primary constituent*

>50%
gravelly, sandy 30 –50 Secondary coarse-grained
constituents
w/some (gravel, sand) 15 –30 Additional fine-grained
w/trace (gravel, sand) 5 –15 constituents
silty, clayey * 12 –50 Secondary fine-grained
constituents
w/some (silt, clay) * 5 –12 Additional fine-grained
w/trace (silt, clay) * < 5 constituents
*Indextest
sand/
orpl
ast
ici
tyt
est
sar
eper
for
medt
odet
ermi
newhet
hert
het
erm“
sil
t”or
“
clay”i
sused.

9-6: Unified Soil Classification Summary

Group
Major Divisions Typical Names
Symbols*
Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures,
GW
fraction is smaller than No. 4 fraction is larger than No. 4
Gravels
little or no fines.
Clean
More than half of coarse GP
Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures,
Gravels
little or no fines.
Silty gravels. Poorly graded gravel-sand-silt
With Fines
GW
Gravels
mixtures.
Coarse Grained Soils
sieve size
Clayey gravels, poorly graded

GC
More than half of material is larger
gravel-sand-clay mixtures.
Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no
SW fines.
More than half of coarse
Sands
Clean
Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or

than 200 sieve size
Sands
SP no fines.
with Fines
Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures.

sieve size
SW
Sands
SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures.
Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour,

ML
More than half of material is smaller than
silty or clayey fine sands with slight plasticity.

Silts and Clays
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,

CL gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean
Fine Grained Soils
less than 50
Liquid limit
clays.
Organic silts and organic silt-clays of low
OL
plasticity.
Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous
Silts and Clays
MM
greater than 50
fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts.

200 sieve size
Liquid limit
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity.
Highly Organic Soils PT Peat and other highly organic soils.

* Boundary classifications. Soils possessing characteristics of two groups are designated by
combinations of group symbols, for example GW-GC, well graded gravel-sand mixture with clay
binder.

9-7: Degree of Plasticity

Plasticity Dry
Term Field Test (approximation)
Index, PI% Strength
Nonplastic 0-3 Very low Dry specimen ball falls apart easily. Cannot
be rolled at any moisture content.
Low plasticity 3 - 15 Low Dry specimen ball easily crushed with
fi
nger s. 1/ 8”t hread can bar elybe r ol l
ed
within its plastic range.
Medium 15 - 30 Medium Difficult to crush dry specimen ball when dry.
plasticity 1/8”t hr eadi seasyt or ol
l
.
High plasticity 30 or more High Impossible to crush dry specimen ball with
fi
nger s.1/ 8”threadt akesconsider abl
et i
me
to roll/knead to reach plastic limit. Can be
re-rolled several times without breaking after
reaching plastic limit.
9-8: Moisture Designations

Term Field Identification
Dry Absence of moisture. Dusty. Dry to the touch.
Damp Soil has moisture. Cohesive soils are below plastic limit (BPL) and
usually moldable.
Moist Grains appear darkened, but no visible water. Silt/clay will clump. Sand
will bulk. Soils are often at or near plastic limit.
Wet Visible water on larger grain surfaces. Sand and cohesionless silt exhibit
dilatancy. Cohesive silt/clay can be readily remolded. Soil leaves
wet nessont hehandwhensqueez ed.“ Wet ”indicat
est hatt hesoi lis
much wetter than the optimum moisture content and above plastic limit
(APL).

9-9: Consistency of Cohesive Soils

SPT N-Value
Consistency Field Approximation
(Blow/Foot)
Very soft Less than 2 Squeeze between fingers when fist is closed; easily
penetrated several inches by fist.
Soft 2 –4 Easily molded by fingers; easily penetrated several

inches by thumb.
Medium stiff 4 –8 Molded by strong pressure of fingers; can be

penetrated several inches by thumb with moderate
effort.
Stiff 8 –15 Molded by strong pressure of fingers;

readily indented by thumb but can be penetrated
only with great effort.
Very Stiff 15 –30 Readily indented by thumbnail.
Hard Greater than 30 Indented with difficulty by thumbnail.
9-10: Relative Density for Granular Soils

Safety Hammer
Relative SPT
Field Approximation
Density N-Value
(Blow/Foot)
Very loose 0-4 Easily penetrated many inches (>12) with ½ inch
rebar pushed by hand.
Loose 5 –10 Easily penetrated several inches with ½ inch rebar
pushed by hand.
Medium Dense 11 –30 Easily to moderately penetrate with ½ inch rebar
driven by 5 lb. hammer.
Dense 31 –50 Penetrated 1 foot with difficulty using ½ inch rebar
Very Dense Greater than 50 Penetrated only a few inches with ½ inch rebar

9-11: Gradation Categories

Gradation Term
Description Example
(USCS)
Well-graded Full range and even distribution of grain Coarse to fine Sand with trace
(GW, SW) sizes present. silt, SW
Poorly-graded Narrow range of grain sizes present Fine to medium Sand, SP
(GP, SP)
Uniformly-graded Consists predominantly of one grain Clean fine Sand,
(GP, SP) size. SP
Gap-graded Within the range of grain sizes present, Fine Sand with some coarse
(GP, SP) one or more sizes are missing. gravel, SP
Coefficients:
D60 ( D30 ) 2
Cu  Cc  D10 xD60
D10
Uniformity
% Passing
USCS Term Coefficient
No. 200 Sieve
Requirements
SW 5% Cu > 6 and Cc 1
GW 5% to 3
Cu > 4 and Cc 1
to 3
Note: If 5 to 12% passes the No. 200 sieve, then use a dual classification with the pre-
dominant fine-grained constituent, i.e., SW-SM, etc.
9-12: Criteria for Describing Structure

Term Criteria
Stratified Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers at
least ¼-inch.
Laminated Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers
less than ¼-inch.
Fissured Contains shears or separations along planes of weakness.
Blocky Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular
lumps which resist further breakdown.
Lensed Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small
lenses of clay; note thickness.
Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout.

9-13: Common Igneous Rocks

Intrusive Common Extrusive
(coarse-grained) Essential Minerals Accessory Minerals (fine-grained)
Granite Quartz Plagioclase Rhyolite
K-feldspar Mica
Amphibole
Pyroxene
Diorite Plagioclase Mica Andesite
Amphibole
Gabbro Plagioclase Amphibole Basalt
Pyroxene
9-14: Pyroclastic Rocks

Rock Name Characteristics
Cinders Uncemented glassy and vesicular ejecta 4-32 mm
size.
Tuff Breccia Composed of ejecta >32 mm size, in ash/tuff matrix, indurated.
(agglomerate)
Lapilli Tuff Composed of ejecta 4-32 mm size, in ash/tuff matrix, indurated.
Tuff Cemented volcanic ash particles <4 mm size, indurated.
Pumice Excessively vesicular glassy lava.
9-15: Igneous Rock Textures

Texture Grain Size Rock Type
Pegmatitic Very large; diameters Intrusive
measured in inches or feet. Wide
range of sizes.
Phaneritic Can be seen with naked eye Intrusive or Extrusive
Aphanitic Cannot be seen with naked Intrusive or Extrusive
eye
Amorphic Glassy No grains present Extrusive
Porphyritic Grains of two widely different sizes Intrusive and Extrusive

9-16: Common Sedimentary Rocks

A. Mechanical Sedimentary Rocks
Rock Name Original Sediment
Conglomerate Gravel, or sand and gravel
Sandstone Sand
Siltstone Silt
Claystone Clay
Mudstone Silt, clay, possibly with sand and/or gravel
inclusions, nonoriented
Shale Oriented, laminated, fissile, clay and silt
(laminated claystone/siltstone)
B. Chemical Sedimentary Rocks
Rock Name Main Mineral
Limestone Calcite
Dolomite Dolomite
Chert Quartz
9-17: Common Metamorphic Rocks

A. Foliated Metamorphic Rocks
Rock Name Texture Formed From Main Minerals
Slate Platy, fine-grained Shale Mica, quartz
Schist Irregular layers, Slate, igneous rocks Mica, quartz, feldspar,
medium-grained amphibole
Gneiss Layered, Igneous rocks, Mica, quartz, feldspar,
coarse-grained schist, sandstone amphibole
B. Nonfoliated Metamorphic Rocks
Rock Name Texture Formed From Main Minerals
Marble Crystalline Limestone, dolomite Calcite, dolomite
Quartzite Crystalline Sandstone Quartz
Serpentinite Massive to layered, Ultramafic rocks, Serpentine
fine-to coarse- i.e., peridotite,
grained gabbro

9-18: Scale of Relative Rock Weathering

Designation Field Identification
Fresh Crystals are bright. Discontinuities may show some minor
surface staining. No discoloration in rock fabric.
Slightly Weathered Rock mass is generally fresh. Discontinuities are stained and
may contain clay. Some discoloration in rock fabric.
Decomposition extends up to 1 inch into rock.
Moderately Weathered Rock mass is decomposed 50% or less. Significant portions of
rock show discoloration and weathering effects. Crystals are
dull and show visible chemical alteration. Discontinuities are
stained and may contain secondary mineral deposits.
Predominantly Rock mass is more than 50% decomposed. Rock can be
Decomposed excav at
ed with geol ogi st
’s pick. Al ldiscont i
nuit
ies exhi
bit
secondary mineralization. Complete discoloration of rock
fabric. Surface of core is friable and usually pitted due to
washing out of highly altered minerals by drilling water.
Decomposed Rockmassi scompl etelydecomposed.Or i
ginalrock“ f
abric”
may be evident. May be reduced to soil with hand pressure.

9-19: Scale of Relative Rock Hardness

Approximate
Hardness Field Unconfined
Term
Designation Investigation Methods Compressive
Strength
Extremely soft R0 Can be identified with difficulty by < 100 psi
thumbnail. May be moldable or
friable with finger pressure.
Very soft R1 Crumbles under firm blows with 100-1000 psi
point of a geology pick. Can be
peeled by a pocketknife and
scratched with fingernail.
Soft R2 Can be peeled by a pocketknife 1000-4000 psi
with difficulty. Cannot be
scratched with fingernail. Shallow
indentation made by firm blow of
geology pick.
Medium hard R3 Can be scratched by knife or pick. 4000-8000 psi
Specimen can be fractured with a
single firm blow of hammer/
geology pick.
Hard R4 Can be scratched with knife or 8000-16000 psi
pick only with difficulty. Several
hard hammer blows required to
fracture specimen.
Very hard R5 Cannot be scratched by knife or > 16000 psi

sharp pick. Specimen requires
many blows of hammer to fracture
or chip. Hammer rebounds after
impact.

9-20: Stratification Terms

Term Characteristics
Laminations Thin beds (< 1 cm.).
Fissile Tendency to readily break along laminations.
Parting Tendency to break parallel to bedding.
Foliation Nondepositional, e.g., segregation and layering of minerals in

metamorphic rocks.
9-21: Joint and Bedding Spacing Terms

Spacing Joint Spacing Terms Bedding/Foliation Spacing Terms
Less than 2 in. Very close Very thin (laminated)
2 in. –1 ft. Close Thin
1 ft. –3 ft. Moderately close Medium
3 ft. –10 ft. Wide Thick
More than 10 ft. Very wide Very thick (massive)

9-22: Standardized Volume Percentage Chart

9-23: Graduation Chart

9-24: Measurement of Joints

9-25: Field Log Form

9-26: Example, Final Exploration Log

9-27: Key to Boring Logs
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
CLAY SILT SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
.002 mm #200 #40 #10 #4 ¾ inch 3 inch 12 inch
USCS GROUP TYPICAL SOIL DESCRIPTION

GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines
GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines
GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-clay mixtures
SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines
SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines
SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand-silt mixtures
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand-clay mixtures
ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands with slight plasticity
CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays
OL Organic silts and organic silt-clays of low plasticity
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity
CS Claystone/Siltstone
PT Peat and other highly organic soils
MOISTURE CONDITION CRITERIA

SOIL CEMENTATION CRITERIA
Description Criteria
Description Criteria
Dry Absence of moisture, dusty,
Weak Crumbles or breaks with
handling or little dry
to touch.
finger pressure.
Moist Damp, no visible free water.
Moderate Crumbles or breaks with
considerable
Wet Visible free water, usually
below finger pressure.
groundwater table. Strong Wont break or crumble w/finger pressure

Symbols
 Groundwater Elevation
STANDARD PENETRATION CLASSIFICATION*

GRANULAR SOIL CLAYEY SOIL
BLOWS/FT DENSITY BLOWS/FT CONSISTENCY
0-4 VERY LOOSE 0-1 VERY SOFT
5 –10 LOOSE 2-4 SOFT
11 - 30 MEDIUM DENSE 5-8 MEDIUM STIFF
31 - 50 DENSE 9 - 15 STIFF
OVER 50 VERY DENSE 16 - 30 VERY STIFF
*Standard Penetration Test (N) 140 lb hammer 31 - 60 HARD
30 inch free fall on 2 inch O.D. x 1.4 inch I.D. sampler. OVER 60 VERY HARD
Blow counts on Calif. Modified

Sampler (NCMS) can be converted
to NSPT by:
(NCMS)(0.62) = NSPT
Blow counts from Automatic or
Safety Hammer can be converted
to Standard SPT N60 by:
(NAUTOMATIC)(1.25) =N60
(NSAFETY)(1.17) =N60

7. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
ManualonSubsur
facei
nvest
igat
ions,
”1988
AASHTO,“
Standar
dSpecifi
cat
ionsf
orTr
ans
por
tat
i
onMat
eri
al
sandMet
hodsof
Sampl
i
ngand
Test
ing,
”PartI
I:Test
s
ASTM,“AnnualBookofASTM St
andar
ds,
”Section 4: Construction, Vol. 04-08: Tests D420
through D5779
FHWA, “
Soils and Foundations Workshop Reference Manual,”NHI Course No. 132012,
FHWA,“
Det
ermi
nat
ionofConsi
stencyChar
act
eri
sti
csofSoi
l
s,”FHWA-RD-77-101, 1977
FHWA,“Tr aining Course i n Geot echnicaland Foundat i
on Engi neeri
ng:Rock Sl opes,”
Participants Manual, and Student Exercises, FHWA-HI-99-007 and NHI-99-036, 1999
FHWA,“Ev
aluat
ionofSoilandRockPr
oper
ti
es,
”Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ingCi
rcul
arNo.5,
FHWA-IF-02-034
FHWA,“
RockandMi
ner
alI
dent
if
icat
ionf
orEngi
neer
s,”FHWA-HI-91-025, 1991
FHWA,“
Subsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions
,”FHWA-HI-97-021, 1997
NAVFAC DM-7.
1,“SoilMechani
cs,
”Depar
tmentoft
heNav
y,Nav
alFaci
l
it
iesEngi
neer
ing
Command, 1986
NDOT, Testing Manual, http://test.nevadadot.com/reports_pub/test_manual/list.asp
Or
egonDOT,“
Soi
landRockCl
assi
fi
cat
ionManual
,”1987
Wy
ll
ie,“
Foundat
ionsonRock,
”ChapmanandHal
l
,1992

CHAPTER 10
FIELD INSTRUMENTATION

FIELD INSTRUMENTATION 10-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE.............................................................................................................. 1
2. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1
3. USES OF INSTRUMENTATION ............................................................................ 2
4. PLANNING INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAMS.................................................... 3
5. INSTRUMENTATION, MONITORING, AND DATA INTERPRETATION ............... 4
6. GROUNDWATER LEVEL AND PORE PRESSURE MEASUREMENT ................. 5
6.1 Observation Wells .................................................................................................. 6
6.2 Open Standpipe Piezometers ................................................................................ 6
6.3 Vibrating Wire Piezometers .................................................................................... 7
6.4 Pneumatic Piezometers ......................................................................................... 7
7. LATERAL GROUND MOVEMENT INSTRUMENTATION ..................................... 8
7.1 Telltale Stakes........................................................................................................ 8
7.2 Survey Hubs........................................................................................................... 8
7.3 Portable Crack/Deformation Gauges...................................................................... 8
7.4 Inclinometers .......................................................................................................... 8
7.5 ShearPl aneI ndi cat oror“ Poor -Man’ s”I ncl inomet er ............................................... 9
7.6 Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) ...................................................................... 10
7.7 Lateral Extensometers ......................................................................................... 10
7.8 Webcams ............................................................................................................. 10
8. SETTLEMENT/HEAVE MONITORING ................................................................ 11
8.1 Settlement Plate/Platform..................................................................................... 11
8.2 Remote Settlement (Gauge Monitoring Tubes) .................................................... 11
8.3 Inductive Coil Gauge (Deep Settlement Monitoring) ............................................ 12
8.4 Borehole Extensometer (Deep Settlement Monitoring) ........................................ 12
8.5 Horizontal Inclinometer (Settlement Monitoring)................................................... 12
9. TILTMETERS ....................................................................................................... 13
10. LOAD CELLS AND STRAIN GAUGES ................................................................ 13
11. EARTH PRESSURE CELLS ................................................................................ 13
12. VIBRATION MONITORING.................................................................................. 13
13. GROUND TEMPERATURE ................................................................................. 14
14. SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS................................................................ 14
15. REFERENCES..................................................................................................... 15

FIELD INSTRUMENTATION 10-1
1. PURPOSE
Field instrumentation is used for two primary purposes: to determine ground in situ
conditions for design, and to monitor performance of critical elements of a project. During
the investigation and design phase, instrumentation can be used to determine ground in
situ conditions. Instrumentation monitoring can be extended over several months, as
needed, to measure seasonal effects. During construction, instruments can be used to
monitor in situ conditions to verify design assumptions and to warn of possible changed
conditions or impending hazards. In addition, instrumentation may be used to monitor
performance of embankments, slopes and foundation soils in response to construction
(such as stability and the magnitude and time rate of settlement of new embankments).
2. INTRODUCTION
Geotechnical instruments are used to characterize site conditions, verify design
assumptions, monitor the effects of construction, enforce the quality of workmanship, and
provide early warning of impending failures. In these regards, they are used to augment
standard investigation practices and visual observations where conditions would otherwise
be difficult to evaluate or quantify due to their location, magnitude or rate of change. Ralph
Peck’ spaperont he“ Obser vat
ionalMet hod”( Ni nthRanki neLect ure,1969) ,descr i
beshow
instrumentation should be utilized during critical parts of construction to supplement the
observations.
Instruments should be used to answer specific questions and provide engineering
insight to a problem. There are a multitude of instruments available that can be grouped
into the following functional applications:
 Groundwater Level and Pore Pressure
 Lateral Ground Movement and Deformation
 Settlement/Heave
 Tilt/Rotation
 Load/Stress on Structural Members
 Earth Pressure
 Vibration
 Ground Temperature
The Geotechnical Engineer should become familiar with the different types of
instrumentation available in order to understand their uses; how they are installed and
operated; instrument accuracy, precision, and sensitivity; monitoring requirements;
potential errors; environmental limitations, and the effects of nearby activities. Consultation
with equipment suppliers and instrumentation Consultants is advisable when complex types
of instruments are required. References providing detail and schematics regarding
instrumentations include:
 FHWA,Manual
on“
Geot
echni
calI
nst
rument
ati
on”
,(NHICour
se132041,Modul
e11)

 AASHTO,Manual
on“
Subsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions”
,Appendi
xG –Instrumentation
 “
Geot
echni
calI
nst
rument
ati
onf
orMoni
t
ori
ngFi
eldPer
for
mance”(
Dunni
cl
if
f)
3. USES OF INSTRUMENTATION
In the design phase, instrumentation can be used to determine groundwater
levels/pressures at various depths, or to obtain data on existing slopes, landslides,
structures or embankments. For example, piezometers and inclinometers, placed within an
unstable area of an existing slope, can provide the Geotechnical Engineer with information
that is valuable in assessing the cause of the problem and in designing the necessary
remedial measures. The following list describes examples when instrumentation can be
useful in the design phase:
 Testing constructed embankments to assist settlement prediction (survey hubs,
settlement plates, piezometers)
 Evaluating landslides (inclinometers and piezometers)
 Evaluating excavations and earthworks including cuts and fills (observation wells)
 Mitigating rockfall (crack monitors and strain gauges)
On projects where analysis has indicated potential problems with embankment or
structure settlement or stability, geotechnical instruments should be used to monitor,
evaluate and control construction progress. The location and types of instrumentation
should be well defined as an integral part of earthwork and foundations. The contract
documents should include special provisions regarding the application of instruments and
construction requirements. For example, instrumentation allows the engineer to evaluate
settlement rate and stability as construction proceeds. The Geotechnical Engineer should
install these instruments and interpret the obtained data in consultation with the Resident
Engineer. The following list describes examples when instrumentation can be beneficial:
 Monitoring the effects of blasting or heavy construction (vibration monitoring of
adjacent facilities)
 Monitoring movements in adjacent slopes and structures (survey hubs, tiltmeters)
 Monitoring ground stability during and after construction (piezometers, survey
hubs/stakes, and inclinometers)
 Monitoring embankment settlement and confirming improved ground conditions
befor eproceedi ngt osubsequentst agesoff
il
l
ing,usi
ngt
he“Observat
ionalMethod”
(settlement plates and piezometers)
 Monitoring applied loads in reinforced wall systems, such as ground anchors, soil
nails, and MSE wall reinforcing strips (load cells, strain gauges, extensometers)
 Monitoring deflection, displacement, and loads of flexible wall systems, such as
sheetpiles (inclinometers, survey points, earth pressure cells)
 Monitoring loads and deflections at the base of drilled shafts (load cells,
extensometers)

 Monitoring the effectiveness of dewatering (piezometers or observation wells to
determine drawdown at various distances from the dewatering wells)
 Monitoring temporary stability during excavations for landslide stabilization (survey
hubs, stake lines, inclinometers)
 Monitoring stability of tunnel cuts, rock slopes, and rockbolts (extensometers, load
cells, strain gauges)
4. PLANNING INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAMS
When ordinary inspection, investigation, and testing are insufficient to verify the
intended performance, there may be a need for instrumentation. A successful
instrumentation program involves creating a plan that matches appropriate instruments to
the project needs and the resources available for implementation, monitoring and data
reduction. The instrumentation plan should take into consideration the anticipated
construction process/schedule from beginning to end. The planning task should consider
several factors, which include the following:
 Objectives for instrumentation (What is the performance, property, or behavior that
needs to be known?)
 Identification of instruments (What instrument functional applications are needed?
Which instruments provide measurement of the desired objectives? What accuracy
and reliability are needed? What are the simplest instruments that meet the
objectives and get the job accomplished?)
 Location (Determine instrument locations in safe places. Identify installation depths.
Determine if monument covers and other warning/protection devices are needed to
protect instruments.)
 Acquisition of instruments (Will the Department acquire the instruments directly or
will the construction contractor or a Consultant be asked to provide instruments?
Providing specifications may be necessary to acquire equipment or results desired.
Cost considerations could affect the types and extent of instrumentation selected.)
 Calibration (Is this necessary for the selected types of instruments?)
 Installation (Identify who will perform and supervise the installations. Are there
installation procedures that are unique for this project? Verify that the installation
approach will not compromise the quality of the expected data. Are protective
measures needed?)
 Training personnel (Will the new instrumentation require training by the Geotechnical
Engineer or manuf act urer’
sr epresent at
iv
e? Ar e t he av ailable Depar tment
technicians familiar with the selected instruments?)
 Monitoring (Determine the monitoring requirements and frequency, which could be
variable depending on construction progress and ground behavior. Determine the
means of collecting and storing data. Should monitoring be done manually each
time, or should continuous data collection systems be used?)

 Data analysis (Determine how the data will be reduced, evaluated, and plotted.
Identify the types of plots that are relevant to meet the objectives of the engineering
evaluation.)
 Documentation (Determine how the data and interpretations, including graphical
plots, should be prepared and displayed. Determine the scheduling and recipients of
reports/memorandums.)
 Follow-Up (Plan to verify construction practices in response to instrumentation
results, and be prepared to respond to potential concerns.)
5. INSTRUMENTATION, MONITORING, AND DATA INTERPRETATION
Proper installations are important to getting useful results that can be readily
interpreted for the intended pur pose.Thei nstrumentmanuf acturer’
sinformationshoul dbe
rev i
ewed and,i fnec essar y,t he manuf acturer’sr epresentative should be cont acted t o
obtain advice for less frequently used instruments. Unfortunately, many instruments have
been installed improperly and have resulted in obtaining questionable and misleading data.
Installation requires significant attention to details and using the procedure suitable for the
geologic conditions and the instrument program objectives. Some instruments need to be
calibrated, such as load and pressure devices, inclinometer probes, vibrating wire
piez omet er
s. ( Ref er t o t he manuf acturer’s r ecommendat ions). The i nstallat
ion of
instruments should be under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer or trained and
experienced technician.
Instruments are often exposed to the environment and are susceptible to damage
due to accidental impacts (human, animal, and equipment) or vandalism. Environmental
factors can affect instrument performance. Therefore, consider the installation location and
whether the instrument may be affected by conditions such as water, melting snow, heat, or
subfreezing temperatures. Many instruments having equipment such as inclinometer
casing, settlement platform risers, or junction boxes, which protrude above ground in the
construction area, are particularly susceptible to damage from construction equipment. The
requirement for the Contractor to protect and maintain them, as needed, throughout contact
period should be clearly described in the contract documents.
Protective casings and monument covers may be installed for protecting instruments
that are exposed near the ground surface. In addition, placing barricades, posts and
warning flags around the instrument location can achieve further protection. The
Geotechnical Engineer must work with the Resident Engineer to ensure that the Contractor
understands the importance of these instruments, the need to protect them, and the
possible impacts to construction, such as work stoppage near damaged instruments.
Maintenance of instruments and readout devices should be performed at
recommended intervals in order to maintain accuracy and dependability. Electrical and
pneumatic systems need to be free of moisture, dirt and dust. Deteriorated or damaged
components should be immediately repaired. Periodic calibrations are required for some
instruments and readout devices.
Most instruments require initial readings to be repeated (duplicate set) to crosscheck
that the reference data set is accurate and dependable. The monitoring frequency should
be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer to fit the anticipated construction schedule
and ground behavior. The Geotechnical Engineer should reevaluate the monitoring
program, as construction proceeds, to determine if monitoring frequency should be
changed.
The data will need to be stored in digital and/or hard copy. When using portable
electric data systems, the data should be immediately transferred to a workstation
computer. It is advisable to print a back-up copy to provide a redundancy in the stored data.
Data analysis should usually be performed immediately, according to the most
recent guidance provided by FHWA, AASHTO, geotechnical instrumentation publications,
and the manufacturer. Comparing them to previous data sets and known site conditions, as
well as performing error checks should verify the reasonableness of the data and the
analysis results. Compare the results to previously projected scenarios and determine if
there are any concerns. Apply correction factors, if necessary, to make the data relevant
and usable.
Data results are most useful when plotted in a form that is easily understood and
relates to the construction and instrumentation program objectives. Typically, graphs
compare the specific measured results against time; however, results can be shown in
other ways. For example, for settlement monitoring, graphs can relate and compare such
things as fill placement height versus settlement, static groundwater level or pore pressure
head versus fill placement height, or settlement versus time.
Trends in the data should be evaluated to determine if there is an unusual condition
or a common theme demonstrated by the results. A determination should be made if there
is a performance hypothesis that is consistent with the instrumentation results. This will
help evaluate the validity of data and interpretations. Results should be reviewed by
experienced personnel to recommend changes in construction, if necessary.
Instrumentation results should be documented promptly. The timing of the
reports/memorandums should be established to fit the construction schedule in order to be
of value. Sometimes, the reports may need to be made the same day as the readings, or
possibly the next morning. If concerns or issues arise that could affect construction, they
should be immediately communicated by the Geotechnical Engineer to the Resident
Engineer or Inspector.
6. GROUNDWATER LEVEL AND PORE PRESSURE MEASUREMENT
Piezometric pressures influence the strength of soil or rock. Critical pore water
pressures should be estimated during design of embankment fills and other structures.
During construction, piezometers can be installed to monitor the pore water pressures. The
dissipation of the pore water pressure over time is used as a guide to consolidation rate.
Thus, piezometers can be used to control the rate of fill placement during embankment
construction over soft soils. Piezometers should be placed prior to construction in the
strata/zones that contribute to settlement or shear strength. If the strata or zones are more
than 10 feet thick, more than one piezometer should be placed to provide adequate
coverage with depth. It is possible to install several piezometers in the same borehole;
however, this requires more complex installation and introduces the possibility of cross-
flows from inadequate seals. Single piezometer installations are generally recommended.
The pore water pressure should be measured often during embankment
construction. After the fill is in place, and critical conditions have passed, pore water
pressures can be monitored at a decreasing frequency. The data should be plotted (as
pressure or elevation of water head) as a function of time. A recommended practice is to
plot pore water pressure, settlement, and embankment elevation on the same time-scale
plot for comparison.
Instruments commonly used to measure groundwater pressures include observation
wells, open standpipe piezometers, vibrating wire piezometers and pneumatic piezometers.
6.1 Observation Wells
An observation well consists of a perforated section of pipe attached to a riser pipe
installed in a borehole backfilled with sand. A pipe cap on top of the riser pipe and,
typically, a cement seal around the top of the pipe are used to prevent surface water from
entering the monitoring system. A vent is required in the cap to allow pressures in the pipe
to equalize.
Groundwater levels in standpipes and wells are read using an electronic dipmeter,
which emits an audible (beep) and visible (red light) signal when the surface of
groundwater is encountered. The red light signal can be very handy when working around
noisy equipment. The depth is measured using a graduated cable.
Observation wells are used for monitoring the groundwater levels. Observation
wells are also used to monitor the changes of ground water levels due to conducting a
pump test to determine permeability. If an observation well is installed across several zones
of permeability, the measurement will correspond to the zone of highest permeability.
Observation wells should preferably be installed in materials of high permeability so that the
lag time related to changes in groundwater levels is minimized and reasonably accurate
results are obtained. Observation wells in silt and clay soils could experience long lag times
and therefore should be used cautiously. Where these conditions exist, it is advisable to
use an alternative type of piezometer.
6.2 Open Standpipe Piezometers
Open standpipe piezometers are similar to observation wells, except that the
perforated portion of the pipe and sand filter region (backfill) is sealed in a discrete zone
and the riser pipe is much smaller in diameter. The smaller diameter of the pipe reduces
the lag time related to changes in ground water levels. Above the sand filter, the remaining
backfill should include a seal (either cement/bentonite or bentonite pellets). Surface runoff
should be prevented from entering the standpipe by installing a box or monument that does

not restrict the pipe from venting. Groundwater levels in standpipes are read using an
electronic dipmeter which signals when the water surface inside the pipe is encountered.
The depth is measured using the graduated cable.
Open standpipe piezometers have a long successful performance record and are
preferable to observation wells in most applications. Open standpipe piezometers should
be used only in materials of high to moderately high permeability so that lag time remains
relatively short. Standpipe piezometers are less effective in low-permeable silts or clayey
soils to measure fluctuations in groundwater levels.
6.3 Vibrating Wire Piezometers
Vibrating wire piezometers are pressure transducers that operate using the
frequency of vibration of a wire connected to a flexible metallic diaphragm. As the pressure
changes, the length of the wire changes, resulting in a different vibrating frequency, which
can be correlated to a specific water pressure. Each uniquely calibrated piezometer is
contained in a protective housing with a porous filter. There are several manufacturers of
vibrating-wire piezometers. Each manufacturer sells readout devices that are generally able
to read other brands of piezometers as well.
Vibrating wire piezometers are installed in a similar manner as open standpipe
piezometers. It is recommended that the wire leads be kept taut during installation,
especially when using hollow-stem auger drilling systems, to avoid abrasions and
breakage. This can be performed by taping the leads to a solid rod or PVC pipe.
Vibrating wire piezometers have several significant advantages over open standpipe
piezometers including: (1) require very short lag time related to changes in groundwater
levels in all types of soils, (2) cause minimum interference to construction equipment due to
flexibility of wire placement, and (3) are easily adapted for use with an inexpensive data-
logger for automated readings. Disadvantages include: (1) more care is required to assure
proper installation, and (2) the electronic units are susceptible to damage by lightning,
transient electricity, and shorting if the leads become abraded and the wires are exposed to
moisture. The power source needs to be maintained (i.e., periodic replacement of
batteries).
6.4 Pneumatic Piezometers
Pneumatic piezometers consist of a sensor body with a flexible diaphragm, and inlet
and outlet tubes. The junction box outlet is connected to a readout unit and pressurized gas
is applied to the inlet tube. As the applied gas pressure equals and then exceeds the pore
water pressure, the diaphragm deflects allowing gas to vent through the outlet tube. The
gas supply is then turned off and the diaphragm returns to its original position. The
pressure in the inlet tube equals the pore water pressure and is measured and recorded.
Pneumatic piezometers are installed in a similar manner as vibrating wire piezometers.
Pneumatic piezometers have many of the same advantages that vibrating-wire
piezometers have. Disadvantages include: (1) require more equipment, (2) require more

complex setup and operator training, and (3) the quality of the readings is more operator-
dependent.
7. LATERAL GROUND MOVEMENT INSTRUMENTATION
Movements can be identified by visual observations, or can be measured using
surveying equipment to monitor tag lines comprised of hubs/stakes, or
permanently/temporarily installed reflectors. Movements can also be measured by more
sophisticated instruments such as inclinometers. Survey instrumentation, telltale stakes,
and crack monitoring devices measure movements only on the surface, whereas
inclinometers measure movements below the ground surface.
7.1 Telltale Stakes
The simplest means of monitoring ground movement is a row of stakes along a line-
of-sight. If any of the stakes are observed to veer from the line-of-sight, ground movement
may be occurring. This system serves as an early warning method and can be checked
frequently with ease. For this system to be effective, the stakes at each end must be on
stable ground and safe from being disturbed.
7.2 Survey Hubs
Survey hubs (stakes or pins) could be used to monitor horizontal and vertical
movement of the ground surface George, this is in Lateral Ground Movement
Instrumentation Section so I crossed it out, where the hubs can be installed and maintained
with essentially no disturbance. Surveying of one or a series of hubs (tag line) can help
determine rates and direction of ground surface movement, and the lateral extent of
landslides.
Typical hubs survey monitoring can identify gross movements of ¼ inch or more. For
greater dependability, use deeply installed steel pins/rebar that are not as easily disturbed
by surface activities and freeze/thaw. The reference datum (benchmark) should be located
where it is not subject to movement.
7.3 Portable Crack/Deformation Gauges
Cracks on rock slopes, buildings, walls, and slides can be monitored using a strain
measuring tool. Tools include: A transparent graduated grid/scale, calipers, survey tape,
micrometer, dial gauge, mechanical strain gauge, or electrical crack gauge. One simple
monitoring method is to firmly place a stake/hub on each side of a crack and then measure
the distance between the two. The magnitude and time rate of movement is monitored.
Commonly, as the rate of movement accelerates, the likelihood of an imminent failure
increases and concern should be raised.
7.4 Inclinometers
Inclinometers are used to monitor ground deformation below the ground surface.
The installation includes placing a grooved plastic tube (inclinometer casing) within a
borehole and backfilling the annular space outside the casing. To accurately measure
lateral displacements, the bottom of the tube must be socketed at least ten feet below the
failure zone where the bottom of the tube does not experience any movement, thereby
achieving a stable point of fixity.
An inclinometer probe contains two transducers for taking measurements. The probe
should be carefully handled and periodically calibrated and verified for proper performance.
The inclinometer probe is lowered down to the bottom of the tube with the probe wheels
following the grooves within the tube. The orientation of the tube (degree of tilt) is
measured as the probe is pulled up (usually in 2-foot increments). The measurements are
taken with a portable electronic readout device.
Readings are plotted relative to an initial set of readings taken immediately after
installation to show any displacements that have occurred versus depth. Subsequent
readings can be included on the same plot to show the rate of displacement over time.
Vector sums can be used to determine the direction of movement. Depending on the rate of
landslide movement, it is important to take readings often enough to pick up the depth(s) of
slide movement before the casing pinches off, becoming unusable.
Inclinometers are routinely used to monitor landslides. Inclinometers are placed at
several locations along the length of the slide to develop a cross-section showing the depth
and orientation of the slide shear zone. The cross-section should be aligned along the axis
of landslide movement based on the calculated direction of movement. Inclinometers can
also be installed to monitor critical embankment and excavation slopes where stability is a
concern. Fill operations should be halted if unacceptable movements (as determined by the
Geotechnical Engineer) are detected.
In installation of an inclinometer, the annulus space between the borehole wall and
the casing should be backfilled with a firm grout as recommended by the manufacturer. The
grout should be placed either by Tremie tube into the annular space starting at the bottom
of the hole, or pumped through a pipe connected to a one-way valve at the bottom of the
inclinometer casing. In some cases, sand or gravel is used as a backfill material. However,
granular material can bridge within the hole, or result in loose backfill zones, which could
cause casing deflections that are not related to ground movement. Granular fill should only
be used in boreholes that cannot be grouted, or where the rate of movement is high
enough to be readily distinguishable from other casing disturbances. For installations in
highly compressible soils, telescoping couplings should be used to prevent damage to the
casing due to ground settlement.
7.5 ShearPl
aneI
ndi
cat
oror“
Poor
-Man’
s”I
ncl
inomet
er
A shear plane indicator consists of a plastic pipe installed in a borehole, similar to an
observation well. Depending on the size of the plastic pipe, a short steel rod is lowered into
the pipe on a fishing line, wire or cable. Typically, rod lengths range from six inches to two
feet. Monitoring consists of pulling the rod up from the bottom of the hole to see if it begins
to bind up in the hole where the pipe is bent by slide movement. Often, slide movements
occur within a zone, not as a discrete failure plane. In this case, the rod typically binds up at

the bottom of the failure zone. To determine if the failure is occurring discretely or as a
failure zone, a second steel rod could be lowered into the pipe (top-down) to determine the
upper limit of slide movement. This instrument is an approximating tool, which could be
considered where funds are limited; however, it is not as accurate or dependable as the
regular inclinometer.
7.6 Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR)
This relatively new method provides a basic subsurface movement identification
system. The TDR instrument utilizes a coaxial cable installed in a borehole, which is
monitored by applying a voltage pulse. Wherever there is a change in electrical properties,
such as the one caused by deformations of the cable due to ground movements, a portion
of the voltage is reflected back to the source and relative magnitudes of distortion are
measured for interpretation. The depths to possible deformation zones can be
approximated.
Use of TDR is most valuable in cases where the location of the instrumented boring
is in the roadway, where setting up and reading an inclinometer may be unsafe. The TDR
cable can be routed in a narrow trench to beyond the edge of pavement and the readings
can be made at that location. Advantages over an inclinometer are that the TDR cable may
continue to function for a longer period than an inclinometer casing, (which may become
too distorted for the probe to be inserted after only several inches of movement), and
multiple zones of movement can be detected over time.
Disadvantages to use of TDR are that accurate movement magnitudes, rates, and
direction cannot be determined; that the system is complex; and the supply and technical
suppor tareli
mited.Ref ertoli
teraturebyKaneandO’ Connerf orf
ur t
herinformation.
7.7 Lateral Extensometers
Extensometers can be used to measure displacement and deformations of rock
cuts, tunnel cuts, and retaining systems. The extensometer rods or cables are placed in
holes that are generally perpendicular to the cut or wall surface to determine whether
material or blocks of rock are being displaced. Relative displacements of the extensometer
rods in relation to each other or to the ground surface can be measured with strain gauges.
7.8 Webcams
Webcams have been used as warning devices for real-time monitoring of areas that
have high risks of sliding, rockfall or other geotechnical problems that can be identified
visually. The objective is to spot a problem occurring and to take action before significant
harm occurs. It is typically not feasible to have inspectors or maintenance staff on site all
the time, particularly during evenings and weekends. The benefits of the webcam
instrumentation are that high risk areas can be monitored remotely around the clock
(possibly by maintenance staff in traffic control centers). Limitations include: (1) visibility
can be hindered during dark, rain and fog conditions, (2) small movements/events may not
be detected, and (3) potential delay time before staff recognizes that a problem condition is

occurring or has occurred. This application is a reactive method, but could help prevent
greater problems from occurring. The Geotechnical Engineer should determine when
geologic conditions are too hazardous or dangerous to require a full-time watchperson,
warning signs, and possibly control and/or restriction of traffic, in addition to remote visual
monitoring.
8. SETTLEMENT/HEAVE MONITORING
The most common settlement monitoring instrumentation is the settlement plate.
Less common instruments include the inductive coil gauge, the borehole extensometer,
and inclinometer casing installed horizontally on the embankment foundation. To augment
settlement deformation measurements, piezometers are used to provide a measure of the
dissipation of pore pressure associated with consolidation.
8.1 Settlement Plate/Platform
Settlement instruments record elevations, which are used to calculate the amount of
settlement under a load. They are most commonly used on projects with high fill
embankments, where significant settlement is predicted. The simplest device is the
settlement platform or plate, which consists of a square wooden platform or steel plate
placed on the existing ground surface prior to embankment construction. A reference rod
and protecting pipe are attached to the platform. As fill operations progress, more
segments of l rods and pipes are added.
Settlement is determined by periodically measuring the elevation of the top of the
reference rod. The platform elevation must be measured before embankment construction
commences. . Subsequent readings should be taken periodically during embankment
construction and whenever additional riser pipes are attached. Stable benchmarks should
be used for a reference elevation datum, and should be located away from all possible
vertical movement or other disturbance. The Geotechnical Engineer should determine
locations of the benchmarks. It may be necessary to use multiple benchmarks for
redundancy and to survey elevations between them at regular intervals for confirmation.
Settlement plates should be placed at locations under the embankment where
maximum settlement is predicted. On large projects, two or more settlement plates per
embankment should be installed. The settlement data should be plotted as a function of
time. The Geotechnical Engineer should analyze this data to determine when the rate of
settlement has slowed sufficiently for other construction operations to commence, such as
subsequent embankment or base course placement for paving. Concerns with settlement
plate instruments are potential for damage to the reference rods by construction
equipment, and difficulty in properly compacting around the pipes/rods as subsequent
embankment lifts are placed. Protection and warning devices are required.
8.2 Remote Settlement (Gauge Monitoring Tubes)
Settlements can be monitored by using manometer technology, which eliminates
the need for riser pipes within the fill as the embankment is being constructed. The change

in piezometric head within the manometer tube can be translated to settlement magnitude.
This system, while less susceptible to construction traffic, is more complex than the
settlement plate and requires calibration and specialized maintenance, as well as care and
protection during installation.
8.3 Inductive Coil Gauge (Deep Settlement Monitoring)
A more technically complex alternative to a settlement plate is the inductive coil
gauge in which a probe lowered down a flexible compressible pipe can identify points along
the pipe either mechanically or electrically. Distances between these points are
determined, and then used to calculate the magnitude and rate of settlement at various
depths. An alternative system includes magnet and reed switch gauges. This method of
settlement measurement allows a profile to be obtained within the compressible soil layer.
Ref ertoFHWA,“ Geotechnical Instrumentation –St udentWor kbookf orTr ainingCour se,
”
1981. Surveying the top of the pipe elevation needs to be performed if the pipe is not
seated into an incompressible soil layer. Care must be taken during installation and
grouting the pipe in the borehole so that the flexible pipe is allowed to settle in the same
fashion as the surrounding soil.
8.4 Borehole Extensometer (Deep Settlement Monitoring)
The borehole extensometer is an alternative to the inductive coil gauge, which
consists of one or several steel rods placed within a borehole and anchored at specified
depths to monitor localized settlement within specific layers. Anchors are attached to the
bottom of extensometer rods, as a stationary reference point at the deepest location
desired in the borehole. The mechanical anchoring system (Borros) consists of a device
with expandable steel members that are pushed into the borehole sidewall. Grout
backfilling the borehole is an alternative to anchor the steel extensometer rods. Elevation
measurements are related to the lowermost anchored-rod or surveyed datum. System
redundancy can be provided by surveying the ground surface elevation and the instrument
measuring plate. The relative displacements of each rod are measured with a dial gauge
mounted on a pedestal.
8.5 Horizontal Inclinometer (Settlement Monitoring)
Inclinometers can be used to measure vertical deformation (settlement) when the
grooved inclinometer casing is placed horizontally beneath a proposed embankment. One
end of the casing must terminate at a fixed datum (or the datum should be accessible for
resurveying each time measurements are taken). A pulley system is required to move the
inclinometer probe along the casing. It is preferable that both ends of the casing daylight to
simplify monitoring operations and to provide a more reliable means of maintaining the
system. Taking measurements using horizontal inclinometers takes longer time than using
settlement plates. This instrument is used sparingly, primarily where settlement plate
instruments are too likely to be damaged or when settlement profiling under the
embankment cross-section is required.

9. TILTMETERS
Tiltmeters measure the inclination (tilt or rotation) of discrete parts of rock cuts and
structures from the established datum. They are most commonly used to monitor tilting of
bridge abutments, retaining walls and marginally stable slopes or rock outcrops. Types of
tiltmeters range from a simple plumb line to more sophisticated electrical equipment with
accelerometer or electrolytic level transducers. The fixed-in-place tiltmeter is more
accurate than the portable version because there is no inaccuracy associated with the
direct anchoring system. The portable instrument introduces some inaccuracy due to the
use of an intermediate reference plate and mechanical connections.
10. LOAD CELLS AND STRAIN GAUGES
Load cells and strain gauges are used to measure forces and deformation of critical
structural elements, such as high capacity ground anchors, heavily loaded drilled shafts,
and tunnel supports. Strain gauges could be used solely for measuring strain, or can be
incorporated into structural members to measure loads (which require computations relying
on elastic properties of the device). Calibration is typically required. Electrical resistance
and vibrating wire type load cells are more reliable and accurate (accuracy within ±2 to
±10%) than proof ring type load cells. A common load applying device is a calibrated
hydraulic jack; however, its accuracy to measure the applied load is within about ±10 to
±25%. For many engineering applications, higher measuring accuracy is required. .
11. EARTH PRESSURE CELLS
“Embank mentear t
hpr essur ecel ls”ar ei nstal
ledwi thi nembank ment stodet er mine
the magnitude and direction of total stress. In addi t
ion,“Cont ac
tear thpr essurecel l
s”ar e
used to measure total stress acting against retaining walls, foundations, and culverts. Both
of these types of earth pressure cells are primarily used in research and verifying design
assumptions of special applications, and are rarely used for construction control. In
general, these instruments are expensive and accurate earth pressures are difficult to
obtain.
12. VIBRATION MONITORING
It is sometimes desirable to monitor the ground vibrations induced by blasting,
pavement breaking, pile driving, rock excavation (ripping, chiseling, hammering), operation
of construction equipment, or traffic loading. This is especially critical when construction is
in close proximity to sensitive structures or equipment, which may become damaged if
subjected to excessive vibration. A visual survey of structures that may potentially be
damaged due to vibration should be conducted prior to the construction. Structures should
be photographed. Video cameras are typically used for visual recording with a commentary
ofobser v at
ions.Inbl ast
ingoper at ions,t hi
si sr efer r
edt oast he“ PreblastSurvey .
” Thi s
may include land survey of very significant structures.
A vibration monitoring device typically consists of a recording unit, one or more
geophones, and connecting cables. Instrument types include: seismographs, peak meters,
and air blast sensors. Sound sensors to detect noise levels are also available. Geophones
and/or sound sensors are placed at locations where data on vibration levels is desired.
Peak particle velocities, principle frequencies, peak sound pressure levels, and actual
waveforms can be recorded. Results are compared with preestablished vibration limiting
criteria, which are based on structure conditions, equipment sensitivity, or human tolerance.
13. GROUND TEMPERATURE
Measurements of ground temperature could be accomplished by installing
thermistors into boreholes. Multiple installations are possible. An electronic readout
instrument is required. Initial readings should be made over a period of several days to
verify that temperature measurements have reached equilibrium. Ground temperature can
be a factor in addressing viscoelastic behavior of embedded materials, impacts on grout
curing, and potential frozen ground issues. Vibrating wire piezometers commonly come
equipped with thermistors.
SUBJECT ASTM AASHTO

Settlement Plate/Platform - -
Pore Pressures in Soils - T 252
Extensometers Used in Rock D 4403 -
Installing, Monitoring, and Processing Data of the Traveling - T 254
Type Slope Inclinometer
Subsurface Liquid Levels in a Borehole or Monitoring Well D 4750 -
(Observation Well)
Design and Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Wells in D 5092 -
Aquifers
Static Calibration of Electronic Transducer Based Pressure D 5720 -
Measurement Systems for Geotechnical Purposes
Monitoring Well Protection D 5787 -
Calibrating Linear Displacement Transducers for D 6027 -
Geotechnical Purposes
Monitoring Ground Movement Using Probe Type D6230 -
Inclinometers

15. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
Manual
onSubsur
faceI
nvest
igat
ions,
”Appendi
xG:I
nst
rument
ati
on,1984
AASHTO,“
InSi
tuI
mpr
ovementTechni
ques,
”TaskFor
ce27Repor
t,1990
Dunni
clif
f,J ohn,“Geot echni
calI nstrument
ati
onf
orMoni
t
ori
ngFi
eldPer
for
mance,
”Wi
l
ey-
Interscience, New York, 1993
FHWA,“Geotechni calI
nst
rument ation,
”Ref
erence Manual
,NHICour
se No.13241 –
Module 11, FHWA-HI-98-034, 1998
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
calI
nst
rument
ati
on–St
udentWor
kbookf
orTr
aini
ngCour
se,
”1981
FHWA,“
Adv anced Course on Sl ope St abi
l
it
y,”Vol
.1,Chapt
er9,I
nst
rument
ati
on and
Monitoring, FHWA- SA-94-005, 1994
FHWA,“
Tol
erabl
eMov
ementCr
it
eri
aforHi
ghwayBr
idges,
”FHWA- RD-85-107, 1985
FHWA,“
Foundat
ionI
nst
rument
ati
on–I
ncl
i
nomet
ers,
”FHWA-TS-77-219, 1977
FHWA,“
RockSl
opes–Desi
gn,Ex
cav
ati
on,St
abi
l
izat
ion,
”FHWA-TS-89-045, 1989
Kane, W. F., Per ez, H., and Anderson, N.O.,“Dev elopment of a Ti me Domai n
Reflectomet rySy stem t
o Moni
torLandsli
de Activi
ty,”FinalRepor tFHWA/ CA/ TL-
96/09, Department of Civil Engineering, University of the Pacific, Stockton,
California, June 1996
NCHRP,“TreatmentofPr oblem Foundat i
ons f orHi ghway Embankment
s,”Chapt
er7,
Construction and Performance Monitoring, Synthesis 147, 1989
O’
Conner
,K.
M.,“ RealTi me Moni toring ofInf
rastruct
ure Usi ng TDR Tec hnol
ogy ,”25t
h
FHWA Northwest Geotechnical Workshop, Bismarck, North Dakota, August 1999
Peck,R.B. ,“
Adv ant
agesand Li
mit
ati
onsofthe Observat
ionalMet
hod i
n Appl
i
ed Soi
l
Mechanics,
”NinthRanki
neLectur
e,Geotec
hnique,Vol.19,No.2,pp171–187,
1969
TRB,“
Guidet oEarthwor kConst
ruct
ion:St
ateoft
heAr
tRepor
t,
”TRBRepor
tNo.8,I
SBN
0-309-04957-1, 1990
TRB,“
Landsli
des :Investi
gat
ionandMi
ti
gat
ion,
”Chapt
er11,Fi
eldI
nst
rument
ati
on,Speci
al
Report 247, 1996
USDA,“
SlopeSt abi l
ityRef er enceGui deForNat ionalFor
est
sint
heUni
tedSt
ates
,”Vol
.I,
Section 3, Site Investigations, EM-7170-13, 1994

CHAPTER 11
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 11-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................ 1
2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
3. ROADWAY EMBANKMENT MATERIALS ........................................................... 1
3.1 Suitable use of Materials within Project................................................................ 1
3.2 Limits of Usable Materials .................................................................................... 2
3.3 Corrosivity............................................................................................................. 2
3.4 Drainage ............................................................................................................... 2
3.5 Earthwork Factors ................................................................................................ 3
3.6 Other Considerations............................................................................................ 3
4. EMBANKMENT SETTLEMENT ........................................................................... 3
5. SOIL CUT AND FILL SLOPE STABILITY ............................................................ 5
5.1 Embankments Over Liquefiable Ground .............................................................. 6
5.2 Reinforced Soil Slopes ......................................................................................... 6
6. ROCK CUT SLOPES ........................................................................................... 7
6.1 Predesign Tasks................................................................................................... 8
6.2 Slope Stability Analyses ....................................................................................... 9
6.2.1 Kinematic Analyses .............................................................................................. 9
6.2.2 Stability Analyses ................................................................................................. 9
6.2.3 Factor of Safety .................................................................................................. 10
6.2.4 Computer Programs ........................................................................................... 10
6.3 Rock Slope Design ............................................................................................. 10
6.3.1 Design Standards and Policies........................................................................... 11
6.3.2 Selecting Slope Angle ........................................................................................ 11
6.3.3 Construction Considerations and Mitigation Measures ...................................... 11
6.3.4 Rockfall Control Design ...................................................................................... 13
7. LANDSLIDES ..................................................................................................... 13
8. GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING DESIGN............................. 14
8.1 Seismicity ........................................................................................................... 15
8.2 Seismic Response of Soils ................................................................................. 16
8.3 Dynamic Response Characteristics of Structures .............................................. 16
8.4 Liquefaction ........................................................................................................ 16
8.5 Seismic Slope Stability ....................................................................................... 17
8.6 Seismic Analysis of Retaining Structures ........................................................... 17
9. FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................................. 18
9.1 Service Load vs. Load and Resistance Factor Design ....................................... 18
9.2 Foundation Feasibility......................................................................................... 18
9.3 Spread Footings ................................................................................................. 19
9.4 Foundations on Rock ......................................................................................... 19
9.5 Deep Foundations .............................................................................................. 19
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 11-ii
9.5.1 Axial Capacity..................................................................................................... 20

9.5.2 Lateral Capacity.................................................................................................. 20
9.5.3 Seismic Analyses ............................................................................................... 20
9.5.4 Liquefaction Potential and Mitigation.................................................................. 20
9.5.5 Scour Considerations ......................................................................................... 21
9.5.6 Design Phase Load Testing ............................................................................... 21
9.6 Driven Piles ........................................................................................................ 21
9.7 Drilled Shafts ...................................................................................................... 22
9.8 Auger Cast Piles (ACP) ...................................................................................... 22
9.9 Micropiles ........................................................................................................... 22
10. RETAINING WALL SELECTION AND DESIGN ................................................ 22
10.1 Standard Cantilever Walls.................................................................................. 23
10.2 Modular Gravity Walls ........................................................................................ 24
10.3 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls........................................................ 24
10.4 Soil Nail Walls .................................................................................................... 25
10.5 Cantilevered Soldier Pile and Sheet Pile Walls .................................................. 26
10.6 Ground Anchor Wall Systems ............................................................................ 26
11. DEWATERING ................................................................................................... 27
12. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 28
11-1: Policies and Procedures Memorandum .................................................... 28
11-2: List of Landslide Mitigation Methods ......................................................... 35
11-3: AASHTO Factors of Safety ....................................................................... 35
11-4: Computer Programs .................................................................................. 36
11-5: Guidelines for Geotechnical Engineering Analysis.................................... 42
13. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 44

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 11-1
1. PURPOSE
After exploration and testing have been completed, the Geotechnical Engineer must
organize and analyze all existing data and provide design recommendations. The extent of
the analysis depends upon the scope of the project and the soils/rock involved.
2. INTRODUCTION
Many factors must be considered during the analysis and design phase of projects.
Figure 11-5 provides guidelines for types of analyses that should be performed. The
references cited in the text provide suggested methods of analysis and design. Figure 11-4
provides a list of computer software programs used by the Department. In using these
references and software programs, be aware that engineering technology progresses rapidly
and those methods and software programs are being improved or new methods or programs
introduced frequently. The Geotechnical Engineer should keep abreast of the state-of-the-art
practice for appropriate and economical designs. The Geotechnical Engineer needs to
consult with the Principal Geotechnical Engineer when new techniques are to be utilized.
3. ROADWAY EMBANKMENT MATERIALS
The suitability of in situ materials for use as roadway Embankment Borrow is

determined by analysis of the results of reconnaissance and subsurface exploration.
Embankment materials must meet the Department Standard Specifications for Road and
Bridge Construction, unless alternate specifications are needed.
The subsurface materials encountered during soil explorations should be classified,
and interpretations of the stratigraphy should be made. Soils should be grouped if they belong
within the same stratum. If planned testing identifies dissimilar types of soils within the same
stratum, additional sampling and testing may be required to better define the in situ materials
and potential variabilities. On occasion, dissimilar soil types may be grouped for such reasons
as borderline test results, or insufficient quantities of in situ material to economically justify
separation of the material during construction. Some engineering judgment must undoubtedly
be used in grouping and stratifying soil types. Conclusions should be clearly explained and
justified in the Geotechnical Report. Each stratum should be analyzed to define
characteristics that may affect the design.
3.1 Suitable use of Materials within Project
The Geotechnical Engineer should determine the appropriate suitability of materials to

be excavated in the project. The uses of specific materials are typically based on
classifications and tests, such as gradations, R-value, plasticity, moisture, rock durability, and
degree of weathering. The Geotechnical Engineer should determine if materials within the
proposed project excavations meet required specifications of Borrow Embankment materials.
Estimates should be made of available quantities of each identified material type. The

location of material types should be identified in order to provide information for project
designers, construction schedule planners, and contractors regarding potential earthwork
issues. Sometimes the sequencing of cross-hauls to excavate, process and deliver materials
can be complex and therefore specific information can be beneficial during project
development and construction. Borrow Embankment materials have R-values greater than or
equal to 45. Typically roadway embankment materials must meet required specifications for
Borrow Embankment materials. The Geotechnical Engineer must provide detailed and
accurate information on the boring logs and in the Geotechnical Report regarding the drilling
process and description of encountered soils during the subsurface investigation. This will
assist the Contractor to make a reasonable interpretation of the subsurface conditions to be
encountered and avoid a change of conditions when excavating. Contractors review boring
logs and Geotechnical Reports to make their assessments of excavatability requirements.
The Geotechnical Engineer should evaluate whether controlled blasting techniques are to be
used to develop appropriate cut slopes in rock.
Rock excavation and blasting are described in greater detail in Section 6.
3.2 Limits of Usable Materials
The limits of in situ materials considered unsuitable, for use on the project, or as a
foundation to support structural elements of the project, should be defined, and the effect of
each material on roadway performance should be assessed. Refer to Sections 203 and 207
of the Department Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction for requirements
on excavation and replacement of these materials. In areas where excavation may be
excessive, but the potential for problems exists if not excavated, possible stabilization
methods to be considered include placement of geotextile, surcharging, mixing the soil with
lime, cement, or fly ash, or a combination of these.
3.3 Corrosivity
Results of field and/or laboratory tests should be reviewed and the potential for
corrosion of the various foundation and drainage system components should be assessed.
The Structural/Chemical Section of the Materials Division provides the recommendation.
3.4 Drainage
The permeability and infiltration rates of cut slopes and embankment materials should
be estimated based on test results or knowledge of the material characteristics. This
information, along with data on the depth to groundwater, can be used in assessing the need
and design of a drainage system. Subsurface drainage systems may include pavement
underdrains and interceptor drains. Surface drainage systems may include retention,
detention, and infiltration basins. TheHy draul i
csSect ionoft heDepartment ’
sRoadway
Design Division designs surface drainage systems.

3.5 Earthwork Factors
Earthwork factors (shrink/swell) used in estimating cut and fill quantities are typically
based on local experience. Shrink/swell is the percent decrease or increase in volume that
occurs when a material is excavated from an in situ location and used to construct an
embankment. In general, rock that is blasted from in place and used in an embankment will
swell. The Geotechnical Engineer should determine the shrink/swell factors for the materials
to be excavated, and estimate average values according to roadway excavation plans. The
roadway alignment can be divided into sections to group excavated materials that are similar.
Thesef act orsaf fecttheRoadwayDesi gnEngi neer’
smat erialsquant it
iesest i
mat ef ort he
project (refer to Church, (1981).
The values of shrink/swell factors vary considerably depending on the method of fill
construction and the level of compaction effort applied. Typically, material to be wasted from
a project is placed in a disposal area by end dumping using gravity compaction. For highway
construction, earth materials are placed and compacted using heavy compaction equipment
as specified in the Department Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.
For most hard rock, such as granite or limestone, the swell can range up to 36 percent.
Conversely, due to the compaction effort, soils that are removed from in place and then
placed and compacted in an embankment tend to shrink, typically averaging about 10 percent.
If the Geotechnical Engineer cannot determine the shrinkage factor for excavated soil used
as Borrow Embankment material, a value of 15% should be recommended.
3.6 Other Considerations
Presence of characteristics and features determined from soil explorations that affect
the roadway design, include expansive soils, springs, sinkholes, rock, or soft subgrade. The
effect of these characteristics on roadway performance should be assessed.
4. EMBANKMENT SETTLEMENT
The magnitude and time rate of settlement of embankments are typically estimated
using one-dimensional consolidation theory and strip loading stress distributions. Several
conditions that can cause settlement include loading due to new embankments, embankment
widening, lowering of groundwater (including temporary dewatering), temporary fills and
stockpiles. FHWA publications (Soils and Foundations Workshop, 2000; and Advanced
Course on Slope Stability, 1994) provide technical guidance for estimating settlement at
abutments, along embankment centerline and edge of pavement, and at locations beyond
embankment toes where sensitive structures or facilities might exist. The Geotechnical
Engineer may use FoSSA software, provided by the Federal Highway Administration to
estimate settlements. Other software programs such as EMBANK or SIGMA/W (a finite
element program) are available.
If design analyses indicate excessive settlement magnitude or time, mitigation
measures should be evaluated. Mitigation measures could include: (1) surcharging, (2)
removal of settlement-prone material, (3) installation of vertical drainage systems such as wick
drains, sand drains, or stone columns, (4) ground improvement such as jet grouting, dynamic
compaction, deep soil mixing, vibroflotation, and placing piles, (5) reducing loads by
decreasing the height of embankments, substituting lightweight fill (sawdust, shredded tires,
baked shale, extruded polystyrene-EPS), (6) spanning the compressible area with a pile-
supported structure (bridge or viaduct), and (7) column supported embankments.
The use of surcharging is a very common mitigation measure. The principle is to over-
consolidate the foundation soil to reduce postconstruction settlement. The postconstruction
settlement is estimated by comparing the settlement versus time graphs for both the design
embankment and for the embankment plus surcharge condition. Sometimes, surcharging
does not produce the desired amount of preloading settlement within the timeframe
constraints. If this is the case, then the alternative mitigation measures are evaluated.
Vertical drainage systems can be used to speed the rate of settlement of a fill placed
on top of a soft soil deposit. This method effectively shortens the drainage path that pore
water must travel during consolidation under an applied load. The Geotechnical Engineer
selects the drain spacing that results in a consolidation that meets the project design and
construction requirements (i.e., settlements have occurred to an acceptable magnitude prior to
construction of a settlement sensitive element, such as a bridge abutment). A wick drain
consists of a plastic drainage core wrapped in a nonwoven geotextile. The drains are installed
by a mandrel on a rig that drives the mandrel with continuous down pressure or vibration. The
mandrel is extended to the design elevation and then retracted. An anchor plate at the bottom
of the drain prevents the drain from being pulled upwards with the mandrel. After installation
of the drains, a free draining sand blanket is installed on the ground surface to enable free
flow of water from the drains. The fill embankment is then constructed on top of the sand
blanket.
Jet grouting mixes cement with the native soil to create a higher capacity and less
compressible foundation. Silt and sand soils are best suited for this type of mitigation
technique since they are readily cut and mixed by the water jets. Clay soils may not break
down sufficiently. Dynamic compaction and vibroflotation (including stone columns) increase
the density of subsurface soils. Silt and sand soils are best suited for these types of
mitigations techniques since they relieve excess pore water pressures generated by the
dynamic motions. Placing piles can be used (although infrequently in practice) to distribute
embankment loads to a lower, less compressible stratum.
Sometimes a proposed roadway alignment can be modified to reduce embankment
heights in critical settlement-prone areas. If not, another option to reduce embankment weight
is to substitute lightweight materials instead of soils in the embankment. Sawdust or wood
fiberfills have been used for decades. Since the 1980s, shredded tires have also been used
in embankments. Drawbacks for these lightweight materials are: (1) having the potential for
combustion, and (2) occurrence of surface deflections/rebound under traffic loads. Baked
shale and extruded polystyrene (EPS) do not have these drawbacks; although EPS needs to
be encapsulated to prevent damage from solvent spills, such as gasoline. EPS is the lightest
of the lightweight construction fill materials, with a density of about 2 lbs/cu. ft.
On some projects such as those in wetlands, much mitigation may not be permitted due
to environmental constraints. Use of a bridge or viaduct may be acceptable because of
having minimal environmental impacts, as well as avoiding need of support on compressible
soils. Structural mitigations are typically the most expensive options.
5. SOIL CUT AND FILL SLOPE STABILITY
Short cut and fill slopes are typically evaluated using precedence, experience, and
judgment. The Geotechnical Engineer needs to recognize when the height of a cut/fill slope or
poor subsurface conditions warrant performing stability analyses. A quick form of analysis is
the use of stability charts and graphs that solve relatively simple and common cases. The
U.S. Forest Service Slope Stability manuals provide a compilation of stability charts. Also,
ref ertoFHWA’ sAdv ancedCour seonSl opeSt abil
it
ymanual . Cuts and fills that have
irregular geometry, intermediate groundwater levels, or low-strength soils may justify the use
of limit equilibrium stability analyses. Most landslides should be evaluated with stability
analysis.
For decades now, FHWA has endorsed XSTABL, which is a stability analysis software
based on the STABL programs developed by Purdue University in the 1970s. This program
has been modified into the user-friendly program PCSTABL. There are several other software
packages which some have greater capabilities and output formats, such as Slope-W,
UTEXAS, and PC-Slope. Refer to FHWA publications (Soil and Foundation Workshop and
Advanced Course on Slope Stability).
Typical cut and fill slopes have inclination angles of 2H:1V. Steeper slopes can be
used based on analyses using representative shear strength or based on local precedence.
When the analyses indicate that slope angles do not have a sufficient level of stability (Factor
of Safety, F.S.), mitigation measures may be necessary. The following is a list of possible
mitigations for cut and fill slopes.
Cut Slope Mitigation
 Flatten the cut slope angle
 Lower the groundwater level using drainage methods (trench drains, interceptor drains)
 Replace some of the cut slope material with higher strength material, such as rock fill
(rock inlay)
 Reinforce cuts (soil nails)
Fill Slope Mitigation
 Flatten the fill slope angle
 Install drainage measures (underdrain blankets, trench drains)
 Use an embankment fill material with higher shear strength properties (for example,

embankments constructed with rock fill can generally support 1.5H:1V slopes)
 Place toe counterberms
 Place rockfill shear key
 Improve the foundation materials (overexcavate and replace)
 Use staged embankment placement (allowing excess pore water pressures to dissipate
in the foundation soils between each fill stage)
 Reinforce the fill slopes (RSS)
5.1 Embankments Over Liquefiable Ground
Foundation soils that are potentially liquefiable (typically saturated, loose silts and
sands) can lose strength during earthquake shaking or possibly from blasting-induced
vibrations. Embankments overlying soils that liquefy can experience stability problems
including slumping, lateral spreading, and subsidence.
The simplified analyses methods involve comparing the cyclic strength of the soil to the
cyclic stresses caused by the earthquake. If the stresses exceed the strength, the material
has a factor of safety of less than 1.0 against liquefaction and is determined to be potentially
liquefiable. An estimate of the cyclic strength (termed the cyclic resistance ratio or CRR) is
commonly obtained from in situ tests including the Standard Penetration, Cone Penetrometer,
or geophysical. An estimate of the cyclic stresses caused by an earthquake (termed the cyclic
stress ratio or CSR) is obtained from a simplified formula developed by Seed and Idriss
(1971). More detailed evaluations of cyclic stresses and in situ static stresses can be
obtained from one-dimensional ground response programs such as SHAKE, or from two-
dimensional, nonlinear, finite-difference programs such as FLAC (Itasca Consulting Group,
1995). Estimates of potential lateral spread can be obtained from empirical procedures
developed by Youd, et al. (2002). Mitigation measures can include dynamic compaction,
blasting and vibroflotation, placing stone columns, permeation and jet grouting, removal of the
potentially liquefiable layer, or possible relocation of the project.
Refer to the 1997 FHWA, Geotechnical Engineering, Circular No. 3,“Desi
gnGuidance:
Geotechnical Ear t
hquakeEngineer
ingforHighway s,”Vol. 1; and by recent NCEER workshops
(see,“Li
quef act ionResi st
anceofSoi l
s:Summar yRepor t”f r
om t he1996NCEER;1998
NCEER/ NSF, “
Wor kshopsonEv al
uati
onof Liquefac ti
onRes ist
anc eof Soils,
”YoudandI dr
iss
,
andASCE,“ Geot echni
calandGeoenv ir
onment alEngi neer ing,”Apr il
,2001).
5.2 Reinforced Soil Slopes
Reinforced Soil Slopes (RSS) consist of tensile reinforcements in soil backfill allowing
the slope to be constructed steeper than without the reinforcement. Depending on the
materials used, the slope inclinations can be constructed up to 70 degrees from the horizontal.
Primary reinforcing elements provide overall stability, while secondary (shorter) reinforcing
elements are used to provide near face stability. Typically, various types of slope facing such

as erosion control blankets, geogrids, gabions, or shotcrete are used to prevent near surface
erosion and raveling, especially for steep slopes.
All RSS must be designed for external stability such as sliding and deep seated, local
bearing capacity failure, and excessive settlement from both short- and long-term conditions.
Reinforcement requirements must be designed to adequately account for the internal stability
of the slope. Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes (RSS) –
Design and Construction Guidelines (FHWA-NHI-00-043) provide detailed design procedures
for reinforced soil slopes. The design concepts are similar to MSE walls.
RSS are relatively easy to construct, and have a lower cost relative to MSE walls.
Proper drainage is needed behind the reinforced mass to prevent development of hydrostatic
pressures. Design of reinforced slopes requires that sufficient width be provided to install
reinforcing elements. In road rehabilitation projects, construction of the required backfill zone
could impact the travel lanes or may necessitate acquiring additional right-of-way. Reinforced
soil slopes have a number of advantages including:
 Requiring less fill material and having a smaller overall footprint, which can reduce
right-of-way acquisition and environmental impacts in sensitive areas.
 Often allowing, onsite materials to be used for construction.
 Assisting growth of vegetation on slope face for a more environmentally acceptable
appearance.
6. ROCK CUT SLOPES
The Geotechnical Engineer should take into account the structural and strength
properties of the rock to develop designs that address the constructability concerns and long-
term performance of the finished cut slopes. The objective of the design process is to
determine the cut slope angle for the steepest continuous slope without intermediate slope
benches that addresses cut slope performance (reduced rockfall) and safety while reducing
excavation quantities. Rock slope stabilization and rockfall protective measures may be
required to reduce rockfall hazards, minimize environmental and right-of-way impacts, and
meet other project goals. The Geotechnical Engineer should review:
 FHWA,
“RockBl
ast
ingandOv
erbr
eakCont
rol
,”NHI
Cour
seNo. 13211, FHWA-HI-92-
001
 FHWA,“
RockSl
opes,
”NHICour
seNo. 130235 - Module 5
 FHWA,“
RockSl
opes:Desi
gn,Ex
cav
ati
on,St
abi
l
izat
ion,
”FHWA-TS-89-045
 FHWA,“
Rockf
allHaz
ardMi
ti
gat
ionMet
hods- Par
ti
ci
pantWor
kbook,
”FHWASA-93-
085
 FHWA,“
Rockf
all
Haz
ardRat
ingSy
stem - Par
ti
ci
pant
’sHandbook,
”FHWASA-93-057
 son,C.
Pierson, L.A., Gullix F.,andChassie,R.G.
,“Rockf
allCat
chmentAr
eaDesi
gn
Guide, Final Report SPR-3(
032),”Repor
tNo. FHWA-OR-RD-01-04

 FHWA,“
Gui
deCont
rol
l
edBl
ast
ingSpeci
fi
cat
ion”(1985)
6.1 Predesign Tasks
A general knowledge of the geology of the area can be obtained by examining

published geologic maps and reports along with any available aerial photographs. Slope
angles and slope heights are determined using topographic maps and cross sections. If site
topographic maps are not available, topographic surveys need to be performed.
The Geotechnical Engineer needs to characterize the rock in the slope and consider
rock classification, degree of weathering, presence of discontinuities, and degradability.
Degradability of rock, such as the weathering potential and erodibility, needs to be considered
in the design because these characteristics can adversely affect the long-term stability of the
slope.
Discontinuities, such as joints, foliations, shears, and faults, are important factors in the
stability of rock slopes. The orientation, frequency, persistence, and shear strength of rock
discontinuities are obtained from existing cuts, outcrops or rock core. The measurements of
the strike and dip (dip and dip direction) of the discontinuities along with their shear strength
are typically presented and evaluated on stereonets to determine if rockfall is kinematically
possible. When rock properties and discontinuities need to be investigated beyond their
ground surface expressions or when no outcrops are available, coring exploration is used to
obtain rock cores. The cores provide information on the roughness and infilling of
discontinuities. Oriented coring exploration may be used to obtain information on the dip and
dip direction of discontinuities.
The shear strength of rock along the discontinuities that separate the rock mass into
discrete blocks is a much more critical rock slope stability parameter than the strength of the
intact rock. In simplest terms, the shear strength governs the angle at which one rock block
will begin to slide over an adjoining block. The resistance to sliding is controlled by both the
macro roughness (irregularities such as steps or undulations on the joint surfaces) and the
micro roughness. The micro roughness is related to the texture of the rock and any
movement that may have occurred between adjacent blocks that may have created
slickensides or gouge. The resistance to sliding can be determined by performing shear tests
in the field or laboratory, or it can be estimated in the field by observing the inclinations of pre-
existing failure surfaces.
Groundwater conditions must be evaluated for the design and analysis of rock cut
slopes. Groundwater pressure acting within the discontinuities can cause significant
destabilization by decreasing the shear strength due to uplift and/or increasing the driving
forces acting on the block. Typically, the groundwater level within a slope can be estimated by
observing seepages from and around the rock slope. When groundwater conditions are
unknown and groundwater is expected to influence the stability of the slope, groundwater
pressures can be measured using piezometers.

Rockfall hazards and potential rock slope problems have been evaluated for many of
theDepar tment ’
shighway sthrought hei mpl ementation of the Rockfall Hazard Rating System
(RHRS). The maintenance history, including a description of past problems and interim
mitigations measures are included in the RHRS database. The Geotechnical Engineer should
refer to FHWA, Rockfall Hazard Rating System - Participant's Manual, FHWA-SA-93-057,
1993.
6.2 Slope Stability Analyses
The stability of hard rock slopes is highly controlled by discontinuities (joint and joint
sets) within the rock. Failures tend to occur as discrete blocks. Discontinuities form planes of
weakness. Without discontinuities, rock slopes, even those composed of relatively weak rock,
could stand hundreds of feet tall without potential of failure. Kinematic analysis of the
discontinuities is performed to determine the most likely mode of failure. This is followed by
slope stability analyses to determine the factor of safety.
6.2.1 Kinematic Analyses
A kinematic analysis is the first step in evaluating slope stability. This analysis
establishes the possible failure modes of the blocks that comprise the slope. The analysis
determines if the orientations (dip and dip direction) of the various discontinuities will interact
with the cut slope orientation and inclination to form discrete blocks with the potential to fail
without regard to any forces that may be involved. Failure modes typically fall within one of
three categories: plane failure, wedge failure, or toppling. Where a rock mass is highly
fractured by randomly oriented discontinuities or composed of very weak rock, the mode of
failure may be circular as in a soil slope.
The analysis involves a comparison of the orientations of the dominant discontinuity
sets with the orientation of the cut slope. Where discrete blocks are formed and where the
failure surfaces that bound these blocks dip out of the slope at an angle steeper than the
shear strength along the discontinuity, failure is kinematically possible. A stereonet is used to
display the discontinuity and slope data in this analysis. For detailed discussions of
stereographic analysis, refer to Hoek and Bray (1981), Hoek and Brown (1980), and Goodman
(1976).
6.2.2 Stability Analyses
After the kinematic analyses have identified the most likely mode(s) of failure, the next
step is to perform a stability analysis using the shear strength of discontinuities and
groundwater conditions. The objective is to calculate the factor of safety of the slope or
individual block being analyzed. Each of the failure modes follows.
 Plane Failure –The reference discusses general procedures, influence of groundwater
and tension cracks, and reinforcement of slopes (use of rock bolts and anchors) and
has several practical examples that are helpful in understanding the procedures

involved.
 Wedge Failure –The reference contains wedge stability charts that can be used when
the two discontinuity planes forming the wedge have frictional strength only and the
slope is fully drained. These charts may be suitable for a preliminary design of highway
cut slopes. Wedge failure stability analyses are more complex than plane failures.
Computer programs (SWEDGE, YAWC, GOLDPIT, and Key Block Theory) may be
used to perform the analyses. Appendix IV of the reference describes analytical
solutions that may be used with computers and programmable calculators.
 Toppling Failure –The reference contains an analytical method that may be applied to
a few special cases of toppling failures.
 Circular Failure –Slope failures in decomposed rock, closely fractured rock, or rock fills
generally occur along a curved surface and are not controlled by discontinuities. These
slopes may be analyzed using circular failure surfaces similar to the method used in
analyzing soil slopes. Computer programs, such as XSTABL are routinely used for the
analysis.
6.2.3 Factor of Safety
The minimum factor of safety (FS) to be used in stability analyses for a specific rock
slope depends on factors such as:
 The degree of uncertainty in the stability analysis inputs; the most important being the
amount of intact rock, shear strength and groundwater conditions
 Costs of constructing the slope to be more stable
 Costs and other consequences of the slope failure
 Whether the slope is temporary or permanent
Typical FS values range from 1.3 to 1.5; however, based on engineering judgment,
values outside of this range may be appropriate, depending on the circumstances.
6.2.4 Computer Programs
Computer programs such as Rocscience and Rockpack III are available to perform rock
slope stability analyses. Rockfall events can be simulated using computer programs such as
CRSP (Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program), Version 4.0 and Rocfall, Version 4.0. These
programs allow hundreds or even thousands of rockfall events to be quickly simulated. This
number of events typically represents many years of actual rockfall. The output includes
rockfall trajectories and the bounce heights and total kinetic energies at selected locations on
or beyond the base of the slope. The results are useful in determining the optimum location
and capacity of certain mitigation measures, such as rockfall barriers and catch fences.
6.3 Rock Slope Design
Rock slope design consists of determining (1) the orientation of the cut, (2) the

steepness of the cut, and (3) the need for mitigation measures if the resulting factor of safety
is deemed too low or the rockfall potential onto the facility is unacceptably high.
6.3.1 Design Standards and Policies
The Geotechnical Engineer should verify the applicable Department standards and
policies to confirm the practices to be followed. The Department Standard Specifications for
Road and Bridge Construction includes standard requirements for rock construction, including
the following sections:
 203.03.03, Blasting
 203.03.04, Rock Cuts
 203.03.05, Overbreak
Although thorough engineering analyses should be performed, it is important to note
that due to uncertainties in defining the controlling conditions present within a rock mass,
sound engineering judgment should be applied in the design of rock slopes. Experience is the
best predictor of the effectiveness of a rock slope or rockfall remedial design. Case histories
in similar rock conditions should be consulted to provide additional guidance.
6.3.2 Selecting Slope Angle
Several factors affect how steep a rock slope should be cut including the orientation
and strength of the discontinuities within the slope, the anticipated method of construction,
and whether additional measures will be used to enhance slope stability. Some methods of
slope construction damage the rock such that the finished cut slope has an increased
likelihood of long-term rockfall. Uncontrolled blasting, for example, can cause fracturing and
open existing fractures tens of feet into the slope. A finished cut slope can be constructed by
excavating the rock using heavy equipment ripping or production blasting techniques, or it can
be augmented with controlled blasting methods. The use of controlled blasting, either
presplitting (preshear) or trim (cushion) blasting, produces a cut slope with significantly less
potential for rockfall.
Local experience with similar rock type should be investigated. In some cases, right-of-
way limitations or other factors, such as economics, may require the design slope to be
steeper than desirable. If the resulting factor of safety is determined to be too low, or the
potential for rockfall is estimated to be unacceptably high during the design life, rock slope
stabilization and rockfall mitigation measures should be included in the design.
6.3.3 Construction Considerations and Mitigation Measures
In addition to the natural rock discontinuities that control the stability of rock slopes,
fractures caused by poor blasting techniques could increase the rockfall potential. Mitigation
measures to enhance stability include installation of reinforcement, drainage, and erosion
protection systems. The following is a partial list of available techniques:
 Controlled Blasting - Lightly loaded, aligned and closely spaced blast holes are used to
form the final cut slope face in a manner that minimizes the affects of the intense
detonation gas pressures caused by production blasting. The controlled blasting is
performed either before the main production blasting is detonated (presplit blasting) or
after the production blasting (cushion blasting). In presplit blasting, the row of control
blast holes is detonated to form a break in the slope along the final cut slope, which
serves to vent production gas pressure and keep it from penetrating and damaging the
rock that will form the final cut face. In cushion blasting, the row of control blast holes
is detonated last to trim off the rock outside the cut slope. The cushion blasting
technique is most commonly used in weaker rock conditions or wherever the thickness
of rock to be excavated is less than 15 feet. Controlled blasting is routinely used for
rock cuts that are 0.75H:1V or steeper. The limiting factor is the inability to maintain
proper blast hole alignments on flatter slopes.
 Rock Removal - One method to mitigate an unstable rock slope is to remove the
potentially unstable rock by hand scaling, blast scaling, or excavation equipment
techniques. In the construction of new rock cuts, rock scaling is generally required and
treated as incidental to the payment for the type of excavation performed.
 Screening and Barrier Systems –Draped mesh system (slope screening) applies
limited normal force against the rock face, and primarily serves to control the descent
of falling rocks into the roadside collection area. Barrier systems can range from
concrete or gabion wall barriers to proprietary systems, such as the Brugg Barrier
Fences.
 Reinforcement - Structural reinforcement can be provided by rock bolts, dowels, and
cable lashing. Tensioned rock bolts are used to increase the normal stress along the
discontinuity where sliding is possible, thus increasing the shear strength of the
discontinuity. They may also be used to anchor potentially unstable rock blocks in
place. Dowels are untensioned rock bolts or shear pins used to resist lateral
movement of rock blocks by their lateral capacity. Cable lashing uses tensioned
cable(s) to increase the normal force against the face of an isolated block to increase
sliding resistance.
 Drainage - Dewatering to reduce groundwater pressures acting within the rock slope
improves slope stability. Reduced groundwater pressure within a discontinuity
increases the shear strength, while lowering the groundwater height within tension
cracks reduces the driving force on a rock block. Proper drainage of rock slopes could
be achieved by installing drain holes (weep holes, horizontal drains) or vertical relief
wells. Various measures, such as construction of surface drains and ditches minimize
water infiltration and therefore prevent build up of groundwater pressures.
 Erosion Protection - Soils, decomposed rocks, highly fractured rocks, and certain types
of rocks are susceptible to erosion or degradation. When hard rock, resistant to
erosion, is underlain by an erodible or degradable layer, loss of support for the
overlying rock may develop over time. This may create an unstable condition.
Stopping this process can be accomplished by applying shotcrete to the surface of the
less resistant zones. Weep holes are installed to prevent buildup of groundwater
pressures behind the shotcrete. To improve the performance of shotcrete, wire mesh
or steel fibers are routinely used to reinforce the shotcrete.
 Buttresses - When an overhanging rock is large and it is impractical to remove or
reinforce it, buttresses can be used to support the overhanging rock and increase its
stability. Buttresses serve two functions: (1) protect or retain underlying erodible
material, and (2) support the overhang.
6.3.4 Rockfall Control Design
In many rock slopes, the potential for rockfall remains even after mitigation measures
are in place. It may be impractical to stabilize all potentially unstable rocks. In these
situations, the likelihood of rocks reaching the road should be evaluated and appropriate
control or protection measures should be recommended. The consequences and probabilities
of falling rocks reaching the road or facilities should be weighed against the cost of installing
control measures. Rockfall mitigation measures generally fall into two major categories: (1)
measures to prevent rockfalls (scaling, rock bolts, dowels, cable lashing, etc.), and (2)
measures to control the manner in which rocks fall or to absorb energies and restrict falling
rocks into roads and facilities (slope mesh, fallout areas, barriers, catch fences, etc.).
Fallout area or ditch design may be performed with the aid of the detailed design
char t
sincludedi nPi erson,et al
.,“Rockf all
Cat chment AreaDes ignGuide”(2001) . If the slope
is too complex to allow direct use of design charts, actual rock rolling tests or rockfall
simulation analyses should be performed. In most cases, rolling rocks is not practical or
possible, and computer simulation is the preferred method. The CRSP (Colorado Rockfall
Simulation Program) program (Colorado DOT, et al., 2000), is widely used for this purpose.
The computer program RocFall available from Rocscience Inc. (See Section 6.2.4 above) is
another program with some additional capabilities. These programs may be used to aid in the
design of fallout areas and the capacity and placement of barriers.
Scaling, the removal of loose rock from the cut slope face, is routinely used to provide
an immediate reduction in the rockfall potential; however, it is considered a temporary
measure. Reinforcement or external support methods including, shotcrete, dowels, rock bolts,
rock anchors, cable lashing, or concrete buttresses, can provide longer-term protection, as
can various measures that intercept and control rockfalls, such as fallout areas (ditches),
draped mesh, catch fence, or rockfall barrier systems.
7. LANDSLIDES
Two geotechnical references for landslide investigations for transportation projects are
(1)TRB SpecialRepor t247,“ Landsl i
des:I nv est i
gationandMi t i
gation,
”and( 2)FHWA,
“AdvancedCourseonSl opeSt abili
ty
” . There are many technical papers regarding numerous
advancements in the state-of-the-art analyses for landslides, assisting Geotechnical

Engineers to continually update their knowledge. In critical landslide mitigation applications, it

may be advisable to retain a landslide expert to provide guidance to the Department or to
perform the investigation and studies.
Landslides can be improperly diagnosed because of inadequate geologic
reconnaissance/interpretation and poorly conceived exploration/instrumentation programs.
Responding to and investigating a landslide is likened to a forensic investigation. The
Geotechnical Engineer is searching for clues and evidence, and needs to resolve all apparent
conflicts and contradictions in the perceived causative explanation/model.
Mitigation plans to stop small slides can be made through a combination of
precedence, experience and judgment. An example is constructing a rock inlay to replace
small slumps. More complicated and/or larger landslides generally require an extensive
exploration/instrumentation program, along with expert geology and geotechnical engineering.
Common mitigation measures are summarized in Figure 11-2.
8. GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING DESIGN
Earthquake engineering is a multidisciplinary design process involving the fields of

geology, seismology, geotechnical engineering and structural engineering. Field mapping,
aerial photograph interpretation, geophysical testing and other investigative procedures to
delineate faults and fault zones are performed. Fault data is used to develop ground motion
parameters, typically bedrock motions, at the ground surface (commonly referred to as the
outcropping rock motion). This information could include maximum acceleration, maximum
velocity, and duration of shaking. The motions could also be presented in the form of
digitalized acceleration-time records of an earthquake. These first two tasks can be time-
consuming and expensive to perform for every project. Accordingly, site-specific geologic and
seismic hazard evaluations are typically only performed for critical structures. For noncritical
structures, ground motion parameters are usually obtained from existing regional studies and
available literature.
Geotechnical Engineers evaluate various potential ground shaking hazards involving
soil and rock, including:
 Amplification or attenuation of bedrock motion through overlying soil deposits
 Liquefaction which could cause loss of bearing pressure resistance, lateral spreading
and ground settlement of loose, saturated, cohesionless soil deposits
 Causing Increased lateral earth pressures on retaining structures
 Causing landslides, rockfalls, and slope and embankment instability
 Causing fault rupture
Bridge Engineers are primarily interested in the lateral forces applied to structural
facilities, including bridges, viaducts, buildings, and retaining walls. Geotechnical Engineers
provide soil and ground response parameters to the Bridge Engineer for calculation of the
shear forces acting on the structures as a result of the earthquake shaking and other possible
secondary loading effects on structures, including liquefaction-induced lateral spread and

settlement.
Geotechnical earthquake engineering has developed significantly since the 1970s, and
although research continues in this discipline, generally accepted design procedures have
been established for many of the potential hazards. However, as with most areas of
geotechnical practice, the Geotechnical Engineer needs to keep abreast of current research to
maintain competence with general standards of practice.
The Department follows AASHTO guidelines for seismic design of transportation
facilities. The current AASHTO guidelines are outlined in Standard Specifications for Highway
Bridges. Article 3.21 of AASHTO (2002), Division 1, states that seismic design must consider
the following items: (1) the relationship of the site to active faults, (2) the seismic response of
the soils at the site, and (3) the dynamic response characteristics of the structure. For bridges
and roadway structures, the Geotechnical Engineer is responsible for analyzing items (1) and
(2), and providing the results to the Bridge Engineer who analyzes item (3). For cuts and
embankments, the Geotechnical Engineer is responsible for analyzing all three items.
8.1 Seismicity
The western portion of Nevada, known as the Nevada Seismic Zone, has experienced
large earthquakes in historic times, and is considered one of the more seismically active areas
in the United States.
The relationship of the site to active faults is represented using peak bedrock
acceleration maps. For noncritical structures, the acceleration coefficient (A) is obtained from
Article 3.2 of Division IA of AASHTO, 2002. The maps of horizontal acceleration in rock, A,
are based on 90 percent probability of not being exceeded in 50 years. This corresponds to
an approximate 475-year return period. Article 11.3.3.8 of Department Bridge Manual (1991)
specifies that the minimum expected bedrock acceleration is 0.15g.
For very large or critical structures, a site-specific seismic hazard evaluation can be
performed. These studies are performed on a probabilistic or deterministic basis. A
probabilistic evaluation estimates the level of ground acceleration for a given return period for
all potential seismic sources. A deterministic evaluation provides an estimate of the maximum
ground acceleration that would be caused by each fault source or source zone. The individual
fault source or source zone that results in the largest ground acceleration at the site is
commonly referred to as the Maximum Credible Earthquake or MCE.
According to section 3.4 of Division 1A of AASHTO, 2002, a bridge is determined to be
in one of four Seismic Performance Categories (SPC), A through D, based on the Acceleration
Coefficient (A) and the Importance Classification (IC). Refer to special seismic design
requirements for the foundations and abutments of bridges in SPC B, C, and D. The
Geotechnical Engineer may be required to perform investigations to identify potential hazards
and obtain seismic design information related to: liquefaction, slope instability, fill settlement,
and increased lateral earth pressure.
8.2 Seismic Response of Soils
For the design of bridges according to Section 3.5.1 of Division 1A of AASHTO, 2002,
the seismic response of the soils is expressed by the Site Coefficient (S), which is in turn
determined by the Soil Profile Type. The Geotechnical Engineer performs subsurface
explorations, classifies the subsurface materials, and determines the Soil Profile Type. A site-
specific response may be developed by using various computer programs (SHAKE, TARA,
FLAC, etc.) depending on the complexity and importance of the structure. However, site-
specific response analyses using computer programs are typically not performed, except for
special cases.
8.3 Dynamic Response Characteristics of Structures
Seismic lateral forces acting on a structure are influenced by the seismic response of
the soils at the site and the fundamental period of the structure. Typically, elastic seismic
coefficients, as defined in Division 1A of the 1998 Commentary in AASHTO, 2002, are used to
define the earthquake load to be used in the elastic analysis for seismic effects. Article 3.6 of
Division 1A of AASHTO, 2002, states an alternate method that can be used is with a 5%
damped, site-specific, response spectrum developed by a qualified professional. The
Geotechnical Engineer may develop the site-response spectrum by using the computer
program SHAKE. Earthquake time histories to be used in SHAKE should be selected to
closely match the estimated ground motions for the site. The 1997 FHWA, Geotechnical
Engineering, Circular No. 3, provides a summary of seismic design procedures, including
selection of representative earthquake time histories.
8.4 Liquefaction
The selection of ground motion parameters for the lateral force design procedures
discussed in Division 1A of AASHTO, 2002, assumes that the soil overlying bedrock is not
liquefiable. If loose, saturated, cohesionless deposits are subjected to cyclic shear stresses
(typically an earthquake, less commonly blasting or construction-induced vibrations), the
tendency for the soil to densify will result in a temporary increase in pore water pressure. This
in turn results in a decrease in effective stress and a weakening of the soil. Structures
founded in liquefiable soil can lose bearing pressure resistance or skin friction, and can be
subjected to increased lateral and vertical loads from lateral spreading and settlement of the
liquefied deposit. Liquefaction has caused a number of bridge failures during past
earthquakes. The recommended procedure to evaluate the liquefaction potential is based on
the Standard Penetration Test blowcounts of soils. The liquefaction evaluation procedure is
described in many standard references on geotechnical earthquake engineering, including
Chapt er8ofFHWA,“ Ear t
hquakeEngi neer ing”(1997),Vol . I. An example of a liquefaction
ev aluationi si nEx ampl e5ofFHWA,“ Ear thquakeEngi neer ing”(1997),Vol . II.

8.5 Seismic Slope Stability
Earthquake shaking can result in failures of natural slopes and man-made

embankments. The standard procedure for evaluating the stability of a nonliquefiable slope is
the pseudostatic analysis, where a lateral force is applied to the center of gravity of a soil
mass having a failure potential when performing a limit equilibrium analyses. The selection of
shear strength in slope stability analyses involving seismic loadings should be based on short-
term undrained shear strengths. The pseudostatic procedure does not provide an estimate of
potential seismic deformations. In many instances, the stability of a slope during an
earthquake may drop below a factor of safety of 1 for only a brief period of time during the
transient shaking. In this case, a pseudostatic analysis would indicate an unacceptable factor
of safety below 1, but the actual deformation of the slope or embankment would be minimal
and the overall performance acceptable.
One method to estimate seismic deformations of nonliquefiable slopes is the Newmark
Sliding Block Analysis. This method uses the yield acceleration of a slide mass and a seismic
time history to estimate the permanent seismic deformation. This method, however, is not
used on a routine basis. Refer to FHWA,“ Ear thquakeEngi neer i
ng, ”( 1997),andKramer
“Geot echni calEar thquakeEngi neer
ing,
”(1996), for more details on the deformation analyses.
The seismic slope stability and deformation analyses are not applicable to liquefiable
materials. These analyses are based on the assumption that the shear strength of the soil
remains relatively constant with deformation and strain. However, liquefiable soils in slopes
can lose most of their shear strengths, develop into a flow failure condition, and displace
considerable amounts. The mechanical/physical response of soil during flow failure is not
conducive to engineering analysis at this time.
One method to evaluate the potential flow failure in sloping ground is to assign liquefied
residual shear strengths to the soil layers with low factors of safety against liquefaction. If the
limit equilibrium slope stability analyses give low factors of safety, then flow failure should be
considered a possibility at the site. Ground improvement and/or project relocation are options
to consider when this occurs.
8.6 Seismic Analysis of Retaining Structures
Earthquake shaking results in increased lateral earth pressures acting on retaining

structures. Types of structures needing analyses may include bridge abutments, conventional
cantilever retaining walls, Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls, tieback walls, and soil
nail walls. The needed analyses involve estimating the increase in lateral earth pressures
exerted on the walls by earthquakes. The Mononobe-Okabe Method is generally used for
walls free to yield about their bases. A modified Mononobe-Okabe is used for walls that are
not free to rotate. Refer to Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, Articles c6.4.3,
c7.4.3, and c7.4.5 of AASHTO (2002), for the seismic requirements for abutments in SPC B,
C, and D, respectively, in the 1998 Commentary ofAASHTO,2002,FHWA,“ Ear t
hquake

Engi
neer
ing”(
1997)
,Vol
. I and Kramer, “
Geot
echni
calEar
thquakeEngi
neer
ing,
”(1996).
9. FOUNDATIONS
Foundations must have adequate capacity to support the design load combinations and
satisfy the serviceability requirements established by the Bridge Engineer. Serviceability
requirements establish allowable settlement and deflections. Foundation design is generally
an iterative process between the Geotechnical and Bridge Engineer. These iterations mean
that the Geotechnical Engineer may have to reevaluate the design many times. Therefore, it
is important to document the assumptions made during the design process and the
justification for design decisions.
Foundations are classified as shallow, deep, or hybrid. The most economical
foundation type depends on types of subsurface soils and groundwater conditions, design
loads, design scour elevations, serviceability requirements, and construction sequence.
Shallow foundations consist of spread footings or mats. Deep foundations include driven
piles, micropiles, and drilled shafts. Hybrid foundations are a combination of shallow and
deep foundations.
9.1 Service Load vs. Load and Resistance Factor Design
Foundations are designed based on Service Load Design (SLD) or Load and
Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) using the procedures outlined in the AASHTO references.
The Bridge Engineer typically determines the design method. When using SLD, the
Geotechnical Engineer uses actual or unfactored loads for the design provided by the Bridge
Engineer. Recommended safety factors, load and resistance factors, and load combinations
are outlined in AASHTO references.
9.2 Foundation Feasibility
The Geotechnical Engineer should consider several items when evaluating potential
foundation systems. Cost is always a consideration. Typically, cost does not impact the
choice between shallow or deep foundation systems, because in most cases, the site is either
suitable for shallow foundations or it is not. Cost becomes more of a factor when comparing
different types of deep foundations.
Depth to suitable bearing material is the first factor to consider when choosing between
shallow or deep foundations. If suitable material is at a reasonable depth, the Geotechnical
Engineer should consider potential impacts of scour, groundwater, and construction sequence
on shallow foundations. Scour may preclude the use of a shallow foundation if the scour level
is lower than the suitable bearing material. Groundwater impacts bearing capacity and
constructability. Construction sequence could impact the bearing capacity and settlements of
shallow foundations. The Geotechnical Engineer should consider local practice for founding
structures when choosing a foundation system. Sometimes, experience precludes a
foundation type for reasons that are not readily evident.

Deep foundations can be classified as driven or drilled systems. A drilled system is

typically better suited to cases where significant penetration into hard or dense material is
required either to develop uplift loads or to get below the design scour depth. Driven systems
are generally better suited where subsurface conditions would make drilling problematic.
Conditions that make drilling difficult include encountering boulders, uniform-graded gravel,
voids, and artesian groundwater. The availability of raw materials, cost of labor, and regional
geology generally favor one type of deep foundation over others. It is often useful to compare
different deep foundations on the basis of cost per ton of design load or per foot of installed
length. There is generally enough information in recent Department bid tabulations to
compare foundations on this basis.
The type of foundation for all supports of a structure needs to be compatible with each
other in order to minimize differential settlement between supports. Other considerations
include maintaining the simplicity of structural analysis under dynamic loads, and potential
structure widening in the future. If there appears to be a sound reason to use a combination
of different foundation types, the Geotechnical Engineer should seek the input of the Bridge
Engineer. Situations are evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the Bridge Engineer.
9.3 Spread Footings
Geotechnical Engineering, Circular No. 6,“ ShallowFoundat ions,

”2002,Ref erences
FHWA RD-89-185, FHWA HI-88-009, AASHTO Standard Specifications, and NHI course
manual for Shallow Foundations, NHI No. 132037 (Module 7) present design methods and
commentary on bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations. The design of
shallow foundations on soils is generally controlled by allowable settlement criteria, not by
shear failure. The Geotechnical Engineer should focus efforts on settlement evaluation, rather
than bearing capacity for most sites. The design scour depth could make excavating to
construct shallow foundations unfeasible. Groundwater depth could influence constructability
as well. Groundwater flow into footing excavation can loosen potential bearing material and
make forming and pouring a footing difficult. Spread footings for any structure must have a
minimum of 2 feet embedment depth from bottom of the footing to the finished grade.
9.4 Foundations on Rock
AASHTO Standard Specifications, FHWA Circular No. 6, and NHI Course No. 132037
(Module 7), provide a summary of methods to calculate bearing capacity of competent as well
as jointed rock. More in depth discussions are available in the References (Wylie and
Canadian). The Geotechnical Engineer should determine the influence that dominant joint
sets in the rock have on foundation performance.
9.5 Deep Foundations
Before planning subsurface explorations, the Geotechnical Engineer should perform

preliminary calculations based on available information to estimate the depth of the required

foundation elements. Minimum exploration depths are outlined in AASHTO references. In no

case should deep foundation tip elevations be deeper than the subsurface explorations.
9.5.1 Axial Capacity
Both compression and uplift axial capacities should be calculated for deep
foundations. References FHWA-HI-97-014 and AASHTO Standard Specifications outline
design procedures for driven piles. References FHWA-IF-99-025 and AASHTO Standard
Specifications for Highway Bridges describe the design procedures for drilled shafts. The
Geotechnical Engineer should consider subsurface conditions and construction sequence to
evaluate the potential for downdrag loads on piles. In general, downdrag is a concern
whenever the ground moves downward 0.1 to 0.25 inches relative to the pile. Downdrag can
occur due to settlement, shrink/swell, or liquefaction.
9.5.2 Lateral Capacity
References FHWA-HI-97-014 and FHWA-IP-84-11 are helpful references for lateral

load design procedures. Generally, the Geotechnical Engineer provides soil parameters to
the Bridge Engineer so that LPILE program or other approved programs can be used for the
lateral analysis of the foundation. The Geotechnical Engineer should consider construction
methods and sequence when developing LPILE parameters. Assumed conditions should be
provided to the Bridge Engineer with the parameters.
9.5.3 Seismic Analyses
Seismic analysis should be performed to evaluate both axial and lateral loading
conditions during and after a seismic event. The greatest influence on axial capacity is the
temporary loss of skin friction during soil liquefaction and the increased downdrag force from
post-liquefaction settlement. Liquefaction can also cause lateral spreading of sloping ground,
which in turn increases the lateral forces acting on the pile and reduces available soil
resistance to overlying inertial forces. The seismic evaluation and design of soil-pile
interaction is an area of active research.
9.5.4 Liquefaction Potential and Mitigation
Liquefaction potential should be evaluated per the references cited in this Chapter.
Generally, if liquefiable soils are present, some means of mitigation is required to protect
structure foundations. Typically, the Department policy does not require liquefaction mitigation
for approach embankments. The Geotechnical Engineer should clearly explain to the design
team the need of any ground improvement mitigations and any consequences if the
mitigations are not implemented. For example, if liquefaction mitigation is proposed for an
area around deep foundations but not under approach fills; complete reconstruction of
approach fills may be required following a seismic event.

9.5.5 Scour Considerations
Typically, the Hydraulics Engineer determines the depth of scour with input from the
Geotechnical Engineer. The following items are typically required to complete the scour
analyses: (1) boring logs, (2) grain size analyses to characterize river bed materials, and (3) a
description of the geomorphology of the site (i.e., floodplain stream, crossing of a delta). If
scour has a major impact on the foundation design, the Hydraulics Engineer should be notified
to consider designing some type of scour protection or revetment around deep foundations.
References FHWA, Hydraulic Engineering Circular (HEC), HEC 18, HEC 20, and HEC 23, are
helpful references. In some cases, it is more economical to design deep foundations for the
scour case.
9.5.6 Design Phase Load Testing
The decision of whether or not to conduct foundation load tests during the design
phase is based on economics and the degree of uncertainty acceptable for the design.
Design phase load tests should also be considered whenever loads are high and there is no
redundancy in the foundation system. For medium to large projects, the cost of conducting
load tests during the design phase may be offset by savings in construction. Site-specific load
tests allow the Geotechnical Engineer to use lower factors of safety for design, which results
in lower construction costs. There are several types of load tests, including static, dynamic,
Statnamic, and Osterberg load cell tests.
9.6 Driven Piles
References FHWA-HI-97-014 and AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway

Bridges outline design procedures for driven piles. Dynamic pile driving analysis using a Pile
Driving Analyzer (PDA) can be performed during design and/or construction phase. The
objective of using the PDA during the design phase is to develop site-specific engineering
properties in order to develop a more cost effective design with less conservative assumptions
and lower factors of safety. However, the use of the PDA testing in the design phase can be
more costly than during construction phase because the contractor must mobilize pile driving
equipment for a relatively small amount of work. During construction, the PDA is used to
confirm design assumptions.
Soil setup occurs when piles are driven into saturated clays and loose to medium
dense sands. Positive pore water pressures generated during pile installation result in low
capacities at the end of driving. As excess pore water pressures dissipate, effective stress
and pile capacity increase. PDA testing can be used to quantify setup if piles are
instrumented during initial driving and on restrike. The Geotechnical Engineer can use wave
equation analyses to develop driving criteria for end of driving conditions. Using criteria for
end of driving conditions eliminates the need for restrikes during production.

9.7 Drilled Shafts
References“ DrilledShafts: Const ructi

onPr ocedur esandDes ignMet hods ,”FHWA-IF-
99-025 and AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges outline design procedures
for drilled shafts. FHWA provides more complete narrative and construction considerations,
but design methodologies are similar. Design of drilled shafts varies from driven piles
because the construction processes are different. Drilling results in lower horizontal effective
stress than displacement type piles. In addition, drilling fluids and incomplete base cleaning
contribute to lower unit skin friction and end bearing than driven piles. The primary advantage
drilled shafts have over driven piles is their large size and resultant large capacity.
Load testing can be performed during design and/or construction of drilled shafts.
However, this is seldom done for Department projects. The objective of testing during the
design phase is to develop a more cost effective design by using lower factors of safety.
There are several methods for load testing drilled shafts. In general, static load tests are not
feasible for drilled shafts due to the need of a high reaction force frame system.
9.8 Auger Cast Piles (ACP)
Design of Auger Cast Piles (ACP) is similar to drilled shafts. ACP typically has higher
unit skin friction than drilled shafts. This is due to the fact that grout is injected under pressure
for ACP, and sidewall asperities have a larger influence for ACP than drilled shafts because
ACP has smaller diameters than drilled shafts. Local experience or load testing is generally
required to choose parameters for design.
9.9 Micropiles
Micropiles are small diameter drilled piles. Reference FHWA-SA-97-070 summarizes

the design methodology. Micropiles are typically used where site restrictions prohibit the use
of large foundation construction equipment. Micropiles are installed by specialized drills
typically used to install tiebacks. Due to their size, Micropiles have lower capacity than large
deep foundation elements. Production rates are typically lower for Micropile rigs than for other
types of deep foundation construction. These factors contribute to the relatively high cost of
Micropiles.
10. RETAINING WALL SELECTION AND DESIGN
There are a variety of wall types and a number of factors that control wall type
selection. The Geotechnical Engineer should have an understanding of the applications of
each wall type, exploration and design requirements, construction methods, and relative costs.
The FHWA, Geotechnical Engineering, Circular No. 2,“ Ear thRet aini
ngSy stems, ”(SA-96-
038), provides an overview of wall types with general information pertaining to selection
criteria, and design and analysis procedures.
Wall types can be classified into fill wall and cut wall applications. Examples of fill walls
include standard cantilever walls, modular gravity walls (gabions, bin walls, and crib walls),
and Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls. Cut walls include soil nail walls, cantilever
soldier pile walls, and ground anchored walls (other than nail walls). Some wall types require
a unique design for both internal and external stability. Other walls have standardized or
proprietary designs for internal stability with external stability analyzed by the Geotechnical
Engineer. Geotechnical Engineers should be able to develop their own designs as well as
evaluate and review standardized and proprietary wall designs.
Factor of safety recommendations for Service Load Design (SLD) of gravity and semi-
gravity walls (standard cantilever, modular gravity, and MSE) are provided in Figure 11-3.
Refert oAASHTO,“ StandardSpeci ficati
onsforHi ghwayBr i
dges, ”17t hed. ,forLoad Factor
Design (LFD) and other loading criteria. Performance factors for Load Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD) are discussed in the AASHTO, LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 2nd ed.
Section 12.2 of the Department Bridge Manual (1991) states that seismic design of retaining
walls must use the LFD Method, and that all other design cases should use SLD. In general,
AASHTO recommended factors of safety should be used for wall designs. However,
engineering judgment may allow using lower factors of safety when wall loadings are well
understood, and wall costs are high. One example is a landslide stabilization wall where using
AASHTO recommended factors of safety can be quite expensive. Depending on the level of
understanding of slide conditions, this may merit the selection of a lower safety factor.
10.1 Standard Cantilever Walls
A concrete cantilever wall is constructed of cast-in-place reinforced concrete, consisting

of a vertical stem and footing slab base connected to form the shape of an inverted T. After
curing, the back of the wall is backfilled with free-draining, granular backfill. The backfill
weight on the heel of the footing slab enables the structure to function as a gravity wall.
General texts, such as NAVFAC, Canadian Geotechnical Manual, Terzaghi & Peck, and Peck,
Hanson, & Thornburn, and AASHTO (17th ed.) provide guidelines and design charts for
analysis of static conditions for standard walls. Seismic induced lateral earth pressures
should be determined using the Mononobe-Okobe analysis. The FHWA, Geotechnical
Engineering, Circular No. 3, provides guidance on this analysis approach. AASHTO (17th ed.)
recommends using a seismic coefficient equal to one-half the acceleration coefficient (kh =
0.5A) in the Mononobe-Okobe analysis for unrestrained walls. For nonyielding walls, the
seismic lateral earth pressure can be approximated by using a seismic coefficient of (kh =
1.5A) in the analysis. It should be noted that the procedure described in this reference
provides the combined static and seismic loadings. It is recommended this combined loading
be applied at the midheight of the wall. Section 12.2 of the Department Bridge Manual (1991)
states that seismic design of retaining walls must be used in the Load Factor Design (LFD).
The LFD method uses different load factors for the static and seismic forces. The
Geotechnical Engineer should work closely with the Bridge Engineer to determine the
appropriate earth pressure loadings for seismic conditions so that the design is performed in
accordance with current Department procedures.

The Department Standard Plans include drawings of many different cantilever walls for
various geometric and ground conditions. These drawings include information such as
assumed surcharge forces, back slope angles, foundation capacities, seismic accelerations,
and Backfill soil properties. The Geotechnical Engineer is responsible for providing all soil
parameters needed to design walls that are not covered in the Department Standard Plans, as
well as determining the suitability of use of the walls covered in the Department Standard
Plans for the project. The Bridge Engineer performs all stability analyses.
10.2 Modular Gravity Walls
Modular gravity walls use interlocking soil or rock-filled concrete, timber, or steel
modules that resist earth pressures by acting as a gravity wall. Examples include gabion
walls, bin walls, concrete block walls, and crib walls. These wall types commonly use
proprietary materials.
Earth pressures for modular gravity walls are determined using the same procedures as
for standard cantilever walls. Because many of these wall types are proprietary, it is
recommended that Geotechnical Engineer susemanuf acturers’lit
er aturefordesign,and
check them with generic methods. Manufacturers include Maccaferri and Hilfiker (gabions),
Criblock (crib walls), Contech and Double-Wal (bin walls). Seismic design of these walls is
base on the Mononobe-Okobe analysis. These walls are relatively easy to construct, and
have a relatively low cost. Modular gravity walls are likely to deform more than concrete
cantilever walls, so the tolerable settlements of upslope structures should be considered.
Department procedures recommend against use of rockery walls due to a lack of design
guidance from FHWA and AASHTO. They can be used only under special circumstances
(i.e., aesthetics) with approval from the Department Bridge Engineer.
10.3 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls
Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls consist of tensile reinforcements in soil

backfill, with facing elements that are vertical or near vertical. The reinforced mass functions
as a gravity wall. The Department has specific procedures and requirements for the design of
MSE walls. The policy memorandum (dated September 27, 2002) is presented in Figure 11-1.
AASHTO (17th ed.) describes the state of the practice design procedure for MSE walls. A
recent, comprehensive reference on MSE wal l
si s FHWA’ s manualon “ Mechanically
Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes –Design and Construction Guidelines”
(FHWA-NHI-00-043).
MSE walls are commonly used for medium to large wall and grade separation projects
because they are often less expensive than concrete cantilever walls. Most MSE wall
applications use proprietary systems where the internal design is performed by the wall
vendor. The Department Research Division maintains names of approved MSE wall vendors
and systems in the Qualified Products List (QPL).
The Geotechnical Engineer is responsible for performing the external stability analysis

in the design phase of the project, and providing the required reinforcement lengths to the
Bridge Division to be included in the Construction Plans. The vendor performs the internal
and external stability analyses and evaluates the adequacy of reinforcement lengths shown in
the Construction Plans. The vendor submits calculations and shop drawings showing the
actual reinforcement lengths to be used on the project based on the longer of needed
reinforcement lengths for external or internal stability analyses. The Geotechnical Engineer
reviews the submitted calculations and shop drawings for approval.
10.4 Soil Nail Walls
Soil nails are closely spaced, passive reinforcements used to strengthen existing
ground. They consist of steel bars grouted into the soil connected to a temporary or
permanent shotcrete facing. They are constructed in a top down manner and are used to
support an excavation face.
Soil nail walls are an economical alternative to ground anchored walls when installed in
the appropriate soil conditions. The following are some of the items that should be taken into
account when considering use of soil nail walls:
 A 6-foot high excavation face must stand unsupported for at least 48 hours. This
requires some cohesion or cementation of the subject soils.
 Drilling into cohesionless materials requires the use of temporary casing during drilling.
This has a significant impact on construction costs.
 Excavations in soft clays are unsuitable for soil nails due to the low frictional resistance
of the materials.
 The excavation face should be dry or dewatered to permit stability of the vertical
excavation.
 Proper corrosion protection is extremely important for long-term performance of a soil
nail wall. The Department uses a double protection system for all soil nail walls.
Typically NDOT does not use epoxy coating as a corrosion protection measure.
 Soil nail walls are not recommended where the ground could deform, such as
landslides.
The FHWA, Manual for Design and Construction Monitoring of Soil Nail Walls (FHWA-
SA-96-069) is recommended for design of soil nail walls. Analysis programs such as GoldNail
(available from FHWA) and Snailz (available from http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/geotech)
should be used for the design. In addition to static and seismic conditions of the completed
wall configuration, the stability for each stage in the construction sequence of a soil nail wall
should be evaluated. The controlling condition is often a construction case. The FHWA Soil
Nailing Field Inspectors Manual (FHWA-SA-93-068) provides practical information to
understand construction procedures.

10.5 Cantilevered Soldier Pile and Sheet Pile Walls
These walls consist of vertical elements that derive lateral resistance from embedment
into soil below the exposed face, and support the retained soil with facing elements or the
piles themselves. These walls are often used for temporary excavations to limit upslope
deformations during construction. Permanent applications include short walls that are part of
a taller wall section utilizing ground anchors, and where an unsupported excavation is not
desired. Wall heights typically are limited to a maximum of 15 feet unless they are also
supported by ground anchors. These walls do not work well when embedded in deep soft
soils, where the passive resistance on the front of the wall is low. AASHTO Standard
Specifications for Highway Bridges contains the relevant design charts to determine the wall
loadings. Bridge Engineers determine the appropriate sizes of the structural elements based
on the applied loads.
10.6 Ground Anchor Wall Systems
Ground anchored wall systems consist of ground anchors (cement-grouted,

prestressed steel tendons installed in soil or rock) connected to wall elements consisting of
soldier piles or concrete bearing pads. They are usually constructed in a top down manner
and are most often used to support an excavation face. They can also be used for landslide
stabilization.
Ground anchored walls are more expensive than most traditional walls due to the need
of uncommon construction equipment and skills. However, they are well suited where
deformations of adjacent structures are of concern. Ground anchored walls are applicable to
a wider range of materials than soil nail walls. The following are some of the items that should
be taken into account when considering use of ground-anchored walls:
 Underground easements should be obtained to protect the anchors throughout their
functional life.
 Proper corrosion protection is essential to achieve the design life of the structure. The
Department uses a double protection system for all ground anchored walls. Typically
the Department does not use epoxy coating as a corrosion protection measure.
 The upper level of anchors should be located and oriented below the zone normally
used for buried utilities and guardrail posts.
 Acceptance of ground anchors should be based on proof tests of each anchor.
Sometimes preproduction tests and long-term monitoring may also be required.
 Anchors bonded in clays may have long-term creep problems. Anchors in clays should
be creep tested.
 The contract documents should require the contractor to determine the anchor bond
length necessary to resist the applied anchor force.
Refer to the FHWA, Geotechnical Engineering, Circular No. 4,“
GroundAnchor
sand

Anchor edSy stems” , (FHWA-IF-99-015), and the Post Tensioning Institute (PTI) publication,
“Recommendations for Prestressed Rock and Soil Anchors” , 1996. In addition to static and
seismic conditions of the completed wall configuration, the stability for each stage in the
construction sequence of a ground anchored wall should be evaluated. The controlling
condition is often a construction case.
11. DEWATERING
Design of dewatering systems is typically the Cont ractor’

sr esponsi bili
ty. The
Geotechnical Engineer should have a basic understanding of the advantages and
disadvantages of different dewatering systems. The Geotechnical Engineer should be able to
perform calculations to establish requirements of dewatering systems. The references
(Powers, and COE) provide a background and narrative for dewatering system design.

12. FIGURES
11-1: Policies and Procedures Memorandum

STATE OF NEVADA
MEMORANDUM
September 27, 2000
To: See List Below
PN
From: Parviz Noori, Assistant Chief Materials Engineer –Geotechnical
Subject: Policies and Procedures Memorandum No. C028-2000-01

MSE Walls
sa
NDOT’ ndWa
llSuppl
ie
r’sRe
spo
nsi
bil
it
ie
s
Contract Plans and Shop Drawings
Standard Specifications and Special Provisions
The purpose of this memo is to help clarify responsibilities of the contractor and each NDOT
Division concerning cost, analysis, details, and required information in regard to contract
documents.
I. Responsibilities:
A. The Roadway Design Division will provide (to the Geotechnical Section and the Bridge
Division) alignment and profile of the wall, and cross sections at 8 meter intervals for the
length of the wall. Cross sections will include elevations of top of the wall, existing
(original) ground intersecting the plane of the wall, proposed ground at the exposed face at
the base of the wall, bottom of the slope in front of the base (slope supporting the wall) of
the wall (if applicable), and top of the slope above (slope being retained by the wall) the wall
(if applicable). In addition, exact inclination angles of slopes above (retained slope) and/or
below (supporting the wall) the wall (if applicable) will be provided by the Roadway Design
Division. Any ditch information behind the top of the wall should also be shown. This
information may be provided in tabular form or by placing these elevations on the
aforementioned cross sections. Topographical information for the existing ground condition
and completed condition will be provided to a distance of at least three times the wall height
in front and behind the wall.
B. NDOT is responsible for deep seated (global, rotational) external stability. The Geotechnical
Section will conduct global stability analyses and provide design recommendations for wall
stability.
C. NDOT is responsible for external stability. The Geotechnical Section will conduct external
stability analyses with respect to sliding, overturning, and bearing pressure failures.

D. The Geotechnical Section will design the wall with respect to external stability. Publication
No. FHWA-SA-96-071 (Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes
Design and Construction Guidelines, Reprinted September 1998) and/or the latest edition of
the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges will be used to design and
determine the minimum reinforcement lengths of the wall. Typical information and details
to be provided by the Geotechnical Section to the Bridge Division would include the
following:
1. 300 mm wide and 150 mm thick unreinforced concrete leveling pad.
2. Exact embedment depth to top of the leveling pad for the entire length of the
wall.
3. Minimum 1200 mm wide bench in front of walls placed (located) on top of
slopes.
4. No steeper than 1V:2H slopes in front of or on top of walls.
5. Strength properties of soils supporting the wall (foundation soils), MSE backfill,
and retained backfill.
6. Magnitude of anticipated total and differential settlement.
7. Recommended waiting period, prior to construction of barrier rails, copings,
concrete anchor slabs, and roadway surface.
8. Minimum required reinforcement lengths for the entire length of the wall.
9. Surcharges.
E. The wall supplier, based on information provided in contract documents, will check the
external stability with respect to sliding, overturning, and bearing pressure to confirm
NDOT’ spropos edmi nimumr einf orce ment l
eng ths. NDOT will determine the need for any
changes indicated by thec ontr
a ctor ’
se xt
ernals tabil
itya na lysi
s. All costs associated with
changes to the wall due to external stability shall be the responsibility of NDOT.
F. The wall supplier is responsible for internal stability. All costs associated with
modifications to the overall wall geometry due to internal stability design shall be
responsibility of the wall supplier.
G. The Bridge Division will estimate the quantities and prepare the contract plans.
H. It is NDOT policy not to allow placement of spread footings on embankment retained by
MSE walls.
I. Piles Within MSE Walls: Piles must be placed prior to the construction of the wall.
Downdrag forces need to be analyzed and friction protection material such as
“Ye llowjacket”s l
eeve sora na ppr ove de quali fne ededmus tbespecified in the contract
documents.
J. The soil reinforcement length and/or layout must be modified when piles are located within
the wall. The wall supplier must design the reinforcement for pile locations and submit all
calculations for review and approval. Bar mat systems may be cut provided at least two
longitudinal bars remain connected to a transverse bar. Strap systems may be skewed up to
20 degrees from a line perpendicular to the wall face. Otherwise, bridging systems must be
used.
II. Contract Plans:
The Bridge Division will prepare the contract plans. Typical details to be included in the
contract plans are the following:

A. General Notes:
1. Design Specifications: AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway
Bridges, (date) with interim revisions through (date), and/or Publication
No. FHWA-SA-96-071 (Reprinted September 1998).
2. Construction Specifications: NDOT Standard Specifications for Road
and Bridge Construction (date) except as noted below and in the Special
Provisions for the project.
3. Loading: Live load surcharge pressure equal to 610 mm of earth (When
applicable).
 Seismic acceleration = (peak ground acceleration).
 Use one-half of peak ground acceleration for design.
 Additional lateral load from bridge piles = (value) (When applicable).
4. Concrete: All concrete shall be class AA (or Class A) Modified (Major)
concrete with Fc’=____MPaa t28da y s.
5. Reinforcing Steel: All reinforcing steel shall be ASTM A615 grade 410
or A706.
6. Size of Wall Panel: Area of the MSE wall panel face shall not exceed
(normally 2.8) square meters.
7. Soil Properties: MSE wall is designed based on the following soil
properties:
 Mechanically stabilized earth fill:
 Minimum internal angle of friction = __, minimum cohesion = __,
 and minimum unit weight = _______.
 Fills not meeting the above specified soil parameters should not be
approved.
 Foundation soils:
 Internal angle of friction = ______, cohesion = _____, and unit weight =
_______.
 Random fills (retained fills):
 Internal angle of friction = ______, cohesion = _____, and unit weight =
_______.
8. External Design Parameters:
 Sliding friction factor = _________.
 Allowable bearing pressure of foundation soils beneath wall = ______.
 Ultimate bearing pressure of foundation soils beneath wall = ______.
9. Method of design: Specify i
f“ SIMPLI FIEDMETHOD”or
“MEYERHOFMETHOD”i sus edfort hede sign.

B. Plan View:
1. Alignment of the wall relative to the main or major alignment with
necessary stations and offsets to exposed face of wall.
2. Alignment (if applicable) of top of the slope on top of the wall (every 8
meters and at every break point) with necessary stations and offsets to
exposed face of wall (this information may be provided in a table).
3. Alignment (if applicable) of top of the slope in front of the wall (every 8
meters and at every break point) with necessary stations and offsets to
exposed face of wall (this information may be provided in a table).
4. Alignment (if applicable) of bottom of the slope in front of the wall
(every 8 meters and at every break point) with necessary stations and
offsets to exposed face of wall (this information may be provided in a
table).
C. Elevation View:
1. Elevation at the bottom of the leveling pad, the bottom of the pad should
be level (and stepped if necessary).
2. Line showing the finished grade at exposed face of the wall (finished
grade must not be stepped).
3. Elevation at top of the wall every 8 meters and at every break point (this
information may be provided in a table).
Elevation at top of slope on top of the wall every 8 meters and at every break point (this information
may be provided in a table).
4. Elevation at top of slope in front of the wall (elevation of the bench in
front of the wall every 8 meters and at every break point, this
5. Elevation at bottom of slope in front of the wall every 8 meters and at
every break point (this information may be provided in a table).
D. Cross sections:
1. Minimum soil reinforcement lengths for the entire length of the wall (this
2. Width and thickness of leveling pad.
3. Minimum soil cover on top of the leveling pad.
4. Width of the bench in front of the wall.
5. Inclination of the slope in front of the wall (this information may be provided
in a table).
6. Inclination of the slope on top of the wall (this information may be provided
in a table).
7. Barrier rail, coping, and concrete anchor slab on top of the wall.
8. Existing (original) ground.
9. Limits of excavation and granular backfill.
10. Limit of over-excavation (if applicable).
11. Limit of MSE Backfill (reinforced soil mass).
12. Limit of Borrow and/or Select Borrow (if applicable).

13. Limit of Drain Rock (if applicable).

14. Limit of Geotextile (if applicable).
E. Quantities:
1. Area of the wall face.
2. Volume of MSE Backfill.
3. Volume of any Structural Excavation including any over-excavation.
4. Volume of any Granular Backfill, Borrow, Select Borrow, or Drain Rock.
5. Area of any Geotextile.
6. Volume of concrete and reinforcing steel for barrier rails and concrete
anchor slabs.
7. No direct payment for concrete leveling pad and reinforced concrete
coping.
F. Special Details:
1. Aesthetic treatments.
2. Coping details.
3. Connection of MSE walls to wingwalls of bridges or other retaining
walls (if applicable).
4. Details for drainage or other obstructions (if applicable).
III. Special Provisions:
The Geotechnical Section will be responsible for including the following in the Special
Provisions:
1. Required soil specifications such as soundness and electrochemical
properties for the backfill materials.
2. Required methods of testing.
3. Any required over excavation.
4. Statements that NDOT is responsible for external stability design and
Wall Supplier is responsible for checking external stability design.
5. Statements that NDOT is responsible for any cost due to required
changes for the external stability design.
6. Statements that Wall Supplier (Contractor) is responsible for cost
increases due to internal stability requirements.
7. Statements that Wall Supplier (Contractor) must submit 7 copies of the
shop drawings and calculations.
8. Statements that shop drawings and calculations must be stamped and
signed by an engineer who is a registered Professional Civil Engineer
licensed to practice in the State of Nevada.
9. Statements that allow NDOT 28 working days for review and approval of
shop drawings and calculations and no additional working days will be
provided for submittals returned for corrections.
The Bridge division will be responsible for providing the List of approved Wall Suppliers.
IV. Shop Drawings and Calculations:
The Geotechnical Section will be responsible for checking and approving the following:
1. Calculations for external stability (at every 8 meters).
2. Calculations for required soil reinforcement lengths with respect to

external stability.
3. Calculations for required soil reinforcement width, thickness, and lengths
with respect to internal stability.
4. Soil reinforcement lengths shown on the drawings.
5. Applied bearing pressures shown on the drawings.
6. MSE Backfill materials specifications.
7. Construction methods and procedures shown on the drawings regarding
geotechnical issues.
8. Corrosion protection specifications shown on the drawings.
For Consultant designed projects, the Consultant will perform the above review and approval.
The Geotechnical Section will perform a cursory review after the Consultant has completed their review.
The Bridge Division will be responsible for checking and approving the following:
1. Wall alignment and elevations.
2. Panel design and details.
3. Coping details.
4. For Consultant designed projects, the Consultant will perform the above
review and approval. The Bridge Division will perform a cursory review
after the Consultant has completed their review.
V. Review & Approval Procedures for Shop Drawings and Calculations:
1. TheRe sidentEng ine erwi l
ls ends evenc opie soft hec ontrac tor ’s
submittal to the Bridge Division.
2. The Bridge Division will send six copies of the submittal to the
Geotechnical Section.
3. The Geotechnical Section will contact the Resident Engineer to see if it is
acceptable to contact the Wall Supplier directly.
4. The Geotechnical Section will have twelve working days from the date of
receiving the submittal to review the shop drawings and calculations.
5. Shop drawings will have two stamps, one each from the Bridge Division
and Geotechnical Section. Design calculations will have one stamp from
the Geotechnical Section. For Consultant design projects, shop drawings
will have three stamps (one Consultant (approval), one Geotechnical
(reviewed) and one Bridge (reviewed)) and calculations will have two
stamps (one Consultant (approval) and one Geotechnical (reviewed)).
Prior to stamping the shop drawings and calculations, the Geotechnical
Section will coordinate with the Bridge Division on the joint review. If
the shop drawings and/or calculations need to be returned for
corrections, one memo will be written to the Resident Engineer by the
Bridge Division incorporating all needed corrections.
6. The Geotechnical Section will send five stamped copies of the
calculations and shop drawings with corrections (if any) to the Bridge
Division.
7. The Bridge Division will respond to the Resident Engineer regarding
approval of the shop drawings and calculations within sixteen working

days from the date of receiving the submittal from the Resident
Engineer.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, please call me at 888-7786.
PN:pn

11-2: List of Landslide Mitigation Methods

Slide Mitigation Mitigation Options
Avoid problem Relocate facility
Completely or partially remove unstable
materials
Install bridge
Reduce driving forces Change line or grade
Drain surface
Drain subsurface
Reduce weight
Increase resisting forces, apply external Use buttress and counterweight fills; toe berms
force Use structural systems
Install anchors
Increase internal strength Drain subsurface
Use reinforced backfill
Install in situ reinforcement
Use biotechnical stabilization
Treat chemically
Use electro-osmosis
Treat thermally
Note: Refer to TRB Special Report 247 (Table 17-1) for further information.
11-3: AASHTO Factors of Safety
(from Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 17th Ed.)
Analysis Condition Minimum Factor of Safety (FS)
o Sliding (static) 1.5
o Sliding (seismic) 1.125
o Overturning (static) 2.0 for footings on soil
1.5 for footings on rock
o Overturning (seismic) 1.5 for footings on soil
1.125 for footings on rock
o Bearing Capacity (static) 3.0 (refer to shallow foundation section)
o Bearing Capacity (seismic) 1.5 (refer to shallow foundation section)

11-4: Computer Programs

Vertical Static Pile Capacity
S PILE FHWA-SA-92-044 Ultimate vertical static pile
capacity
PILEPMT Texas A & M University Ultimate vertical Load vs.
depth, and Load vs.
Settlement (using pressure
meter data)
NEW NEG Texas A & M University Analysis of Piles subjected to
negative skin friction
SHAFT 5.0 Ensoft, Inc., www.ensoftinc.com A program for the study of
drilled shafts under axial
loads
TZ PILE Ensoft, Inc., www.ensoftinc.com Computes the load-
settlement relationships of
vertically-loaded piles using t-
z cures and q-w curves
APILE APILE Plus 3.0 for Windows, Ensoft, Inc., Computes the axial capacity
www.ensoftinc.com of driven piles as a function
of depth
Group Group 4.0 for Windows, Ensoft, Inc., Pile group design program
www.ensoftinc.com that calculates the distribution
of loads to piles in a
symmetrical group
FB-Pier Florida Pier Program (FDOT, FHWA) Finite element analysis for
(University of Florida) deep foundations
Driven Piles
WEAP Gobel, G.G. & Rausche, Frank WEAP 87, Pile group design program
Wave Equation Analysis of Pile Foundations, that calculates the distribution
Volumes I-V, FHWA, 1987 of loads to piles in a
symmetrical group
DRIVEN FHWA-SA-98-074 Finite element analysis for
deep foundations

11-4: Computer Programs, contd.

Lateral Loads on Piles
COM624P COM624P, Laterally Loaded Pile Analysis Computes deflections and
Program, Version 2.0, FHWA-SA-91-048, stresses for laterally loaded
1993, piles and drilled shafts
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/software.htm
LPILE LPILE Plus 4 for Windows Computes deflections and
stresses for laterally loaded
piles and drilled shafts under
lateral loads
Spread Footings
CBEAR CBEAR Users Manual, FHWA-SA-94-034, Computes ultimate bearing
1996, capacity of spread or
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/software.htm continuous footings on
layered soil profiles
Sheet Piles
CWALSHT Dawkins, William P., Users Guide: Computer Design and analysis of either
Program For Design and Analysis of Sheet anchored or cantilevered
Pile Walls by Classical Methods, Waterways sheet pile retaining walls.
Experiment Station, 1991 Moments, shear, and
deflection are shown
graphically
Shoring Civil Tech, CT-SHORING, WINDOWS 3.X, Excavation supporting
95, NT system design and analysis


Slope Stability
PCSTABL PC-STABL5M Users Manual, FHWA, 1990; Calculates factor of safety
PC-STABL6 Users Manual, FHWA, 1990 against rotational, irregular,
or sliding wedge failure by
simplified Bishop or Janbu, or
Spencer method of slices.
Version 6 is used for
embankments
w/reinforcement by simplified
Bishop method
XSTABL Interactive Software Designs, Inc., XSTABL. Program performs a two
An Integrated Slope Stability Analysis dimensional limit equilibrium
Program for Personal Computers Reference analysis to compute the
Manual factor of safety for a layered
slope using the modified
Bishop or Janbu methods
SLOPE-W GEO-SLOPE International, Ltd. Program that uses limit
1400, 633 6th Avenue SW equilibrium theory to compute
the factor of safety of earth
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 2Y5
and rock slopes
http://www.geo-slope.com
UTEXAS2 University of Texas A slope stability program,
which calculates the safety
factor for either a prescribed
shear surface or searches for
the critical shear surface
Embankment Settlement
EMBANK EMBANK Users Manual, FHWA-SA-92-045, Calculates compression
1993 settlement due embankment
loads


Soil Nailing
GoldNail Golder Associates, GoldNail. The program is a slip-surface,
A stability analysis computer program for limiting-equilibrium, slope-
soil nail wall design, Reference Manual stability model based on
Version 3.11 satisfying overall limiting
equilibrium (translational and
rotational) of individual free
bodies defined by circular slip
surfaces. GoldNail can
analyze slopes with and
without soil nail reinforcement
or structural facing
Seismic
Pro Shake EduPro Civil Systems, Inc. The program is used to
5141 189th Avenue NE perform one-dimensional,
equivalent linear ground
Sammamish, WA 98074
response analyses
Shake2000 Ameritech Engineering Used for seismic analysis of
Corvallis, OR soil deposits and earth
structures and to provide a
http://www.shake2000.com
first approximation of the
dynamic response of a site


Rock Slopes
Rock NDOT, Geotechnical Section Contains the Rockfall Hazard
Database Rating System information on
Manage- rated slopes
mint System
Rocfall Rocscience, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Rockfall simulation software

that provides trajectory and
energy predictions for rockfalls
passing up to three analysis
points
CRSP Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program, Rockfall simulation software

available from Colorado DOT that provides trajectory and
energy predictions for rockfalls
passing a single analysis point
RockPack III C.F. Watts & Assoc., Radford, VA Rock slope stability software
for the kinematic and slope
stability analysis of structural
discontinuity data


MSE and Steepened Slopes
MSEW 1.0 ADAMA Engineering, Inc., The program can be applied

Mechanically Stabilized Earth to walls reinforced with
Walls Software, Version 1.0 geogrids, geotextiles, wire
mesh, or metal strips. It
allows for reduction factors
associated with polymeric
reinforcement or for corrosion
of metallic reinforcement
RSS Reinforced Slope Stability A computer program for the

A Microcomputer Program User ’
sManual, design and analysis of
FHWA-SA-96-039, 1997, reinforced soil slopes (RSS
www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/software.htm Reinforced Slope Stability).
This program analyzes and
designs soil slopes
strengthened with horizontal
reinforcement, as well as
analyzing unreinforced soil
slopes. The analysis is
performed using a two-
dimensional limit equilibrium
method
ReSSA NHI (FHWA) Upgrade of RSS Program
Other Programs
Math CAD Mathsoft Engineering and Education Alternative to Excel that

101 Main Street accepts and displays natural
Cambridge, MA 02142 mathematical notation
NOTE:
Many additional programs that perform similar tasks can be obtained from the private
sector. The programs listed are continually updated or revised.

11-5: Guidelines for Geotechnical Engineering Analysis

Retaining Walls
Structure Foundations
(Conventional, Crib, &
Soil Classification Embankment and Cut Slopes (Bridges & Retaining Walls)
Reinforced Soil)
Unified AASHTO Soil Type Slope Stability* Embankment Foundation Bearing Capacity Settlement Analysis Lateral Earth Stability
(USCS) (Approx) Analysis Settlement Analysis Analysis Pressure Analysis
GW A-1-a GRAVEL well Stability analysis Settlement analysis Required for spread Analysis generally GW, SP, SW, & SP All walls should
graded generally not required generally not required footings, pile, or drilled not needed except soils generally be designed to
if cut or fill slope is except possibly for SC soils. shaft foundations. for SC soils or for suitable for backfill provide
GP A-1-a GRAVEL 1½H:1V or flatter, and Spread footings large, heavy behind or in minimum F.S.=2
poorly graded water table in cut generally adequate structures. retaining or against
slope is drawn down except possibly for SC Empirical correlations reinforced soil overturning, &
GRAVEL silty by underdrains. soils. with SPT values walls. minimum
GM A-1-b Erosion of slopes may usually used to GM, GC, SM, & SC F.S.=1.5 against
GRAVEL be a problem for SW estimate settlement. soils generally sliding along
clayey or SM soils. suitable if have less base.
GC A-2-6 than 15% fines. External slope
A-2-7 Lateral Earth stability
SAND well pressure analysis considerations
SW A-1-b graded required using soil same as
angle of internal previously given
SAND poorly friction. for cut slopes &
SP graded embankments.
A-3
SAND silty
SM
A-2-4
SC A-2-5 SAND clayey
A-2-6
A-2-7
ML A-4 SILT Stability analysis is Settlement analysis Analysis required. Analysis required. These soils are not
inorganic required unless required unless non-plastic. Spread footings Can use SPT values recommended for
nonplastic. generally adequate. if nonplastic. use directly behind
SILT Sandy Erosion of slopes may or in retaining or
be a problem. rein-forced soil
walls.
CL A-6 CLAY Required. Required. Analysis required. Analysis required.
Lean Clay inorganic Deep foundations Lab consolidation
OL A-4 SILT Required. Required. generally required test data needed to
organic unless soil has been estimate settlement
preloaded. amount & time.
NOTES: These are general guidelines –Detailed slope stability analysis may not be required where past experience exists in area with similar soils and similar slope angles. This table is
based on FHWA Geotechnical Checklist and Guidelines (FHWA-ED-88-053).

11-5: Guidelines for Geotechnical Engineering Analysis, contd.
Retaining Walls
Structure Foundations
Soil Classification Embankment and Cut Slopes (Conventional, Crib, & Reinforced
(Bridges & Retaining Walls)
Soil)
Unified AASHTO Soil Type Slope Stability* Analysis Embankment Bearing Capacity Settlement Analysis Lateral Earth Stability Analysis
(USCS) (Approx) Foundation Analysis Pressure
Settlement Analysis
MH A-5 SILT Stability analysis required. Required. Analysis required. Analysis required. Lab These soils are All walls should
inorganic Erosion of slopes may be a Deep foundations consolidation test data not recommended be designed to
problem. generally required, needed to estimate settlement for use directly provide minimum
unless soil has been amount and time. behind or in F.S.=2 against
CH A-7 CLAY Required. Required. preloaded. retaining walls. overturning, &
inorganic minimum
“fatcl
ay s” F.S.=1.5 against
sliding along
OH A-7 CLAY Required. Required.
base.
organic
External slope
PT -- PEAT muck Required. Required. Deep foundation Highly compressible. Not stability
Long-term required, unless peat suitable for foundation considerations
settlement can be excavated and support. same as
significant. replaced. previously given
Rock Fills: Analysis not required for Not required. Analysis required for Analysis only required where Lateral earth for cut slopes &
slopes 1-1½H:1V or less. spread footings or rock is badly weathered or pressure embankments.
Cuts: Analysis required, but drilled shafts –usually closely fractured (low RQD analysis
depends on spacing, empirical, related to value). May require special required using
orientation, and strength of RQD (Rock Quality testing, such as pressure rock backfill
discontinuities, and durability of Designation). meter. angle of internal
the rock. friction.
REMARKS:
Soils –Temporary groundwater control may be needed for foundation excavations in GW through SM soils.
Backfill specifications for reinforced soil walls using metal reinforcement should meet the following requirements to insure use of noncorrosive backfill:
1. pH range = 5-10
2. Resistivity3,000 ohm-cm
3. Chlorides 200 ppm
4. Sulfates 1,000 ppm
Rock –Durability of shale (siltstone, claystone, mudstone) to be used in fills should be checked. Nondur abl
eshal esshoul dbeembank edassoi ls,i.e. ,pl
acedi
nmaximum 12”l oosel i
ft
s&
compacted with heavy sheepsfoot or grid rollers.
NOTES: These are general guidelines–Detailed slope stability analysis may not be required where past experience exists in area with similar soils or rock, and gives required slope angles. This
table is based on FHWA Geotechnical Checklist and Guidelines (FHWA-ED-88-053).

13. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“
Bear
ingCapaci
tyofSoi
lforSt
ati
cLoadonSpr
eadFoot
ings,
”AASHTO T235
AASHTO,“
Gui deSpeci
fi
cat
ionsf
orShot
cret
eRepai
rofHi
ghwayBr
idges,
”TaskFor
ce37
Report, 1998
AASHTO,“
HighSt
rai
nDy
nami
cTest
ingofPi
l
es,
“AASHTO T298
AASHTO,“
InSi
tuI
mpr
ovementTechni
ques,
”TaskFor
ce27Repor
t,1990
AASHTO,“InSi
tuSoi
lI
mpr
ovementTechni
quesTaskFor
ce27Repor
t,
”FHWA-SA-92-041,
1992
AASHTO,“
Standar
dSpeci
fi
cat
ionsf
orHi
ghwayBr
idges”
,Ar
ti
cl
e3.
21ofDi
vi
si
on1,2002
ASCE,“
DamageFr
om Bl
astVi
brat
ions,
”1974
ASCE,“
Dewat
eri
ng:Av
oidi
ngI
tsUnwant
edSi
deEf
fect
s,”I
SBN0-87262-459-5, 1985
ASCE,
“Sett
lement ofShal l
owFoundat i
onsonCohesi onl
essSoi
l
s:Des
ignandPer
for
manc
e,”
Geotechnical Special Publication No. 5, 1986
ASTM,“
Bear
ingCapaci
tyofSoi
lforSt
ati
cLoadonSpr
eadFoot
ings,
”ASTM D1194
ASTM,“
HighSt
rai
nDy
nami
cTest
i
ngofPi
l
es,
”ASTM D4945
ASTM,“
Lat
eralLoadsonPi
l
es,
”ASTM D3966
ASTM,“
LowSt
rai
nInt
egr
it
yTest
ingofPi
l
es,
”ASTM D5882
ASTM,“
Nor
mal
i
zedPenetration Resistance –Li
quef
act
ionPot
ent
ial
,”ASTM D6066
ASTM,“
Pil
esUnderSt
ati
cAx
ialCompr
essi
veLoad,
”TestMet
hod,ASTM D1143
ASTM,“
RockBol
tAnchorPul
lTest
,”ASTM D4435
ASTM,“
RockBol
tLong-Ter
m LoadRet
ent
ionTest
,”ASTM D4436
ASTM,“
Tensi
l
eLoadsonPi
l
es,
”ASTM D3966
Canadi
anGeot
echni
calSoci
ety
,“Canadi
anFoundat
ionEngi
neer
ingManual
,”1985
Ceder
gren,“
Seepage,Dr
ainage&Fl
owNet
s,”2nded.
,Wi
l
ey,1977
Chur
ch,H.
K.,“
Excav
ati
onHandbook,
”McGr
aw-Hill, 1981
Code of Federal Regulations,Sec
ti
on29,“
OSHASt
andar
ds”
Cor
psofEngi neers,“ Desi
gn,Const ruct
ion,andMai nt
enanceofRel
i
efWel
l
s,Techni
cal
Engineering and Design Guide No. 3,
”repr
int
edbyASCE,1993
Cor
psofEngi neers,“
Design,Const r
uct i
on,andMai nt
enanceofRel iefWel l
s,”EM 1110-2-
1914, 1992, www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em.htm

Duncan, J.M. & Buchi gnani,A. L.,“ An Engi neer ing Manualf orSet tlementSt
udi
es,
”
Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, 1976
FHWA,“
Adv ancedCour seonSl
opeSt
abi
l
it
y,”Vol
s. 1 and 2, FHWA- SA-94-005 and FHWA-
SA-94-006, 1994
FHWA,“
Bri
dgeFoundat
ionNeeds
,”FHWA-RD-82-050, 1982
FHWA,“
Checkl
istandGuideli
nesf
orRev
iewofGeot
echni
cal
Repor
tsandPr
eli
minar
yPl
ans
andSpecif
icat
ions,
”1985
FHWA,“DesignandConstr
ucti
onofCompact edShal eEmbankments,”Vol s. 1 to 5, FHWA-
RD-75-61, FHWA-RD-75-62, FHWA-RD-77-1, FHWA-RD-78-140, and FHWA-RD-78-
141, 1978
FHWA,“DesignandConst r
ucti
onofDr iv
enPi
l
eFoundat
ions,
”Vol
s. 1 and 2, FHWA-HI-97-
013 and FHWA-HI-97-014, 1997
FHWA,“Desi
gnandConst
ruct
ionofShal
eEmbankment
s,”Summar
y,FHWA-TS-80-219,
1980
FHWA,“
Desi
gnandConst
ruct
ionofSt
oneCol
umns,
”FHWA-RD-83-026, 1983
FHWA; “Determi
nat
ionofPileDr ivabil
ityandCapaci
tyf
rom Penet
rat
i
onTes
ts,
”Vol
s. I through
III; FHWA-RD-96-179 thru 181, 1997
FHWA;“
Dynami
cCompact
ion,
”Geot
echni
cal
Engi
neer
ing,Ci
rcul
arNo. 1, SA-95-037, 1995
FHWA,“
Dril
l
edandGr outedMi cropi
l
es:
Stat
eof
Prac
ti
ce,
”Rev
iewVol
s. I. through IV.; FHWA-
RD-96-016 thru 019, 1997
FHWA,“
Dri
l
led and Grouted Micropiles: State-of-Pr
act
iceRev
iew,
”FHWA-RD-96-019, 1997
FHWA,“
Dri
l
ledShaf
tsf
orBr
idgeFoundat
ions,
”FHWA-RD-92-004, 1993
FHWA,“Dri
lledShaf
ts:Const
ruct
ionPr
ocedur
esandDesi
gnMet
hods,
”FHWA-IF-99-025,
1999.
FHWA,“
Dril
ledShaf ts:Const
ruct
ionPr
ocedur
esandDesi
gnMet
hods,
”FHWA-IF-99-025,
Updated 2000
FHWA,“Eart
hRet
aini
ngSy
stems,
”Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ing,Ci
rcul
arNo. 2, SA-96-038,
1996
FHWA,“
Ear thquakeEngi neer i
ng, ”Geot echni calEngi neer
ing,Ci r
cul
arNo. 3, for Highways,
Vol. 1 - Design Principles, and Vol. 2 - Design Examples, FHWA SA-97-076 and FHWA
SA-97-077, 1997
FHWA,“
EMBANK:AMicrocomput
erProgr
am toDet
ermi
neOne-Dimensional Compression
Set
tl
ementDuet
oEmbank mentLoads,
”FHWA-SA-92-045, 1993

FHWA,“Eval
uat
ionandI
mpr
ovementofEx
ist
ingBr
idgeFoundat
ions,
”FHWA-RD-83-061,
1983
FHWA,“
Eval
uationofSoi landRockPr
oper
ti
es,
”Geot
echni
calEngi
neer
ing,Ci
rcul
arNo. 5,
FHWA-IF-02-034, 2002
FHWA,“
Expansi
veSoi
l
sinHi
ghwaySubgr
adesSummar
y,”FHWA-TS-80-236, 1980
FHWA, “
Geosy
nthet
icDesi
gnandConst
ruct
ionGui
del
i
nes,
”FHWAHI
-95-038, 1995
FHWA,“
Geosy ntheti
cMec
hani
cal
l
ySt
abi
l
izedEar
thSl
opesonFi
rm Foundat
i
ons
,”FHWA-SA-
93-025, 1993
FHWA, Geotechnical Engineering, Circular No. 3,“
Desi
gn Gui
dance: Geot
echni
cal
EarthquakeEngi neer
ingforHi ghway s,”Vol
ume1,1997
FHWA,“
Geot echni
cal Engineer i
ngNot ebook, Acompi
lati
onofFHWAGeot echnicalNot ebook
I
ssuances”(Cur rently,thereare16i ssuances. Recent issuances are available at
www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/geopub.htm)
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
calI
nst
rument
ati
on,
”FHWA-HI-98-034, 1998
FHWA,“
GroundAnchor sandAnchor
edSy
stems,
”Geot
echni
cal
Engi
neer
ing,
Cir
cul
arNo. 4,
FHWA-IF-99-015, 1999
FHWA,“
Gui deCont rol
ledBlastingSpeci
fi
cat
ion,
”Geot
echni
cal
Adv
isor
yNo. 7, Geotechnical
Engineering Notebook, 1985
FHWA,“
Gui del
i
nesf
orConePenet
rat
ionTestPer
for
manceandDesi
gn,
”FHWA-TS-78-209,
1978
FHWA,“Guidel
inesf
orthe Desi
gn ofMechanicall
ySt abil
i
zed Earth Walls( Inext
ensi
ble
Reinf
orcement
s),
”GT#1,FHWAGeot echnicalEngineer
ing Notebook, 1988
FHWA,“HandbookonDesi
gnofPi
l
esandDr
il
l
edShaf
tsUnderLat
eral
Load,
”FHWA-IP-84-
11, 1984
FHWA,“
HighwaySubdr
ainageDesi
gn,
”FHWA-TS-80-224, 1980
FHWA,“Hydrauli
cEngi neer
ingCi
r arNo. 18, Evaluating Scour at Bridges, 3rd ed.”
cul ,FHWA-
IP-90-017, 1995
FHWA,“Hy
drauli
cEngi neeringCi
rcul
arNo. 20,St
ream St
abi
l
it
yatHi
ghwaySt
ruct
ures”
,
FHWA-IP-90-014, 1991
FHWA,“Hy dr
aul
ic Engineeri
ng Ci rcularNo. 23, Bridge Scour and Stream Instability
Countermeasures –Experience, Selection, and Desi
gnGui
dance”
,FHWA-HI-97-030,
1997
FHWA,“LoadandResi stanceFact
orDesi
gn(
LRFD)f
orHi
ghwayBr
idgeSubst
ruct
ures,
”
FHWA-HI-98-032, 1998

FHWA;“LoadTr
ansf
erf
orDr
il
l
edShaf
tsi
nInt
ermedi
ateGeomat
eri
als,
”FHWA-RD-95-172,
1996
FHWA,“Manualf orDesi
gnandConst
ruct
ionMoni
tor
ingofSoi
lNai
lWal
l
s,”FHWA-SA-96-
069, 1998
FHWA,“Mechanical
l
yStabil
i
zed Ear
th Wall
sand Rei nfor
ced Soi
lSl
opes–Design and
Const
ruct
ionGuidel
i
nes,”FHWA-SA-96-071, 1996
FHWA,“Mechanical
l
yStabil
i
zed Ear
th Wall
sand Rei nf
orced Soil Slopes –Design and
Const
ruct
ionGuidel
i
nes,”FHWA-NHI-00-043, 2001
FHWA,“
Mi cr
opi l
eDesi
gnandCons
truct
ionGui
del
i
nes- I
mpl
ement
ati
onManual
,
”FHWA- SA-
97-070, 1997
FHWA,“
Negat
iv
eFr
ict
ionDowndr
agonaPi
l
e,”TS-78-210, 1978
FHWA,“Pref
abr
icat
edVerti
calDr ai
ns,
”Vol
s. I to III, FHWA-RD-86-186, FHWA-RD-86-169,
and FHWA-RD-86-170, 1986
FHWA,“
RSSRei nforcedSl
opeSt
abi
l
it
y- A Microcomputer Program - Us
er'
sManual
,
”FHWA-
SA-96-039, 1996
FHWA,“
Reinfor
cedSoi l St
ruct
ures
”,Vol
umeI
,“Desi
gnandCons
truc
ti
onGui
del
i
nes
,”FHWA-
RD-89-043, 1990
FHWA,“RockBlast
ingandOv erbreakCont
rol
,”Nat
ionalHi
ghwayI
nst
it
ute,NHICour
seNo.
13211, FHWA-HI-92-001, 1991
FHWA,“
RockSl opes,Tr aini
ngCour sei nGeot echni calandFoundat i
onEngi
neer
ing,
”NHI
Course No. 130235 –Module 5, National Highway Institute, 1998
FHWA,“
RockSl opes:
Design,Excavation,
Stabi
l
izat
ion,
”Tur
ner
-Fairbank Highway Research
Center, FHWA-TS-89-045,1989
FHWA,“
Rockf al
lHaz ar
dMi t
igati
onMet
hods,
”Par
ti
ci
pant
Wor
kbook,
FHWA-SA-93-085, NHI
Course No. 13219, 1994
FHWA,“
Rockf
allHaz
ardRat
ingSy
stem,
”Par
ti
ci
pant
'
sManual
,FHWA-SA-93-057, 1993
FHWA,“
Soi
landBaseSt abil
izat
ionandAssoci
atedDr ainageConsi
der
ati
ons,
”Vol
s. 1 and 2,
FHWA-SA-93-004 and FHWA-SA-93-005, 1993
FHWA,“
Soi
lNai
l
ingFi
eldI
nspect
orsManual
,”FHWA-SA-93-068, 1994
FHWA, "Soils and Foundations Workshop Reference Manual," NHI Course No. 132012,
FHWA,“SPILE,A Micr
ocomput erPr ogram f
orDet
ermi
ning Ul
ti
mat
e Ver
ti
calSt
ati
cPi
l
e
Capacit
y,”FHWA-SA-92-044, 1993
FHWA,“
Spr
eadFoot
ingsf
orHi
ghwayBr
idges,
”FHWA-RD-86-185, 1986
FHWA,“Techni
calGui
del i
nesforEx
pansi
veSoi
l
sinHi
ghwaySubgr
ades,
”Fi
nalRepor
t,
FHWA-RD-79-51, 1980
FHWA,“
Tol
erabl
eMov
ementCr
it
eri
aforHi
ghwayBr
idges,
”FHWA- RD-85-107, 1985
FHWA,“Tr ai
ning Course i
n Geot echnicaland Foundat
ion Engi
neering:Geot
echnical
EarthquakeEngineeri
ng,”Parti
cipant’
sManual
,andStudentExer
cises,FHWA-HI-99-
012 and FHWA-HI-99-014, 2000.
FHWA,“Trai
ning Cour
se i
n Geotechni
caland Foundat
ion Engineeri
ng:Rock Sl opes,”
Part
i
cipant’
sManual
,andStudentExer
cises,
FHWA-HI-99-007 and NHI-99-036, 1999
FHWA,“
UsersManualforComput
erProgr am CBEAR:Bear
ingCapaci
tyAnal
ysi
sofShal
l
ow
Foundat
ions,
”FHWA-SA-94-034, 1994
FHWA,“
User'sManualf
orComputer Program DRIVEN: Ultimate Static Capacity for Driven
Pi
les,
”FHWA-SA-98-074, 1998
FHWA,“User
'sManualf orLat eral
lyLoadedPileAnal ysi
sPr
ogr
am f
ort
heMi
crocomput
er,
”
(COM624P) Version 2.0, FHWA-SA-91-048, 1991
Goodman,R. E.,“ Met
hods ofGeologi
calEngi
neer
ing i
n Di
scont
inuous Rock
s,”West
Publishing Company, 1976
Hoek, E. andBr ay ,J.
W.,“RockSl opeEngi
neer
ing,
”Rev
ised3rd ed., Institution of Mining and
Metallurgy, London, 1981
Hoek, E. andBrown,E. T.
,“Under
groundEx
cav
ati
onsi
nRock,I
nst
it
ution of Mining and
Metall
urgy
,”London,1980
I
tascaConsul
ti
ngGr
oup,“
FLACUserManual
,”1995
Kr
amer
,S.
L.,“
Geot
echni
calEar
thquakeEngi
neer
ing,
”Pr
ent
ice-Hall Inc., 1996
McVay
,M.,Armaghani ,B.,andCasper ;R.,“
Desi gnandConst
ruct
ionofAuger-Cast Piles in
Flor
ida,Desi gnandConst ruct
ionofAugerCastPi l
es,andOt herFoundati
onI ssues, ”
Transportation Research Record 1447, 1994
NAVFAC DM-7.1 –“
SoilMechani
cs,
”Depar
tmentof the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command, 1986
NAVFAC DM-7.2 –“ Foundat i
onsandEar thSt
ruct
ures,
”Depar
tmentof the Navy, Naval
NCEERWor
kshops,“
Liquef
act
ionResi
stanceofSoi
l
s:Summar
yRepor
t,
”1996
NCEER/
NSF,“
Wor
kshopsonEv
aluat
ionofLi
quef
act
ionResi
stanceofSoi
l
s,”1998
NCHRP (
Bri
aud,etal .
),“
Downdr
agOnUncoat
edandBi
tumen-Coat
edPi
l
es,
”Resear
ch
Report 393, 1994
NCHRP,“
Shal
l
owFoundat
ionsf
orHi
ghwaySt
ruct
ures,
”Sy
nthesi
s107,1983

NCHRP,“
Stat
icandDy
nami
cLat
eralLoadi
ngofPi
l
eGr
oups,
”NCHRPRepor
t461,2000
NCHRP, “
Treat
mentofPr
obl
em Foundat
ionsf
orHi
ghwayEmbankment
s,”Sy
nthesi
s147,
1989
Or
egonDOT,“
Rockf
all
Cat
chmentAr
eaDesi
gnGui
de,
”Resear
chPr
ojectSPR-3(032), 2002
Or
egonDOT,“
TheNatur
eofRockf
all
AsTheBasi sf
oraNewFal l
outAr eaDesi
gnCr
it
eri
afor
0.
25:
1Slopes,
”Resear
chReportNo. FHWA-OR-GT-95-05, 1994
Peck,R.
B.,Hanson,W.
E.,andThor
nbur
n,T.
H.,“
Foundat
ionEngi
neer
ing,
”2nded.
,Wi
l
ey,
1974
Pi
erson,L.
A.,Gull
i
xson,C. F.
,andChassi e,R. G.
,“Rockfal lCat
chmentAr
eaDesi gnGuide,
”
Oregon DOT and FHWA Final Report SPR-3(032), FHWA-OR-RD-01-04, 2001
PostTensi
oni
ngI
nst
it
ute(
PTI
),“
Recommendat
ionsf
orPr
est
ressedRockandSoi
lAnchor
s,”
1996
Power
s,J.
P.,“
Const
ruct
ionDewat
eri
ng:AGui
det
oTheor
yandPr
act
ice,
”Wi
l
ey,1981
Schmertmann, J.H., “
Guidel
inesforUsei ntheSoi
l
sInvest
igat
ionandDesignofFoundat i
ons
f
orBr idge St r
uct
ures int he St ate ofFl
ori
da,”Research Report121-A, Florida
Department of Transportation, 1967
Seed,H.B.,andIdr iss,I
.M.
,“Simplifi
edProcedur eforEv aluati
ngSoilLiquef
actionPot enti
al,
”
Journal Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 97:SM9, pp 1249 - 1273,
September 1971
SHAKE,“
AComput erPr
ogr
am f
orConductingEqui
val
entLi
nearSei smi cRes pons eAnal ys es
ofHor i
zontal
l
yLayer
edSoilDeposi
ts,”User
’sManual, Modified by I.M. Idriss and J.I.
Sun, 1991
Ter
zaghi
,K.
,andPeck,R.
B.,“
Soi
lMechani
csi
nEngi
neer
ingPr
act
ice,
”2nded.
,Wi
l
ey,1967
TRB,“
Desi
gnofPi
l
eFoundat
ions,
”NCHRPSy
nthesi
sofHi
ghwayPr
act
ice42,1977
TRB,“
Landsl
i
des:I
nvest
igat
ionandMi
ti
gat
ion,
”Speci
alRepor
t247,1996
USCor
psofEngi neers,“Design,Const r
uct i
on,andMaintenanceofRel
i
efWel
l
s,Techni
cal
Engineering and Design Guide No. 3,
”repri
ntedbyASCE,1993
USFor
estSer vi
ce, “
SlopeStabil
ityReferenceGui
def
orNat
i
onal
For
est
sint
heUni
t
edSt
ates
,”
Vols. I to III, EM-7170-13, August 1994
Wy
li
e,D.
C.,“
Foundat
ionsonRock,
”2nded.
,E&FNSpon,1999
Youd,T.L.
,Hansen,C. M.,andBar tl
ett
,S.F.,“Rev
isedLinearRegr essi
onEquat i
onsfor
Prediction of Lateral Spread Displacement, Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenv ir
onment
alEngi neer
ing,”December2002
YoudandI
dri
ss,andASCE,“
Geot
echni
cal
andGeoenv
ironment
alEngi
neer
ing,
”Apr
il
,2001

Youd,
T.L.,andI driss,I
.M.
,“Li
quefacti
onResi
stanceofSoi
l
s: Summar yRepor t f
rom the 1996
NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of
Soil
s,”Jour nalofGeotechnicalandGeoenvir
onmentalEngi neering,ASCE,pp297-
312, April 2001

CHAPTER 12
PRESENTATION OF GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION

PRESENTATION OF GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION 12-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1
2. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT ORGANIZATION ............................................................ 1
3. TITLE PAGE................................................................................................................ 4
4. TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. 5
5. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 5
6. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 5
7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 5
8. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AND SEISMICITY ............................................................ 5
9. FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................................... 6
10. LABORATORY ANALYSES ........................................................................................ 6
11. DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................. 6
12. CALCULATIONS ......................................................................................................... 6
13. ANALYSES.................................................................................................................. 6
14. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... 7
15. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 9
16. FIGURES..................................................................................................................... 9
17. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS DATA..................................................................... 9
18. LABORATORY TESTS RESULTS .............................................................................. 9
19. IN SITU TESTS RESULTS.......................................................................................... 9
20. INSTRUMENTATION RESULTS................................................................................. 9
21. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 10

PRESENTATION OF GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION 12-1
1. INTRODUCTION
Upon completion of the geotechnical investigation and analysis, the information and
findings must be compiled in a standard report format. The report serves as the permanent
record of all geotechnical data known to be pertinent to the project and is referred to
throughout the design, construction, and service life of the project. The data and
recommendations are typically compiled in a Geotechnical Report. The intent of the
Geotechnical Report is to present the data collected in a clear manner, to draw conclusions
from the data, and to make recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of the project. The
primary clients that use the report are roadway designers, Bridge Engineers, construction
personnel, and contractors. The Geotechnical Report is a professional document, and must
be prepared under the direction of a registered professional engineer. When Consultants
pr eparer epor t
s,t heConsul tant’
sr ecommendat ionsmustber eviewed,document edand
retained by the Geotechnical Engineer assigned to the project. All final reports, calculations,
boring logs, details, etc. must be submitted to the Department on Compact Disks (CD) in
addi ti
ontopapercopi es.Al l bori
ngl ogsmust bepr epar edusi ngt he“ gINT”sof twar epr ogr am
wi thpri
ntout sint heDepar t
ment ’sformat.TheDepar tment ’sfinaldeci sionont heuseoft he
Consul tant’srecommendat ions should be documented (i.e., in a memorandum to the Project
Manager in charge of the project). This Chapter describes the format for presentation of
geotechnical data. General outlines of the topics to be discussed in the Geotechnical Report
are presented.
2. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT ORGANIZATION
The Geotechnical Report contains factual data, interpretations, engineering studies and
analyses, and recommendations for design and construction. The report should be formatted
to present information using a standardized approach, so that users are able to locate
information readily and consistently. The format and contents of the Geotechnical Report are
somewhat dependent on the type of project. The general outline for a Geotechnical Report is
as follows:
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Executive Summary (optional)
 Introduction
o General
o Scope
o Other reports and investigations
 Project Description
 Geologic Conditions and Seismicity
o Local Geology
o Faulting and Seismicity

 Field Investigations (summary, with details in Appendices A, B, D, and E)

 Laboratory Analyses (summary, with details in Appendix C)
 Discussion (with supporting figures in Appendix A)
o Anticipated Subsurface Conditions (soil, rock, groundwater)
o Geologic Hazards
o General Site Evaluation
 Summary of Engineering Analyses and Calculations (typically a summary will suffice in
a main section of the Geotechnical Report, and the detailed documentation of analyses
and calculation could be in an appendix or as a separate report.)
 Recommendations
o Site Grading and Earthwork
 Use of Materials
 Embankments
 Cut Slopes
 Drainage
o Rock Slopes (slope angles, stabilization, rockfall mitigation)
o Foundations
 Spread Footings
 Driven Piles
 Drilled Shafts
 Micropiles
o Retaining Walls
o Construction Specifications
o Recommended Construction Observations, Testing and Instrumentation
o Closure
 References
 Appendix A: Figures
o Site Location Map
o Soil Boring Location Map
o Geologic Mapping
o Supporting Photographs of Site Conditions
o Interpreted Geologic Cross-Sections
o Recommended Design Details
 Appendix B: Subsurface Explorations Data
o Boring Log Key
o Boring Logs
o Test Pit Logs
o Geophysical Data
 Appendix C: Laboratory Test Results
o Test Result Summary Sheets

o Particle Size Distribution Report Sheets (gradation curves)

o Consolidation/Hydrocollapse Test Report Sheets and/or Summary Table
o Triaxial Test Results Sheets and/or Summary Table
o Direct Shear Test Report Sheets and/or Summary Table
o Chemical Analysis Results Sheets and/or Summary Table
 Appendix D: In Situ Test Results
 Appendix E: Instrumentation Results
Much less commonly, a Geotechnical Baseline Report may be required, particularly in
conjunction with solicitations for Design-Build projects. The Geotechnical Baseline Report
outline is similar to the above outline, except that it is strictly a factual report, and no analyses
or design recommendations are presented. Geotechnical Reports should be prepared using a
formal technical report writing style. The reports are read by various parties within the
Depar tmentandbyt heDepar tment ’
sagent s( Consul tant s,cont ractors, attorneys, etc). In
litigation matters, the Geotechnical Report could be read by opposing legal counsel looking for
weaknesses, misstatements, errors, omissions, evidence of substandard work or implied
conditions. Internal report reviews are criti calt ov erifyt hatr epor tsmeett heDepar tment ’s
standards before the reports are distributed. Reports and report drafts are discoverable in
legal proceedings, and can be used by opposing counsel in an attempt to cast doubt on the
competency of the Depart ment’sGeot echnicalEngi neer .
The Geotechnical Report typically is used by the Department as the basis for resolving
contractor claims of changed conditions. The Geotechnical Report should divulge all
subsurface information used for design. The report writers and reviewers should be aware
that the information contained in the report is typically used by contractors to prepare their
bids. Since some words and phrases can have double meanings, it is important, to avoid the
use of incomplete, ambiguous, and subjective statements. Reports should be reviewed
specifically for such content and the questionable words and phrases replaced with clearer
terms. Geotechnical interpretations are needed to describe and justify the assumptions made
in areas where conditions are unknown. Unnecessary interpretations and statements or overly
optimistic statements should be avoided.
Guidance for checking the completeness of Geotechnical Reports is provided in the
FHWA publ icati
on “ Checkl i
stand Gui del i
nes f orRev iew ofGeotechnical Reports and
Prel
iminar yPl ansandSpeci f
icati
ons”(1985) .Checkl istsar epr ovi
dedf orv ariousty
pesof
geotechnical investigations and construction elements, in the following categories:
 Site investigation information
 Shallow foundations
 Pile foundations
 Drilled shaft foundations
 Retaining walls
 Bridge approach embankments over soft ground

 Centerline cuts and embankments

 Landslide corrections
 Material sites
 PS&E review checklist
 Minimum geotechnical engineering analyses required for embankments, cut slopes,
structure foundations, and retaining walls
 Guideline minimum boring, sampling, and testing criteria
In addition, recent FHWA technical publications for different types of geotechnical
construction (such as soil nailing and ground anchors) provide guidance on documentation
relevant to those areas. Analyses and computations should be checked by an independent
Geotechnical Engineer following appropriate QA/QC procedures. Reviews should utilize the
guideli
nesi nFHWApubl i
cation“ Checkl i
standGuidelines for Review of Geotechnical Reports
andPr eli
mi naryPl ansandSpeci f
icati
ons”(1985),aswel last hi
sManual ,andFHWAdesi gn
reference manuals.
To maximize the benefits of the geotechnical investigation, the Geotechnical Engineer
should interact with the project design and construction engineers throughout the duration of
the project. The geotechnical input should be considered and incorporated into the project as
the design is developed. If the project design is altered as project development advances, the
geotechnical recommendations may have to be modified from those presented in the
Geotechnical Report. When the project approaches the final design stage, the Geotechnical
Engineer should determine if an additional or a final Geotechnical Report should be prepared
to reflect modified assumptions and recommendations incorporated in the final design plans.
The following offices should be provided copies of Geotechnical Reports, as applicable:
 Project Manager
 District Engineer
 Construction Engineer
 Structural Design Division
 Roadway Design Division
 FWHA Project Engineer (for Federally funded projects)
In addition to writing the report, the Geotechnical Engineer should review all phases of
the plans and specifications to ensure that the geotechnical recommendations have been
correctlyi ncor porated. The Depar tment“ Standard Speci fi
cationsf orRoad and Br idge
Const ruction”andPul lSheet specifi
cat i
onsshoul dnot bechangedf orproj ectsexcept wi
ththe
approval of the Assistant Materials Engineer.
3. TITLE PAGE
The title page should include the formal name of the project, the project identification
number, the county, the date the report was finalized, and the names with titles of report

preparers and their signatures (which includes the author, the reviewer, and approval by the
overseeing engineer).
4. TABLE OF CONTENTS
The table of contents should list the report sections and subsections, followed by
appendices. A list of tables and figures should be included. A table of contents is not
necessary for a short report or technical memorandum.
5. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Executive Summary may be desirable for larger reports to help provide the most
important findings and recommendations in a short and simple manner. An Executive
Summary is not necessary for a short report or technical memorandum.
6. INTRODUCTION
This section introduces the scope of work as it relates to the general project description
(a more detailed project description is provided in the next report section). A list of previous
reports and investigations that are relevant to the current project and site should be identified
in this introductory section.
7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section describes the elements of the project and the geotechnical-related items.
Provide a list of project information that was received during the course of the investigation
(alignment, foundation layout, 30% plans, scour estimate, etc.). The details should include the
various grading requirements and structure needs. Project constraints should be identified.
Design loads and seismic criteria should be addressed. Provide a description of width,
composition, and condition of existing roadway. Provide the estimated depths of scour used
(typically determined by the Hydraulics Engineer), if applicable. A vicinity map is useful to
show the general location of the project.
8. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AND SEISMICITY
This section describes the known and published geology of the site and vicinity, as well
as the regional and local seismicity. Provide a description of significant geologic and
topographic features of the site. The principal geologic formations are described, along with
their soil and rock characteristics. The general thicknesses (and contact elevations) of the
principal geologic units should be described based on available information. Describe both
natural and man-made features that are of construction importance or need to be protected.
Include pertinent geologic mapping. Identify the closest relevant faults and areas of seismic
activity, along with the published expected peak horizontal ground acceleration (as stated in
reli
abl egeol ogi
cpubl icat
ionsandt heAASHTO“ Standar dSpeci fi
cationsf orHi ghwayBr i
dges
Desi gnManual ”
).

9. FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
This section presents an overview of the exploration program. Information presented

here should include geologic reconnaissance work, the method of subsurface explorations, in
situ testing, and instrumentation. The sampling methods should be briefly described. Each
boring and test pit should be identified and labeled, along with its depth and purpose. Provide
a sentence referencing the exploration logs, in situ test results, and instrumentation results in
the appendices.
10. LABORATORY ANALYSES
List the types of tests performed and summarize the results, leaving the details in the
appendix. Briefly describe key findings from the laboratory tests. Provide a sentence
referencing the laboratory test results in the appendix.
11. DISCUSSION
The subsurface conditions should be described along the route of the project. This
might require splitting the discussion into sections along the alignment. Describe the
engineering characteristics and anticipated behavior of each soil and rock unit. Identify
potentially difficult or problematic conditions. Describe any precedent information such as past
slope performance or instabilities and ground settlement evidence. The groundwater regimes
throughout the project should be described. Describe any potential geologic hazards, such as
unstable slopes and rockfall hazards.
12. CALCULATIONS
A complete set of the analysis computations should be adequately documented and

saved in a separate file or report. All calculations by Consultants are reviewed by the
Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer reviews and makes recommendations
back to the Consultants to be incorporated into the calculations. Consultants remain
responsible for the accuracy and completeness of all deliverables.
13. ANALYSES
Provide an overview of the geotechnical engineering analyses and studies performed.

Describe the purpose of each set of analyses, and provide the assumptions used, the
corresponding results, and impact on the project. Details should be included in an appendix, if
necessary. When applicable, analyses for alternate foundations including spread footings,
driven piles and drilled shafts should be provided for all structures. A description of the
analyses performed and an explanation of why specific foundation alternatives were eliminated
should be included.

14. RECOMMENDATIONS
The Geotechnical Engineer must provide recommendations for all earthwork, rock
slopes, retaining walls, foundations and geotechnical problems. The excavated materials must
be described in terms of their behavior and its suitability for use as Borrow material. Address
how the materials satisfy Department standards for Borrow materials. Unsuitable materials
must be addressed and their locations identified. If groundwater or seepage could impact the
project, describe any recommended drainage systems and their locations. Estimate earthwork
shrink/swell factors to allow for computation of earthwork quantities.
Provide recommendations for embankment construction, including methods to ensure
slope stability and manage settlement. Estimate the magnitude and rate of settlement.
Evaluate possible alternatives if magnitude or time required for settlement is excessive, and
recommend treatment based on economic analysis, time and environmental constraints.
When addressing stability, describe the factor of safety criteria and the level achieved with the
recommended approach. Evaluate possible treatment alternatives if the factor of safety is too
low. Provide recommendations for any ground improvement. Reinforced slopes, if to be used,
should be detailed for design. Landslide mitigation measures require detailed design
recommendations.
Provide rock slope recommendations including the design of slopes (appropriate cut
slope angles) and fallout area dimensions. The potential for rockfall should be described and
any recommended mitigations should be detailed.
Foundation recommendations should be provided for all structures including bridges,
soundwalls, earth retaining walls, channels, box culverts and poles. Address the use of both
shallow and deep foundations and describe advantages and disadvantages for each. Provide
detailed recommendations for preferred foundation types. For shallow foundations, provide
the recommended elevations of bottom of footings and the allowable soil pressures based on
settlements and bearing capacities. Describe suitable pile types and reasons for design
selections and exclusions. Provide plots of soil resistance for selected pile size alternates.
Plot sshoul dbedev elopedindi cat
i
ngbot hDav i
sson’ scurveandul ti
mat es oilr
es is
tancev ersus
elevation, and should show end bearing and skin friction as well as total resistance. Depth of
scour should be accounted for on each plot. Separate pile analyses for recommended pile
sizes are to be performed for each boring. A corresponding pile capacity curve for each
analysis should be provided. When more than one boring is drilled at a pile group location or
when it is appropriate to generalize the soil strata, one design analysis is performed for each
pile size. Recommendations for piles include:
 Lateral capacity
 Vertical (axial) capacity
 Seismic criteria and design parameters
 Minimum pile length or tip elevation (related to axial capacity)
 Minimum pile spacing

 Estimated pile settlement or pile group settlement

 Effects of scour, down drag, and lateral squeeze, if applicable.
 Pile cap depths or elevations
 Maximum driving resistance to be encountered in reaching the estimated bearing
elevation including the estimated amounts of scour used in the capacity analysis
 Recommended locations of test piles and pile installation criteria for dynamic monitoring
 Selection of load test types, locations and depths, where applicable
Recommend which retaining wall types are appropriate for the project. Provide detailed
recommendations for design of the preferred wall type(s). Provide loads and factored soil
resistance with respect to sliding and overturning for walls other than cantilever walls included
intheDepar tment“ StandardPl ansf orRoadandBr idgeConst ruction” ,andaddr essov erall
stability of walls. Include any requirements for tiebacks, geotextiles, reinforcing materials, etc.
IncludeMSEr ei nforcementl engt hsandlocat ionsi flengt hsv ary.SeeNDOT,“ Bri
dgeDesi gn
andPr ocedur esManual ”fordet ail
s.
Describe the effect of roadway construction (vibratory rollers, utility excavations,
settlements, etc.) on surrounding structures and any possible impacts they may have on the
use of the structures during construction. Structures in close proximity to construction
activities must be evaluated for potential damages caused by these activities. When
warranted, recommendations such as time restraints on certain operations, underpinning, and
monitoring need to be provided to reduce the damaging effects of the construction. Where
ngsi
there is a potential impact on existing buildi nt hesur roundi ngarea,includet
hes t
ruc t
ure’
s
address, type of construction, the estimated vibration level that may cause damage, the usage
(storage building, hospital, etc.), what the potential problem may be and what actions should
be taken to minimize the impact in the report.
TheDepar tment’s“St andardSpec i
fi
cati
onsf orRoadandBr idgeCons truction”mus tbe
utilized wherever possible for simplicity and contractor familiarity. Provide specifications and
details where the Standard Specifications do not apply or do not address the planned
const r
uctionoper ationforthepr oj
ec t.Ther eisnoneedt orepeatt heDepar t
ment ’sSt andard
Specifications in the Geotechnical Report.
Provide recommendations for geotechnical testing, observations, and/or instrum-
entation, depending on the needs of the project and the relative complexity or criticality of the
work to be performed. Describe the benefit of performing the testing and instrumentation, and
the possible consequences if they are not performed or if the instruments are accidentally
damaged. List the tests and instruments to be used and their planned locations.
Comment son const r
ucti
oni ssuesar e helpfulto bot ht he Depar tment ’
sResi dent
Engineer and the contractor. Unless otherwise specified by the Department, provide
information about anticipated water, soil, and rock conditions that might affect construction
operations, sequences, and methods. These conditions might include soft foundation soils,
quick soils, extremely weathered or fractured rock, massive rock, high moisture contents,

presence of subsurface boulders, buried drainage systems, and/or springs that could interfere
with construction. Identify design features that were specifically included to address
geotechnical problems during construction. Discuss the design features and possible
consequences of not implementing these features. Identify restrictions, such as not being
allowed to place fill or temporary stockpiles in sensitive or unstable areas, and provide
information on temporary cut slopes.
15. REFERENCES
Cite the references used in the geotechnical evaluations and analyses.

16. FIGURES
Figures are typically presented in Appendix A. The main figures should include:
 Topographic site plan, usually with a vicinity map
 Boring location map
 Geologic mapping
 Supporting photographs of site conditions
 Geologic cross-sections and typical sections along the alignment, if approved by the
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
 Recommended design details
17. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS DATA
The details of the exploration methods are in the main body of the Geotechnical Report
and do not need to be repeated in the appendices. On large projects, a Summary Table with
borings listed in numerical order and their corresponding stationing locations may be included
to allow the reader to find boring locations and numbers readily. Subsurface exploration data
including Boring Logs, Test Pit Logs, and/or Geophysical plots are typically presented in
Appendix B. A key to Boring Logs needs to be included.
18. LABORATORY TESTS RESULTS
A Summary Table of laboratory test results and detailed graphs of results of tests such
as consolidation, shear strength, triaxial, and gradation are typically presented in Appendix C.
19. IN SITU TESTS RESULTS
Details of any in situ testing (other than SPT) and corresponding test data and results
are typically presented in Appendix D.
20. INSTRUMENTATION RESULTS
Details of the instrumentation installations and the monitoring program are typically
presented in Appendix E. The results of the monitoring program are typically included.

21. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“ ManualonSubsur faceI nvest
igat
ions,
”1988
AASHTO,“ St andardSpeci f
icat i
onsf orHighwayBr i
dgeDesi gnManual”
FHWA,“ Checkl i
standGui del i
nesf orReviewofGeot echnicalReport
sandPrel
imi
naryPlans
and Specifications,”FHWA-PD-97-002, 1985
FHWA, Engineering Notebook Issuance GT-15, “Geot echnicalDi
ff
eri
ngSi
teCondi
t
ions,
”May
1996
FHWA, “Soils and Foundations Workshop Reference Manual,”NHI Course No. 132012,
NDOT,“BridgeDesi gnandPr ocedur esManual ,StructuralDivi
si
on”
NDOT,“Standar dSpeci fi
cationsf orRoadandBr idgeConst r
ucti
on”

CHAPTER 13
CONSTRUCTION PHASE

CONSTRUCTION PHASE 13-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................ 1
2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
3. EARTHWORK ...................................................................................................... 1
4. GROUND IMPROVEMENT .................................................................................. 2
5. GEOSYNTHETICS............................................................................................... 2
6. ROCK SLOPES.................................................................................................... 2
7. EXCAVATION SHORING, COFFERDAMS AND DEWATERING ......................... 3
8. SPREAD FOOTINGS ........................................................................................... 3
9. DEEP FOUNDATIONS ......................................................................................... 3
9.1 Driven Piles .......................................................................................................... 3
9.1.1. Dynamic Driving Analysis ..................................................................................... 4
9.1.2. Construction Inspection ........................................................................................ 4
9.1.3. Pile Driving Analyzer............................................................................................. 4
9.1.4. Pile Integrity Testing ............................................................................................. 4
9.2 Drilled Shafts ........................................................................................................ 5
9.2.1. Construction Inspection ........................................................................................ 5
9.2.2. Shaft Inspection Device (SID) .............................................................................. 5
9.2.3. Shaft Integrity Testing........................................................................................... 6
9.3 Load Tests............................................................................................................ 6
9.3.1. Static Load Tests.................................................................................................. 7
9.3.2. Dynamic Load Tests............................................................................................. 7
9.3.3. Statnamic Load Tests........................................................................................... 7
9.3.4. Osterberg Load Tests........................................................................................... 8
10. RETAINING STRUCTURES ................................................................................ 8
10.1 MSE Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes ............................................................... 8
10.2 Ground Anchors ................................................................................................... 8
10.3 Soil Nail Walls ...................................................................................................... 9
11. LANDSLIDE MITIGATION.................................................................................... 9
12. FIELD INSTRUMENTATION MONITORING...................................................... 10
13. TROUBLESHOOTING ....................................................................................... 10
14. RECORDS / DOCUMENTATION ....................................................................... 10
15. SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS............................................................... 11
16. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 12
13-1: Statnamic Axial Load Test (1 of 2) ............................................................ 12
13-1: Statnamic Axial Load Test (2 OF 2) .......................................................... 12
13-2: Osterberg Load Cells (1 of 4) ................................................................... 13
17. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 15
CONSTRUCTION PHASE 13-1
1. PURPOSE
Geotechnical Engineers are involved in the construction phase of projects. The

Geotechnical Engineers should visit the site to observe any encountered problems firsthand. It
is important to document observations made during the visit.
2. INTRODUCTION
During construction, in situ materials and construction methods may require inspection
to assure compliance with the design assumptions and the project specifications. The
inspect i
ontasks, dependi ngont heRes ident Engi neer ’
srequest,mayi nc l
udes ubgradeand/ or
embankment compaction control, assurance of proper backfilling techniques around structural
elements; typical footings, drilled shafts, piles, and ground anchor installations. The Resident
Engineer (Inspectors) need to be provided with geotechnical information and written guidelines
to perform their tasks effectively.
Existing structures that are potentially sensitive to vibrations or movement should be
monitored, including preconstruction and postconstruction surveys of the structures. Mitigating
action may be necessary to reduce the impact of construction induced ground movements. It
may also be desirable to monitor groundwater level changes, settlement, heave, and/or lateral
displacement of the structures.
3. EARTHWORK
Inspectors perform day-to-day inspection for earthwork projects. Typical earthwork

inspection requires only nominal involvement from the Geotechnical Engineer during
construction. However, if special considerations must be addressed during construction,
Resident Engineers and their Inspectors should be advised prior to the start of construction.
They should also be made aware that it is important to notify the Geotechnical Engineer if
“changedcondi t
ions”and/ orsignifi
cant groundwat erfl
ow/ spr
ingsar eenc ount ered. I
ngener al,
the Geotechnical Engineer should not assume that Inspectors will initiate contact, and should
maintain communication with Inspectors if certain work items require input or support from the
Geotechnical Engineers.
Inspectors typically require construction support from the Geotechnical Engineer
regarding works such as:
 Excavation of poor foundation soils
 Staged embankment placement over soft foundations
 Settlement monitoring and mitigation methods
 Cement and lime stabilization
 Use of degradable rock materials
 Cutting slopes
 Drainage systems installation beneath fills

4. GROUND IMPROVEMENT
Geotechnical Engineers provide specifications for ground improvement techniques in

the design stages of projects. Projects involving ground improvement measures (such as
excavation, surcharging, wick drains, stone columns, dynamic compaction, or grouting)
typically require the Geotechnical Engineer to provide day-to-day support to the Inspector at
the early stages of ground improvement work. Once design assumptions are confirmed and
the ground improvement contractor has established a routine, the Geotechnical Engineer may
decrease involvement to regular review of daily inspection reports and occasional site visits.
During each site visit, the Geotechnical Engineer should confirm that ground improvement
activities are conducted as directed, based on evaluations of obtained technical data. The site
visit is an opportunity to verify any ground variation from the anticipated subsurface conditions.
If variations exist, the need to modify ground improvement operations to suit the different
subsurface conditions should be evaluated.
5. GEOSYNTHETICS
Geotechnical Engineers provide specifications for geosynthetic material requirements

and installation methods in design stages of projects. Geosynthetic applications include
subgrade separation, construction platform, erosion control, drainage filter, embankment
reinforcement, pavement reinforcement, MSE wall reinforcement, and impermeable barriers.
Inspectors typically perform routine inspection of common geosynthetics, checking
certifications and ordering any tests required by the specifications. Any specific concerns
regarding geosynthetic material property values or installation should be discussed with the
Inspector.
6. ROCK SLOPES
Geotechnical Engineers meet with Inspectors and contractors at the sites to review the
rockwork objectives before construction of projects commences. The Geotechnical Engineer
shoul dassi sti nrev i
ewingt hecont ractor’
sbl ast
ingsubmi tt
als,andobser ving/ evaluat i
ngt est
blasts, if applicable. Previously undisclosed rock slope problems could occur during
construction, for which the Geotechnical Engineer should perform an additional investigation.
Typically, a three-dimensional evaluation of rock structure and problem conditions is needed.
Typically, as construction proceeds, slope conditions and the need for special
measures, such as rock bolts can change due to blasting or scaling operations. The
Geotechnical Engineer should routinely evaluate slopes during construction and be prepared
to modify the mitigation measures as necessary. Because rockfall mitigation measures are
rarely applied, construction personnel generally have little experience with them. The
Geotechnical Engineer should provide on-site support for specialty work items such as slope
scaling, slope screening, rock bolting, block underpinning, cable lashing, barrier systems
installation, and shotcrete placement.

7. EXCAVATION SHORING, COFFERDAMS AND DEWATERING
Temporary shoring, cofferdams, and dewatering are typically the responsibility of the
contractor. Shoring requirements ar especi fi
edin“ Occupat i
onalSaf et
yandHeal thStandards
fortheConst ructionI ndust ry ,
”29CFRPar t26,promul gat edbyt heOccupat ional Safet
yand
Health Administration (OSHA), U.S. Department of Labor. Bridge and Geotechnical Engineers
review shop drawings and calculations. The Geotechnical Engineer may be asked to assist the
Inspector when the shoring system is complex and critical facilities are located nearby.
Dewatering may be necessary with excavation for bridge foundations and retaining walls, to
prevent base heave, subgrade softening, and flow of soil from the side slopes. Instrumentation
might be required in critical shoring and dewatering applications.
8. SPREAD FOOTINGS
Geotechnical Engineers are not typically involved in the inspection of shallow

foundations during construction. Footing pad preparation inspection is straightforward when
standard specifications are used and Inspectors have adequate training and support.
Special situations may require the involvement of the Geotechnical Engineer where soil
conditions are poor (weak foundations) and/or where the applied bearing pressures are high
(heavy loads). In these cases, the Geotechnical Engineer should discuss the design intent and
anticipated subsurface conditions with Inspectors prior to construction. If foundation soil
conditions in the field are different from those shown on Plans and/or the Geotechnical Report,
the Resident Engineer typically informs the Geotechnical Engineer of the change so that
appropriate modifications can be implemented (ref ert o FHWA,“ Shal
low Foundat ions,”
Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 6, 2002).
9. DEEP FOUNDATIONS
Geotechnical Engineers remain involved with deep foundation projects during

const ruction.Ani niti
alt askistor ev i
ew t hecont r
actor’sproposedconst r
uctionappr oach
including evaluating items such as the adequacy of pile hammers or drilling equipment. Site
visits are often required to assist the Inspector and to look for unusual or changed site
conditions. The Geotechnical Engineer should regularly contact the Inspector to follow
progress, and to review and file pile installation records. Deep foundation systems can be
classified as driven (displacement) or drilled (replacement).
9.1 Driven Piles
The Geotechnical Engineer should be familiar with the recommended construction

inspection procedures outlined in the following FHWA publications:
 Performance of Pile Driving Systems –I nspect
or’
sManual
 Design and Construction of Driven Pile Foundations
 Static Testing of Deep Foundations

9.1.1. Dynamic Driving Analysis
Geotechnical Engineers perform dynamic pile driving analyses during the design phase
of projects to evaluate pile types, driving stresses, and drivability with different size hammers.
These analyses are performed using wave equation software such as WEAP. The contractor
proposes use of a hammer type for driving of the piles. The Geotechnical Engineer reviews the
cont ractor ’
ssubmi t
talandev al
uat est hepr oposedpi le/hammersy st
em t ocal culatedrivi
ng
stresses and the driving criteria that corresponds to the resistance loads. The Geotechnical
Engineerper formsawav eequat ionanal ysisbasedont hecont ract or’
ssubmi ttaltov er
if
ythe
adequacy of the proposed equipment and methods. The Geotechnical Engineer provides
driving criteria to the Resident Engineer.
9.1.2. Construction Inspection
Geotechnical Engineers work with Resident Engineers to verify that equipment used at
the sites matches the equipment proposed by the contractors. This involves inspecting
hammer models and serial numbers. Hammer cushions are difficult to observe without
disassembling the helmet; however it is important to verify that the cushion material and
thicknessmat cht hecont ract
or’ssubmi ttal
.TheGeot echnical Engi neers houldr ef
ert
oSection
508,“ Dri
ven Pi l
es,”oft he Depar t
mentSt andar d Speci f
ications f orRoad and Br idge
Construction as a guide when involved with construction of driven piles.
9.1.3. Pile Driving Analyzer
Using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) involves attaching strain gauges and
accelerometers to a pile prior to being driven into the ground. Data collected by the
instruments as the pile being driven are processed by the PDA unit to calculate the following:
 Pile load capacity
 Driving stresses
 Energy transferred from hammer to pile
Signal irregularities that may result from pile damage can be detected by obtained data.
Data from the PDA can be further processed using the CAPWAP program to determine site-
specific soil engineering properties to be used in wave equation analyses. The PDA is used
during construction to confirm design assumptions. If PDA measurements taken during
construction indicate differing site conditions than assumed in the design, there is the potential
for costly redesign efforts and contractor change orders.
9.1.4. Pile Integrity Testing
Geotechnical Engineers could be involved in evaluating questionable piles during

construction. The use of low strain, impact, nondestructive testing has become common to
assess damage in driven piles. It can also be used to determine the actual length of piles
supporting existing structures. One instrument used for this testing is the Pile Integrity Tester
(PIT). When using the PIT, the top of the pile is struck with a hammer and the signal reflection
is measured at the top of the pile. The signal reflects when there is a change in impedance in
the pile section. If the signal comes back too quickly, there may be damage to the pile. The
PIT can be particularly useful in evaluating the length of foundations for older structures
without as-built drawings. The main advantage of using the PIT device is low cost. The main
disadvantage is the test results are very subjective and limited to cases where the top of the
pile is accessible for testing. The use of high strain, impact, nondestructive testing is preferable
to using the PIT if pile-driving equipment is available. This testing involves instrumenting a pile
with a PDA and restriking it with the pile hammer.
9.2 Drilled Shafts
Geotechnical Engineers should be familiar with the recommended construction

inspection procedures outlined in the following FHWA publications:
 Static Testing of Deep Foundations
 Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design Methods
9.2.1. Construction Inspection
The quality of a drilled shaft installation is dependent on the construction procedures.

Geot echnicalEngi neersshoul dr ef ert oSect ion509,“ Drill
edShaf t
s,”oft heDepartment
Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction as a guide when involved with
construction of drilled shafts. The Geotechnical Engineer evaluates t hecont rac t
or ’
sproposed
construction methods before equipment are mobilized to the site. During the review, the
Geotechnical Engineer considers how the construction procedures affect the engineering
properties such as unit end bearing and unit skin friction. The Geotechnical Engineer should
arrange to be on site early in the construction phase so that any installation techniques that
adversely affect the performance of the shaft are eliminated. Geotechnical Engineers should
contact Inspectors to ensure that they understand the construction processes and know when
in the construction process problems typically occur.
Different techniques are used to properly construct and maintain the integrity of the
shaf topeni ngpr i
ort opl acementoft heconcr ete.Fort hewetmet hod,mi neralor“ polymer
slur r
y”,i
fallowed, is used to maintain a positive head inside the open shaft in order to keep the
hole open. In order to ensure that the slurry meets the requirements to perform properly, the
following control tests shall be performed: density, viscosity, sand content, and pH.
For drilled shafts socketed into rock, it is important to evaluate the quality of the rock at
the base of the socket. In order to evaluate the quality of the rock directly below the shaft
excavation, rock cores may be taken once the shaft design depth is reached. The coring
method must be approved, and should be able to provide core samples from 4 to 6 inches in
diameter and allow the cored material to be removed in an undisturbed state. (Refer to ASTM
D 2113 and ASTM D 5079.)
9.2.2. Shaft Inspection Device (SID)
The SID is used to inspect the bottom cleanliness of excavated drill holes prior to
placement of concrete. The SID uses a high-resolution camera mounted in a watertight

chamber. The inspection bell is lowered from a service platform to the bottom of the shaft, and
the operator can view the bottom via the camera. The bell is fitted with a depth gauge to
indicate the thickness of debris on the shaft bottom. The SID also has the capability to sample
soils along sidewalls of shaft excavations in order to evaluate the buildup of slurry.
9.2.3. Shaft Integrity Testing
Various test methods are available to assess the quality of the in-place deep foundation
element. These quality assurance tests need to be performed by qualified personnel, and the
results need to be analyzed and interpreted by experienced engineers in order to provide
meaningful results. Pile Integrity Testing can be used to detect anomalies, such as necking or
voids in some drilled shafts. However, since drilled shaft foundations carry such high loads, it
is common to perform high-resolution integrity testing on every shaft.
Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) is a method commonly used to evaluate the integrity of
a completed shaft. The test involves lowering probes to the bottoms of water-filled access
steel or PVC tubes. Measurements are made of different properties of compression waves
emitted from a source probe in one tube and detected by a receiver probe in another tube (at
the same elevation). The probes are pulled back to the surface, and this procedure is repeated
at various depths to obtain a profile of the entire depth of the shaft. Potential defects are
indicated by delays in the signal arrival time and lower energies at a given test depth. Since
access tubes are needed for this test, the design and arrangement of the reinforcement must
take the total number and location of these tubes into account. Typically, CSL for drilled shafts
is performed by a consultant through an agreement with the Department.
If problems are revealed by CSL, the contractor may be required or choose to core the
shaft to evaluate the severity of the defect. Revealed problem areas may be repaired using
pressure-grouting techniques. Drilled shafts are typically designed with a minimum diameter of
three feet, and have the following number of CSL tubes:
Drilled Shaft Diameter (feet) 3 3.5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Number of CSL Tubes 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
9.3 Load Tests
Geotechnical Engineers can use load tests during design phases of projects to develop
a more cost-effective foundation, or during construction to verify design assumptions.
Traditionally, load tests have only been required for complex or high capacity deep
foundations. A few years ago at the Department when load tests were required, Geotechnical
Engineers typically relied on static load tests. Currently, conducting static load tests for
projects are not common. The primary reason static load tests are not used frequently is the
high cost to conduct the test.

The objectives of load tests are to verify that actual piles or shafts response to loading
is in agreement with the anticipated response, and to ensure that the actual ultimate capacities
are not less than the calculated ultimate capacities. Geotechnical Engineers should be
involved in the load tests and the interpretation of test results. Designs should be modified as
necessary based on the results of load tests.
9.3.1. Static Load Tests
There are three types of commonly used static load tests: axial compression (refer to
ASTM D 1143), axial tension (refer to ASTM D 3689), and lateral load (refer to ASTM D 3966).
In each case, the test typically consists of a jack/load cell system to apply loads against a
reaction frame and a dial gauge set up to measure displacements. The Department has a set
of equipment for conducting low capacity axial compression tests, which includes a small jack
(approximately 100 tons capacity), a pump, dial gauges and a generator. The contractor
prov i
dest her
equi redloadf ramesy st
em. TheGeot echnical Engineerreviewst hecontr
ac tor’
s
proposed reaction system for approval.
9.3.2. Dynamic Load Tests
High strain dynamic testing can be performed to confirm the foundation capacity,
determine site-specific soil engineering properties, and to evaluate potential damage. Dynamic
testing is performed using a PDA. Dynamic testing can be performed before construction as
part of a test pile program or during construction to confirm design assumptions (refer to
ASTM D 4945) .Dy namicl oadt esti
ngi susedonmostoft heDepar tment ’spr
ojectsandi s
performed by specialty engineering Consultants under contract with the contractor or
agreement with the Department. Geotechnical Engineers are involved in the planning and
evaluation of test data.
9.3.3. Statnamic Load Tests
Statnamic load tests are used to load high capacity foundations using relatively small
reaction masses. Reaction piles needed for static load testing are not required for Statnamic
testing. In a Statnamic test, solid fuel is burned in a pressure chamber located between the
foundation element and reaction masses. As pressure builds in the pressure chamber, equal
and opposite forces are exerted on the foundation and reaction masses. Loading increases to
a maximum before unloading by controlled venting of exhaust gasses. Loads and deflections
are measured by load cells and laser levels, respectively. A typical Statnamic test with a
duration less than 1 second will yield 2,000 or more pairs of load versus deflection data.
Statnamic tests are capable of applying axial or lateral loads up to 3,400 tons (see
Figures 13-1). The load application is between a static load and a dynamic load. Computer
software calculates damping and inertial effects to yield a static-equivalent load versus
deflection plot. The software also calculates particle velocity and acceleration. All results are
calculated and available immediately on site.

Statnamic tests can be performed on single or group foundation elements on land and
over water. Tests can be performed on drilled shafts, driven piles, and shallow foundations.
9.3.4. Osterberg Load Tests
Osterberg load tests are often a cost-effective alternative to static load tests. The
Osterberg Load Cell, also referred to as an O-cell, is most commonly used in conjunction with
drilled shafts; however, they can also be used with driven piles. For drilled shafts, they can be
placed anywhere within the shaft (see Figures 13-2). Multiple cells can be used to obtain
strength information for an isolated strata of interest. For driven piles, the unit consists of a
sacrificial jacking unit placed on the bottom of the pile. In all applications, the cell expands to
apply equal loads to the portions of the foundation element above and below the cell.
During an Osterberg load test, deflections of the top and bottom plate of the cell are
measur edusi ng“ tel
ltal
es.”Def l
ec tion at the top of the pile is measured using dial gauges.
Load is determined by the pressure applied to a calibrated Osterberg cell. The maximum load
achievable in Osterberg load tests is limited by one of three factors: the capacity of the
foundation element below the cell, the capacity of the foundation element above the cell, or
the capacity of the Osterberg cell. Currently there is no ASTM standard on this type of testing.
See the FHWA manual on the Osterberg Cell for guidance on conducting the test and
interpreting the data.
10. RETAINING STRUCTURES
The Geotechnical Engineer is involved in project performance with structures, especially

when the performance depends on sensitive design assumptions.
10.1 MSE Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes
Typically, retaining wall vendors perform the detailed internal design for MSE systems.
Geotechnical Engineers review calculations and shop drawings submitted by wall vendors for
external and internal stabilities as described in the policies and procedures memorandum No.
CD28-2000-02. When requested, Geotechnical Engineers assist Inspectors to verify that
engineering properties used by wall vendors match the actual field conditions, and that
compaction techniques and efforts being employed are appropriate and adequate. MSE wall
requirements are specified in Section 640 of the Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction.
Techniques for construction of Reinforced Soil Slopes (RSS) are similar to MSE walls.
For a discussion on construction inspection, refer to the FHWAmanualon“ Ear t
hRetaining
Systems, ”Geot echni calEngi neer i
ngCi rcularNo.7,I F-02-054, (2002).
10.2 Ground Anchors
Geotechnical Engineers review ground anchor calculations and shop drawings

submitted by contractors. When the project is designed by a Consultant, the Geotechnical
Engineer should be thoroughly familiar with the design to perform the review. Ground anchor

load tests are conducted by contractors and evaluated by Inspectors. Geotechnical Engineers
may be requested to assist with these evaluations. This involvement would typically be
reduced once contractors have established procedures that meet the design requirements and
Inspectors become more experienced. Geotechnical Engineers work with Inspectors to
maintain well-documented written records ofcont ract
or s’oper
ati
onsandi nstall
at i
ondet ail
s,
especially in dealing with potential construction claims.
Geotechnical Engineers should be familiar with construction methods and load testing
procedures described in Sections 643 and 660, of the Department, Standard Specifications of
Road and Bridge Construction, which are included as Pull Sheets at this time. There are three
types of anchor tests. A proof test consists of loading an anchor in increasing increments to
the maximum test load. The maximum test load is held for a limited duration to check for creep
deformation. A performance test is similar to a proof test except the anchor is unloaded after
each load increment until the maximum test load is obtained. An extended creep test consists
of a performance test with a creep testing duration of 1 to 8 hours. The Geotechnical Engineer
reviews all test results for approval. A detailed discussion of load testing for post-tensioned
ground anchor sisav ail
abl eint he FHWA manualon “ Ground Anchor sand Anchored
Sy stems, ”Geot echni calEngi neer i
ngCi r
cularNo,4,FHWA-IF-99-105, (1999).
10.3 Soil Nail Walls
Geotechnical Engineers review calculations and shop drawings for approval, submitted
by contractors. Soil nail construction specifications are covered in Sections 643 and 660 of the
Department, Standard Specifications of Road and Bridge Construction, which is included as
Pull Sheets at this time. Soil nail load tests are conducted by contractors and evaluated by
Inspectors. Typically, the Geotechnical Engineer is involved in the early stage of soil nail
installation and his/her involvement is reduced once the contractor has established a
procedure that meets the design requirements and the Inspector is experienced enough to
perform the inspection independently.
Geotechnical Engineers should be familiar with construction methods and load testing
procedures as well as the design intent of the soil nails. Soil nail testing typically consists of
one or two verification tests performed prior to production work, and proof testing performed
on 5% of the production nails. Proof and verification tests are loaded to 150% and 200% of the
design nail load, respectively. Creep tests are performed as part of the verification or proof
tests to determine the long-term load holding characteristics. A comprehensive discussion on
soil nail construction is included in t
heFHWA,“ Soi lNai l
ingFi el dInspect or ’
sManual ,”FHWA-
SA-93-068,( 1993) ,and“ SoilNai lWallManual ,”Geot echni calEngi neer ingCi rcul
arNo.7,
FHWA-SA-96-069.
11. LANDSLIDE MITIGATION
Landslide mitigation projects are typically complex. Ref

erto TRB,“Landsl i
de
I
nvest
igat
ionandMi t
igation”forcons t
ruct
ionguidelines.Designsareal
way
sbasedonalimited
number of subsurface explorations and numerous assumptions regarding subsurface

conditions between borings, and, therefore, geotechnical involvement is required through

construction. It is important for the Geotechnical Engineer to regularly visit the site to observe
subsurface soil and groundwater conditions.
In order to maintain slope stability, a staged construction approach is often used to limit
the amount of excavation that is allowed at any one time (to minimize the loss of ground
support). Geotechnical Engineers must clearly communicate these requirements to
Inspectors. The Geotechnical Engineer should review the design and any submitted shop
drawings and construction methods/procedures before commencement of work; evaluating the
relative levels of stability for various work phases of the project. In addition, once construction
begins, the Geotechnical Engineer should anticipate differing site conditions that could require
field adjustments. This situation is not uncommon, and therefore, a plan should be prepared in
advance to address potential changed conditions scenarios in the event they occur.
12. FIELD INSTRUMENTATION MONITORING
Field instrumentation could be used during and after construction to verify that actual
field conditions are in agreement with the assumptions made for the design, or to monitor
performance of the facility and/or changes in the field. Instrumentation can serve as an early
warning of potential problems, and should be monitored according to the schedule developed
by the Geotechnical Engineer. Immediate data reduction and evaluation is typically required.
Problems identified by instrumentation often require immediate construction response and/or
mitigation efforts.
13. TROUBLESHOOTING
No matter how carefully projects are investigated and designed, the possibility exists for
unforeseen problems to arise during construction or afterwards. Geotechnical Engineers
should be prepared to investigate when such problems occur, and recommend design
changes or changes in construction techniques to suit the conditions, while minimizing
construction delays. If it is determined that the cause of a problem has a geotechnical basis,
the Geotechnical Engineer should recommend remedial actions that will eliminate, or at least
minimize, potential consequences. At times, a quick evaluation followed by emergency-level
recommendations may be necessary to keep an emerging issue from becoming a major
construction and safety problem.
14. RECORDS / DOCUMENTATION
Valuable geotechnical information is gained from all construction projects. Therefore, it

is important to document this information for future applications. This data is often helpful
during the design of other projects under similar conditions, and often is valuable in defending
the Department from construction claims. Problems similar to those encountered in
construction of completed projects can possibly be avoided in the future when the
Geotechnical Engineer has detailed records of the problems and events.

Complete records of the geotechnical aspects of the construction and maintenance

phases of a project should be kept. Any specialized construction procedures or design
changes should be noted. Special Provisions should be modified and improved, based on
experiences gained from past projects. Construction and maintenance problems and their
solutions should be described in detail.
It is valuable to document observations made during each site visit. Documentation
should include written descriptions of problem soil and rock conditions, as well as
photographs. All photographs should be date stamped and cataloged in a permanent record.
Digi
talphot ographsneedt obekeptont heGeot echnicalEngineer’sDeskTopcomput erwi t
h
backupcopi esont hedat aser
ver,onhar dcopi es,andonCD’ si nthepr ojectfil
e.
If appropriate, the Geotechnical Engineer should take cross-section measurements of
problem areas. Cross-sections in conjunction with station and offset limits help quantify
problem areas. Measurements should always be tied to a relatively permanent benchmark, or
reference point. A benchmark may consist of a survey stake that has known coordinates
(identifiable on a site map) or an identifiable point on a nearby structure indicated on the plans.
Additional information, such as elevations, may occasionally be obtained from benchmarks
placed by other organizations (USGS, etc.) if the elevation is stamped on the benchmark.
These measurements could be valuable when negotiating potential contractor claims.
TEST ASTM AASHTO
Statnamic Load Test - -
Osterberg Load Test - -
Viscosity of Slurry - -
pH of Slurry - -
Standard Test Method for Piles Under Static Axial D 1143 -
Compressive Load
Standard Test Method for Individual Piles Under Static Axial D 3689 -
Tensile Load
Standard Test Method for Piles Under Lateral Loads D 3966 -
Standard Test Method for Density of Bentonitic Slurries D 4380 -
Standard Test Method for Sand Content by Volume of D 4381 -
Bentonitic Slurries
Standard Test Method for High-Strain Dynamic Testing of D 4945 T 298
Piles
Standard Practices for Preserving and Transporting Rock D 5079 -
Core Samples
Standard Test Method for Low Strain Integrity Testing of D 5882 -
Piles

16. FIGURES
13-1: Statnamic Axial Load Test (1 of 2)
13-1: Statnamic Axial Load Test (2 OF 2)

13-2: Osterberg Load Cells (1 of 4)


17. REFERENCES
AASHTO,“ Inspect or s’Gui def orShot creteRepai rofBr idges, ”TaskFor ce37Repor t,1999
ADSC,“Dril
ledShaf tInspect or’sManual ,
”1989
ASCE,“Damagef rom Bl astVi brat i
ons, ”1974
FHWA, COM624P –“ Lat er allyLoadedPi leAnal ysisPr ogr am fort heMi crocomputerVer si
on
2.0,”FHWA-SA-91-048, 1991
FHWA,“Desi gnandConst r uctionofDr i
venPi leFoundat ions,”FHWA-HI-97-014, 1997
FHWA,“Desi gnandConst r uctionofSt oneCol umns, ”FHWA-RD-83-026, 1983
FHWA, “
Dr i
ll
edShaf t:Cons truc t
ionPr oc edur esandDes ignMet hods ,”FHWA-IF-99-025, 1999
FHWA,“Ear thRet ai ningSy stems, ”Geot echni cal Engi neer i
ngCi rcularNo.2,FHWA-SA-96-
038, 1997
FHWA, “
Ex trapol ationofPile Capacity from Non-Fai ledLoadTes ts ,
”FHWA-RD-99-170, 1999
FHWA,“Geosy nthet icDesi gnandConst ructionGui delines, ”FHWA-HI-95-038, 1995
FHWA,“Geot echni calI nst rument ation,”FHWA-HI-98-034, 1998
FHWA,“Gr oundAnchor sandAnchor edSy st ems, ”Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 4,
FHWA-IF-99-015, 1999
FHWA,“Gr oundI mpr ov ementTec hni calSummar ies,”Vols. 1 and 2, FHWA-SA-98-086R
FHWA,“HighwayandSl opeMai ntenanceandSl i
deRest orati
onWor kshopManual ,”FHWA-
RT-88-042, 1988
FHWA,“ Manualf orDesi gnandConst ructionMoni tori
ngofSoi lNai lWal l
s,”FHWA-SA-96-
069, 1998
FHWA,“Manual onDesi gnandConst ructi
onofDr ivenPi l
eFoundat ions, ”FHWA-HI- 97-013
and 14, 1996
FHWA,“ Mechani cal l
ySt abi l
ized Ear th Wal lsand Rei nforced Soi lSl opes–Design and
Construct ion, ”FHWA-SA-96-071, 1996
FHWA,“Mi cropi l
eDesi gnandConst r
uct i
onGui delines, ”FHWA-SA-97-070, 2000
FHWA,“Per manentGr oundAnchor s,”FHWA-DP-68-1R, 1988
FHWA,“RockBl ast ingandOv er breakCont r
ol,”FHWA-HI-92-001, 1991
FHWA,“ Rockf allHaz ardMi tigat i
on Methods –Par t
icipant ’sWor kbook, ”SA-93-085, NHI
Course #13219, 1994
FHWA,“Rockf allHaz ardRat ingSy stem,Par ti
cipant ’sManual ,”FHWA-SA-93-057, 1993
FHWA,“ Shal l
owFoundat ions, ”Geot echni calEngi neer ingCi r
cul arNo.6,FHWA-IF-02-054,
2002
FHWA,“Soi lNai lWal lManual ,
”Geot echni cal Engi neer ingCi r
cul arNo.7,FHWA-SA-96-069
FHWA,“Soi lNai lWal lsGeot echni calEngi neer ingCi r
cul arNo.7, ”IF-02-054, 2002
FHWA,“Soi lNai li
ngFi eldI nspect or’sManual ,
”FHWA-SA-93-068, 1993.
FHWA,“ Soi l
sand Foundat i
onsWor kshop Ref erence Manual ,”FHWA-NHI-00-045, NHI
Course #132012, 2000
FHWA,“Stat icTest ingofDeepFoundat i
ons, ”FHWA-SA-91-042, 1991
FHWA,“TheOst er ber gCel l f
orLoadTest i
ngDr ill
edShaf tsandDr i
venPi l
es,”FHWA-SA-94-
035, 1995
FHWA,“ ThePer f
ormanceof Pile Driving Systems –Inspector’
sManual ,”FHWA-RD-86-160,
1986
FHWA, “TheTex asQuick-Load Method for Foundation Load Testing - UsersManual
,”FHWA-
IP-77-8, 1976
Goble,G.G.andRausche, Fr ank, GRLWEAP, “
Wav eEquat ionAnal y sisofPi
leFoundat
ions
,”
GRL & Associates, Inc., 1991
Keene,“SandDr ainConst ructionInspect i
onManual ,
”FHWAHi ghwayFocus,Vol ume10,
Number 3, 1978
NDOT,“
Standar
dSpeci
fi
cat
ionsf
orRoadandBr
idgeConst
ruct
ion,
”Sect
ion640
NDOT,“
Standar
dSpeci
fi
cat
ionsf
orRoadandBr
idgeConst
ruct
ion,
”Sect
ion643
NDOT,“ St
andar dSpeci f
icat
ionsforRoadandBr i
dgeConstr
uction,”Sect
ion660
OSHA,“ CodeofFeder alRegulati
ons,”Section29,OSHASt andar ds
Pi
leDy namics,Inc.
,“PileDrivi
ngAnal yzerManual ,
”PAK,Cleveland,Ohio,1997
TRB, Dunnicli
ff
,John,“ GeotechnicalI
nstrumentati
on f
orMoni tori
ngField Perf
ormance,”
NCHRP Synthesis 89, 1993
TRB,“Guidet oEarthworkConst ructi
on:StateoftheArtReport
,”TRBRepor tNo.8,ISBN0-
309-04957-1, 1990.
TRB,“Landslides:I
nv esti
gati
onandMi ti
gation,Speci
alReport247, ”I
SBN 0-309-06151-2,
1996

CHAPTER 14
MAINTENANCE PHASE

MAINTENANCE PHASE 14-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE ......................................................................................................... 1
2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
3. RESPONDING TO MAINTENANCE REQUESTS AND EMERGENCIES ......... 1
4. RESEARCHING HISTORIC DATA.................................................................... 2
5. MONITORING GEOTECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ......................................... 3
6. ROCKFALL HAZARD RATINGS OF HIGHWAY SLOPES................................ 3
7. MITIGATION OF SLOPE FAILURES AND LANDSLIDES................................. 4
8. REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 5

MAINTENANCE PHASE 14-1
1. PURPOSE
Maintenance staff may contact Geotechnical Engineers regarding specific problems

and when in need of immediate assistance. Monitoring of problem conditions may include
field evaluations, documentation, and instrumentation. Recommendations should be
provided when problem conditions are significant or when Maintenance staff has plans to
make repairs.
2. INTRODUCTION
Typically, potential maintenance problems include roadway settlement/distortion,

swelling ground, slope erosion, slope failures, rock slope degradation, rockfall hazards, and
groundwater seepage. In addition, damage could occur to constructed items such as
subdrains, horizontal drains, ground anchors, and wall systems. Earthquakes, heavy
precipitation, fires and floods are causes of hazards and damage to facilities. Man-made
hazards include vehicular damage to walls and foundations and geotechnical
instrumentation. Some existing constructed items may need occasional maintenance, such
as flushing and surging horizontal drains and unplugging subdrain discharge pipes. When
requested, Geotechnical Engineers should visit the site to observe and document the
occurring problems. By evaluating the problem areas, Geotechnical Engineers may decide
to monitor the problems, recommend interim mitigation measures (within available
Maintenance budget), or recommend a standard stabilization method (which could require
new project funding and placement on the State Transportation Improvement Plan). The
involved District Engineer evaluates the options.
3. RESPONDING TO MAINTENANCE REQUESTS AND EMERGENCIES
Generally, it is more cost effective to respond to maintenance requests than to

emergencies. Working with Maintenance staff to investigate problem areas before they
become emergencies assists to identify the cause of the problem and plan for an
appropriate repair. Geologic conditions can result in hazardous conditions at or near
roadways. However, impending geologic hazards could be difficult to identify
by Maintenance staff. Geotechnical Engineers should evaluate the geologic conditions and
potential hazards and provide recommendations regarding the relative risks that road users
may face, as well as Maintenance staff that may be working in close proximity. In
performing the site evaluation, Geotechnical Engineers are cautioned to follow safety
practices for their own protection as well as others involved. (Refer to Department
guidelines and OSHA.)
In geotechnical site problems, typically Geotechnical Engineers are requested to
assess potential hazards and risks. In situations that could imperil the public, warnings may
need to be provided and local road users and property owners notified. In extremely

hazardous situations, road closure may be required. In responding to such public safety
issues, consult with the Principal Geotechnical Engineer, and the area Maintenance
Foreman or Supervisor.
Depending on the maintenance cost of a problem and the availability of funds,
Geotechnical Engineers may be asked to recommend interim solutions or“ band-aid”
mitigations rather than more permanent solutions. When responding to maintenance
emergencies, a rapid response is often necessary to ensure public safety and maintain the
integrity of the roadway. As maintenance repairs proceed, on site inspection and assistance
should be provided to identify differing conditions and make field adjustments as required.
Innovative and experimental mitigations may be appropriate, especially if they fit within
budget constraints. Removal of slide debris from a roadway or ditch is often done to restore
road service, but could cause additional slope distress and failures. Short-term options to a
variety of maintenance problems could include surface water control/diversion, draining of
trapped water, slope modifications (flatter slopes or benched slopes), rock inlays, berms,
horizontal drains, dewatering wells, fabric walls and gabion walls (MSE), soldier pile and
sheetpile walls, pin piles, pavement patching, bio-remediation (seeding, willow wattles, etc.),
interim buttresses, injection or jet-grouting, scaling, preliminary rock bolts/bars and beams to
pin rock that is on the verge of toppling, and unloading a slope to slow slide movements until
a permanent solution is constructed. Sometimes these solutions are implemented without
complete engineering analyses in order to provide a rapid response; however, Geotechnical
Engineers must explain the uncertainties and risks to the decision-makers and follow
through with thorough analyses to determine whether the implemented measures are
adequate and whether additional or different measures would need to be included.
Sometimes the interim solutions are implemented to address immediate concerns,
and are followed later by permanent solutions if greater funding becomes available and
Plans can be prepared. Frequently, interim repairs are relied upon much longer than initially
intended. Therefore, before recommending an interim or experimental solution,
Geotechnical Engineers should consider the drawbacks related to the measure becoming
permanent. Geotechnical Engineers should document and keep records of events regarding
maintenance issues. With adequate risk/consequence evaluations, the Maintenance
Division will be in a position to consider the relative advantages of each option when making
decisions on how to proceed. In order to secure funding, for a maintenance project, typically,
justification for need of mitigation is required. Larger projects typically need to be submitted
for construction consideration.
4. RESEARCHING HISTORIC DATA
Although timeliness is important, Geotechnical Engineers should use available

resources as time permits to identify the true cause of problems. Geotechnical Engineers
should ask Maintenance staff for their experience in the area, consult geology publications,

and examine air photos (stereo pairs), research Department files for historic data, hazards,
and prior projects. Geotechnical Engineers should review any available relevant
Geotechnical Reports, instrumentation memorandums/data, and any notes to see if any
unknown or unanticipated conditions were encountered or any unusual methods were used
in construction of the facility.
Information sources and suggestions are described in the referenced manuals for
various types of hazards. When responding to a rockfall hazard, Geotechnical Engineers
should ask Maintenance staff how often rockfall events occur, where it comes to rest, how
much material is typical for a single event, and whether it is comprised of individual blocks or
a volume of numerous pieces.
Occasionally Geotechnical Engineers are involved in evaluating existing structure
foundations for new loading conditions. These typically occur as part of a seismic or scour
vulnerability assessment. An important part of the assessment is the type, depth, and
condition of the structure foundation. The sources for this information may be as-built
drawings, construction records, and Plans for the structure.
5. MONITORING GEOTECHNICAL PERFORMANCE
By regularly monitoring problem areas, Geotechnical Engineers can often reduce the
uncertainties involved in the design of mitigation measures and permanent stabilizations.
Instrumentation could be as complicated as extensometers and slope inclinometers or as
simple as survey points. Regardless of the complexity of the monitoring program,
Geotechnical Engineers should place and secure instruments as needed to survive for the
duration of the intended monitoring period. For example, placing PK nails in pavement as
survey points would not be a good choice where snow is plowed or pavement repairs may
occur during the monitoring period. Existing structures that are potentially sensitive to
vibrations or movement should be monitored. It may also be desirable to monitor
groundwater level changes, settlement, heave, and/or lateral displacement of the roadway
and structures.
6. ROCKFALL HAZARD RATINGS OF HIGHWAY SLOPES
Rockfall potential is inherent along roadways in mountainous terrain. Rockfall

originates from both natural and man-made slopes because of geologic processes. The
Rockfall Hazard Rating System (RHRS) is a rock slope management tool for quantifying the
potential hazard a rock slope poses to users. The Department has implemented the RHRS.
The RHRS database is valuable to the Department because, when fully implemented and
maintained, it contains historical slope performance and quantifies the rockfall potential to
provide a rational basis for determining project priorities.
The six steps in the RHRS process are summarized below:
 Slope Inventory (creating a geographic database of rockfall locations)

 Preliminary Rating (grouping the rockfall sites into three more manageably sized
categories: A, B, and C)
 Detailed Rating (numerically prioritizing the identified rockfall sites from the least to
the most hazardous)
 Preliminary Design and Cost Estimate (adding remediation information to the rockfall
database)
 Project Identification and Development (advancing rockfall correction projects to
construction)
 Annual Review and Update (maintaining the rockfall database)
Detai
l
softheRHRS andt hepr ocedur
esi
nvolv
edaredescr i
bedi nt he“
FHWA
Rockf
allHazar
dRat
ingSy
stem Part
ici
pant’
sManual
”,FHWA-SA-93-057, 1993.
7. MITIGATION OF SLOPE FAILURES AND LANDSLIDES
Mitigation of slope failures and landslides that are not part of design and construction
contracts are often managed differently due to smaller funding sources and emergency
response timeframe. Feasible solutions might not be able to fully stabilize the problem, but
can be planned to reduce risk and maintenance. A source of guidance for maintenance-
level slides is FHWA publication “ Highway and Slope Maintenance and Slide Restoration
Wor kshopManual ,”FHWART-88-042, 1988.

8. REFERENCES
AASHTO,
“Inspect
ors’
Gui
def
orShot
cret
eRepai
rofBr
idges,
”TaskFor
ce37Repor
t,1999.
FHWA,“
Ear
thRet
aini
ngSy
stems,
”Geot
echni
cal
Cir
cul
arNo.2,FHWA-SA-96-038, 1997.
FHWA,“
Geosy
nthet
icDesi
gnandConst
ruct
ionGui
del
i
nes,
”FHWA-HI-95-038, 1995.
FHWA,“
Geot
echni
calI
nst
rument
ati
on,
”FHWA-HI-98-034, 1998.
FHWA,“
Gr oundAnchorsandAnchor
edSy
stems,
”Geot
echni
cal
Cir
cul
arNo.4,FHWA-IF-
99-015, 1999.
FHWA,“
HighwayandSl opeMai
ntenanc
eandSl
i
deRes
tor
ati
onWor
kshopManual
,
”FHWA-
RT-88-042, 1988.
FHWA,“
Mechani cal
lySt
abi
li
zedEar t
hWal lsandRei
nfor
cedSoi
lSl
opes–Design and
Const
ruct
ion,”FHWA-SA-96-071, 1996.
FHWA,“
Rockfal
lHaz
ardMi
ti
gat
ionMet
hods–Par
ti
ci
pant
’sNot
ebook,
”FHWA-SA-93-085,
1993.
FHWA,“
Rockf
allHaz
ardRat
ingSy
stem,Par
ti
ci
pant
’sManual
,”FHWA-SA-93-057, 1993.
FHWA,“
Soi
l
sandFoundat ionsWor kshopRef
erenceManual
,”NHICour
seNo.132012,
OSHA, “
CodeofFeder
alRegul
ati
ons,
”Sect
ion29,OSHASt
andar
ds.
TRB, Dunnicliff, John,“

Geot
echni
calInst rumentat
ionf orMoni tor
ingFi
eldPer
for
mance,
”
NCHRP Synthesis 89, Transportation Research Board, 1993.
TRB,“
Landsli
des:I
nvest
igat
ionandMi
ti
gat
ion,
”Speci
alRepor
t247,I
SBN0-309-06151-2,
1996.

GLOSSARY G-1
ACCELEROMETERS –An electronic measuring device that is attached to a structural

member to measure and record accelerations, typically used with Pile Driving Analyzer to
measure the stress wave induced by pile driving equipment.
ALLUVIUM –Unconsolidated and poorly sorted sediments deposited by a river or stream.
The deposited sediments typically range from silt to gravel-size but can include boulders.
The size of the material deposited is dependent on the speed at which the water is flowing.
The more rapidly the water is flowing the larger the material transported.
ASSIGNED SHIFT–The hours and times the employee is regularly scheduled to work.
AUGER –A screw-like boring tool used to explore relatively unconsolidated near-surface
materials.
BECKER PENETRATION TEST (BPT) – A test used to investigate coarse-grained
materials (gravel, cobbles) using an instrumented steel pipe pile.
BEDDING –Distinct layers of sediment or rock that may differ in a variety of ways from
adjacent layers. Bedding typically applies to sedimentary and pyroclastic rocks.
BORROS ANCHOR–A three-pronged mechanical anchor lowered into a borehole used to
secure the base of a settlement or heave monitoring instrument in soft soils.
BORROW –Material that is excavated on the project site or supplied by a Contractor for
earthwork or other construction applications.
CDL –Commer
cialDr
iver
’sLi
cense
CABLE LASHING –The use of anchored and tensioned cables to provide support for an
isolated potentially unstable rock.
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) –A simple penetration test developed to evaluate
the strength of road subgrades. In this test a plunger of standard area penetrates a soil
sample. The force required to cause the penetration is plotted against measured
penetration to determine the CBR value.
CANTILEVERED WALL –The most common type of conventional reinforced concrete
wall, where the wall stem is attached to a spread footing (or pile cap).
CEMENTATION –Bonding of grains by secondary minerals (e.g., calcite or iron oxide) or
degradation products (e.g., clay). Typically causes an increase in dry strength.
COLLUVIUM–Soil transported and deposited downslope by gravity, typically by landslides,
soil slumps, debris flows, downhill creep, etc. The material is generally poorly sorted and
tends to form hummocky terrain.
COLORADO ROCKFALL SIMULATION PROGRAM (CRSP) –A computer program used
to simulate rockfall events and provide information on rockfall trajectories and energies.
CONE PENETROMETER TEST (CPT) –An in situ test that produces a plot of resistance
with depth used to interpret the profile of subsurface materials.
02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures

GLOSSARY G-2
CONSULTANT –A firm, or professional, that has an expertise in specific disciplines that

can contract with the Department to perform services on behalf of the State.
CONTROLLED BLASTING –The use of closely spaced and lightly loaded blast holes to
produce a relatively undamaged, stable cut slope.
CORE RECOVERY –An index of rock quality calculated by the ratio of the length of core
recovered (rock/soil extracted in the core barrel) to the total core run length reported as a
percentage. Core recovery depends on drilling technique and speed, and equipment
quality, as well as rock characteristics and condition.
COUNTERBERM –A fill embankment placed at the toe of a marginally stable slope to
improve overall stability.
CONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED (CU) TEST –A flexible triaxial shear strength test used to
determine total or effective stress strength parameters. The specimen is consolidated
before shearing and is not allowed to drain during the test.
CREEP TESTS (SOIL NAILS AND ANCHORS) –Determines the long-term performance
characteristics of either soil nails or ground anchors, usually requires 1-8 hours to perform.
CROSSHOLE SONIC LOGGING –Method used to determine the integrity of drilled shafts
and slurry walls by use of down-hole measurements.
DEGREE OF INDURATION –A qualitative measurement of the hardening of a rock or rock
material by heat, pressure, or the introduction of cementing material, esp. the process by
which relatively consolidated rock is made harder or more compact. It can also indicate the
formation of hardpan by chemical action on a soil horizon.
DEGREE OF WEATHERING – A measurement of rock weathering based on an
established scale (see Table 9-18) used as a descriptor of rock and an indicator of rock
quality and strength. Weathering is the destructive process by which earthy and rocky
materials are changed in color, texture, composition, firmness or form by exposure to
atmospheric agent sneart heEar t
h’ssurface.Itcanl eadt othecompl etedi si
ntegr ati
onand
chemical decomposition of rock.
DEWATERING –The art of drawing down groundwater levels to enable construction and
improve slope stability.
DILATANCY –A qualitative descriptor of the movement of water in soil voids caused by
shearing or shaking; used as a soil characteristic in visual classification.
DISPERSION –The characteristic occurrence and amount of settlement or suspension of a
soil in water that can be used for visual classification. For example, clay remain suspended
in the water longer than silt or sand, which tends to settle faster leaving the water less
opaque or clear.
DRILLED SHAFTS –Deep reinforced concrete foundations constructed in a drilled hole to
a desired bearing level. The shaft borings are typically cased.

GLOSSARY G-3
DRY STRENGTH –A soil characteristic quantified by the pressure required to crush a dried
lump of soil. This characteristic may be used as part of a visual soil description.
DUTY STATION –Theempl
oyee’
sassi
gnedwor
klocat
ion.
DYNAMIC COMPACTION –A method of ground improvement that densifies subsurface
soils by dropping a heavy mass on the ground surface in a grid pattern.
DYNAMIC DRIVING ANALYSIS (WEAP) –Pile analysis performed before pile driving to
determine a suitable pile type, such as steel or concrete, and to evaluate the proposed
driving system.
DYNAMIC PILE TEST –Test performed while driving piles to evaluate the performance of
the pile driving system, calculate pile installation stresses, determine pile integrity, and
estimate static pile capacity.
EA –Engineering Authorization
EEO –Equal Employment Opportunity
EMBANKMENT EARTH PRESSURE CELLS –Devices installed within embankments to
determine the magnitude and direction of total stress.
ENTRY PERMITS –Formal permission documents to access private property.
EXTENSOMETER – Small diameter steel rods used to measure relative
displacements/deformations within a soil or rock mass. A typical extensometer consists of
a reference head at the collar of a drill hole, and one or more in-hole steel rods attached to
anchors at known depths within the ground.
EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENE (EPS) –A very low density (2 lbs/cu. ft.) material, used in
lightweight fill applications.
FACTOR OF SAFETY (FS) –The ratio of resisting to driving forces used to quantify the
margin of stability for various design applications, such as foundations, slope stability,
retaining walls, etc.
FAULTS –A break in the continuity of materials, where displacement has occurred. The
presence of gouge (pulverized rock), bedding offset, and/or slickensided surfaces
(commonly with mineral or clay coating) may be indicators of fault movement.
FILL –Soil or rock that has been added or placed at a location by human activity.
FMLA –Family Medical Leave Act
FOLIATION – A descriptive term common to metamorphic rocks for the structural or
textural appearance of the rock due to flattening or aligning of the constituent minerals.
GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT FILE –File containing the complete Geotechnical history of a
project
SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOILS (GS) –Ther
ati
oofamat
eri
al’
sdensi
tyt
othedensi
tyof
water.

GLOSSARY G-4
GRAVITY WALL –A wall that relies on mass for stability such as a bin, crib, or mass
concrete wall.
GROUND ACCELERATION – A material property used for seismic analysis that is
dependent on the earthquake recurrence interval and site conditions.
GROUND ANCHORS – Retaining wall support system consisting of anchors (steel
tendons, rods, etc.) placed in holes that penetrate competent geologic strata. The anchors
are grouted in place and then tensioned to the prescribed design load.
HORIZONTAL DRAINS –Drilled holes used to reduce groundwater pressures in soil or
rock slopes, or landslides.
HYDRAULIC FRACTURING TEST (HF) –A test used to directly measure the in situ lateral
stress state (Ko) in rock formations.
IGNEOUS ROCKS –Intrusive or extrusive rocks formed from cooled and solidified magma
or lava. Common igneous rock types include: granite, basalt, diorite, andesite, rhyolite, and
gabbro.
INCLINOMETER –Instruments used to monitor lateral movements below ground. This
instrument consists of four elements: 1) casing with internal guide grooves, 2) sensor (a
probe with wheels that fit the grooves in the casing), 3) control cable (signal wire and depth
measurement), and 4) a readout device (indicator). The change in casing profile over time
is used to determine the depth and rate of movement at the failure surface in a landslide.
INFILLING –The material separating the adjacent sides of a discontinuity in rock.
INTERCEPTOR DRAINS –Ditches or trench drains installed to collect surface water/runoff,
shallow groundwater, and/or springs in order to reduce infiltration into cut slopes or other
marginally stable areas.
IOWA STEPPED BLADE TEST (ISB) –A direct measure of the in situ lateral stress state
(Ko) in soils.
JACK/LOAD CELL SYSTEM – Static pile load testing equipment used to apply
compressive load to the pile and measure movements.
JET GROUTING –Method of ground stabilization that injects cement and water and mixes
t
hem wit
hinsi
tusoi
ltocr
eateanet wor kofst r
engt hened“ soil-cementcolumns.”
JOINT ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT (JRC) – The surface shape along a rock
discontinuity. The JRC can be visually approximated by comparing joint surfaces with
reference charts.
JOINT –A rock discontinuity where no displacement has occurred, often caused by tensile
stresses associated with rock cooling, removal of adjacent rock, or tectonic movements. A
repetitive pattern of more or less parallel joints is called a joint set.
KINEMATIC ANALYSIS – Evaluation of the capability of a rock block bounded by
discontinuities and a slope face to fail out of the slope without reference to forces involved.

GLOSSARY G-5
LARGE PENETRATION TEST (LPT) –A modification of the Standard Penetration Test,

which uses a larger diameter sampler for use in gravelly soils.
LIQUID LIMIT (LL) –The moisture content of a soil at the boundary between the liquid
and plastic states. Used in the classification of soils and the determination of the
plasticity index.
LIQUEFACTION –A problem condition that develops when pore water pressures are
suddenly increased to the extent that the effective shear strength approaches 0 and the soil
turns fluid.
LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR DESIGN (LRFD) –A design approach for structures
in which failure and serviceability conditions can be evaluated, considering the
uncertainties associated with loads and material resistances.
LOAD CELL – A transducer that converts force into a measurable electrical output.
Although there are many varieties of load cells, strain gage based load cells are the most
commonly used type.
MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALL (MSE WALL) –Gravity fill wall reinforced
with horizontal steel strips, geogrids, wire mesh, geosynthetic fabric or other material.
Many patented systems and a variety of facing options are available.
METAMORPHIC ROCK –A rock formed from igneous, sedimentary or other metamorphic
rocks by intense heat and pressure. Common metamorphic rock types include: slate,
schist, gneiss, quartzite, and marble.
MODULAR GRAVITY WALLS –Interlocking concrete, steel, or wood modules such as
gabions, bin walls, crib walls, concrete blocks, etc.
MSDS –Material Safety Data Sheets
NDOT –Nevada Department of Transportation
NON DESTRUCTIVE TECHNIQUES (NDT) –Measurement of in-place pile properties or
drilled shaft condition without damaging the member. NDT methods include geophysical
surveys, transient shock excitation, ground penetrating radar and cross-hole sonic logging.
NRS –Nevada Revised Statute
OBSERVATION WELL –A casing (commonly PVC) installed in borehole, which is slotted
or perforated in the depth range desired for groundwater measurement. Ideally, the water
level in the casing represents the average head of water acting on the perforated zone.
OBSERVATIONAL METHOD –The use of geotechnical observations and instrumentation
during construction to adjust designs to fit field conditions.

GLOSSARY G-6
ON-CALL AGREEMENT – A general agreement between the Department and a

Consultant that is executed periodically, normally every two years, for a specific discipline
of work. It does not contain any details about particular project work assignments, but does
include all necessary terms and conditions to bind the parties into a contractual
relationship. The agreement can be utilized by issuing a Task Order when the service of a
Consultant is needed.
ON-CALL CONSULTANT –A Consultant under contract to NDOT that can be issued Task
Orders to provide specific work.
OPEN WORK GRAVEL –A processed, poorly-graded, coarse gravel used for drainage
applications.
OSHA –Occupational Health and Safety Act.
OSTERBERG LOAD TEST –Jacking unit attached to the bottom of a pile or placed at the
base of a drilled shaft that applies pressure to measure foundation resistance.
PEAK GROUND ANCHOR –Method to develop forces necessary to stabilize structures
and landslides. Anchors can include helix, bar or strand types.
PERS –Publ
i
cEmpl
oyee’
sRet
ir
ementSy
stem.
PIEZOCONE PENETROMETER TEST (PQS) –The use of a Cone Penetrometer with a
piezometer at the tip to measure pore pressures generated during the test and to determine
the rate of pore pressure dissipation during consolidation.
PIEZOMETER –Instrument used to measure groundwater pressure (pore pressure) at the
elevation of the sensor.
PILE DRIVING ANALYZER (PDA) –System used to perform computations to analyze the
response of a pile to driving equipment, driving stresses, pile integrity and the pile capacity.
PILE INTEGRITY TESTER (PIT) – An NDT test that uses a hammer and recording
instrument to measure signal response of the pile to a low energy source (hammer).
PILE LOAD TEST –Tests in which either a tensile or compressive load is applied to
determine load/deflection relationships and to evaluate pile capacity.
PILES –Deep foundations that are either drilled or driven into place. Many types of
displacement and non-displacement piles exist, typically made of steel or concrete.
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) –A quantitative or qualitative property of a soil that describes its
response to changes in moisture content to create a soft and pliable consistency. Used for
identification and classification of soil.
PLASTIC LIMIT (PL) –The moisture content at the boundary between the plastic and
semi-solid states. Used in the classification of soils and the determination of the
plasticity index.

GLOSSARY G-7
POOR MAN’ SI NCLI NOMETER –A means of determining the approximate depth to the
slide failure surface by lowering a length of steel rod on a cable into a simple small
diameter plastic pipe (similar to an observation well). Distortion and bending of the pipe
caused by ground movements prevents the steel rod from passing.
PRECOMPRESSION –A ground improvement method used to compress the foundation
soil before constructing sensitive structures and pavements on soft ground. Pre-
compression in fine-grained soils can be accelerated by using vertical drainage systems,
such as sand or wick drains.
PRELOADING –See Surcharging.
PRESSUREMETER (PMT) –An in situ test used to measure the stress/strain properties of
soils by inflating a probe lowered into a borehole. The PMT provides a much more direct
measurements of soil compressibility and lateral stresses than other test methods such as
SPT or CPT.
PROOF TESTS (SOIL NAILS AND ANCHORS) – Test of soil nail or ground anchor
capacity by incrementally loading to 125% - 150% of the design load.
PUSHED-IN SPADE CELLS –A device used to directly measure the in situ lateral stress
state (Ko) in soils.
QTEST (UNCONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED, UU) – Triaxial shear strength test used
primarily in the calculation of immediate embankment stability during short-term
(quick-loading) conditions. During the test, the specimen is not permitted to change its
initial water content before or during shear. The results are total stress strength
parameters.
RTEST (CONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED, CU) –A flexible triaxial shear strength test used
to determine either total or effective stress strength parameters. In this test, the specimen
is allowed to consolidate before shearing, but during shear the sample is not allowed to
drain, maintaining the consolidated water content.
R-VALUE –A test used to determine subgrade strength and the ability of the soil to
resist lateral deformations when a vertical load is acted upon it.
REINFORCED SOIL SLOPES (RSS) – Embankments constructed with metal or
geosynthetic reinforcements to allow construction of steeper side slopes or to improve
slope stability.
RELICT ROCK STRUCTURE – Describes decomposed rock or residual soil that still
reveals the original texture of the crystals of the parent rock.
RESILIENT MODULUS (MR) –A test used to measure stress-deformation relationships of
subgrade materials.
RIGHT OF ENTRY –Permission to enter privately owned property.

GLOSSARY G-8
ROCK BOLTS –Tensioned steel bars installed in drilled holes to support isolated rock
blocks on a slope. Anchorage can be achieved by either mechanical or grouting methods.
ROCK BUTTRESS –The placement of a rock fill at the toe of a soil or rock slope to
improve stability. It is a measure commonly used to mitigate an existing landslide.
ROCK DOWELS –Untensioned steel bars used to add support to isolated rock blocks on a
slope. The term also refers to short steel shear pins grouted into drilled holes at the
leading edge of a rock slab to prevent sliding.
ROCKFALL HAZARD RATING SYSTEM (RHRS) –A technique for managing rock slopes
and quantifying the rockfall hazard adjacent to highways. The system provides a proactive,
rational way to prioritize spending of construction funds to mitigate rockfall hazards.
ROCK INLAY –Slope protection blanket, usually 2 to 10 feet thick, placed against an over-
excavated portion of a slope to replace weak surface soil.
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) –An index of rock fracturing based on the number
and frequency of fractures in core samples recovered while drilling. The RQD is used for
rock classification and characterization.
ROCK SLOPE FALLOUT/CATCHMENT AREA –An area located at the base of a rock
slope designed to capture and restrict rockfalls from reaching the roadway or other facility.
ROTARY DRILLING –The chief method of drilling deep wells. A drill bit grinds a hole in
the rock. Lubrication and cooling are provided by continuously circulating water or drilling
mud, which brings the well cuttings to the surface.
SAND DRAINS –A method to accelerate settlement by increasing the rate of drainage in
fine-grained, compressible strata by shortening the drainage path to a much more
permeable, small diameter column of sand.
SCALING – Removal of loose rock from slopes using either manual or mechanical
methods.
SCOUR –Erosion of river or stream bed or bank sediments that could undermine nearby
foundations. A significant concern for bridge applications.
SEDIMENTARY ROCKS –Rock formed by cementation or by pressure from overlying
sediments. Common sedimentary rock types include: conglomerate, breccia, sandstone,
siltstone, claystone, shale, limestone, chalk, and dolomite.
SEISMIC REFRACTION – A noninvasive subsurface exploration technique used to
interpret the layering of subsurface materials, which relies on the travel times of the seismic
waves as they pass through materials of increasing seismic velocity with depth.
SENSITIVITY –Sensitivity refers to the significant loss of strength when a fine-grained soil
is remolded.

GLOSSARY G-9
SERVICE LOAD DESIGN (SLD) – Foundation design that uses factor of safety
methodol
ogy appl
ied to ul
ti
mate bear
ing capacit
ies t
o det
ermi
ne “
all
owabl e beari
ng
essur
pr es.
”Alsorefer
redtoastheAll
owableStressDesignmet
hod(ASD).
SETTLEMENT PLATE – A simple platform and riser pipe that is placed within the
embankment. The top of the pipe is surveyed at various times during embankment
construction to determine the magnitude and time-rate of settlement.
SHAFT INSPECTION DEVICE (SID) –Sampling method (with camera) used to inspect the
bottom and side-walls of drilled shafts to evaluate the base and sidewall condition.
SHEAR KEY – A mitigation method for improving the shear resistance in landslides,
retaining walls and embankments.
SHEAR PLANE INDICATOR –A shear plane indicator consists of a plastic pipe installed in
abor
ehole,si
mil
art
oanobservat
ionwel l.AlsoSee“ PoorMan’ s”Inc l
inomet er.
SHEET PILE WALL –A wall formed with a continuous and interlocked line of steel sheet
piles that behave in a cantilevered manner. Tie-back anchors are sometimes added if the
wall height creates high structural moments in the sheets.
SHELBY TUBE –A thin-walled, push-tube sampler used to obtain undisturbed samples of
cohesive soils.
SHOTCRETE –The high-pressure application of concrete onto a soil or rock surface to
prevent erosion, sloughing, and raveling.
SHRINK/SWELL –The change (percent decrease or increase) in volume that occurs when
excavated earth materials are placed in a compacted or uncompacted embankment. Rock
materials tend to swell; soil materials tend to shrink.
SHRINKAGE LIMIT (SL) –A test performed on clay soils suspected of having swell
potential
. The testdet erminesthe l
i
mit
sofa soil
’stendencyt ol ose volume dur i
ng
decreases in moisture content.
SLICKENSIDES –A discontinuity between adjacent rock blocks that appears polished or
glossy, sometimes with linear markings showing evidence of the orientation of past
movement. Not all slickensides are caused by faulting. Slickensides can be caused by
deformation (i.e., folds, flows) or landsliding.
SLOPE MESH –Steel mesh (gabion or chain link) anchored at the crest of a slope that
drapes down the face of the slope to control the descent of rockfall.
SOIL NAIL WALL – Soil cut slope retaining system consisting of steel bars/tendons
installed in drilled holes and grouted in-place. Earth pressure near the face is transferred to
soil nails by a reinforced shotcrete facing. The final wall facing may consist of shotcrete or
concrete panels (precast or cast-in-place).
SPACING – The distance between individual joints or beds. Care must be taken to
distinguish between joints and mechanical breaks that are caused by handling or drilling.

GLOSSARY G-10
SPLIT-SPOON SAMPLER –A thick-walled, divided tube sampler used to obtain disturbed

soil samples and penetration rates during the Standard Penetration Test (SPT).
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) –A standardized soil sampling procedure in
which a 140-pound hammer is dropped 30 inches to drive a two-inch split-spoon sampler
18 inches. The number of blows (blow count) required to drive the sampler through the last
12 inches is correlated with the soil conditions.
STATNAMIC LOAD TEST –A test that uses pressure created by burned fuel to apply
either horizontal or vertical load to a pile or drilled shaft.
STONE COLUMNS – A ground improvement method that displaces and densifies
subsurface soil through vibration and replacement of displaced soil with free-draining
crushed stone. Installation increases overall shear strength and accelerates consolidation.
STRAIN GAUGES – Electronic measuring device attached to a structural element to
measure small compressive or tensile deformations over a set distance. Results are used
to calculate percent strain.
STRATIFICATION – The layering of rock units evidenced by changes in texture,
composition, age, fossil content or unique forms.
STRUCTURAL DISCONTINUITIES –Natural breaks within a rock mass such as joints,
bedding, faults, fractures or foliations.
SUBDRAINAGE – A technique used below pavements or embankments to remove
groundwater.
SURCHARGING –Placement of a temporary fill or other weight to accelerate settlement
prior to constructing a permanent facility, such as pavements or bridge abutments.
SURVEY HUBS –Stakes that are positioned in critical areas to monitor relative ground
surface movements using standard survey techniques.
T.P. –Transportation Policy.
TASK ORDERS –A document used to specifically describe all items of work agreed upon
between the Department and a Consultant for a particular project. Task Orders are
numbered and are sub parts of an On-Cal
lagreement.Anex ampl ewoul dbe“ TaskOr der
Number 5 of On-Call Agreement Number P063-07-089.
”
TELLTALE STAKES – St akes i
nst
all
ed al
ong a “
li
ne-of-si
ght
”used t
o make v
isual
evaluations of ground surface movements.
TEMPORARY DUTY STATION – A work location to which an employee is formally
transferred, in writing, for a period of time in excess of two weeks.
TERRACE DEPOSIT –Alluvial deposits found along the margin or above the level of a
stream channel marking a former water level. They are commonly composed of higher
energy deposits such as sand and gravel.

GLOSSARY G-11
TEST PITS –A pit dug with a shovel or backhoe to obtain bulk samples and to identify the
types and sequence of near surface materials.
THERMISTOR – Measures ambient or ground temperature using a calibrated gauge
consisting of two wires made of different materials that exhibit a predictable contraction or
expansion in response to a change in temperature.
TILTMETER –Tiltmeters use a server-accelerometer to measure the rotation of a surface
point on a critical slope or structure. The data is transferred to a readout device via a
control cable.
TIME DOMAIN REFLECTOMETRY (TDR) –A device used to determine the depth of a
landslide that relies on changes in electrical properties of a coaxial cable caused by
thinning/stretching at the failure surface as landslide movements proceed.
TOTAL STRESS CELLS (TSC) –A device used to directly measure the in situ lateral
stress state (Ko) in soils.
TOUGHNESS –A qualitative measurement used as a descriptor of a soil based on the way
a soil lump or ball breaks when in a moist state.
TRAVEL STATUS –Tempor aryassi
gnmentawayf
rom t
heempl
oyee’
sdut
yst
ati
on,whi
ch
does not require written transfer.
TREMIE TUBE –During the backfilling process, grout can be delivered to the bottom of a
borehole through a tube to prevent contamination, caving or bridging.
TRENCH DRAINS –A method of subdrainage to intercept, collect and remove shallow
groundwater.
UNCONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED (UU) – Triaxial shear strength test result used
primarily in the calculation of immediate embankment stability during short-term
(quick-loading) conditions. In this test, the specimen is not permitted to change its
initial water content before or during shear.
UNDERDRAIN BLANKET –A method to reduce the potential for groundwater to affect an
embankment by placing a free-draining rock layer on the foundation soil prior to placing fill.
VALUE ENGINEERING (VE) –An engineering process to re-examine project development
and decisions to evaluate if more efficient or less costly solutions could be incorporated.
VECTOR SUMS –Used to determine the overall direction of movement.
VERIFICATION TESTS –Performance test used to verify that constructed elements (such
as soil nails) meet design specifications. Generally sacrificial elements are loaded to 200%
of the design load.

GLOSSARY G-12
VIBRATING-WIRE PIEZOMETER OR STRAIN GAUGE –Electronic gauges that utilize the

frequency of a wire connected to a flexible diaphragm to measure strain or pressure. The
key principle is that the natural frequency of a vibrating wire constrained at both ends varies
with the square root of the tension in the wire. Changes in the tension of the wire indicate
corresponding changes in strain or pressure of the attached structural member.
VIBRATION MONITORING – Ground vibrations are monitored with an instrument
containing an oscillographic recording system, capable of measuring vertical, longitudinal
and transverse components of motion with respect to the source of vibration motion.
Commonly used in blasting or pile driving operations.
VIBROFLOATATION –A method of ground improvement that creates a vertical hole for
incorporating sand backfill (using a vibrating probe) to create denser conditions.
WEEP HOLES –Drain holes formed in cut slopes, walls or shotcreted surfaces to relieve
the buildup of groundwater pressure.
WICK DRAINS – Geosynthetic fabric and plastic core drains inserted into the soil to
increase subsurface soil drainage. Used to accelerate settlement to shorten construction
time. They are an alternative to sand drains.

Geo - PPM - Nevada Dot

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

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

Geo - PPM - Nevada Dot

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

i

GEOTECHNICAL POLICIES AND

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

This Geotechnical Section Manual is primarily designed to provide appropriate

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

MASTER TABLE OF CONTENTS

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

6. EXCEPTIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS

It is the responsibility of all Geotechnical Engineers to become familiar with the

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

3.3 Structural And Chemical Section

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

5.1 Geotechnical Reports

The recommendations for solution of anticipated construction problems are an area

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

Geotechnical Engineers must provide pertinent information regarding completed projects to

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

 Providing notes for Special Provisions

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

2-2: Organizational Chart –Materials Division

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

2-3: Entry Permit

Property Owner Date

Property Owner Date

Phone number and best time to call

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

2-4: New Hire Processing Documents Checklist

W-4 Form (2002)

Commercial Driver –“Al

“EmployeeAck nowl edgementofVal

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

26. FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 14

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

available. All equipment is to be cared for and maintained appropriately.

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

Finally, all correspondence should be processed in a timely manner.

 Principal Geotechnical Engineer, two copies

 Geotechnical Section Project file

 Personal file of the Geotechnical Engineer

The proper distribution of letters and memorandums is critical in achieving necessary

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

02/14/2005 NDOT Geotechnical Policies and Procedures Manual

information, to include accounting information, quantity, stock or model number, detailed