Explorer les Livres électroniques

Catégories

Explorer les Livres audio

Catégories

Explorer les Magazines

Catégories

Explorer les Documents

Catégories

0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)

888 vues7 pages© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)

888 vues7 pagesAttribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

2, 181±187

TAO - W E I F E N G

Results of previous studies on using the fall-cone test to Les reÂsultats des eÂtudes preÂceÂdentes sur l'utilisation du test

determine the plastic limit of soils show that further re- du coÃte de chute pour deÂterminer la limite plastique des sols

search is warranted. The present investigation devotes itself indiquent de des travaux de recherche additionnels sont

to modi®cation of the specimen preparation technique, ex- neÂcessaires. Les recherches actuelles sont consacreÂes aÁ la

amination of the relationship between depth of cone penetra- modi®cation de la technique de preÂparation des speÂcimens, aÁ

tion and water content, and estimation of the plastic limit l'examen des rapports entre profondeur de peÂneÂtration du

using the penetration depth against water content relation- coÃne et teneur en eau, et l'estimation de la limite plastique

ship. Specimen rings are made and used to replace the en utilisant le rapport profondeur de peÂneÂtration du coÃne/

specimen cup so as to facilitate the preparation of speci- teneur en eau. On a produit des bagues speÂcimen que l'on a

mens. Data of 26 soils, covering a wide range of liquid limits utiliseÂes pour remplacer le gobelet speÂcimen, a®n de faciliter

from 30% to 526%, show that the logarithm of depth of la preÂparation des speÂcimens. Des donneÂes sur vingt-six sols,

cone penetration against logarithm of water content relation- portant sur une large plage de limites liquides de 30% aÁ

ship is linear. Therefore, a linear equation with two soil- 526%, indiquent que le rapport entre l'algorithme de la

dependent parameters is developed for estimation of the profondeur de peÂneÂtration du coÃne et celui de la teneur en

plastic limit. For a soil, the value of the soil-dependent eau est lineÂaire. En conseÂquence, on produit une eÂquation

parameters can be determined from as little as four fall- lineÂaire avex deux parameÁtres fonction du sol pour l'estima-

cone tests and substituted into the equation to estimate the tion de la limite plastique. Pour un certain sol, on est en

plastic limit. The computed plastic limits of the soils ana- mesure de deÂterminer la valeur de parameÁtres tributaires du

lysed are within 0´8±1´2, with an average value of 1, times sol avec un nombre d'essais au coÃne pouvant eÃtre infeÂrieur aÁ

the measured plastic limits. The effects of strain rate and quatre, que l'on peut substituer ensuite dans l'eÂquation pour

undrained strength ratio on the estimation of the plastic eÂvaluer la limite plastique. Les limites plastiques calculeÂes

limit are evaluated and found to be limited. pour les sols analyseÂs sont comprises entre 0´8 at 1´2, avec

une valeur moyenne de 1, multiplieÂes par les limites plas-

tiques mesureÂes. On a eÂvalueÂ les effets de la vitesse de

deÂformation et du rapport de reÂsistance non draineÂ sur

l'evaluation de la limite plastique et ils se sont aveÂreÂs

KEYWORDS: clays; laboratory tests; plasticity; shear strength. limiteÂs.

INTRODUCTION contents near the plastic limit, the relationship between logarith-

The use of laboratory cone penetrometers to determine the mic depth of fall-cone penetration and water content has been

liquid limit of soils has been studied in detail (e.g. Terzaghi, used to estimate the value of the plastic limit. Based on the

1927; Sowers et al., 1959; Karlsson, 1961; Sherwood & Riley, critical state theory, Wood & Wroth (1978) and Belviso et al.

1970; Littleton & Farmilo, 1977; Garneau & Le Bihan, 1977; (1985) suggest that the logarithmic depth of penetration against

Wroth & Wood, 1978; Houlsby, 1982; Wood, 1982; Whyte, water content relationship is linear between the liquid limit and

1983; Wood, 1985; Wasti & Bezirci, 1986; Leroueil & Le the plastic limit, and the slope of this relationship is equal to

Bihan, 1996; Farrell et al., 1997). The British Standard (BS one half of the plasticity index. Then, the plastic limit can be

1377:pt2: 1990), the Swedish Standard (SS 027120:1990) and computed by subtracting the plasticity index from the liquid

the Canadian Standard (CAN/BNQ 2501-092-M-86) have in- limit. However, the relationship has been found to be highly

cluded the determination of the liquid limit by using fall-cones. non-linear for a number of soils (e.g. Karlsson, 1961; Wood,

On the other hand, only a few studies (e.g. Wood & Wroth, 1985; Wasti & Bezirci, 1986; Harison, 1988).

1978; Belviso et al., 1985; Harison, 1988) have focused on the The penetration depth corresponding to the liquid limit is

determination of the plastic limit by the fall-cone test. 20 mm for the 308 British cone. Hansbo (1957) proposes the

It was generally recognized that fall-cone tests were dif®cult following equation:

to perform at water contents near the plastic limit, since soil W

samples were stiff and dif®cult to mix (Wood & Wroth, 1978; su k (1)

Whyte, 1983; Wasti & Bezirci, 1986; Harison, 1988; Stone & d2

Phan, 1996). Furthermore, in BS 1377 (1990), Test 2(A) where su is undrained shear strength, k is a constant, W is the

(British Standards Institution, 1990), the test procedure for weight of cone, and d is depth of penetration. It can be seen

determination of liquid limit includes the following: `The re- from equation (1) that undrained shear strength is inversely

mixed soil shall be pushed into the cup with a palette knife, proportional to the square of the depth of penetration. The data

taking care not to trap air.' The process of placing the soil into of Skempton & Northey (1953) show that the undrained shear

the specimen cup is in¯uenced by individual judgement and is strength at the plastic limit is about 100 times the undrained

probably the most dif®cult step in the fall-cone test. In fact, shear strength at the liquid limit. Thus, it can be computed from

pushing soil into the cup may not be good practice, since the equation (1) that the depth of cone penetration at the plastic

soil is repeatedly loaded, although this effect is dif®cult to limit is about 2 mm for the 308 cone. Harison (1988) suggests a

evaluate. This problem becomes more serious as the water bilinear model indicating that the relationship is linear for

content of the soil sample decreases. depths of penetration either greater or smaller than 14 mm.

Since it is dif®cult to carry out the fall-cone test at water Therefore, the plastic limit can be estimated by extrapolating a

linear relationship obtained from two to three fall-cone tests

Manuscript received 7 July 1999; revised manuscript accepted 4 with depth of penetration smaller than 14 mm. However, with

October 1999. the general lack of suf®cient published information on the

Discussion on this paper closes 4 August 2000; for further details see p. ii. logarithmic depth of cone penetration against water content

Chung Yuan Christian University. relationship in between depths of penetration of 14 cm and

181

182 FENG

2 mm, a question as to whether the bilinear model is appro- sharpened end facing downwards, as shown in Fig. 1(c). Initial

priate still remains. levelling of the ring can be done with a hand level and a small

In summary, it appears that further studies are warranted in glass plate placed at the top of the ring. After the initial

the following areas: levelling, the ring was pushed downwards by hand until it

reached the glass plate, as shown in Fig. 1(d). A wire-saw and a

(a) modi®cation on the specimen preparation technique

straight edge were then used to remove excess soil from the top

(b) examination of the shape of the relationship between

of the ring, so as to obtain a ¯at surface, as shown in Fig. 1(e).

logarithm depth of cone penetration and water content,

Lastly, the soil specimen together with the small glass plate was

especially for depths of penetration less than 14 mm

transferred to the base stand below the fall-cone for the penetra-

(c) estimation of the plastic limit by using the depth of

tion test.

penetration and water content relationship.

Samples of kaolin, bentonite and three natural soils were

This paper presents the results of a study focused on the above- prepared at water contents slightly higher than the liquid limits

mentioned areas. and then stored overnight before testing. For each soil, the fall-

cone tests were carried out starting from water contents slightly

higher than the liquid limit to water contents as near the plastic

TEST PROGRAMME limit as possible. After each fall-cone test, the water content of

A set of fall-cone apparatus (made by Wykeham Farrance, the soil specimen was measured. The remaining soil sample

Inc.), with a 308 cone (weight 80 g) was used during this was spread over the large glass plate for air-drying for the next

investigation. As dif®culties in specimen preparation are primar- fall-cone test. The time required for proper air-drying of the

ily associated with placing soil samples into the specimen cup, soil sample depends on a number of factors, such as the contact

the cup was modi®ed during this investigation by removing the areas between the soil and the air, the plasticity of the soil, etc.

bottom of the cup, keeping the diameter and the height of the In order to de®ne better the penetration depth against water

cup unchanged. As a result, the specimen cup became a speci- content relationship, the fall-cone tests were carried out at as

men ring. Furthermore, one end of the ring was sharpened, as many water contents as possible.

shown in Fig. 1(a), to facilitate penetration into soil samples. In

fact, a stainless steel ring 55 mm in diameter, 40 mm in height

and 2 mm in thickness was used for depths of cone penetration RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEPTH OF CONE PENETRATION AND

in between 25 mm and 10 mm. For depths of cone penetration WATER CONTENT

less than 10 mm, a shallower stainless steel ring (20 mm in Relationships between logarithmic depth of cone penetration

height) was used so that smaller amounts of soil were needed and water content for the soils tested during the present in-

for the tests. vestigation are shown in Figs 2±6. It can be seen from these

The specimen preparation procedure started with mixing the ®gures that these relationships are all non-linear in nature and

soil sample thoroughly on a large square glass plate (30 3 the minimum depths of penetration are as low as 3´1 mm.

30 cm) at water contents slightly higher than the liquid limit. A Incidentially, these data can be used to check Harison's (1988)

single batch of the mixed soil sample was then transferred to a bilinear model. In order to quantify the non-linearity of the

small square glass plate (10 3 10 cm) to make a soil mound, as curves, secant slopes of the curves between 14 mm penetration

shown in Fig. 1(b), with lateral and vertical dimensions greater and 5 mm penetration for Sinjun clay, Taipei clay, Panama clay,

than the dimensions of the specimen ring used. Two spatulas kaolin and bentonite are ®rst determined as 19%, 22%, 73%,

were used to mix the soil samples and to make the soil mound, 23% and 360%, respectively. In contrast, the tangent slopes of

to reduce the possibility of trapping air within the specimen. the curves at 5 mm penetration for Sinjun clay, Taipei clay,

Furthermore, only small pressures are exerted on the soil, so Panama clay, kaolin and bentonite are 12%, 9%, 55%, 13% and

that their effect on the test result may be ignored. The specimen 225%, respectively. It is thus apparent from these data that the

ring was then placed on top of the soil mound with the use of the bilinear model to estimate the value of the plastic

limit will result in an underestimation.

Specimen ring

ESTIMATION OF THE PLASTIC LIMIT

D In order to estimate the plastic limits, the non-linear regres-

H

sion curves shown in Figs 2±6 may be manually extended with

(a) 60

Sinjun clay

50

PL(conventional) = 19%

Soil Soil

Water content: %

40

10 cm Glass plate

(b) (c)

30

20

Soil Soil

(d) (e) 10

30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1

Fig. 1. Side views of (a) the specimen ring, (b) the soil mound and Penetration depth: mm

the glass plate, (c) the specimen ring placed on top of the soil

mound, (d) the specimen ring fully penetrating the soil mound, and Fig. 2. Logarithm of penetration depth against water content rela-

(e) excess soil removed from the top of the specimen ring tionship for Sinjun clay

FALL-CONE PENETRATION AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIP OF CLAYS 183

60 500

50 400

PL(conventional) = 24% PL(conventional) = 37%

Water content: %

Water content: %

40 300

30 200

20 100

10 0

30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1 30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1

Penetration depth: mm Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 3. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content Fig. 6. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content

rela-tionship for Taipei clay rela-tionship for bentonite

2 mm. Results of the estimations show that the plastic limits of

Sinjun clay, Taipei clay, Panama clay, kaolin and bentonite are

Panama clay 20%, 25%, 61%, 26% and 38%, respectively, which agree well

120

PL(conventional) = 59% with the plastic limit values obtained from conventional tests,

given in Figs 2±6. It may be noted from Figs 2±6 that 8±14

data points are shown for each soil. The large number of data

Water content: %

in engineering practice to carry out such a large amount of tests

90

for estimation of the plastic limit.

On the other hand, the data shown in Figs 2±6 can be re-

plotted on log±log scales, as shown in Fig. 7. Similar plots can

be made using the data of Skempton & Northey (1953),

60 Karlsson (1961), Wood, (1985), Wasti & Bezirci (1986) and

Harison (1988), as shown in Figs 8±12, respectively. Based on

the data shown in Figs 7±12, a linear model is proposed for the

log±log relationship and is expressed by the following equation:

30

30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1 log w log c m log d (2)

Penetration depth: mm

where w is water content, c is water content at d 1 mm, m is

Fig. 4. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content

rela-tionship for Panama clay the slope of the linear relationship, and d is the depth of cone

penetration. Values of c and m obtained from linear regression

analyses of the data presented in Figs 7±12 are listed in Table 1.

1000

60

Kaolin

50

PL(conventional) = 25%

Bentonite

Water content: %

Water content: %

40

100

Panama clay

30

Kaolin

20 Taipei clay

Sinjun clay

10 10

30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1 30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1

Penetration depth: mm Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 5. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content Fig. 7. Log±log plot of penetration depth plotted against water

rela-tionship for kaolin content rela-tionships for the ®ve soils tested

184 FENG

It may be noted from Table 1 that the bentonite samples have

liquid limits of about 423% and 526%, the kaolin samples have

liquid limits of 50% and 59%, and the other 22 natural soils

show a wide range of liquid limits ranging from 30% to 125%.

Both of the bentonite specimens gave the same m value of 1,

which is much larger than the m values from 0´216 to 0´569 for

the natural soils. A large value of m indicates a higher rate of

decrease in water content with decreasing depth of penetration.

A large value of c implies a large value of the plastic limit. The

Panama clay specimen tested has an organic content of 12%,

which is probably responsible for its large c value of 47%. The c

values of the Bandung clays are rather high, that is 30±39%;

probably these soils are organic to some degree, but information

on the composition of these soils is absent.

The existence of the linear relationship as expressed by

equation (2) is useful for estimation of the plastic limit. For a

soil, c and m can be determined from results of as few as four

fall-cone tests with depths of penetration evenly distributed

between 25 mm and 3 mm. Equation (3) can then be used to

compute the plastic limit:

Fig. 8. Log±log plot of penetration depth plotted against water PL c(2) m (3)

content rela-tionships according to the data of Skempton & Northey

(1953) For example, the c and m values as listed in Table 1 and

equation (3) are used to compute the plastic limit values of the

26 soils. The computed plastic limits are compared with the

plastic limits determined by the conventional method, as shown

in Fig. 13. The dashed lines in Fig. 13 show that the computed

plastic limits are within 0´8±1´2 times the measured plastic

limits, with an average value of 1´0. The discrepancies between

the measured and the computed plastic limits may result from

several reasons, such as the undrained strength ratio of 100

adopted and problems associated with the conventional plastic

limit test.

The empirical ratio of undrained strength at the plastic limit

to undrained strength at the liquid limit is estimated from the

data of Skempton & Northey (1953) as 100. However, Whyte

(1982, 1983) suggests that the strength ratio derived from the

data of Skempton & Northey (1953) should be about 70.

Furthermore, the data of Karlsson (1961) indicate a range of the

strength ratio from 50 to 100 for some Swedish clay and a

strength ratio of about 200 for both a quick clay and a varved

clay. Now as equation (2) is developed, it is possible to examine

the effect of the strength ratio on the estimated plastic limit.

According to equation (1), strength ratios of 50, 100 and 200

correspond to depths of penetration of 2´8, 2 and 1´4 mm,

respectively. For the soils listed in Table 1, the corresponding

Fig. 9. Log±log plot of penetration depth plotted against water water contents are computed using both equation (2) and values

content rela-tionships according to the data of Karlsson (1961) of c and m, and the results are also shown in Table 1. It may

be concluded from Table 1 that, except for the bentonite, the

estimated plastic limits are affected by the strength ratio

assumption around 10±20%, which is consistent with the data

shown in Fig. 13. The bentonite probably has a strength ratio

slightly lower than 100, as the computed water content of 34%,

corresponding to depth of penetration of 2 mm, is slightly

smaller than the measured plastic limit of 37%.

The measured plastic limits shown in Fig. 13 were deter-

mined by the conventional plastic limit test, in which a soil

thread was rolled to 3 mm diameter before it crumbled on

rolling. The water content of the crumbled soil thread has been

de®ned as the plastic limit. However, the stress system applied

to the soil thread during rolling is highly complicated and is not

controlled. Whyte (1982) reported that the plastic limit of a clay

determined in different laboratories ranged from 19% to 39%,

with an average plastic limit of 23%. He further concluded that

the rolling thread test does not provide reliable and consistent

results for the plastic limit. Since the data shown in Fig. 13

come from at least four different groups of people and four

different laboratories, it is expected that some uncontrolled

factors during the conventional plastic limit test have played a

role in the discrepancies between the measured and the com-

puted plastic limits.

Fig. 10. Log±log plot of penetration depth plotted against water The fall-cone test is much more reliable than the conven-

content relationships according to the data of Wood (1985) tional plastic limit test. As can be seen in both Fig. 14 and

FALL-CONE PENETRATION AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIP OF CLAYS 185

content relationships according to the data of Wasti & Bezirci Fig. 12. Log±log plot of penetration depth plotted against water

(1986) content relationships according to the data of Harison (1988)

Table 1. Values of c and m parameters of clays and water contents computed from strength ratios of 50, 100 and 200

Soil LLCasagrande : % c: % m w1:4 : % w2 : % w2:8 : % w1:4 =w2 : w2:8 =w2 Reference

Sinjun clay 36 14 0´322 16 18 20 0´89 1´11 Present investigation

Taipei clay 43 17 0´322 19 21 24 0´90 1´14 Present investigation

Panama clay 125 47 0´321 52 59 66 0´88 1´12 Present investigation

Kaolin 50 20 0´301 22 25 27 0´88 1´08 Present investigation

Bentonite 423 17 1 24 34 48 0´71 1´41 Present investigation

Shellhaven clay 97 26 0´436 30 35 41 0´86 1´17 Skempton & Northey (1953)

London clay 73 21 0´410 24 28 32 0´86 1´14 Skempton & Northey (1953)

Horten clay 30 13 0´266 14 16 17 0´88 1´06 Skempton & Northey (1953)

Gosport clay 80 28 0´352 32 36 40 0´89 1´11 Skempton & Northey (1953)

Swedish clay 83 26 0´425 30 35 40 0´86 1´14 Karlsson (1961)

Swedish clay 70 25 0´360 28 32 36 0´88 1´13 Karlsson (1961)

Swedish clay 63 22 0´360 25 28 32 0´89 1´14 Karlsson (1961)

Swedish clay 54 21 0´308 23 26 29 0´88 1´12 Karlsson (1961)

Drammen clay 35 12 0´350 14 15 17 0´93 1´13 Wood (1985)

Kaolin 59 21 0´343 24 27 30 0´89 1´11 Wood (1985)

Gault clay 65 23 0´345 26 29 33 0´90 1´14 Wood (1985)

Bentonite 526 16 1 22 32 45 0´69 1´41 Wasti & Bezirci (1986)

Turkey soil 110 20 0´569 24 30 36 0´80 1´20 Wasti & Bezirci (1986)

Turkey soil 52 21 0´335 24 26 30 0´92 1´15 Wasti & Bezirci (1986)

Bandung clay 100 39 0´312 43 48 54 0´90 1´13 Harison (1988)

Bandung clay 86 31 0´341 35 39 44 0´90 1´13 Harison (1988)

Bandung clay 78 30 0´318 33 37 42 0´89 1´14 Harison (1988)

Bandung clay 72 30 0´292 33 37 41 0´89 1´11 Harison (1988)

Bandung clay 65 32 0´237 35 38 41 0´92 1´08 Harison (1988)

Bandung clay 63 30 0´239 33 35 38 0´94 1´09 Harison (1988)

Bandung clay 59 31 0´216 33 36 39 0´92 1´08 Harison (1988)

Table 2, both the logarithm of penetration depth against loga- be evaluated as follows. The volume of the portion of the 308

rithm of water content relationships and the (c, m) data of cone penetrating into the specimen can be computed using

kaolin obtained by ®ve persons demonstrate excellent repeat- equation (4):

ability of the fall-cone test. It is worthy of note that four of the

®ve persons had no previous experience with the fall-cone test V 0:075h3 (4)

and were taught only once how to run the test. It is clear from

the present investigation that mixing the soil specimen thor- where h is depth of penetration. A zone of in¯uence of the

oughly during preparation is one of the most important steps in cone penetration must be de®ned so that induced volumetric

the fall-cone test. strain can be determined. The in¯uence zone may be assumed

to have a conical shape having a height equal to the depth of

penetration and a diameter of three times the cone diameter

STRAIN RATE EFFECT (Houlsby, 1982). Then the volumetric strain induced by cone

It is generally known that the undrained shear strength of penetration is 11% and is independent of the depth of penetra-

saturated clays is a function of strain rate. Since the fall-cone tion. On the other hand, experience obtained during the present

test is in fact a strength test, the effect of strain rate, if any, on investigation showed that a penetration of 20 mm takes about

the test results must be evaluated. ®ve times as long as a penetration of 4 mm. Therefore, a ratio

In the absence of data on the time rate of cone penetration, of average strain rates between 20 mm and 4 mm of penetra-

an average strain rate for 20 mm and 4 mm of penetration may tions can be computed using equation (5):

186 FENG

on undrained shear strength is computed using equation (6) to

be 7% between 20 mm and 4 mm penetrations.

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions are based on data and analyses

presented in the previous paragraphs:

(a) The specimen preparation technique has been improved by

using specimen rings to hold the specimens. The process of

specimen preparation with the specimen ring is faster and

easier than that with a specimen cup, and it reduces the

chances of trapping air in the specimen. Furthermore, the

specimen ring is pushed into the soil, instead of pushing

soil into the specimen cup. For liquid limit determinations,

the specimen ring retained the dimensions of the specimen

cup. For depths of penetration less than 10 mm, a specimen

ring of 20 mm in height can be used so that less soil is

needed for the fall-cone test.

(b) The relationship between logarithmic depth of penetration

Fig. 13. Computed plastic limits plotted against measured plastic and water content in the range from the liquid limit to the

limits plastic limit is generally non-linear. The minimum depth of

penetration attainable with the specimen ring is about

100 3 mm. For the ®ve soils tested during the present investi-

gation, an attempt to extend the non-linear regression

curves from around 3 mm to 2 mm penetration gives a close

estimate of the plastic limits, though these non-linear curves

are de®ned by 8±14 data points. On the other hand, the

Kaolin

relationship between logarithmic depth of penetration and

logarithmic water content is linear. This relationship can be

Water content: %

penetration evenly distributed between 25 mm and 3 mm.

This makes the fall-cone test easier to perform to determine

the plastic limit.

(c) Based on the linear model of the relationship between

logarithmic depth of penetration and logarithmic water

content and an undrained strength ratio of 100, an equation

is derived for estimation of the plastic limit. This equation

includes two soil-dependent parameters which can be

determined from at least four fall-cone tests and substituted

10 into the equation to estimate the plastic limit. For the 26

30 20 10 7 5 3 2 1 soils analysed, the computed plastic limits are within 0´8±

Penetration depth: mm 1´2, with an average value of 1´0, times the measured plastic

limits. Factors such as the assumption of strength ratio of

Fig. 14. Log±log plot of penetration depth versus water content

relationships determined by ®ve persons for the repeatability study. 100 and problems associated with the conventional plastic

One person determines one relationship as represented by a limit test could have contributed to the discrepancies

regression line passing through points of the same symbol. between the computed and the measured plastic limits.

The plastic limits computed using the undrained strength

ratios of 50 and 200 are affected by 10±20% of the plastic

Table 2. Values of c and m for kaolin determined for the limits estimated using the undrained strength ratio of 100

repeatability study

for most of the soils analysed. The strain rate effect in the

Test PL (measured): c: % m PL (computed): % fall-cone test is small. For a variation in depth of

no. % penetration from 20 mm to 4 mm, the strain rate effect on

1 25 20 0´301 25 undrained strength is estimated as 7% for inorganic clays.

2 25 19 0´295 23

3 25 19 0´316 24

4 25 20 0´281 24

5 25 21 0´281 26 REFERENCES

Belviso, R., Ciampoli, S., Cotecchia, V. & Federico, A. (1985). Use of

the cone penetrometer to determine consistency limits. Ground

Engng 18, No. 5, 21±22.

å_ 4 t20 British Standards Institution (1990). Methods of test for soils for civil

5 (5)

å_ 20 t4 engineering purposes. British Standards Institution BS 1377. London.

Canadian Standards Association and Bureau de normalisation du Quebec

The effect of strain rate on undrained shear strength can then (1986). Soils-Determination of liquid limit by the Swedish fall cone

be computed by using equation (6): penetrometer method and determination of plastic limit. CAN=BNQ

2501-092-M-86.

Cá =Cc Farrell, E., Schuppener, B. & Wassing, B. (1997). ETC 5 fall-cone

su(4) ÿ su(20) å_ 4

(6) study. Ground Engng 30, No. 1, 33±36.

su(20) å_ 20 Garneau, R. & Le Bihan, J. P. (1977). Estimation of some properties of

Champlain clays with the Swedish fall-cone. Can. Geotech. J. 14,

where su is undrained shear strength, å_ is strain rate, cá is the No. 3, 571±581.

secondary compression index, and cc is the compression index Hansbo, S. (1957). A new approach to the determination of the shear

(Terzaghi et al., 1996). For example, the value of Cá =Cc can be strength of clay by the fall-cone test. R. Swedish Geotech. Inst.

taken as 0´04 for inorganic clays, and the effect of strain rate Proc. No. 14, 7±47.

FALL-CONE PENETRATION AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIP OF CLAYS 187

Harison, J. A. (1988). Using the BS cone penetrometer for the deter- Swedish Standards Commission (1990). Geotechnical tests ± cone liquid

mination of the plastic limits of soils. GeÂotechnique 38, No. 3, limit. Swedish Standards Commission, Stockholm, SS 027120.

433±438. Terzaghi, K. (1927). Determination of consistency of soils by means of

Houlsby, G. T. (1982). Theoretical analysis of the fall-cone test. GeÂo- penetration tests. Public Roads 7, No. 12, 240±247.

technique 32, No. 2, 111±118. Terzaghi, K., Peck, R. B. & Mesri, G. (1996). Soil mechanics in

Karlsson, R. (1961). Suggested improvements in the liquid limit test, engineering practice, 3rd edn. New York: Wiley.

with reference to ¯ow properties of remoulded clays. Proc. 5th Wasti, Y. & Bezirci, M. H. (1986). Determination of the consistency limits

ICSMFE 1, 171±184. of soils by the fall-cone test. Can. Geotech. J. 23, No. 2, 241±246.

Leroueil, S. & Le Bihan, J. P. (1996). Liquid limits and fall cones. Can. Whyte, I. L. (1982). Soil plasticity and strengthÐa new approach using

Geotech. J. 33, No. 5, 793±798. extrusion. Ground Engng 15, No. 1, 16±24.

Littleton, I. & Farmilo, M. (1977). Some observations on liquid limit Whyte, I. L. (1983). Cone penetrometer and liquid limit. GeÂotechnique

values. Ground Engng 10, No. 4, 39±40. 33, No. 1, 76±77.

Sherwood, P. T. & Riley, M. D. (1970). An investigation of a cone- Wood, D. M. (1982). Cone penetrometer and liquid limit. GeÂotechnique

penetrometer method for the determination of the liquid limit. 32, No. 2, 152±157.

GeÂotechnique 20, No. 2, 203±208. Wood, D. M. (1985). Some fall-cone tests. GeÂotechnique 35, No. 1,

Skempton, A. W. & Northey, R. D. (1953). The sensitivity of clays. 64±68.

GeÂotechnique 3, No. 1, 30±53. Wood, D. M. & Wroth, C. P. (1978). The use of the cone penetrometer

Sowers, G. F., Vesic, A. & Grandol®, M. (1959). Penetration tests for to determine the plastic limit of soils. Ground Engng 11, No. 3, 37.

liquid limit. Philadelphia ASTM, STP No. 254, 216±224. Wroth, C. P. & Wood, D. M. (1978). The correlation of index properties

Stone, K. J. L. & Phan, K. D. (1996). Cone penetration tests near the with some basic engineering properties of soils. Can. Geotech. J. 15,

plastic limit. GeÂotechnique 45, No. 1, 155±158. No. 2, 137±145.