DOCSLIB.ORG

Guide to Site Investigation (2017 Version)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guide to Site Investigation (2017 Version) Geoguide 2 Guide to Site Investigation Geotechnical Engineering Office Civil Engineering and Development Department The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Geoguide 2 Guide to Site Investigation Geotechnical Engineering Office Civil Engineering and Development Department The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 2 © The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region First published, September 1987 Reprinted, December 1990 Reprinted, December 1993 Reprinted, September 1996 Reprinted, October 2000 Continuously updated e-version, 18 December 2017 Prepared by: Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering and Development Department, Civil Engineering Building, 101 Princess Margaret Road, Homantin, Kowloon, Hong Kong. This Geoguide is a continuously updated version incorporating amendments issued since the Geoguide was last published. The continuously updated version is released in e-format only on the CEDD website. This Geoguide is to be cited as “GEO (2017). Guide to Site Investigation (Geoguide 2) (Continuously Updated E-Version released on 18 December 2017). Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering and Development Department, HKSAR Government, 349 p.” 3 Foreword This Geoguide presents a recommended standard of good practice for site investigation in Hong Kong, the need for which was formally recognized as early as July 1983 by the Subcommittee of the Building Authority Working Party on Geotechnical Regulations. In its format and content, the Geoguide follows closely the British Standard BS 5930 : 1981, Code of Practice for Site Investigations, but the recommendations in the British Standard have been adapted to suit local conditions and practices. It should be used in conjunction with the companion document, Guide to Rock and Soil Descriptions (Geoguide 3). These Geoguides expand upon, and largely replace, Chapter 2 of the Geotechnical Manual for Slopes. This Geoguide covers Sections l to 7 of BS 5930, while Section 8 is dealt with in Geoguide 3. It has been prepared in such a way that the organization and format of the British Standard have generally been preserved. Where portions of BS 5930 have been adopted in the text without significant amendment, this is clearly denoted by the use of an italic typeface. It should be noted that this Geoguide gives guidance on good site investigation practice and, as such, its recommendations are not mandatory. It is recognized that the practitioner will often need to use alternative methods. There will also be improvements in site investigation practice during the life of the document which will supersede some of its recommendations. The Geoguide was prepared in the Geotechnical Control Office (GCO) under the general direction of Mr J.B. Massey. The main contributors to the document were Dr A. Cipullo, Mr K.S. Smith and Mr D.R. Greenway, with significant contributions during the final stages of preparation from Dr P.L.R. Pang and Dr R.P. Martin. Many other members of the GCO made valuable suggestions and contributions. To ensure that the Geoguide would be considered a consensus document of the civil engineering profession in Hong Kong, a draft version was circulated widely for comment in early 1987 to contractors, consulting engineers and Government Departments. Many organizations and individuals made useful and constructive comments, which have been taken into account in finalizing the Geoguide, and their contributions are gratefully acknowledged. Practitioners are encouraged to comment at any time to the Geotechnical Control Office on the contents of this Geoguide, so that improvements can be made to future editions. E.W. Brand Principal Government Geotechnical Engineer September 1987 4 Contents Page No. Title Page 1 Foreword 3 Contents 4 Part I : Introduction 17 1. Scope 18 2. Terminology 20 Part II : General Considerations 21 3. Primary Objectives of Site Investigation 22 4. General Procedures 23 4.1 Extent and Sequence of Investigation 23 4.1.1 General 23 4.1.2 Adjacent Property 23 4.2 Desk Study 24 4.3 Site Reconnaissance 25 4.4 Detailed Examination and Special Studies 25 4.5 Construction and Performance Appraisal 25 4.6 Site Investigation for Tunnel Works 26 5. Earlier Uses of the Site 28 5.1 General 28 5.2 Tunnels 28 5.3 Mines and Quarries 28 5.4 Waste Tips 28 5.5 Other Earlier Uses 28 5.6 Ancient Monuments 29 6. Aerial Photographs 30 6.1 General 30 6.2 Topographic Maps and Aerial Photographic Imagery 30 5 Page No. 6.2.1 Map and Plan Scales 30 6.2.2 Aerial Photographic Imagery 30 6.2.3 Orthophoto Maps and Plans 31 6.3 Aerial Photograph Interpretation 31 6.3.1 Identification and Interpretation of Ground 31 Features 6.3.2 Examples of API in Hong Kong 32 Part III : Planning the Ground Investigation 33 7. Introduction to Ground Investigation 34 7.1 Objectives 34 7.2 Planning and Control 35 8. Types of Ground Investigation 37 8.1 Sites for New Works 37 8.2 Defects or Failures of Existing Features or Works 37 8.3 Safety of Existing Features and Works 38 8.3.1 Effect of New Works upon Existing Features and Works 38 8.3.2 Types of Effects 38 8.3.3 Procedure 39 8.4 Materials for Construction Purposes 39 9. Geological Mapping for Ground Investigation 41 10. Extent of the Ground Investigation 42 10.1 General 42 10.2 Character and Variability of the Ground 42 10.3 Nature of the Project 43 10.3.1 General 43 10.3.2 Slope and Retaining Wall Construction 43 10.3.3 Foundations for Structures 43 10.4 Preliminary Investigation 43 10.5 Location 44 6 Page No. 10.6 Spacing 44 10.7 Depth of Exploration 45 10.7.1 General 45 10.7.2 Foundations for Structures 45 10.7.3 Embankments 47 10.7.4 Cut Slopes 47 10.7.5 Pavements 47 10.7.6 Pipelines 47 10.7.7 Marine Works 48 10.8 Specific Guidance for Silt- and Clay-rich Layers of Rock Cut 48 Slopes 10.9 Specific Guidance for Tunnel Works 50 10.9.1 Preliminary Design Stage 50 10.9.2 Detailed Design Stage 51 11. Selection of Ground Investigation Methods 53 11.1 General 53 11.2 Site Considerations 53 12. Effect of Ground Conditions on Investigation Methods 55 12.1 General 55 12.2 Granular Soils Containing Boulders, Cobbles or Gravel 55 12.3 Granular Soils 56 12.4 Intermediate Soils 57 12.5 Very Soft to Soft Cohesive Soils 57 12.6 Firm to Stiff Cohesive Soils 57 12.7 Cohesive Soils Containing Boulders, Cobbles or Gravel 58 12.8 Fill 58 12.9 Rock 59 12.10 Soils Derived from Insitu Rock Weathering 59 12.11 Discontinuities 60 12.12 Cavities 61 7 Page No. 13. Aggressive Ground and Groundwater 62 13.1 General 62 13.2 Investigation of Potential Deterioration of Concrete 62 13.3 Investigation of Potential Corrosion of Steel 62 13.4 Investigation of Fill Containing Industrial Wastes 63 14. Ground Investigations over Water 64 14.1 General 64 14.2 Stages and Platforms 65 14.3 Floating Craft 65 14.4 Working between Tide Levels 66 14.5 Locating Borehole Positions 66 14.6 Determination of Reduced Levels 66 14.7 Drilling, Sampling and Testing 67 15. Personnel for Ground Investigation 68 15.1 General 68 15.2 Planning and Direction 68 15.3 Supervision in the Field 68 15.4 Logging and Description of Ground Conditions 69 15.5 Laboratory Testing 70 15.6 Specialist Advice 70 15.7 Interpretation 70 15.8 Operatives 70 16. Review during Construction 72 16.1 General 72 16.2 Purpose 72 16.3 Information Required 73 16.3.1 Soil and Rock 73 16.3.2 Water 73 16.4 Instrumentation 73 16.5 Tunnel Works 73 8 Page No. Part IV : Ground Investigation Methods 75 17. Introduction to Ground Investigation Methods 76 18. Excavations and Boreholes 77 18.1 Shallow Trial Pits and Slope Surface Stripping 77 18.2 Deep Trial Pits and Caissons 78 18.3 Headings or Adits 78 18.4 Hand Auger Boring 78 18.5 Light Cable Percussion Boring 79 18.6 Mechanical Augers 79 18.7 Rotary Open Hole Drilling and Rotary Core Drilling 79 18.7.1 General 79 18.7.2 Flushing Medium 80 18.7.3 Inclined Drilling 81 18.8 Wash Boring and Other Methods 82 18.8.1 Wash Boring 82 18.8.2 Other Methods of Boring 82 18.9 Backfilling Excavations and Boreholes 83 19. Sampling the Ground 84 19.1 General 84 19.2 Sample Quality 85 19.3 Disturbed Samples from Boring Tools or Excavating 85 Equipment 19.4 Open-tube Samplers 86 19.4.1 Principles of Design 86 19.4.2 Sampling Procedure 87 19.4.3 Thin-walled Samplers 88 19.4.4 General Purpose 100 mm Diameter Open-tube Sampler 88 19.4.5 Split Barrel Standard Penetration Test Sampler 89 19.5 Thin-walled Stationary Piston Sampler 89 19.6 Continuous Soil Sampling 89 9 Page No. 19.6.1 General 89 19.6.2 The Delft Continuous Sampler 90 19.7 Sand Samplers 90 19.8 Rotary Core Samples 90 19.9 Block Samples 92 19.10 Handling and Labelling of Samples 92 19.10.1 General 92 19.10.2 Labelling 93 19.10.3 Disturbed Samples of Soil and Hand Specimens of Rock 93 19.10.4 Samples Taken with a Tube Sampler 94 19.10.5 Rotary Core Extrusion and Preservation 95 19.10.6 Block Samples 96 20. Groundwater 97 20.1 General 97 20.2 Methods of Determining Groundwater Pressures 98 20.2.1 Response Time 98 20.2.2 Observations in Boreholes and Excavations 98 20.2.3 Standpipe Piezometers 99 20.2.4 Hydraulic Piezometers 99 20.2.5 Electrical Piezometers 100 20.2.6 Pneumatic Piezometers 100 20.2.7 Installation of Piezometers 101 20.2.8 Varying Groundwater Pressures 102 20.2.9 Soil Suction 103 20.3 Groundwater Samples 103 21.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geotechnical Investigations
    GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GUIDELINES VERSION 1.2 3 UNOPS Geotechnical Investigations Version 1.2 - 2018 Version for digital distribution. If printed, spiral binding is recommended. © UNOPS 2018 Published and maintained by the Infrastructure and Project Management Group All rights reserved. The reproduction of any materials from this publication must be accompanied by a reference to the title and a website location of this publication. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNOPS concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. All reasonable precautions have been taken by UNOPS to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall UNOPS be liable for damages arising from its use. This publication may be reproduced for personal use but may not otherwise be reproduced or, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of UNOPS. Trademarks ISO® is a registered trademark of the International Organization for Standardization. Credits: Cover page photo: © Lesterman / Shutterstock.com Contact For more information or for providing feedback, contact: [email protected] UNOPS | Geotechnical Investigations Version 1.2 | December 2018 4 Acknowledgments PROJECT TEAM REVIEWERS AND CONTRIBUTORS The UNOPS Geotechnical The project team wishes to thank, on behalf of UNOPS, the following people who Investigations Guidelines is a provided valuable feedback during the different stages of development of this product of collective hard work and publication in its current revision.
    [Show full text]
  • Caulmert Limited
    CAULMERT LIMITED Engineering, Environmental & Planning Consultancy Services Corby Materials Recycling Facility Viridor Waste Management Ltd Concrete Slab for Glass Storage, Handling and Transfer Factual Ground Investigation Report Prepared by: Caulmert Limited 8 St Georges Court, Dairyhouse Lane, Altrincham, Cheshire, WA14 5UA Tel: 0161 9286886 Email: [email protected] Web: www.caulmert.com Doc ref: 2010.7.VWM.DEO.PAC.B0 Issue date: April 2015 APPROVAL RECORD Site: Corby Materials Recycling Facility Client: Viridor Waste Management Ltd Project Title: Concrete Slab for Glass Storage, Handling and Transfer Document Title: Factual Ground Investigation Report Document Ref: 2010.7.VWM.DEO.PAC.B0 Report Status: DRAFT Project Director: Allan Smith Project Manager: Chris Newton Caulmert Limited: 8 St Georges Court, Dairy House Lane, Altrincham, Cheshire, WA14 5UA Tel: 0161 9286886 Author Dominic Ostafijczuk Date April 2015 Reviewer Paul Clayden Date April 2015 Approved Chris Newton Date April 2015 DISCLAIMER This report has been prepared by Caulmert Limited with all reasonable skill, care and diligence in accordance with the instruction of the above named client and within the terms and conditions of the Contract with the Client. The report is for the sole use of the above named Client and Caulmert Limited shall not be held responsible for any use of the report or its content for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared and provided to the Client. Caulmert Limited accepts no responsibility of whatever nature to any third parties who may have been made aware of or have acted in the knowledge of the report or its contents. No part of this document may be copied or reproduced without the prior written approval of Caulmert Limited.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Classification of Soils and Rocks for The
    PIANC WG Report n° 144 - 2017 ABRIDGED FIELD VERSION CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS AND ROCKS FOR THE MARITIME DREDGING PROCESS The World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure PIANC The World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure PIANC REPORT N° 144 MARITIME NAVIGATION COMMISSION CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS AND ROCKS FOR THE MARITIME DREDGING PROCESS - ABRIDGED FIELD VERSION - 2017 PIANC has Technical Commissions concerned with inland waterways and ports (InCom), coastal and ocean waterways (including ports and harbours) (MarCom), environmental aspects (EnviCom) and sport and pleasure navigation (RecCom). This report has been produced by an international Working Group convened by the Maritime Navigation Commission (MarCom). Members of the Working Group represent several countries and are acknowledged experts in their profession. The objective of this report is to provide information and recommendations on good practice. Conformity is not obligatory and engineering judgement should be used in its application, especially in special circumstances. This report should be seen as an expert guidance and state-of-the-art on this particular subject. PIANC disclaims all responsibil- PIANC REPORT N° 144 ity in the event that this report should be presented as an official standard. MARITIME NAVIGATION COMMISSION PIANC Secrétariat Général Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20, B 3 B-1000 Bruxelles Belgique http://www.pianc.org VAT BE 408-287-945 ISBN 978-2-87223-247-5 © All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS Part 1: Introduction and Outline
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report ~ Fhwa-Ok-13-09 Odot Sp&R Item Number 2227
    APPLIED APPROACH SLAB SETTLEMENT RESEARCH, DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION FINAL REPORT ~ FHWA-OK-13-09 ODOT SP&R ITEM NUMBER 2227 Submitted to: John R. Bowman, P.E. Planning & Research Division Engineer Oklahoma Department of Transportation Submitted by: Gerald A. Miller, Kianoosh Hatami, Amy B. Cerato, Colin Osborne School of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science University of Oklahoma August 2013 TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. REPORT NO. 2. GOVERNMENT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NO. FHWA-OK-13-09 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE Applied Approach Slab Settlement Research, August 2013 Design/Construction 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT Gerald A. Miller, Kianoosh Hatami, Amy Cerato, Colin Osborne 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO. University of Oklahoma School of Civil Engineering and Environmental 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. Science ODOT SP&R Item Number 2227 202 West Boyd Street, Room 334 Norman, OK 73019 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED Oklahoma Department of Transportation Final Report Planning and Research Division From September 2010 – December 2012 200 N.E. 21st Street, Room 3A7 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE Oklahoma City, OK 73105 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Click here to enter text. 16. ABSTRACT Approach embankment settlement is a pervasive problem in Oklahoma and many other states. The bump and/or abrupt slope change poses a danger to traffic and can cause increased dynamic loads on the bridge. Frequent and costly maintenance may be needed or extensive repair and reconstruction may be required in extreme cases. Research critically investigated the design and construction methods in Oklahoma to reveal causes and solutions to the bridge approach settlement problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Tunnels in Swelling Ground
    Marco Barla Tunnels in Swelling Ground SIMULATION OF 3D STRESS PATHS BY TRIAXIAL LABORATORY TESTING Dottorato di Ricerca in Ingegneria Geotecnica Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Milano Università degli Studi di Genova Università degli Studi di Padova Dottorato di Ricerca in Ingegneria Geotecnica (XII ciclo) Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Milano Università degli Studi di Genova Università degli Studi di Padova November 1999 TUNNELS IN SWELLING GROUND SIMULATION OF 3D STRESS PATHS BY TRIAXIAL LABORATORY TESTING ………………………. Marco Barla Author ……………………….………. ………...….…………… ....…….………………… Prof. Michele Jamiolkowski Prof. Giovanni Barla Prof. Diego Lo Presti Supervisors ……………………….. Prof. Renato Lancellotta Head of the Ph.D. Programme in Geotechnical Engineering “Peace cannot be kept by force, it can only be achieved by understanding.” Albert Einstein SAN DONATO TUNNEL (FLORENCE, ITALY), 1986 SARMENTO TUNNEL (SINNI, ITALY), 1997 ABSTRACT I Abstract The present thesis is to contribute to the understanding of the swelling behaviour of tunnels with a major interest being placed on the stress and deformation response in the near vicinity of the advancing face, i.e. in three dimensional conditions. Following the introduction of the most recent developments, mostly based on contributions of the International Society for Rock Mechanics, the research examines the stress distribution around a circular tunnel by means of numerical methods. According to different stress conditions and stress-strain laws for the ground, the stress history of typical points around the tunnel (sidewalls, crown and invert) is described with the stress path method (Lambe 1967). This allows one to evidence how the three dimensional analyses results are necessary to describe the ground behaviour. In particular, it can be observed that the excavation is accompanied by a continuous variation of the mean normal stress even for an isotropic initial state of stress.
    [Show full text]
  • Nash Flood Wall
    A1 N RAILWAY EMBANKMENT EXISTING DRAINAGE DITCH AT 0.35m TOE OF RAILWAY EMBANKMENT 8.000mAOD FALL EXPOSED CONCRETE WALL SURFACE TO HAVE A FAIR WORKED FINISH REINFORCED CONCRETE PLEASE REFER TO FLOOD WALL KEY PLAN A ARBORICULTURAL DRAWINGS SCALE 1:10,000 FOR DETAILS OF TREE REMOVAL FLOOD SIDE DRY SIDE AND TPZ'S IF APPROPRIATE (APPROX. NORTH FACING) GENERAL NOTES: 0.5m DIAMETER PIPE RIP RAP STONE LAYER TO BE THROUGH WALL TO MAINTAIN INSTALLED ON SOUTHERN 2.7m 1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL FLOOD SIDE OF RETAINING DRAINAGE DITCH SIDE OF RETAINING WALL WALL FOR EROSION CONTROL OTHER DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT B DOCUMENTS. NOTIFY THE PROJECT MANAGER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 5M WORKING SPACE TO REAR 5.65mAOD 2. ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLMETERS AND ALL LEVELS IN METERS ABOVE ORDNANCE DATUM UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. B 3. DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. Trial Pit PROPOSED EARTHWORK RAMPING AROUND TOE OF WALL TO SCREEN 5.000mAOD 0.4m VISUAL APPEARANCE C RIP RAP STONE LAYER TO BE INSTALLED 500mm Ø OPENING IN RETAINING \\global\europe\Cardiff\Jobs\274000\274580-00\4 Internal Project Data\4-30 Drawings\4-31 Issue drawings\274580-ARP-XX-XX-DR-CX-3400.dwg ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE OPENING WALL AT THIS LOCATION TO 1.2m 1.3m TO PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL MAINTAIN FLOW IN DRAINAGE DITCH Trial Pit C SECTIONS LEGEND: Trial Pit SECTION B-B EXISTING GROUND LEVELS (WALL SECTION) 1:25 FLOOD WALL UPSTAND A FLOOD WALL FOUNDATION Post PLAN LEGEND: RAISED SLUDGE 10M WORKING SPACE TO FRONT OF WALL PLANNING APPLICATION BOUNDARY BEDS FOR CABIN, ACCESS PARKING, TURNING AND MATERIALS STORAGE PROPOSED GROUND RAISING TIE INTO EXISTING EMBANKMENT FLOOD SIDE DRY SIDE (APPROX.
    [Show full text]
  • Slope Stability
    Slope stability Causes of instability Mechanics of slopes Analysis of translational slip Analysis of rotational slip Site investigation Remedial measures Soil or rock masses with sloping surfaces, either natural or constructed, are subject to forces associated with gravity and seepage which cause instability. Resistance to failure is derived mainly from a combination of slope geometry and the shear strength of the soil or rock itself. The different types of instability can be characterised by spatial considerations, particle size and speed of movement. One of the simplest methods of classification is that proposed by Varnes in 1978: I. Falls II. Topples III. Slides rotational and translational IV. Lateral spreads V. Flows in Bedrock and in Soils VI. Complex Falls In which the mass in motion travels most of the distance through the air. Falls include: free fall, movement by leaps and bounds, and rolling of fragments of bedrock or soil. Topples Toppling occurs as movement due to forces that cause an over-turning moment about a pivot point below the centre of gravity of the unit. If unchecked it will result in a fall or slide. The potential for toppling can be identified using the graphical construction on a stereonet. The stereonet allows the spatial distribution of discontinuities to be presented alongside the slope surface. On a stereoplot toppling is indicated by a concentration of poles "in front" of the slope's great circle and within ± 30º of the direction of true dip. Lateral Spreads Lateral spreads are disturbed lateral extension movements in a fractured mass. Two subgroups are identified: A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Glacial Origins of Relict 'Pingos'
    Annals of Glaciology The glacial origins of relict ‘pingos’, Wales, UK Neil Ross1 , Peter Brabham2 and Charles Harris2 1School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK and 2School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK Paper Abstract Cite this article: Ross N, Brabham P, Harris C Ramparted depressions (doughnut-shaped debris-cored ridges with peat- and/or sediment-filled (2020). The glacial origins of relict ‘pingos’, central basins) are commonly perceived to represent the relict collapsed forms of permafrost – Wales, UK. Annals of Glaciology 1 13. https:// ground-ice mounds (i.e. pingos or lithalsas). In Wales, UK, ramparted depressions of Late doi.org/10.1017/aog.2019.40 Pleistocene age have been widely attributed to permafrost-related processes. However, a variety Received: 28 June 2019 of alternative glacial origins for these enigmatic landforms are also consistent with the available geo- Revised: 6 November 2019 logical and geomorphological evidence, although previous studies have barely considered such Accepted: 7 November 2019 alternative processes of formation. From detailed geophysical, sedimentological and remote-sensing Key words: studies at two field sites, we demonstrate that: (i) the wastage of stagnating glacier ice is a viable alter- glacial geology; permafrost; pingo; near native explanation for the formation of ramparted depressions in Wales; (ii) the glacial geomorph- surface geophysics; stagnant ice; Quaternary ology and geology of these landforms is analogous
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Shear Strength in Cohesive Soils with Special Reference to Swedish Practice and Experience
    Information 3 Evaluatian of shear strength in cohesive soils with special reference to Swedish practice and experience ROLF LARSSON ULF BERGDAHL LEIF ERIKSSON STATENS GEOTEKNISKA INSTITUT EVALUATlON OF SHEAR STRENGTH IN COHE8­ IVE SOILS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO SWE­ DISH PRACTICE AND EXPERIENCE In this publication, information is given on how different test results and empirical experience can be weighted and combined to give the best possible estimation of the shear strength proper­ ties in cohesive soils. The procedure described has evolved during the continuing work at SGI as research results and practical experience from the Institute as weil as others have been obtained and taken into con­ sideration. The publication describes how the Institute cur­ rently proceeds in the evaluation of shear strength in cohesive soils. The intention has aiso been to bring about a more unified and objective proce­ dure t han that has been used up to now. Valuable views on this work have been given by colleagues in and outside the Institute. Linköping November 1984 Rolf Larsson Ulf Bergdahl Leif Eriksson CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 2 DEFINITIONs AND SYMBOLS 3 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH IN NORMALLY CONSOLIDATED 4 AND SLIGHTLY OVERCONSOLIDATED SOILS eorrection of values of undrained shear strength 4 obtained by vane shear tests and fall cone tests Estimatian of shear strength values on the basis 5 of Hansbo's relation Estimatian of corrected shear strengths on the 6 basis of results from other soundings Estimatian of corrected shear strengths on the 6 basis
    [Show full text]
  • 1.6 Consolidation Test
    Engineering Properties of Soils 1-24 1.6 Consolidation Test 1.6.1 General - Consolidation can be defined as a dissipation process of excess pore pressure induced by applied load or change of boundary conditions. - It is a time dependent behavior of soil deformation. ⇒ Significant in saturated clayey soils. ⇒ Factors on consolidation time 1) Degree of saturation 2) Coefficient of permeability of soil 3) Viscosity and compressibility of the pore fluid 4) Length of path the expelled pore fluid must take to find equilibrium. 5) Compressibility of soils - Consolidation test determines parameters for the time dependent behavior of soils. 1) The amount of deformation ⇒ (Primary) Consolidation settlement (+ Secondary compression settlement) 2) Rate of consolidation (i.e. Consolidation time) SNU Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering Lab. Engineering Properties of Soils 1-25 - Idealized stages in primary consolidation - Consolidation theory follows Darcy’s law. v = ki = k(Δh/L) ⇒ Δt = L/v = L/{ k(Δh/L)} = L2/(kΔh) ⇒ Doubling L requires 4 times for consolidation. ⇒ Consolidation rate is getting slower with decreasing Δh. SNU Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering Lab. Engineering Properties of Soils 1-26 1.6.2 Consolidation Test - Simulates 1-dimensional state (flow and deformation) ⇒ Using a circular metal ring confining the sample. ⇒ (Possible to measure the pore pressure during consolidation and to perform the permeability tests in the oedometer.) SNU Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering Lab. Engineering Properties of Soils 1-27 - Sample size : 20 – 40 mm thickness(H) and 45 – 113 mm diameter(D). D/H > 2.5 and D < {(Tube sample) - 6mm.} (Commonly used sample size : D = 63.5mm, H= 25.4mm) - Ring-to-soil friction problems: ⇒ Should be reduced by limiting sample thickness, spraying the inner ring wall with tefron powder or using a tefron-lined ring.
    [Show full text]
  • Geotechnical Characterization of Structurally Complex Formations: Advanced Laboratory Testing
    Geotechnical Characterization of Structurally Complex Formations: Advanced Laboratory Testing Mariacristina Bonini Research Assistant Politecnico di Torino (Italy) e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT This paper focuses on specific issues of advanced laboratory testing of Structurally Complex Formations. The former introductory paper on this subject showed that standard laboratory testing may clarify a few aspects related to swelling potential, water content and hydraulic conductivity and determination of the strength parameters by means of triaxial tests. It is was soon evident that further research was required to characterize the relationship between the behavior of the natural and reconstituted soil and to improve comprehension of the role which structure played in the setting up of the testing procedure and interpretation of results. The outcomes of this survey are described in the following. KEYWORDS: Structurally Complex Formations; Reconstituted Specimens; Advanced Laboratory Testing; Oedometer Tests; Triaxial Tests. INTRODUCTION The rock materials considered in this study pertain to the Raticosa and Osteria tunnels, pertaining to the Italian High Speed Railway project between Bologna and Florence. The tunnels were partly excavated through the Chaotic Complex Tectonised Clay Shales (CCTCS) formation, soft rocks with complex structure subjected to time-dependent behavior. The laboratory specimens obtained from cubic samples taken at the tunnel face were subjected to a number of standard laboratory tests (e.g. classification, physical properties, mineralogical composition, swelling behavior, hydraulic conductivity, triaxial testing) devoted to interpret the complex mechanical behavior of the CCTCS Formation. An introductory paper (Bonini 2012) collected the results of the standard laboratory testing (Bonini 2003) which evidenced the presence of a structure made of clay fragments of various shapes and sizes, spaced by a net of fissures and planes of different roughness and orientation.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocean Drilling Program Scientific Results Volume
    Rea, D.K., Basov, I.A., Scholl, D.W., and Allan, J.F. (Eds.), 1995 Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, Vol. 145 36. SUBMARINE SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ON THE DETROIT SEAMOUNT, SITE 8831 John A. Roberts,2 Anne K. Rutledge,3 and Aarno T. Kotilainen4 ABSTRACT Diatom- and clay-rich sediments sampled from the Detroit Seamount were tested to determine the parameters required for slope stability analysis. Consolidation tests performed show that the sediments are apparently overconsolidated in the upper 24 m of the section and become normally consolidated at greater depths. Triaxial testing shows that the major sediment types (clays and diatom oozes) cannot be distinguished on the basis of normalized strength parameters. The results of a slope stability analysis using the infinite slope theory indicate that the sediments are unstable when subjected to earthquake ground accelerations in excess of 7% to 8% of gravity on the flanks and 10% to 11 % on the top of the seamount. Examination of stress path plots show that most of the samples tested exhibit a nondisintegrative nature, that would be expected to produce slump blocks or slides. INTRODUCTION Consolidation Tests The study of the stability of submarine slopes has increased in One-dimensional consolidation tests were performed using Soil interest to marine geologists over the past 20 yr, as the extent of down- Testing Inc. oedometers at Texas A&M University. The samples (cut to slope mass movement processes has become clear. Very large slope a size of 6.35 cm diameter by 2.54 cm high) were laterally constrained failures have been documented from around the world (e.g., Lewis, while being incrementally loaded up to 800 kPa and then rebounded to 1971;Embley, 1976; Masson et al., 1992).
    [Show full text]