Study of Su Predicted by Pressuremeter Test
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 114, Issue 11
Abstract
There are at least five different methods for interpreting the results of field pressuremeter tests. Each of these methods yields different values of undrained shear strength when applied to the same pressuremeter test. A laboratory pressuremeter model was designed to simulate the pressuremeter test. Sedimented kaolinite samples were used for the laboratory model tests. These samples were consolidated to different values of the maximum vertical pressure and with overconsolidation ratios ranging from one to eight. For comparison purposes, two sets of ‐consolidated undrained triaxial tests, compression and extension, were carried out in the same range of the maximum vertical pressure and overconsolidation ratio. The range of variation of the undrained shear strength values computed for the same test by the different methods is very wide and increases with an increase in the overconsolidation ratio. A new method of interpreting the field pressuremeter test results is developed and presented. In this method, the effect of the vertical stress and the excess pore pressure are included for the determination of the undrained shear strength. The results of the new method coincide with that of the triaxial test with a maximum variation of
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Baguelin, F., et al. (1972). “Expansion of cylindrical probes in cohesive soils.” J. Soil Mech. and Found. Div., ASCE, 98(SM11), 1129–1142.
2.
Baguelin, F., Jezequel, J. F., and Shields, D. H. (1978). The pressuremeter and foundation engineering. Trans‐Tech. Publications, Clausthal, W. Germany.
3.
Carter, J. P., Randolph, M. F., and Wroth, C. P. (1979). “Stress and pore pressure changes in clay during and after the expansion of a cylindrical cavity.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech., 3(4), 305–322.
4.
Clough, G. W., and Denby, G. (1980). “Self‐boring pressuremeter study of San Francisco Bay bud.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 106(GT1), 45–63.
5.
Das, B. M. (1983). Advanced soils mechanics. Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York, N.Y.
6.
Denby, G., and Clough, G. W. (1980). “Self‐boring pressuremeter test in clay.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 106(GT12), 1369–1387.
7.
Gangopadhyay, C. R., and Nasr, N. N. (1986). “Interpretation of pressuremeter tests using laboratory simulated tests.” ASTM Special Technical Publication 950, American Society of Testing Materials, Philadelphia, Pa., 214–231.
8.
Hoffman, O., and Sachs, G. (1953). Introduction to the theory of plasticity for engineers. McGraw‐Hill, Inc., New York, N.Y.
9.
Jewell, R. J., Fahey, M., and Wroth, C. P. (1980). “Laboratory studies of the pressuremeter test in sand.” Geotechnique, 30(4), 507–531.
10.
Ladanyi, B. (1972). “In‐situ determination of undrained stress‐strain behavior and sensitive clays with the pressuremeter.” Can. Geotech. J., 9(3), 313–319.
11.
Lukas, G. L., and DeBussy, L. (1976). “Pressuremeter and laboratory test correlations for clays.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 102(GT9), 945–963.
12.
Marsland, A., and Randolph, M. F. (1976). “Comparisons of the results from pressuremeter tests and large in‐situ plate tests in London clay.” Geotechnique, 27(2), 217–143.
13.
Nasr, A. N. (1986). “A study on interpretation of pressuremeter test,” thesis presented to the Graduate School of Wayne State University, at Detroit, Mich., in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
14.
Palmer, A. C. (1972). “Undrained plane‐strain expansion of a cylindrical cavity in clay: a simple interpretation of the pressuremeter test.” Geotechnique, 22(3), 451–457.
15.
Prevost, J. H. (1979). “Undrained shear tests on clays.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 105(GT1), 14311–14334.
16.
Prevost, J. H., and Hoeg, K. (1975). “Analysis of pressuremeter in strain‐soft soil.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 101(GT8), 717–731.
17.
Schmertmann, J. H. (1975). “The measurement of in‐situ shear strength.” Proc. Conf. on In‐Situ Measurement of Soil Properties, ASCE, 2, 57–138.
18.
Schofield, A., and Wroth, P. (1968). Critical state soil mechanics. McGraw‐Hill Publishing Co., Ltd., London, England.
19.
Vaid, Y. P., and Campanella, R. G. (1974). “Triaxial and plane strain behavior of natural clay.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 100(GT3), 207–224.
20.
Wood, D. M., and Wroth, C. P. (1977). “Some laboratory experiments related to the results of pressuremeter tests.” Geotechnique, 27(2), 181–201.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 114 • Issue 11 • November 1988
Pages: 1209 - 1226
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 ASCE.
History
Published online: Nov 1, 1988
Published in print: Nov 1988
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.