Cone Penetration in Cemented Sands: Bearing Capacity Interpretation
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 119, Issue 12
Abstract
Two bearing‐capacity theories are used to predict cone‐penetration tip resistance and sleeve friction in weakly cemented sands. These theories use the rigid‐plastic assumption for stress‐deformation behavior of soils. Both theories provided good predictions of tip resistance when compared with experimental values obtained in limited penetration tests conducted in the laboratory. Laboratory tests were conducted on artificially cemented specimens of Monterey No. 0/30 sand prepared in rigid molds. A curing period of 14 days was used. The confinement was due only to the self‐weight, rendering very low confining stresses. Predicting sleeve friction with bearing‐capacity theories necessitated an estimate of the lateral earth pressures. The recorded sleeve‐friction values implied higher lateral pressures than the state of stress. Tip resistance and friction resistances predicted by these theories are used to propose a preliminary classification, identification, and analysis scheme for cemented sand deposits. It is necessary to evaluate the reliability of the proposed scheme at higher confining stresses in calibration chambers. In‐situ penetration tests in cemented deposits would be needed to assess the accuracy of the proposed scheme.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Acar, Y. B., and Tumay, M. T. (1986). “Strain field around cones in steady penetration.” J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 112(2), 207–213.
2.
Acar, Y. B., Durgunoglu, T., and Tumay, M. T. (1982). “Interface properties of sand.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 108(4), 648–654.
3.
Acar, Y. B., and El‐Tahir, E. A. (1986). “Low strain dynamic properties of artifically cemented sand.” J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 112(11), 1001–1015.
4.
Akili, W., and Nabil, M. A. A.‐J. (1988). “Cone penetration tests on artificially cemented sands.” Proc., 1st Int. Symp. on Penetration Testing, ISOPT‐1, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Vol. 2, 607–614.
5.
Bachus, R. C., Clough, G. W., Sitar, N., Shafi‐Rad, N., Crosby, J., and Kaboli, P. (1981). “Behavior of weakly cemented soil slopes under static and seismic loading conditions.” Rep. No. 51, Vol. II, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
6.
Brinch‐Hansen, J. (1961). “A general formula for bearing capacity.” Bull. No. 11, Danish Geotechnical Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark, 38–46.
7.
Durgunoglu, H. T., and Mitchell, J. K. (1973). “Static penetration resistance of soils.” Rep., Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
8.
Frydman, S. (1981). “Calcareous sands of the Israeli coastal plain, geotechnical properties, behavior and performance of calcareous soils.” Proc. Symp., ASTM, Philadelphia, Pa., 226–251.
9.
Janbu, N., and Senneset, K. (1974). “Effective stress interpretation of in‐situ static penetration tests.” Proc. European Symp. on Penetration Testing, ESOPT I, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Vol. 1.2, 479–488.
10.
Janbu, N. (1976). “Static bearing capacity of friction piles.” Proc., 6th European Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Vol. 1.2, 479–488.
11.
Rad, N. S. (1984). “Effect of cementation on penetration resistance of sand.” Final Rep. No. GE‐84/01, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, La.
12.
Rad, N. S., and Clough, G. W. (1982). “The influence of cementation on the static and dynamic behavior of sands.” Rep. No. 59, John A. Blume Earthquake Engrg. Ctr., Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.
13.
Rad, N. S., and Tumay, M. T. (1986). “Effect of cementation on penetration resistance of sand—a model study.” Geotech. Testing J., 9(3), 117–125.
14.
Rix, G., and Stokoe, K. (1991). “Correlation of initial tangent modulus and cone penetration resistance.” 1st Int. Symp. on Calibration Chamber Testing, Elsevier Science Publishing Co., New York, N.Y.
15.
Sitar, N. (1990). “Seismic response of steep slopes in weakly cemented sands and gravels.” Proc. H. Bolton Seed Memorial Symp., J. M. Duncan, ed., Vol. 2, 67–82.
16.
Senneset, K., Sandven, R., and Janbu, N. (1989). “The evaluation of soil parameters from piezocone tests.” Transp. Res. Record 1235, National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
17.
Senneset, K., and Janbu, N. (1985). “Shear strength parameter obtained from static cone penetration tests.” Strength testing of marine sediments: laboratory and insitu measurements; ASTM STP 883, R. C. Chaney and K. R. Demars, eds., ASTM, Philadelphia, Pa., 42–54.
18.
Senneset, K., Janbu, N., and Svano, G. (1982). “Strength and deformation parameters from cone penetration tests.” Proc., 2nd European Symp. on Penetration Testing, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 24–27.
19.
Terzaghi, K. (1943). Theoretical soil mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, New York, N.Y.
20.
Villet, W. C. B., and Mitchell, J. K. (1981). “Cone resistance, relative density and friction angle.” Special Publication on Cone Penetration Testing and Experience, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 178–208.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 119 • Issue 12 • December 1993
Pages: 1990 - 2002
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 27, 1991
Published online: Dec 1, 1993
Published in print: Dec 1993
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.