Effects of Disturbance on Undrained Strengths Interpreted from Pressuremeter Tests
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 126, Issue 12
Abstract
Although the cylindrical cavity expansion theory should provide a sound basis for obtaining the undrained shear strength of clays from pressuremeter tests, the interpreted strengths are often inconsistent with data measured in high-quality laboratory tests. This paper investigates how the pressuremeter results are affected by disturbances that inevitably occur during device installation. The installation of self-boring and displacement-type pressuremeters is simulated using strain path analyses, with realistic effective stress-strain-strength properties described by the MIT-E3 model. Derived strengths obtained from the simulated expansion of displacement-type pressuremeters tend to underestimate the in situ/cavity expansion strength by amounts that depend on the relative volume of soil displaced, the time delay prior to testing, and the initial overconsolidation ratio of the clay. Interpretation procedures using the simulated contraction curves give much more reliable estimates of the true undrained shear strength. The simulated disturbance effects of self boring lead to derived peak shear stresses that are significantly higher than the reference undrained shear strengths. This overestimate depends on the volume of soil removed during installation and is enhanced when the finite membrane length is included in the analyses. Self-boring pressuremeter data from a well-documented test site in Boston confirm the general character of the predicted pressuremeter stress-strain behavior. The theoretical analyses underestimate the peak strengths derived from self-boring pressuremeter (SBPM) expansion tests, but match closely the measured postpeak resistance in the strain range of 3–6% (saddle point condition). Saddle point strengths are similar in magnitude to the shear strengths measured in laboratory undrained triaxial compression tests at this site. The current predictions are not able to explain the very high shear strengths derived from the SBPM contraction curves.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Aubeny, C. P. ( 1992). “Rational interpretation of in situ tests in cohesive soils.” PhD thesis, Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
2.
Azzouz, A. S., Baligh, M. M., and Whittle, A. J. (1990). “The shaft resistance of piles in clay.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 116(2), 205–221.
3.
Baguelin, F., Jezequel, J. F., Mee, E. L., and Mehaute, A. L. (1972). “Expansion of cylindrical probes in cohesive soils.”J. Soil Mech. and Found. Div., ASCE, 98(11), 1129–1142.
4.
Baguelin, F., Jezequel, J. F., and Shields, D. H. ( 1978). The pressuremeter and foundation engineering.
5.
Baligh, M. M. (1985). “Strain path method.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 111(9), 1108–1136.
6.
Baligh, M. M. ( 1986a). “Undrained deep penetration: I. Shear stresses.” Géotechnique, London, 36(4), 471–485.
7.
Baligh, M. M. ( 1986b). “Undrained deep penetration: II. Pore pressures.” Géotechnique, London, 36(4), 487–501.
8.
Baligh, M. M., Azzouz, A. S., and Chin, C. T. (1987). “Disturbances due to `ideal' tube sampling.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 113(7), 739–757.
9.
Benôıt, J. ( 1991). “Self-boring pressuremeter testing—Central Artery (I-93)/Third Harbor Tunnel (I-90) project: Special test program, South Boston, Massachusetts.” Rep. Prepared for Haley & Aldrich.
10.
Benôıt, J., Atwood, M. J., Findlay, R. C., and Hilliard, B. D. ( 1995). “Evaluation of jetting insertion for the self-boring pressuremeter.” Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa, 32, 22–39.
11.
Benôıt, J., and Clough, G. W. (1986). “Self-boring pressuremeter tests in soft clay.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 112(1), 60–78.
12.
Briaud, J-L. ( 1992). The pressuremeter, Ashgate, Brookfield, Vt.
13.
Campanella, R. G. Howie, J. A., Hers, I., Sully, J. P., and Robertson, P. K. ( 1990). “Evaluation of the cone pressuremeter test in soft cohesive soils.” Pressuremeters, Institute of Civil Engineers, London, 125–135.
14.
Chin, C. T. ( 1986). “Open-ended pile penetration in saturated clays.” PhD thesis, Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
15.
Clough, G. W., Briaud, J. L., and Hughes, J. M. O. ( 1990). “The development of pressuremeter testing.” Pressuremeters, Institute of Civil Engineers, London, 25–45.
16.
Denby, G. M., and Clough, G. W. (1980). “Self-boring pressuremeter tests in clay.”J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 106(12), 1369–1387.
17.
Rep. Prepared for Mass. Hwy. Dept., Haley & Aldrich, Boston.
18.
Fyffe, S., Reid, W. M., and Summers, J. B. ( 1986). “The push-in pressuremeter: 5 years offshore experience.” The pressuremeter and its marine applications, ASTM STP 950, J-L. Briaud and J. M. E. Audibert, eds., West Conshohocken, Pa., 22–38.
19.
Ghionna, V. N., Jamiolkowski, M., and Lancelotta, R. ( 1982). “Characteristics of saturated clays as obtained from SBP tests.” Symp. on Pressuremeter and Its Marine Applications, 165–185.
20.
Gibson, R. E., and Anderson, W. F. ( 1961). “In-situ measurements of soil properties with the pressuremeter.” Civ. Engrg. and Public Works Rev., 56(658), 615–618.
21.
Henderson, G., Smith, P. D. K., and St. John, H. D. ( 1980). “The development of the push-in pressuremeter for offshore site investigations.” Proc., SUT Conf. on Offshore Site Investigations, Society for Underwater Technology, London, 159–167.
22.
Houlsby, G. T., and Carter J. P. ( 1993). “The effects of pressuremeter geometry on results of tests in clay.” Géotechnique, London, 43(4), 567–576.
23.
Houlsby, G. T., and Withers, N. ( 1988). “Analysis of the cone pressuremeter test in clay.” Géotechnique, London, 38(4), 575–587.
24.
Huang, A-B., and Haefele, K. C. ( 1988). “A push-in pressuremeter/sampler.” Proc., 1st Int. Symp. on Penetration Testing, 1, 533–538.
25.
Jamiolkowski, M., Ladd, C. C., Germaine, J. T., and Lancelotta, R. ( 1985). “New developments in field and laboratory testing of soils. Theme lecture 2.” Proc., 11th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., 1, 57–153.
26.
Jefferies, M. G. ( 1988). “Determination of horizontal geostatic stress in clay with self-bored pressuremeter.” Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa, 25, 559–573.
27.
Lacasse, S., D'Orazio, T. B., and Bandis, C. ( 1990). “Interpretation of self-boring and push-in pressuremeter tests.” Pressuremeters, Institute of Civil Engineers, London, 273–285.
28.
Lacasse, S., and Lunne, T. ( 1982). “In situ horizontal stress from pressuremeter tests.” Symp. on Pressuremeter and Its Marine Applications, 187–208.
29.
Ladanyi, B. ( 1972). “In-situ determination of undrained stress-strain behavior of sensitive clays with the pressuremeter.” Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa, 9(3), 313–319.
30.
Ladd, C. C., Germaine, J. T., Baligh, M. M., and Lacasse, S. ( 1980). “Evaluation of self-boring pressuremeter tests in Boston blue clay.” Rep. No. FHWA/RD-80/052, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
31.
Ladd, C. C., Young, G. A., Kraemer, S. R., and Burke, D. M. ( 1998). “Engineering properties of Boston blue clay from special testing program.” Proc., ASCE Geo-Congr. 98, ASCE, Reston, Va., 1–24.
32.
Law, K. T., and Eden, W. J. ( 1985). “Effects of soil disturbance in pressuremeter tests.” Proc., ASCE Conf. on Updating Subsurface Sampling of Soils and In-Situ Testing, ASCE, Reston, Va., 291–303.
33.
Ménard, L. ( 1956). “An apparatus for measuring the strength of soils in place.” MSc thesis, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.
34.
O'Neill, D. A. ( 1985). “Undrained strength anisotropy of an overconsolidated thixotropic clay.” MS Thesis, Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
35.
Palmer, A. C. ( 1972). “Undrained plane-strain expansion of a cylindrical cavity in clay: A simple interpretation of the pressuremeter test.” Géotechnique, London, 22(3), 451–457.
36.
Prévost J. H., and Høeg, K. (1975). “Analysis of the pressuremeter in strain-softening soil.”J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 101(8), 717–732.
37.
Prévost, J. H. (1976). “Undrained stress-strain-time behavior of clays.”J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 102(12), 1245–1259.
38.
Reid, W. M., St. John, H. D., Fyffe, S., and Rigden, W. J. ( 1982). “The push-in pressuremeter.” Symp. on Pressuremeter and Its Marine Applications, 247–261.
39.
Shuttle, D. A., and Jefferies, M. G. ( 1995). “A practical geometry correction for interpreting pressuremeter tests in clay.” Géotechnique, London, 45(3), 549–553.
40.
Sloan, S. W., and Randolph, M. F. ( 1982). “Numerical predictions of collapse loads using finite element methods.” Int. J. Numer. and Analytical Methods in Geomech., 6, 47–76.
41.
Whittle, A. J. ( 1992). “Assessment of an effective stress analysis for predicting the performance of driven piles in clay.” Advances in underwater technology—Ocean science and offshore engineering volume 28: Offshore site investigation and foundation behaviour, Society for Underwater Technology, London, 607–643.
42.
Whittle, A. J., and Aubeny, C. P. ( 1992). “The effects of installation disturbance on interpretation of in-situ tests in clays.” Predictive Soil Mech., Proc., Wroth Memorial Symp., Thomas Telford, London, 742–768.
43.
Whittle, A. J., Aubeny, C. P., Rafalovich, A., Ladd, C. C., and Baligh, M. M. ( 1991). “Interpretation of in-situ tests in cohesive soils using rational methods.” Res. Rep. R91-01, Dept. of Civ. & Envir. Engrg., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
44.
Whittle, A. J., DeGroot, D. J., Ladd, C. C., and Seah, T-H. (1994). “Model prediction of the anisotropic behavior of Boston blue clay.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 120(1), 199–224.
45.
Whittle, A. J., and Kavvadas, M. (1994). “Formulation of MIT-E3 constitutive model for overconsolidated clays.”J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 120(1), 173–198.
46.
Windle, D., and Wroth, C. P. ( 1977). “The use of a self-boring pressuremeter to determine the undrained properties of clays.” Ground Engrg., Sept., 37–46.
47.
Withers, N. J., Schapp, L. H. J., and Dalton, C. P. ( 1986). “The development of the full displacement pressuremeter.” The pressuremeter and its marine applications, ASTM STP 950, West Conshohocken, Pa., 38–56.
48.
Wood, D. M. ( 1981). “True triaxial tests on Boston blue clay.” Proc., 10th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., 825–830.
49.
Wroth, C. P. ( 1984). “The interpretation of in situ soil tests.” Géotechnique, London, 34(4), 447–492.
50.
Wroth, C. P., and Hughes, J. M. O. ( 1973). “An instrument for the in-situ measurement of the properties of soft clays.” Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., 1.2, 487–494.
51.
Yeung, K. S., and Carter, J. P. ( 1990). “Interpretation of the pressuremeter test in clay allowing for membrane end effects and material nonhomogeneity.” Pressuremeters, Institute of Civil Engineers, London, 199–208.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 126 • Issue 12 • December 2000
Pages: 1133 - 1144
History
Received: Sep 11, 1998
Published online: Dec 1, 2000
Published in print: Dec 2000
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.