Review of Standard Penetration Test Short Rod Corrections
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYThis article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYThis article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 131, Issue 4
Abstract
Short rod corrections are used to reduce standard penetration test blow counts recorded using rod lengths shorter than to values that would have been recorded if longer rods had been used. They are based on the assumption that energy transferred during secondary impacts does not contribute to sampler penetration. This paper describes modifications made to a safety hammer to provide hammer–anvil contact histories. Data collected demonstrate the occurrence of secondary impacts prior to the time at which the hammer and anvil were originally assumed to separate. These impacts can be predicted given only the dimensions of the hammer and rods. Secondary impacts are also observed after this time and the energy transferred is quantified. The data suggest that the total transferred energy is independent of rod length and that the secondary impacts occur early enough to contribute to sampler penetration. Modified short rod corrections may still be justified if transferring energy over a series of impacts leads to different blow counts than transferring the same amount of energy during a single impact.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The first writer is pleased to acknowledge the financial support of the Killam Trusts and the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Highways (MOTH). The United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) sponsored a recent stress wave energy study conducted by the UBC Department of Civil Engineering and an associated upgrade of the stress wave energy measurement system. The safety hammer was loaned by Foundex Explorations Ltd. of Surrey, B.C. and modified by Harald Schrempp of the UBC Department of Civil Engineering. Mr. Ali Amini of the UBC Department of Civil Engineering provided assistance during the laboratory program. The writers thank the reviewers, whose insightful observations led to improved clarity of the final paper.
References
Abou-matar, H., and Goble, G. G. (1997). “SPT dynamic analysis and measurements.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 123(10), 921–928.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). (1986). “Standard test method for stress wave energy measurement for dynamic penetrometer testing systems (discontinued 1998).” D 4633-86, Philadelphia.
Daniel, C. R., Howie, J. A., and Taylor, B. (2003a). “Analysis of SPT stress wave data using the CASE method.” Proc., 56th Canadian Geotechnical Conf., (CD-ROM), Canadian Geotechnical Society, Alliston, Ont., Canada.
Daniel, C. R., Jackson, R. S., Howie, J. A., and Walker, B. W. (2003b). “Development of a spreadsheet for modelling SPT stress wave data.” Geotech. Test. J., 26(3), 320–327.
Decourt, L., Muromachi, T., Nixon, I. K., Schmertmann, J. H., Thorburn, S., and Zolkov, E. (1988). “Standard penetration test (SPT): International reference test procedure.” Proc., 1st Int. Symp. on Penetration Testing, Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 3–26.
Howie, J. A., Daniel, C. R., Jackson, R. S., and Walker, B. (2003). “Comparison of energy measurement methods in the standard penetration test.” Rep. Prepared for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Dept. of Civil Engineering, The Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Kovacs, W. D., and Salomone, L. A. (1982). “SPT hammer energy measurement.” J. Geotech. Eng. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 108(4), 599–620.
Morgano, C. M., and Liang, R. Y. (1992). “Energy transfer in SPT–rod length effect.” Proc., 4th Int. Conf. on the Application of Stress-Wave Theory to Piles, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 121–127.
Schmertmann, J. H., and Palacios, A. (1979). “Energy dynamics of SPT.” J. Geotech. Eng. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 105(8), 909–926.
Seed, H. B., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L. F., and Chung, R. M. (1985). “The Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations.” J. Geotech. Eng., 111(12), 1425–1445.
Skempton, A. W. (1986). “Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation.” Geotechnique, 36(3), 425–447.
Sy, A., and Campanella, R. G. (1991). “An alternative method of measuring SPT energy.” Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, Univ. of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Mo., 499–505.
Youd, T. L., et al. (2001). “Liquefaction resistance of soils: Summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 127(10), 817–833.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 131 • Issue 4 • April 2005
Pages: 489 - 497
Copyright
© 2005 ASCE.
History
Received: Jul 1, 2003
Accepted: Jun 30, 2004
Published online: Apr 1, 2005
Published in print: Apr 2005
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.