CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II, 2016-2017; Semester 2

Solutions of Practice Problems on Subsurface Investigation

1. The subsurface profile at a particular site is shown in Figure 1. Calculate the following
quantities at point A.
a. effective vertical geostatic stress
b. total vertical geostatic stress
c. lateral (horizontal) effective stress; given the coefficient of lateral earth pressure
at rest K0 = 0.4
d. lateral total stress
e. mean effective stress
f. total mean stress
g. overconsolidation ratio (OCR) if in the past the ground surface were at a level 2 m
higher than the present level (with water table at the same location).
[Hint: Mean effective stress at any point m = (v+2h)/3; h =K0v; v=v+u; h=h+u]
Silty sand
= 30 ,
3.0 m dry= 17 kN/m3
sat= 20 kN/m3
1.0 m

2.0 m Sand
A = 33 ,
dry = 19 kN/m3
sat = 22 kN/m3

Fig. 1. Subsurface profile for use in Problem 1

Answer:

In subsurface profile shown in Figure 1,

w 9.81 kN/m3
for silty sand -
dry ,1 17 kN/m3 , sat ,1 20 kN/m3 and 1 30
for sand -
dry ,2 19 kN/m3 , sat ,2 22 kN/m3 and 2 33
At point A:
(a) Effective vertical geostatic stress;
v, A ' 3 m ( dry ,1 ) 1 m ( sat ,1 w ) 2 m ( sat ,2 w )
3 m (17 kN/m3 ) 1 m (20 kN/m3 9.81 kN/m3 ) 2 m (22 kN/m3 9.81 kN/m3 )
v, A ' 3 m (17 kN/m3 ) 1 m (10.19 kN/m3 ) 2 m (12.19 kN/m3 )

Page 1 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

v, A ' 85.57 kPa

(b) Total vertical geostatic stress;
v, A v, A ' uA 85.57 3 m ( w )
85.57 3 m (9.81 kN/m3 )
v, A 115 kPa
(c) Lateral (horizontal) effective stress;
Here, the coefficient of lateral earth pressure at rest K0 0.4
h, A ' K0 ( v, A ') 0.4 (85.57 kPa)
h, A ' 34.228 kPa
(d) Lateral (horizontal) total stress;
h, A h, A ' u A 34.228 kPa +3 m (9.81 kN/m3 )
h, A ' 63.658 kPa
(e) Mean effective stress;
v, A ' 2 h, A '
m, A '
3
85.57 kPa 2(34.228 kPa)
m, A '
3
m, A ' 51.342 kPa
(f) Total mean stress;
m, A m, A ' u A 51.342 kPa +3 m (9.81 kN/m3 )
m, A 80.772 kPa
(g) Overconsolidation ratio (OCR);
In the past, ground surface were at a level 2 m higher than the present level (with water table at
the same location). Therefore, thickness of silty sand layer was 5 m ( 3 m +2 m ) in the past.
past maximum effective stress = 5 m ( dry ,1 ) 1 m ( sat ,1 w ) 2 m ( sat ,2 w )
5 m (17 kN/m3 ) 1 m (20 kN/m3 9.81 kN/m3 ) 2 m (22 kN/m3 9.81 kN/m3 )
5 m (17 kN/m3 ) 1 m (10.19 kN/m3 ) 2 m (12.19 kN/m3 )
119.57 kPa
present effective stress 3 m (17 kN/m3 ) 1 m (10.19 kN/m3 ) 2 m (12.19 kN/m3 )
85.57 kPa
Past maximum effective stress
OCR
Present effective stress
119.57 kPa

85.57 kPa
OCR 1.397

Page 2 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

2. SPT blow counts (N) obtained at intervals of 1 m at a sandy site are given below. A donut
hammer and a liner sampler without the liner were used. Every care was taken to connect the
rod segments firmly and to follow standard procedure. The water table is at a depth of 3 m,
and the site is lightly overconsolidated (OC) because approximately 2 m of soil (average total
unit weight approximately equal to 17 kN/m3) were removed before the SPT was performed.
The K0 of this soil in a normally consolidated state (K0,NC) would be 0.48. Calculate energy
corrected N60 and corresponding stress-normalized, energy-corrected blow counts (N1)60 at
depth 1, 4 and 6 m. Use the relation K0 = K0,NC(OCR)0.5. Use the following table to guide you
through the calculations.

Depth (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6
Field SPT blow count (N) 15 18 22 23 25 28

Depth (m) NSPT N60 'v,present (kPa) 'v,past (kPa) OCR K0 (N1)60
1 15
4 23
6 28

Answer:

We know energy corrected (standardized) value of SPT blow count

For a donut hammer =45%

For rod length (i.e. depth of sampling) < 4m =0.75

4m to 6 m =0.85

A liner sampler without a liner was used thus =1.2

For standard borehole diameter =1.0

Thus N60 values for all depths

@ 1 m N60 = (0.75) (0.75) (1.2) (1.0) 15=10.1
@ 4m N60 = (0.75) (0.85) (1.2) (1.0) 23=17.6
@ 6m N60 = (0.75) (0.95) (1.2) (1.0) 28=23.9

Now we need to normalize N60 values to get (N1)60

Where
Sample Calculations at 4m:-

Page 3 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

Similar calculations are done to obtain the following table:

Depth OCR
m kPa kPa
1 15 10.1 17 51 3 0.83 18.6
4 23 17.6 58.2 92.2 1.58 0.6 20.6
6 28 23.9 72.6 106.6 1.47 0.58 25.5

Page 4 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

3. The results of SPT tests performed with an automatic trip hammer (hammer efficiency =
80%) using the standard ASTM split spoon sampler with a liner are shown in the following
table. The borehole diameter was within the recommended range. The soil profile consists of
a normally consolidated (NC) sand with average total unit weight equal to 20 kN/m3. The
water table is located at 4.5 m below the ground surface. Estimate the relative density D R
using correlation proposed by Meyerhof and Skempton (1986) at depths 4m and 6m. Use A =
36.5 in your calculations.

Depth (m) 4 5 6
Field SPT value (N) 25 30 35

Answer:

For automatic trip hammer =80%

A liner sampler with a liner was used thus =1.0

Borehole diameter was within recommended limits so =1.0

Rod Length correction

@ 4m =0.85
@ 6m =0.95

Therefore

@ 4 m N60 = (1.33) (0.85) (1.0) (1.0) 25=28.3

@ 6 m N60 = (1.33) (0.95) (1.0) (1.0) 35=44.2

Following Meyerhof and Skempton (1986) method

Given:

A=36.5, B=27, and C=1 for NC sand

So using the above equation

@ 4m =69.8%
@6m =82.5%

Page 5 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

4. The cone resistance qc for a clean sand at 6 m has been measured at 11 MPa. The average
total unit weight of the soil column above 6 m is 21 kN/m3. The water table is 3 m below the
surface. The soil is normally consolidated, with K0 = 0.45. The soil has c = 30. Estimate
the relative density DR of the sand at 6 m using relationships proposed by (a) Kulhawy and
Mayne (1990) and (b) Salgado and Prezzi (2007).

Answer:

Given:
qc at 6 m = 11MPa
Average total unit weight above 6 m = 21kN/m3
Water table is 3 m below surface
Soil- NC with o 0.45, c 30

(a) Following the equation proposed by Lancellotta (1983); Jamiolkowski et al. (1985)
Kulhawy and Mayne (1990)
q
DR 68 log c
1
pa 'vo
Now, 'vo 6 21 3 9.81 96.6 kPa
qc 11 MPa
11103
DR 68 log 1
100 96.6

DR 71.3%

(b) From the equation based on cavity expansion analysis,

q '
ln c 0.4947 0.1041c 0.841ln h
DR a pa
p
'
0.0264 0.0002c 0.0047 ln h
pa
Now, 'h o 'vo 0.45 96.6 = 43.5 kPa
11 43.5
ln 0.4947 0.1041 30 0.841ln
DR
0.1 100
43.5
0.0264 0.0002 30 0.0047 ln
100
DR 73%

Page 6 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

5. A CPT was performed in a deposit of soft clay with the water table at a depth of 1 m. The
cone resistance at a depth of 10 m was equal to 0.6 MPa. What is the minimum and
maximum value of su of the clay at what depth would expect based on a range of values of Nk
varying from 10 to 15? The average total unit weight of this clay is 17 kN/m3. Consider that
the clay layer to be fully saturated due to capillary rise.

Answer:

Given, qc 0.6 MPa @ 10m depth

Range of N k 10 to 15
Average total unit weight = 17 kN/m 3
Water table is at 1 m depth, fully saturated clay due to capillary rise

We know, qc N k su v
qc v
su
Nk
Now at 10m v 17 10 170 kPa
600 170
For N k 10, su 43 kPa
10
600 170
For N k 15, su 29 kPa
15

Page 7 of 8
CE 330 Geotechnical Engineering II Semester 2, 2016-2017

6. Penetration resistance qc, sleeve friction fs and pore pressure u2 measured during a CPT at a
depth of 20 m below ground surface are summarized in the table below. The dimensions of
the cone are as displayed in Fig. 2. Piezoprobe tests have shown that in situ pressures are
hydrostatic and index tests have indicated the unit weight of the soil = 18 kN/m3. What sort
of material is likely being encountered? Use Robertsons chart and consider that the soil layer
is fully saturated.

z (m) qc (kPa) fs (kPa) u2 (kPa)

20 2000 25 320
29.9 mm

Fig. 2. Cone dimensions for use in

Problem 6
35.7 mm

Answer:

Given, @ 20m depth, qc 2000 kPa, f s 2000 kPa, u2 2000 kPa

Unit weight of soil, =18 kN/m 3
Unit weight of water, w =9.81 kN/m 3
Diameter of shoulder & cone = 29.9 mm & 35.7 mm respectively

Area of load cell 29.92

= 0.7
Area of cone 35.7 2
Total stress at 20m , vo 18 20 360 kPa
Effective stress at 20m , 'vo 360 9.81 20 163.8 kPa
qnet qt vo
Now, qt qc (1 )u2
= 2000 + (1-0.7) 320
=2096 kPa
qnet 2096 360 1736 kPa =1.7 MPa
q 1736
Normalized cone tip resistance, Q net 10.6
'vo 163.8
fs 25 100
Friction ratio, F (%) 1.44%
qnet 1736
u2 uo 320 9.81 20
Pore pressure ratio, Bq 0.071
qnet 1736
Using Robertson chart, it is found that the soil is of clayey silt to silty clay type.

Page 8 of 8