SUBSURFACE

EXPLORATION
Topics Covered
 Introduction
 Methods of Boring
 Methods of Investigation
 Soil Samplers and Sampling
 Location and Number of Pits and Borings
 Penetrometer Tests
 Borehole Logs
 Geophysical Methods
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
INTRODUCTION
 The Soil Mechanics 1 (Geotechnical Engineering) course
reviewed the fundamental properties of soils and
their behavior under stress and strain in idealized
conditions. In practice, natural soil deposits are not
homogeneous, elastic, or isotropic. In some places,
the stratification of soil deposits even may change
greatly within a horizontal distance of 15 to 30 m. For
foundation design and construction work, one must
know the actual soil stratification at a given site, the
laboratory test results of the soil samples obtained
from various depths, and the observations made
during the construction of other structures built
under similar condition.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
INTRODUCTION
 For most major structures, adequate subsoil
exploration at the construction site must be
conducted.
 The process of determining the layers of natural soil
deposits that will underlie a proposed structure and
their physical properties is generally referred to as
subsurface exploration.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
PURPOSE OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
 The purpose of subsurface exploration is to obtain information
that will aid the geotechnical engineer in:
1. Determining the nature of soil at the site and its
stratification.
2. Selecting the type and depth of foundation
suitable for a given structure.
3. Evaluating the load-bearing capacity of the
foundation.
4. Estimating the probable settlement of a structure.
5. Determining potential foundation problems (e.g.,
expansive soil, collapsible soil, sanitary landfill, etc.).
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
PURPOSE OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
 The purpose of subsurface exploration is to obtain information
that will aid the geotechnical engineer in:
6. Determining the location of water table.
7. Determining the depth and nature of bedrock, if
and when encountered.
8. Performing some in-situ tests, such as permeability
tests, vane shear test, and standard penetration
test.
9. Predicting the lateral earth pressure for structures
such as retaining walls, sheet pile, and braced
cuts.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
A soil exploration program for a given structure can be
divided broadly into three phases:
1. Collection of Preliminary Information:
This step includes obtaining information
regarding the type of structure to be built and its
general use. The following are examples explaining
the needed information about different types of
structures:
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
 For the construction of building:
 The approximate column loads and their spacing.
 Local building codes.
 Basement requirement.

 For the construction of bridge:

 The length of their spans.
 The loading on piers and abutments.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
2. Reconnaissance
The engineer should always make a visual
inspection (field trip) of the site to obtain information
about:
 The general topography of the site, the possible
existence of drainage ditches, and other materials
present at the site. Evidence of creep of slopes and
deep, wide shrinkage cracks at regularly spaced
intervals may be indicative of expansive soil.
 Soil stratification from deep cuts, such as those
made for the construction of nearby highways and
railroads.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
2. Reconnaissance
 The type of vegetation at the site, which may
indicate the nature of the soil.
 Groundwater levels, which can be determined by
checking nearby wells.
 The type of construction nearby and the existence
of any cracks in walls (indication for settlement) or
other problems.
 The nature of the stratification and physical
properties of the soil nearby also can be obtained
from any available soil-exploration reports on
existing structures.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
This phase consists of:
 Planning (adopting steps for site investigation, and
future vision for the site).
 Making test boreholes.
 Collecting soil samples at desired intervals for visual
observation and laboratory tests.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the number of boring:
There is no hard-and-fast rule exists for
determining the number of borings to be advanced.
For most buildings, at least one boring at each corner
and one at the center should provide a start. Spacing
can be increased or decreased, depending on the
condition of the subsoil. If various soil strata are more
or less uniform and predictable, fewer boreholes are
needed than in nonhomogeneous soil strata.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the number of boring:
The following table gives some guidelines for
borehole spacing for different types of structures:
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the depth of boring:
The approximate required minimum depth of
the borings should be predetermined. The estimated
depths can be changed during the drilling operation,
depending on the subsoil encountered (e.g., Rock).
To determine the approximate required
minimum depth of boring, engineers may use the
rules established by the American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE 1972):
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the depth of boring:
a) Determine the net
increase in effective
stress (Δσ’) under a
foundation with depth
as shown in the figure.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the depth of boring:
b) Estimate the variation of the vertical effective
stress (σ’o) with depth.
c) Determine the depth (D=D1) at which the effective
stress increase (Δσ’) is equal to (1/10)q (q = estimated
net stress on the foundation).
d) Determine the depth (D=D2) at which (Δσ’/
σ’o)=0.05.
e) Determine the depth (D=D3) which is the distance
from the lower face of the foundation to bedrock
(if encountered).
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the depth of boring:
f) Choose the smaller of the three depths (D1, D2, D3)
just determined as the approximate required
minimum depth of boring.
After determining the value of (D) as explained
above the final depth of boring (from the ground
surface to the calculated depth) is:
Dboring = Df + D
because the drilling will start from the ground surface.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the depth of boring:
If the preceding rules are used, the depths of
boring for a building with a width of 30 m will be
approximately the following (Sowers and Sowers, 1970).
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the depth of boring:
To determine the boring depth for hospitals and
office buildings, Sowers and Sowers (1970) also used
the following rules:

where,
Db is the depth of boring
S is the number of stories
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the value of vertical effective stress (σ’o):
The value of (σ’o) is always calculated from
ground surface to the required depth, as previously
discussed in Chapter 8 (Soil Mechanics 1).
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the increase in vertical effective stress (Δσ’):
The value of (Δσ’) is always calculated from the
lower face of the foundation, as previously discussed
in Chapter 8 (Soil Mechanics 1).
An alternative approximate method can be
used rather than Boussinesq and Westergaard
methods which is easier and faster. This method is
called 2V:1H method. The value of (Δσ’) can be
determined using 2:1 method as following:
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the increase in vertical effective stress (Δσ’):

where,
P is the load applied on
the foundation (kN).
A is the area of the stress
distribution at depth (D).
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the increase in vertical effective stress (Δσ’):
Note that the equation presented is based on
the assumption that the stress from the foundation
spreads out with a vertical-to-horizontal slope of 2:1.
Now, the values of (D1 and D2) can be calculated
easily as will be seen later.
Note that if the foundation is circular the value
of (Δσ’) at depth (D) can be determined as following:
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 Determining the increase in vertical effective stress (Δσ’):

where,
P is the load applied on
the foundation (kN).
B is the diameter of the
foundation (m).
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 In practice: The number of boreholes and the
depth of each borehole will be identified according
to the type of project and the subsoil on site. The
following is an example for a 5-storey residential
building with dimensions of (40 x 70) m:
 The required number of boreholes = 5 boreholes
(one at each corner and one at the center) as
mentioned previously.
 The depth of each borehole for this project is (8-
10) m up to a depth of water table.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3. Site Investigation
 The following figure
shows the distribution of
boreholes on the land.
 Soil borings can be
made by several
methods such as auger
boring, wash boring,
percussion drilling, and
rotary drilling.
 Problem Set 1
1. Site investigation is to be made for a structure of 100 m
length and 70 m width. The soil profile is shown below. If the
structure is subjected to 200 kPa, what is the approximate depth
of borehole? (Assume γw = 10 kN/m3).
 Problem Set 1
2. Site investigation is to be made for a structure of 100 m
length and 70 m width. The soil profile is shown below.
Knowing that the structure exerts a uniform pressure of 200
kPa on the surface of the soil, what is the approximate depth of
borehole? (Assume γw = 10 kN/m3).
 Problem Set 1
3. For the soil profile
shown below, if D1 = 10 m
and D2 = 2D1 :
3.1 Determine the dimensions
of the foundation to achieve the
required depth of borehole.
3.2 Calculate the load of
column which should be
applied on the foundation to
meet the required depth of
boring.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Test Pits
 Permits visual inspection of
subsurface conditions in
natural state.
 Maximum depth limited to
18-20 ft.
 Especially useful for gravelly
soil where boreholes may
be difficult.
 Sampling/testing done on
exposed surfaces.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Auger Boring
 Simplest method of exploration and sampling.
 Power-driven or hand-operated.
 Maximum depth of 10 m.
 Suitable in all soils above ground water table but
only in cohesive soil below ground water table.
 Hollow stem augers used for sampling or
conducting Standard Penetration Tests.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Auger Boring

Hand-operated augers

Power-driven augers
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Wash Boring
A casing is driven with a drop hammer. A hollow drill
rod with chopping bit is inserted inside the casing.
 Soil is loosened and removed from the borehole
using water or a drilling mud jetted under pressure.
 The water is jetted in the hole through the bottom of
a wash pipe and leaves the hole along with the
loose soil, from the annual space between the hole
and wash pipe.
 The water reaches the ground level where the soil in
suspension is allowed to settle and mud is re-
circulated.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Wash Boring
Another example of wash boring is called mud
rotary drilling (soil) or core drilling (rock).
 Mud rotary
 Hollow drill rods with a drill bit is rotated into the
soil. Drilling mud is continuously pumped into the
hole. The bit grinds the soil and the return flow
brings the cuttings to the surface.
 Core drilling
 Used for obtaining rock cores.
 A core barrel is fitted with a drill bit is attached to
hollow drill rods.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Wash Boring
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Wash Boring

Diamond drill bit Tricone drill bit

 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF BORING
Percussion Drilling
 Grinding the soil by repeated lifting and dropping of
heavy chisels or drilling bits.
 Water is added to form slurry of cuttings.
 Slurry removed by bailers or pumps.

 In general, a machine used to drill holes is called a

drill rig (generally power-driven, but may be hand-driven).
 A winch is provided to raise and lower the drilling
tools into the hole.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
METHODS OF INVESTIGATION
 Probingor sounding methods:
 Drive a pipe or rod into the soil.
 Measure the resistance offered by the soil (e.g.,
SPT, CPT, VST, PMT, DMT).
 Geophysicalmethods:
 Seismic refraction method.
 Electrical resistivity method.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLING SOIL
There are two types of samples:
 Disturbed Samples: These types of samples are
disturbed but representative, and may be used for
the following types of laboratory soil tests:
 Grain-size analysis
 Determination of liquid and plastic limits
 Specific gravity of soil solids
 Determination of organic content
 Classification of soil
Disturbed soil samples cannot be used for consolidation, hydraulic conductivity,
or shear tests, because these tests must be performed on the same soil of the field
without any disturbance (to be representative). The major equipment used to
obtain disturbed sample is split-spoon.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLING SOIL
There are two types of samples:
 Undisturbed Samples: These types of samples are used
for the following types of laboratory soil tests:
 Consolidation test
 Hydraulic conductivity test
 Shear strength test
These samples are more complex and expensive, and it’s suitable for clay,
however in sand it is very difficult to obtain undisturbed samples. The major
equipment used to obtain undisturbed sample is thin-walled tube.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLING SOIL
 Degree of Disturbance
If we want to obtain a soil sample from any site,
the degree of disturbance for a soil sample is usually
expressed as:

where,
AR is the area ratio (ratio of disturbed area to total area)
Do is the outside diameter of the sampling tube
Di is the inner diameter of the sampling tube
If AR > 10%, the sample is disturbed.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
The following are the major field tests for
determining soil shear strength:
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
This test is one of the most important soil tests for
geotechnical engineers because it’s widely used in
calculating different factors as will explained later.
This test is performed as following:
1. Determining the required number and depth of
boreholes in the site.
2. The sampler used in SPT is standard split spoon
which has an inside diameter of 34.39 mm and an
outside diameter of 50.8 mm.
3. Using drilling machine, 1.5 m are drilled.
4. The drilling machine is removed and the sampler
will be lowered to the bottom of the hole.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
5. The sampler is driven into the soil by hammer blows
to the top of the drill rod. The standard weight of
the hammer is 622.72 N (63.48 kg), and for each
blow, the hammer drops at a distance of 76.2 cm.
6. The number of blows required for a spoon
penetration of three 15 cm intervals are recorded.
7. The first 15 cm drive is considered as seating load
and is ignored.
8. The number of blows required for the last two
intervals are added to give the SPT N-value at that
depth.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
9. The sampler is then withdrawn and the soil sample
recovered from the tube is placed in a glass bottle
and transported to laboratory.
10. Using the drilling machine to drill another 1.5 m and
then repeat the above steps for each 1.5 m till
reaching the specified depth of borehole.
11. Take the average for N-value from each 1.5 m to
obtain the final SPT N-value.
12. Split spoon samples are taken at intervals (1.5 m)
because these samples are highly disturbed.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
BORING LOG
 Name and address of the drilling
company
 Driller’s name
 Job description and number
 Number, type, and location of
boring
 Date of boring
 Subsurface stratification, which
can be obtained by visual
observation of the soil brought
out by auger, split-spoon
sampler, and thin-walled Shelby
tube sampler
 Elevation of water table
 Standard penetration resistance
and the depth of SPT
 Number, type, and depth of soil
sample collected
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
BORING LOG
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correction for N-value
There are several factors that contribute to the
variation of the SPT N-value at a given depth for similar
profiles. Among these factors are the SPT hammer
efficiency, borehole diameter, sampling method, and
rod length.
In the field, the magnitude of hammer
efficiency can vary from 30-90%, the standard
practice now is to express the N-value to an average
energy ratio of 60% (N60), so correcting for field
procedures is required as following:
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correction for N-value

where,
N60 is the corrected SPT assuming 60% efficiency
Em is the efficiency of the SPT hammer
CB is the correction factor for the boreholes diameter
CS is the correction factor for the sampler type used
CR is the correction factor for the rod length
N is the ‘raw’ value of the SPT as obtained in the field
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correction for N-value
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correction for N-value
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correlation between N60, consistency and qu
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correlation between N60 and cu
Hara, et al. (1971) also suggested the following
correlation between the undrained shear strength of
clay (cu) and N60:

where,
pa is the atmospheric pressure (≈100 kPa = 2000 psf)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
The overconsolidation ratio, OCR, of a natural
clay deposit can also be correlated with the SPT N-
value. On the basis of the regression analysis of 110
data points, Mayne and Kemper (1988) obtained the
relationship:

where,
σ'o is the effective vertical stress in MN/m2
It is important to point out that any correlation is
only approximate.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correction for N60 in Granular Soil
In granular soils, the N60 value is affected by the
effective overburden pressure, σ'o. For that reason, the
N60 value obtained from the field exploration under
different effective overburden pressures should be
change to correspond to a standard value of σ'o;

where,
(N1)60 is the corrected N value to a standard value of σ'o
CN is the correction factor
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correction for N60 in Granular Soil
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correlation between N60, σ’o and ϕ’
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correlation between N60, Dr, and ϕ’
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Correlation between N60 and Es
The modulus of elasticity of granular soils (Es) is
an important parameter in estimating the elastic
settlement of foundations. A first order estimation for
Es was given by Kulhawy and Mayne (1990) as,

where,
pa is the atmospheric pressure
α is 5 for sands with fines, 10 for clean normally consolidated
sand, and 15 for clean overconsolidated sand
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
 Advantage  Disadvantage
 Inexpensive  Operate dependent
 Availability  Accuracy is poor
 Sample obtained  Not good for gravel
 Huge database  No continuous profile
 Able to penetrate local  No good correlation for
hazard clay
 Problem Set 2
1. A standard penetration test (SPT) has been conducted
in a loose coarse sand stratum to depth of 16 ft below the
ground surface. The blow counts obtained in the field
were as follows: 0 – 6 in = 4 blows; 6 – 12 in = 6 blows; 12 –
18 in = 8 blows. The tests were conducted using a US-style
donut hammer in a 6-in diameter boring with a standard
sampler and liner. The effective unit weight of the loose
sand stratum is about 93.8 pcf. Determine the corrected SPT if the
testing procedure is assumed to be only 60% efficient.
 Problem Set 2
2. A raw value of N = 40 was obtained from an SPT at a
depth of 20 ft in a sand stratum that has a unit weight of
135 pcf. Correct it only for depth.
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

1. Electronic steel probes with 60° apex tip

2. ASTM D 5778 Procedures
3. Hydraulic push at 20 mm/s
4. No boring, no samples, no cuttings, no spoil
5. Continuous readings of stress, friction, pressure
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
Cone trucks
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
Comparison between SPT and CPT
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
This test is also called the static penetration test
and no boreholes are necessary to perform it.
 Types
 Mechanical friction-cone penetrometer
 Electric friction-cone penetrometer
 Measurements
 Tip resistance
 Sleeve friction
 Water pressure
 Others
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
 Applications
 Soil identification
 Granular soil: Dr, ϕ, Es, Liquefaction
 Cohesive soil: Su, OCR
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

SPT-N vs CPT-qc
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Robertson and Campanellas

(1983) correlation between
qc, Fr, and soil type
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
 Advantage  Disadvantage
 Continuous profile  Doesn’t work in gravel
 Accurate  No sample
 Pore water pressure  Limited penetration
 Inexpensive
 Fast
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Vane Shear Test (VST)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Vane Shear Test (VST)
 Used primarily to assess the undrained strength of
soft clay
 Method
 Borehole, pipe, push and rotate
 Relate peak strength to undrained strength, Su
 Rotate continuously for 10-25 revolution to
remold soil and then the residual strength is
measured
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Vane Shear Test (VST)
 Advantage
 Fast and economical
 Reproducible in homogeneous deposits
 Significant data base
 Very good for estimating sensitivity

 Disadvantage
 Su is the only application
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Pressuremeter Test (PMT)
 Method
 Pre-bored hole PMT
 Self-boring PMT
 Measurement
 Pressure-deformation
relationship
 Applications
 Estimating soil strength
parameters
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Pressuremeter Test (PMT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Pressuremeter Test (PMT)
 Advantage
 Stress-strain response obtained
 Ko is obtained
 Excellent tool for pile especially for lateral load

 Disadvantage
 Soil stratigraphy must be known in advance
 Excess pore water pressure not known
 Dependent on borehole disturbance
 More time consuming and expensive
 Misleading if soil is highly anisotropic
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Dilatometer Test (DMT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 DilatometerTest (DMT)
 Measurements
 Thrust
 A-pressure (→ 0.05 mm)
 B-pressure (→ 1.10 mm)
 C-pressure (0.05 mm ←)
 Corrections for readings
 Applications
 Sand: Classification, Stratigraphy, Liquefaction,
Dr, Stress parameters, ϕ’
 Clay: Su, KD, mv, Stress history, ED, G
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Dilatometer Test (DMT)
 Foundation
ENGINEERING
IN-SITU TESTS FOR SOILS
 Dilatometer Test (DMT)
 Advantage
 Simple and rapid, rugged, less disturbed
 Good for horizontal stress, OCR
 Nearly continuous profile

 Disadvantage
 Limited field exposure
 Availability
 Difficult in hard soil
 Thrust measurement complicates the system
 No sample obtained
 Problem Set 3
1. Read the boring log shown on the next slide.
1.1 Determine the location of the phreatic surface.
1.2 Determine the depth of the boring.
1.3 Determine the number of samples taken.
Problem Set 3
 Problem Set 3
2. Using the boring log and the SPT vs Soil Engineering
Parameters Table shown on the next two slides, answer
these four questions:
2.1 Correct the value of the SPT of Sample S-4 to a 70% sampling
efficiency with a standard sampling method and a US-donut hammer
at elevation -17 ft.
2.2 Correct the same sample S-4 for depth assuming the unit weight is
126 pcf.
2.3 What are your estimates for the angle of internal friction and unit
weight?
2.4 What is the elevation (above sea level) of the groundwater and the
elevation of the bottom of the boring?
Problem Set 3
Problem Set 3
Problem Set 3