1 Subsurface Study

CHAP 1 : SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
ECG553 GEOTECHNIQUES : PART 4
WEEK 1 – WEEK 2
CHAP. 1
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
by;
HJH. FAUZILAH ISMAIL
HAIROL ANUAR HARON
ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 1

ACTIVITY :
• Introduction to Chap 1
• Lecture ~ 106 slides
• Independent learning activities

LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of this chapter, student should be able to:

• Understand the importance of site investigation (SI)
prior to any design of geotechnical structures.
• Design SI schedule for simple Civil Engineering work.
• Discuss different SI methods.
• Proposed relevant laboratory and field tests to be
conducted for appropriate geotechnical design
parameters.
• Use appropriate correlations based on field tests.

PRESENTATION OUTLINES :
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 What is Site Investigation (SI)
1.1.2 Purpose of SI
1.1.3 Objectives of SI
1.1.4 Stages of SI
1.2 Method of Exploration
1.2.1 Trial Pit
1.2.2 Hand / Power Augers
1.2.3 Boring (Wash / Rotory)
1.3 Borehole Log Descriptions
1.4 Method of Sampling
1.4.1 Disturbed & Undisturbed Sample
1.4.2 Soil Disturbance
1.4.3 Soil Samplers
PRESENTATION OUTLINES :
1.5 Insitu Testing

1.5.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
1.5.2 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
1.5.3 JKR / Mckintosh Probe Test
1.5.4 Shear Vane Test
1.5.5 Geophysical Methods;
1) Electrical Resistivity Methods
2) Seismic Methods
1.6 Laboratory Testing
1.7 SI Report

1.1 : INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 WHAT IS SITE INVESTIGATION (SI)?
Site Investigation is the process whereby all relevant information concerning the
site of a proposed civil engineering or building development and its surrounding
area is gathered.

1.1.2 THE PURPOSE OF SITE INVESTIGATION
The purpose of all site investigation is the identification of the

geotechnical and geoenvironmental characteristics of the ground at
a site to provide the basis for the design of efficient, economic and
safe projects.
Comprehensive accumulation of information on the ground and its

characteristics will be used in an appropriate foundation design for
the structures and/or pavement design for the projects and
enables a practical, safe and economic construction process to be
planned.

1.1.3 OBJECTIVES OF SITE INVESTIGATION
1) To assess the general suitability of the site and neighbour -

hood for the proposed works, from a geological and
geotechnical point of view.
2) To provide suitable geotechnical data for all aspects of
an economic, safe and reliable design of foundations,
earthworks and temporary works, including assessment of
the effects of any previous uses of the site.
3) To assess the quantity, quality and ease of extraction
of construction materials suitable for the works.

1.1.4 STAGES OF SI
3. DETAILED SITE
2. SITE
1. DESK STUDY RECCONAISSANCE EXPLORATION AND
SAMPLING
4. LABORATORY
6. REPORTING
RESULTS 5. IN SITU TESTING TESTING OF
SAMPLES

1.1.4 STAGES OF SI
1. DESK STUDY
Collection of information relating to the site

E.g – maps, drawings, details of existing or historic development, local authority
information, geological maps, details of utilities, services, ariel photographs,
ownership of adjacent properties, etc
2. SITE RECCONAISSANCE
Early examination of the site by appropriate experts

E.g – geologist, land surveyor, soils engineer, hydrologist, etc.
Information should be collected on the overall site layout, topography, basic
geology, details of access, entry and height restrictions
Local condition should be examined – climate, stream flows, groundwater
condition and etc.

1.1.4 STAGES OF SI
3. DETAILED SITE EXPLORATION AND SAMPLING
Investigation of detailed geology and subsurface soil condition

Examination of existing and adjacent structures for signs of cracking and
settlement
Location of underground structures or cavities, buried pipes, services
Provision of samples for further examination and laboratory testing
4. LABORATORY TESTING OF SAMPLES
Tests on disturbed and undisturbed samples

Tests on soils for classification, quality, permeability, shear strength,
compressibility, etc.
Tests on rock cores and samples for strength and durability
Test on constructional material – compaction tests, tests on groundwater,
chemical, etc.

1.1.4 STAGES OF SI
5. IN SITU TESTING
Texts carried out on the site either prior to or during the construction process;
ground test such as shear-vane, standard penetration, cone penetration, JKR
Probe test and geophysical test.
6. REPORTING RESULTS
Detailed of geological study, including structures, stratigraphy and mapping;

results of boring, etc., including log, references for samples and stratigraphy
interpretations as requested; comments and recommendations relating to the
design and construction of the proposed works.

1.2 : METHODS OF EXPLORATION
a) Geological nature of the site

b) Topographical nature of the site
c) Type of information required
d) Cost and time


Selection Of Number And Location Of Boreholes
Warehouse
Multi-storey / Flat Landslide

Selection Of Number And Location Of Boreholes

Boring rig
Simply dug using excavator or hand tools
TRIAL PIT
1-2 m width
2-3 m depth BOREHOLE
75 mm dia
10-30 m depth
CLAY
Other exploration methods :
 Hand Augering (HA)
 JKR / Mackintosh Probes
 Geophysical Testing
 Etc.
1.2.1 : Trial Pit
TRIAL PITS OR TEST PITS
A pit is dug by hand using shovels or with a machine such as a backhoe. This
method can provide excellent shallow-depth soil stratigraphy. You can inspect the soil
and take undisturbed samples for lab tests.
In details,…

5.2.1 : Trial Pit
An engineer supervising and marking Trial pit showing soil Profiles

samples from trial pit
1.2.1 : Trial Pit
A Very Large Trial Pit

1.2.2 : Hand Or Power Augers
HAND OR POWER AUGERS
THESE are tools used to quickly create a hole about 100 mm to 250 mm in diamater
in the ground. You can inspect the soil and take undisturbed samples for lab tests.
In details,…




METHOD ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

1.2.3 : Wash and Rotary Boring
WASH BORING
Water is pumped though a

hollow rod that may not be
equipped with a drill bit to
remove soil from a borehole.
The washings can be used to
estimate the soil types.

1) Wash Boring

1) Wash Boring
WASH BORING
 It is a popular method due to the use of limited equipments.
 The advantage of this is the use of inexpensive and easily portable handling
and drilling equipments.
 Here first an open hole is formed on the ground so that the soil sampling or
rock drilling operation can be done below the hole. The hole is advanced by
chopping and twisting action of the light bit. Cutting is done by forced water
and water jet under pressure through the rods operated inside the hole.
 A pipe of 5cm diameter is held vertically and filled with water using horizontal
lever arrangement and by the process of suction and application of pressure,
soil slurry comes out of the tube and pipe goes down.
 This can be done upto a depth of 8m –10m (excluding the depth of hole
already formed beforehand) Just by noting the change of colour of soil coming
out with the change of soil character can be identified by any experienced
person.
 It gives completely disturbed sample and is not suitable for very soft soil, fine
to medium grained cohesionless soil and in cemented soil.
2) Rotary Boring

2) Rotary Boring

2) Rotary Boring
 Rotary drilling method of boring is useful in case of highly resistant strata.

 It is related to finding out the rock strata and also to access the quality of rocks from cracks,
fissures and joints. It can conveniently be used in sands and silts also.
 Here, the bore holes are advanced in depth by rotary percussion method which is similar to
wash boring technique.
 A heavy string of the drill rod is used for choking action.
 The broken rock or soil fragments are removed by circulating water or drilling mud pumped
through the drill rods and bit up through the bore hole from which it is collected in a settling
tank for recirculation.
 If the depth is small and the soil stable, water alone can be used.
 However, drilling fluids are useful as they serve to stabilize the bore hole. Drilling mud is
slurry of bentonite in water. T
 he drilling fluid causes stabilizing effect to the bore hole partly due to higher specific
gravity as compared with water and partly due to formation of mud cake on the sides of the
hole.
 As the stabilizing effect is imparted by these drilling fluids no casing is required if drilling
fluid is used.
 This method is suitable for boring holes of diameter 10cm, or more preferably 15 to20cm in
most of the rocks. It is uneconomical for holes less than 10cm diameter. The depth of
various strata can be detected by inspection of cuttings.
1.2.3 : Wash / Rotary Boring
METHOD ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

1.3 : STRATIGRAPHY
IDENTIFICATION AND
BOREHOLE LOG/RECORD
The subsurface conditions

observed in the soil
samples and drilling cuts or
perceived through the
performance of the drilling
should be described by the
driller.
In addition to the
description of individual
samples, the boring log
should also describe
various strata


BORANG
IKRAM TIMUR KOTA BHARU IS / SI - 01
DEEP BORING LOG
PROJECT : PEMBINAAN JETI PENGURUSAN DI PUSAT TAMAN LAUT, Job No
PULAU PERHENTIAN BESAR, BESUT, TERENGGANU. IES/IT/06/0035
BH 2 Reduced Level: -3.90m Supervisor : NIK MAT ZIN/ ZAKARIA
Sheet No. 1 of 2 Type of Drill: ROTARY Date : 21.05.2006 - 24.05.2006
DESCRIPTION OF SOIL SAMPLE
CONSISTENCY, COLOUR Legend DEPTH No. Field Test N R/r SPT Plot
RELATIVE DENSITY, GRAIN (meter) 75 75 75 75 75 75 (%)
SIZE, TEXTURE ETC. mm mm mm mm mm mm No of Blows (N)
0 10 20 30 40 50
Water Depth - 1.80m 0.00 0
Top Soil - Sea Bad : fine SAND.

. . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . .
Medium dense, light grey fine to coarse silty . . . . . . 1.50 S1 2 3 4 6 6 7 23 22 1.5
SAND. (S-M) . . . . . 1.95 D1

. . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . .
- Ditto - . . . . . . 3.00 S2 3 4 6 7 7 8 28 24 3
. . . . . 3.45 D2
. . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . .
Dense, grey poorly graded GRAVEL. (GP) . . . . . . 4.50 S3 3 5 7 7 8 8 30 20 4.5
. . . . . 4.95 D3
. . . . . .
Depth (m)
. . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . .
Dense, grey poorly graded SAND. (SP) . . . . . . 6.00 S4 4 4 6 8 8 9 31 18 6
. . . . . 6.45 D4
. . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . .
Medium dense, red poorly graded GRAVEL. . . . . . . 7.50 S5 3 4 5 5 5 6 21 20 7.5
(GP) . . . . . 7.95 D5
. . . . . .
+ + + 8.30
+ + CL : 1.50m
Very strong, grey fresh GRANITE. + + + to C1 CRR : 100%
+ + RQD : 98% 9
+ + + 9.80
+ +
NOTES: 10.5
= Standard Penetration Test (SPT) REMARKS

= Disturbed sample
= SPT Result
= Recovery ratio CONSISTENCY / RELATIVE DENSITY
= Vane Shear Test
= Undrained Shear Strength Cohesive Soil (N) Non Cohesive Soil (N)
= Remoulded Shear Strength
= Sensivity
= 50 mm dia. undisturbed sample 0 Very Soft 0 Very Loose
= 50mm dia. undisturbed piston sample 2 Soft 4 Loose
= Mazier Sample 4 Firm 10 Medium dense ……………………………
= Water sample 8 Stiff 30 Dense Mahadi B. Abd Hamid
= Core sample (Rock) 16 Very Stiff 50 Very Dense SI Manager
= Rock Quality Designation (%) 32 Hard (GEOLOGIST)
= Water level
= British Standard Classification System

CHAP 1 : SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Basic Principles of Soil Investigation
Example of Soil Profile from SPT Test/Borelog
Cadangan Pembinaan Pengkalan Polis Marin Pelabuhan Klang Phase II - BH 1
1.5
N Value
3.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 4.5
0.0 6.0 LoosetoVeryLooseSAND
1.5 0 7.5
Non Cohesive Soil (SAND) Cohesive Soil (CLAY)
3.0 0 N Value Relative Density N Value Consistency 9.0
4.5 0 0 to 4 Very Loose 0 to 2 Very Soft 3 10.5
4 to 10 Loose 2 to 4 Soft
6.0 0 10 to 30 Medium 4 to 8 Firm 11 12.0 MediumSAND
7.5 6 30 to 50 Dense 8 to 15 Stiff 13.5
Over 50 Very Dense 15 to 30 Very Stiff
9.0 6 30 to 50 Hard 15.0 MediumtoStiff SILT
10.5 9 8 16.5
12.0 11 The Relationship between N value with 18.0
SPT Plot : N Value vs Depth
Generalized Soil Profile

Relative Density & Consistency of the Soils LoosetoMediumSAND
13.5 10 10 19.5
15.0 7 21.0
Stiff SILT
16.5 8 12 22.5
18.0 8 24.0
VeryStiff SILT
19.5 11 17 25.5
21.0 12 27.0
28.5
Depth (m)
22.5 12 Stiff toVeryStiff CLAY

24.0 17 30.0
25.5 16 18 31.5
27.0 17 14 33.0 Stiff SILT
28.5 14
34.5
MediumSAND
30.0 18
19 36.0
31.5 21
50 37.5 DenseSAND
39.0
33.0 14
40.5 HardCLAY
34.5 18
50 42.0
36.0 19
43.5
37.5 50 DenseSAND
50 45.0
39.0 50
40.5 50
42.0 50
Soil Description
Average SPT
43.5 50
Depth (m)
45.0 50
46.5
48.0
N Value

1.3
CHAP: STRATIGRAPHY IDENTIFICATION
1 : SUBSURFACE AND BOREHOLE LOG/RECORD
EXPLORATION

1.3.1 : BOREHOLE LOG/RECORD : RECOVERY RATIO
RECOVERY RATIO OF SOIL SAMPLE
This is another parameter that also defines degree of sample disturbance.

This is a ratio of length of recovered sample to inserted length in sampling
tube and expressed as percentage. This is used for rock or cohesive core
soil. An unit recovery ratio (length of sample recovered = sampler insertion
into desired stratum), means sample was not compressed in the tube due to
friction. When it becomes more than unity, a potential looseness of sample
due to
• arrangement of roots / stones
• removal of preloads

1.3.1 : BOREHOLE LOG/RECORD : RECOVERY RATIO

1.3.2 : BOREHOLE LOG/RECORD : CORE RECOVERY AND RQD

1.3.2 : BOREHOLE LOG/RECORD : CORE RECOVERY AND RQD

SOIL IDENTIFICATION
CHAP ANDEXPLORATION
1 : SUBSURFACE DESCRIPTION CHART

1.4 : METHODS OF SOIL SAMPLING

1.4.1 : Disturbed and Undisturbed Sample
Soil samples obtained for engineering testing and analysis, in general, are of two
main categories:
1) Disturbed Samples
Disturbed samples are those obtained using equipment that destroy the macro structure of
the soil but do not alter its mineralogical composition.
Specimens from these samples can be used for determining the general lithology of soil
deposits, for identification of soil components and for general classification purposes (grain
size distribution, Atterberg limits) and compaction characteristics of soils.
2) Undisturbed Samples
Undisturbed samples are obtained in clay soil strata for use in laboratory testing to
determine the engineering properties of those soils.
Undisturbed samples of granular soils can be obtained, but often specialized procedures are
required such as freezing or resin impregnation and block or core type sampling.
Undisturbed samples are obtained with specialized equipment designed to
minimize the disturbance to the in-situ structure and moisture content of the soils.
Specimens obtained by undisturbed sampling methods are used to determine the strength,
stratification, permeability, density and compressibility properties

Method of obtaining undisturbed block sample;

Method of obtaining undisturbed block sample;

Enables visual inspection,
locating strata boundaries,
and access for undisturbed
block samples.
A Very Large Trial Pit

Sample extrusion through boring/drilling

1.4.2 : Sample Disturbance
During collection of soil samples from either shallow or deep location, there may
have disturbance from small to large degree. When boring is of wash boring, a
suspension of soil is collected; obviously this is a very disturbed sample. This method
represents a soil that has almost lost all ambient properties (completely disturbed
structure, altered natural moisture content etc); only provides information about
changes in the layers.
With this complete disturbance, some methods provides less disturbed sample and
there have some special method that provides least disturbed sample. There have
some special method that provides nearly undisturbed sample. We have discussed
about block sampling in our preceding post.
A soil sample may be disturbed in three consecutive stages either in any one stage or
may be in combination of stages. These are:
a. Disturbance before sampling
b. Disturbance during sampling
c. Disturbance after sampling

Soil disturbance occur from several sources during sampling, such as

friction between the soil and the sampling tube, the wall thickness of the
sampling tube, the sharpness of cutting edge, and the care and handling of
the sampling tube during transportation.
To minimize friction, the sampling tube should be pushed instead of

driven into the ground.

Required for triaxial, consolidation tests in the lab.
Good quality samples necessary.
AR<10% O.D.2  I .D.2

soil AR  2
100 (%)
I .D.
sampling tube area ratio
The thicker the wall, the greater the disturbance.
Take good care in transport and handling.

1.4.3 : SOIL SAMPLERS

1.4.3 : SOIL SAMPLERS


1.5 : IN-SITU TESTING
1.5.1 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

1.5.2 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
1.5.3 Shear Vane Test (VST)
1.5.4 JKR/Mackintosh Probe Test
1.5.5 Geophysical Testing
1) Electrical Resistivity Method
2) Seismic Method
• Seismic Reflection Method
• Seismic Refraction Method

PURPOSED OF INSITU TESTING
Main reasons to carry out in-situ testing;
 It is very difficult (almost impossible) to obtain good

undisturbed samples for certain soils such as soft
sensitive silts, clays and some coarse non-cohesive
soils.
 It is difficult to accurately model in the laboratory

truly representative conditions of structure and/or
pore pressure under certain site conditions.

Plate Bearing Test
Estimated immediate settlement of a foundation

(Terzaghi and Peck, 1967) is given by the expression :
2
 2B 
s B  sb  
B  b
where
sb = settlement of a test plate of side dimension b
sB = settlement of a foundation of side dimension B
at the same intensity of loading.

5.5.1 : STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)
This test is widely used during the course of sinking test

boreholes as means of estimating the relative density and
shear strength characteristics.
According to BS 1337: Part 9, a standard 50 mm diameter

split-barrel sampler (Fig. 12.5 (c), slide 36) is driven into
ground at the bottom of the hole by repeated blows from a
drop-hammer of mass 65 kg, falling a distance of 760 mm.
After the initial drive of 150 mm, the number of blows

required to drive the sampler a further 300 mm is recorded.
This number of blows is referred to as the standard

penetration resistance or N-value (Table 11.6)
Drop hammer
50 mm
Drive head
76 mm
Extension
borehole
rod
457 mm Split tube

Split spoon
sampler
76 mm Drive shoe
SPT test in borehole
Split-spoon sampler


SPT – Data Correction
A dynamic test carried out in boreholes during site

investigations. Terzaghi and Peck, 1967 provided a
chart to determine the allowable bearing capacity.
However, the N-values obtained from SI need to be
corrected.
a) Correction due to the presence of water table

(Terzaghi and Peck, 1948) :
N corr .  15  2 (N - 15)
1

SPT – Data Correction….. cont.

b) Correction with respect to effective
overburden stress:
N corr .  C N N
where C N  a correction factor
Amongst a number of correction proposals is the

chart given by Peck, Hanson and Thornburn
(1974) in which :
C N  0.77 log (2000/ 'o )

CHAP 1 : SUBSURFACE
BEARING CAPACITYEXPLORATION
OF SOILS
Empirical Methods - SPT
Correlation of SPT N-values for overburden stress

(Peck, Hanson and Thornburn, 1974)
CHAP 1 : SUBSURFACE
OF SOILS Relationship
between N-value
Allowable bearing capacity of sands
and ’, Nq and N
Peck et al. proposed

approximate
relationships between
the N-value and the
peak angle of shearing
resistance and also the
bearing capacity
SOIL (ECG413)
MECHANICS (ECG426)
ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI factors. ARM 2014
ARM/FBI 201463
CHAP 1 : SUBSURFACE
OF SOILS Relationship between N-
value and allowable bearing
Allowable bearing capacity of sands pressure (after Terzaghi and
Peck, 1967)
The breadth of the footing and

the N-value are used as entry
data and the allowable
bearing capacity (qTP) is read
SOIL (ECG413)
MECHANICS (ECG426)
ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI off the left verticalARM/FBI
axis.2014
ARM 201464
The effect of water table may be taken into

account by applying the following correction :
1 Dw 
Cw  1  
2  D  B
where Dw = depth of water table below surface
D = founding depth below surface
B = footing breadth
Thus qa  C w qTP Yields conservative values with

settlement < 25 mm
For wide footings and rafts the limiting values

may be raised to 50 mm
Meyerhof (1965) suggested that the qTP values could be

increased by 50% and that no correction should be made
for the water table since the effect would be incorporated in
the measured N-values. He proposed the following simple
relationships;
sL N sL N
For B < 1.25 m : qa  For rafts : qa 
1.9 2.84
sL N  B  0.33
2
For B > 1.25 m : qa 
2.84  B 
where sL = permitted settlement limit
N = average N-value between z = D and z = D + B*
B = breadth of footing

1.5.2 : CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT)
The cone penetration test is a static penetration

test in which the device (Fig. 12.6) is pushed,
rather than being blows, into the soil.
The cone, which has an apex angle of 60° and

end diameter of 35.7 mm (giving an end area of
1000 mm2), is attached to a rod; this latter being
protected by an outer sleeve.
By applying a measured force to the rod, the

cone is pushed for about 80 mm into soil at a
uniform rate of penetration of 20 mm/s.
The ratio of the force required to the end area is

called the cone penetration resistance (qc)
A recent development is the ‘electric’ cone

penetrometer in which a load cell is incorporated,
thus enabling a continuous charted readout of
penetration resistance against depth.


CPT Data

CPT – Data Correlation and Application

The cone is pushed into the soil at a rate of 20 mm/s
and the cone resistance (qc) measured as the
maximum force recorded during penetration divided
by the end area.
A compressibility coefficient was suggested by de Beer

and Martens (1951):
1.5 qc
C
 'o
where;
qc = cone resistance (MPa)
 'o  effective overburden
pressure (MPa)

The settlement si at the centre of a layer of thickness
H is given by :
H   'o  q 
si  log  
C  ' 
 o 
where q  Increase in stress at the centre of the

layer due to a foundation pressure q


The above method is considered to overestimate the
value of si. A rapid method was suggested by Meyerhof
(1974).
qn B
si 
2q c
where qn  net applied loading = q -  'o
qc  average cone resistance over a depth

below the footing equal to the
breadth B


• Schmertmann’s method (1970)
• Schmertmann et al. ’s method (1978)
Probably the most thorough and reliable method for
computing immediate settlement from CPT results.
I z z
si  C1C2 qnet 
E
where : C1 = 1 – 0.5(σo’/qn) ; for qn < σo’ , C1 = 0.5
C2 = 1 + 0.2 log(10t) ; t is time in years
= 1.0 for immediately after construction case
Iz = vertical strain influence factor
∆z = thickness of sub layers
E = stiffness modulus = 2.5qc for square foundation (L/B=1.0)
= 3.5qc for long foundation (L/B>10)

Vertical strain
influence factor (after
Schmertmann et al,
1978)
CPT/SPT Relationship
Amongst the proposed relationships are :
qc  0.4N (MPa) Meyerhof (1956)
qc  0.25N (MPa) Meigh and Nixon (1961)

for silty fine sand
qc  1.2N (MPa) Meigh and Nixon (1961)

for coarse gravel
qc /N vs Av. grain size D50 (MPa)

Burland and Burbidge (1985)
– see NEXT SLIDE

Relationship between CPT and SPT (after Burland and Burbigde, 1985)

1.5.3 : JKR / MACKINTOSH PROBE TEST
 A light dynamic test where the cone is driven into the soil by 5.0 kg
hammer with free drops from a height of 280 mm
 Number of blows is recorded for every 300 mm penetration.
 The maximum number of blows for 300 mm is 400 or 12 m

penetration.
 Possible errors that may occur during this test are:

• Height of drop is not constant
• Applying force to the hammer
• Penetration depth not marked correctly
• Wrong counting of blows
• Bent rod
• Worn out threads

1.5.3.1 : COMPARATIVE DATA

SPT, JKR and Mackintosh Probe – comparative data

Cone (driving
point) Weight of Height of Energy per
Type of
Hammer Fall Unit Area
Penetrometer Diameter Area (kg) (mm) N·m/m2
(mm) (mm2)
JKR Probe 25 491 5 280 27972
Mackintosh
27.9 611 4.5 300 21675
Probe
SPT 50 1963 65 760 246874

Comparison of Energy between JKR Probe,

Mackintosh Probe & SPT
246874
i) Ratio of Energy of SPT to JKR Probe =  8.8
27972
246874
ii) Ratio of Energy of SPT to Mackintosh Probe =  11.4
21675
If the cone base diameter of Mackintosh probe is 25 mm, then;
246874
iii) Ratio of Energy of SPT to Mackintosh Probe =  9.2
26979

Correlation between JKR Probe, Mackintosh

Probe & SPT
(i) JKR Probe’s correlation with SPT-N value
JKR Nvalue
SPT Nvalue 
8.8
(ii) Mackintosh Probe’s correlation with SPT-N value
Mackintosh Nvalue
SPT Nvalue 
11.4
(iii) JKR Probe’s correlation with Mackintosh Probe value
26 JKR Nvalue  20 Mackintosh Probe Nvalue

SPT and JKR/Mackintosh Probe relationship – FINE SOIL

Unconfined
Unconfined JKR or
N Compressive
Consistency Compressive strength Mackintosh
(Blows/ft) strength, u
(Ton/Sq Ft) Probe (Blows/ft)
(kPa)
2 Very soft 0.00 – 0.25 0.0 – 25 0 – 10
2–4 Soft 0.25 – 0.50 25 - 50 10 – 20

Medium
4-8 0.50 – 1.00 50 – 100 20 – 40
(firm)
8 - 15- Stiff 1.00 – 2.00 100 – 200 40 – 70
15 - 30 Very stiff 2.00 – 4.00 200 – 400 70 – 100
Over 30 Hard 4.00 400 100
Relationship between SPT, Mackintosh/JKR probe and unconfined

compressive strength of fine soil.
SPT and JKR/Mackintosh Probe relationship - GRANULAR

JKR or
Allowable soil Allowable soil
N Relative Mackintosh
pressure pressure
(Blows/ft) density Probe
(Ton/Sq Ft) (kPa)
(Blows/ft)
0–4 Very loose Not suitable Not suitable 0 - 10
4 - 10 Loose 0.0 – 0.8 0 – 80 10 - 30
10 - 30 Medium 0.8 – 2.8 80 – 280 30 - 80
30 - 50 Dense 2.8 – 4.7 280 – 470 80 - 110

Note ;
Over 50 Very dense 4.7 470 110 1 Ton/sq ft =
100 kN/m2
Table above shows relationship between SPT, Mackintosh/JKR probe
and allowable soil pressure of granular soil.
1.5.4 : SHEAR VANE TEST
 Very often silts and clays, particularly those of alluvial or shallow water origin
are difficult to sample.
 The shear vane is used to measure the in situ undrained shear strength of
these soils.
 A four-bladed vane (Fig. 12.7) is driven into the soil at the end of the rod and
the vane then rotated at a constant rate between 6 and 12 deg./min. until the
cylinder of soil contained by the blades shears.
 The maximum torque required for this is recorded
 For weak soils (cu<50kPa) the blade size should be 75 mm wide by 150 mm
long, and for slightly stronger soils (50<cu<100kPa) 50 x 100 mm.
 Remoulded strength can be measured by rotating the vane at a faster rate.
 Depending on the nature of the soil, vane tests may be carried out down to
depths of 60-70 m.
Shear vane Apparatus
 d 2
d d
T  cu hd x  2 x 
 2 4 3

COMMON FIELD TESTS

1.5.5 : GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION
Certain geophysical properties, such as electrical resistance, vary from stratum to
stratum; a stratum boundry is therefore indicated by an anomaly in the
measurements of the particular property.
Nondestructive techniques used to provide spatial information on soils, rocks, and

hydrological and environmental conditions.
Do not actually measure engineering properties but provide indirect methods of soil
exploration.
They can be used economically to determine soil stratum boundaries, to locate

bedrock and water table levels
Required correlations with borelogs report
There two (2) types of geophysical method commonly use ;

1) Electrical Resistivity/Conductivity
2) Seismic Methods
i. Seismic Refraction Method
ii. Seismic Reflection Method
1.5.5.1 : Electrical Resistivity Test
1) Electrical Resistivity/Conductivity Test

• Can be used for identification and quantification of depth
of groundwater, detection of clays and measurement of
groundwater conductivity.
• Soil resistivity, measured in (ohm-cm), varies with
moisture content and temperature changes.
• In general, an increase in soil moisture results in a
reduction in soil resistivity.
• The pore fluid provides electrical paths in clays.
• Resistivities of wet fine-grained soils are generally much
lower than those of wet course-grained.
• The difference in resistivity between a soil in dry and in a
saturated condition may be several orders of magnitude
Soil profile from electrical resistivity tests

Correlation Data : Electrical Resistivity Method

1.5.5.2 : Seismic Method
2) Seismic Test
• Seismic investigations utilize the fact that surface waves

travel with different velocities through different materials
• The subsurface interfaces are determined by recording the
magnitude and travel time of the seismic waves.
• For shallow depths of investigation, the ground surface is
pounded by a sledgehammer to generate the seismic
waves; for large depth, a small explosive charge is used.
• Seismic reflection and refraction are used in geotechnical
site characterization.

1.5.5.2 : Seismic Test ; 1) Reflection Method
1) Seismic Reflection Method



1.5.5.2 : Seismic Test ; 2) Refraction Method
2) Seismic Refraction Method

1.5.5.2 : Seismic Test ; 2) Refraction Method

Comparison of seismic reflection ray and refraction ray paths

Correlation Data : Seismic Wave Method

Soil profile from a multichannel analysis of surface wave from seismic test

1.6 : LABORATORY TESTING
CLASSIFICATION TEST; b) Sedimentation analysis

Particle Size Distribution Tests (Hydrometer )
a) Sieve Analysis

CLASSIFICATION TEST; Atterberg’s Limit Tests
a) Liquid Limit Determination b) Plastic Limit Determination

TRIAXIAL TESTS CONSOLIDATION TEST
To determine drained and undrained To determine compressibility

soil strength parameters parameters of soils
1.7 : SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT
A S.I report is usually the culmination of the investigation, exploration and testing
programme. A typical report will normally include the following;
1. Introduction
A brief summary of the proposed works, the investigation carried out, the location
of the site and significant names and dates.
2. Description of site
A general description of the site, its topography and main features ~ details of
previous development, details access; existing works, underground opening,
drainage, etc. A map showing site location, adjoining land and borehole locations.
3. Geology of the Site

A description of overall geology related to the regional geology of the area,
description of main soil, rock formations and structures, comments on the
influences of geology on design and construction.
4. Soil Conditions
A detailed account of the soil conditions encountered, related to the design and
construction of the proposed works, description of all the relevant layers,
laboratory results and in-situ test, details of gwt and drainage conditions.
1.7 : SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT
5. Construction Materials
A detailed account of the nature, quantity, availability and significant properties of
materials considered for construction purposes.
6. Comments and Construction Review

Comments are necessary on the validity and reliability of the information being
presented where further work is required this should be mentioned, if the brief is
also make recommendation these should include consideration of alternative
methods of both design and construction
7. Appendices
It is convenient to assemble most of the collected data into a series of appendices;
borehole logs, lab test and results, in-situ test results, geophysical survey records,
references, relevant literature extracts etc.

REFERENCES
1. Muni Budhu. (2011). Soil Mechanics and Foundations, 3rd

Edition. John Wiley & Sons.
2. Whitlow, R. (2004). Basic Soil Mechanics, 4th Edition. Pearson
Prentice Hall.
3. Lecturer’s notes** ~ Haron, H.A., Baharom, B, and Kamarudin, F
**Some extractions were made especially on the photos and schematic diagrams.

1 Subsurface Study

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

1 Subsurface Study

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CHAP 1 : SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

ECG553 GEOTECHNIQUES : PART 4

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 1

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 2

At the end of this chapter, student should be able to:

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 3

1.5 Insitu Testing

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 5

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 6

The purpose of all site investigation is the identification of the

Comprehensive accumulation of information on the ground and its

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 7

1) To assess the general suitability of the site and neighbour -

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 8

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 9

Collection of information relating to the site

Early examination of the site by appropriate experts

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 10

3. DETAILED SITE EXPLORATION AND SAMPLING

Investigation of detailed geology and subsurface soil condition

4. LABORATORY TESTING OF SAMPLES

Tests on disturbed and undisturbed samples

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 11

Detailed of geological study, including structures, stratigraphy and mapping;

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 12

1.2 : METHODS OF EXPLORATION

a) Geological nature of the site

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 13

1.2 : METHODS OF EXPLORATION

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 14

Multi-storey / Flat Landslide

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 16

1.2 : METHODS OF EXPLORATION

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 18

An engineer supervising and marking Trial pit showing soil Profiles

A Very Large Trial Pit

HAND OR POWER AUGERS

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 21

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 22

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 23

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 24

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 25

Water is pumped though a

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 26

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 27

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 29

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 30

 Rotary drilling method of boring is useful in case of highly resistant strata.

1.2.3 : Wash / Rotary Boring

METHOD ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 32

The subsurface conditions

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 33

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 34

Top Soil - Sea Bad : fine SAND.

Medium dense, light grey fine to coarse silty . . . . . . 1.50 S1 2 3 4 6 6 7 23 22 1.5

SAND. (S-M) . . . . . 1.95 D1

Dense, grey poorly graded GRAVEL. (GP) . . . . . . 4.50 S3 3 5 7 7 8 8 30 20 4.5

Dense, grey poorly graded SAND. (SP) . . . . . . 6.00 S4 4 4 6 8 8 9 31 18 6

Medium dense, red poorly graded GRAVEL. . . . . . . 7.50 S5 3 4 5 5 5 6 21 20 7.5

= Standard Penetration Test (SPT) REMARKS

ECG553-Geotechniques/Shah Alam Campus/FBI 35

Generalized Soil Profile

22.5 12 Stiff toVeryStiff CLAY