477

EVALUATION OF BASE AND SUBGR,{DE LAYER MODULI

USTNG DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER

Jian-Neng WANG, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Ching-Yun Institute of Technology
2F ,68, Ln 422, Sec 2, Chung-Shan E Rd
Chungli 320, Taiwan
Tel: 886-3-456-8088
Fax: 886-3-466-4628

Dar-Hao CHEN, Ph.D., P.E.

Pavement Rcsearch Engineer
Texas Department of Transportati on
Pavements Section, 4203 Bull Creek Road,
Austin TX 78731, USA
Tel: 512-467 -3963.
E-mail : [email protected]. us

E-mail: [email protected]
John BILYEU
Data Analysis Specialist
Texas Department of Transportation,
Pavements Section, 4203 Bull Creek Road
Austin TX 78731, USA
Tel: 512-465-3677
E-mail : JB [email protected]

Abstract: The Dt'namic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) has become a cost-saving altemative for
characterizing the properties ofpavement layers. The goals of this study were to recommend a
method to estimate modulus through DCP testing, to compare the moduli from different test
methods, and to investigate any changes in stifftress using liquid stabilizers. Over 100 DCP
tests have been conducted at various sites. Some were conducted on four full-scale APT
sections. Several others have been done on in-service pavement sections. The FWD and
SASW tests were conducted to compare the moduli from DCP measurerients. The moduli
from DCP tests are compatible with those from FWD-MDD tests. The moduli of base layers
obtained from SASW testing were about 1.2 times higher than those from FWD-MDD tests,
while subgrade moduli were about 2.3 times larger. Test results indicate the use of stabilizer did
not improve the stiffnesses bfbase and subgrade layers.

Key Words: DCP, modulus. FWD, base, subgrade

I.INTRODUCTION
The Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) has been used to determine the bearing capacity of
base and subgrade layers without digging test pits or collecting soil samples. The determination
of in-situ California Bearing Ratio (CBR) by conventional methods is time-conzuming and
requires the use of costly equipment. The DCP is one of least expensive devices that can be
used to characterize base and subgrade properties, A complete set up of the DCP equipment
costs less than $ I 600. The DCP sen,es as an excellent tool for construction inspection; it has
the ability to verifr both the level and uniforrnity of compaction. In addition, the layerthickness
can be determined from the changing slope of the depth vs. accumulated blows profile. Livneh
et al. (1989) demonstrated that the results from penetration tests correlate u,ell with in-situ CBR

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3, No.1, Octobcr, 2001

478
Jian-Neng WANC, Dar-Hao CHEN and John BILYEU

values. In addition, the layer thickness obtained from DCP tests corresponds reasonably to the
thickness obtained in the test pits, and they.concluded that the DCP tests are a reliable
altemative for project evaluation. Harrison (1986) also found that there is a strong correlation
between CBR and DCP results. He reported that changes in moisture content and dry density do
not affect the CBR-DCP relationship. With such close relationship between CBR and DCP,
pavement engineers are now able to use the DCP for rapid field inspection.
More than

a dozen

DOTs and federal agencies are cunently using the DCP to assess the strength

highway structures (Siekmeier et al., 2000). For example, MnDOT

(Burnham, 1996) adopted a requirement that the subgrade CBR should be at least 6 to minimize
rutting damage to the finished grade (prior to paving) and to provide adequate subgrade support
for proper compaction of the base and other layers. Soils with CBR values of less than 8 may
need remedial procedures, such as sub-cutting, drying and compaction, backfilling with
granular borrou,, or lime treatment. They also adopt the same equation developed in i992 by
the LrS Arml,Engineers Waterways Experiment Station to compute the CBR value (Webster el
al.,1992). They found that the effects ofsoil moisture content and dry density influence both
CBR and DCP values in a similar rvay and are considered negligible for the correlation.
and uniformity

of

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has used stabilized subgrades and bases
extensively. [n fact, subgrade stabi]ization is almost routine in many districts, especially in
those rvith clay subgrades. A pressing need exists to determine the effectiveness ofstabilization
of subgrades and base courses, to evaluate the current mixtures and thickness design approaches
and to suggest realistic structural properties associated with these stabilized pavement layers.
The Texas Transportation Institute conducted extensive research using the Falling Weight
Deflectometer (FWD) and DCP to understand the mechanism of stabilization and engineering
improvements in calcareous bases and subgrade layers [Little et al. 1995; Chen e[ al.200lb].
The Kansas Department of Transportation has been using the FWD and DCP for pavement
evaluation since the early 1990s (Chen, l. et al. 1999). The DCP was used to verifu FWD
measurements and moduli backcalculated from the deflection data. The DCP helps researchers
to provide recommendations for modifications to current TxDOT mixture and thickness design
approaches. The goal is to minimize structural damage within the stabilized base layer due to
cracking unrelated to load, and load-associated fatigue cracking.

2. BACKGROUND

Rapid in-situ strengh testing provides transportation agencies the opportunity to conduct
quality assurance programs based on strength or modulus measurements. As a result, different
devices rvill be applied in the field, and the correlation among those devices will be important.
Also, the DCP is usefirl when the back-calculated moduli from Falling Weight Deflectometer
(FWD) data is in question, such as when the AC thickness is less than 3 inches, or when shallow
bedrock is present. These two situations often cause a misinterpretation of FWD data. The
DCP can be applied in these two situations to increase t}te accuracy of the stiffiress
measurement. In addition, an FWD test may not be conducted directly on weak subgrade and/or
base layers due to the large deflections that can exceed the equipment's calibration limit. In
addition, many backcalculation programs are based on a linear-elastic concept, and testing on
weak subgrade and base layers may cause nonlinear deformation.

Before the DCP can evaluate layer stiffness, an empirical correlation needs to be established.
Many equations have been proposed in the past to correlate DCP results to CBR values, and

Proccedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3,

No.l, October,

2001

479
Evaluation of Base and Subgrade Layer Moduli Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

CBR values to moduli. Those empirical equations were reviewed, evaluated and compared
against the results obtained from the Mobile Load Simulator (MLS) project. The MLS is a full
scale, accelerated pavement testing (APT) device. In this study, over 60 DCP tests have been
conducted on or near four test sections located on the south and no(h bound lanes ofUS28l
near Jacksboro, Texas. From the same test site, FWD, Iaboratory, Spectral Analysis of Surface
Waves (SASW), and in-situ instrumentation results are available for comparison. In addition,
40 more DCP and FWD tests have been conducted on several in-sen'ice pavement sections.

3. DCP TESTING PROGRAM

3.1 Test Section
The majority of the test results (FWD, SASW, DCP) used in this study rvere from US28 I. Thus,
(in each
a detailed description is presented for this test site only. US28l is a two-lane high'*'ay
Pavement
District
Worth
Fort
direction, a totaL of four lanes) in the Fort Worth District. The
Engineer indicated that there was an average of3,100 vehicles per day (1,550 per direction) in
tgg+. fne percentage of trucks is approximately 17.4Yo. The first asphalt layer of the test

section was construcied

in 1957. There were four major overlays/rehabilitations that

rvere

completed in 197 I , 1976, 1986, and 1995. There were four major upgrades/rehabilitations that
wereconrpletedin 197i, 1976,1986,and 1995. Thelastmajorrehabilitationwasdouein 1995,
rvith asphalt concrete processes. The layers most tested by DCP for this study are the 380mm
flexible base and softlaverage modulus 86 MPa) subgrade. Neither of these layers has been
was
reworked since the road was originally constructed in 1957. Accelerated pavement testing
ESALs
388,800
and
972,000
.
Approximately
US281
lanes
of
north
bound
and
south
appiied on
this
were applied by the Texas MLS to the south and north bound lanes, respectively. Details of
,.r.*"h can be found in references (Chen and Hugo, 1998; 2001a)'
The DCp and FWD were applied to three job sites in the Dallas Dislrict (IH635FR, FM 2818'
IH30) and one site in the Auitin District (US290). These four projects were chemically treated
with liquid stabilizer. The effectiveness of chemical treatrnents was evaluated based on
stiffness measurements of the stabilized layers and adjacent non-stabilized layers'

of
Two sections of US290 were tested. Both sections consist of 2 inches of AC over 12 inches
the
of
the
base
is
that
two
sections
the
between
difference
The
only
crushed limestone base.
first section was treated with ENI liquid stabilizer.
inches
The pavement structure of frontage road (FR) IH635 consists of a 4-inch AC on top of 24

of

liquid-stabilized (EMC squared/EMS) subgrade. Figure

shows the preparation of

implementing DCP and FWD tests on IH635'

treated
The pavement of IH 30 consists of a 7 inches of AC and 8 inches of EMC Squared/EMS
subgrade.

were tested
The FM28l8 pavement structure also has 4 inches of AC. Two different sections
of
with the DCp and FWD. The first pavement section included 4 inches of AC over 12 inches
approximately
on
subgrade mo<iified with EMC Squared/EMS. This section was constructed
(within the fill material) there are another
I 5 feet of fill material. Down approximately I 0 feet
section of FM28l8
12 inches of subgrade modified with EIvIC Squared/EMS. The second
Squared/EMS'
EMC
with
treated
included 4 inches of HMAC over 6 inches of subgrade

Proceedings of rhe Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3,

No.l, Octoher

2001

480
Jian-Neng WANG, Dar-Hao CHEN and John BILYEU

3.2 DCP Testing

Livnch et at. (1995) reported that vertical confinement effects on DCP values (due to upper
asphalt layers) do exist. Since this is the true effect of the pavement structure, any DCP
measurement for pavement evaluation purposes should be performed through a narrow hole in
the asphalt layers and not after removal of a wide strip of asphalt (Livneh et a\.,1995).

Three types of DCP tests'6,ere conducted on US281 to investigate the eft-ects of test procedure
on DCP results. The most common procedure involved drilling through the AC layers, about
200mm (7.5-8 inches) in this case. Then, the DCP was started on the top of the base layer.
DCP tests were also conducted u'hen the asphalt layers were removed for another reason, such
as to collect core samples, install sensors, or remove larger blocks of AC for Nuclear Density
Gauge tests. These tests were considered similar to the drilled-AC tests, though the removal of
overburden pressure may have raised the penetration rate. The third fype of DCP test was

conducted with no drilling or removal of the AC layers. As this method u'as very laborintensive and damaging to the equipmen! only 9 such tests were run. Some of the DCP tests'
were conducted after traffic load was applied to observe any effects on the DCP

values.

Some

modifications in both the testing apparatus and the testing procedure procedures have been
reported by Livneh, M. et al. (2000) and Livneh, M. (2000).
'fables

I through 4 shorv the DCP results obtained in this study. As observed in Tables 1 to 4.
Coefficients of Variation (COVs) from subgrade data are higher than from base data. Since
varied test procedures would affect results by at least 10oh,it is preferable to conduct all DCP
tests through a drilled hole. Figure 2 shows the DCP values for base and subgrade layers of all
test sections; each different mark represents the ayerage value for individual DCP testing.
Since varied test procedurcs would affect results by at least
DCP tests through a drilled hole.

llyo,it

is preferable to conduct all

4. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DCP AND CBRVALUES

4.l Correlation Equation Between DCP and CBR

For a rvide range of granular and cohesive materials, Corps of Engineers found a relationship as
in Eq. 1 (\\/ebster et a|.,1992). Eq. I has been adopted by many researchers and practitioners
(Livneh 1995, Webster'et aL.,1992, Siekmeier et a1.,2000) and u.ill be used in this study as

well.
log CBR

2.465

- l.l2

Qog PR)

or

CBR=2?2/PR|

t2

(t)

Wherc CBR: California Bearing Ratio

PR: the penetration through the layer in units of mm./blow

4.2 Equations to Relate CBR to Modulus

One of the most commonly required inputs in pavement design is the modulus value. Thus, the
relationship between CBR and modulus becomes essential to implement the DCP in pavement
evaluation. The 1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures adopted Eq. 2 lbr

Procecdings of the Eastem Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3, No.1. Octoher. 2001

481

Evaluation of Base and Subgrade Layer Moduli Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

calculating moduli (E), which was proposed by Huekelom and Klomp (1962)

E(psl

1500 *

CBR

or

E(MPa) = 10.34 * CBR'

(2)

The moduli from which this correlation rvas developed ranged from 750 to 3000 times the CBR.
Also, the formula is limited to fine-grained soil with a soaked CBR of 10 or less. Porvell el a/
(1984) indicated a relationship between modulus and CBR as

E(psi)

2500 * CBR0'64

or E(l[Pa)

17.58

'+

(3)

CBRq6a

Eq. 3 was selected to compute modutus values in this study. A relationship betrveen CBR and
*odrlw has been reported by Van Til et al. (1972). This study also compared the moduli
obtained from all CBR'Modulus relationship.

5. CONIPARISON OF

MODULI FROM DCP AND OTHERTEST METHODS

5.1Moduli from FWD-MDD Tests

of
Deflection profiles from FWD tests provide information valuable for the assessment
backcalculated
the
pavement layer moduli through a backcalculation process. The use-of
verification of
moduli is often obtained from a best fit to the measured deflection profile. The
judgment;
*d !?)
backcalculated moduli has been done in two ways: (1) engineering
(1992)
al'
et
Kim
t:sting'
comparison with othertest results such as laboratory and field seismic
Deflectometer
a
Multi-Depth
and Uzan and Scullion (1990) applied FWD tests on top of

(II{DD) and measured the resulting surface deflections and depth deflections simultaneously
deflections measured
using both the FWD geophones unJth" MDD. They found that the depth
and
dependability of
accuracy
the
evaluating
Uy tie MDD could be a powerful tool in
the FWD-MDD
of
a
schematic
shows
3
Fig'
data'
backcalculated moduli values from FWD
test.

proximity to the MDDs with

Four different loads, 25,40,52, and 67 kN, were applied in close
Only thc results from
each load repeated three times !o examine the repeatability of the results.
test
is given in Chen el
40 kN loads were reported here. Detailed discussion of the FWD-MDD
al. (1999).
measured by

Moduli were found through several iterative computations to reconcile deflections

subgrade layers were
the FWD (on the surfaceJ and MDD (at depth). Note that the base and
trafficking were
during
moduli
in 1953. Only small changes in base and subgrade
constructed
expected.

5.2 Moduli from SASW Tests

modulus of each layer of
In this study, the data from the SASW tests were used to estimate the
determine the modulus
to
be
used
can
method
the pa.,ement at each test section. The SASW
aspects of the SASW
experimental
and
theoretical
the
profile of a pavement section, Detail of
Table 5 presents the
(1998)'
et
al.
Yuan
(1995)
and
et
al.
method can be found inNazarian
after
trafficking'
and
before
for
both
methods
and
SASW
moduli from the FWD-MDD

octobcr, 2001
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for'llansportation Studics. Vol.3, No.1,

482
Jian-Neng WANG, Dar-Hao CHEN and John BILYEU

5.3 Moduli from Laborator-v Tests

Ten Shelby-tube samples were collected for lab testing. The lab tests (for resilient modulus)
rvere performed at the Texas Transportation Institute. Three different deviator stresses and two

confining pressures were applied in the testing. The tests were conducted under triaxial
conditions to obtain modulus values and permanent deformation properties up to 20,000 load
applications. It is not the scope of this study to discuss the permanent deformition properties.

The modulus vaiues presented here are determined at the 200th Ioad repetition. The
of the modulus values through laboratory testing is well documented in the

detcrmination

literature. The modulus values and the corresponding deviator stresses and confining pressrues
6. From analyses using the program BISAR, it was found that the deviator
stresses and confining pressures for the pavement structure under a 40 kN load are
are given in Table

approximately 20 to 35 kPa (3 to'5 psi) and 7 to 14 kPa (l to 2 psi) respectively, For the deviator
stresses and confining pressures the pavement rvill encounter, the modulus values are.
approximately 96 to 103 MPa (14 to l5 ksi).

5..1

Comparison of N{oduli for DCP and Other Tests

Comparisons of the modulus values from different test methods are presented in Fig. 4. The
DCP-determined moduli of base and subgrade layers were very close to those obtained from
FWD-MDD tests. The comparison shows the DCPdetermined moduli obtained from Eq. 3
were much better than those &om others. ln addition, the moduli from Eq. 2 rvere much hig-her
than those moduli from other Equation or chart especially for base layers. Using Eq, t to
compute CBR and then using Eq. 3 to compute moduli values agreed well in this
Eq. 3 hus
"ar".
been recommended to TxDor for fiuther evaluation and routine analysis.
The laboratory determined subgrade moduli were higher than those from DCp and FWD-MDD
tests' No correction factor was required for the backcalculated moduli to match the laboratory
moduli.

The effects of MLS loaaing on base and subgrade layers of the 28lS site were investigated.
Prior to MLS loading, the average CBR values of 69 and l2 (moduli values of 262 and 86 Mpa;
rvere found for base and subgrade, respectivell'. Af,er approximately 972,000 ESALs of MLS
loading, tJre average CBR values of 57 and l2 (moduli values of 232 and 83 MPa) were found
for those layers. The DCP tests were conducted from the top of the base through holes drilled in
the AC. There were insigaificant changes (less than l0%) in the coefficient values before and
after loading. Also, the average moduli values for the subgrade were approximately the same
before and after trafficking. DCP testing indicated a reduction in base modulus value from 262

to 232 MPa. The subsurface layers did not deteriorate much due to the surface loading,
probably because of the thick AC cover and the fact that they have been in service since 1957.

FWD-MDD test results at the above section also indicated the subgrade moduli were
approximately the same before and after MLS testing. The reduction in base moduli due to
loading, according to FWD-MDD tests, was 241 to 220 Mpa. After 972,000 ESALs no
cracking had been observed, and the average rut depth was approximately 4mm.

Proccedings of the Eastem Asia Society for Transportation Studies, vol.3, No.1, october, 2001

Evaluation of Base and Subgrade Layer Moduli Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

The laboratory determined subgrade moduli were only slightly higher than those from DCP and
FWD-MDD tlsts. The moduli of base andsubgrade obtained from SASW testing were about
1.2 and 2.3 times as large as those from FWD-MDD testing, respectively'

6. STIFFNESS EVALUATION OF STABILIZED BASE AND SUBGRADE

well
The cost effectiveness of the lime, cement and flyash stabilized base and subgrade has been
recognized. However, the limitations of each treatment are equally real. Normally, cement is
usedlo treat sandy soils and lime is applied to stabilize clay materials. However, the presence
of sulfate may render a lime treatment ineffective and cause the soil to expand' Premature
to
failures of lime stabilization projects have been reported by the Dallas District in areas known
soilpH
of
a
the
have ciays rvith a high-sulfate content. Lime treatment will generally increase
Horv""er, due to nJn-ionic and neutral pH properties of this blend of stabilizers, the soil pH
does not radically change.

Chemical treatment could be a viable alternative

to lime when heating the

sulfate-rich

two
expansive clay. One of objectives of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of

and
chemical treatments using Ei'Jt, and a blend of EMC Squared and EMS stabilizers. FWD
in
changes
any
determine
projects
to
tests *ere conducted on four liquid-stabilized

DCp

stiffness due to application ofthe liquid stabilizers.

below the
For IH 635, an effort was made to determine the untreated subgrade modulus value
be
observed
can
gain
stiffness
in
no
results,
DCP
the
on
Based
Fig.S.
treated layer, as shown in
subgrade
a
lime-stabilized
have
to
not
uncommon
is
It
subgrade.
in this EMC Squared-treateJ
that the
indicated
moduli
backcalculated
FWD
and
DCP
Both
MPa.
IOOO
layer exceeding
Comparison of
modulus of the EMC Squared-treated subgrade layer was less than 173 MPa'
was found no gain in
the treated subgrade *i tt" underlying uotreated subgrade of FM28l8
76 MPa for
strength, as shJwn in Fig. 6. The modulus from DCP results was approximately
subgrade in
treated
of
the
(1
both treated and untreate-<l sections. The average modulus 17 MPa)
was
This
conclusion
(76
MPa).
this area is higher than from IH635FR (62 MPa) and FM2828
but
due
the
treatment
to
due
was
not
area
based on DCitest results. The higher strength in this
of
comparison
the
from
derived
was
to higher quality of the existing u1ut"tiul. This observation
the treated layer may
the treated and untreated subgrade below. For 1H30, FigUre 7 shows how
EN
1 treated base, and
the
from
results
test
The
be stiffer or softer than the un-clerlying subgrade.
by using
was
observed
gain
in
stiffness
no
that
indicate
EMC Squared/EMs treated subgrade
in other
materials
subgrade
and
base
the
may
improve
the liquid stabilizers. The stabilizers
no
indicate
study
this
tests
in
in'situ
the
but
etc.)
heave,
as permeability, frost
*uyr

iro"t

improvement in stiffness'

,.lo*"rosloNs
pavements located on the
For this study, over 60 DCP tests were conducted on or near two test
sites have been used
The
same
Texas.
Jacksboro,
near
south and north bound lanes ofUS281
are available' The
methods
other
test
many
from
values
for the MLS project, so the moduli
moduli were
the
DCP
and
were
studied
values
DCP
the
on
effects of testing conditions
40
more DCP
In
addition,
tests.
laboratory
and
SASW
FWD-MDD,
from
.o*f*"a with tiose
conclusions
The
ana iWO tests have been conducted at several in-service pavement sections.

Vol.3,
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Srudies,

No.l, October, 2001

Jian-Neng WANG, Dar-Hao CHEN andJohn BILyEU

are given as follows;

It was found that using Eq. 1 to compute CBR and then using Eq. 3 to compute moduli
from DCP tests yielded cornpatible results with those from FWD-MDD iests. Eq. 3
has been recommended to TxDOT for further evaluation and/or adoption into routlne
analysis.

r
'

The laboratory-determined subgrade moduli were only slightly higher than those from
DCP and FWD-MDD tests. The 1993 AASHTO Design Guide suggested that a facror
of 0.33 should be applied to backcalculated moduli to match laboratory moduli. The
factor is not applicable in this case.
The moduli of base and subgrade obtained from SASW testing rvere about 1.2 and2.3
times higher than those from FWD-MDD testing, respectively.
Based on test results from treated and non-treated materials, there is no eviclence to
suppofi the claim that the chemical treatrnents lead to increased stiffness. Using these'
liquid stabilizers did not lead to a consistent, measurable increase in stiffness.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to Mr. Ken Fults and Dr. Mike
Murphy for their input and support. Special thanks are extendcd to Mr. Cy Helms for
conducting field tests and collecting data. Thanks also go to }v{r. Tom Scullion of the Texas
Transportation Institute and Dr. Deren Yuan of the University of Texas at El paso for laboratory
triaxial and SASW testing.

REF'ERT'NCES
Bumham, T. (1996) Application of the Dl.namic Cone Penetrometer to Mn/DOT's pavemenr
office of Minnesota Road Research.

Assessment Procedures,-Revised Draft Report.

Chen, Dar-Hao and Hugo, F. (1998) Test Results and Analyses of the Full-Scale Accelerated
Pavement Testing of TxMLS, Journal of rransportation Engineering, ASCE, vol. 124 No.

5,479-490.

chen, Dar-Hao, and Bilyeu, J., Hugo, H. (1999) Monitoring pavement Response and
Performance Using in-Situ lnstrumentation Under Full-Scale Accelerated Loading, Field
Instrumentation for Soil and Rock, ASTM STP 1358, lzl-l34,American Society for Testing
and

Materials.

.,

Chen, Dar-Hao, and Hugo, H. (2001a) Comparison of the Effectiveness of Two Pavement
Rehabilitation Strategies, Journal of rransportation Engineering, ASCE, vol. 127, No.2,
47-58.

chen, Dar-Hao, Bilyeu, J., and Murphy, M. (2001b) Stiffness Evaluarion

of

chemical

Stabilizers Used in the Dallas urd Austin Districts, Report Prepared for The Texas Department
of Transportation.

chen, J., Hossian, M., LaTorelia, T. M. (1999) Use of Falling weight Deflectometer and

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia society for Transportation studies, vol.3.

No.l, october, 2001

485

Evaluation of Base and Subgade hyer Moduli Using Dynamic cone Penetrometer

in

Pavement Evalu4tion, Transportation Research Board,

Transportation Research Record 1655, 145'l 5 l.

Dynamic Cone Penetrometff

Harrison J.A, (1986) Correlation of CBR and Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Strength
Measurement of Soils, Ausfralian Road Research, Vol. 16, No.2, 130-136'
Heukelom. W. and Klomp, A.J.G. (1962) Dynamic Testing as Means of Controlling Pavements

During and After Construction, Proceedings of the First International Conference on

Structural Design of Asphalt Pavement, University of Michigan'
Kim, Y. R., Khosla, N.P., Satish, S., and Scullion, T. (1992) Validation of Moduli
Backcalculation Procedures Using Multi-depth Deflectometers Installed in Various Flexible
pavernent Structures, Transportation Research Board, Transportation Rescarch Record
L377, t28-142.

Little DN, Scullion T, Kota PBVS, Bhuiyan, J. (1995) Identification of the Structural Benefits
of Base and Subgrade Stabilization, Repon Number TTl-1287-2, Texas Trausportation
Institute.

Livneh, M. (1989) Validation of Conelations Between a Number of Penetration Tests and In

Situ Califomia Bearing Ratio Tests, Transportation Research Board, Transportation
Research Record 1219.
Livneh, \4.. Ishai. I., and Livneh, N. (1995) Effect of Vertical Confinement on Dynatnic Cone
penetrometer Strength Values in Pavement and Subgrade Evaluations, Transportation Research
Board, Transportation Research Record 1473, l-8.

Livneh. M., Livneh, N. and Ishai, I. (2000) The Israeli Experience with the Regular and
Extended Dynamic Cone Penetrometer for Pavement and Subsoil-Strength Evaluation.
Volume, ASTM
Nondestructive Testing of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli: Third
STP 1375, 189-213, American Society for Testing and Materials'
Livneh, N{. (2000) Friction Correction Equation for the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in Subsoil
1714,
StrengJh Testing, Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Record
89-97.

with
Nazarian. S., Yuan, D., and Baker, M. (1995) Rapid Determination of Pavement Moduli
Texas
of
The
University
1243'1,
Report
Research
Method,
Spectral-analysis-of Surfacp-waves
at El Paso.

Design of
Porvell, \\/.D., Potter, J.F., Mayhew, H.C., and Nunn, M.E. (1984) The Structural
1132.
Bituminous Roads, TRRL Report LR
cone
siekmeier, J.A., Young, Duane, and Beberg, P. (2000) comparison of the Dynamic
penetrometer Witfr Otiter Tests During subgiade and Granular Base Characterization in
Third
Minnesota, Nondestructive Testing of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli:
Materials'
and
Testing
for
Society
American
175-188,
Volume, ASTM STP 1375,
Uzan, J., and Scullion, T. (1990) Verification of Backcalculation Procedures, Proceeding
Third International Conference on Bearing capacity of Roads and Airfields, Trondheim,
Norway, 447-458.
van Til, c. J., McCullough, B. F., Vallerga, B. A. and Hick, R. G. (1972) Evaluation of
AASHO lnrerim Guides for Design of Pavernent Structures, NCHRP Report 128, Highu'ay
Research Board.

Webster S.L., Grau, R.H., and Williams, R.P. (1992) Description and Application of Dual Mass

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3, No.1, Octobeq 2001

486
Jian-Neng WANG, Dar-Hao CHEN and John BILYEU

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Instruction
Report, No. GL-92-3.
Yuan, D., Nazarian, S., Chen, D-H, and Hugo, F. (1998) Use of Seismic Pavement Analyzer in
Monitoring Degradation of Flexible Pavement Under Texas Mobile Load simulator (A Case
Study), Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Record No. 1615. 3- 10.

Table 1. DCP Results for 281S (Through a Drilled Hole)

Tests)
mm/blow CBR

Before MLS Loading

Subgrade (10 Tests)

Base (10

Average
St.Dev.

cov

3.76
0.67
18%

262
l+

20%

Tests)
mm/blow CBR

mm,/blow CBR

Modulus
(MPa)

13%

Average

18.59

St.Dev.

7.26

COV

39%

St.Dev.

cov

4.46
0.77
%17

12

20

36%

After MLS Loading

Base (9

Average

Modulus
(MPa)

Subgrade (9 Tests)

mm/blou'

Modulus
(MPa)

57

232

t1

30

Average
St.Dev.

13%

CBR

19.49
5.97

t2

31%

33%

Modulus
(MPa)
17

21%

Table 2. DCP Results Before MLS Loading for 281N (Through a Drillerl Hole)
Base

(l I

Tests)

mm/blorv CBR
Average

3.75

St.Dev.

0.77

21%

Subgrade (10 Tests)

46

28%

mm./blow

Modulus
(MPa)

Average

14.05

St.Dev.

4.82

CBR

Modulus
(MPa)

I8

110

t7%

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society fur Transponation Studies, Vol.3, No.1, October, 2001

24

187

Evaluation of Base and Subgrade I-ayer Moduli Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Table 3. DCP Results After MLS Loading for 281S

Through Removal of AC Slab

Tests)
mm/blow CBR

Subgrade (3 Teqls)

Base (3

46

Averase 5.29
|
13%

St.Der,.

0.'7

COV

mm/blow CBR

Modulus

t6%

(MPa)
203 Average

Modulus

(MPa)

t4

92
JJ

57%

36%

17.75

2l

St.Dev.

7.19

t0%

cov

41%

Through AC Surface
Base

Tests)

Su

Tests

mm/blow

rnm/blou'

CBR

Modulus

3.78

70

264

Aver

St.Dev.

0.79

2t

48

St.Dev.

COV

2t%

30%

t8%

COV

CBR

13.52

Modulus

t7

Tahle 4. DCP Results for other Pavcment Sections

FM2818 (Treated Subgrade, 7 Tests)

IH 365 (Subgrade, 7 Tests)

CBR

nln/blow

(MPa)
10.29

Average

27 .94

9.35

St.Dev.

4.22

6.60

4.20

T5%

7t%

4t%

COV

mm/blow CBR

N{odulus

(MPa)

St.Dev.

Tests)
,n.lblotu CBR Modulus

cov

sro.r,.

cov

+.

+0

zo

zo

t7%

28%

22?.,

20 .98

9.68

1.06

0.53

5%

6%

0.39

IH 30 ($ubgrade, 5 Tests)

FM2818 (Untreated Subgrade, 7

Modulus

mm/blow CBR

st.o"u.

cov

tz'

?l

'

qa

9't%

13%

Modulus

to ' ro
6l%

U5290/281 Intersectiori (Base, 2 Tests)

mrn/blow

CBR

Modulus

Averase 0.22

1316

251

Table 5. Moduli from FWD-NIDD and SASW Tests

Modulus (MPa)
Site

F'WD-MDD

before
281 S

241

after
220

281N

262

255

FWD-lv{DD
after

SASW

before After before

290
308

293
252

hefore

After

76

69

168

172

69

69

170

140

Proceedings of the Eastem Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol-3, No.1, October, 2001

188

Jian-Ncns

\\ANG. Dar-Hao Cll[,N

and John

I]ll.\'l:U

Table 6. l\Ioduli from Laboratory I'riaxial Tests

Laboratory Triaxial l-esting
S

iit

at i\

(kPa)

Confinine (kPa)

Nlodulus (l\{Pa)

34

14

105

l4

l+

Deviator

96

2r
69

["igure

l. Prcparation for F\\'D

l4

25

and DCI'Tests on 111635

Proccedings rrf lhc Easlern .Asia Societv forTr;rnsportation Studies, Vtrl..l. No.1. October. 2001

489
Evaluation of Base and Subgrade layer

Mo&li

Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

t0

9E
-9

E6
E

!x.

==a
o
o

tr

tI

o-

o
o

FI

a
E

a
E

0
U32CtN

(b.lor

I L8)

(.lt.r
Lr)

U82,tX

(D.lo.
L8)

U82!t3
tt

U32tl8

{rtr.r

U32t0

t Lt)

Tert Section (8a;e)

(A)
i0

Bro
-9

tt
E
E

-20

o
Q'

tr
o.

8,o

x
x

td

t
*'
A

;a

x
a

*I

x
A

I
us2EtN us2alN u32'{s

us2t13

,b.torltlsl ,eltr.llLsl lb.forrllsl lrfr.rlrlsl

1H633 FM2llE Fil2E t

tlo.t dl lunhdrdl

lH30

T6st Section (Subgradel

Figure 2. DCP Measurements for (A) Base (B) Subgrade

,:j

li

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3,

No.l, Ocbber,

2001

490
Jian-Neng WANG, Dar-Hao CIIEN and John BILYEU

305mm bGhr6o FWD senro.s

MOo

Figure 3. Schematic of FWD-MDD Test

+ DC? (h*..U q d)
-+- DC? (rh.ldm md K@)
--i- DCP Ne lil ( rlJ
{-F{DMDD

.--._--

+s^sa

E5m

a
E

USltlN&fsMLS)

US28lS(t6trML9

US281S

(sfta MLS)

Tar Scctior (Brs)

(A)
2!0

200

!
Arm

I':
a
j

Erm
B

$
t

lMtN

US2I'S Uglls
MLs) (um MLs)

(8dm ML$ (.nd

tstS

FU2Ell

Fmlrl

(rcard)

ludnrld)

lHs

Tost Soction (Subgrade)

(B)

Figure 4. Comparison of Modulus Values for Different Testing (A) Base (B) Subgrade

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.3, No.1, October, 2001

491

Evaluation of Base and Subgrade hyer Moduli Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

orn-ddive

nrrbdttlcme

cum,Jative nur$er of bbws

10ns40

10zJ30

5
10

^10

ts
EN

E,u 1

520

Bx
30

tltdd

2s

ri

30

35

35

$!gdq

Figure 5. DCP Resulis from IH635 for Treated and Untreated Layers
orrrJdre

ornldiw nrrhrd Horu

0

Trdd

nn.bcf Hots

10?o3040

10ns(o5060

10

'10

g1s

E,u

s'tord

sh
e

.sn
EI

Szs

2s

30

36

36 +

&

lo

Figure 6. DCP Results from f,.M2818 for Treated and Untreated Layers

cunl*enunte

orrud,enntrrdlio,lB

of

blour

10n30

10nOr()
0
5
10

Ers
e20

n
6

25

30
35

40

Figure 7. DCP Data from III30 for Treated and Untreated Layers

Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vo1.3, No.1, October, 2001