CPT Su

JOINT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAM
FHWA/IN/JTRP-2010/07
Final Report
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN BASED ON

CPT AND PMT
Daehyeon Kim
Youngjin Shin
Nayyar Siddiki
April 2010
TECHNICAL Summary
INDOT Research
Technology Transfer and Project Implementation Information
TRB Subject Code:

Publication No.: FHWA/INDOT/JTRP-2010/07, SPR-3106
April 2010
Final Report
MECHANISTIC DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR CRC COMPOSITE PAVEMENT

INTRODUCTION
Several in-situ tests such as the Standard
Penetration Test (SPT), the Cone Penetration
Test (CPT, CPTU and SCPTU), the Flat
Dilatometer Test (DMT), the Pressuremeter Test
(PMT), and the Vane Shear Test (VST) have
been widely used to obtain engineering
parameters needed for geotechnical design.
These in-situ tests are in some cases combined
with laboratory tests (soil index tests, triaxial
tests, unconfined compression tests, direct shear
tests, and consolidation tests).
In particular, the CPT has
recently gained much attention from many
Departments of Transportation such as the
Louisiana DOT, the Minnesota DOT and the
California DOT (Caltrans) as these tests can
effectively characterize the soil properties of
large volumes of soils, thereby minimizing the
need to perform a large number of timeconsuming laboratory tests. Use of in-situ testing
offers not only time and cost savings, but also
eliminates the concerns regarding sample
disturbance resulting from soil sampling and
storage.
The Standard Penetration Test
(SPT) is still the most widely-used in-situ test.
However, the SPT suffers from the following
limitations: 1) the dependency of the SPT blow
count N on the operator, 2) the lack of
repeatability and accuracy, and 3) the lack of
theoretical basis for interpretation. By contrast,
the CPT provides fast and continuous soil
profiling. Furthermore, the CPT is not operatordependent and has a strong theoretical basis for
interpretation.
Due to its obvious advantages over
other in-situ tests, the CPT has been increasingly
used by many state Departments of
04/10 JTRP 2010/07
Transportation. This trend reflects the

recognition that cost savings can be realized by
improved geotechnical design practices with the
use of results from more advanced in-situ tests.
In order to further improve our geotechnical
service,
the
Indiana
Department
of
Transportation acquired CPT equipment in 2005.
A thorough study on state-of-the-art practices
regarding the use of these tests should be
performed so that INDOT can benefit
economically and technically from its investment
in this advanced equipment.
There have been remarkable
advancements in the interpretation of the CPT
test. However, there are still considerable
limitations for its use in routine geotechnical
design and practice. This is because most
empirical relationships between CPT results and
soil properties have been developed for textbook
soils (clean sand or pure clay). Also, some
empirical correlations based on the CPT have
been developed without due consideration of
important factors such as the rate effect and the
proper estimation of undrained shear strength.
Therefore, all these factors should be considered
in order to perform better and render more
accurate geotechnical design.
The primary aim of this research project
was to develop an empirical correlation between
CPT results and clayey soils in Indiana. Attempts
were made to evaluate the cone factor
considering the plasticity index by performing
the field cone penetration test and laboratory
tests for clayey soils in Indiana. The rate effect of
CPT was considered and the isotropic
consolidated undrained compression test (CIUC)
for shear strength assessment was used
INDOT Office of Research & Development
West Lafayette, IN 47906
FINDINGS
The main objective of this research is to develop
geotechnical design using CPT results, especially
for clayey soils in Indiana. The detailed
objectives of this project are: 1) to compile and
summarize design methods available in the
literature, facilitating the identification of
methods that are suitable for soil types using
CPT results; 2) to study the mechanical behavior
of clayey soils commonly found in Indiana
through a series of laboratory tests and in-situ
tests; 3) to develop an empirically-based
correlation between the engineering properties of
clayey soils found in Indiana and CPT results.
The major findings of this project were:
1) the cone factor, which is vital to reliable
estimation of undrained shear strength from cone
resistance, is influenced by the following: soil
type, penetration rate during CPT and test
methods for undrained shear strength; 2) partial
drainage may occur at the standard penetration
rate during the CPT for most of the soils that are
neither pure clay nor clean sand. It induces

partial consolidation in front of the cone and
increases cone resistance; 3) drainage conditions
at a certain penetration rate during the CPT
should be examined. If the drainage condition
during the CPT is not an undrained one when
developing relationships with undrained shear
strength, the CPT should be performed again at a
rate of penetration that is sufficiently high to
ensure undrained penetration; 4) the undrained
shear strength can vary with respect to test
methods. Therefore, it is crucial to determine the
proper evaluation method of undrained shear
strength for the specific purpose of the project. In
this research, the isotropic consolidated
undrained compression test (CIUC) was used; 5)
based on the field cone penetration test results,
the empirical equation N k 0.285I p 7.636
is suggested.
IMPLEMENTATION
The current research suggests an empirical
equation to determine cone factor with respect to
plasticity index for clayey soil in Indiana in order
to correlate undrained shear strength and cone
resistance using the CPT. It must be noted that
the results are dependent on the quantity and
quality of data used. Therefore, we

recommend that future research should: 1)
develop a general correlation by adding
more data; 2) establish a CPT-based
empirical equation for other soils in Indiana
such
as
cohesionless
soils.
CONTACT
Tommy Nantung
Research & Development, INDOT
1205 Montgomery Street
Phone: (765) 463-1521
Fax: (765) 497-1665
[email protected]
04/10 JTRP 2010/07
INDOT Office of Research & Development
i
Final Report
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN BASED ON CPT AND PMT
by
Dr. Daehyeon Kim, P.E.

Dr. Youngjin Shin
Nayyar Siddiki, P.E.
Joint Transportation Research Program

Project No. C-36-52X
File No. 06-20-23
SPR- 3106
Conducted in Cooperation with the

Indiana Department of Transportation
and the U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
The content of this report reflects the views of the authors who are responsible for the
facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily
reflect the official views or policies of the Indiana Department of Transportation or the
Federal Highway Administration at the time of publication. This report does not
constitute a standard, speculation or regulation.
School of Civil Engineering
Purdue University
April 2010
TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE

1. Report No.
2. Government Accession No.
3. Recipient's Catalog No.
4. Title and Subtitle
5.
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN BASED ON CPT AND PMT
Report Date
April 2010
6. Performing Organization Code
7. Author(s)
8. Performing Organization Report No.
Daehyeon Kim, Youngjin Shin, Nayyar Siddiki
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
10. Work Unit No.
Joint Transportation Research Program

1284 Civil Engineering Building
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907-1284
11. Contract or Grant No.
SPR-3106
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Indiana Department of Transportation

State Office Building
100 North Senate Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Final Report
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
Prepared in cooperation with the Indiana Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration.
16. Abstract
This research presents the correlation of undrained shear strength based on the cone resistance from the
cone penetration test (CPT) for clayey soils in Indiana. It utilized the field cone penetration test program including
the CPT, the index test, the one dimensional test and the triaxial test. The cone factor, which is essential to reliable
estimation of undrained shear strength from cone resistance, has been evaluated considering the plasticity index of
soils. The cone factor is influenced by the penetration rate during the CPT and test methods that are used for
obtaining the undrained shear strength. The rate effect of the CPT has been examined to ensure undrained
penetration, and the isotropic consolidated undrained compression test (CIUC) for shear strength assessment has
been used to effectively reflect in-situ strength. Following the field cone penetration test program, clayey soils
from 4 sites in Indiana have been investigated. Based on the results from the test program, the cone factor ranges
from 8.0 at I p 7.9 to 12.1 at I p 20.0 for over-consolidated clays. This result parallels the increasing trend of
the cone factor as the plasticity index increases, which was reported by Aas et al. (1986), while Lunne et al. (1976)
and Baligh et al. (1980) showed decreasing trends. The equation N k 0.285I p 7.636 is suggested for
estimating the cone factor in geotechnical design.
17. Key Words
18. Distribution Statement
Undrained shear strength, cone penetration test

(CPT), clayey soils in Indiana, cone factor, rate effect
19. Security Classif. (of this report)
Unclassified
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-69)
No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the

National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161
20. Security Classif. (of this page)
Unclassified
21. No. of Pages
91
22. Price
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors deeply appreciate the opportunity to conduct this research under the auspices
of the Joint Transportation Research Program with support from the Indiana Department
of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. They wish to recognize the
active working relationship with the Study Advisory Committee members: Mir Zaheer
and Keith Hoernschemeyer of the FHWA Indiana Division. The authors also convey
special thanks to Travis Cole for performing CPT tests, to Bobby Daita from H.C.
Nutting Company for providing Shelby tube samples, and to Steve Dick for all the help
he extended in the laboratory.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER1.INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................1
1.1. Statement of Problem ...............................................................................................1
1.2. Objective of Research ...............................................................................................1
1.3. Report Outline ..........................................................................................................2
CHAPTER 2. CLAYEY SOILS IN INDIANA ..................................................................3
2.1. Introduction...............................................................................................................3
2.2. Soils in Indiana .........................................................................................................4
2.3. Behavior of Clayey Soils in Indiana .........................................................................6
2.3.1. Literature Review on Clay Behavior ................................................................ 7
2.3.2. Behavior of Clayey Soils in Indiana ............................................................... 19
CHAPTER 3. PILE DESIGN BASED ON IN-SITU TEST .............................................25
3.1. Introduction.............................................................................................................25
3.2. Direct Estimation of Pile Load Capacity Based on CPT ........................................27
3.2.1. Schmertman`s Method .................................................................................... 28
3.2.2. Aoki and Velloso`s Method ............................................................................ 28
3.2.3. LCPC Method ................................................................................................. 29
3.3. Indirect Estimation of Pile Load Capacity Based on Soil Property........................30
3.3.1. - Method ...................................................................................................... 30
/Page
CHAPTER 4. FIELD CONE PENETRATION TEST AND LABORATORY TEST .....32
4.1. Introduction.............................................................................................................32
4.2. Site 1 : I-69 .............................................................................................................32
4.2.1. Laboratory Test Program ................................................................................ 34
4.2.2. Triaxial Test .................................................................................................... 38
4.2. Site 2 : SR-49 ..........................................................................................................40
4.2. Site 3 : US-24 .........................................................................................................44
4.2. Site 4 : US-31 .........................................................................................................48
CHAPTER 5. SOIL PROPERTY ESTIMATION BASED ON CPT ...............................55
5.1. Introduction.............................................................................................................55
5.2. Correlation between Undrainded Shear Strength and Cone Resistance .................55
5.3. Influence of the Rate of Penetration on CPT ..........................................................59
5.4. Evaluation of Cone Factor Nk ...............................................................................61
CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................67
6.1. Conclusions ............................................................................................................67
6.2. Recommendations and Future Research Needs......................................................67
LIST OF REFERENCES ...................................................................................................69
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
Table 1 Summary of laboratory index testing for I-69 ..................................................... 35

Table 2 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for I-69 ............................................. 37
Table 3 Effective preconsolidation stress p and OCR ................................................... 37
Table 4 Summary of triaxial test results for I-69 .............................................................. 39
Table 5 Summary of index test results for SR-49 ............................................................. 41
Table 6 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for TB-9 for SR-49....41
Table 7 Summary of triaxial test results for SR-49 .......................................................... 44
Table 8 Summary of laboratory index testing for US-24I ................................................ 46
Table 9 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for US-24.......................................... 46
Table 10 Effective preconsolidation stress p and OCR for US-24. ............................... 47
Table 11 Summary of triaxial test results for US-24 ........................................................ 48
Table 12 Summary of laboratory index testing for US-3150
Table 13 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for US-31........................................ 50
Table 14 Effective preconsolidation stress p and OCR for US-31.51
Table 15 Summary of triaxial test results for US-31.54
Table 16 Summary of drainage condition during CPT .63
Table 17 Summary of cone factor Nk and plasticity index I p .....64
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
Figure 1 Major soil formations in the State of Indiana (West, 1995) ................................ 5
Figure 2 A consolidated undrained test on a normally consolidated clay sample (Bishop
and Henkel, 1962) ............................................................................................... 8
Figure 3 Mohr envelopes for consolidated undrained test on a normally consolidated clay
sample (Bishop and Henkel, 1962) ................................................................... 9
Figure 4 A consolidated undrained test on a heavily over-consolidated clay sample
(Bishop and Henkel, 1962) ................................................................................. 9
Figure 5 Mohr envelopes for consolidated undrained test on a heavily over-consolidated
clay sample (Bishop and Henkel, 1962) ........................................................... 10
Figure 6 The effect of over-consolidation on the value of pore pressure parameter A at
the failure: (a) Weald clay (b) London clay (Bishop and Henkel, 1962) ....... 11
Figure 7 Undrained stress-strain behavior of reconstituted Pietrafitta clay (Burland et al,
1996) ................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 8 Undrained stress-strain behavior of reconstituted Corinth marl (Burland et al,
1996). .............................................................................................................. 14
Figure 9 Behavior of reconstituted Boston blue clay in undrained triaxial compression
(Santagata, 1994) ............................................................................................ 16
Figure 10 One dimensional compression curves for various reconstituted clays (Burland,
1990). .............................................................................................................. 17
Figure 11 Influence of (a) mixing moisture contents; (b) load increment duration on
compression curves for reconstituted clays (Leonards and Ramiah, 1959) .... 18
Figure 12 Typical one dimensional compression curves for Boston blue clay (Ladd et al.,
1999) ............................................................................................................... 19
Figure 13 Stress-strain curve for I-69 ............................................................................... 21
Figure 14 Excess pore pressure distribution for I-69 ........................................................ 21
Figure
Page
Figure 15 Stress-strain curve for US-24 ........................................................................... 21

Figure 16 Excess pore pressure distribution for US-24 .................................................... 22
Figure 17 Stress-strain curve for RB-99 (US-31) ............................................................. 22
Figure 18 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-99 (US-31) ...................................... 23
Figure 19 Stress-strain curve for RB-114 (US-31) ........................................................... 23
Figure 20 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-114 (US-31) .................................... 23
Figure 21 Stress-strain curve for RB-31 (US-31) ............................................................. 24
Figure 22 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-31 (US-31) ...................................... 24
Figure 23 Soil boring test result for the I-69 site .............................................................. 33
Figure 24 CPT results at I-69 site ..................................................................................... 34
Figure 25 Grain size distribution of the clayey soil in I-69 .............................................. 35
Figure 26 Geocomp automated consolidation testing apparatus ...................................... 36
Figure 27 Specimen displacements versus square root of time (48 kPa) for I-69 ............ 37
Figure 28 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for I-69............................................................... 38
Figure 29 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for I-69 ............................. 38
Figure 30 Geocomp automated static triaxial testing apparatus ....................................... 39
Figure 31 Soil profile for the SR-49 site........................................................................... 40
Figure 32 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for TB-9 ............................................................. 42
Figure 33 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for TB-10 ........................................................... 42
Figure 36 Soil profile for the US-24 site ......................................................................... 45
Figure 37 Grain size distribution of the clayey soil in US-24 .......................................... 46
Figure 38 Semi-log plots Cv versus v ............................................................................ 47
Figure 39 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for US-24 .......................... 47
Figure 40 Soil profile for the US-31 site .......................................................................... 49
Figure 41 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for RB-99........................................................... 51
Figure
Page
Figure 42 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for RB-114......................................................... 52

Figure 43 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for RB-31........................................................... 52
Figure 44 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for RB-99 ......................... 53
Figure 45 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for RB-114 ....................... 53
Figure 46 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for RB-31 ......................... 54
Figure 47 The cone factor Nk values for clayey soils in England (Nash and Duffin, 1982)
......................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 48 The cone factor Nk values for clayey soils in England (O`riordan et al., 1982)
......................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 49 Correlations between cone factor Nk and plasticity index (Lunne et al., 1976)
......................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 50 Correlations between cone factor
Nk and plasticity index I p (Baligh et al.,1980)
......................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 51 Correlations between cone factor Nk and plasticity index (Aas et al., 1986) .. 59
Figure 52 Effect of penetration rate on normalized cone resistance and pore pressure
(Kim et al., 2006) ............................................................................................ 61
Figure 53 Correlation of factor Nk and plasticity index I p ............................................. 61
ABSTRACT
Kim, Daehyeon, Shin, Youngjin, and Siddiki, Nayyar. Geotechnical Design Based on
CPT and PMT Final Report FHWA/IN/JTRP-2009/XX, SPR 3106, Joint Transportation
Research Program, Purdue University, September 2008
Keywords: undrained shear strength, cone penetration test (CPT), clayey soils in Indiana,
cone factor, rate effect
This research presents the correlation of undrained shear strength based on the
cone resistance from the cone penetration test (CPT) for clayey soils in Indiana. It
utilized the field cone penetration test program including the CPT, the index test, the one
dimensional test and the triaxial test. The cone factor, which is essential to reliable
estimation of undrained shear strength from cone resistance, has been evaluated
considering the plasticity index of soils. The cone factor is influenced by the penetration
rate during the CPT and test methods that are used for obtaining the undrained shear
strength. The rate effect of the CPT has been examined to ensure undrained penetration,
and the isotropic consolidated undrained compression test (CIUC) for shear strength
assessment has been used to effectively reflect in-situ strength. Following the field cone
penetration test program, clayey soils from 4 sites in Indiana have been investigated.
Based on the results from the test program, the cone factor ranges from 8.0 at I p 7.9 to
12.1 at I p 20.0 for over-consolidated (OC) clays. This result parallels the increasing
trend of the cone factor as the plasticity index increases, which was reported by Aas et al.
(1986), while Lunne et al. (1976) and Baligh et al. (1980) showed decreasing trends. The
equation N k 0.285I p 7.636 is suggested for estimating the cone factor in geotechnical
design.
CHAPTER1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statement of Problem

Currently, the cone penetration test (CPT) is considered one of the most useful in-situ
tests and is widely used in onshore and offshore soil investigations. The CPT measures
the cone resistance, the sleeve friction resistance, and the pore pressure. These
measurements can be effectively used for the following applications: 1) to classify soil
identification, 2) to directly estimate pile capacity from the CPT and 3) to evaluate soil
properties through an appropriate correlation, especially the undrained shear strength.
Thus, the CPT can be used for a wide range of geotechnical engineering applications.
There have been remarkable advancements in the interpretation of the CPT test.
However, there are still considerable limitations for its use in routine geotechnical design
and practice. This is because most empirical relationships between the CPT results and
soil properties have been developed for textbook soils (clean sand or pure clay). Also,
some empirical correlations based on CPT have been developed without consideration of
important factors such as the rate effect and the proper estimation of undrained shear
strength. It is necessary to take all these factors into consideration in order to obtain more
accurate geotechnical design.
1.2 Objective of Research

The main objective of this research is to develop geotechnical design using CPT results,
especially for clayey soils in Indiana. The detailed objectives of this project are:
1) To compile and summarize design methods available in the literature for CPT to
identify methods that are suitable for soil types;
2) To study the mechanical behavior of clayey soils commonly found in Indiana through
a series of laboratory tests and in-situ tests;
3) To develop an empirically-based correlation between the engineering properties of
clayey soils found in Indiana and CPT results.
In order to accomplish these goals, we performed the field cone penetration test
program including the CPT, the index test, the one dimensional test and the triaxial test.
In accordance with the test results, we suggest a rational correlation between undrained
shear strength and cone resistance for clayey soil in Indiana to enable better and more
exact geotechnical design. Clayey soils from 4 sites have been investigated considering
the following: the rate effect of the CPT and the use of the isotropic consolidated
undrained compression test (CIUC) for shear strength assessment.
1.3 Report Outline

The report is organized into six chapters:
Chapter 1 provides an introduction.
Chapter 2 presents a comprehensive literature review of non-textbook soil, soils in
Indiana, and the behavior of clay. The behavior of clayey soils in Indiana has been
investigated through laboratory tests.
Chapter 3 reviews pile design method based on cone penetration tests (CPT),
including direct and indirect estimation.
Chapter 4 describes the field cone penetration program performed for clayey soils
in Indiana. Techniques for tests and test procedures are described. The test results are also
summarized.
Chapter 5 deals with correlations between undrained shear strength and cone
resistance and discusses the influence of the rate effect during the CPT. The cone factor
considering plasticity index for clayey soils in Indiana is suggested.
Chapter 6 consists of a summary, conclusions, and recommendations for further
research.
CHAPTER 2 CLAYEY SOILS IN INDIANA
2.1 Introduction
Soil mechanics has been primarily developed for two specific types of soils,
namely, clean sands and pure clays. Textbook soil mechanics, or the mechanics of clean
sands and pure clays, has therefore been studied extensively to date. Although there are
some similarities, pure clays and clean sands are distinct materials in several aspects.
Each geomaterial exhibits its own extreme behavior. Pure clay is very resistant to
permeation. Therefore, loading or unloading clay soils induces pore pressures. They
dissipate after a certain amount of time, which is completely dependent on their
compressibility. The behavior of clay soils is close to that of clay in an undrained
condition in the short term, but conversely is similar to the behavior of drained clay in the
long term. The amount of pore pressure dissipation determines whether the condition is
classified as undrained or drained. By contrast, clean sand is very permeable. Thus, a
drained loading condition prevails in most cases even though the rates of loading are
higher than the dissipation of pore water pressure; for example, earthquakes can produce
undrained behavior. In addition to their natural differences, there is another reason soil
mechanics focuses mainly on clean sands and pure clays. As mentioned earlier, sands are
very permeable materials while clays allow very little permeation. This feature has been
useful in laboratory tests designed to apply entirely opposite drainage conditions to soil
samples: a drained condition in sand and an undrained condition in clay, respectively.
Studies about these two situations are vast and widely available in textbooks.
Unfortunately, many naturally-formed deposits of geomaterials are neither clean
sands nor pure clays. These kinds of soils are non-textbook soils. It is obvious that the
behaviors of non-textbook soils differ from those of clean sands or pure clays due to their
compositions. Moreover, loading rates for such soils may be neither drained nor
undrained depending on their loading rates and dissipation rates. This means that
geotechnical design using parameters obtained from either drained or undrained tests may
lead to problems such as conservative or unsafe design for foundations, retaining
structures and slopes. The geotechnical design based on non-textbook soil should
consider its drainage condition at loading for economic and effective design. In this
research, clayey soils in Indiana have been used. Its drainage condition would be
examined in advance to know whether two extreme drainages could be applied. The
intrinsic characteristics of Indiana soil and its mechanical behavior are reviewed in the
following chapters.
2.2 Soils in Indiana

The geology of Indiana is both complex and diverse. According to Zevgolis
(2005), its geologic history includes periods of deposition and subsequent erosion,
subsidence and faulting, and submersion by epi-continental seas with subsequent
deposition of thousands of feet of material to form sedimentary rocks. All of these events
took place prior to the start of the Quaternary Period, which began about two million
years ago. The bedrock that was created over time is buried in most of the northern part
of the state by more recent, unconsolidated Quaternary deposits. Most of the present land
surface in Indiana was developed during the Quaternary Period, which includes the
Pleistocene (Glacial) and Holocene (Recent) Epochs.
Indiana is located toward the eastern edge of the great interior plains of North
America. These plains extend from the Appalachian Mountains in the east to the Rocky
Mountains in the west. This area has been highly glaciated and its terrain is mainly flat.
Thus, glaciation and its effects have played a major role in the formation of the local soils,
especially in the northern and central parts (Zevgolis, 2005). The other controlling factor
in the formation of soils is the resistance of bedrock to erosion in southern Indiana.
Figure 1 Major soil formations in the State of Indiana (Zevgolis, 2005)
Figure 1 shows the distribution of the major soil formations across the state. The
material that is found in northern and central Indiana is a glaciated deposit. The northern
part of Indiana is a deposit of the Wisconsin glaciation. The central part is an extensive
plain of deposits left by the glaciers of the Illinoian period. In both cases, the bedrock is
buried beneath the glacial deposits. The difference between the two zones is that the
northern one has some small parts with non-glacial sediments, such as dunes, and stream
or lake deposits.
The soil formation that is most widely encountered in northern and central Indiana
is till, i.e. a sand-clay or silty-clay material. The way till is generally formed is as follows:
The debris transported by a glacier is eventually deposited after the ice has melted and it
is then called drift. The deposition takes place either on site, in which case we refer to it
as unstratified drift, or after the debris is being carried away by the meltwater, in which
case we refer to it as stratified drift. The unstratified drift consists of till, which in turn
consists of a rather random mixture of materials ranging in size from clay to large
boulders. It is composed mostly of silt and clay with occasional pebbles. Till is deposited
by the receding glacier to yield landforms collectively known as moraines. Much of
northern and central Indiana is known as the Tipton Till Plain, made up of ground
moraines and end moraines (Zevgolis, 2005).
In short, most of Indianas soils are non-textbook soils, which have different
characteristics than either clean sands or pure clays. This research therefore focuses on
suggesting CPT-based design methods suitable for Indiana clayey soils.
2.3 Behavior of Clayey Soils in Indiana

In order to obtain a clear picture of the behavior of clayey soils encountered in
Indiana, laboratory tests have been performed. The index properties of natural clayey
soils can vary widely over the area where they are collected. Therefore, every time a new
source of material is obtained, a series of index property tests should be carried out. Grain
size distribution, Atterberg limits, and specific gravity tests have been conducted.
Compression curves and compressibility parameters have been obtained from the
Oedometer test.
Undrained behavior of clayey soils is investigated through a consolidated
undrained test (CU). There are several available laboratory test methods for undrained
shear strength including: the direct simple shear test (DSS), the isotropic consolidated
undrained test (CIU), the K 0 consolidated undrained test (CKoAU) and the
unconsolidated undrained test (UU). The method of determining undrained shear strength
can significantly influence the results. This indicates that the value of undrained shear
strength is not fixed. Therefore, it is crucial to determine the proper evaluation method of
undrained shear strength for the specific purpose of the project.
In this research, the isotropic consolidated undrained compression test (CIUC)

was chosen in order to effectively simulate in-situ conditions and estimate undrained
shear strength. In an unconsolidated undrained test (UU), a specimen is not consolidated
to an in-situ mean effective stress. For this reason, the test is likely to underestimate
undrained shear strength. According to Jardine et al. (2005), K 0 consolidated undrained
tests (CAU) on high quality samples provide a more representative estimate of in-situ
shear strength under triaxial compression conditions, but obtaining an accurate in-situ K 0
evaluation with laboratory tests is challenging. Therefore, the isotropic consolidated
undrained test (CIU) was used in this research to estimate the undrained shear strength of
the clay. The isotropic consolidated undrained test (CIU) tends to slightly overestimate
undrained shear strength when compared to the K 0 consolidated undrained test (CAU) if
K 0 is smaller than unity, which is due to the isotropic consolidation before shearing.
When the shear strength mobilized in the field is determined from laboratory tests,
several factors should be considered: mode of shear, shearing time to failure, progressive
failure, and soil disturbance. Analysis of these factors will allow for the correction of the
laboratory test shear strength before use for field undrained failures (Jardine et al., 2005
and Mesri and Huvaj, 2007).
2.3.1 Literature Review on Clay Behavior

Undrained Shear Strength Behavior of Clay Soils
Figure 2, developed by Bishop and Henkel (1962), illustrates typical behaviors as
shown in consolidated undrained tests (CU) on reconstituted normally consolidated clays
(NC). Mohr circles with different consolidation pressures are shown in Figure 3 in terms
of total and effective stresses. Volume change is prevented during shearing so that
positive pore pressure develops. Regarding over-consolidated clays (OC), Figure 4 shows
typical results: a decrease in pore pressure has occurred until failure is reached. The
magnitude of pore pressure induced in the case of over-consolidated clays (OC) greatly
depends on the degree of the over-consolidation ratio (OCR). Mohr circles of overconsolidated clays (OC) may have a cohesion intercept in both total and effective stresses
as shown in Figure 5. For over-consolidated clays (OC), excess pore pressures start to
develop as positive, approach zero and then, for samples with an over-consolidation ratio
(OCR) greater than about 6, become negative (Salgado, 2006). Bishop and Henkel (1962)
showed the effects of over-consolidation ratio (OCR) on the pore pressure changes during
shear with A f parameter in Figure 6 for samples of both Weald Clay and London Clay.
A f stands for the ratio of pore pressure development to deviatoric stress at failure. A f
decreases as the over-consolidation ratio (OCR) increases, and becomes negative when
the over-consolidation ratio (OCR) is greater than approximately 4.
Figure 2 A consolidated undrained test on a normally consolidated clay sample (Bishop

and Henkel, 1962)
Figure 3 Mohr envelopes for consolidated undrained test on a normally consolidated clay
sample (Bishop and Henkel, 1962)
Figure 4 A consolidated undrained test on a heavily over-consolidated clay sample

(Bishop and Henkel, 1962)
Figure 5 Mohr envelopes for consolidated undrained test on a heavily over-consolidated

clay sample (Bishop and Henkel, 1962)
10
Figure 6 The effect of over-consolidation on the value of pore pressure parameter A at

the failure: (a) Weald clay (b) London clay (Bishop and Henkel, 1962)
Atkinson and Bransby (1978) collected isotropic consolidated undrained test

results for reconstituted Weald clay from Bishop and Henkel (1962) and drew the typical
p : q and v : p diagrams for normally consolidated clays (NC) and over-consolidated
clays (OC). Positive pore pressure develops during shearing because there is no volume
change within soil samples for normally consolidated clays (NC) and it decreases the
mean effective stress p . Therefore, the effective stress path moves left compared to the
total stress path and the volume during shearing is consistent with volume after
consolidation. A soil sample was prepared similarly to previous tests except for the over-
11
consolidation ratio (OCR), which was isotropically consolidated to 827 kN / m2 and

unloaded to 34.5 kN / m2 . This means that its over-consolidation ratio (OCR) is 24.
Shearing with no volume change creates negative pore pressure development for overconsolidated clays (OC). The effective stress path moves right compared to the total
stress path opposite the normally consolidated clays (NC) and the volume of the soil
sample is constant.
In a 1990 Rankine lecture, Burland (1990) argued that the compressibility and
strength properties of reconstituted clay provide a useful frame for understanding and
interpreting the properties of natural clay. Triaxial tests were conducted on four stiff clays
(Pietrafitta clay, Todi clay, Vallericca clay and Corinth marl) and compared with the
corresponding results for reconstituted clays. Burland et al. (1996) concluded that the
strength reduction after the peak is primarily due to breakage of interparticle bonds, but
some particle orientation also takes place at higher confining stresses for both the
normally consolidated (NC) and the over-consolidated (OC) clays. Figure 7 shows the
isotropic consolidated undrained test (CIU) stress-strain relationships for normally and
over-consolidated reconstituted Pietrafitta clay. All the over-consolidated samples were
unloaded from a previous value of p 2000kPa . With regard to the normally
consolidated (NC) samples, the undrained stress-strain and pore pressure-strain
relationships show flat peaks and at axial strains about 15% the strengths reduce rapidly.
It is evident that soil samples with higher mean effective stresses show greater undrained
shear strengths, and more pore pressure develops. With regard to the over-consolidated
(OC) samples, undrained stress-strain curves show rapid post-peak reductions in strength.
The behavior of the over-consolidated (OC) samples is dilatant and it is inclined to grow
more dilatant with higher over-consolidation ratios (OCR). Figure 8 shows isotropic
consolidated undrained test (CIU) stress-strain curves for normally consolidated and
over-consolidated reconstituted Corinth marl. The undrained over-consolidated samples
were unloaded from p 2000kPa . For the normally consolidated (NC) and the overconsolidated (OC) samples, the undrained stress-strain curves are smoother compared to
Pietrafitta clay even though the trend of the behavior is similar.
12
Figure 7 Undrained stress-strain behavior of reconstituted Pietrafitta clay (Burland et al,

1996)
13
Figure 8 Undrained stress-strain behavior of reconstituted Corinth marl (Burland et al,

1996)
The behavior of another representative clay soil, Boston blue clay, was reviewed.
Undrained strength behavior for Boston blue clay has been studied by many researchers.
Figure 9 shows the typical triaxial compression behavior of reconstituted Boston blue
clay at OCR of 1, 2, 4, and 8, as illustrated by Santagata (1994). It presents the effective
, the stress
stress paths normalized to the maximum vertical consolidation stress vm
strain curves and normalized excess pore pressures during shearing. Normally
consolidated clay (NC) shows a peak at small strains followed by development of large
positive pore pressures that cause a significant decrease in p and significant post-peak
softening, while over-consolidated clay (OC) shows a decrease in the peak value of
14
strength, in strain softening and in the development of excess negative pore pressure
(Santagata, 1994).
The undrained stress-strain lines of over-consolidated (OC) samples of Boston
blue clay present flat peaks while those of Pietrafitta clay and Corinth marl have rapid
peaks due to dilatancy. However, Corinth marl does not show clear peaks in strength
compared to Pietrafitta clay. In the case of normally consolidated (NC) samples, the
undrained behaviors are different as for clay soil types, too. This shows that the reaction
to loading depends on the source of the clay. The undrained strength behavior of clay can
be greatly affected by different soils; therefore, there is no fixed result in terms of clay
behavior.
15
Figure 9 Behavior of reconstituted Boston blue clay in undrained triaxial compression

(Santagata, 1994)
16
Compressibility of Clay Soils

Compressibility of reconstituted clays has been investigated with one dimensional
compression curves like that in Figure 10. All the curves are similarly slightly concave.
The effect of water contents was examined using the Oedometer test for three clays, as
shown in Figure 11. The number against each curve gives the mixing water content
expressed as a proportion of the liquid limit of the clay. At pressures more than 100 kPa,
the compression curves for each soil are likely to converge (Leonards and Ramiah, 1959).
The influence of load increment duration was investigated for two clays and it shows
there is little difference between the curve of each clay.
Figure 10 One dimensional compression curves for various reconstituted clays (Burland,
1990)
17
Figure 11 Influence of (a) mixing moisture contents; (b) load increment duration on
compression curves for reconstituted clays (Leonards and Ramiah, 1959)
For Boston blue clays, one dimensional compression curves from 40 incremental
Oedometers and 27 CRS consolidations were drawn and compared (Ladd et al., 1999). It
provides the compressibility characteristic for heavily over-consolidated clay (OCR>2)
and lightly over-consolidated clay (OCR<2), as shown in Figure 12. The former has a
rounded curve in the vicinity of p and a linear virgin compression line, as illustrated by
CRS 24. The latter exhibits a non-linear and S-shaped virgin compression curve, as
illustrated by CRS 19 (Ladd et al., 1999).
18
Figure 12 Typical one dimensional compression curves for Boston blue clay (Ladd et al.,
1999)
The database containing information on one dimensional compression behavior of

reconstituted Boston blue clay shows that the compression ratio CR, which is
defined by the slope of the virgin compression line, varies in the range of 0.155
0.180. The swelling ratio SR, which is defined by the slope of the line drawn
through the points corresponding to the unloading phase, is approximately an
order of magnitude smaller than the CR (Santagata, 1994). The SR for
reconstituted Boston blue clay with over-consolidation ratio (OCR) 4 varies from
0.012 to 0.017 according to the database. The SR increases as the soil is unloaded
to higher over-consolidation ratios (OCR). Ahmed (1990) obtained 0.011 for
over-consolidation ratio (OCR) 2 and Sheahan (1991) obtained 0.019 for overconsolidation ratio (OCR) 8.
2.3.2 Behavior of Clayey Soils in Indiana
19
In order to observe the behavior of clayey soils in Indiana, 9 clayey soils from 4
sites in Indiana were examined. The sites are I-69, SR-49, US-24, and US-31. A
laboratory test program including index tests, one dimension consolidation tests, and
isotropic consolidated undrained compression tests (CIUC) was conducted using
undisturbed soil from Shelby tube sampling. The results from index tests and one
dimensional consolidation tests will be reviewed in later chapters. The undrained shear
strength behavior is studied in this section.
According to one dimensional consolidation test results, all of the specimens
studied in this research are over-consolidated (OC) clay. This is because the locations of
the collected Shelby tubes are not very far from the surface due to the workability of a
boring machine. The deepest Shelby tube in this research is located 3m from the surface.
The over-consolidation ratios (OCR) for I-69, US-24, RB-99 (US-31), RB-114 (US-31)
and RB-31 (US-31) are 4.2, 2.8, 3.6, 5.1 and 11.8, respectively; this includes both lightly
OC and highly OC clays. The stress-strain curve and excess pore pressure distribution for
the soils are shown in Figure 13 to Figure 22. The fact that all of the specimens tested
were over-consolidated (OC) clay is verified by the behavior of excess pore pressure. As
mentioned before, excess pore pressures for over-consolidated clays (OC) start to develop
as positive, approach zero and then, for samples with an over-consolidation ratio (OCR)
greater than about 6, become
negative (Salgado, 2006). The excess pore pressure
distribution for RB-31 (US-31), which has the highest OCR at 11.8, shows the steep
decline for negative pore pressures compared to soil samples with smaller OCR. The
development of negative pore pressure causes an increase of mean effective stress p ,
and it prevents a rapid peak in the stress-strain curve. This stress-strain behavior parallels
the behavior of Boston blue clay.
20
Deviatoric stress (kPa)
200
100
0
0
10
15
20
Axial strain (%)
Figure 13 Stress-strain curve for I-69

100
50
0
0
10
15
20
-50
-100
-150
Axial strain (%)
Figure 14 Excess pore pressure distribution for I-69
200
100
0
0
10
15
Axial strain (%)
Figure 15 Stress-strain curve for US-24
21
20
100
50
0
0
10
15
20
-50
-100
-150
Axial strain (%)
Figure 16 Excess pore pressure distribution for US-24
200
100
0
0
10
15
Axial strain (%)
Figure 17 Stress-strain curve for RB-99 (US-31)
22
20
100
50
0
0
10
15
20
-50
-100
-150
Axial strain (%)
Figure 18 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-99 (US-31)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
10
15
20
Axial strain (%)
100
50
0
0
10
-50
-100
-150
Axial strain (%)
23
15
20
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
10
15
20
Axial strain (%)
100
50
0
0
10
15
20
-50
-100
-150
Axial strain (%)
24
CHAPTER 3 PILE DESIGN BASED ON IN-SITU TESTS
3.1 Introduction
Piles are relatively long and generally slender structural foundation members that
transmit superstructure loads to deep soil layers. In geotechnical engineering, piles
usually serve as foundations when soil conditions are not suitable for the use of shallow
foundations. Moreover, piles have other applications in deep excavations and in slope
stability. As presented in the literature, piles are classified according to:
(1) nature of load support (friction and end-bearing piles),

(2) displacement properties (full-displacement, partial displacement, and nondisplacement piles),
(3) composition of piles (timber, concrete, steel and composite piles).
The behavior of the pile depends on many different factors including pile
characteristics, soil conditions and properties, installation method, and loading conditions.
The performance of piles affects the serviceability of the structure they support. The
estimation of pile load carrying capacity can be achieved using different methods such as
pile load tests, dynamic analysis, static analysis based on soil properties from laboratory
tests, and static analysis utilizing the results of in-situ tests such as SPT or CPT.
In the design and analysis of piles, it is important to identify piles based on the
nature of support provided by the surrounding soil (i.e. to classify piles as end-bearing
piles or friction piles). While end-bearing piles transfer most of their loads to an endbearing stratum, friction piles resist a significant portion of their loads via the skin
friction developed along the surface of the piles. The behavior of friction piles mainly
depends on the interaction between the surrounding soil and the pile shaft.
25
The ultimate axial load carrying capacity of the pile ( Qu ) is composed of the endbearing capacity of the pile ( Qt ) and the shaft capacity ( Qs ). The general equation is
given as:
Qu Qt Qs qt At fAs
(1)
where qt is the unit tip bearing capacity, At is the area of the pile tip, f is the unit skin
friction, and As is the area of the pile shaft. In sands, the end-bearing capacity Qt
dominates; in soft clays, the friction capacity Qs dominates. The design load carrying
capacity Qd of the pile can be calculated by:
Qd
Qu
F .S .
(2)
where Qu is the ultimate load carrying capacity and F .S . is the factor of safety.
In general, the application of in-situ tests to pile design is done through:
(1) Direct Method and

(2) Indirect Method.
When utilizing the direct method, one can make use of the results from in-situ test
measurements for the analysis and the design of foundations directly. It is simple and
powerful, but a huge database is needed to get meaningful results. The application of the
direct method to the analysis and design of foundations is usually based on empirical
relationships. On the other hand, the indirect method requires the evaluation of soil
characteristic parameters, such as the undrained shear strength Su from in-situ test results.
The direct method, used for pile design, has been mainly based on the standard
penetration test (SPT) and the cone penetration test (CPT). Although the SPT has been
used more extensively, it is widely recognized that the SPT has a number of limitations.
A serious limitation is that SPT blow count is not well related to the pile loading process.
The SPT blow count can also vary depending on operation procedures. The CPT is a
superior test for pile design purposes. The indirect method for pile design includes Vesic
26
(1977), Coyle and Castello (1981), and method (Burland, 1973) for cohesionless soil,
and Su method (Bowles, 1982) along with method (Tomlinson, 1975) for cohesive
soil. Most indirect pile design methods define the correlation between soil parameters and
base or shaft resistance.
In this research, laboratory test results including index tests, oedometer tests, and
triaxial tests are compared with cone penetration test results in order to make a proper
correlation between both of them for Indiana clayey soil. Therefore, the main focus of
this study is on the estimation of soil properties for indirect CPT-base design. In this
chapter, the existing methods for pile design using CPT will be reviewed.
3.2 Direct Estimation of Pile Load Capacity Based on CPT

The determination of pile load capacity based on CPT results can be expressed as:
qb cb qc
(3)
qs csi qsi
(4)
where qb is the base resistance, cb is the empirical parameter to convert qc to base

resistance, qc is the cone resistance at the pile base level, qs is the shaft resistance, csi is
the empirical parameter to convert qsi to shaft resistance, and qsi is the representative
cone resistance for layer i.
Values for cb and csi have been proposed mostly based on empirical correlations
developed between pile load test results and CPT results. Because different authors have
proposed different values for cb and csi , the use of such parameters should be applied
under conditions similar to those under which they were determined. Although most
expressions were based on cone resistance qc , some authors (Price and Wardle 1982,
Schmertmann 1978) have suggested the use of cone sleeve friction f s for the estimation
of shaft resistance with the following general expression:
qs csfi f si
27
(5)
where csfi is an empirical parameter to convert cone sleeve friction to shaft resistance and
f si is a representative cone sleeve friction for layer i.
3.2.1 Schmertmann`s method

For the estimation of pile base resistance in stiff cohesive soil, Schmertmann
(1978) proposed the use of an average cone resistance by multiplying the reducing factor.
The average cone resistances depth is calculated to be between 8B above a pile and 0.7B
to 4B below a pile. For shaft resistance in sand, the following values of the shaft
resistance factor cs of (4) were proposed for different pile types:
cs 0.008 for open-end steel tube piles,

cs 0.012 for precast concrete and steel displacement piles,
cs 0.018 for vibro and cast-in-place displacement piles with steel driving tube removal,
as well as timber piles.
According to Schmertmann`s method, the unit skin friction of the pile is given by:
f c f s
(6)
where c is a reduction factor which varies from 0.2 to 1.25 for clayey soil, and f s is the
sleeve friction.
3.2.2 Aoki and Velloso`s method

Based on the load test and CPT results, Aoki and Velloso (1975) proposed the
following relationship for both shaft and base resistance in terms of cone resistance qc :
qb
qs
1
qc
F1
F2
qc
(7)
(8)
where , F1 , and F2 are the empirical parameters.
28
3.2.3 LCPC method

Bustamante and Gianeselli (1982) presented the LCPC method for the French
Highway Department based on an analysis of 197 pile load tests using a variety of pile
types and soil conditions. It is also known as the French method. In this method, both the
unit tip bearing capacity and the unit skin friction of the pile are obtained from the cone
tip resistance. The sleeve friction is not used. The basic formula for the LCPC method
can be written as:
qb kc qca
qs
1
qc
ks
(9)
(10)
where kc is the base resistance factor, qca is equivalent cone resistance at pile base level,
k s is the shaft resistance factor, and qc is representative cone resistance for the
corresponding layer. The values of kc and k s depend on the nature of the soil and its
degree of compaction as well as the pile installation method. According to Bustamante
and Gianeselli (1982), the values of kc for driven piles cannot be directly applied to Hpiles and tubular piles with an open base without proper investigation of full scale load
tests. The equivalent cone resistance qca used in (9) represents an arithmetical mean of
the cone resistance measured along the distance equal to 1.5B above and below the pile
base.
In the LCPC method, separate factors of safety are applied to shaft and base
resistance. A factor of safety equal to 2 for shaft resistance and 3 for base resistance were
considered, so that the carrying load is given by:
Qw
Q s L Qb L
2
3
(11)
where Qw is allowable load, Q s L is limit shaft load, and Q b L is limit base load.
29
3.3 Indirect Estimation of Pile Load Capacity Based on Soil Property

Since a pile is assumed to fail under undrained conditions in clayey soils, the
capacity of piles installed in clayey soils in soil property-based design is calculated using
the total stress approach. These indirect methods require the evaluation of soil
characteristic parameters. The ultimate unit base resistance is defined in terms of the
undrained shear strength ( Su ) as:
qu Nc Su
(12)
where N c is the bearing capacity factor. This value varies according to pile type and
ultimate load criteria.
3.3.1 method
For shaft capacity calculations of piles installed in clays, the
qs Su
method is used:
(13)
where is a correction factor.

The main concept of the method is to correlate pile shaft capacity to the Su of
an in-situ soil through a reduction factor referred to as . Many variations of the
method have been developed based on empirical correlations induced from collected pile
load test results.
Randolph and Murphy (1985) proposed an equation for for use in the
method that was developed based on the database compiled by Olson and Dennis (1982).
They assumed that mobilized skin friction depends on the angle of friction between pile
and soil, undrained shear strength, and effective stress. According to them, the effects of
all these parameters are captured by the equation Su / v . The method developed by
Randolph and Murphy (1985) was included in the API design method published in 1993.
In the API method, the equations for estimating the shaft friction are defined as follows:
0.5(Su / v )0.5 Su / 1.0
(14)
0.5( Su / v )0.25 Su / 1.0
(15)
where v =effective overburden pressure.
30
31
CHAPTER 4 FIELD CONE PENETRATION TEST PROGRAM
4.1 Introduction
A field cone penetration test program was undertaken to investigate the
correlation between undrained shear strength Su and cone resistance qT for clayey soils
in Indiana. The drainage condition during the cone penetration test (CPT) was examined
with the criteria for establishing drainage condition rate thresholds for CPT (Kim et al.,
2006). The cone penetration tests (CPT) were performed at 4 sites in the state of Indiana
and the sites were determined using the boring log database of the Indiana Department of
Transportation (INDOT). Clayey soils with some amounts of sand or silt were collected
for the test program. The procedure followed for the cone penetration tests (CPT) is in
agreement with ASTM D 5778. The rate of cone penetration tests (CPT) was 2cm/s at all
the sites. The sites are I-69, SR-49, US-24, and US-31. The laboratory test program
included index tests, one dimension consolidation tests, and triaxial tests using
undisturbed soil from Shelby tube sampling. Among the triaxial tests, the isotropic
consolidated undrained compression test (CIUC) was chosen in order to effectively
simulate in-situ conditions and estimate undrained shear strength qT .
4.2 Site 1: I-69

The first site is located near the Interstate Highway 69 in Madison County,
Indiana. The Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) were performed and undisturbed samples
were taken. The soil profile from the boring test is presented in Figure 23. Upon
discovery of the location of the clayey soil layer, several Shelby tubes were collected for
laboratory tests. The CPT results from the I-69 test site are shown in Figure 24.
32
Figure 23 Soil boring test result for the I-69 site
33
Figure 24 CPT results at I-69 site
4.2.1 Laboratory Test Program

In order to estimate the mechanical behavior of soil, several laboratory tests were
performed. Shelby tubes were taken in order to collect undisturbed specimens so that the
in-situ condition of soil masses could be represented during laboratory tests. The usage of
reconstituted specimen is more convenient for preparing test specimen, but there is a
considerable possibility that it may lose its intrinsic characteristic. The results from cone
penetration tests (CPT) should be influenced by the intrinsic composition of soil-mass;
therefore, several laboratory tests were performed using undisturbed samples in order to
make a qualified relationship between both of them. This laboratory test program was
composed of index tests, one dimension consolidation tests, and triaxial tests. The
undrained shear strength Su from the triaxial test was related to the results from cone
34
penetration tests (CPT), and this relation would be classified with plasticity index I p
from index tests. The drainage condition during cone penetration tests (CPT) should be
identified using the coefficient of consolidation Cv from a one-dimensional consolidation
test.
4.2.1.1 Soil Index Tests

Grain size distribution for the clayey soil layer (from 1.1m to 2.3m) is shown in
Figure 25. The results of the Atterberg limit tests are summarized in Table 1. The clays at
a depth of 1.68m have a liquid limit (LL) of 36.5% and a plastic limit (PL) of 16.4%, and
I p =20.1%.
Figure 25 Grain size distribution of the clayey soil in I-69
35
Table 1 Summary of laboratory index testing for I-69

Depth (m)
W (%)
LL (%)
PL (%)
I p (%)
1.68
20.5
36.5
16.4
20.1
4.2.1.2. One Dimensional Consolidation Test

Conventional one-dimensional consolidation tests were conducted according to
the consolidation test procedure as described in ASTM D 2435. The coefficient of
consolidation Cv and the over-consolidation ratio (OCR) of the clayey soil layers were
estimated. The tests were conducted using a Geocomp automated consolidation testing
device shown in Figure 26. Specimens were loaded in 7 increments up to a maximum
applied vertical stress of 760 kPa and Cassagrande`s method was used to evaluate the
over-consolidation ratio (OCR). Figure 27 presents a displacement versus the square root
of time plot at vertical pressure 48 kPa. The coefficient of consolidation Cv at each step
was measured and is shown in Table 2 and Figure 28. Semi-log plots of settlement versus
vertical stress were obtained and are shown in Figure 29. The effective preconsolidation
stress was determined with Cassagrande`s method, and the calculated over-consolidation
ratio at the I-69 site is 4.2 as shown in Table 3. In other words, this layer is an overconsolidated layer (OC). It is shown again in the graph illustrating the coefficient of
consolidation, which increases by the preconsolidation stress and decreases.
36
Figure 26 Geocomp automated consolidation testing apparatus
Table 2 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for I-69

Depth
(m)
1.68
12kPa
24 kPa
48 kPa
96 kPa
192 kPa
382 kPa
766 kPa
0.0137
0.00417
0.0197
0.0406
0.0140
0.0018
0.00073
Table 3 Effective preconsolidation stress p and OCR
Depth (m)
1.68
37
Effective Preconsolidation
Vertical effective stress
stress (kPa)
(kPa)
101
23.8
OCR
4.2
Displacement (mm)
1. 90
1. 95
2. 00
2. 05
2. 10
2. 15
0
10
1/2
Time (min )
Figure 27 Specimen displacements versus square root of time (48 kPa) for I-69
Cv (cm /sec)
0. 08
0. 04
0. 00
10
100
Vertical stress (kPa)
Figure 28 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for I-69
38
1000

10
100
1000
Displacement (mm)
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 29 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for I-69
4.2.2 Triaxial Test

From a triaxial test, it is possible to extract fundamental material parameters about
the soil sample including its angle of internal friction, cohesion, and undrained shear
strength. These parameters are then used to predict how the material will behave in a
larger-scale engineering application. In this research, an isotropic consolidation
undrained compression test (CIUC) was performed on the collected undisturbed sample,
which was consolidated with mean effective stress at a depth where the sample was
collected. For the tests, a Geocomp automated static triaxial testing device like the one
shown in Figure 30 was used. The location for the test specimen was selected according
to the soil boring test and the field CPT test results. The usual specimen size was 72 mm
in diameter and about 150 mm in height. The specimen was saturated by backpressure
saturation. Back pressure was gradually increased until B value exceeded 0.95. After
saturation, the specimens were isotropically consolidated by applying effective confining
stress and sheared. The CU triaxial test results for I-69 site are summarized in Table 4.
39
Figure 30 Geocomp automated static triaxial testing apparatus
Table 4 Summary of triaxial test results for I-69

Depth (m)
Overburden stress (kPa)
Undrained shear strength (kPa)
1.68
35.2
55.2
4.3 Site 2: SR-49

The second site is located on SR-49 (on the north side of Oliver Ditch) in Jasper
County, Indiana. Cone penetration test (CPT) results and the soil profile for the main pile
location are shown in Figure 31. The subsoil profile is composed of multiple layers of
various types of soils. The groundwater table is encountered at a depth of 1m from the
surface. Shelby tube samples taken from different depths are numbered from TB-1 to TB16. Clayey soils are found from 9m to 20m.
40
Test Number
Qt (MPa)
Depth (m)
10
20
30
Depth (m)
40
Sample number
or N value
0.0
TB-1 (28")
(1)
highly organic soil

2
(2)
0~
2.9m
TB-2 (8")
TB-3 (18")
TB-4 (15")
(3)
2.9
clayey sand
3.7
sandy clay
5.7
10.2
Depth (M)
9.0
~4.4m
TB-5 (26")
(5)
~4.9m
N=9
~5.7m
~6.2m
TB-6 (?, sand)

17
~7.2m
TB-7 (12")
(6)
(7)
(8)
10
clayey silt
12.0
N = 15
(4)
clayey sand
silty clay
~3.5m
12
silty clay
17.0
very stiff silt
18.1
~10.0m
TB-9 (23")
21
(10)
~11.4m
TB-10 (24")
(11)
~11.9m
~12.8m
21
TB-11 (25")
~13.2m
17
TB-12
TB-13 (25")
TB-14 (12")
33
40
52
186
97
71
37
(13)
16
TB-8 (8") sand

35
No Recovery
~10.5m
14
silty clay
~8.0m
~8.4m
~9.3m
(9)
(12)
14.5
~7.6m
(14)
(15)
18
~15.0m
~17.0m
17.0 ~
18.6m
~19m
silty clay
~21.0m
20
TB-15
TB-16
Figure 31 Soil profile for the SR-49 site
A series of laboratory tests were carried out to estimate the mechanical behavior
of soil where the cone penetration test (CPT) was done. The same test program applied to
site 1: I-69 was used. TB-9, TB-10, TB-11 and TB-14 were clayey soils. Sieve and
hydrometer analysis were undertaken for all the clayey soil layers. Atterberg limits and
the natural water content was obtained. Table 5 summarizes these basic properties of the
soil layers. One dimensional consolidation tests were performed on samples collected
41
from the same soil layers. The coefficients of consolidation Cv for all the soil layers are
presented in Table 6 and Figures 32, 33, 34 and 35. An isotropic consolidation undrained
compression test (CIUC) was also performed following the same sequence and the
triaxial test results are summarized in Table 7.
Table 5 Summary of index test results for SR-49
Gravel
(%)
Sand (%)
Silt (%)
~2mm
~0.075mm
~0.002
mm
TB-9
1.6
TB-10
TB-11
TB-14
Soil Layer
Clay
(%)
LL
(%)
PL
(%)
Ip
(%)
W
(%)
LI
(%)
82
16.4
36.6
17.5
19.1
25.4
0.41
1.7
83.2
15.1
28.6
18.8
9.8
23.2
0.45
14.9
63.7
21.4
21.1
11.8
9.3
15.4
0.38
5.1
65.4
29.5
21.9
11.8
10.2
11.3
Table 6 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for TB-9 for SR-49

Soil
Layer
12 kPa
50 kPa
100 kPa
200 kPa
400 kPa
800 kPa
1600 kPa
TB-9
0.0025
0.0052
0.0068
0.0173
0.0116
0.0126
0.0121
TB-10
0.0251
0.0455
0.0343
0.0861
0.0835
0.0800
0.0532
TB-11
0.0012
0.0022
0.0053
0.0035
0.0037
0.0062
0.0083
TB-14
0.0038
0.0010
0.0006
0.0012
0.0004
0.0003
0.0002
42
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 04
0. 03
0. 02
0. 01
0. 00
10
100
1000
10000
Figure 32 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for TB-9
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 12
0. 08
0. 04
0. 00
10
100
1000
43
10000
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 04
0. 03
0. 02
0. 01
0. 00
10
100
1000
10000
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 04
0. 03
0. 02
0. 01
0. 00
10
100
1000
Table 7 Summary of triaxial test results for SR-49
44
10000
Soil layer
TB-9
105
183
TB-10
126
319
TB-11
133
102
TB-14
174
290
4.4 Site 3: US-24

The third site is along the US-24 highway and is located in Milan and Maumee
Townships, Allen County, Indiana. Cone penetration test (CPT) results and the soil
profile are shown in Figure 36. As shown in Figure 36, the soil profile up to 15m is
composed of clayey soil layers. Shelby tube samples were taken from 5m to 7m in order
to run the test program.
45
Figure 36 Soil profile for the US-24 site
of soil where the cone penetration test (CPT) was done. The same test program applied to
the first and second sites was used. Sieve and hydrometer analysis for the clayey soil
layer from 1.5m to 2.1m is shown in Figure 37. Table 8 summarizes the results of the
Atterberg limit tests for the soil layers. The clays at 1.83m depth have a liquid limit (LL)
of 38% and a plastic limit (PL) of 20%, and I p =18%. One-dimensional consolidation
tests were performed on samples collected from the same soil layers. The coefficients of
consolidation Cv for the clayey soil layer are presented in Table 9 and Figure 38. Semilog plots of settlement versus vertical stress are obtained in Figure 39. The effective
preconsolidation stress was determined with Cassagrade`s method and the calculated
over-consolidation ratio at the US-24 site was 2.8 as shown in Table 10. An isotropic
46
consolidation undrained compression test (CIUC) was also performed following the same
Percent passing (%)
sequence. The triaxial test results are summarized in Table 11.
100
80
10
0. 1
0. 01
Particle size (mm)
Figure 37 Grain size distribution of the clayey soil in US-24

Depth (m)
W (%)
LL (%)
PL (%)
I p (%)
1.83
24.0
38.0
20.0
18.0
Table 9 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for US-24

Depth (m)
12kPa
24 kPa
48 kPa
96 kPa
192 kPa
382 kPa
766 kPa
1.83
0.0157
0.0102
0.0212
0.0230
0.0232
0.0039
0.0035
47
Table 10 Effective preconsolidation stress p and OCR for US-24
Depth (m)
Vertical effective stress
stress (kPa)
(kPa)
57.8
20.5
1.83
OCR
2.8
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 0250
0. 0200
0. 0150
0. 0100
0. 0050
0. 0000
10
100
1000
Figure 38 Semi-log plots Cv versus v

10
100
1000
Displacement (mm)
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 39 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for US-24
48
Table 11 Summary of triaxial test results for US-24

Depth (m)
1.83
40.2
120.1
4.5 Site 4: US-31

The fourth site is located on the US-31 highway in Howard County, Indiana.
Cone penetration test (CPT) results and the soil profile are shown in Figure 40. The
subsoil profile includes multiple layers of several types of soils. Shelby tube samples
taken from several sites near US-31 are numbered from RB-1 to RB-114. Clayey soils
from RB-99, RB-114 and RB-31 were investigated by the test program.
49
Figure 40 Soil profile for the US-31 site
of soil where cone penetration tests (CPT) were done. The same test program as before
was used. The soils used were from 1.83m to 2.43m for RB-99 and RB-114, and from
2.43m to 3.04m from RB-31. Atterberg limits as well as natural water content for all
these clayey soil layers were summarized in Table 12. One-dimensional consolidation
tests were performed on samples collected from the same soil layers. The coefficients of
consolidation Cv for all the soil layers are presented in Table 13 and Figures 41, 42, and
43. Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress are obtained in Figures 44, 45, and
46. The effective preconsolidation stress was determined with Cassagrande`s method and
the calculated over-consolidation ratios at RB-99, RB-114 and RB-31 are 3.6, 5.1 and
11.8 respectively, as shown in Table 14. An isotropic consolidation undrained
50
compression test (CIUC) was also performed according to the same sequence and the
triaxial test results are summarized in Table 15.

Soil layer
W (%)
LL (%)
PL (%)
I p (%)
RB-99
12.1
18.9
13.6
5.3
RB-114
15.1
23.0
15.1
7.9
RB-31
13.1
17.9
13.1
4.8
Table 13 Coefficient of consolidation Cv (cm2/sec) for US-31

Soil
Layer
12kPa
50 kPa
100 kPa
200 kPa
400 kPa
800 kPa
RB-99
0.0024
0.0002
0.0015
0.0086
0.0004
0.0008
RB-114
0.00008
0.00007
0.00005
0.00003
0.00001
0.00001
RB-31
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0004
0.0004
0.0003
51
Table 14 Effective preconsolidation stress p and OCR for US-31

Vertical Effective Stress
Stress (kPa)
(kPa)
RB-99
85.6
23.8
3.6
RB-114
121
23.8
5.1
RB-31
364
30.7
11.8
Soil Layer
OCR
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 1000
0. 0800
0. 0600
0. 0400
0. 0200
0. 0000
10
100
Figure 41 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for RB-99
52
1000
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 0008
0. 0006
0. 0004
0. 0002
0. 0000
10
100
1000
Cv (cm2/sec)
0. 0050
0. 0040
0. 0030
0. 0020
0. 0010
0. 0000
10
100
53
1000

10
100
1000
Displacement (mm)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 44 Semi-log plots of settlement versus vertical stress for RB-99

10
100
1000
Displacement (mm)
0
1
2
3
4
5
54

10
100
1000
Displacement (mm)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Table 15 Summary of triaxial test results for US-31

Soil layer
RB-99
44.8
65.5
RB-114
45.0
333.5
RB-31
57.6
441.6
55
CHAPTER 5 SOIL PROPERTY ESTIMATION BASED ON CPT

5.1 Introduction
The cone penetration test (CPT) is considered one of the most useful in-situ tests
and is widely used in onshore and offshore soil investigations at the present time. The
cone penetration test (CPT) measures the cone resistance qc , the sleeve friction
resistance f s , and the penetration pore pressure u . These measurements can be effectively
used for applications: 1) to classify soil identification, 2) to directly estimate pile capacity
from cone penetration tests (CPT) and 3) to evaluate soil properties through an
appropriate correlation, especially the undrained shear strength Su . Thus, the cone
penetration test (CPT) can be used for a wide range of geotechnical engineering
applications.
The undrained shear strength Su is one of the most important design parameters in
clay soils, and most geotechnical designs in clay soils are conducted using undrained
shear strength Su . Undrained shear strength Su can be determined through several
approaches: laboratory tests, in-situ tests, and empirical equations. The empirical
equation is a powerful and simple method. However, some empirical correlations
represent more or less local correlations, and are not always applicable to different types
of soil (Robertson et al, 1986). Unless well-established local correlations have been
developed, rational interpretation of undrained shear strength Su from cone penetration
test (CPT) data is extremely difficult.
5.2 Correlation between Undrained Shear Strength and Cone Resistance
The undrained shear strength Su of clay can be evaluated from cone resistance qc
through an equation such as:
56
Su
qt v
Nk
(16)
where Nk is the cone factor and v is total overburden stress. The cone factor Nk is
most important for reliable estimation of undrained shear strength Su from cone
resistance qt . Therefore, numerous research programs have been conducted in order to
develop accurate cone factor Nk values (Lunne and Kleven, 1981; Aas et al., 1986;
Rochelle et al., 1988; Lunne et al., 1986 and Strak and Juhrend, 1989). The cone factor is,
however, influenced by types of soil, test methods for undrained shear strength Su , and
the penetration rate during cone penetration tests (CPT). It is necessary to calculate the
cone factor Nk values suitable for a localized soil. In this research, the cone factor Nk
values for Indiana clayey soils will be investigated for better and more accurate
geotechnical design. Some examples of criteria suggested for cone factor Nk values are
shown in Figure 47 and Figure 48 (Nash and Duffin, 1982 and O`riordan et al., 1982).
Some researchers claim the cone factor Nk is also affected by a plasticity index
I p , and suggest correlations between Nk and I p (Lunne et al. 1976, Baligh et al. 1980,
Lunne and Kleven 1981, Aas et al. 1986, and Rochelle et al. 1988). Lunne et al. (1976)
collected 6 sites of Scandinavian soft to medium stiff clay and presented Nk from
undrained shear strength Su values obtained from field vane tests and I p as shown in
Figure 49. The results of this study show the decreasing trend of cone factors for the
plasticity index even though the results have some scatters. The cone factor Nk decreases
from 24 to 8 as plasticity index I p increases from 5 to 55. Baligh et al. (1980) gathered
data from NGI and MIT, and suggested similarly decreasing behavior with the range of
cone factor Nk between 18 and 10 in case of plasticity index I p between 5 and 50, as
shown in Figure 50. In addition, the values of undrained shear strength Su used for
correlation were obtained from field vane tests. Aas et al. (1986) considered cone area
ratio and presented an opposite trend for young and aged quick clays with Lunne et al.
57
(1976) and Baligh et al. (1980). The cone factor Nk increases with the plasticity index
from 13 at I p =0 to 19 at I p =50. In the case of over-consolidated quick clays, the results
fall outside the band (See Figure 51). La Rochelle et al. (1998) could not find any
correlation between the cone factor and the plasticity index. In any case, the trend of cone
factors Nk are not consistent and based on localized soil data. It is evident that there is
not a clear and reliable correlation between cone factor Nk and plasticity index I p so far.
Figure 47 The cone factor Nk values for clayey soils in England (Nash and Duffin, 1982)
Figure 48 The cone factor Nk values for clayey soils in England (O`riordan et al., 1982)
58
Figure 49 Correlations between cone factor Nk and plasticity index (Lunne et al., 1976)
Figure 50 Correlations between cone factor Nk and plasticity index I p (Baligh et al.,1980)
59
Figure 51 Correlations between cone factor Nk and plasticity index (Aas et al., 1986)
5.3 Influence of the rate of penetration on CPT

The standard rate for cone penetration tests is 2cm/s according to ASTM D 5778.
This standard penetration rate is applied regardless of the soil type. Generally, it is
assumed that drained behavior for clean sand prevails during penetration at standard
penetration rates. Contrarily, undrained behavior is assumed to prevail for pure clay at the
standard penetration rate. For intermediate soils which make up the majority of soils,
partial drainage may occur at the standard penetration rate. When the drainage condition
changes from undrained to partially drained, the soil ahead of the cone begins to
consolidate. This consolidation induces an increase in soil strength and cone resistance.
During penetration, the closer the conditions are to full drainage, the higher the value of
cone resistance. This means the simplest idealized approach of a broad distinction
between undrained and drained conditions for the interpretation of in-situ tests cannot be
applied since test response can be affected by partial consolidation (Schnaid, 2005). The
penetration rate strongly affects the value of cone penetration resistance. Therefore,
60
drainage conditions at a certain penetration rate should be examined. If the drainage

during CPT is not an undrained one when establishing a relationship between undrained
shear strength and cone resistance, the CPT should be performed again at a rate of
penetration that is sufficiently high to ensure undrained penetration.
Several research studies were conducted in order to investigate the rate effect of
CPT. Roy et al. (1982) performed piezocone penetration tests in soft clays with 7
penetration rates whose range is between 0.5 and 40 mm/sec (16). They argued that the
increase of cone resistance at low penetration rates was due to the transition from
undrained to drained penetration. Furthermore, Kamp (1982) investigated the comparison
of cone resistances and friction resistances when the rate of penetration changes (17).
In addition to cone penetration rate, the coefficient of the soil is related to the
drainage condition during cone penetration. Therefore, the terminology of the normalized
penetration rate V was suggested by several researchers in order to explain the rate effect
of cone penetration tests. This value depends on the rate of penetration v , the coefficient
of consolidation cv , and the cone diameter d . An illustration is equation (17):
vd
cv
(17)
Kim et al. (2006) performed a series of penetration tests in the field and in a
calibration chamber using miniature cones and concluded that the change in drainage
conditions during penetration is the main cause of the rate effects. The rate effects can be
discussed separately for the undrained, partially drained and fully drained penetrations
(See Figure 52):
1. Under fully drained penetration, cone penetration results are not affected by penet
ration rate change ( V 0.05 ).
2. When drainage conditions change from undrained to partially drained penetration,
the soil around the cone starts to consolidate as the cone advances. Therefore, con
e resistance qt increases. However, the gain of soil strength due to increased drain
age and loss of soil strength due to lower loading rates can compensate for each ot
her. Therefore, the transition band is decided using excess pore pressure readings,
and its range is 0.05 V 10 .
61
3. Under undrained penetration, the undrained behavior of clay is rate-dependent.

This is because clay soil has a viscous strength component ( V 10 ).
Figure 52 Effect of penetration rate on normalized cone resistance and pore pressure
(Kim et al., 2006)
In this research, the rate effect for cone resistance has been examined to avoid
overestimated or underestimated field test interpretation using results from Kim et al.
(2006).
5.4 Evaluation of Cone Factor Nk

As mentioned before, the estimation of undrained shear strength Su of cohesive
soils using the cone resistance qc from the CPT is based on the cone factor Nk , as
calculated by many researchers. Therefore, numerous researchers have tried to obtain
values for Nk from field cone penetration data and some of them have suggested that Nk
is related to the plasticity index I p .
62
In order to correlate Nk and I p for clayey soils in Indiana, the cone penetration
test program for clayey soils from 4 sites was performed. The drainage conditions
considering the rate effect during CPTs have been examined with results from Kim et al.
(2006). According to Kim et als criterion, all the drainage conditions of soil samples fall
within undrained penetration and are shown in Table 16.
The cone resistance qc , the undrained shear strength Su and the overburden
pressure v are calculated following the cone penetration test program; then, the cone
factor Nk is evaluated. Table 17 and Figure 55 show the cone factor Nk and the
plasticity index I p for clayey soils in Indiana. The cone factor Nk values range from 8.0
to 13.4 (Kim et al., 2006). These results fall within the range of values reported in
international literature (Lunne et al., 1997) and are comparable with the cone factor
values from 8 to 25 for clays. In addition, these values show increasing trends and
changes with a plasticity index from 8.0 at I p 7.9 to 12.1 at I p 20.0 . As shown in
Figure 53, these results are similar to the findings of Aas et al. (1986), while Lunne et al.
(1976) and Baligh et al. (1980) show decreasing trends. Using the correlation between
the cone factor and the plasticity index for clayey soils in Indiana in Figure 53, a
localized equation N k 0.285I p 7.636 with a correlation coefficient equal to 0.75 is
suggested for estimating the cone factor. It must be mentioned that the results are
dependent on the quantity and quality of data used. Therefore, it may not be possible to
draw general conclusions. The analysis is meaningful as it indicates increasing trends of
cone factor with plasticity index for clayey soils in Indiana. This equation should be
implemented with more field data for more precise cone factor estimation.
63
Table 16 Summary of drainage condition during CPT

I-69
SR-49(TB-9)
SR-49(TB-10)
SR-49(TB-11)
SR-49(TB-14)
0.002
0.007
0.03
0.005
0.004
7112
2032
474
2844
3566
Drainage
Undrained
Undrained
Undrained
Undrained
Undrained
OCR
4.2
US-24
US-31(RB-99)
US-31(RB-114)
US-31(RB-31)
0.02
0.0002
0.0007
0.0002
711
71120
20320
71120
Drainage
Undrained
Undrained
Undrained
Undrained
OCR
2.8
3.6
5.1
11.8
Cv
(cm2/sec)
Cv
(cm2/sec)
64
Table 17 Summary of cone factor Nk and plasticity index I p

I-69
SR-49(TB-9)
SR-49(TB-10)
SR-49(TB-11)
SR-49(TB-14)
qt (kPa)
700
2550
3600
1340
3550
Su (kPa)
55.2
183
319
102
290
v (kPa)
34
105
126
133
174
Nk
12.1
13.4
10.9
11.8
11.6
Ip
20.0
19.1
9.8
9.3
10.2
US-24
US-31(RB-99)
US-31(RB-114)
US-31(RB-31)
qt (kPa)
1620
600
2720
4030
Su (kPa)
120
65.5
333
442
v (kPa)
40
45
45
58
Nk
13.2
8.5
8.0
9.0
Ip
18.0
5.3
7.9
4.8
65
Figure 53 Correlation of factor Nk and plasticity index I p
66
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusions
In this study, the empirical equation for cone factor with respect to the plasticity
index for clayey soil in Indiana was suggested in order to correlate undrained shear
strength and cone resistance from CPT results. Four field cone penetration test programs
were conducted on 9 clayey soils: the CPT, the index tests, the one dimensional test, and
the triaxial test. The following conclusions can be drawn from the study:
(1) The cone factor, which is essential to reliable estimation of undrained shear
strength from cone resistance, is influenced by soil type, penetration rate during the CPT,
and test methods for undrained shear strength.
(2) For most of the soils that are neither pure clay nor clean sand, partial drainage
may occur at the standard penetration rate during the CPT. The standard penetration may
induce partial consolidation in front of the cone and increase cone resistance.
(3) Drainage conditions at a certain penetration rate during CPT should be
examined. If the drainage during CPT is not an undrained one when developing
relationships with undrained shear strength, the CPT should be performed again at a rate
of penetration that is sufficiently high to ensure undrained penetration.
(4) The undrained shear strength can vary with respect to test methods. Therefore,
it is crucial to determine the proper evaluation method of undrained shear strength for the
specific purpose of the project. In this paper, the isotropic consolidated undrained
compression test (CIUC) was used.
(5) The results show increasing trends of cone factor with plasticity index similar
to Aas et al. (1986), while Lunne et al. (1976) and Baligh et al. (1980) show decreasing
trends.
(6) Based on the field cone penetration test program results, the empirical
equation N k 0.285I p 7.636 is suggested.
67
6.2 Recommendations for Future Research

Future research on the topic of this report is suggested as follows:
(1) The empirical equation for cone factor with respect to the plasticity index for
clayey soil in Indiana was suggested via this report. More data should be
added for general correlation.
(2) This research focused on the influence of plasticity index on the cone factor.
Some researchers insist that the over-consolidation ratio can be an affecting
element in estimating cone factor. The influence of the over-consolidation ratio
for CPT- based correlation needs to be studied.
68
LIST OF REFERENCES
Aas, G., Lacasse, S., Lunne, T., and Hoeg, K. (1986). Use of in situ tests for foundation
design on clay, Proceeding of In Situ `86: Use of In Situ Tests in Geotechnical
Engineering, Virginia, pp. 1-30.
Ahmed, I. (1990). Investigation of normalized behavior of resedimented Boston blue clay
using Geonor direct simple shear, M.S. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Aoki, N. and de Alencar, D. (1975). An approximate method to estimate the bearing
capacity of piles, Proceeding of the 5th pan-American conference of soil
mechanics and foundation engineering, Buenos Aires, Vol. 1, pp. 367-376.
Anagnostopoulous, A., Koukis, G., Sabatakis, N., and Tsiambaos, G. (2003). Empirical
correlations of soil parameters based on cone penetration test for Greek soils,
Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 21, pp. 377-387.
ASTM international (2004). Designation: D 2435: Standard Test Methods for OneDimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils Using Incremental Loading.
ASTM international (2004). Designation: D 4767: Standard Test Method for
Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Compression Test for Cohesive Soils.
ASTM international (2007). Designation: D 5778: Standard Test Method for Electronic
Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils.
Atkinson, J.H. and Bransby, P.L. (1978). The mechanics of soils, McGraw Hill.
Baligh, M.M., Vivatrat, V., and Ladd, C.C. (1980). Cone penetration in soil profiling,
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol. 106, No. 4, pp. 447-461.
Bishop, A.W. and Henkel, D.J. (1962). The measurement of soil properties in the triaxial
test, Edward Arnold.
Bowles, J.E. (1982). Foundation analysis and design, McGraw Hill.
69
Burland, J.B. (1990). On the compressibility and shear strength of natural clays,
Geotechnique, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 329-378.
Burland, J.B., Rampello, S., Georgiannou, V.N., and Calabresi, G. (1996). A laboratory
study of the strength of four stiff clays, Geotechnique, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 491514.
Bustamante, M. and Gianeselli, L. (1982). Pile bearing capacity predictions by means of
static penetrometer CPT, Proceeding of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration
Testing, Amsterdam, pp. 493-500.
Jamiolkowski, M, Lancellotta, R., Tordella, L., and Battaglio, M. (1982). Undrained
strength from CPT, Proceeding of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration
Jardine, R., Chow, F., Overy, R., and Standing, J. (2005). ICP design methods for driven
piles in sands and clays, Thomas Telford.
Kamp, W.G.B. (1982). The influence of the rate of penetration on the cone resistance in
sand, Proceeding of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing,
Amsterdam, pp. 627-633.
Kim, K.K., Prezzi, M., and Salgado, R. (2006). Interpretation of cone penetration tests
in cohesive soils, Research No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2006/22 Final report, Indiana
Department of Transportation.
Ladd, C.C., Kraemer, Young, G.A., Kraemer, S.R., and Burke, D.M.
(1999).Engineering properties of Boston blue clay from special testing
program, Proceeding of sessions of Geo-Congress 98, pp. 1-24.
La Rochelle, P., Zebdi, P.M., Leroueil, S., Tavenas, F., and Virely, D. (1988).Piezocone
tests in sensitive clays of Eastern Canada, Proceeding of 1st International
Symposium on Penetration Testing, Orlando, pp. 831-841.
Leonards, G.A. and Ramiah, B.K. (1959).Time effects in the consolidation of clay,
ASTM special technical publication, No. 254, pp. 116-130.
Lunne, T., Eide, O., and de Ruiter, J. (1976). Correlation between cone resistance and
vane shear strength in some Scandinavian soft to medium stiff clays, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 430-441.
70
Lunne, T., Eidsmoen, T., Gillespie, D., and Howland, J.D. (1986). Laboratory and field
evaluation of cone penetrometer, Proceeding of In Situ `86: Use of In Situ Tests
in Geotechnical Engineering, Virginia, pp. 714-729.
Lunne, T. and Kleven, A. (1981) Role of CPT in North Sea foundation engineering,
Symposium on Cone Penetration Engineering Division, ASCE, pp. 49-75.
Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K., and Powell, J.J.M. (1997). Cone penetration testing in
geotechnical practice, Blackie Academic Professional.
Mayne, P.W., Auxt, J.A., Mitchell, J.K., and Yilmaz, R. (1995). U.S. national report on
CPT, Proceeding of International Symposium on Penetration Testing, Linkoping,
pp. 263-276.
Mesri, G. and Huvaj, N. (2007). Shear strength mobilized in undrained failure of soft
clay and silt deposits, Proceedings of Sessions of Geo-Denver 2007 Congress:
Advances in Measurement and Modeling of Soil Behavior, Denver, pp. 1-22.
Nash, D.F.T. and Duffin, M.J. (1982). Site investigation of glacial soils using cone
penetration tests, Proceeding of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration
Olsen, R.E. and Dennis, N.D. (1982). Review and compilation of pile test results,
O`riordan, N.J., Davies, J.A., and Dauncey, P.C. (1982). The interpretation of static
cone penetrometer tests in soft clays of low plasticity, Proceeding of 2nd
European Symposium on Penetration Testing, Amsterdam, pp. 755-760.
Price, G and Wardle, I.F. (1982). Comparison between cone penetration test results and
the performance of small diameter instrumented pile in stiff clay Proceeding of
2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing, Amsterdam, pp. 775-780.
Rad, N.S. and Lunne, T. (1988). Direct correlations between piezocone test results and
undrained shear strength of clay, Proceeding of 1st International Symposium on
Penetration Testing, Orlando, pp. 911-917.
Randolph, M.F. and Murphy, B.S. (1985). Shaft capacity of driven piles in clay,
Proceeding of 17th offshore technology conference, Houston, pp. 371-378.
Robertson, P.K., Campanella, R.G., and Wightman, A. (1983). SPT-CPT correlations,
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 109, No. 11, pp. 1449-1459.
71
Roy, M., Tremblay, M., Tavenas, F., and La Rochelle, P. (1982). Development of pore
pressures in quasi-static penetration tests in sensitive clay, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 124-138.
Salgado, R. (2007). The engineering of foundations, McGraw Hill.
Santagata, M. (1998). Factors affecting the initial stiffness and stiffness degradation of
cohesive soils, Ph.D. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Schnaid, F. (2005). Geo-characterization and properties of natural soils by in situ tests,
Ground Engineering, Vol. 38, No. 9, pp. 23-24.
Schmertmann, J.H. (1978). Guideline for cone penetration test, Research No.
FHWA/TS/-78-209, U.S. Department of Transportation.
Sheahan, T.C. (1991). An experimental study of the time-dependent undrained shear
behavior of resedimented clay using automated stress-path triaxial equipment,
Sc.D. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Stark, T.D. (1989). Undrained shear strength fro cone penetration tests, Proceeding of
12th International conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Rio
de Janeiro, pp. 327-330.
Tomlinson, M.J. (1975). Foundation analysis and design, Pitman, London.
Zevgolis, I. and Bourdeau, P. (2005). Mechanically stabilized earth wall abutments for
bridge support, Research No. F HWA/IN/JTRP-2006/38 Final report, Indiana
Department of Transportation.
72
APPENDICES
96
Appendix A: Triaxial Test Results of Project Soils

This chapter presents the triaxial test results of all the soils used in the project I-69, US24, RB-99(US-31), RB-114(US-31) and RB-31(US-31).
Deviatoric stress (psi)
I-69 (10 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)
I-69 (20 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
I-69 (30 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 54 Stress-strain curve for I-69
100
Excess pore pressure

(psi)
I-69 (10 psi)

20
15
10
5
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)
Excess pore pressure (psi)
I-69 (20 psi)

20
15
10
5
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)

(psi)
I-69 (30 psi)

20
15
10
5
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 55 Excess pore pressure distribution for I-69
101
US-24 (6 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)
US-24 (20 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
US-24 (30 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 56 Stress-strain curve for US-24
102
Excess pore pressure (psi)
US-24 (6 psi)
20
15
10
5
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)

(psi)
US-24 (20 psi)

20
15
10
5
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)

(psi)
US-24 (30 psi)

20
15
10
5
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 57 Excess pore pressure distribution for US-24
103
US-31 group 1 (4 psi)
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)
30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 58 Stress-strain curve for RB-99(US-31)

(psi)
US-31 group 1 (4 psi )

20
10
0
0
10
-10
-20
Axial strain (%)
104
15
20

(psi)

20
10
0
0
10
15
20
-10
-20
Axial strain (%)
Figure 59 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-99(US-31)
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)
30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 60 Stress-strain curve for RB-114(US-31)
105

(psi)

30
20
10
0
0
10
15
20
15
20
Axial strain (%)

(psi)

30
20
10
0
0
10
Axial strain (%)
Figure 61 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-114(US-31)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
Axial strain (%)
Figure 62Stress-strain curve for RB-31(US-31).
106
20

(psi)

10
0
0
10
15
-10
-20
-30
Axial strain (%)
Figure 63 Excess pore pressure distribution for RB-31(US-31).
107
20

CPT Su

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CPT Su

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CPT Su

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOINT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAM

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN BASED ON

Technology Transfer and Project Implementation Information

TRB Subject Code:

MECHANISTIC DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR CRC COMPOSITE PAVEMENT

04/10 JTRP 2010/07

Transportation. This trend reflects the

INDOT Office of Research & Development

West Lafayette, IN 47906

neither pure clay nor clean sand. It induces

quality of data used. Therefore, we

04/10 JTRP 2010/07

INDOT Office of Research & Development

West Lafayette, IN 47906

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN BASED ON CPT AND PMT

Dr. Daehyeon Kim, P.E.

Joint Transportation Research Program

Conducted in Cooperation with the

TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE

2. Government Accession No.

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN BASED ON CPT AND PMT

8. Performing Organization Report No.

Daehyeon Kim, Youngjin Shin, Nayyar Siddiki

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

10. Work Unit No.

Joint Transportation Research Program

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Indiana Department of Transportation

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

17. Key Words

18. Distribution Statement

Undrained shear strength, cone penetration test

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

21. No. of Pages

Table 1 Summary of laboratory index testing for I-69 ..................................................... 35

Figure 15 Stress-strain curve for US-24 ........................................................................... 21

Figure 42 Semi-log plots Cv versus v for RB-114......................................................... 52

Nk and plasticity index I p (Baligh et al.,1980)

1.1 Statement of Problem

1.2 Objective of Research

1.3 Report Outline

CHAPTER 2 CLAYEY SOILS IN INDIANA

2.2 Soils in Indiana

Figure 1 Major soil formations in the State of Indiana (Zevgolis, 2005)

2.3 Behavior of Clayey Soils in Indiana

In this research, the isotropic consolidated undrained compression test (CIUC)

2.3.1 Literature Review on Clay Behavior

Figure 2 A consolidated undrained test on a normally consolidated clay sample (Bishop

Figure 4 A consolidated undrained test on a heavily over-consolidated clay sample

Figure 5 Mohr envelopes for consolidated undrained test on a heavily over-consolidated

Figure 6 The effect of over-consolidation on the value of pore pressure parameter A at

Atkinson and Bransby (1978) collected isotropic consolidated undrained test

consolidation ratio (OCR), which was isotropically consolidated to 827 kN / m2 and

Figure 7 Undrained stress-strain behavior of reconstituted Pietrafitta clay (Burland et al,