Adapted T-bar penetrometer versus CPT to determine undrained shear

strengths of Dutch soft soils

Oung, O., Van der Vegt, J.W.G. & Tiggelman, L.
GeoDelf, Delft, the Netherlands
Brassinga, H.E.
Public Works Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands

Keywords: penetration testing, cone, CPT, T-bar, in-situ testing, soft soils, undrained shear strength

ABSTRACT: The objective of this work is to evaluate a new on-site investigation technique: the T-bar pene-
trometer to measure in-situ low undrained shear strengths. In laboratory conditions, model penetration tests in
a prepared clay sample have been performed using a scaled cone penetrometer of the Dutch standard design
and a jointless design where the sleeve is strain-gauged to measure the tip load using either a T-bar or a cone.
The results obtained gave a better understanding of some effects affecting the tip load. In field conditions,
penetration tests have also been performed using a T-bar and a cone. The undrained shear strengths evaluated
from these penetration tests were compared mutually and to vane tests and triaxial tests. The capacity of the
T-bar penetration tests to determine reliable values of undrained shear strength in-situ is discussed in com-
parison to the cone penetration tests.

the stability of dikes is new in the Netherlands. It is

1 INTRODUCTION
expected to produce less conservative predictions.
Moreover when the investigation technique to be
The soft peat and clayey soils in the Nether-
investigated is approved then because of its low
lands are often so soft that checks on the stability
costs more sites can be investigated so that predic-
of a large number of constructions like dikes have
tions can be more representative and of higher
to be carried out regularly and extensively. As in
quality.
the case of dikes about 3 thousand kilometers are
The objective of this paper is to evaluate the
at stake and therefore the activities to evaluate the
application of a T-bar penetrometer in comparison
risks comprising soil investigation (typically soil
to the cone penetrometer to determine (low)
sampling and triaxial tests) and calculations are
undrained shear strengths in the typically Dutch
very costly. In practice, because of limited budgets
soft soils. In the first part of this paper, tip resis-
only limited amounts of tests can be carried out on
tances of a T-bar and a cone are investigated as
sparse sites. To reduce the costs and to improve the
well as some effects influencing the tip bearing in
quality of the predictions, alternative solutions
model tests. In the second part, penetration tests
need to be found.
using T-bar and cone penetrometers on a dike in
The applications of in-situ and continuous tech-
the island of Marken (the Netherlands) and com-
niques (like a Cone Penetration Test ‘CPT’) are
plementary soil investigation methods are studied.
generally of lower costs than multistage methods
The undrained shear strengths of each method are
involving laboratory tests (like triaxial tests on
compared and the results are discussed.
bored samples). They also can provide more in-
formation than on-site discontinuous investigation
methods like for instance vane shear tests, which
2 MODEL TESTS
are performed at chosen depths. Provided that the
obtained parameters are reliable and accurate (lim-
ited corrections are needed) then it is worth pro- 2.1 Cones and T-bar for model tests
moting such techniques. The T-bar penetrometer was initially designed
In this work, the parameter to be determined is for centrifuge testing (Stewart & Randolph
the undrained shear strength cu. In addition to the (1991)). The need for centrifuge testing to have a
inherent advantages of using an in-situ and con- sensitive on- flight investigation technique was
tinuous method, the use of cu in the predictions of
strong because clay consolidated in-flight changes 2.2 Model tests
drastically its strength when unloaded to 1-g condi-
Penetrations tests have been performed in a pre-
tions (Davies & Parry (1983)). In the centrifuge
pared clay cake. The clay was prepared by consoli-
conditions,a sounding technique is required to be on
dating hydraulically kaolinite Speswhite clay slurry
one hand as reduced as possible in dimensions be-
(100% water content) at a pressure of130kPa for
cause of the limited size of the soil model and on the
~30days in a cylinder of 900mm in diameter. This
other hand as sensitive as possible. In this perspec-
pressure was removed while performing the penetra-
tive, miniature cones have been built but their meas-
tion tests. At the end of the consolidation, the clay
urements suffer from the effect of water pressure oc-
was 585mm high. The clay was protected during the
curring in soft cohesive soils affecting the global tip
tests using a cling film. Free water left on top of the
bearing (Tani & Craig (1995)). The lack of space in
clay after consolidation was removed to prevent
the shaft made it difficult, nearly impossible, to
swelling and loss of strength in the upper part. The
build in a (water) pressure transducer so that correc-
homogeneity of the clay cake was checked by de-
tions were not possible. On the contrary, the T-bar
termining water contents every 25mm in depth. The
penetrometer showed little effect of water pressure
profile obtained is given in Fig. 2.
in its measurements. Later, it has been successfully
tested in soft clay in field conditions (Stewart & Table 1. Characteristics of the tips used in model tests
Randolph (1994)) and offshore to investigate the Type of head T-bar Cone Cone
seabed (Randolph & al. (1998)). UWA UWA ApvdB
To determine the undrained shear strength cu of Projected area 213.2 32.9 38.5
soft clays sensitive penetrometers are required. [mm2]
Range of bearing 0.938 6.09 18.2
pressure [MPa]
N-factor 10.5 10-20 10-20
(+/-13%) (15) (15)

Strain-
gauges 6.46 mm water content [%]
Φ shaft 0 25 50 75 100
0
7.08 mm
100
Depth in sample [cm]

200
6.46 mm 15.15 mm
30.11
300

Figure 1. Miniature cone penetrometer and T-bar designed by 400

the University of Western Australia for centrifuge testing.
Two types of sensitive penetrometers were used in
the model tests:
- The T-bar and cone (6.47 mm in diameter)
penetrometers of the University of Western Aus-
tralia UWA. The design of these penetrometers
differed from a standard CPT (Lunne & al.
(1997)) by the measuring element. As shown in
Fig. 1, strain gauges were glued along the inner
shaft and the outer sleeve consists of a stiff plastic
tube. The surface of the rod was smooth. The T-
bar shown in Fig. 1 is not correctly scaled.
- The cone of 7-mm in diameter (without friction
sleeve and pore pressure measurements) ordered
by GeoDelft to AP van der Berg bv. (ApvdB).
This cone was scaled down based on a standard
cone.
The range of bearing capacity of the T-bar and cone
of UWA was 200N. The accuracy on the full scale
was 0.1%, which is 0.2N. For the cone_ApvdB, the
range of bearing capacity was 250N and the accu-
racy full scale was 1N. Projected areas and range of
bearing pressure are given in Table 1.
500
600
Figure 2. Profile of water contents 16 hours after penetration
tests.
The penetration tests have been carried out at
various penetration rates: 5, 0.5 and 0.05mm/s.
For comparison, each test was carried out by
pushing away simultaneously 2 penetrometers into
the clay sample. The 2 penetrometers consisted of on
one side, the cone_ApvdB and on the other side ei-
ther the cone_UWA or the T-bar_UWA. The mini-
mum distance between two penetration sites was
100mm. Tests have been repeated to check their re-
producibility.
The results of these tests are presented in Fig. 3.
The following observations can be expressed:
1. The tip resistances of the T-bar and of the
cone_ApvdB were reproducible (Fig. 3). Those of
the cone_UWA were clearly not.
2. The cone_ApvdB presented rather stable meas-
urement of the tip resistance in comparison to the
cone_UWA. In the construction of the UWA pene-
trometer, the plastic skin was not directly mounted
to the inner shaft at the shoulder of the tip but a dis-
tance of 2mm. This indicates that the UWA pene-
trometer could be sensitive to soil friction.
3. The cone_UWA and the cone_ApvdB penetrome-
ters showed different tip resistances especially at the
penetration rate of 5mm/s. The tip resistances profile
of cone_UWA (1) varied very differently in com-
parison to the 3 other ones. Cone_UWA (1) is
probably not representative (see Fig. 3). The tip re-
sistance profile of cone_UWA (2) was larger than
that of the cone_ApvdB, especially at 5mm/s. This
difference can be explained by the effect of water
pressure, which partly lowered the measured tip re-
sistance of the cone_ApvdB in comparison to the
cone_UWA. The UWA penetrometer was designed
to be unsensitive to lateral water pressures. At the
rate of 5mm/s, undrained conditions apparently
ruled.
4. The T-bar_UWA showed clearly lower tip resis-
tances than the two types of cones, independently
from the penetration rates and types of construc-
tions. The difference in the shape of the tip can be
invoked here.
Measured tip resistance [kPa]
0 200 400 600 800
-100
5 mm/s
-200
Depth [mm]
-300
5 mm/s
-400
0.5 mm/s
-500
-600
Figure 3. Profiles of measured tip resistances of penetration
tests using 3 various tips, at various penetration rates
5. At a penetration rate of 0.05mm/s, a clear in-
crease in the total tip resistance was observed in all
the tests performed although passing from 5mm/s to
0.5 mm/s showed nearly no increase in the tip resis-
tance. This point will be discussed in section 2.5.
2.3 Evaluation of total water pressure
Generally, at relatively large penetration rates,
excess pore pressures are generated at the tip of
penetrometer resulting in lower measured tip resis-
tances. To correct from this effect, only water pres-
sures at the tip of the penetrometer can be used. For
the standard cone penetrometer, the measured bear-
ing pressures should be corrected according to the
following relation:
qt = qc + (1-a)u (1)
Where qt is the corrected tip resistance, qc is the
measured tip resistance, a is net area ratio and u is
the total water pressure acting behind the cone.
To estimate the total water pressure at 5mm/s, in
the series of penetration tests performed, the pene-
trometer was held at a depth of ~-215mm. The tip
resistances of the T-bar and the cone penetrometers
varied accordingly (Fig. 4). Just after the standing
still, the penetrometers were pushed away at a rate
of 5mm/s. They then showed an immediate decrease
followed by a steep increase, which may be related
to relaxation of the soil around the penetrometer and
dissipation of water pressure. The difference be-
tween these two measurements was relatively con-
stant (~100kPa).
Moreover the bearing pressure of the T-bar was
on average nearly zero and became even slightly
negative at about the end of this dissipa-
tion/relaxation test. By holding the T-bar, the clay
went to rest on the upper part of the bar. The soil
stress pushing upwards the T-bar was compensated
for only ~75%.
1000
1000
750
Measured tip resistance [kPa]
Cone_UWA
T-Bar UWA (1)
500 Cone ApvdB (1)
T_Bar UWA (2)
Cone ApvdB (2)
Cone UWA (1) 250
Cone_UWA (2) T-Bar UWA (1)
0
Cone APvdB (1) T_bar UWA (2)
Cone_ApvdB (2)
-250 Displacement
Displacement
-500
0.05 mm/s
-750
1 10 100 1000 10000
Time [s]
Figure 4. Measured tip resistances and penetrometer displace-
ment versus time.
After 40s of water pressure dissipation, the pene-
trometers were pushed away at a rate of 5mm/s. This
operation generated an immediate and sharp increase
in bearing pressures (Fig. 4). Because of the
undrained conditions, it was probable that the gener-
ated water pressures should have affected the total
resistance of the cone penetrometers assuming that
water pressure had nearly no effect on the T-bar
measurement (Stewart & Randolph (1994)). A dif-
ference of ~100kPa between the two bearing pres-
sures was reproducibly found. It is equivalent to a
water pressure affecting the cone resistance with
~14kPa. The net area ratio of the cone_ApvdB was
0.86. Because of the small size and the homogeneity
(Fig. 2) of the clay cake water pressures at the tip
could be taken as nearly constant along the depth.
For the evaluation of cu, the value of 14kPa was used
to correct the cone resistance from the effect of wa-
ter pressure at the tip.
2.4 Undrained shear strengths
From the penetration tests, it is possible to evalu-
ate the undrained shear strengths cu of the soil. Cu is
proportional to the total tip resistance:
For cone: cu =(qt –σvo)/N (2)
For T-bar: cu =qt/N (3)
Where σvo is the total in-situ vertical stress and N a
factor varying with the type of penetrometer. Eq.3
means that most probably soil cannot fill in immedi-
ately the room behind the T-bar while it is pushed
away.
The N-factor of the T-bar penetrometers Nb de-
rived from a plasticity solution, see Stewart &
Randolph (1991). Nb has upper and lower limits cor-
responding to limits of roughness coefficients, which
are in the range of 13% from the adopted value of
10.5. The cone-factor Nc varies between 10 and 20
and varies strongly with the type of soil encountered.
Lunne & al.(1997) and Stewart & Randolph (1991)
used a value of 15. In this work, the values of 15 and
20 were applied for Nc. The N-factor of the T-bar
and the cone penetrometers are summarized in Table
1.
Cu [kPa]
0 10 20 30 40
0
T-Bar UWA
-100
Cone APvdB
cone corrected
-200
Depth [mm]
cone corrected
-300 Triaxial tests
Vane test
-400
Nc=15
-500
Nc=20
-600
Figure 5. Profiles of undrained shear strengths (N-factor of
cone: 15 and that of T-bar: 10.5). (for more details see text).
For comparison, triaxial tests (UU: unconsoli-
dated undrained) have been performed on samples
taken at three different depths. The tests were con-
form to the Dutch standards (NEN 5117) on a bored
sample, which in turn was divided into 3 cylindrical
samples of 67mm in diameter and 130 mm long. The
results of these tests are presented in Fig. 5. In this
figure, a line represents each triaxial test. Only one
miniature vane test was performed at the a depth of -
147mm. The measured su was multiplied by 0.8 ac-
cording to Bjerrum’s correction in order to obtain cu
(Bjerrum (1972)). This value was extrapolated to the
rest of the clay assuming homogeneity (see line cor-
responding to the vane test in Fig. 5).
In Fig. 5, the cu -values of the T-bar penetrometer
was obtained from the measured tip resistances ac-
cording to eq.2 whereas that of the cone penetrome-
ter was corrected from the water pressure deter-
mined previously.
Correction of qt should also take into account soil
friction occurring behind the cone and the slit. Eq.1
would then be rewritten as follows:
qt = qc + (1-a)u - bsu (1bis)
b defines the length of the side of the cone tip (b =
Lx4/D; D is shaft diameter). For the mini-
cone_ApvdB, b = 1.1 and a = 0.86. As a conse-
quence, the unwanted effect of soil friction (~15kPa)
on qt compensates that of the excess water pressure
(~14kPa) in the tested soft clay as foreseen by Mesri
(2001).
It can be concluded that the cu -values of the T-
bar penetration test agrees fairly with the UU triaxial
tests. A good agreement is found between the vane
test and the CPT when using not corrected cone re-
sistances and an N-factor of 15 (Fig. 5). The cu-
values obtained from the CPTs were (~2 times) lar-
ger than those of the triaxial and of the T-bar pene-
tration tests. This cannot be explained by the con-
struction defaults but rather the interaction between
soil and penetrometer for such soft clay and low
penetration rates. More attention must be spent on
this issue in the future.
2.5 Effect of low penetration rates
According to Campanella et al. (1983), at low
penetration rates, the measured and the total (or ef-
fective) bearing pressures qc and qt increase as well
as the measured sleeve friction. They found that this
effect is mainly caused by the plasticity of the soil
and is not related to total water pressures, which ef-
fect diminishes with the decrease of the penetration
rates. In Fig. 3 however, the tip resistances at
0.05mm/s were substantially larger than those at 0.5
and 5mm/s independently of the types of penetrome-
ter. Fig. 4 presents the measurements against the
logarithm of time. The bearing pressures increased
nearly linearly with log(time) and seemed to reach a
maximum value, for both T-bar and cone_ApvdB.
The reason for this effect is not clear. Possibly, the
increase of the sleeve friction corresponded to an in-
crease in a skin friction generated by the slow dis-
placement of the shaft. This friction might be trans-
ferred by continuity to the tip of the penetrometer.
Another possibility is the hardening of the soil cre-
ated by the penetration in the initially soft clay.
 Furthermore, it can be noticed that the bearing Fig. 6. The results of the CPM test were not yet
pressures of the cone_UWA at 0.05mm/s were much available at the time of writing.
larger that those of the cone_ApvdB. This can be at-
tributed to the construction of this cone, which
makes it sensitive to soil friction as already men-
tioned.
2.6 Summary
Conclusions out of the model tests are:
- A T-bar penetrometer shows substantially lower
tip resistance than a cone penetrometer.
- No correction on the T-bar resistance was
needed to obtain cu -values close to those of the Figure 6. Relative distance of field tests.
triaxial tests.
3.1 Methods applied
- In the model tests performed, no correction on
the cone resistance was necessary because the ef- In the following, a brief description of applied on-
fect of soil friction acting on the cone substan- site investigation techniques is briefly given.
tially compensated that of water pressure acting
behind the tip. 3.1.1 T-bar penetrometer
A T-bar penetrometer has been built according to
- The N-factor of 10.5 for the T-bar was accept-
the dimensions given in Stewart & Randolph (1994)
able. Acceptable values of the cu coming from
for use in field conditions. This T-bar was con-
CPTs depend strongly on the choice of the cone
structed in such a way that it can be directly
N-factor. In the model tests, it should be large
mounted on a 36mm shaft of the standard CPT
(15) to fit better the cu-values of the vane test.
equipment, at the location where a piezometer is
usually mounted. A picture of the made T-bar and its
dimensions are shown in Fig. 7. The penetration rate
3 DETERMINATION OF CU IN FIELD
was 20mm/s. The projected area of the T-bar was
CONDITIONS
6400mm2. The accuracy was 0.01MPa. The proce-
dure to perform the penetration tests is the same as
Undrained shear strengths in field conditions can
that of a CPT. Fig. 8 shows how the adapted T-bar
be determined by applying the following characteri-
was mounted on a rig under a tractor.
zation methods, see Lunne & al. (1997):
In-situ measurements:
- Field Vane Tests (FVT)
160 mm long
- Cone pressuremeter (CPM)
- Penetration tests (CPT)
Measurements upon undisturbed samples:
- Unconsolidated and Undrained UU tests at in-situ
confining pressure 40 mm in 36 mm in
- Consolidated & Undrained CU tests at in-situ con- diameter diameter
fining pressure
The field investigation has taken place in the is-
land of Marken surrounded by the IJsselmeer (the
Netherlands). This location presented soft soils like Figure 7. Photography of a T-Bar penetrometer
silty clay and Dutch peat. At two locations (HM
34.15K and HM 41.80) along the body and on the
crown of the dike protecting the island from flood-
ing, a series of field tests were performed with a
small tractor. Testing at each location started with a
CPT for soil stratification and classification. With
the results of this CPT, the depths were chosen to
perform the Field Vane Tests (FVT). At each of the
2 locations, a CPM test, a CPT (see section 3.1.2)
and several samples were collected using the Bege-
mann sampler. The triaxial tests were carried out on
these samples. Each of these methods was operated
at reasonable distance from each other as shown in Figure 8. Mounting of the T-Bar penetrometer
3.1.2 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
The standard and sensitive CPTs have been per-
formed using a GeoDelft cone penetrometer con-
form the Dutch standard NEN 5140. The one used
was a standard Dutch cone with a cone area of
1000mm2, a friction sleeve of 150mm and a shaft of
36mm in diameter. The standard cone penetrometer
was calibrated in pressures ranging from 0 to
50MPa. The sleeve was calibrated in the range of 0
to 0.7MPa. The sensitive cone penetrometer was
treated in the same way as the standard one with the
only difference that it was calibrated in a lower pres-
sure range (0–14MPa) to obtain more accurate
measurements (the accuracy was 0.02MPa). The
sleeve friction was calibrated in the same range of
pressures. The penetration rate was 20mm/s.
3.1.3 Field Vane Tests (FVT)
The Geonor field vane tests were performed con-
form the Dutch standard NEN 5106. The vane (65x
130mm2) was pushed (with a protection shield) into
the soil and at a chosen depth the vane itself was
pushed away 50cm further. The rotation rate of the
vane was 0.1 degree per second. After measuring the
maximum undrained shear strength, the vane was
rapidly rotated at least 10 revolutions before the re-
moulded state was recorded.
Figure 9. Begemann sampler of 66 mm in diameter
3.1.4 The Delft continuous, or Begemann, sampler
combined with triaxial tests
The Delft continuous or Begemann sampler pro-
duces a continuous profile of the soils encountered
(Begemann (1966)). Both the sample diameter and
its quality should be ideal for undisturbed laboratory
testing. A cross-section through the sampler is
shown in Fig. 9. The bottom 0.9m of the whole sys-
tem consists of three tubes centered on one another
as follows. The outside thick walled tube on which
the compressive force is also exerted to push this
part into the ground. Then a very thin walled tube of
smaller diameter over which up to 23m of watertight
pre-coated nylon stocking can be slid in folds. At the
bottom end of the outside tube there is a cutting shoe
so designed that a sample is obtained to the requisite
diameter and the right length.
The triaxial tests were carried out in order to
measure the stress-strain behavior and the shear
strength parameters of a soil specimen under con-
trolled stress conditions according to the Dutch NEN
5140 class 2. For this project, the samples were
firstly anisotropically consolidated and all tests were
performed in single stages in undrained conditions
(CU).
3.2 Field penetration tests
Fig. 9 shows the results from the CPT and T-bar
measurements on both locations.
The following observations can be made:
For both locations, the tip resistances measured
were mainly comparable. The sleeve friction and
consequently the friction ratio of the T-bar penetro-
meter were lower than that of the cone. The soil
stratification interpreted from the qt and Rf, of the
CPTs agree with the Begemann samples. Although
for the T-bar there are no empirical relations be-
tween qt, fs and Rf yet available, the measurements
of Fig. 10 show that the same types of relations can
be determined. It is not excluded that just a simple
transposition of the empirical classification may be
enough.
It can also be observed that the tip resistance of
the cone shows a very peaked line in comparison to
that of the T-bar. This can be attributed to the small
projected area of the cone, which makes it sensitive
to slight disturbance in the soil like fine heterogenei-
ties. The T-bar however seems to present more aver-
age measurements of qt as well as fs.
Moreover at the site HM41.80, layer 5 consisting
of peat ended at -5.82m for the T-bar whereas for the
cone it was 0.38m deeper. This difference can be
clearly observed on both the measurements of the tip
resistance and the sleeve friction. The Begemann
however shows the end of layer 5 at –5.47m. As-
suming that the Begemann sampler provided with a
nearly undisturbed sample and therefore the most re-
liable method here, the difference in detecting the
low limit of the peat layer between the cone and the
Begemann was 0.73m. This is relatively large even
if the Begemann sample was slightly disturbed and a
drastic change in the soil layers can not be invoked
because the sites of investigation were very close to
each other. The reason for this large difference can
be referred to the pattern of the soil flow around the
 1
2 1
2
3
3
4
4
5 5
67 6
8 7
9

Legend: Clay Silt Peat Sand

Figure 10. T-bar and Cone penetration tests and Begemann profiles: at site HM 40.80 Crown and HM34.15 Crown. Full line (blue):
CPT. Dotline (red): T-bar penetrometer. Numbers in the profiles are related to soil layers.

Estimated undrained shear strength [ kPa] Estimated undrained shear strength [ kPa]
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
2 2

0 0

-2 -2 T-Bar
CPT*
Depth [m NAP]

Depth [m NAP]

T-Bar
-4 CPT* -4 CU Triaxial tests

CU Triaxial tests Vane tests

Vane tests
-6 -6

-8 -8

-10 -10

HM34.15 Crown HM41.80 Crown

-12 -12
Figure 11. Profiles of Cu of T-bar and (sensitive) CPT.

penetrometer. The resolution to detect layers fron- tests.The vane shear strength su has not been cor-
tiers is nearly twice the diameter of the cone and it is rected. It is possible for clay to apply the correction
about the double of that of the T-bar. In this case, the on su using a factor depending on the plasticity index
T-bar can reflect better the limits of the layers than of the soil as suggested by Bjerrum (1972). This fac-
the cone. tor varies between 0.6 and 1.2. (Aas et al. (1986)). A
3.3 Determination of cu good fit between vane and triaxial tests would re-
quire a Bjerrum’s factor of 0.8.
The undrained shear strengths of the penetration In peat (layer 5 of Begemann samples), although
tests were estimated from the measured tip resis- the T-bar presented relatively lower tip resistances
tances. An N-factor of 10.5 was applied to the T-bar than the cone for both investigation sites, the cu ob-
bearing pressures while 15 to the cone bearing pres- tained were comparable. The shear strengths of the
sures. In Fig. 11, the profiles of the undrained shear triaxial tests were close to those of the penetration
strengths of the penetration tests are plotted together tests only at the site HM34.15. The cu of the vane
with the results of the CU triaxial and field vane tests (~60kPa) were very distinct from those of the
T-bar and cone (~40kPa). These results showed that
the vane shear strengths (both in clay and in peat)
were larger than those of the triaxial and the penetra-
tion tests. The penetration tests either with the T-bar
or the cone showed reproducible cu. Their difference
was about 5kPa. A good fit between the cu-values
would require applying an N-factor of 13 on the
cone resistance.
In the silty clay layer, the tip resistances of the
two penetrometers were rather similar, which means
that either water pressure at the tip affected both
measurements in the same way or this effect was
negligible. The cu values of the T-bar in the silty
clay layers (layers 2 and 3) agreed with the vane
shear strengths. The triaxial tests have provided with
lower cu- values than the other methods. However
the undrained shear strengths calculated differed of
~15kPa on the site HM41.80 (Fig. 11). It seems that
the effect of water pressures on the tip resistance
was limited. This difference can be explained by the
value of the N-factor chosen. An N-factor of 10
would have better fitted the cu of the cone penetro-
meter than a value of 15. In this case, T-bar and cone
had the same N-factor.
4 CONCLUSIONS
From the model and field tests performed, the fol-
lowing conclusions can be expressed:
- The model tests show that the measured tip
resistance is rather dependent on the design and
the construction of each individual model tip.
- The tip resistance measured in the model tests
show large differences between the Australian T-
bar and CPT, while in the field test there is a
good agreement. Geometrical effects of the
model penetrometers may cause this.
- The determination of the undrained shear
strength from the T-bar in model tests is straight-
forward, while this determination from CPT tests
depends on necessary correction due to pore
pressures, soil friction and the N-factor.
- In the conditions of the field tests, the influence
of local excess pore pressure on the measured
cone resistance of a CPT to determine undrained
shear strength could be neglected.
- The T-bar penetrometer as used in the field tests
proved to be a practical and reliable tool for the
continuous simultaneous determination of tip re-
sistance, stratification and undrained shear
strength. Whereas the combined effect of in-
creased sensitivity of the measuring device and
the small size of the cone penetrometer makes a
sensitive CPT less reliable.
- In the Dutch engineering practice, the measured
cone resistance is used as prescribed in NEN
6740. This prescription does not include correc-
tion for excess water pressure effect and the soil
friction on the tip resistance although this might
affect partly the measurements especially in co-
hesive soft soils. Nevertheless, it is of impor-
tance to investigate this issue to complete the
evaluation of the T-bar penetrometer.
- Not experienced here but important to notify is
the robustness of the T-bar penetrometer. Sensi-
tive cone penetrometers can be definitively bro-
ken when it encounters hard things in the soil.
This makes the T-bar penetrometer even more
suitable for use in field conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to acknowledge Prof. Randolph
and the University of Western Australia for provid-
ing us with their homemade penetrometers as well as
AP vd Berg.bv for building a 7mm-cone.
REFERENCES
Aas, G; Lacasse, S., Tunne,T. and Hoeg, K; 1986. Use of in
situ tests for foundation design on clay. Invited lecture
ASCE Specialty Conf. “in-situ”, Blacksburg.
Begemann, H.K.S.Ph. 1966. The new apparatus for taking a
continuous sample. LGM-mededelingen. Vol. 10, No4,
Delft Geotechnics.
Bjerrum L., 1972. Embankment in soft ground. Proc. Perform-
ance of earth and earth supported structures. ASCE, La-
fayette, Vol. 2, 1-54.
Campanella R.G., Robertson P.K. & Gillespie, D. 1983. Cone
penetration testing in deltaic soils, Can. Geotech. J., vol.
20: 23-35.
Davies M.C.R. & Parry H.G. 1983. Shear strength of clay in
centrifuge models. J. Geot. Eng. Vol. 109, No 10, October:
1331-1337.
Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K. & Powel, J.M. 1997. Cone penetra-
tion testing in geotechnical practice. Ed. Blackie academic
& professional, Chapman & Hall, London.
Mesri. 2001. Undrained shear strength of soft clays from push
cone penetration test. Géotechnique. 2:167-168.
Randolph, M.F., Hefer, P.A. Geise, J. & Watson, P.G. 1998.
Improved seabed strength profiling using T-bar penetrome-
ter. In proceedings int. conf. offshore site investigation and
foundation behaviour. ‘New frontiers’, Society for Under-
water Technology. London: 221-235.
Randolph, M.F. & House, A.R. 2001. The complementary roles
of physical and computational modelling. Int. J. Physical
Modelling in Geotech. vol. 1: 01-08.
Randolph, M.F., Martin, C.M. & Hu, Y. 2000. Limiting resis-
tance of a spherical penetrometer in cohesive material.
Géotechnique, Vol. 50, No 5, 573-582.
Stewart, D.A. & Randolph, M.F. 1991. A new site investigation
tool for the centrifuge. Centrifuge ’91. Ko (ed.), Balkema,
Rotterdam. ISNB: 9061911931.
Stewart, D.A. & Randolph, M.F. 1994. T-bar penetration test-
ing in soft clay. J. Geotech. Eng. Vol. 120, No 12, Decem-
ber: 2230-2235.
Tani K. & Craig W.H. 1995. Development of Centrifuge cone
penetration test to evaluate the undrained shear strength
profile of a model clay bed. Soils and Foundations. Vol. 35,
No 2, June: 37-47.