Analysis Based on

In-Situ Tests
Dian Ratri Cahyani 1606896981
Mahardhika Rizky G 1506789114
 Objectives

Differences

SPT

Outline • End bearing

• Skin friction

CPT

• End bearing
• Skin friction

Pressure Meter Test

Introduction of Testing
• Definition:
• In-situ tests are carried out in the field with intrusive testing equipment
• If non-intrusive method is required, then it is better to use geophysical methods.

• Advantage of in-situ testing (Against lab testing)

• It avoids the problems of sample recovery and disturbance
• Some in-situ tests are easier to conduct than lab tests
• In-situ tests can offer more detailed site coverage than lab testing

• Testing Standards
• American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
• Standar Nasional Indonesia (SNI)
 Objectives

• The primary objectives of field exploration are to determine as accurately

as may be required:
• The nature and sequence of the subsurface strata
• The groundwater conditions at the site
• The physical properties of the soils and rock underlying the site
• Other specific information, when needed, such as chemical composition
of the groundwater, and the characteristics of the foundations of
adjacent structures
 Differences

Type of Test Best suited to Not applicable to Properties that can be

determined
Standard Penetration Test Sand Soft to firm clays - Qualitative evaluation of
(SPT) compactness
- Qualitative comparison of
subsoil stratification
Cone Penetration Test Sand, silt, and clay Gravels - Continuous evaluation of
(CPT) density and strength of
sands
- Continuous evaluation of
undrained shear strength
in clays
Pressure Meter Test (PMT) Soft rock, dense sand, gravel, Soft sensitive clays, loose - Bearing capacity and
and till silts, and sands compressibility
Piles Subjected to Axial Compression Load
The load is shared between the bearing at
its tip and in shaft friction around its
perimeter. The relationship can be written
as
𝑸𝒗(𝒖𝒍𝒕) = 𝑸𝒑 + 𝑸𝒔 − 𝑾𝒔

Where
Qv(ult): ultimate bearing capacity of a pile
Qp: end-bearing capacity
Qf: frictional capacity
Ws: self-weight
where where
• Ap: pile end (point) area • p: pile perimeter
• c: cohesion of underlying soil • Fs: unit shaft friction over a length ∆𝐿
• 𝛾: unit weight of soil • L: pile length
• Nc, Ny, Nq: bearing capacity factors
• B: pile width or diameter
• Df: depth of pile tip below ground
 • End-bearing Capacity (Qp)
Meyerhof (1976)
For sand
ഥ
𝟎. 𝟒𝑵
𝑸𝒑 = 𝑫𝒇 𝑨 𝒑 ≤ 𝟒𝑵 ഥ 𝑨𝒑
𝑩
Standard For cohesionless or nonplastic silt
Penetration 𝑸𝒑 =
ഥ
𝟎. 𝟒𝑵
𝑫𝒇 𝑨 𝒑 ≤ 𝟑𝑵 ഥ 𝑨𝒑
𝑩
Test (SPT)
ഥ = 𝑪𝑵 𝑵
𝑵

𝒍𝒐𝒈𝟐𝟎
𝑪𝑵 = 𝟎. 𝟕𝟕
𝝈𝒗
𝝈𝒗 ≥ 𝟎. 𝟐𝟓 𝒕𝒔𝒇 𝒐𝒓 𝟐𝟑. 𝟒𝟒 𝒌𝑷𝒂
Where
ഥ average N-SPT value at near the pile tip
𝑁:
Ap: pile end (point) area
Df: depth of pile tip below ground
B: diameter of pile
𝝈𝒗 : effective stress

• Skin friction
𝑸𝒔 = 𝒇𝒔 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒆𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒅𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒍𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒕𝒉
𝑵ഥ
𝒇𝒔 = ≤ 𝟏 𝒕𝒔𝒇
𝟓𝟎
Standard Penetration Test
• This empirical test consist of driving a split
spoon sampler, with an outside diameter of
50 mm, into the soil at the base of a borehole
• Relatively quick, simple, reasonably cheap, and
suitable for the most soils
• But SPT does not typically provide
continuous data, limited applicability to soil
containing cobbles and boulders, samples
obtained from the SPT are disturbed, and SPT
N blows require correction
 Example
A close-ended 12-in (300 mm)
diameter steel pipe pile is driven into
sand to 30-ft (9 m) depth.
The watertable is at ground surface
and sand has ∅ = 36°,
unit weight 𝛾 = 125 𝑙𝑏/𝑓𝑡 3 (19.8
kN/m3) and
𝛾′ = 62.5 𝑙𝑏/𝑓𝑡 3 .
Find allowable bearing capacity on SPT
data given!
a) End bearing capacity Qp
10 + 12 + 14
𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑁𝑆𝑃𝑇 𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑝 = = 12
3
𝑙𝑏
𝝈𝒗 = 125 − 62.5 × 30 = 1865 2 = 0.938 𝑡𝑠𝑓
𝑓𝑡
𝑙𝑜𝑔20
𝑪𝑵 = 0.77 = 1.02
0.938

ഥ = 1.02 × 12 ≈ 12
𝑵

ഥ
𝟎. 𝟒𝑵
𝑸𝒑 = ഥ 𝑨𝒑
𝑫𝒇 𝑨𝒑 ≤ 𝟒𝑵
𝑩

0.4 × 12
𝑸𝒑 = 30 × 0.785 ≤ 4 × 12 × 0.785
1

𝑸𝒑 = 113 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠 ≤ 37.7 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠 → 𝑁𝑂𝑇 𝑂𝐾

Therefore
𝑸𝒑 = 𝟑𝟕. 𝟕 𝒕𝒐𝒏𝒔
b) Skin friction
4 + 6 + 6 + 8 + 10
𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑁𝑆𝑃𝑇 𝑎𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡 = = 6.8
5
Use an effective overburden pressure 𝝈𝒗 for average depth of L/2 = 30/2 = 15 ft.
𝑙𝑏
𝝈𝒗 = 125 − 62.5 × 15 = 937.5 2 = 0.469 𝑡𝑠𝑓
𝑓𝑡

𝑙𝑜𝑔20
𝑪𝑵 = 0.77 = 1.25
0.469

ഥ = 1.25 × 6.8 ≈ 8.5

𝑵

8.5
𝒇𝒔 = ≤ 1 𝑡𝑠𝑓 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟕 𝒕𝒔𝒇 ≤ 1 𝑡𝑠𝑓 → 𝑂𝐾
50

𝑸𝒔 = 𝑓𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑑𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ

𝑸𝒔 = 0.17 𝜋 × 1 30 = 𝟏𝟔 𝒕𝒐𝒏𝒔
c) Self-weight
𝑾𝒔 = 𝜸 × 𝑽𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆

Let 𝛾 of steel pipe pile = 53 lb/ft3

𝑾𝒔 = 53 × 𝜋 × 1 × 30 = 4995.13 𝑙𝑏 = 2.49 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠

d) Allowable bearing capacity

𝑸𝒗(𝒖𝒍𝒕) = 𝑄𝑝 + 𝑄𝑠 − 𝑊𝑠

𝑸𝒗(𝒖𝒍𝒕) = 37.7 + 16 − 2.49 = 51.21 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠

𝑸𝒗 𝒖𝒍𝒕 𝟓𝟏. 𝟐𝟏
𝑸𝒗(𝒂𝒍𝒍) = = = 𝟏𝟕. 𝟗 𝒕𝒐𝒏𝒔 = 𝟏𝟓𝟔 𝒌𝑵
𝑭𝑺 𝟑
 • End bearing capacity (Qp)
Meyerhof (1976)
Qp can also be obtained from the static cone
resistance (qc) as follows
𝑸𝒑 = 𝒒𝒄 𝑨𝒑
For granular soil
Cone Where
Penetration Ap: pile tip area
Test (CPT) qc: cone penetration resistance

• Skin friction (Qs)

𝑸𝒔 = 𝒇𝒔 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒆𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒅𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒍𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒕𝒉

𝒇𝒔 = 𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒇𝒕 𝒇𝒓𝒊𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒇 𝒅𝒓𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒏 𝒑𝒊𝒍𝒆

 Cone Penetration
Test

• The cone
penetration or cone
penetrometer
test (CPT) is a method
used to determine the
geotechnical
engineering properties
of soils and delineating
soil stratigraphy.
• Initially developed in
the 1950s at the Dutch
Laboratory for Soil
Mechanics in Delft to
investigate soft soils.
 • The Soil
Parameters

• Friction ratio
and angle

• Cone
Resistance

The result of CPT • The Density of

soil
 • End bearing capacity (Qp)

𝑸𝑷 = 𝑨𝑷 𝒒𝒐 + 𝑲𝒒 𝑷𝑳 − 𝑷𝒐

Pressure Meter Where

Test 𝑨𝑷 : pile point (end) area
𝒒𝒐 : horizontal stress in soil at the elevation
of the pile tip
𝑲𝒒 : bearing capacity factor from the chart
(on the next slide)
 Pressuremeter test

• A pressuremeter is a meter
constructed to measure the
“at-rest horizontal earth
pressure”.
• The pressuremeter has two
major components:
• The first component is a
read-out unit that remains
above ground.
• The second component of
the pressure meter is a
probe that is inserted into
the borehole (ground) to
read the pressure.
• Skin friction (Qs)
𝑸𝒔 = 𝒇𝒔 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒆𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒅𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒍𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒕𝒉
Steps of Foundation Design
1. Decide the Location of Columns & Foundation and Type of
Loads Acting on Them. (Dead Load, Live Load, Wind Load, etc.)
On the building plan, the position of columns and loadbearing walls should be
marked, and any other induced loadings and bending moments. The loads should be
classified into dead, imposed and wind loadings, giving the appropriate partial safety
factors for these loads.

2. Estimate Allowable Bearing Pressure of Soil Using Ground

Investigation Report
From a study of the site ground investigation (if available), the strength of the soil
at various depths or strata below foundation level should be studied, to determine the
safe bearing capacity at various levels. These values – or presumed bearing values (from
any standards or codes) in the absence of a site investigation – are used to estimate
the allowable bearing pressure.
Steps of Foundation Design
3. Decide Depth Of Foundation
The invert level (underside) of the foundation is determined by either the
minimum depth below ground level unaffected by temperature, moisture content
variation or erosion – this can be as low as 450 mm in granular soils but, depending on
the site and ground conditions, can exceed 1 m – or by the depth of basement, boiler
house, service ducts or similar.

4. Calculate Foundation Area

The foundation area required is determined from the characteristic
(working) loads and estimated allowable pressure. This determines the
preliminary design of the types or combination of types of foundation. The
selection is usually based on economics, speed and buildability of construction.
Steps of Foundation Design
5. Determine Variation In Vertical Stresses
The variation of vertical stress w.r.t depth is determined, to check for possible over-stressing
of any underlying weak strata.

6. Calculate Settlement
Settlement calculations should be carried out to check that the total and differential
settlements are acceptable. If these are unacceptable then a revised allowable bearing pressure
should be determined, and the foundation design amended to increase its area, or the
foundations should be taken down to a deeper and stronger stratum.

7. Cost Control
Before finalizing the choice of foundation type, the preliminary costing of alternative
superstructure designs should be made, to determine the economics of increasing
superstructure costs in order to reduce foundation costs.
Steps of Foundation Design
8. Time Consideration
Alternative safe designs should be checked for economy, speed and simplicity of
construction. Speed and economy can conflict in foundation construction – an initial
low-cost solution may increase the construction period. Time is often of the essence
for a client needing early return on capital investment. A fast-track programme for
superstructure construction can be negated by slow foundation construction.
References
• Applied Research Associates, I. (2018). How to Interpret Soil Test Results from CPT
Testing. [online] Vertekcpt.com. Available at: http://www.vertekcpt.com/blog/soil-
test-results-cpt-interpretation#.W55WlugzbRY.

• Clarke, B.G.(1995), “Pressuremeters in Geotechnical design”, International Thomson

Publishing /UK, and BiTech Publishers,Vancouver.

• Prakash, S. and Sharma, H. (2007). Pile foundations in engineering practice. Norwich,

NY: Knovel.

• Tomlinson, M. and Woodward, J. (2008). Pile Design and Construction Practice. 5th ed.
THANK YOU