CPTU identification of regular, sensitive, and organic clays towards evaluating preconsolidation stress profiles

Shehab S Agaiby; Paul W Mayne; Shehab S Agaiby; Paul W Mayne

doi:10.3934/geosci.2021032

AIMS Geosciences

2021, Volume 7, Issue 4: 553-573. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2021032

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

CPTU identification of regular, sensitive, and organic clays towards evaluating preconsolidation stress profiles

Shehab S Agaiby ^{1
,
,},
Paul W Mayne ²

1.
Department of Public Works, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
2.
Geosystems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332–0355 USA

Received: 05 August 2021 Accepted: 15 September 2021 Published: 13 October 2021

Soil classification by piezocone penetration tests (CPTU) is mainly accomplished using empirical soil behavior charts (SBT). While commonly-used SBT methods work well to separate fine-grained soils from granular coarse-grained soils, in many instances, the groupings often fail to properly identify different categories of clays, specifically: (a) "regular" clays that are inorganic and insensitive, (b) sensitive and quick clays; and (c) organic soils. Herein, a simple means of screening and sorting these three clay types is shown using three analytical CPTU expressions for evaluating the preconsolidation stress profile from net cone resistance, excess porewater pressure, and effective cone resistance. A number of case studies are utilized to convey the methodology.
- clays,
- cone penetration,
- organic soils,
- piezocone,
- sensitive soils
Citation: Shehab S Agaiby, Paul W Mayne. CPTU identification of regular, sensitive, and organic clays towards evaluating preconsolidation stress profiles[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2021, 7(4): 553-573. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2021032

Related Papers:

Abstract

Soil classification by piezocone penetration tests (CPTU) is mainly accomplished using empirical soil behavior charts (SBT). While commonly-used SBT methods work well to separate fine-grained soils from granular coarse-grained soils, in many instances, the groupings often fail to properly identify different categories of clays, specifically: (a) "regular" clays that are inorganic and insensitive, (b) sensitive and quick clays; and (c) organic soils. Herein, a simple means of screening and sorting these three clay types is shown using three analytical CPTU expressions for evaluating the preconsolidation stress profile from net cone resistance, excess porewater pressure, and effective cone resistance. A number of case studies are utilized to convey the methodology.

References

[1]	Agaiby S (2018) Advancements in the interpretation of seismic piezocone tests in clays and other geomaterials. School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA USA, 925.
[2]	Robertson PK (1990) Soil classification using the cone penetration test. Can Geotech J 27: 151-158. doi: 10.1139/t90-014
[3]	Lunne T, Robertson PK, Powell JJM (1997) Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice, EF Spon/CRC Press, London, 352.
[4]	Eslami A, Fellenius BH (1997) Pile capacity by direct CPT and CPTU methods applied to 102 case histories. Can Geotech J 34: 886-904. doi: 10.1139/t97-056
[5]	Schneider JA, Hotstream JN, Mayne PW, et al. (2012) Comparing CPTU Q-F and Q-Δu₂/σ_vo' soil classification charts. Geotechnique Lett 2: 209-215. doi: 10.1680/geolett.12.00044
[6]	Jefferies M, Been K (2015) Soil Liquefaction: A Critical State Approach, Second Edition, Taylor & Francis Group, London, 712.
[7]	Robertson PK (2009) Interpretation of cone penetration tests—a unified approach. Can Geotech J 46: 1337-1345. doi: 10.1139/T09-065
[8]	Shahri AA, Malehmir A, Juhlin C (2015) Soil classification based on piezocone data. Eng Geo 189: 32-47. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.01.022
[9]	Valsson SM (2016) Detecting quick clay with CPTU. 17th Nord Geotech Meet.
[10]	Sandven R, Gylland A, Montafia A, et al. (2016) In-situ detection of sensitive clays—Part I: selected test methods. 17th Nord Geotech Meet, Reykjavik.
[11]	Sandven R, Gylland A, Montafia A, et al. (2016) In-situ detection of sensitive clays—Part Ⅱ: Results. 17th Nord Geotech Meet. Reykjavik, Iceland: Icelandic Geotechnical Society.
[12]	Gylland AS, Sandven R, Montafia A, et al. (2017) CPTU classification diagrams for identification of sensitive clays. Landslides in Sensitive Clays, Springer Series on Advances in Natural & Technological Hazards Research, Cham, Switzerland, 57-66.
[13]	DeGroot DJ, Landon ME, Poirier SE (2019) Geology and engineering properties of sensitive Boston Blue Clay at Newbury, Massachusetts. AIMS Geosci 5: 412-447. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.412
[14]	Mayne PW, Benoît J (2020) Analytical CPTU Models Applied to Sensitive Clay at Dover, New Hampshire. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 146: 04020130. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002378
[15]	Long M (2008) Design parameters from in-situ tests in soft ground. Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Taylor & Francis, London, 90-116.
[16]	Coutinho RQ, Bello MI (2014) Geotechnical characterization of Suape soft clays, Brazil. Soils Rocks 37: 257-276.
[17]	Mlynarek Z, Wierzbicki J, Gogolik S, et al. (2014) Shear strength and deformation parameters of peat and gyttja from CPTu, SDMT, and VST tests, 5th Intl Workshop CPTu DMT Soft Clays Organic Soils, 193-209.
[18]	Nejaim PF, Jannuzzi GMF, Danziger FAB (2016) Soil behavior type of the Sarapuí Ⅱ test site. Geotechnical & Geophysical Site Characterization 5, Gold Coast, Australian Geomechanics Society, 1009-1014. Available from: www.usucger.org.
[19]	Zawrzykraj P, Rydelek P, Bąkowska A (2017) Geoengineering properties of Eemian peats from central Poland in the light of static cone penetration and dilatometer tests. Eng Geol 226: 290-300. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.07.001
[20]	Mayne PW, Agaiby S (2019) Profiling yield tresses and identification of soft organic clays using piezocone tests, Proceedings XVI Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics & Geotechnical Engineering, Paper 0149, Cancun, Mexican Society of Geotechnical Engineering (SMIG). Available from: www.issmge.org.
[21]	Mayne PW, Agaiby SS, Dasenbrock D (2020) Piezocone identification of organic clays and peats, GeoCongress 2020: Modeling, Geomaterials, and Site Characterization, (Minneapolis, GSP 317), ASCE, Reston, VA, 541-549.
[22]	Fellenius BH, Eslami A (2000) Soil profile interpreted from CPTU data. Geotech Eng Conf Year 2000 Geotech, 18.
[23]	Mayne PW (1991) Determination of OCR in clays by piezocone tests using cavity expansion and critical state concepts. Soils Found 31: 65-76. doi: 10.3208/sandf1972.31.2_65
[24]	Chen BY, Mayne PW (1994) Profiling the Overconsolidation Ratio of Clays by Piezocone Tests, Report No. GIT-CEE/GEO-94-1 submitted to National Science Foundation by Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 280.
[25]	Burns SE, Mayne PW (1998) Monotonic and dilatory porewater pressures during piezocone dissipation tests in clay. Can Geotech J 35: 1063-1073. doi: 10.1139/t98-062
[26]	Agaiby SS, Mayne PW (2018) Interpretation of piezocone penetration and dissipation tests in sensitive Leda Clay at Gloucester Test Site. Can Geotech J 55: 1781-1794. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2017-0388
[27]	Mayne PW, Greig J, Agaiby S (2018) Evaluating CPTu in sensitive Haney clay using a modified SCE-CSSM solution. 71st Can Geotech Conf GeoEdmonton, Paper ID No. 279, Canadian Geotechnical Society. Available from: www.cgs.ca.
[28]	Mayne PW, Paniagua P, L'heureux JS, et al. (2019) Analytical CPTu model for sensitive clay at Tiller-Flotten site, Norway, XVⅡ ECSMGE: Geotechnical Engineering Foundation of the Future, Paper 0153, Reykjavik, Icelandic Geotechnical Society. Available from: www.issmge.org.
[29]	Di Buò B, D'Ignazio M, Selãnpaã J, et al. (2019) Yield stress evaluation of Finnish clays based on analytical CPTU models. Can Geotech J 57: 1623-1638. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2019-0427
[30]	Agaiby SS, Mayne PW (2018) Evaluating undrained rigidity index of clays from piezocone data. Cone Penetration Testing (Delft), CRC Press/Balkema, 65-72.
[31]	Senneset K, Sandven R, Janbu N (1989) Evaluation of soil parameters from piezocone tests. Transp Res Rec, 24-37.
[32]	Mayne PW (2007) In-situ test calibrations for evaluating soil parameters, Characterization & Engineering Properties of Natural Soils, Taylor & Francis, London, 1602-1652.
[33]	Mayne PW (2007) NCHRP Synthesis 368: Cone Penetration Testing. Transportation Research Board, National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 118. Available from: www.trb.org.
[34]	Ouyang Z, Mayne PW (2018) Effective friction angle of clays and silts from piezocone. Can Geotech J 55: 1230-1247. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2017-0451
[35]	Ouyang Z, Mayne PW (2019) Modified NTH method for assessing effective friction angle of normally consolidated and overconsolidated clays from piezocone tests. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 145.
[36]	Houlsby GT, The CI (1988) Analysis of the piezocone in clay. Penetration Testing 1988, Balkema, Rotterdam, 777-783.
[37]	Lunne T, Long M, Forsberg CF (2003) Characterization and engineering properties of Onsøy clay. Charact Eng Prop Nat Soils, 395-427.
[38]	Lunne T, Randolph M, Sjursen MA, et al. (2006) Shear strength parameters determined by in-situ tests for deep water soft soils. NGI-COFS Report 20041618-1. Joint Industry Project by the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Oslo and Centre for Offshore Foundation Systems, Perth: 558.
[39]	Gundersen A, Hansen R, Lunne T, et al. (2019) Characterization and engineering properties of the NGTS Onsøy soft clay site. AIMS Geosci 5: 665-703. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.665
[40]	Chung SG, Ryu CK, Min SC, et al. (2012) Geotechnical characterization of Busan clay. KSCE J Civ Eng 16: 341-350. doi: 10.1007/s12205-012-1433-8
[41]	Chung SG, Kweon HJ (2013) Oil-operated fixed-piston sampler and its applicability. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139: 134-142. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000730
[42]	Pineda JA, McConnell A, Kelly RB (2014) Performance of an innovative direct push piston sampler in soft clay. Proc 3rd Symp Cone Penetration Test, 279-288
[43]	Pineda JA, Suwal LP, Kelly RB, et al. (2016) Characterization of Ballina clay. Géotechnique 66: 556-577. doi: 10.1680/jgeot.15.P.181
[44]	Pineda JA, Kelly RB, Suwal L, et al. (2019) The Ballina soft soil field testing facility. AIMS Geosci 5: 509-534. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.509
[45]	Hight DW, Paul MA, Barras BF, et al. (2003) The characterization of the Bothkennar clay. Characterization and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils, Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse, 543-597.
[46]	Mayne PW (2008) Piezocone profiling of clays for maritime site investigations. Geotechnics in Maritime Engineering, Polish Committee on Geotechnics, 333-350.
[47]	Getchell A, Santamaria A, Benoît J (2014) Geotechnical Test Embankment on soft marine clay in Newington—Dover, MS Thesis, Civil Engineering Dept, Univ of New Hampshire. Durham, NH: 103. Available from: https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis/825.
[48]	Locat A (2012) Rupture progressive et étalements dans les argiles sensible. PhD Dissertation, Université Laval, Quebec, 216.
[49]	Locat A, Locat P, Demers D, et al. (2017) The Saint-Jude landslide of 10 May 2010, Quebec, Canada: Investigation and characterization of the landslide and its failure mechanism. Can Geotech J 54: 1357-1374. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2017-0085
[50]	Locat A, Locat P, Michaud H, et al. (2019) Geotechnical characterization of the Saint-Jude clay, Quebec, Canada. AIMS Geosci 5: 273-302. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.2.273
[51]	Paniagua P, L'Heureux JS, Carroll R, et al. (2017) Evaluation of sample disturbance of three Norwegian clays. 19th ICSMGE Secr Seoul. Available from: www.issmge.org.
[52]	Lehtonen V (2015) Modelling undrained shear strength and pore pressure based on an effective stress soil model in Limit Equilibrium Method, Tampereen teknillinen yliopisto. Julkaisu-Tampere University of Technology. Publication, 213.
[53]	Di Buò B, D'Ignazio M, Selãnpaã J, et al. (2016) Preliminary results from a study aiming to improve ground investigation data. 17th Nord Geotech Meet 1: 25-28.
[54]	Wang B, Brooks GR, Hunter JAM (2015) Geotechnical data from a large landslide site at Quyon, Report 7904, Quebec Geological Survey of Canada, 54.
[55]	Wang B, Brooks GR, Hunter JAM (2015) Geotechnical investigations of a large landslide site at Quyon, Québec. 68th Can Geotech Conf.
[56]	Lafleur J, Silvestri V, Asselin R, et al. (1988) Behavior of a test excavation in soft Champlain Sea clay. Can Geotech J 25: 705-715. doi: 10.1139/t88-081
[57]	Chiasson P, Lafleur J, Soulié M, et al. (1995) Characterizing spatial variability of a clay by geostatistics. Can Geotech J 32: 1-10. doi: 10.1139/t95-001
[58]	Sandven R, Montafia A, Gylland A, et al. (2015) Detection of brittle materials. Summary report with recommendations. Final report. NIFS Report no. 126/2015,150.
[59]	Helle TE, Long M, Nordal S (2018) Interpreting improved geotechnical properties from RCPTUs in KCl-treated quick clays, Cone Penetration Testing 2018, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London, 339-345.
[60]	Edil TB, Wang X (2000) Shear strength and K₀ of peats and organic soils. Geotechnics of High Water Content Materials, American Society for Testing & Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 209-225.
[61]	Den Haan EJ, Kruse GAM (2007) Characterization and engineering properties of Dutch peats, Characterization & Engineering Properties of Natural Soils, Taylor & Francis Group, London, 2101-2133.
[62]	Mesri G, Ajlouni M (2007) Engineering properties of fibrous peats. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 133: 850-966. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:7(850)
[63]	Jannuzzi GMF, Danziger FAB, Martins ISM (2015) Geological-geotechnical characterization of Sarapuí Ⅱ clay. Eng Geol 190: 77-86. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.03.001
[64]	Larsson R, Westerberg B, Albing D, et al. (2007) Sulfidjord: geoteknisk klassificering och odraneråd skjuvhållfastthet. SGI Report 69, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Linköping, 138.
[65]	Lamb RA, Chow LC, Bentler JG (2018) US Highway 14 embankment over soft soils—success with ground improvement and modern instrumentation. 66th Annu Geotech Eng Conf, 117-126.
[66]	Chow LC, Bentler JG, Lamb RA (2019) Primary and post-surcharge secondary settlements of a highway embankment constructed over highly organic soils: a case history. Geo Congr 2019 Embankments Dams Slopes, 109-118.
[67]	McCabe BA (2002) Experimental investigations of driven pile group behaviour in Belfast soft clay, Doctoral dissertation, Trinity College Dublin, 415.
[68]	Lehane BM (2003) Vertically loaded shallow foundation on soft clayey silt. Proc Inst Civil Eng Geotech Eng 156: 17-26. doi: 10.1680/geng.2003.156.1.17
[69]	Westerberg B, Andersson M (2017) Sulfidjord—kompressionsegenskaper och sättningar. En studie av provbankar i Lampen och andra bankar. SGI Publikation 41, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Linköping, 238.
[70]	Merani JM, Hunt CE, Donahue JL, et al. (2016) CPT interpretation in highly organic soils and soft clay soils. Geo Chicago 2016, 412-421.
[71]	Mayne PW (1987) Determining preconsolidation stress and penetration pore pressures from DMT contact pressures. Geotech Test J 10: 146-150. doi: 10.1520/GTJ10947J
[72]	Andersson M (2012) Kompressionsegenskaper hos sulfidjordar: En fält-och laboratoriestudie av provbankar, Luleå tekniska universitet, Sweden, 336.
[73]	Westerberg B, Andersson M, Winter MG, et al. (2015) Compression properties of an organic clay. XVI Eur Conf Soil Mech Geotech Eng, 3091–3096.
[74]	Baroni M, Almeida MSS (2017) Compressibility and stress history of very soft organic clays. Proce Inst Civ Eng 170: 148-160. doi: 10.1680/jgeen.16.00146
[75]	Mayne PW (2017) Stress history of soils from cone penetration tests. Soils Rocks 40: 203-218. doi: 10.28927/SR.403203
[76]	Agaiby SS, Mayne PW (2019) CPT evaluation of yield stress profiles in soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 145: 04019104. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002164

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)