Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering

, Volume 56, Issue 4, pp 258–264 | Cite as

Experimental Studies of the Unit Side Friction Resistance of Soil to Static Penetration Depending on Probe Dimensions

  • O. N. IsaevEmail author
  • R. F. Sharafutdinov
  • I. B. Ryzhkov
  • D. S. Zakatov

The paper presents the results of experimental studies of the effect of friction sleeve dimensions on soil resistance along its side surface during static penetration tests using a standard Russian-made probe (diameter: 35.7 mm, friction sleeve length: 310 mm) and a foreign-made probe (diameter: 43.8 mm, friction sleeve length: 146 mm). The behavior and empirical relationships reflecting the effect of various factors on the resulting sleeve friction resistance of soil are described.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    G. G. Boldyrev, Guidelines for Test Data Interpretation using Static and Dynamic Penetration Test Methods for Geotechnical Design, OOO PRONDO, Moscow (2017).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Recommendations on the Interpretation Procedure of Static Penetration Test Results within the Continental Shelf, VNIImorgeo, Riga (1988).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Lunne, P. K. Robertson, and J. J.M. Powell, Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice, Spon Press, London and New York (1997).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. B. Ryzhkov and O.N. Isaev, “CPT sleeve friction resistance - geotechnical practice in Russia,” Proc. of the 3rd Int. Symp. on Cone Penetration Testing, tech. paper No. 1-09, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp. 257-262 (2014).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    I. B. Ryzhkov and O. N. Isaev, Cone Penetration Testing of Soils in Geotechnics, Bokforlaget Efron & Dotter AB (2016).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    I. B. Ryzhkov and O. N. Isaev, Static Penetration Testing of Soils, Izd. ASB, Moscow (2010).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. G. Campanella and P. K. Robertson, “Applied Cone Research,” Proc. of Symp. on Cone Penetration Testing and Experience, Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, October (1981), pp. 343-362.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Reference Test Procedure (IRTP) for the Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and the Cone Penetration Test with Pore Pressure (CPTU): Report of the ISSMGE Technical Committee 16 on Ground Property Characterization from In-situ Testing, TC 16, ISSMGE (1999).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. N. Starkov, Reference Book on Mathematical Formulas and Graphs of Functions [in Russian], BKhV-Peterburg, St.Petersburg (2015).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H.K.S.Ph. Begemann, “Improved Method of Determining Resistance to Adhesion by Sounding Through a Loose Sleeve Placed behind the Cone,” Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Found. Eng., Zurich 1, 213-217 (1953).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    N. Z. Bilenko and I. B. Ryzhkov, “Application of a Multi-section Pile to Study the Pile Behavior in Weak Clay Soils, Trudy NIIpromstroy," Vopr. Fundamentostr. Mekh. Gruntov, Ufa (1985), pp. 64-70.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. I. Kobzar, Applied Mathematical Statistics. For Engineers and Scientists, FIZMATLIT, Moscow (2006).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. D. Martynova, "Study of the dependence of unit head resistance and specific friction on pile crosssection, Osn. Fundam. i Mech. Gruntov, No. 2, 12-14 (1967).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    GOST 19912-2012 Soil. Field Test Methods using Cone Penetration Test and Dynamic Probing [in Russian], Standartinform, Moscow (2013).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. N. Isaev
    • 1
    Email author
  • R. F. Sharafutdinov
    • 1
  • I. B. Ryzhkov
    • 2
  • D. S. Zakatov
    • 1
  1. 1.Gersevanov Research Institute of Bases and Underground Structures (NIIOSP), JSC “Research Center “Stroitelstvo”MoscowRussia
  2. 2.Bashkir State Agrarian UniversityUfaRussia

Personalised recommendations