Advertisement

Correlation Analysis of CPT Test Results and the Compaction Index for Calcareous Sand

  • Xiaocong Liang
  • Xiaobing Guo
  • Xin Wang
  • Sheng Chen
  • Deyong Wang
Conference paper

Abstract

In previous studies, the standard penetration test (SPT) has been used to determine the compaction of sand and develop resulting correlations. However, correlations are rarely based on the cone penetration Test (CPT), especially those correlating with relative compaction values. Several drilling boreholes were selected to collect samples for laboratory testing as part of the Kuwait LNGI project. The test results showed that the relative density and fines content exhibit a linear correlation at a specified level of relative compaction and the samples with high fines contents yielded larger maximum density values based on compaction tests compared with those based on relative density tests. Moreover, a comparative analysis of the correlation between qc and the relative density was conducted based on three methods: Jamiolkowski’s method, Baldi’s method and Jamiolkowski’s method with a carbonate content correction. The analysis results revealed that Jamiolkowski’s method yielded higher qc values than Baldi’s method at a 90% compaction level, and the corrected Jamiolkowski method yielded low qc values. Furthermore, in accordance with the above analysis, it was more reasonable to establish acceptance criteria based on Baldi’s method for the compaction of sand with a carbonate content less than 45%. However, the corrected Jamiolkowski method should be applied when the carbonate content is greater than 45%.

Keywords

Relative compaction Relative density Correlation analysis Calcareous sand Acceptance criteria 

References

  1. 1.
    Villet, W.C.B., Mitchell, J.K.: Cone resistance, relative density and friction angle, cone penetration testing and experience. ASCE (1981)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schmertmann, J.H.: Static cone to compute static settlement over sand. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 96, 1011–1043 (1970)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schmertmann, J.H.: Guidelines for cone penetration test, performance and design. Report No. FHWA-TS-78-209, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. (1978)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lambe, T.W., Whitman, R.V.: Soil Mechanics, SI Version. Wiley, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ASTM D 4254: Standard test methods for minimum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of relative density. ASTM Special Technical Publications (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ASTM D1557: Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using modified effort. ASTM Special Technical Publications (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee, K.L., Singh, A.: Relative density and relative compaction. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 97(7), 1049–1052 (1971)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gomaa, Y., Gihan, A.: Correlation between relative density and compaction parameters. In: Twelfth International Colloquium on Structural and Geotechnical Engineer, 12th ICSGE, Cairo (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arcement, B.J., Wright, S.G.: Evaluation of Laboratory Compaction Procedures for Specification of Densities for Compacting Fine Sands. Earth Walls (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baldi, G., Bellotti, V.N., Ghionna, N., Jamiolkowski, M., Pasqualini, E.: Interpretation of CPT’s and CPTU’s – 2nd part: drained penetration of sands. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Geotechnical Seminar Field Instrumentation and In-Situ Measurements, Nanyang Technological Institute, Singapore, 25–27 November 1986, pp. 143–156 (1986)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jamiolkowski, M., LoPresti, D.C.F., Manassero, M.: Evaluation of relative density and shear strength of sands from cone penetration test and flat dilatometer test. In: Soil Behavior and Soft Ground Construction (GSP119), pp. 201–238. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ASTM D2487: Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purpose (Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM Special Technical Publications (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K., Powell, J.J.M.: Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice. Blackie Academic and Professional, London (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    PIANC: Classification of soils and rocks for the maritime dredging process report of marcom working group 144 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wehr, W.J.: Influence of the carbonate content of sand on vibro compaction. In: 6th International Conference on Ground Improvement Techniques, Coimbra, Portugal (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lunne, T.: Guidelines for use and interpretation of CPT in hydraulically constructed fill. Report No. 20041367-3, NGI (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hyde, A.F.L., Kam, M.W., et al.: The effect of silica content on the propertied of carbonate sand. In: Proceedings of the XIII, ICSMFE, New Delhi, pp. 267–270 (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiaocong Liang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Xiaobing Guo
    • 3
  • Xin Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sheng Chen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Deyong Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.CCCC Fourth Harbor Engineering Institute Co., Ltd.GuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Environment Protection & Safety of Transportation Foundation Engineer of CCCCGuangzhouChina
  3. 3.CCCC Guangzhou Dredging Co., Ltd.GuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations