Experimental Studies and Interpretation of Penetration Logging Data

  • V. I. FerronskyEmail author
Part of the Springer Geophysics book series (SPRINGERGEOPHYS)


Penetration logging data, which are obtained at field works in the form of a complex of logging diagrams, hold extensive information on the physical and mechanical properties of studied sediments, the lithological structure and content of a section, variability of properties and contents in-depth and spread of strata. Some knowledge and experience are needed for transfer of that information into the form of quantitative and qualitative data used for the calculation and design of different building constructions and geological mapping. Good knowledge of the physical and theoretical fundamentals of methods is needed for the understanding of different effects affecting the interaction of nuclear radiation with soil and rocks. And also the purpose of that information and its quantity should be clear. In this chapter different aspects of interpretation of penetration logging results and some questions of conditions for application of the methods are discussed. In particular, attention is paid to the physical processes in the ground at probe displacement and the effects of probe parameters (diameter, displacement rate, position of the friction gauge, probe dimension and so on). Finally, an estimate is made of the applicability of the theoretical solutions presented in Chap. 6 on using cone resistance and lateral friction for determination of soil mechanical properties.


Sandy Loam Cone Angle Critical Depth Probe Length Pile Diameter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alekseev FA (1972) Application of radioactive and stable isotopes in geological investigations. Nuclear Geophysics, Atomizdat, Moscow, pp 177–193Google Scholar
  2. Baranov VI, Khristianov LA (1963) Radioactivity of the ocean sediments. Chemistry of the Earth’s crust. Moscow, Academizdat, pp 401–409Google Scholar
  3. Begemann HK (1965) The friction jacket cone as an aid in determining the soil profile. In: Proceedings 6th ICSMFE, Montreal 1:17–20Google Scholar
  4. Bondarik GK (1971) Fundamentals of the theory of engineering geological rock properties. Nedra, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  5. Bondarik GK, Komarov IS, Ferronsky VI (1967) Field methods of engineering geological studies. Nedra, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  6. Buisman AS (1944) Drondmechanika, 2nd edn. Waltman, DelftGoogle Scholar
  7. Czubek JA (1976) Comparison of nuclear well logging data with results of core analysis. Nuclear techniques in geochemistry and geophysics. IAEA, Vienna, pp 93–106Google Scholar
  8. Faiestein BD, Makarov RM (1964) Rig C-832 for the ground sounding. Installations for for the ground sounding and drilling. CBTI Gosstroy USSR, Moscow, pp 3–24Google Scholar
  9. Ferronsky VI (1969) Penetration logging methods for engineering geological investigation. Nedra, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferronsky VI, Ferronsky SV (2013) Formation of the solar system. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferronsky VI, Gryaznov TA (1979) Penetration logging. Nedra, MoscowCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kerisel J (1961) Foundations profondes en milieu sableux: variation de la force portante limite en function de ladensite, de la profondeur, du diameter et de la vitesse d’enfoncement. In: Proceedings of the 6th ICSMFE, vol. 2, Paris, pp 73–79Google Scholar
  13. Kerisel J (1964) Deep foundations basic experimental facts. In: Proceedings of the 5th ICSMFE, pp 8–31Google Scholar
  14. Komarov IS (1972) Accumulation and assessment of information in engineering geological investigations. Nedra, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  15. Lederer CM, Hollander JM, Perlman I (1967) Table of isotopes, 6th edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Meyerhof G G (1951) The ultimate bearing capacity of foundation. Geotechniqueb 2:301–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Paproth E (1943) Der Prüfstab Künzel, ein Gerät für Bauuntersuchungen. Die Bautechnik, pp 21–38Google Scholar
  18. Parez L, Bachelier M (1965) Contribution a a l’etyde la compressibilite des sols a l’aide du penetrometre a cone. In: Proceedings of the 6th ICSMFE, Vol. II, Montreal, pp 3–7Google Scholar
  19. Proceedings (1974–1975) In: Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. ESOPT, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  20. Sanglera G (1971) Investigation of soils by penetration test (transl. from French). Stroyizdat, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  21. Schmertmann JH (1970) Static cone to compute static settlement over sand. Proc ASCE 96:1011–1043Google Scholar
  22. Schultze, Melzer K (1965) The determination of the density and the modulus of compressibility of non-cohesive soils by soundings. In: Proceedings 4th ICSMFE, Montreal, pp 354–358Google Scholar
  23. State Standard (1982) Mining rocks: Methods of field test by penetration logging, GOST 25260-82, approved on 1982, May 17Google Scholar
  24. Terzagy K, Pek R (1958) Soil mechanics in engineering practice (Transl. from German). Gosstroyizdat, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  25. Tomlinson MI (1957) The adhesion of piles driven in clay soils. In: Proceedings of the 4th ­ICSMFE, London, vol 2, pp 66–71Google Scholar
  26. Trofimenkov YuG, Vorobkov LN (1964) Field methods of the grounds study. Stroyizdat, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  27. Yaroshenko VA (1964) Interpretation of the ground static penetration results. Design of complicated foundations. Fundamentproject, Moscow, 99:14–24Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Water Problems Institute of the Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations