Prediction of the shear wave velocity <italic>V</italic><sub>S</sub> from CPT and DMT at research sites

doi:10.1007/s11709-013-0234-6

Front Struc Civil Eng

2014, Vol. 8

Issue (1) : 83-92 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0234-6

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Prediction of the shear wave velocity V_S from CPT and DMT at research sites

Amoroso SARA(

)

Department of Seismology and Tectonophysics, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, L′Aquila 67100, Italy

Download: PDF(761 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

The paper examines the correlations to obtain rough estimates of the shear wave velocity V_S from non-seismic dilatometer tests (DMT) and cone penetration tests (CPT). While the direct measurement of V_S is obviously preferable, these correlations may turn out useful in various circumstances. The experimental results at six international research sites suggest that the DMT predictions of V_S from the parameters I_D (material index), K_D (horizontal stress index), M_DMT (constrained modulus) are more reliable and consistent than the CPT predictions from q_c (cone resistance), presumably because of the availability, by DMT, of the stress history index K_D.

Keywords horizontal stress index shear wave velocity flat dilatometer test cone penetration test

Corresponding Author(s): SARA Amoroso,Email:sara.amoroso@ingv.it

Issue Date: 05 March 2014

Cite this article:

Amoroso SARA. Prediction of the shear wave velocity V_S from CPT and DMT at research sites[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2014, 8(1): 83-92.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-013-0234-6
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2014/V8/I1/83

Fig.1 Dilatometer []. (a) Dilatometer blade; (b) schematic layout of the flat dilatometer test

Fig.2 Seismic Dilatometer []. (a) Seismic dilatometer equipment; (b) schematic layout of the seismic dilatometer test

Fig.3 Ratio/MDMT for various soil types []

Fig.4 Comparison of profiles of VS measured by SDMT and estimated from DMT data at six sites in the area of L'Aquila

Fig.5 DMT/SDMT and CPTU/SCPTU profiles at Treporti-Venice Lagoon (Italy) - Before construction and after
removal

Fig.6 Comparison of VS measured by SCPT and estimated from CPT and DMT data at Treporti-Venice Lagoon
(Italy)–Before construction and after removal

Fig.7 SDMT and SCPTU profiles at Moss Landing- California (USA)

Fig.8 Comparison of VS measured by SDMT or SCPT and estimated from CPT and DMT data at Moss Landing-California (USA)

Fig.9 SDMT and CPT profiles at East Perth (Western Australia)

Fig.10 Comparison of VS measured by SDMT or SCPT and estimated from CPT and DMT data at East Perth and Shenton Park (Western Australia)

Fig.11 DMT and SCPTU profiles at Shenton Park (Western Australia)

Fig.12 SDMT and CPTU profiles at Margaret River (Western Australia)

Fig.13 Comparison of VS measured by SDMT or SCPT and estimated from CPT and DMT data at Margaret River and Perth CBD (Western Australia)

Fig.14 DMT and SCPTU profiles at Perth CBD (Western Australia)

1	Marchetti S, Monaco P, Totani G, Marchetti D. In Situ Tests by Seismic Dilatometer (SDMT). In: Proceedings of the From Research to Practice in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE Geotech. Spec. Publ. No. 180 (honoring J.H. Schmertmann) , 2008, 292–311
2	Robertson P K. Interpretation of in-situ tests-some insights. Mitchell Lecture. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization (ISC’4). Porto de Galinhas, Pernambuco, Brazil , September, 2012
3	Hegazy Y A, Mayne P W. Statistical correlations between Vs and CPT data for different soil types. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing (CPT’95). Swedish Geotechnical Society Link?ping , 1995, 2: 173–178 .
4	Simonini P, Cola S. On the use of the piezocone to predict the maximum stiffness of Venetian soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering , 2000, 126(4): 378–382
5	Andrus R D, Mohanan N P, Piratheepan P, Ellis B S, Holzer T L. Predicting shear-wave velocity from cone penetration resistance. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. Thessaloniki, Greece , 2007
6	Madiai C, Simoni G. Shear wave velocity-penetration resistance correlation for Holocene and Pleistocene soils of an area in central Italy. In: Viana da Fonseca A and Mayne P W, eds. Ge-otechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization. Porto , 2004
7	Bouckovalas G, Kalteziotis N, Sabatakakis N, Zervogiannis H. Shear wave velocity in a very soft clay-measurements and correlations. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference Soil Mechanics Foundation Engineering (ICSMFE). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil , 1989,191–194 .
8	Marchetti S. In Situ Tests by Flat Dilatometer. Jnl GED, ASCE , 1980, 106, GT3: 299–321 .
9	ASTM D6635–01 (2001, 2007). Standard Test Method for Performing the Flat Plate Dilatometer. Book of Standards , 14
10	Eurocode 7 (1997 & 2007). Geotechnical Design Part 2: Ground Investigation and Testing. EN 1997–2 : 2007
11	Marchetti S, Monaco P, Totani G, Calabrese M. The flat dilatometer test (DMT) in soil investigations. A Report by the ISSMGE Committee TC16. May 2001, 41. Reprinted in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Flat Dilatometer, Washington D C , 2006, 7–48
12	Hepton P.Shear wave velocity measurements during penetration testing. In: Proceedings of the Penetration Testing in the UK. ICE , 1988, 275–278
13	Martin G K, Mayne P W. Seismic flat dilatometer in Piedmont residual soils. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Site Characterization (ISC’98). Atlanta , 1988, 2: 837–843
14	Mayne P W, Schneider J A, Martin G K. Small- and large-strain soil properties from seismic flat dilatometer tests. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Pre-Failure Deformation Characteristics of Geomaterials. Torino , 1999, 1: 419–427
15	Monaco P, Marchetti S, Totani G, Marchetti D. Interrelationship between small strain modulus G0 and operative modulus. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Performance-Based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (IS-Tokyo 2009). Tsukuba, Japan , 2009, 1315–1323
16	Powell J J M, Butcher A P. Small strain stiffness assessments from in situ tests. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Geotechnical Site Characterization (ISC’2) . Porto, Portugal, 2004, 2: 1717–1722
17	Monaco P, Totani G, Amoroso S, Totani F, Marchetti D. Site characterization by seismic dilatometer (SDMT) in the city of L’Aquila. Rivista Italiana di Geotecnica. Anno XLVIII, 2013, (3) (in press)
18	Hryciw R D. Small-strain-shear modulus of soil by dilatometer. ASCE Jnl GE , 1990, 116(11): 1700–1716
19	Lunne T, Lacasse S, Rad N S. State of the art report on in situ testing of soils. In: Proceedings of the XII ICSMFE, Rio de Janeiro , 1989, 4: 2339–2403
20	US DOT- Briaud J L,Miran J. The Flat Dilatometer Test. Departm of Transportation–Fed Highway Administr, Washington, D C, Publ No. FHWA-SA-91–044, Feb , 1992, 102
21	Tanaka H, Tanaka M. Characterization of sandy soils using CPT and DMT. Soils and Foundations. 1998, 38(3): 55–65
22	Sully J P, Campanella R G. Correlation of maximum shear modulus with DMT test results in sand. In: Proceedings of the XII ICSMFE. Rio de Janeiro , 1989, 1, 339–343 .
23	Baldi G, Bellotti R, Ghionna V, Jamiolkowski M, Lo Presti D C F. Modulus of sands from CPT's and DMT's. In: Proceedings of the XII ICSMFE. Rio de Janeiro , 1989 , 1: 165–170 .
24	Schneider J A, McGillivray A V, Mayne P W. Evaluation of SCPTU intra-correlations at sand sites in the Lower Mississippi River valley, USA. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Geotechnical Site Characterization (ISC’2). Porto, Portugal , 2004, 1: 1003–1010
25	Marchetti S. Sensitivity of CPT and DMT to stress history and aging in sands for liquefaction assessment. In: Proceedings of the CPT 2010 International Symposium Huntington Beach. California , 2010
26	Schmertmann J H. (1984). Comparing DMT with CPT in NC/OC Sand Bucket Tests. DMT Digest No. 4. GPE Inc, Gainesville, Fl, USA , 1984
27	Baligh M M, Scott R F. Quasi static deep penetration in clays. ASCE Jnl GE , 1975, 101(No. GT11): 1119–1133
28	Jamiolkowski M, Lo Presti D C F. DMT research in sand. What can be learned from calibration chamber tests. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Site Characterization (ISC’98). Atlanta, Oral presentation , 1998
29	Lee M, Choi S, Kim M, Lee W. Effect of stress history on CPT and DMT results in sand. J Engineering Geology, 2011, 117(3-4): 259–265
30	Monaco P, Amoroso S, Marchetti S, Marchetti D, Totani G, Cola S, Simonini P. Overconsolidation and stiffness of venice lagoon sands and silts from SDMT and CPTU. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering , May 14 online publishing, 2013
31	Amoroso S. Prediction of the shear wave velocity Vs from CPT and DMT. In: Cui Y J, eds. Proceedings of the 5th International Young Geotechnical Engineers’ Conference–5th iYGEC 2013. The authors and IOS Press , 2013
32	Simonini P. Characterization of the Venice lagoon silts from in-situ tests and the performance of a test embank-ment. In: Viana da Fonseca A, Mayne P W, eds. Ge-otechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization. Porto, Rotterdam: Millpress , 2004, 1: 187–207
33	Gottardi G, Tonni L. A comparative study of piezo-cone tests on the silty soils of the Venice lagoon (Treporti Test Site). In: Viana da Fonseca A, Mayne P W, eds. Ge-otechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization. Porto, Rotterdam: Millpress , 2004, 2: 1643–1649
34	Marchetti S, Monaco P, Calabrese M, Totani G. DMT-predicted vs measured settlements under a full-scale instrumented embankment at Treporti (Venice, Italy). In: Viana da Fonseca A, Mayne P W, eds. Ge-otechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization. Porto, Rotterdam: Millpress , 2004, 2: 1511–1518 .
35	McGillivray A, Mayne P W. Seismic piezocone and seismic flat dilatometer tests at Treporti. In: Viana da Fonseca A, Mayne P W, eds. Ge-otechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization. Porto, Rotterdam: Millpress , 2004, 2: 1695–1700
36	Simonini P, Ricceri G, Cola S. Geotechnical char-acterization and properties of the Venice lagoon hetero-geneus silts. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Characterization and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils. Singapore , London: Taylor & Francis, 2006, 4: 2289–2328 .
37	Robertson P K. CPT-DMT correlations. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering , 2009, 135(11): 1762–1771
38	Boylan N, Randolph M F, Low H E. Enahncement of the ball penetrometer test with pore pressure measurements. ISFOG 2010, Perth, Western Australia , 2010
39	Amoroso S. G–γ decay curves by seismic dilatometer (SDMT). Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, L’Aquila: University of L’Aquila , 2011
40	Schneider J A, Fahey M, Lehane B M. Characterization of an un-saturated sand deposit by in situ testing. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Site Characterization– ISC’3 . 2008, 633–638
41	Lehane B M, Fahey M. (2004). Using SCPT and DMT data for settlement prediction in sand. In: Viana da Fonseca A, Mayne P W, eds. Ge-otechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization. Porto, Rotterdam: Millpress , 2004, 2: 1673–1679
42	Fahey M, Schneider J A, Lehane B M. Self-boring pressuremeter testing in Spearwood dune sands. Australian Geomechanics J , 2007, 42(4): 57–71
43	Lehane B M, Mathew G, Stewart D. A laboratory investigation of the upper horizons of the Perth/Guildford formation in Perth CBD. Australian Geomechanics Journal , 2007, 42(3): 87–100
44	Fahey M, Lehane B M, Stewart D. Soil stiffness for shallow foun-dation design in the Perth CBD. Australian Geomechanics J , 2003, 38(3): 61–90

[1]	Mahmood AHMAD, Xiao-Wei TANG, Jiang-Nan QIU, Feezan AHMAD, Wen-Jing GU. A step forward towards a comprehensive framework for assessing liquefaction land damage vulnerability: Exploration from historical data[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1476-1491.
[2]	Ikram GUETTAYA,Mohamed Ridha EL OUNI. In situ-based assessment of soil liquefaction potential–Case study of an earth dam in Tunisia[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2014, 8(4): 456-461.
[3]	Pijush SAMUI. Liquefaction prediction using support vector machine model based on cone penetration data[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(1): 72-82.
[4]	Lianyang ZHANG, . A simple method for evaluating liquefaction potential from shear wave velocity[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2010, 4(2): 178-195.
[5]	CHEN Yunmin, CHEN Yingping, HUANG Bo. Experimental investigation of the influence on static and cyclic deformation of structural soft clay of stress level[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(4): 422-429.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed