Discussion Soils and Rocks

142 Pages·2017·59.17 MB·English

ISSN 1980-9743
SOILSandROCKS AnInternationalJournalofGeotechnicalandGeoenvironmentalEngineering
S
o
100 ils 100
a
95 n 95
d
R
75 Volume 40, N. 2, May-August 2017 oc 75
k
s
0525 AERBtDUJMPJo...RneeACJes.Ash.eiTtT.R.nierax.sIHLrgg.viCtRiaiyAuiuoEvoLilk,rRiyllrECtabieHiayaastSucolnti.,PtqioFmErtoHuic.niepvcheW.(zaCrLaEruoeqlla.khRuscunIG)iasaom,egirftnio,Go,iaapeonJrJcce..n.PithRdtne.Zheaor.BetthnfiGihsaecSSetaoreimtncraCScaanooiprldafdlne,-aMeccDOrsetdru,ip.aodEPtFmsus.ecrRtaTeenoolta.ienpetSEtaebyrrisstalDDeqeNtiueuMo efieoenvtooctfedoT, tliCeeRvFlseo.trDPeaBn.eenCatzfdieseune-InniTdnthithtooasaann,cwOtMBA.Feoc.artSiseouadnrnePtdoilseFJsiueSnludiboTjreescttsed 1107299733 V SAnaIonndteGirnelaotesionnvairaloJnomnurennadtal loEf nGRgeionteeeocrhinncgicakl s 0525
o
lu
m
InfluenceoftheEmbeddedLengthontheOverallStabilityofSingleAnchoredRetainingWalls e
4
C.M.SantosJosefino,N.M.C.Guerra,A.N.Antão 133 0
, N
. 2
279155500 AOTSCBCTPDANNMTJE.e.Ehean.CAonI..BSL.eCChSrrCnS.oEpJe.t.áaCB..shEaHleaPvJ,vteCCUn.e-rugaiBoNDSbuQoooEvelDSrrTuaIcrnntiemSuaCIomuztaUnssnoIiez,,prtooAoOceiidfDiAaAilrllnionLurRiiNoobIn,,..sicECz,CeicNiERMle,oioFaSia.nOd.t.TAnf.lsayBRjIa.TteCeCh.bOh.a.lcEeTroSoeSnL.tGaronatr,daViSuorresbmlSehdprioSdolee.leay,eltasaisirJAsftnrdati,etaa,ainhann.RnoRAt,aitgdDCbnP.sei,.CtoatL.soiPhEJiPzani.cn...srxmFLoaGgetAMp.af.lsobSorNrntCEoneramr.cadosehosuNe,setesvamjiiLsosluoamsnep,Cne.fg-daaFseFPotB,cS.sAierAitHotrlsrenrean.eted.cusCzlMnhoagiCEg.loftaaiomtSrStothosaocobn,lhosiien,lSwFefdMuU.FlSidFyteoeihn..rnVAMdiimleIt.ssni-M.ahMn:GdAn-AaeGCrnamxsarCansFqiiPerennauibsrile,sesho:ideCssdopieSS.ceWotrLRuti.iildomesSycse-akFlLBarimolmemenedCMsaipxittuãroesPocinho, 111111495786775775 2 MB S MVoalyu-mAeug4u0s,t 2N0.127 279155500
5 0 5
1
7
0 0
Soils and Rocks is an International Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering published by
ABMS - Brazilian Association for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering
Av. Queiroz Filho, 1700 – Torre A Sky, Sala 106 – Vila Hamburguesa
05319-000, São Paulo, SP
Brazil
SPG – Portuguese Geotechnical Society
LNEC, Avenida do Brasil, 101
1700-066 Lisboa
Portugal
Issue Date:August 2017
Issue:400 copies and 800 online-distributed copies
Manuscript Submission:For review criteria and manuscript submission information, see Instructions for Authors at the end.
Disclaimer:Theopinionsandstatementspublishedinthisjournalaresolelytheauthor’sandnotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsoropinions
ofthepublishers(ABMSandSPG).Thepublishersdonotacceptanyliabilityarisinginanywayfromtheopinions,statementsanduseof
the information presented.
Copyright:Authors and ABMS-Brazilian Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering
SOILS and ROCKS
An International Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
EditorPaulo Scarano Hemsi -Aeronautics Institute of Technology, Brazil
Co-editorJosé Couto Marques -University of Porto, Portugal
Executive Board
Waldemar Coelho Hachich Gustavo Ferreira Simões
University of São Paulo, Brazil Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
António Topa Gomes Rafaela Cardoso
University of Porto, Portugal University of Lisbon, Portugal
Associate Editors
H. Einstein E. Maranha das Neves Harry G. Poulos
MIT, USA Lisbon Technical University, Portugal University of Sidney, Australia
John A. Hudson Nielen van der Merve Niek Rengers
Imperial College, UK University of Pretoria, South Africa ITC, The Netherlands
Kenji Ishihara Paul Marinos Fumio Tatsuoka
University of Tokyo, Japan NTUA, Greece Tokyo University of Science, Japan
Michele Jamiolkowski James K. Mitchell Luiz González de Vallejo
Studio Geotecnico Italiano, Italy Virginia Tech., USA UCM, Spain
Willy A. Lacerda Lars Persson Roger Frank
COPPE/UFRJ, Brazil SGU, Sweden ENPC-Cermes, France
Editorial Board Members
Roberto F. Azevedo Orencio Monje Vilar R. Kerry Rowe
Federal University of Viçosa, Brazil University of São Paulo at São Carlos, Brazil Queen’s University, Canada
Milton Kanji Maria Eugenia Boscov R. Jonathan Fannin
University of São Paulo, Brazil University of São Paulo, Brazil University of British Columbia, Canada
Kátia Vanessa Bicalho Eda Freitas de Quadros Laura Caldeira
Federal University of Espírito Santo, Brazil BGTECH, Brazil LNEC, Portugal
Omar Y. Bitar Tácio de Campos António S. Cardoso
IPT, Brazil Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil University of Porto, Portugal
Lázaro V. Zuquette Richard J. Bathurst José D. Rodrigues
University of São Paulo at São Carlos, Brazil Royal Military College of Canada Consultant, Portugal
Fabio Taioli Robert Mair António G. Coelho
University of São Paulo, Brazil University of Cambridge, UK Consultant, Portugal
Tarcisio Celestino Serge Leroueil Luís R. Sousa
University of São Paulo at São Carlos, Brazil University of Laval, Canada University of Porto, Portugal
Edmundo Rogério Esquível Mario Manassero Rui M. Correia
University of São Paulo at São Carlos, Brazil Politécnico di Torino, Italy LNEC, Portugal
Nilo C. Consoli Luis Valenzuela João Marcelino
Federal Univ. Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil Consultant, Chile LNEC, Portugal
Sandro S. Sandroni Jorge G. Zornberg António C. Mineiro
Consultant, Brazil University of Texas/Austin, USA University of Lisbon, Portugal
Sérgio A.B. Fontoura Andrew Whittle António P. Cunha
Pontifical Catholic University, Brazil MIT, USA LNEC, Portugal New
Ennio M. Palmeira Pierre Bérest António G. Correia
University of Brasilia, Brazil LCPC, France University of Minho, Portugal
Luciano Décourt Peter Kaiser Carlos D. Gama
Consultant, Brazil Laurentian University, Canada Lisbon Technical University, Portugal
Faiçal Massad He Manchao José V. Lemos
University of São Paulo, Brazil CUMT, China LNEC, Portugal
Marcus Pacheco Teruo Nakai Nuno Grossmann
University of the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Nagoya Inst. Technology, Japan LNEC, Portugal
Paulo Maia Claudio Olalla Luís L. Lemos
University of Northern Rio de Janeiro, Brazil CEDEX, Spain University of Coimbra, Portugal
Renato Cunha Frederick Baynes Ricardo Oliveira
University of Brasília, Brazil Baynes Geologic Ltd., Australia COBA, Portugal
“Ad hoc” Reviewers
Soils and Rocksis indebted to all “ad hoc” reviewers.
A complete list of reviewers that contributed to the current volume ofSoils and Rockswill be published here in the December issue.
SoilsandRockspublishespapersinEnglishinthebroadfieldsofGeotechnicalEngineering,EngineeringGeologyandGeoenvironmentalEngineering.
TheJournalispublishedinApril,AugustandDecember.SubscriptionpriceisUS$90.00peryear.Thejournal,withthename“SoloseRochas”,wasfirst
publishedin1978bytheGraduateSchoolofEngineering,FederalUniversityofRiodeJaneiro(COPPE-UFRJ).In1980itbecametheofficialmagazineof
theBrazilianAssociationforSoilMechanicsandGeotechnicalEngineering(ABMS),acquiringthenationalcharacterthathadbeentheintentionofits
founders.In1986italsobecametheofficialJournaloftheBrazilianAssociationforEngineeringGeologyandtheEnvironment(ABGE)andin1999be-
cametheLatinAmericanGeotechnicalJournal,followingthesupportofLatin-AmericanrepresentativesgatheredforthePan-AmericanConferenceof
Guadalajara(1996).In2007thejournalacquiredthestatusofaninternationaljournalunderthenameofSoilsandRocks,publishedbytheBrazilianAsso-
ciationforSoilMechanicsandGeotechnicalEngineering(ABMS),BrazilianAssociationforEngineeringGeologyandtheEnvironment(ABGE)andPor-
tuguese Geotechnical Society (SPG). In 2010, ABGE decided to publish its own journal and left the partnership.
Soils and Rocks
1978, 1 (1, 2)
1979, 1 (3), 2 (1,2)
1980-1983, 3-6 (1, 2, 3)
1984, 7 (single number)
1985-1987, 8-10 (1, 2, 3)
1988-1990, 11-13 (single number)
1991-1992, 14-15 (1, 2)
1993, 16 (1, 2, 3, 4)
1994-2010, 17-33 (1, 2, 3)
2011, 34 (1, 2, 3, 4)
2012-2016, 35-39 (1, 2, 3)
2017, 40 (1, 2,
ISSN 1980-9743 CDU 624.131.1
ISSN1980-9743
SOILS and ROCKS
An International Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Publication of
ABMS - BrazilianAssociationforSoilMechanicsandGeotechnicalEngineering
SPG - Portuguese Geotechnical Society
Volume 40, N. 2, May-August 2017
Table of Contents
ARTICLES
Energy Ratio (E ) for the Standard Penetration Test Based on Measured Field Tests
R
J.A. Lukiantchuki, G.P. Bernardes, E.R. Esquivel 77
Resistivity Piezocone in the Conceptual Site Model Definition
M.T. Riyis, H.L. Giacheti 93
Behavioral Evaluation of Small-Diameter Defective and Intact Bored Piles Subjected
to Axial Compression
P.J.R. Albuquerque, J.R. Garcia, O. Freitas Neto, R.P. Cunha, O.F. Santos Junior 109
Deterioration Characteristic of Mudstone Due to Freeze-Thaw Action
Using Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy
J.C. Hu, H.F. Wang, J. Zhao 123
Influence of the Embedded Length on the Overall Stability of Single Anchored Retaining Walls
C.M. Santos Josefino, N.M.C. Guerra, A.N. Antão 133
A Sole Empirical Correlation Expressing Strength of Fine-Grained Soils - Lime Mixtures
N.C. Consoli, E. Ibraim, A. Diambra, L. Festugato, S.F.V. Marques 147
On the Durability and Strength of Compacted Coal Fly Ash-Carbide Lime Blends
N.C. Consoli, R.B. Saldanha, J.F. Novaes, H.C. Scheuermann Filho 155
TECHNICALNOTE
Seepage Induced Consolidation Model Correlation with Index Properties
M. Janbaz, A. Maher, S. Janbaz 165
CASESTUDIES
Behavior of Reinjectable and Prestressed Anchors in Soil Masses:
Construction Case Study in Congonhas - Brazil
T.B. Porto, A.C.A. Torres, R.C. Gomes 177
Three-Dimensional Geostatistical Estimation of Soil Units: A Case Study From Capitão Pocinho,
Pará, Brazil
J.C.B. Queiroz, T.O. Vieira, P.P. Araujo, F.A. Matos, M.M. Amin, C.W. Salame 187
DISCUSSION
An Evaluation of the Shaft Resistance of Piles Embedded in Gneissic Rock
E.L. Juvencio, F.R. Lopes, A.L.L.S. Nunes 197

Articles
Soils and Rocks
v. 40, n. 2

Energy Ratio (E ) for the Standard Penetration Test Based
R
on Measured Field Tests
J.A. Lukiantchuki, G.P. Bernardes, E.R. Esquivel
Abstract. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is often used to estimate the soil parameters for geotechnical design
projects, using the N index. However, these estimates are performed based on empirical correlations without any
SPT
scientificbasis.Moreover,thetesthasalargeinherentresultsdispersionduetotheuseofdifferenttypesofequipmentand
executionprocedures.SincetheN indexdependsontheamountofenergythatiseffectivelytransmittedtothesampler
SPT
duringthehammerfall,itisfundamentaltobeabletoestimatethisenergy.Giventheimportanceofestimatingtheenergy
thatreachestheSPTsampler,aninstrumentedsubassemblywasdevelopedinordertosimultaneouslyassesstheamountof
energytransmittedtothedrillrods,atsectionsjustabovethesamplerandjustbelowtheanvil.Thispaperpresentsaseries
of SPT experimental results carried out in two different sites located in the State of São Paulo, using two different
equipment set-ups (with manual and automatic tripping mechanisms), enabling the assessment of the top and bottom
energyratiounderdifferentconditions.Resultsshowthatforhandliftinghammerandautomatictriphammersystemsthe
differenceintheenergyratioisnotsignificant.However,thedispersionoftheresultsforthehandliftinghammersystemis
more pronounced due to execution procedures, equipment and operators.
Keywords:penetration test, SPT test, energy, energy ratio, dynamic instrumentation, foundations.
1. Introduction strongly dependent on the amount of energy delivered to
the drill rods (Schmertmann & Palacios, 1979) and to the
Despite criticism, the Standard Penetration Test
SPTsamplerduringhammerimpact(Aoki&Cintra,2000).
(SPT)continuestobewidelyusedforgeotechnicaldesigns,
Foreachhammerdropthereisacorrespondingnominalpo-
usingtheN indexasanindicatorofsoilproperties(shear
SPT tential energy (PE) that is theoretically equal to 474.5 J
strength, compressibility and undrained shear strength of
(ASTM, 2008). According to the Brazilian standard, the
soils).Thecriticismisrelatedtoresultsdispersionattribut-
correspondingnominalpotentialenergyforSPTisequalto
abletothevariabilityinherentinSPTtests.Standardpene-
478.2 J (ABNT, 2001).
tration tests are performed using different types of equip-
Theamountofenergythatisinitiallydeliveredtothe
ment(hammers,drillrod,boreholefluids,samplingtubes,
top of the drill rods, and subsequently transmitted to the
amongothers),executionproceduresandoperators.Conse-
sampler, can be significantly influenced by many factors,
quently, the N index, which is often used to estimate
SPT including the type and shape of hammer, drop height,
geotechnical soil parameters, is broadly variable and its
equipmentconditions,thelengthandmassofthedrillrods,
consistency has been questioned. In addition, these esti-
secondary impacts, soil conditions, verticality of the test,
matesareperformedbasedonempiricalcorrelationswith-
condition of the trip mechanism, among other variables
outanyscientificbasis.Researchersandpractitionershigh-
(Schmertmann & Palacios, 1979; Belincanta & Cintra;
lightthatitispossibletoincreasetheN indexaccuracyby
SPT 1998;Aoki&Cintra;2000;Tsaietal.,2004;Odebrechtet
observing recommended standards and using a more skil-
al.,2005;Sancio&Bray,2005;Aokietal.,2007;Youdet
ledandexperiencedfieldcrew(Schnaidetal.,2009;Read-
al., 2008; Leeet al., 2010; Readinget al., 2010).
inget al., 2010).
The estimation of soil properties is performed Duetotheenergylossesinthedifferentmechanical
throughempiricalcorrelationsusingtheN index,which componentsofthehammerreleasesystemandothersour-
SPT
correspondstothenumberofblowsrequiredforthesam- cesofdissipation,theenergydeliveredtotherodsandsam-
plertopenetrate300mmintotothesoilafteraninitialseat- pler is not equal to the nominal potential energy
ing drive of 150 mm. The N index does not represent (Schmertmann & Palacios, 1979; Aoki & Cintra, 2000;
SPT
physicalsoilresistancebutisanindicatorofsoilresistance, Odebrecht et al., 2005; Cavalcante et al., 2008; Luki-
which depends not only on the soil properties but also on antchuki, 2012, Santana et al., 2012; Lukiantchuki et al.,
the equipment characteristics. The N index is also 2015).Thus,theenergyratiooftheSPTsetup(E )(Eq.1)is
SPT R
JulianaAzoiaLukiantchuki,Ph.D.,AssociateProfessor,DepartamentodeEngenhariaCivil,UniversidadeEstadualdeMaringá,Maringá,PR,Brazil.e-mail:jazoia@ya-
hoo.com.br.
George de Paula Bernardes, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Guaratinguetá, SP, Brazil. e-mail:
[email protected].
Edmundo Rogerio Esquivel, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Departamento de Geotecnia, Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos, SP, Brazil. e-mail: [email protected].
Submitted on June 20, 2016; Final Acceptance on May 10, 2017; Discussion open until December 29, 2017.
Soils and Rocks, São Paulo, 40(2): 77-91, May-August, 2017. 77
Lukiantchukiet al.
usuallydefinedastheratiooftheamountofenergytrans- whereE =istheamountofenergythatreachesthesampler;
s
ferredtothedrillrods(Force-VelocityMethod,referredto e =isthecorrectionfactorwhichrelatestheenergyjustbe-
1
as EFV), to the nominal potential energy (PE) (ASTM, foretheimpacttothefreefallenergy;e =istheratiobe-
2
2010).TheEFViscalculatedbyintegratingtheforcemulti- tweentheenergyjustbelowtheanvilandthekineticenergy
pliedbythevelocityovertime.TheuseoftheEFVmethod justbeforetheimpact;e =isafactorrelatedtothedrillrod
3
inestimatingSPTenergyisconsideredtobethemostreli- length and e = is the factor which relates the energy loss
4
ableandaccuratemethodforestimatingSPTenergyduring over the drill rod length.
wavepropagation(Sy&Campanella,1991;Howieetal., Consideringtheimportanceofestimatingtheenergy
2003; Youdet al., 2008). that reaches the SPT sampler, an instrumented subassem-
bly, capable of reading acceleration and force signals just
t(cid:2)(cid:4)
(cid:5) F(t)(cid:3)v(t)dt abovethesampler,wasdeveloped.Thispaperpresentsthe
E (cid:2) EFV (cid:2) t(cid:2)0 (1) resultsofaseriesofSPTexperimentaltestsperformedus-
R PE PE ingtwoinstrumentedsubassemblies,oneplacedjustbelow
theanvilandtheotherjustabovethesampler.Thisinstru-
where F(t) = the normal force, during the wave propaga-
mentation allowed the simultaneous assessment of the
tion, at a specific section, andv(t) = the particle velocity.
amount of energy transmitted to the drill rods at sections
Theenergyratio(E )shouldbeevaluatedforthesys-
R just above the sampler and just below the anvil. Addi-
temwhentheN indexisusedtoestimatesoilproperties
SPT tionally,theSPTtestswereconductedusingdifferentham-
for geotechnical designs or for comparing results. How-
mertypes(handliftingpinweightandautomatictripham-
ever,differenttypesofequipmentareusedtoperformSPT
mer).Resultsallowforestimationoftheenergyratioatthe
tests,resultinginvariableenergyratiovaluesandN in-
SPT top(anvil)andatthebottom(sampler)ofdrillrods,fortwo
dexes.Therefore,researchersandpractitionersrecommend
different equipment set-ups.
thattheN indexshouldbenormalized(Kovacs&Salo-
SPT
mone, 1982; Robertson et al., 1983; Seed et al., 1985; 2. Instrumentation
Skempton, 1986) to a reference energy ratio of 60% (N )
60 In this research, two instrumented subassemblies
(ISSMFE, 1989) (Eq. 2).
were built, similar to the one developed by Odebrecht et
N (cid:2) ER (cid:3)N (2) al. (2005). Each instrumented subassembly consists of
60 E SPT onesegmentofrod,towhichapairofaccelerometersand
60
oneloadcellhavebeeninstalled(Fig.2a).Theloadcellis
whereNSPT=istheblowcount;ER=istheenergyratioofthe composedoffourdoublestraingauges(350(cid:7)each),from
specificSPTsetup;E =60%oftheinternationalreference
60 a Wheatstone bridge circuit, assembled 90° apart
ofnominalpotentialenergy((cid:6)474J);N =N indexcor-
(Fig.2b).
60 SPT
rectedto60%oftheinternationalreferencefornominalpo-
tential energy.
Inconventionalmethods,energyismeasuredjustbe-
low the anvil through an instrumented subassembly in-
stalledatthetopofthedrillrods.However,Aoki&Cintra
(2000)suggestedredefiningtheSPTenergyratioasthera-
tioofthemaximumamountofenergytransferredtothesoil
samplersystemtothenominalpotentialenergy.According
to these authors, the energy ratio above the sampler is in-
verselyproportionaltothedrillrodlength(Fig.1)andthe
energyratiowouldberelatedtotheworkdoneduringsam-
plerpenetrationintothesoilandnottotheavailablekinetic
energy.
Someresearchers(Cavalcanteetal.,2008;Odebrecht
etal.,2005;Santanaetal.,2012;Lukiantchukietal.,2015)
havemeasuredenergyinasectionjustabovethesampler.
However,littledataisavailableduetothedifficultyinplac-
ingtheinstrumentationinsidetheborehole.Theassessment
oftheamountofenergytransmittedtothestringofrods,si-
multaneouslyatasectionjustbelowtheanvilandasection
justabovethesampler,allowsforestimatingenergylosses
over the rod (e) (Eq. 3) (Danzigeret al., 2008).
4
Figure 1 - Energy ratio above the sampler vs. drill rod length
Es (cid:2)e1 (cid:3)e2 (cid:3)e3 (cid:3)e4 (cid:3)PE (3) (Aoki & Cintra, 2000).
78 Soils and Rocks, São Paulo, 40(2): 77-91, May-August, 2017.