Subsurface Exploration using the Standard Penetration Test and the Cone Penetrometer Test

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) have become industry standards for subsurface geotechnical investigations using small diameter (<8-in. [20-cm]) borings and soundings. Both procedures have evolved over a period of 100 and 70 years, respectively, and have been adopted as ASTM standards. Each procedure has certain advantages over the other, but both can elicit incorrect data under particular subsurface conditions that are often overlooked, depending on the experience of field personnel operating or logging the tests. This paper seeks to explain the operative assumptions employed in both procedures, highlight the various corrections that are commonly employed, and warn the reader of common errors in interpretation. The article concludes by stating that, under most conditions, the joint employment of SPT and CPT together has the greatest potential for characterizing sites correctly.

[1]  Alec Westley Skempton,et al.  Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation , 1986 .

[2]  P K Robertson,et al.  CYCLIC LIQUEFACTION AND ITS EVALUATION BASED ON THE SPT AND CPT , 1997 .

[3]  M. Juul Hvorslev,et al.  Subsurface exploration and sampling of soils for civil engineering purposes : report on a research project of the Committee on Sampling and Testing Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, American Society of Civil Engineers , 1949 .

[4]  K. Vikram,et al.  Time-domain ultrasonic NDE of layered media: Texas A&M University, Aerospace Engineering Department, College Station, TX 77843, USA , 1992 .

[5]  Charles O. Riggs,et al.  North American Standard Penetration Test Practice: An Essay , 1986 .

[6]  R. Whitman,et al.  Sand Compaction with Vibratory Rollers , 1969 .

[7]  R. G. Campanella,et al.  Current status of the piezocone test , 1988 .

[8]  M. Uslenghi,et al.  The World Space Observatory (WSO-UV) - Current status , 2008, 0801.2080.

[9]  H. O. Ireland,et al.  Discussion: The Dynamic Penetration Test: A Standard that is not Standardized , 1970 .

[10]  C.R.I. Clayton,et al.  SPT energy transmission: theory, measurement and significance , 1990 .

[11]  Y Lacroix,et al.  DIRECT DETERMINATION AND INDIRECT EVALUATION OF RELATIVE DENSITY AND ITS USE ON EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS , 1973 .

[12]  C. Clayton.  The Standard Penetration Test , 1995 .

[13]  I. M. Idriss,et al.  Proceeding of the NCEER workshop on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils , 1997 .

[14]  H. O. Ireland,et al.  The Dynamic Penetration Test: A Standard that is not Standardized , 1970 .

[15]  P. Robertson.  Soil classification using the cone penetration test , 1990 .

[16]  R H Karol,et al.  SOILS AND SOIL ENGINEERING.. , 1960 .

[17]  H. J. Gibbs,et al.  Research on determining the density of sands by spoon penetration testing , 1956 .

[18]  H A Mohr.  THE GOW CAISSON , 1964 .

[19]  R. S. Olsen.  Using the CPT for Dynamic Site Response Characterization , 1988 .

[20]  Gfa Fletcher,et al.  STANDARD PENETRATION TEST' ITS USES AND ABUSES , 1965 .

[21]  P. C. Rutledge.  Relation of Undisturbed Sampling to Laboratory Testing , 1942 .

[22]  C.R.I. Clayton,et al.  The standard penetration test (SPT): methods and use , 1995 .

[23]  Robert V. Whitman,et al.  Overburden Correction Factors for SPT in Sand , 1986 .

[24]  K. Terzaghi,et al.  Soil mechanics in engineering practice , 1948 .

[25]  M. Lew.  Liquefaction evaluation guidelines for practicing engineering and geological professionals and regulators , 2001 .