1983
DOI: 10.1139/t83-078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpretation of cone penetration tests. Part I: Sand

Abstract: Significant advances have been made in recent years in research, development, interpretation, and application of cone penetration testing. The addition of pore pressure measurements during cone penetration testing has added a new dimension to the interpretation of geotechnical parameters.The cone penetration test induces complex changes in stresses and strains around the cone tip. No one has yet developed a comprehensive theoretical solution to this problem. Hence, the cone penetration test provides indices wh… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
133
0
8

Year Published

1998
1998
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 371 publications
(146 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
5
133
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…The cone penetration resistance was also estimated from the friction angle that was obtained from the triaxial tests. By using the relationship given by Robertson and Campanella (1983), for 36 % friction angle, cone penetration resistance was determined less than 1,000 kPa which is consistent with the recorded values from the CPTu tests.…”
Section: Cone Penetration Resistance and Relative Densitysupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The cone penetration resistance was also estimated from the friction angle that was obtained from the triaxial tests. By using the relationship given by Robertson and Campanella (1983), for 36 % friction angle, cone penetration resistance was determined less than 1,000 kPa which is consistent with the recorded values from the CPTu tests.…”
Section: Cone Penetration Resistance and Relative Densitysupporting
confidence: 84%
“…As cone resistance is primarily a measure of strength, which in an undrained material will be a function of the void ratio, it should be anticipated that α may vary with OCR as normally and overconsolidated soils at the same void ratio have very different compressibility (indeed, different α-values are recommended for normally and over-consolidated sands; Robertson and Campanella, 1983a;Meigh, 1987). Therefore only the compressibility of specimens recovered from below 15 AOD, where the PFA is thought to be normally consolidated, were intentionally fitted by the CPT correlation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bu yaklaşımla laboratuvarda ölçülene daha yakın bir değerin yakalandığı dikkate değerdir. formülü ile bulunabileceğini ifade edilmiştir [22]. Kalibrasyon silindirinde daha fazla örnek (24 kum) üzerinde yapılan deney sonuçlarına göre geliştirilen alternatif yaklaşımda efektif kayma direnci açısı: 00 17.6 11.0 log( ) tl q   (6) ile elde edilebilir [23].…”
Section: Kayma Direnciunclassified