Analysis of Physical and Mechanical Soil Properties Determined Using Interpretations of Dilatometric Test (DMT) and Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Methods
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7250/bjrbe.2023-18.605Keywords:
dilatometric test, geotechnical investigation, in-situ test, roads, road bearing capacity, road construction, soil properties, static cone penetration testAbstract
Road design is a complex, time-consuming, and very responsible process. To develop a high-quality and viable road project, it is very important to start with an accurate geological survey in order to define the best road layout. Moreover, the geotechnical characterisation of foundation soils and construction materials as well as the analysis and assessment of geotechnical works are mandatory. Laboratory and in situ investigations are complementary and should be carried out by defining a cost-effective investigation campaign. Most often, Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) or Cone (static) Penetration Test (CPT) are performed because they are economic and quick. In addition, it is also possible to perform the Marchetti Dilatometer Test (DMT). From the obtained test results, the data are interpreted by determining the properties of the soil layers. Although all probing methods are similar, each of them gives slightly different results. The aim of this study is to analyse and compare the results of the probing test, to determine the difference between the obtained data and to find out how the obtained results affect the development of constructive solutions from the safety and economic point of view.
References
Been, K., Quiñonez, A., & Sancio, R. B. (2010). Interpretation of the CPT in engineering practice. 2nd International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing, Huntington Beach, CA, USA. https://www.marchetti-dmt.it/ wp-content/uploads/bibliografia/been_2010_CPT_in_practice_CPT10.pdf
Grabar, K., Strelec, S., Spiranec, M., & Dodigovic, F. (2022). CPT–DMT correlations on regional soils from Croatia. Sensors, 22(3), Article 934. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030934
Lunne, T., Robertson, P. K., & Powell, J. J. M. (1997). Cone penetration testing in geotechnical practice (1st ed.). Taylor & Francis Group, London and New York.
Marchetti, S. (2021). A flat dilatometer test. https://www.marchetti-dmt.it/instruments/dmt/
Marchetti, S., Monaco, P., Totani, G., & Calabrese, M. (2001). The flat dilatometer test (DMT) in soil investigations. Report of the ISSMGE Technica1 Committee 16 on Ground Property Characterisation from In-situ Testing. https://www.marchetti-dmt.it/conference/dmt15/papers%20DMT%202015%20(pdf)/TC16%20DMT%20Report%202001.pdf
Marchetti, S. (1980). In situ tests by flat dilatometer. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 106(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJGEB6.0000934
Mayne, P. W. (2007). NCHRP Synthesis 368: Cone penetration test. Transportation Research Board, National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA. https://mcipin.com/publications/CPT/nchrp_syn_368.pdf
Mulabdic, M. (2013). Use of penetration testing for determination of soil properties in earth dam. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris, France, 595–598. https://www.cfms-sols.org/sites/default/files/Actes/595-598.pdf
Nepelski, K. (2019). Interpretation of CPT and SDMT tests for Lublin loess soils exemplified by Cyprysowa research site. Budownictwo i Architektura, 18(3), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.35784/bud-arch.890
Rabarijoely, S. (2018). A new approach to the determination of mineral and organic soil types based on dilatometer tests (DMT). Applied Sciences, 8(11), Article 2249. https://doi.org/10.3390/app8112249
Poenaru, A. (2016). Correlations between cone penetration test and seismic dilatometer Marchetti test with common laboratory investigations. Energy Procedia, 85, 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.12.219
Robertson, P. K., & Cabal, K. L. (2015). Guide to cone penetration testing for geotechnical engineering (6th ed.). Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. https://dokumen.tips/documents/guide-to-cone-penetration-testing-cpt-guide-6th- 2015pdf-cone-penetration.html?page=1
Robertson, P. K. (2012). Interpretation of in-situ tests – some insights. Mitchell Lecture – ISC’4, Brazil. https://www.cpt-robertson.com/PublicationsPDF/Robertson%2C%20Mitchell%20Lecture%2C%20ISC’4%2C%202012.pdf
Robertson, P. K., & Campanella, R. G. (1983a). Interpretation of cone penetration tests. Part I: sand. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 20(4), 718–733. https://doi.org/10.1139/t83-078
Robertson, P. K., & Campanella, R. G. (1983b). Interpretation of cone penetration tests. Part II: clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 20(4), 734–745. https://doi.org/10.1139/t83-079
Robertson, P. K., & Cabal (Robertson) K. L. (2010). Guide to cone penetration testing for geo-environmental engineering. Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. https://www.cpt-robertson.com/PublicationsPDF/CPT%20 GeoEnvironGuide%202010.pdf
SCDOT. (2019). Geotechnical design manual. The South Carolina Department of Transportation. South Carolina State Library. https://dc.statelibrary.sc.gov/handle/10827/30928
The Bishop Method of Slices. (2023, April). https://www.geoengineer.org/ education/slope-stability/slope-stability-the-bishop-method-of-slices
Weber, R. P. (2010). Basic geotechnical engineering for non-geotechnical engineers. Continuing Education and Development, Inc.
Zawrzykraj, P., Rydelek, P., & Bakowska, A. (2017). Geo-engineering properties of Eemian peats from Radzymin (central Poland) in the light of static cone penetration and dilatometer tests. Engineering Geology, 226, 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.07.001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Endijs Virsis, Ainars Paeglitis, Laura Jateikienė
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
