Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
The Pressuremeter and its Marine Applications: Second International Symposium
By
J-L Briaud
J-L Briaud
1Civil Engineering Department,
Texas A&M University
?
College Station, TX 77843 Symposium cochairman and editor
Search for other works by this author on:
JME Audibert
JME Audibert
2
Earth Technology Corporation
?
7020 Portwest Drive, Suite 150 Houston, TX 77024 Symposium cochairman and editor
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN-10:
0-8031-0454-5
ISBN:
978-0-8031-0454-9
No. of Pages:
506
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
1985

At least five different methods are available to interpret the results of field pressuremeter tests for saturated clays, each of which has been reported to yield different values of soil parameters when applied to the same pressuremeter test. In the present investigation, a laboratory pressuremeter model was developed, and simulated pressuremeter tests were run on a sedimented Kaolinite consolidated to different values of the maximum vertical pressure, gsv, and with overconsolidation ratios (OCR) ranging from 1 to 8. Analyses of the model pressuremeter tests indicate that the differences in normalized shear strength, Su/gsv, using the five interpretation methods are large with the difference increasing with increasing overconsolidation ratio. The method by Prevost gave the best fit with the Su/gsv vs OCR relationship determined by the average of KoU Triaxial compression and extension strengths.

1.
Baguelin
,
F.
&
Jezequel
,
J. F.
and
Shields
,
D. H.
,
The Pressuremeter and Foundation Engineering
,
Trans Tech Publications
,
Germany
,
1978
2.
Denby
,
G.
and
Clough
,
G. W.
, “
Self-Boring Pressuremeter Test in Clay
,”
Journal of Geotechnical Division
, ASCE,
1980
, Vol.
106
, No.
GT 12
, pp. 1369-1387.
3.
Palmer
,
A. C.
, “
Undrained Plane-Strain Expansion of Cylindrical Cavity in Clay: A Simple Interpretation of the Pressuremeter Test
,”
Geotechnique
,
1972
, Vol.
22
, No.
3
, pp. 451-457.
4.
Ladanyi
,
B.
, “
In-Situ Determination of Undrained Stress Strain Behavior of Sensitive Clays with the Pressuremeter
,”
Canadian Geotechnical Journal
,
1972
, Vol.
9
, No.
3
, pp. 313-319.
5.
Prevost
,
J. H.
and
Hoeg
,
K.
, “
Analysis of Pressuremeter in Strain Softening Soil
,”
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division
, ASCE,
1975
, Vol.
101
, No.
GT8
, pp. 717-731.
6.
Clough
,
G. W.
and
Denby
,
G.
, “
Self-Boring Pressuremeter Study of San Francisco Bay Mud
,”
Journal of Geotechnical Division
, ASCE,
1980
, Vol.
106
, No.
GT1
, pp. 45-63.
7.
Baguelin
,
F.
, et al, “
Expansion of Cylindrical Probes in Cohesive Soils
,”
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division
, ASCE,
1972
, Vol.
98
, No.
SM11
, pp. 1129-1142.
8.
Lukas
,
G. L.
and
Debussy
,
L.
, “
Pressuremeter and Laboratory Test Correlations for Clays
,”
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division
, ASCE,
1976
, Vol.
102
,
GT9
, pp. 945-963.
9.
Schmertmann
,
J. H.
, “
The Measurement of In-Situ Shear Strength
,”
Proc. of the Conference on In-Situ Measurement of Soil Properties
,
ASCE
,
Raleigh, NC
,
1975
.
10.
Jewell
,
R. J.
,
Fahey
,
M.
, and
Wroth
,
C. P.
, “
Laboratory Studies of the Pressuremeter Test in Sand
,”
Geotechnique
,
1980
, Vol.
30
, No.
4
, pp. 507-531.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal