Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
Geotechnical engineering deals with the safe transmittal of loads due to various engineering applications to, and
into, the soil or rock mass. The soil and rock mass formations are heterogeneous and generally are subjected to
stresses (due to various engineering applications) which are additional to those presently existing in the earth
mass from its self weight and geological history. Due to these earth mass properties, the amalgamation of experience,
study of what others have done in somewhat similar situations and site specific geotechnical information are
required to produce an economical, practical and safe substructure design. The correct interpretation of the
results obtained from field exploration and laboratory test program is one of the most important crucial parts of
geotechnical engineering. Through this paper, the Author shares his experience about problems faced in various
projects while reviewing the geotechnical investigation reports for interpreting geotechnical parameters required
for design of structures. Author has made some suggestions which could be useful to resolve issues under such
circumstances.
1. INTRODUCTION
For any development to take place, whether within cities
or outside hills or plains, dry/marshy ground, it is essential
to provide a technical criteria and guidance for its planning,
design and construction. Geological and geotechnical
investigations are crucial to establish various properties
determining the behaviour of the soil / rocky strata at site.
In such cases it becomes one of the prime responsibilities
of a geotechnical engineer to make correct foundation
recommendations and provide the correct and economical
solution with respect to site condition. This is only possible
by conducting proper tests and making correct
interpretation of parameters obtained from various tests.
2. PURPOSE OF GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION
It is necessary to review the need of investigation and the
information sought there-from before the commencement
of investigation in order to have the desired design
parameters. Primary objective of an investigation is to
determine sub-surface stratification with an additional aim
of assessing the following from an investigation:
(a) The type of foundation system (shallow or deep
foundation system) with respect to the sub-surface
characteristics, location and structures.
1126
to local geology with due consideration to the limitations
of the various field and laboratory tests. Wherever the
parameters are critical there should be provision of
obtaining such parameters by using a minimum of two
alternative methods.
Besides the proper specification /BOQ, it is necessary
to select a contractor who is a geotechnical specialist.
However, sometimes, inspite of taking all precaution it is
observed that poor workmanship, improper calibration of
equipment and personal negligence result in reporting of
unrealistic values. Major cause of misinterpretations are
inexperienced supervisors, lack of inter coordination
between field data (bore logs) and laboratory test data; it
could be a result of improper labelling of samples while
transporting to laboratory, human error while incorporating
the results in the report. In most of the cases, after
completion of report it becomes difficult to reach to the
cause when the report is used to interpret geotechnical
parameters for design of structures due to passage of time.
In an important project having large quantum of
geotechnical investigation, inter coordination problems can
be minimised by taking the advantage of technology, that
is developing digital record of field samples collected and
samples tested in the laboratory which could be used later
for clarifying doubts / correcting interpretation at the time
of inconsistency in the report. This suggestion is made
considering that the storage of samples may be difficult for
longer duration as it requires larger space. Review of interim
reports may also help in reducing inconsistency up to certain
extent.
Interpretation problems may exaggerate if engineer
handling the geotechnical aspects is not qualified and
proficient for handling the geotechnical aspects of the
project assigned to him.
Further the process of revising IS codes /introduction
of new codes is not able to match the pace of development
of new technology due to which there are lack of acceptable
guidelines in some areas which also leads to conflict in
interpretation.
4. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Following points can help in minimising problem in the
interpretation of report:
(a) Test locations Less importance is assigned for
recording the co-ordinates and R.L of test location.
It is common to indicate depth of bore hole with
respect (w.r.t) to existing ground level and not w.r.t
R.L especially on site having flat ground,
forgetting that there can be an ample gap of time
for project to commence after the completion of
geotechnical investigation. Ground levels may
change (normally increases due to backfilling) up
Sanjeev Gupta
1127
of typographical errors. In fractured rock reverse
SPT (recording penetration against 6 consecutive
20 blows) can be helpful in obtaining shear
strength of rock by using recommendations of Cole
and Stroud (1997) . In reverse SPT, first 20 blows
are considered as seating blows.
(f) Unconfined Compression strength (UCS) of rock
sample: It is observed that often UCC dry and
saturated are performed at different depth in order
to have more spread test results. But it defeats the
purpose of comparing effect of saturation on rock
samples. Further in several cases it is found that
average strength of saturated rock samples are
more than average values of dry samples. In such
cases one has to take decision based on his
experience while recommending a value; one way
is to use minimum saturated value but sometimes,
it could be too low. Hence it is suggested to test
similar samples (probably from same source) for
dry and saturated conditions.
(g) Point load test: It is preferred in place of UCS as
it is quicker. It is suggested to limit its use for
rock classification and not to use it as a substitute
to UCS as the correlation between UCS and point
load tests are approximate, on an average UCS is
20~25times point load strength index but can vary
up to 100 % with different rock types especially
for anisotropic rock. Test is not reliable if strength
is less than 1Mpa. It is noticed that guideline for
sampling specified in clause no 5 of IS: 8764 are
very rarely followed, as per the code
recommendations are to be made out of minimum
10 test specimen. IS Code also suggests to report
numerical values for water content & degree of
saturation at the time of testing which is very rarely
followed. All these limitations affect the accuracy
of interpretation, hence it is better to conduct UCS
test and minimise the problems.
(h) Pressuremeter tests: Pressuremeter tests are useful
in the hard clay /soft rocks /highly weathered /
highly fractured rock. Pressuremeter test has got
very little significance in a hard rock whose
strength is beyond the instrument capacity.
Limitations of pressure meter test need to be
understood while making the interpretation.
Unless the soil is isotropic the value of Youngs
modulus/deformation modulus (pressuremeter
modulus) obtained from pressuremeter is lateral
and different from vertical values needed for
settlement analysis. For this reason pressuremeter
modulus usually has more relevance to laterally
loaded piles and drilled caissons.
1128
Sanjeev Gupta