You are on page 1of 77

Ir.

Liew Shaw Shong

1
Introduction
ƒ Site Investigation
Scope à Information on Hydrology,
Meteorology, Environment,
Natural Resources, Activities &
Topography

ƒ Ground Investigation
à Information on Ground &
Groundwater conditions

ƒ Monitoring
à Time dependent changes in
ground movements,
groundwater fluctuation &
movements

2
Introduction
Purpose

3
Introduction

4
5
Why doing GI? Why Geotechnical
Engineer? What Risk &
Consequence
Why doing GI?
It is regard as necessary, but not a
rewarding expense. (Uncertainty,
sufficiently accurate design options
for Cost & Benefit study)

Why Geotechnical Engineer?


Geotechnical engineer as an
underwriter for risk assessment.

What Risk in Ground & its


Consequence ?
Ground Variability & Geo-hazards.
Financial Viability & Cost Overrun
(Construction & Operation).

6
7
Rock Mechanics
Geology deformation Soil Mechanics
composition failure deformation
Hydrology genesis Fracture
seepage failure
Surface fluid flowprocesses Mechanics
seepage
hydrology blasting
Structural
quarry
Mechanics Public Policy
deformation Fluid Control
Systems codes
failure standard
member design Structural e.g. dams Underground
Continuum Support Geo- laws & compliance
Mechanics Systems structures Contract Law
elasticity e.g. foundations e.g. tunnel specification
plasticity
Numericalidealisation
Analysis Geotechnical Risk Management
observation method
boundary element
finite difference Engineering
Surface Geo-structures Ground
risk assessment
instrumentation
discrete element e.g. embankments, Improvement Mechanical
finite element landfills e.g. densification, Engineering
Geochemistry remediation drilling
waste instrument
Materials Site Exploration Ground Construction
leachates excavation
types reconnaissance Movements practice
durability earthquake experience
properties drilling
geosynthetics in-situ testing liquefaction
laboratory testing sinkhole
geophysics

Modified from Morgenstern (2000)


8
Burland’s Genesis/Geology

Geotechnical
Triangle
Morgenstern (2000) Ground Site investigation
Profile Ground description

Precedent,
Empiricism,
Experience,
Risk-management

Ground Appropriate
Behaviour Model

Lab/field testing Idealisation followed by evaluation.


Observation/measurement Conceptual or physical modelling 9
Analytical modelling
Source :http://www.sptimes.com/2004/04/16/Tampabay/At_site_of_collapse__.shtml 10
11
12
Source :National Geographic (Jan 2008)
13
Source :National Geographic (Jan 2008)
ƒ How GI cost

Captain, no worry!
We are still far from
it.

Consequence
Perceive
d Cost

Actual
Cost 14
How GI shall be done ?

15
Codes & Standards

16
Process Diagram of Ground
Investigation

17
Process Diagram of Ground
Investigation

18
Stage 1 of GI

Desk Study

Site Walk-over Survey

Identify Project Need

Scope of GI

Bid Document & Tender

“Without Site Investigation, Ground is a Hazard”


19
Stage 2 of GI

Field Supervision

Sampling, In-situ
Testing, Geophysical
Survey
Monitoring

Laboratory Testing

Work Certification

“Without Site Investigation, Ground is a Hazard”


20
Stage 3 of GI

Factual Data Compilation

Interpretation

Report Preparation

“Without Site Investigation, Ground is a Hazard”


21
Desk Study
Information for Desk Study :
• Topographic Maps
• Geological Maps & Memoirs
• Site Histories & Land Use
• Aerial Photographs
• Details of Adjacent Structures &
Foundation
Granite
• Adjacent & Nearby Ground Investigation Alluvium

Proje
Pipeline
ct Site
s
Jurong Project
Formation Site

1986 1999

Project Pipeline Project


Pipelines Site Site
s 22
Site Walkover Survey
• Confirm the findings from Desk
Study
• Identify additional features &
information not captured by Desk
Study

23
GI Planning

24
Depth of Investigation

Foundation Design

Stability Analysis

25
Common Problems

ƒ Incomplete Survey Information

26
GI Planning

27
GI Planning

28
Specification

ƒ Objectives (study, design, forensic, construction)


ƒ Type of investigation, mapping & field survey
ƒ Vertical & lateral extent (termination depth)
ƒ Sampling requirements (types, sampling locations
& techniques)
ƒ In-situ and laboratory testing requirements
(standards)
ƒ Measurement/monitoring requirements (instrument
types & frequency)
ƒ Skill level requirements in specialist works &
interpretation
ƒ Report format & data presentation
29
Specification

ƒ Work schedule & GI resources planning


ƒ Payments for services, liability, indemnity,
insurance cover

30
Boring/Drilling

Recov
- Subsurface stratification/profile
er
- Material classification & variability
Sampl
- Laboratory tests
e

In-situ - Allow in-situ tests down hole (profiling)


Testin - Direct measurement of ground
g behaviours

- Allow monitoring instruments installed down hole


Monitorin
g

31
Direct Method – Boring, Sampling,
In-situ & Laboratory Testing
Medical Applications
- Biopsy sampling

Geotechnical Applications
- Boring, Trial Pitting & Sampling
• Thin-walled, Piston Sampler
• Mazier Sampler
• Block Sample
-In-situ Testing
• SPT, MP, CPTu, VST, PMT, DMT,
PLT,
• Permeability Test
• Field Density Test
-Laboratory Testing
• Classification Test
• Compressibility Test
(Oedometer/Swell)
• Strength Test (UU/UCT/CIU/DS)
• Permeability Test
• Compaction Test
• Chemical Test (pH, Cl, SO4, Redox,
Organic Content) 32
• Petrography & XRD
Indirect Method – Geophysical
Survey
Medical Applications
- X-ray, Computer Tomography & MRI
- Ultra-sound

-Geotechnical Applications
Geophysical Survey
- Electromagnetic Waves
(Permeability, Conductivity &
Permittivity)
- Mechanical Wave
(Attenuation, S-waves & P-waves)
• Resistivity Method
• Microgravity Method
• Transient Electro-Magnetic
Method
• Ground Penetration Radar
• Seismic Method
33
Santamarina, J. C. (2008) - http://www.elitepco.com.tw/ISC3/images/Keynote-03-Santamarina.pdf
Geophysical Survey
• Merits
• Lateral variability (probing location)
• Profiling (sampling & testing)
• Sectioning (void detection)
• Material classification
• Engineering parameters (G0 &
Gdynamic)
• Problems
•Over sale/expectation
•Misunderstanding between
engineers, engineering
geologists & geophysicists
•Lack of communication
•Wrong geophysical technique
used
•Interference/noice

34
Sampler
Split Spoon
Thin-Walled
Piston Sampler
Mazier Sampler
Core Barrel
Wire-line

35
Sampler
Split Spoon
Thin-Walled
Piston Sampler
Mazier Sampler
Core Barrel
Wire-line

36
Sampler
Split Spoon
Thin-Walled
Piston Sampler
Mazier Sampler
Core Barrel
Wire-line

37
Sampler
Split Spoon
Thin-Walled
Piston Sampler
Mazier Sampler
Core Barrel
Wire-line

38
Sampler
Split Spoon
Thin-Walled
Piston Sampler
Mazier Sampler
Core Barrel
Wire-line

39
Sampler
Split Spoon
Thin-Walled
Piston Sampler
Mazier Sampler
Core Barrel
Wire-line

40
Sample Storage, Handling,
Transportation

41
Sample Preparation

42
Sampling
• Sample Sizes
• Representative mass Before During After
(particle sizes, fabric, Stress relief Stress relief Stress relief
fissures, joints) Swelling Remoulding Moisture
• Adequate quantity for migration

testing Compaction Displacement Extrusion


Displacement Shattering Moisture loss
• Sample Disturbance
Base heave Stone at Heating
• Stress conditions cutting shoe
• Deformation behaviours Piping Mixing or Vibration
segregation
• Moisture content & void Caving Poor recovery Contamination
• Chemical characteristics
Clayton et al (1982)

43
Sample Disturbance
ƒ Poor recovery
à Longer rest period for sample
swelling
à Slight over-sampling
à Use of sample retainer
ƒ Sample contamination

44
Sample Quality Classification
Soil Properties
Sample
Quality Classificatio Moisture
Density Strength Deformation
Consolidatio
n Content n

Class 1 9 9 9 9 9 9
Class 2 9 9 9 2 2 2
Class 3 9 9 2 2 2 2
Class 4 9 2 2 2 2 2
Class 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 45
In-situ Tests

Piezocone (CPTu)

46
In-Situ Tests
• BS1377 : Part 9
• Suitable for materials with difficulty in sampling
• Very soft & sensitive clay
• Sandy & Gravelly soils
• Weak & Fissured soils
• Fractured rocks
• Interpretation
• Empirical
• Semi-empirical
• Analytical

47
Applicability of In-situ Tests
Test K0 φ’ Cu σc E’/G Eu Gmax k
SPT G C R G C G
CPT/CPTu G C G
DMT G, C G
PMT C G, R C
PLT C G, R C
VST C
Seismic G, C,
SBPMT G, C G C G, C R

Falling/ G
Rising Head Test
Constant Head C
TestTest
Packer R

Clayton , et al (1995) G = granular, C = cohesive, R 48


In-situ Tests

49
In-situ Tests
Pressuremeter (PMT)

50
In-situ Tests
Dilatometer (DMT)

51
Instrumentation Monitoring
• Inclinometer
• Extensometer Toward River

• Rod Settlement Gauge/Marker


• Piezometer
• Observation Well

52
Laboratory Tests

53
Source : Life Style Magazine - EDGE 54
Ground Characterisation
Focus of Geological Model

Historical
Stratificatio Geological Weathering Hydrogeology
n Processes

Geological Geo-
Structures morpholog
y
55
Geological Mapping
Mapping of :
- Geological features (Structural - Geomorphology
settings) - Lithology
- Weathering profile - Stratification
- Outcrop exposure
- Seepage conditions

56
Ground Characterisation
Focus of Geotechnical Model

Subsurfa
Strength Stiffness Permeability
ce Profile

Chemical
Material
Characteristi
Type
cs
57
58
59
General Dilemma of GI Industry
• Lack of pride & ƒ Financial survival
appreciation from problem due to
consultant/client in GI competitive rates in
industry. uncontrolled environment
(Cutting corner)
• Actions done is
considered work done! ƒ No appropriate time
Poor professionalism. frame for proper work
procedures (shoddy
works)

ƒ Shifting of skilled expert


to Oil & Gas or other
attractive industries
60
Poor Planning & Interpretation
ƒ Inadequate investigation
coverage vertically &
horizontally
ƒ Wrong investigating tools
ƒ No/wrong interpretation
ƒ Poor investigating sequence

61
Poor Site Implementation
ƒ Lack of level & coordinates of probing
location

ƒ Sample storage, handling,


transportation

ƒ Inappropriate equilibrium state in


Observation Well & Piezometer
62
Poor In-situ & Laboratory Results
ƒ Lack of calibration ƒ Equipment calibration
ƒ Wear & Tear Errors (Variation of pH Values)
ƒ Equipment systematic ƒ Improper sample
error (rod friction, preparation
electronic signal drift, ƒ Inadequate saturation
unsaturated porous tip)
ƒ Inappropriate testing rate
ƒ Defective sensor
ƒ Inadequate QA/QC in
ƒ Inappropriate testing testing processes
procedures
ƒ Inherent sample
disturbance before
testing
63
Poorly Maintained Tools

64
Over-confidence in Geophysics
- We detect everything, but indentify almost nothing
(Rich but Complex).
- Geophysical data is rich in content, but very complex in
nature.
- Not a unique solution in tomographic reconstruction
(Indirect method)
- Poor remuneration to land geophysicist as compared to O&G
- Poor investigation specification
- Lack of good interpretative skill (human capital)
- High capital costs in equipment & software investment

65
Communication Problem

We are connecting the bridge


deck at the same level
successfully!

66
Difficulties in Identification of
Complex Geological Settings

67
Difficulties in Identification of
Complex Geological Settings

68
Weathering Profile
ƒ Deviation of material classification between
borehole and excavation
(Claim issue –
Soil or Rock ?)

69
Complexity of Rock Mass
ƒ Properties
Complicated rock mass strength in slope & excavation
design
ƒ Requiring judgement (involving subjectivity)
ƒ Information normally only available during construction a
⎡ ⎛σ 3' ⎞ ⎤
σ 1 ' = σ 3 ' + σ u ⎢mb ⎜ ⎟ + s⎥
⎢⎣ ⎜⎝ σ u ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦

70
Unexpected Blowout of Underground
Gas
ƒ Gas pockets at 32m
bgl
ƒ Flushing out of sand

71
Supervision

ƒ Assurance of work compliance


ƒ Critical information is captured without missing
ƒ Timely on-course instruction for sampling, in-
situ testing & termination as most GI
specifications are general in nature, but ground
is unpredictable.
ƒ Checking between field records and reported
information
ƒ Work certification
72
Future Trend - Electronic Data
Collection, Transfer & Management
• AGS data transfer format & AGS-
M format (monitoring data)
• First Edition in 1992,
AGS(1992)
• Second Edition in 1994,
AGS(1994)
• Third Edition in 1999
• Advantages :
• Efficient & Simplicity
• Minimised human error
• GI & Monitoring Data
Management System
• Record keeping
• Spatial data analysis

http://www.ags.org.uk/site/datatransfer/intro.cfm 73
Conclusions

ƒ Nature of GI works & Geotechnical design


(Uncertainties)
ƒ Role of Geotechnical Engineer, Engineering
Geologist & Geophysicist
ƒ Stages of GI works (Planning, Implementation,
Interpretation & Report)
ƒ Specifications
ƒ Methodology of GI (Merits & Demerits)
à Fieldworks (Direct/Indirect) + Geological Mapping
à Laboratory tests
ƒ Common Problems & Future Trend

74
References
Anon (1999). “Definition of Geotechnical Engineering”. Ground Engineering, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 39.

BSI (1981). “Code of Practice for Site Investigation, BS 5930”. British Standards Institution, London.

BSI (1981). “Code of Practice for Earthworks, BS 6031”. British Standards Institution, London.

BSI (1986). “Code Practice for Foundation, BS8004”. British Standards Institution, London.

BSI (1990). “British Standard Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes, BS 1377”. British
Standards Institution, London.

Clayton, C. R. I., Matthews, M. C. & Simons, N. E. (1995). “Site Investigation”, Blackwell Science, 2nd
edition.

Gue, S. S. & Tan, Y. C. (2005), “Planning of Subsurface Investigation and Interpretation of Test Results
for Geotechnical Design”, Sabah Branch, IEM.

Liew, S. S. (2005). “Common Problems of Site Investigation Works in a Linear Infrastructure Project”,
IEM-MSIA Seminar on Site Investigation Practice, 9 August 2005, Armada Hotel, Kuala Lumpur.

European Group Subcommittee (1968). “Recommended method of Static and Dynamic Penetration Tests
1965”. Geotechnique, Vol. 1, No. 1.
75
References
FHWA (2002), “Subsurface Investigations — Geotechnical Site Characterization”. NHI Course No.
132031. Publication No. FHWA NHI-01-031
GCO (1984). “Geotechnical Manual for Slopes”. Geotechnical Control Office, Hong Kong
GCO (1980). “Geoguide 2 : Guide to Site Investigation, Geotechnical Control Office, Hong Kong
Gue, S. S. (1985). “Geotechnical Assessment for Hillside Development”. Proceedings of the Symposium
on Hillside Development; Engineering Practice and Local By-Laws, The Institution of Engineers,
Malaysia.
Head, K. H. (1984). “Manual of Soil Laboratory testing”.
Morgenstern, N. R. (2000). “Common Ground”. GeoEng2000, Vol. 1, pp. 1-20.
Neoh, C. A. (1995). “Guidelines for Planning Scope of Site Investigation for Road Projects”. Public Works
Department, Malaysia
Ooi, T.A. & Ting, W.H. (1975). “The Use of a Light Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in Malaysia”. Proceeding
of 4th Southeast Asian Conference on Soil Engineering, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 3-62, 3-79
Ting, W.H. (1972). “Subsurface Exploration and Foundation Problems in the Kuala Lumpur Area”. Journal
of Institution of Engineers, Malaysia, Vol. 13, pp. 19-25
Santamarina, J. C. (2008). “The Geophysical Properties of Soils”, 3rd Int. Conf. on Site Characterisation,
Keynote Lecture No. 3, Taiwan.
Site Investigation Steering Group, “Without Site Investigation, Ground is a Hazard”, Part 1, Site 76
Investigation in Construction Thomas Telford Ltd
77

You might also like