Site Investigation

E X T R A H A N D O U T

BFC 43103 | Sem 1 2013/2014 JKIG, FKAAS, UTHM

drknmy@2013

drknmy@2013

Extra Handout 1

Site Investigation

Table 1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Soil

Exploration Methods (Budhu, 2010)

drknmy@2013

Figure 1: Auger Boring (Jack and Evett, 2008)

Figure 2: Flight Auger Boring (Atkinson, 1993)

drknmy@2013

Figure 3: Test Pit (Jack and Evett, 2008)

Figure 4: Percussion Drilling (Atkinson, 1993)

drknmy@2013

Figure 5: Rotary Drilling (Craig, 2004)

drknmy@2013

Figure 6: Rotary Drilling Rig (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 7: (a) Short-flight auger, (b) continuous-flight auger,

(c) bucket auger and (d) Iwan (hand) auger

(Craig, 2004)

Figure 8: Hollow-stem auger (a) Plugged while advancing the

auger, and (b) plug removed and sampler inserted

to sample soil below augern (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 9: (a) Percussion boring rig, (b) shell, (c) clay cutter

and (d) chisel (Craig, 2004)

Figure 10: Wash Boring (Craig, 2004)

drknmy@2013

Figure 11: Wash Boring (Atkinson. 1993)

Figure 12: Wash Boring (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 13: (a) Open drive sampler, (b) thin-walled sampler,

(c) split-barrel sampler and (d) stationary piston

sampler (Craig, 2004)

drknmy@2013

Figure 14: Mechanical Cone Penetrometer Tip (Dutch

Mantle cone): (a) Collapsed, and

(b) extended (Jack and Evett, 2008)

(c) (d)

Figure 15: Mechanical Friction-cone penetrometer tip

(Begemann friction cone): (c) collapsed;

(d) extended (Jack and Evett, 2008)

drknmy@2013

Figure 16: Static Cone Penetration Testing Equipment

(Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 17: Driving Sequence in an SPT Test (Budhu, 2010)

Figure 18: Split barrel sampler for Standard Penetration Test

(Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 19: Thin Wall Tube Shelby Tube Sampler

(Murthy, 2002)

Figure 20: Osterberg Piston Sampler (a) Sampler is set in drilled hole, (b) Sample tube is pushed hydraulically into the soil, (c) Pressure is released through hole in piston rod (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 21: Probing Tests (Craig, 2004)

Figure 22: In Situ Loading Tests (Craig, 2004)

drknmy@2013

Figure 23: Vane Shear Tester (Budhu, 2010)

Figure 24: Schematic diagram of core barrels (a) Single tube,

(b) Double tube (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 25: Seismic Reflaction Test (Jack and Evett, 2008)

drknmy@2013

Figure 26: Electrode Configuration for Electrical Resistivity

Test (Jack and Evett, 2008)

Figure 27: Representative Electrode Positions during a

Sequence of Sounding Measurements

(the position of the center of the spread is fixed)

(Jack and Evett, 2008)

drknmy@2013

Figure 28: Components of Menard pressuremeter

(Murthy, 2002)

Figure 29: Illustration of a flat plate dilatometer (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 30: Suggested Depths of Boreholes (Murthy, 2002)

drknmy@2013

Figure 31: Arrangement for vane test, from bottom of bore

Hole (Venkatramaiah, 2006)

Site Investigation

E X T R A H A N D O U T

BFC 43103 | Sem 1 2013/2014 JKIG, FKAAS, UTHM

drknmy@2013