Correlation of Soil Properties with SPT

[bdbd]

I have many books that contain some correlations of soil properties with each other or SPT. But they are not enough. I always use tens of books for a project.

Do you know any book that contains most correlations?

Don't say Burt Look.

 

[fattdad]

refer to CGPR publication #12. The Center for Geotechnical Practice and Research is at Virginia Tech.

f-d

ípapß gordo ainÆt no madre flaca!

 

[bdbd]

fd,

Sorry to ask, but do you have the PDF file? My university access does not cover this and I couldn't find any resource other than paid one. If you don't have PDF, I will delete my post.

 

[fattdad]

Yes, as a member of CGPR I do have pdf copies of all their publications. In my role at the state DOT though, I'm unwilling to forward my pdf copies. Not sure if there is free access on the internet.

f-d

ípapß gordo ainÆt no madre flaca!

 

[bdbd]

I have checked with them, no, university access does not cover their publications. I am a MS student, so I do not have the chance to purchase. So, if you will not forward only one publication, I have to search for another source.

 

[L0k]

Go to Foundation Analysis and Design 5th Edition by JE Bowles

 

[oldestguy]

Then some "do-gooder" will come along and say you have to work with different numbers to allow for efficiency or lack there of in the machine's method. Leaving "well-enough" alone doesn't seem to be in their way of working. Good luck.

 

[BigH]

Try Manual for Estimating Soil Properties for Foundation Design by Kulhawy and Mayne (Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI EL-6800). Can also try Hunt's Book "Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Handbook".

 

[oldestguy]

Take a look at these references. Particularly the idea of "correcting" SPT results depending on efficiency.

http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu/ltc_09/pdf/Fernandez, Benjamin.pdf

http://wisconsindot.gov/dtsdManuals/strct/manuals/bridge/ch10.pdf

I view "correcting" SPT figures as wishful thinking, since many older texts and charts worked well knowing the inefficiency of the method. Why take "corrected" values to an old table based on actual field numbers? It's a crude test and fooling with it can only confuse folks.

 

[BigH]

I agree OG - in that most of the charts just used the straight-up values in the field regardless of the energy efficiency - most of them were obviously developed with the cat-head - 1-1/2 to 2 wraps. I think that more recent correlations,though, as with seismic/liquefaction, such energy corrections are necessary - in that the charts are based more on knowing the energies and standardizing it.

 

[bdbd]

This is the problem with this forum. When you ask something, everyone starts with some basics, but never an answer to your question.

Oldestguy, I KNOW the topics about correcting SPT. I always check for the formulation's SPT Energy Value etc. As you can see, that was not my question.

Others, thank you. I used some different resources.

 

[oldestguy]

OK Burt, if you open the door with a vague question, wide open to interpretation, don't be surprised at what happens. Exaggerating as to number of reference books on hand means what in regard to the "question"? Who knows your level of experience in such a case, in particular with respect to energy transfer down a string of drill rods affecting that SPT value. Also why is a book needed when many times technical papers have the scoop that applies directly to a changing technology situation not generally suitable for a reference book? So, I'll answer the question directly, NO. However, I'd do a Google search in detail for "Books on SPT Correlations" before asking here. I did and there appear to be a few.

 

[BigH]

Beberkdemir - I am a few years from retirement age - a few too close .. . no need to shout at OldestGuy or any of us . . . he has more experience that you and I combined (and I am assuming you are under the age of 40).

 

[bdbd]

No disrespect to oldestguy or any of you. If I told my feelings wrong, I am sorry. Please accept my apologies.

What I wanted to tell was, for example, if someone asks me clay's bearing capacity, I will them c*Nc, that's all. If he needs further explanations, I will continue with relation of bearing capacity and slope stability analysis, Vesic etc.

I wrote a lot of explanations, but I deleted to be not disrespectful again.

Greetings

 

[oldestguy]

Hey Burt, no problem. I probably misinterpreted the question. Actually deleted some that came out too quickly. BigH probably is biased, since we both came from Cornell. My 1951 BS is dated before his. When guys brag about their years of experience, it really is just a sign of old age.

On the question, it is my general feeling that some of those older tables and charts are based more upon professional opinions rather than actual tests out in the field, but they seem to work. I think the work of Hough admittedly is so since he used the words "Presumptive Allowable Bearing Capacity" and made reference to building codes.

 

[moe333]

For about 20 Euros, you can purchase software that has a large database of SPT correlations (Geologismiki; SPTCor)