The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration - 1st Edition - ISBN: 9780444409768, 9780444599360

The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration, Volume 1

1st Edition

Authors: G. Sanglerat
eBook ISBN: 9780444599360
Imprint: Elsevier Science
Published Date: 1st January 1982
Tax/VAT will be calculated at check-out
File Compatibility per Device

PDF, EPUB, VSB (Vital Source):
PC, Apple Mac, iPhone, iPad, Android mobile devices.

Amazon Kindle eReader.

Institutional Access

Table of Contents




Chapter 1. History of the Penetrometer

1.1 Origin and Characteristics

1.2 The Dutch Static Penetrometers (Goudsche Machinefabriek)

1.3 The Frankipfahl Static Penetrometer (Germany)

1.4 American Pocket Penetrometers

1.4.1 Measurement of Soil Trafficability Factors by Cone Penetrometer

1.4.2 Solltest Pocket Penetrometer

1.5 The Sol-Essais (Parez) Static Penetrometer (France)

1.6 The Degebo Static Penetrometer (Germany)

1.7 The G.C. Static Penetrometer (Belgium)

1.8 The Recording Static Penetrometer (U.S.A.)

1.9 The Franki Static Penetrometer (Belgium)

1.10 The Soletanche Static Penetrometer (France)

1.11 The Fugro Electric-Static Penetrometer (The Netherlands)

1.12 The Penetrometers of C.E.B.T.P. (France)

1.12.1 Static Penetrometers

1.12.2 Light-Duty Dynamic Penetrometer

1.12.3 Heavy-Duty C.E.B.T.P. Dynamic Penetrometer

1.12.4 Borro Dynamic Penetrometer

1.12.5 Multi-Purpose Penetrometer

1.12.6 Static-Dynamic Penetrometer

1.13 The Electric Static Penetrometer of the Ponts et Chaussées Laboratory at Saint Brieuc (France)

1.14 The B.M.E.E. Light Penetrometer (Great Britain)

1.15 The American Static Penetrometer

1.16 The N.B.R.I. Static Penetrometer (South Africa)

1.17 The Australian Static Penetrometers

1.18 The Russian Penetrometers

1.18.1 Soviet Lunar Penetrometer

1.18.2 Dynamic Russian Penetrometers

1.18.3 Static Sounding Rigs

1.18.4 Static Russian Penetrometers S-979 and S-832

1.19 The Bulgarian Static Penetrometer

1.20 Remarks on the Static Penetrometer

1.21 The Fondasol Dynamic Penetrometer (France)

1.22 The Sermes Dynamic Penetrometer (France)

1.23 The Dynatest (France)

1.24 The Swedish Penetrometers

1.24.1 The Swedish Weight-Sounding Method

1.24.2 Rapid Sounding Method

1.24.3 The Swedish Ram-Sounding Method

1.24.4 The Electrical-Recording Borro Penetrometer

1.24.5 The S.G.I, Sounding Machine

1.24.6 The Jonell and Nilsson Static Penetrometer

1.24.7 The Asond Electric Penetrometer

1.24.8 Investigations with Different Rod Types

1.24.9 Investigations with Different Sounding Points

1.24.10 Swedish Standards Sounding Tests

1.25 The Danish Penetrometer

1.26 Critical Considerations on the Dynamic Penetrometer

1.27 The Swiss Penetrometers

1.27.1 The Haefeli-Fehlmann Static-Dynamic Penetrometer

1.27.2 The Manual and Semi-Automatic Bevac Dynamic Penetrometers

1.28 The Jangot-Bonneton Static-Dynamic Penetrometer (France)

1.29 The Meurisse Static-Dynamic Penetrometer (France)

1.30 The Andina Static-Dynamic Penetrometer (Switzerland and France)

1.31 Graphical Representation of Penetrometer Tests

1.31.1 Static Penetrometers

1.31.2 Dynamic Penetrometers

1.31.3 Static-Dynamic Penetrometers

1.32 Recommendations of the International Commission

1.32.1 Recommended Procedures for the Static and Dynamic Penetration Test

1.32.2 Recommendations for the Method of the Standard Penetration Test (S.P.T.)

Chapter 2. General Theory

2.1 Preliminary Evaluation of the Diagrams and Soil Classification

2.1.1 Homogeneous Soils

2.1.2 Heterogeneous Soils

2.2 Deep Foundations

2.2.1 Case of an Incompressible Layer

2.2.2 Case of an Instantaneously Compressible Layer

2.3 Shallow Footings

2.4 Dynamic-Penetrometer Tests

2.5 Settlement Forecast

Chapter 3. The De Beer Theory for the Interpretation of Penetrometer Test Data

3.1 Shallow Foundations

3.2 Incipient Failure Conditions Under Shallow Footings

3.3 Cohesionless Soils

3.4 Cohesive Soils

3.5 Interpretation of the Penetrometer Diagrams

3.5.1 Shallow Foundations

3.5.2 Deep Foundations

3.6 Comparison Between the Belgian and the Early French Theories

3.6.1 Practical Applications: Sand and Gravel of Rennes (France)

3.6.2 Practical Applications: Ghent-Bruges Sands (Belgium)

3.7 Notes Pertaining to Deep Foundations

Chapter 4. KeriseVs Theory

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Dense Granular Soils

4.3 Loose and Medium Dense Granular Soils

4.4 Cohesive Soils

4.5 Conclusions

Chapter 5. Dutch Theories Developed at the Delft Laboratory

5.1 Pile Foundation Design Based on Penetrometer Test Data

5.2 Experimental Research in Delft

5.3 Practical Applications of the Delft Laboratory Method

5.4 Research on the Skin Friction as Determined From Static-Penetrometer Tests

5.5 Tests Performed in The Netherlands

5.6 Effects of Vertical Heterogeneity of Soils - Geuze's Law

Chapter 6. Static Penetrometers in the U.S.A. and Canada

6.1 Research by A.S. Vesic (U.S. A.)

6.2 Tests of C.L. Crowther (U.S.A.)

6.3 Research by J.H. Schmertmann (U.S.A.)

6.4 Tests of Y.Lacroix (U.S.A.)

6.4.1 Compacted Fills

6.4.2 In situ Soil

6.5 Canadian Tests

Chapter 7. Side Friction and Skin Friction

7.1 Measurements of Side Friction

7.1.1 Accumulated Side Friction

7.1.2 Local Side Friction ƒs Measured on a Sleeve

7.2 Cohesionless Soils

7.3 Cohesive Soils

7.3.1 General

7.3.2 Cohesion

7.3.3 Determination of Cohesion with the Static Penetrometer

7.3.4 Experiments of Liems (Columbia)

7.3.5 Experimental Verification of Cohesion Values

7.3.6 Sol-Essais Tests (France)

7.4 Soil Classification by Determination of Side Friction ƒs and Point Resistance qc with Static Penetrometers

7.4.1 Evaluation of Local Side Friction ƒs from Point Resistance qc

7.4.2 Comparison of ƒs'qc and the Ratio F (= fs/qc)

Chapter 8. The Dynamic Penetrometer

8.1 Tests with Dynamic Penetrometers Fitted with a Cone

8.1.1 Dynamic Penetrometer where Shaft and Point have the Same Diameter

8.1.2 Dynamic Penetrometer where Shaft Diameter is Smaller than Cone Diameter

8.1.3 Dynamic Penetrometer whose Shaft Diameter is Smaller than that of the Cone but Whose Outer Moveable Shaft Diameter is the Same as that of the Cone

8.1.4 Remarks on Dynamic Penetration

8.2 Interpretation of Dynamic-Penetration Tests for Shallow Foundations

8.2.1 Cohesionless Soils (φ ≠ 0 and c = 0)

8.2.2 Cohesive Soils (φ ≠ 0 and c ≠ 0)

8.2.3 Soils Having both φ ≠ 0 and c ≠ 0

8.2.4 Conclusion

8.3 Theories for the Interpretation of Dynamic-Penetrometer Diagrams for Deep Foundations

8.3.1 Fundamental Equation

8.3.2 First Approximation

8.3.3 Second Approximation

8.4 Experiences in the Lyons Area with Sand and Gravel Mixtures

8.5 Heavy- and Light-Duty Dynamic Penetrometers

8.6 The Dynamic Penetrometer and the Driving of Sheet Piles

8.7 Particular Dynamic-Penetrometer Method for Determining Soil Parameters

8.7.1 Aircraft-Launched Penetrometer

8.7.2 The Penevane (Grenoble, France)

8.8 Precautions to be Observed During Dynamic Penetration of Cohesive Soils

8.8.1 Difficulties Encountered

8.8.2 Studies of the "Ecole Centrale Lyonnaise" and the "Institut National des Sciences Appliquées", Lyons (France)

8.8.3 Conclusions

Chapter 9. The Standard Penetration Test and the Static Penetrometer

9.1 Standard Penetration Test (S.P.T.)

9.1.1 Cohesionless Soils

9.1.2 Footings on Clay Soils

9.2 Limitations on the Use of the S.P.T.

9.3 The Various Types of Standard Penetration Test

9.4 Experience of the Bureau of Reclamation (Denver, Colo.)

9.5 Thesis of Bazaraa

9.5.1 Effect of Submergence

9.5.2 Effect of Overburden Pressure on Standard Penetration Values in Sands

9.6 Comparison Between the S.P.T. and the Static-Penetrometer Test

9.6.1 Meyerhof's Estimates for Fine or Silty Sand

9.6.2 Brazilian Experiences

9.6.3 Tests Performed in Portugal

9.6.4 Tests Performed in Mozambique

9.6.5 Spanish Experiences

9.6.6 Tests Performed in India

9.6.7 Conclusions

9.7 Meyerhof's Theory

9.7.1 Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Shallow Footings

9.7.2 Bearing Capacity of Pile Foundations

9.7.3 Conclusions

9.8 Israeli Experiences

9.8.1 Experiences of Alpan

9.8.2 Experiences of Zolkov and Wiseman

9.9 Notes on the Use of S.P.T. in South America and Spain

9.9.1 Argentina

9.9.2 Venezuela

9.9.3 Spain

Chapter 10. Discussions

10.1 Introduction

10.2 Raedschelders' Comments on Intermittent or Continuous Static Penetration (Belgium)

10.3 L'Herminier's and Tcheng's Experiences (France)

10.4 Static Penetrometer Tests in Chalk Deposits

10.4.1 Paris Area

10.4.2 Mons Area (Belgium)

10.4.3 Portsmouth Area (Great Britain)

10.5 Tests Performed in Turkey

10.6 Brasilian Tests

10.7 Tests Performed in Yugoslavia

10.8 German Experiences

10.8.1 Bremen

10.8.2 Aachen

10.8.3 Statistical Research of Menzenbach

10.8.4 Research of Muhs in Berlin

10.9 Bulgarian Tests

10.10 Australian Experiences

10.11 Experiences in Venezuela

10.12 Investigations Performed for Belawan Harbor (Sumatra)

10.13 British Experiences

10.13.1 Tests of Golder

10.13.2 Research by Thomas

10.13.3 Experience of Meigh and Corbett

10.14 Italian Tests

10.15 Penetration Tests in the U.S.S.R

10.16 Swedish Method of Interpretation of Penetration Diagrams

10.17 In situ Measurements of Sand Porosity

10.18 South African Tests

10.19 Correlations Between Static Penetrometer and Pressuremeter

10.19.1 Tests of Van Wambeke (Belgium)

10.19.2 Laboratory Tests of Ponts-et-Chaussées (France)

10.19.3 Israeli Research

10.19.4 Tests of Fondasol (France)

10.19.5 Research Performed by the "Ecole Centrale Lyonnaise" (France)

10.20 Jimenez Salas' Experiences (Spain)

10.21 Compaction Control with the Static Penetrometer

10.21.1 Tests Performed in Congo

10.21.2 Experience in the Lyons Area (France)

10.21.3 Control of the Vibroflotation Effects (South-Africa)

10.22 Driven Pile Length Determination from Static Penetrometer Diagrams

10.23 Required Depth of Soundings

10.24 Influence of Rate of Penetration and Point Diameter on the Point Resistance Value of the Static Penetrometer

10.24.1 Soft Clays

10.24.2 Stiff Clays

10.24.3 Saturated Silts

10.24.4 Loose Sands

10.24.5 Calcareous Loam

10.24.6 Conclusions

10.25 Penetration Tests in Japan

Chapter 11. The Static Penetrometer and the Prediction of Settlements

11.1 General Comments

11.1.1 Theory of Settlement Calculations

11.1.2 Settlements in Undisturbed, Normally Consolidated Clays

11.1.3 Undisturbed Overconsolidated Clays

11.2 Determining the Constant of Compressibility by Static Penetrometer

11.2.1 Sandy Soils: Buisman's Formula

11.2.2 Case of Cohesive Soils

11.3 Method of Determining the Correlation Between qc and Soil Compressibility (Research of E.C.L. and I.N.S.A., Lyons)

11.3.1 Basic Principle

11.3.2 Normally or Underconsolidated Soils

11.3.3 Overconsolidated Soils

11.3.4 Experimental Data

11.3.5 Soil Classification of Samples

11.4 Results of the Research Made at the "Ecole Centrale de Lyon" and the I.N.S.A. of Lyons (France)

11.4.1 Values of the α Coefficient

11.4.2 Correlations of qc,Cc and w

11.5 Practical Examples for Sands

11.6 Practical Examples for Clays

11.6.1 Preliminary Remarks

11.6.2 Problem no. 1

11.6.3 Problem no. 2

11.7 Experiences of Parez and Bachelier (France)

11.8 Delft Laboratory's Results

11.9 Comparison Between Reinforced Concrete Design and Soil Mechanics

11.9.1 French Specifications for Reinforced Concrete

11.9.2 British Specifications for Pre-Stressed Concrete

11.9.3 American Specifications for Reinforced Concrete

11.9.4 Spanish Specifications

11.9.5 Conclusion

11.10 Estimates of Settlements from S.P.T. Data

11.10.1 German Experiences

11.10.2 Israeli Tests

11.10.3 American Experiments

11.11 Research in Africa

11.11.1 South African Tests

11.11.2 Portugese Tests in Angola

11.12 Haefeli's Experiences (Switzerland)

11.13 English Experiences

11.13.1 Tests of Skempton and Meyerhof

11.13.2 Tests of Thomas

11.13.3 Research of Meigh and Corbett

11.14 Australian Tests

11.15 Theory of Schmertmann (U.S.A.)

11.15.1 Corrections of the Basic Assumptions of Strain Distribution

11.15.2 Correlation Between Static-Cone Bearing Capacity qc and Es Values to Use in Settlement Computations

11.15.3 Settlement Estimates

Chapter 12. Conclusions

12.1 Interpretation of Static-Penetration Diagrams

12.1.1 Soil Classification

12.1.2 Shallow Footings

12.1.3 Settlement Prediction for Shallow Footings

12.1.4 Deep Foundations

12.2 Interpretation of Dynamic Penetration Diagrams

12.2.1 Cohesionless Soils

12.2.2 Cohesive Soils

12.2.3 Static-Dynamic Penetrometer

12.2.4 Standard Penetration Test

12.3 Elementary Precautions to be Observed

12.3.1 Cost and Security

12.3.2 Equipment

12.3.3 Conclusions


A. A.S.T.M. Tentative Standard Method for Deep Quasi-Static-Cone Penetration Test

B. L'Herminier's Theory for the Interpretation of Penetration Test Data

C. Bearing-Capacity Factors

D. Curves of Equal Vertical Stresses Under a Continuous Footing and a Square Footing



The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration: Interpretation of Penetration Diagrams—Theory presents the many uses of the penetrometer for investigating soil conditions. Testing methods include the following: (1) in situ load tests on full-scale foundations; (2) laboratory testing of undisturbed samples, and (3) in situ testing of soils. The book regards the advantages of using the penetrometer as a handy tool in drilling and sampling. The text emphasizes that the investigator should never rely entirely on the analogy or the extrapolation of information pertaining to a nearby site. The text describes the different shapes of the penetrometer diagrams obtained from tests in homogeneous cohesionless soil, as well as the significance of the embedment of a pile into the bearing stratum for deep foundation designs. The paper discusses the De Beer theory, Kerisel's theory, and the theory developed at the Delft Laboratory of Soil Mechanics. The laboratory determines the maximum soil pressure and the corresponding embedment of the pile. According to Professor L'Herminier, "the bearing capacity of a pile may be determined...from laboratory tests on soil samples, the other by extrapolating penetrometer data." The book is suitable for structural engineers, civil engineers, geologists, architects, and students of soil mechanics.


© Elsevier Science 1972
Elsevier Science
eBook ISBN:


@qu:It contains a wealth of data and is obviously based on very extensive experience in the field. @source: Geophysics

About the Authors

G. Sanglerat Author