Laserfiche WebLink
Gregg In Situ, Inc. SECOR <br /> January 14, 1998 SFFB, Stockton, CA <br /> 3.0 CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION <br /> The cone penetration test data are presented in graphical form in the attached <br /> Appendix. Penetration depths are referenced to existing ground surface. The data <br /> include CPT logs of measured soil parameters and interpreted soil types along with <br /> pore pressure dissipation plots. <br /> The stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone bearing (Qc), <br /> sleeve friction (Fs), and penetration pore pressure (Ut). The friction ratio (Rf), which is <br /> sleeve friction divided by cone bearing, is a calculated parameter which is used to infer <br /> soil behavior type. Generally, cohesive soils (clays) have high friction ratios, low cone <br /> bearing and generate large excess pore water pressures, Cohesionless soils (sands) <br /> have lower friction ratios, high cone bearing and generate little in the way of excess <br /> pore water pressures. <br /> Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT's) were taken at various intervals in order to <br /> measure hydrostatic water pressures and approximate depth to groundwater table. In <br /> addition, the PPDT data can be used to estimate the horizontal permeability (ko of the <br /> soil. The correlation to permeability is based on the time required for 50 percent of the <br /> measured dynamic pore pressure to dissipate (t54). A summary of the PPDT data is <br /> provided in Table 2. The PPDT plots and correlation figure are provided in the <br /> Appendix. <br /> Table 2 Summary of Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests <br /> Test Location PPDT Test Depth Time for 50% Dissipation <br /> (t5o} <br /> CPT-01 44.78 ft 60 sec <br /> { 80.54 ft 35 sec <br /> l CPT-02 31.82 ft 40 sec <br /> 82.51 ft 18 sec <br /> CPT-03 42.81 ft 50 sec <br /> 47.74 ft 5 sec <br /> 91.70 ft 240 sec <br /> The interpretation of soils encountered on this project was carried out using recent <br /> correlations developed by Robertson and Campanella, 1988. It should be noted that it <br /> ( is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based on Qc, Fs and Ut. In these <br /> 5 <br /> f <br />