site investigation - weebly · drknmy@2013 extra handout 1 site investigation table 1: advantages...
TRANSCRIPT
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
