Search

Numerical simulation of cone penetration testing using the Particle Finite Element Method In‐situ investigation methods, such as piezocone penetration testing, are increasingly used for site characterization due to their proven effectiveness, cost‐, and time‐efficiency. Further development of interpretation methods is subject of ongoing research activities, considering influencing factors such as partial drainage during test execution or microstructural bonding of the soil skeleton. In this paper, the two effects are investigated based on numerical simulations of piezocone penetration using the application G‐PFEM, which takes into account large deformations, soil‐structure interaction, and nonlinear constitutive behaviour. The results highlight the influence of partial drainage and microstructure on the measured tip resistance and pore water pressures, whereas different trends were observed. Furthermore, an in‐situ test conducted in postglacial, fine‐grained sediments was successfully recalculated, suggesting a possible approach to calibrate nonlinear constitutive models, which are commonly used for numerical analysis of geotechnical boundary value problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The challenge of soil classification – Possibilities and advantages of the cone penetration test Geotechnical reports, which include the classification of the subsoil, represent the basis for project planning and are often essential for awarding construction services. Various standards, such as the ISO 14688‐1 and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), are used in practice to characterize the soil based on its particle size distribution and plasticity. In contrast, indirect classifications by means of cone penetration tests are based on soil behaviour type charts. In this paper, classification systems based on the physical properties of soils (ISO 14688‐1, USCS) and in‐situ tests are compared at different test and construction sites. The results indicate that soil behaviour type charts according to Robertson (2009, 2016) and Schneider et al. (2008) are suitable for estimating particle size distributions in alpine deposits, even though a better agreement is reached in fine‐grained soils with the USCS, compared to the ISO 14688‐1. Alternative classifications were elaborated for these soil behavior type charts, leading to an improved estimation of the particle size distribution. Further results illustrate that the estimation of particle size distribution by geotechnical engineers requires great experience in fine‐grained soils and can vary significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]