PAW, Mayne eal. /Geomaterial Behavior and Testing am Mechanical Laboralory-Testing Methods gieeate(sp he” Be3e: eae as Se emrmoss (| | igure 1.4 Laboratory testing devices fr sil parameter determination. budget and considerable time for experimentation, in order to acquire and test sufficient samples and obtain the data In most cases, each of the soil engineering parameters has been defined on the basis of laboratory reference tess. Towards these goals, the geotechnical profession has devised many apparatuses, with a selection presented in Figure 1.4, Only mechanical type measurements for Sols are considered herein, tnd tests for chemical an electrieal properties are not included, ‘Tests for mechanical and hydraulic characterization of geosyntheties are also not included in the figure. The higher end laboratory devices presume that a representative, “undisturbed” specimen has been carefully oblained from the field sampling operations. Only then will the interpreted results resemblance 10 a soil element in the subsurface regime. It likely, however, that some degree of sample disturbance hy occurred during procurement of these geomaterils, T issues of y the insertion probes and widgets that measure a reaction of the soil that inerpreted into a geotechnical parameter directly. Moreover, a good number of innovative and clever in-sil hile stil situated in the ground, as depicted inh Figure 1.5. Foreach instrument, a different measurement on one for more aspects of soil behavior can be deduced, depending upon the method of insertion, direction of loading, strain rat, ‘device geometry, duration of testing, and other factors. In-Situ Testing. Methods = SS SSS Figure 1.5 Inst fil probes for evaluating sil parameter Standardized test procedures. should be followed so that ‘consistent results are obtained among various users. Within a sven country, standards may be imposed by the government, ‘usually ata national evel, or also by the state or province. On a new. general hata, tanita fe feafing aedl moe trickles field and laboratory conditions are given by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the Standards are generally employed in North American practice, or similar procedures produced for the European Union (CEN) or International Standards Organization (ISO). A summary of ‘common ASTM procedures for laboratory and field testing of soils and rocks is given in Mayne et al. 2002). A summary of common ASTM. procedures for laboratory testing of _geosynthetics is given in Zornberg & Christopher (2007). LU Experimentation Sites (Of particular value towards the understanding soil behavior and the. interpretation of test data has been the advent of ‘geotechnical test sites (e-8, Benoft & Lutenegger 2000). Recent symposia held in Singapore produced four volumes on the theme: Characterization and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils. In these proceedings, technical papers summarize the cffonts of various prominent geotechnical research institutions And universities in the detailed field and laboratory testing of 60 different geomaterals, each within a particular geotogie setting ‘of a country. These locations are hereforth termed international {geotechnical experimentation sites (IGES). In_all eases, the IGES research programs have been underway for many years, ‘often many decades, with most having not yet fully answered all of the behaviora) sb at particular sol formation, Ft seate ur 1.6. Various paths to iterpretation of in-situ tests One exam ml mT and researched by the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute sinee 1956 (Lunne et al. 2003), Note that a number of other well- documented sites exist that were not included in this set of proceedings yet would certainly qualily for IGES status, for instance the Saugus, Massachusetts site underlain by” the infamous Boston Blue Clay (Whitle et a. 2001). In the USA, six national test sites have been established (Benoit & Lutenezger, 2000), yet only 2 ofthese are considered within the aforementioned 60 IGES. Worth a final mention is another likely prospect for an IGES at the Canadian national test site in Gloucester, Ontario that is underlain by the well-known Champlain Sea sensitive clays and has been subjected to geotechnical research for almost 60 years (MeRostie & Crawford 2001), ‘The geotechnical experimentation sites are of great value ‘because many different types of measurements are taken inthe ‘same geomaterials in the same vicinity and location, hopefully ‘minimizing Hssues of Variability. It is possible here to obiain