1333

Parameters deduced from the pressuremeter test

A. Fawaz, M. Boulon, and E. Flavigny

Abstract: This paper presents a study of the pressuremeter test and the results that can be obtained from this test.
Hostun’s fine sand was chosen as the material upon which to perform the experimental study of the pressuremeter. Nu-
merical simulations of the pressuremeter tests have been made with the commercially available PLAXIS software. The
numerical results have been compared with the experimental ones. The variation of the parameters resulting from an
applied surcharge was studied experimentally and numerically. Finally, the relationship between the magnitude of the
deformation and the pressuremeter modulus was analyzed.

Key words: sand, pressuremeter, triaxial, pressure, modulus, deformation, numerical simulation.
Résumé : Cet article présente une étude de l’essai pressiométrique et les principaux résultats qui peuvent être obtenus
de cet essai. Le sable fin d’Hostun a été choisi comme matériau pour réaliser l’étude expérimentale sur le pressiomètre.
Une simulation numérique de ces essais a été effectuée avec le logiciel PLAXIS. Les résultats numériques ont été com-
parés à ceux de l’expérience. Les variations des paramètres qui peuvent être déduits de l’essai en fonction de la sur-
charge appliquée ont été étudiées expérimentalement et numériquement. On étudie finalement, la relation entre
l’amplitude de déformation et la mesure de module pressiométrique.
Mots clés : sable, pressiomètre, triaxial, pression, module, déformation, simulation numérique.

Fawaz et al. 1340

Introduction tempted to include the effects of volume change in their

The information that can be deduced from the pressure-
meter test (such as the limit pressure and the pressuremeter
modulus) is considered to be the basis for foundation calcu-
lations. (Baguelin 1982, Gambin 1979)
The pressuremeter and its use has been described by
Ménard (1957, 1976) and Gibson and Anderson (1961). To
interpret the pressuremeter test and to derive some of the nu-
merical parameters that describe the stress–strain relation of
the soil, Ménard has assumed the soil to be elastic-perfectly
plastic and has proposed some empirical formulas for foun-
dation calculations, using the limit pressure and the
pressuremeter modulus derived from the test. He compared
Young’s modulus to the pressuremeter modulus and studied
the influence of the deformation on the measurement of the
pressuremeter modulus. This problem has also been reviewed
by Gambin et al. (1996).
Gibson and Anderson (1961) presented a method for
determining the angle of internal friction from the pressure-
meter test. The method is based on the assumption that
shearing takes place under conditions where there is no vol-
ume change. Both Ladanyi (1963) and Vesic (1972) at-
analysis. Hughes et al. (1977) proposed a method of deter-
mining both the friction angle and the dilatation angle from
the pressuremeter test, which deals more rigorously with the
dilatant behavior of sand.
To further enhance the knowledge of these subjects, the
results of a series of pressuremeter tests carried out at the 3S
Laboratory in Grenoble, France are presented in this study.
The variations of the parameters deduced from these
pressuremeter tests versus the applied surcharge was studied.
Hostun’s fine sand, whose behavior and mechanical parame-
ters have been studied through a series of triaxial tests, was
the material chosen for the tests. The variation of these pa-
rameters with the average stress is presented in this paper.
A numerical simulation of the pressuremeter tests was
carried out using the PLAXIS software, and the mechanical
parameters of the sand used in the calculations are deduced
from triaxial tests. The numerical results have been com-
pared with the experimental ones, and the variation of pa-
rameters deduced from the pressuremeter test with the
applied surcharge on the surface of the sand have been studied.

Received 4 September 2001. Accepted 21 August 2002.
Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at
http://cgj.nrc.ca on 6 November 2002.
A. Fawaz.1,2 Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble,
Laboratoire “Sols, Solides, Structures”, Grenoble, France.
M. Boulon and E. Flavigny. Université Joseph Fourier,
Laboratoire “Sols, Solides, Structures”, Grenoble, France.
1
Present address: Université Libanaise, Institut Universitaire
de Technologie, Saida, Liban.
2
Corresponding author (e-mail: alimfawaz@dm.net.lb).
Experimental study
Triaxial tests
The material used in the pressuremeter tests is fine
quartzic sand, extracted from Hostun’s quarry in Drôme,
France. This sand is frequently used in the 3S Laboratory in
Grenoble as a typical material for testing. (Colliat-Dangus
1986, Fawaz 1993, Mokrani 1991, Renoud-Lias 1978).
Moreover, a series of triaxial tests were performed to im-
prove the knowledge we had about the variation of the me-
chanical parameters with the average stress.

Can. J. Geotech. 39: 1333–1340 (2002) DOI: 10.1139/T02-099 © 2002 NRC Canada
1334 Can. J. Geotech. Vol. 39, 2002

Fig. 1. Variations of the internal friction angle with the confining Fig. 2. Variations of the initial tangent modulus of the triaxial
pressure. curve with the confining pressure.

This series of triaxial tests was carried out on samples Fig. 3. Variation of Poisson’s ratio with the confining pressure.
with a H/D ratio close to 2 (i.e., diameter, D, is 100 mm and
height, H, is 210 mm). The average specific weight was be-
tween 15 and 16 kN/m3, while the confining pressure ranged
between 10 and 400 kPa.
The results obtained from these triaxial tests are the varia-
tion of the angle of internal friction (Fig. 1), the initial tan-
gent modulus (Fig. 2), and Poisson’s ratio (Fig. 3) versus the
confining pressure (for more details concerning the triaxial
tests see Fawaz 1993).
Figure 1 shows that the angle of internal friction ϕ de-
creases with an increase in the average confining pressure;
on the other hand, the initial tangent modulus E increases
when the confining pressure increases (Fig. 2). Values of the
parameters of these tests are comparable to the ones found
by Colliat-Dangus (1986).
The relationship E = K(σ 3)n (Biarez 1962) between the
elastic modulus E and the average stress σ 3 is verified with
n = 0.83 and K = 398 (E and σ 3 are in MPa).

Pressuremeter tests

Experimental device
The sand pit used to perform the pressuremeter tests is a
cylindrical iron tank, 575 mm in diameter and 892 mm in
height. The filling and the gutting were done manually. The
compaction was done with an iron rod having a 214 mm di-
ameter metal disk at one of its ends. To surcharge the sur-
face of the sand, a rubber tube was rolled between the sand
surface and fixed plates. Then air was blown into the tube so
that pressure was applied (Fig. 4).
The pressuremeter probe used was a monocellular type
20 cm in length, L, and 4 cm in diameter, D, which means
that the L/D ratio is equal to 5. This L/D ratio is commonly
used in practice (Gambin 1990). The experimental device
(Fig. 4) was designed to allow the measurement of the dis-
placements in the soil during the pressuremeter test (Fawaz
et al. 2000).
Results and parameters obtained from the tests
Pressuremeter curves
Thirty-six expansion tests were conducted by imposing an
increase in volume of the probe at least equal to the initial
volume V0. The average specific weight of sand γ is calcu-
lated for each test according to the weight and volume of
sand in the tank. The average specific weight was found to
vary between 15 and 16 kN/m3. The load on the surface var-
ied between 13 and 32 kPa.

© 2002 NRC Canada

Fawaz et al.
Fig. 4. General layout of the experimental device (dimensions in cm).
For an average specific weight of the sand of about
15.5 kN/m3, the evolution of pressuremeter curves with the
applied vertical surcharge is shown in Fig. 5.
Conventional limit pressure
The pressuremeter tests were conducted until the cell vol-
ume became more than twice the initial volume, so that the
conventional limit pressure could be read directly from the
expansion curve.
For an average specific weight of sand of about 15.5 kN/m3,
the variation of the conventional limit pressure Pl according
to the simulated depth is shown in Fig. 6. (The simulated
depth is not a real depth but the vertical stress at the probe
level, which is equal to the summation of the surcharge on
the surface and the weight of the sand over the probe level).
This variation with the vertical load is nearly linear. In com-
parison with the results found by Renoud-Lias (1978) and
Mokrani (1991) for the same material, it is noticed that, un-
der the same vertical surcharge, the Pl values shown here fall
in the range of values found by these two authors. But for a
1335
heavy vertical surcharge reaching 500 kPa, the two authors
found a parabolic variation of Pl with the surcharge.
Initial horizontal pressure Po
To reduce sample disturbance, the probe was installed be-
fore filling the tank. However, the zone of soil close to the
probe displayed a different density from the rest of the tank
because the probe influences the repartition of sand and its
compaction.
In addition to the above remarks, the corrections applied
to the basic expansion curve, mainly due to the membrane
inertia, can significantly modify the initial shape of the
curve. These reasons hinder the determination of Po with a
high precision.
For every pressuremeter test the initial portion of the
pressuremeter curve was drawn using a large scale, and gen-
erally, an inflexion point can be observed on the curve that
reflects the existence of a zone around the probe with a den-
sity lower than the density of the global sand. Before this
point the slope dP/dV is less than that after this point, which
© 2002 NRC Canada
1336
Fig. 5. Experimental pressuremeter curves.
Fig. 6. Variation of the conventional limit pressure with the sim-
ulated depth.
allows the pressure Po corresponding to this inflexion point
to be determined.
A plot of the variations of Po against the simulated depth
for an average specific weight of sand of about 15.5 kN/m3
(Fig. 7) shows that this variation is linear.
The transmission of the vertical surcharge is studied in a
later section. In this study, it was found that the applied sur-
charge on the surface transmits about half of its value to the
probe level, so the values obtained from Fig. 7 for the coeffi-
cient of earth pressure at rest Ko ranged between 0.41 and
0.51. For the same type of sand in a dense situation,
Mokrani (1991) found values of Ko varying between 0.25
and 0.53. Eissautier (1986) found values varying between
Can. J. Geotech. Vol. 39, 2002
Fig. 7. Variation of the in situ pressure at rest with the simulated
depth.
Fig. 8. Variation of the distortion modulus with the simulated depth.
0.37 and 0.41. When using the Jaky formula Ko = 1 – sinϕ,
Ko varies between 0.37 and 0.45. Hence, the values found
for Ko are in the range of values found by Mokrani and are
slightly higher than the values given by Eissautier and the
Jaky formula.
Distortion modulus G and pressuremeter modulus Ep
The variation of the distortion modulus G with the simu-
lated depth is shown in Fig. 8. This variation, which is
almost linear, has already been presented by Renoud-Lias
(1978) for the same type of sand.
© 2002 NRC Canada
Fawaz et al.
Fig. 9. Transmission of the vertical surcharge.
The values found here are comparable to those found by
Renoud-Lias. For an average value of the Poisson coefficient
ν close to 0.35, the pressuremeter modulus is
[1] Ep = 2(1 + ν)G = 2.7G
From Fig. 8, the pressuremeter modulus Ep can be calcu-
lated in relation to the average stress σm at the middle of the
probe. The pressuremeter modulus is compared with the
triaxial modulus for the same density of sand and for the
same average stress. Ménard has suggested dividing the
modulus Ep by a factor α to obtain the Young’s modulus.
This factor α is situated between 0 and 1 (for ν = 1/3) and
depends on the nature of the soil and its degree of consolida-
tion (Gambin et al. 1996). In the range of low average pres-
sures (between 7 and 15 kPa) and for an average specific
weight of the sand close to 15.5 kN/m3, a value of α = 0.75
was found.
Transmission of the vertical surcharge
It is noted that the vertical stress transmitted at the probe
level is likely lower than the stress applied at the surface due
to friction on the walls of the tank. A simple experimental
method was adopted to estimate the degree of transmission
of the vertical load. It consists of a small rounded thin galva-
nized steel plate connected to a wire. Some steel plates were
put horizontally into the tank at small distances from the
surface of the sand and others were placed at the mid-level
of the probe. For each load application, some of the steel
plates were pulled up near the surface with a dynamometer
to deduce the coefficient of friction between the sand and
the steel. This operation was repeated for the steel plates at
the probe level. The results are shown in Fig. 9, indicating
that the estimated degree of vertical stress transmission is
about 50%.
For comparison purposes, Renoud-Lias (1978) has used
Hostun sand in a tank of large dimensions (150 cm in diam-
eter and 200 cm in height). He found that at 94 cm depth,
1337
Fig. 10. Mesh and boundary conditions in the probe (dimensions
in cm).
the transmission of the vertical load was about 20% at 20 cm
from the tank wall and about 80% in the middle of the tank.
Numerical study
The PLAXIS software was used to numerically simulate
the pressuremeter test and to compare the numerical calcula-
tions with the experimental results. PLAXIS treats
hydromechanical bidimensional boundary value problems
using the finite element method for continuous media and
for several types of loadings, where the displacements or the
surface forces or the volume forces are imposed. It operates
in plane strain and in axisymmetric deformation and for
small strains in this case. (Vermeer and De Borst 1984)
PLAXIS uses 15-noded triangular elements, which allows
for predicting with high precision the classical plastic limit
loads in soil mechanics. The method of integration used is
the Gauss method, utilizing 15 points of integration for each
element in axisymmetry. The soil behavior is modelled by an
elastoplastic model of nonassociated Mohr-Coulomb type.
Numerical simulation
A numerical simulation was made for the pressuremeter
test carried out in the tank of sand with the same conditions
as in the experiment. The position of the probe in the tank is
shown in Fig. 4. The probe axis is a revolution axis, hence a
study of the radial section of the tank only is sufficient due
to the axisymmetry of the problem. The half tank is
discretized according to the mesh shown in Fig. 10. On this
© 2002 NRC Canada
1338 Can. J. Geotech. Vol. 39, 2002

mesh of 24 elements, OE is the probe axis, and the segment Fig. 11. (a) Measured and calculated pressuremeter curves (high
BC represents the pressuremeter membrane. surcharge: 13–300 kPa). (b) Measured and calculated
pressuremeter curves (low surcharge: 13–32 kPa).
Mechanical parameters for the sand in the calculations
The specific weight value taken for the sand in the calcu-
lations is 15.5 kN/m3, a value adopted in several of the ex-
periments. The sand cohesion is equal to zero; the other
mechanical parameters of the sand were chosen according to
their variations with the average stress obtained from the
triaxial tests discussed previously in the section titled
“Triaxial tests”. The internal friction angle ϕ ranged between
40° for low average stresses and 34.5° for an average stress
of 180 kPa. The Young’s modulus E varied between
8500 kPa and 100 MPa. For the dilatancy angle, the empiri-
cal formula ψ = ϕ – 30° and ψ ≥ 0 was adopted. Poisson’s
ratio ranged from 0.35 to 0.3. The coefficient of lateral earth
pressure at rest, was taken as equal to 0.41.

Results of the calculations

Pressuremeter curves and conventional limit pressure
In the experiments, the vertical load was less than 32 kPa.
Therefore, a first calculation was made with a vertical load
of 13 kPa and another one with a load of 32 kPa. The calcu-
lated pressuremeter curves are close enough to those mea-
sured experimentally (i.e., they show the same trend).
However, from a quantitative point of view, for the same
given volumetric deformation, the calculated pressure is
greater than the measured one. This difference is probably
due to the fact that during the experiment, the transmitted
vertical stress near the probe is about half of the applied sur-
charge, whereas the calculation accounts for the total load.
From other runs for loads going up to 300 kPa, the evolution
of both calculated and measured pressuremeter curves are
reported in Fig. 11.
Figure 12 shows the variations of the conventional limit
pressure Pl versus the simulated depth, compared to the ex-
perimental results of Mokrani (1991) for the same sand. The
same curve trend was found, but the calculated conventional
limit pressures are greater than those measured probably for
the same aforementioned reason regarding the transmission
of the vertical load.

Angle of internal friction

The angle of internal friction ϕ is a parameter that cannot
be deduced directly from the expansion pressuremeter curve.
To determine this parameter, a yield criteria for the soil
could be used. The studies about this problem confirm that
usage of the simple elastoplastic model of soil does not give
realistic values of ϕ. Combarieu (1995) developed a formula
from the elastic–plastic model, but it takes into consideration
the dilatancy of the soil.
1
For Ko < :
1 + sin ϕ
1 − sin ϕ sin ψ
 P1(1 + sin ϕ) 
[2]  
 qo 
(1 + sin ψ ) sin ϕ
π  E
=  − 2 sin ϕ sin ψ   
2   P1 

© 2002 NRC Canada

Fawaz et al.
Fig. 12. Variations of the conventional limit pressure with the
simulated depth.
where ψ is the dilatancy angle, Pl is the limit pressure, E is
the Young’s modulus, and qo is the vertical stress.
This formula was applied on the pressuremeter curves
shown here. It was adopted for E values (the initial tangent
modulus) lying between 8500 kPa for Psu= 13 kPa and
100 MPa for Psu = 300 kPa. (Psu is the surcharge on the sur-
face). It was found that the angle of internal friction lies be-
tween 42.5 and 44.5°. In this way, ϕ was overestimated by
about 4–8°, but this result is more realistic than the one
given by the simple elastoplastic model.
Pressuremeter modulus
The influence of the deformation level in measuring the
modulus was revealed by Ménard in 1961. This subject
needs to be revisited often (Gambin et al. 1996).
There is a threshold beneath which the deformations are
elastic, and the measured modulus within this range of de-
formations is the elastic modulus.
Ménard was interested in the Young’s modulus, which
varies according to the deformation magnitude, and he de-
fined an E+ modulus for the compression stresses and an-
other E − modulus for the tensile stresses, as well as a
pressuremeter modulus Ep = (E+ E − ) 0.5. He formulated a re-
lationship between the pressuremeter modulus and the
Young’s modulus (E = Ep/α with 0 < α < 1, α = 2/3 for the
overconsolidated clays and α = 1/3 for sands). Ménard also
compared the elastic modulus (called the microdeformation
modulus E) to the pressuremeter modulus Ep by proposing:
3Ep < E < 12Ep.
Gambin et al. (1996) used the PLAXIS software to nu-
merically simulate the pressuremeter test. They ran a com-
putation of the pressuremeter modulus Ep as if it were done
from real results. They compared the Ep modulus to the E
modulus used for the calculations. This introduced modulus,
E, in the calculation can be back-calculated by considering
an elastic ground. They find Ep values five to seven times
lower than the introduced modulus.
1339
Fig. 13. Variation of the distortion modulus with the average
stress.
By using the above-presented numerical simulations, it
was verified that the distortion modulus G introduced in the
computations, can be back-calculated by considering the soil
elasticity with a lower bound deformation magnitude equal
to 10–3. On the numerical pressuremeter curves, the moduli
tangent to the origin Gp were computed as if they were mea-
sured in real tests. They correspond to a deformation magni-
tude ranging between 10–2 and 10–1. The variations of the
distortion modulus G and Gp versus the average stress are
reported in Fig. 13.
These results agree with those of Gambin et al. (1996)
and with the adoption by Ménard of a coefficient that ties
the Young’s modulus to the pressuremeter modulus and with
the influence of the deformation on the measurement of the
pressuremeter modulus.
Conclusion
The triaxial tests that were carried out have shown the
variations of Hostun sand’s mechanical parameters with the
confining pressure. The internal friction angle and the Pois-
son ratio’s decrease when the confining pressure increases.
Conversely, the initial tangent modulus increases when this
pressure increases. The experimental pressuremeter tests car-
ried out have shown that the horizontal at rest earth pressure,
the conventional limit pressure, and the distortion modulus
increase nearly linearly with the applied surcharge.
By comparing the measured curves to the calculated ones,
it was found that the numerical simulation with the PLAXIS
software gave satisfactory results. From this simulation, it
was possible to get the parabolic increase of the conven-
tional limit pressure with the important load applied on top
of the sand.
The measured modulus is indeed influenced by the defor-
mation magnitude, and the pressuremeter modulus should be
divided by a coefficient α to obtain the elastic modulus. The
values found for α were between 1/3 and 1/4.
© 2002 NRC Canada
1340
References
Baguelin, F. 1982. Rules of foundation design using self boring
pressuremeter test results. In Symposium sur la pressométrie et
ses applications en mer, 19–20 April, Paris. Edited by Technip,
Paris. pp. 347–360.
Biarez, J. 1962. Contribution à l’étude des propriétés mécaniques
des sols et des matériaux pulvérulents. Thèse de Doctorat –
Sciences. Université de Grenoble, France.
Colliat-Dangus, J.L. 1986. Comportement des matériaux granulaires
sous fortes contraintes. Influence de la nature minéralogique du
matériau étudié. Thèse de Doctorat. Université de Grenoble,
France.
Combarieu, O. 1995. L’essai pressiométrique et la résistance au
cisaillement des sols. Bulletin de Liaison des Laboratoires des
Ponts et Chaussées, 196: 43–50.
Eissautier, M. 1986. Frottement lateral des pieux en milieu
pulvérulent. Expérimentation en petite chambre de calibration.
Thèse de Doctorat. Université de Grenoble, France.
Fawaz, A. 1993. Etude expérimentale et numérique du pressio-
mètre en milieu pulvérulent. Thèse de Doctorat, Institut Na-
tional Polytechnique de Grenoble (INPG), Grenoble, France.
Fawaz, A., Biguenet, G., and Boulon, M. 2000. Déformations d’un
sol pulvérulent lors de l’essai pressiométrique. Revue Française
de Géotechnique, 90: 3–14.
Gambin, M. 1979. Utilisation du modèle pressiométrique et de la
pression limite pour le calcul des fondations. Sols Soils No 28.
pp. 14–25.
Gambin, M. 1990. The history of pressuremeter practice in France.
In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on
Pressuremeters, Oxford University, 2–6 April, Thomas Telford,
London, pp. 5–24.
Can. J. Geotech. Vol. 39, 2002
Gambin, M., Flavigny, E., and Boulon, M. 1996. Le module
pressiométrique. Historique et modélisation In XIe colloque
Franco-Polonais de Mécanique des sols et des roches
appliquées. Edited by E. Dembicki and W. Cichy. University of
Gdansk, Poland, 12 September, pp. 53–60.
Gibson, R.E., and Anderson,W.F. 1961. In situ measurement of soil
properties with the pressuremeter. Civil Engineering and Public
Works Review, 56(658): 615–618.
Hughes, J.M.O., Wroth, C.P., and Windle, D. 1977. Pressuremeter
tests in sands. Géotechnique, 27(4): 455–477.
Ladanyi, B. 1963. Evaluation of pressuremeter test in granular
soils. In Proceedings of the 2nd Panamerican Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Caracas. Vol. 1,
pp. 3–20.
Ménard, L. 1957. Mesure in-situ des propriétés physiques des sols.
Annales des ponts et chaussées, 14: 357–377.
Ménard, L. 1976. Règles relatives à l’exécution des essais pressio-
métriques. Sols Soils No 27, pp. 7–24.
Mokrani, L. 1991. Simulation physique du comportement des
pieux à grande profondeur en chambre de calibration. Thèse de
Doctorat, INPG, Grenoble, France.
Renoud-Lias, B. 1978. Etude du pressiomètre en milieu
pulvérulent. Thèse de Doctorat, Université de Grenoble, France.
Vermeer, P.A., and De Borst, R. 1984. Non associated plasticity for
soils, concrete and rock. Heron Edition, Delft, The Netherlands,
Vol. 29, No 3, 64 p.
Vesic, A.S. 1972. Expansion of cavities in infinite soil mass. Jour-
nal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE,
98(SM3): 265–290.
© 2002 NRC Canada