Paul W. Mayne 1 and John B. Kemper, Jr.
Profiling OCR in Stiff Clays by CPT and SPT
REFERENCE: Mayne, P. W. and Kemper, L B., "Profiling OCR In
Stiff Cla~ by C]~ and SPT," Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJODJ,
Vol. 11, No. 2, June 1988, pp. 139-147.
ABSTRACT: Standard penetration tests (SPT) and cone penetration
tests (CPT) have conventionally been used to index profiles of un-
drained shear strength su in clay deposits. Since s, is related to stress
history, an alternative use of penetration resistances is the profiling of
in-situ overeonsolidationratio (OCR). An empirical methodologyis de-
veloped based on compiled data bases from 50 sites investigated by
SPTs and 40 sites tested by CPTs. The study indicates general trends
occur between the in-situ OCR and penetration resistances normalized
to effectiveoverburden stress in clays. Site specificcalibration with lab-
oratory consolidation tests is required, however, for profiling. Electric
CPTs are preferable over SPTs and mechanical CPTs for profiling
stress history because they are more repeatable and less subject to oper-
ator influence.
KEYWORDS: cone penetrometers, clays, cohesivesoils, consolidation
tests, overconsolidation,penetration tests, preconsolidation, profiling,
standard penetration tests
Penetration tests provide the basic means of geotechnical explo-
rations in North America. The standard penetration test (SPT)
provides both a disturbed sample of soil and a numerical value of
resistance (N value) in terms of blows per foot (blows/30 cm). The
cone penetration test (CPT) provides a more accurate number than
the S I ~ in terms of a point resistance qc; however, no sample is
recovered.
Common usage of SPT and CPT data in clays has been to derive
a value of undrained shear strength Su for use in analyzing geotech-
nical problems [1-3]. Considerable variations and uncertainties
exist in current methodologies for this purpose, possibly caused by
differences in reference strengths, theories, equipment, and a host
of other factors. Alternatively, since the profile of s, is controlled
by the past stress history of the deposit, direct correlations between
the penetration resistances N and qc and the in-situ preconsolida-
tion pressure would be most useful to practicing engineers. In fact,
in many very stiff to hard clays, it is very difficult to obtain thin
wall tube samples for laboratory testing without significant distur-
bance effects.
In this study, yield stresses determined from one-dimensional
laboratory consolidation tests on undisturbed specimens have been
compiled from over 80 different clay sites. Approximately half of
the sites were field tested by CPT, and these have been discussed by
'Graduate research assistant, Cornell University,Geotechnical Research
Lab, Hollister Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853.
2Late assistant vice president, Law Engineering, P.O. Drawer QQ,
Washington, DC 22101.
© 1988 by the American Society for Testing and Materials
139
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
Mayne [4]. The remaining half were subjected to SPT soundings.
General upper and lower bounds for estimating the overconsolida-
tion ratio (OCR) in terms of N and qc are observed in trends devel-
oped from the data bases. The OCR is a particularly more infor-
mative parameter for characterization of clay deposits than Su. In
addition to governing Su profiles, OCR also controls the at-rest lat-
eral stress coefficient Ko, the pore pressure parameterA/, the shear
modulus G, and other soil properties.
Although standardized for some time now (ASTM Method for
Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils D 1586), the
SPT has often been criticized by many as too crude an index for
measuring soil parameters, particularly in clay deposits. Indeed,
many researchers are reluctant to publish SPT data from sites
tested with more sophisticated geotechnical tools, such as self-bor-
ing pressuremeters, piezocones, and dilatometers. Schmertmann
[I] discusses some of the many factors affecting SPT results in
clays including the energy efficiency, clay sensitivity, excess pore
pressures, drilling equipment, and so forth. Despite all of the dis-
advantages, the SPT probably remains the most widely used tool
for subsurface investigations. Since little theoretical basis for inter-
pretation of the SPT has been developed, soil parameters are often
estimated from empirical relationships and engineering experience
[1-61.
The CPT (ASTM Method for Deep, Quasi-Static, Cone and
Friction-Cone Penetration Tests of Soil D 3441) offers a theoretical
basis for interpretation of soil parameters. A comparison of cone
data with reference values determined from laboratory tests and
other field tests, however, has resulted in a semi-empirical ap-
proach to analysis [1,5, 7-9]. The primary advantages of cone
soundings over other in-situ tests is that quick and continuous pro-
files of penetration resistance are obtained inexpensively. The elec-
tric CPT appears to be much more repeatable than either SPT or
mechanical CPT.
SPT and CPT Data Bases
Two separate data bases are reviewed in this study. These sets
include clays subjected to SPTs and clays tested by CPTs. Com-
panion series of one-dimensional consolidation tests were obtained
at all sites.
A total of 50 sites was collected for the SPT data base. The sites,
symbols, and sources of data are given in Fig. 1. Plasticity indices
ranged from 6 to 85 in these clays. SPT-N values ranged from less
than 1 to over 100 bpf. Tests were made with a standard split-
spoon sampler having a 50-ram outside diameter (OD) and 35-mm
inside diameter (ID). Many sources of SPT data came from private
reports and unpublished files because many researchers often do
0149-6115/88/0006-0139502.50
 140 GEOTECHNICAL TESTING JOURNAL

• FA0 CLAY (Hanzawa, 1977) 0 ANACOSTIA(Mueser et al, 1973)

• FUKAGAWA(Endo et al, 1969) 0 PORTSMOUTH(Hayne & Jones, 1983)
• ORINOCO(Yegtan & Lasaivia, 1984) GLEN BURNIE (Mayne & Jones, 1981)
• LONDON(Stroud, 1974, Skempton, 1961) • BALTIMORE(Larson & Mosher, 1985)
BEAUMONT(Rahar & Ingram, 1983) • ANNAPOLIS(Frost & Mayne, 1985)
0 INDIA (Bhandari, 1984) WASHINGTON, D.C. (Gordon & Mayne, 1986)
WALDORF (Schnabel, 1972) @ PLEISTOCENE(Mueser et al, 1967)
MOUNTVERNON(Schnabe], 1972) 0 MONMOUTH(Frost & Mayne, 1985)
& RICHMOND(Casagrande, 1966) ALEXANDRIA (Mueser et al, 1971)
~> FORTFRANCIS (Fabtus, I984) • HYBLAVALLEY (Frost & Mayne, 1985)
O THUNDERBAY (Fabtus, 1984) I.ANNAM (Frost & Mayne, 1985)
NAGOYA (Ueshita e t a ] , 1974) 4 CHICACOHARDPAN(Lukas & debussy, 1976)
W~ CAPETOWN(Wright & Wilson, 1984 MILWAUKEE (Lukas & debussy, 1976)
SHANGHAI (Fang, 1980) CHICAGO TILL (Lukas & debussy, 1976)
TRINIDAD (Watson et al, 1984) DETROIT (Lukas & debussy, 1976)
4> CRETACEOUS(Mueser et al, 1967) SANTOS (Tetxetra, 1960 a)
BUENOSAIRES (Bolognesi & Moretto, 1960) BRAZIL (Tetxetra, 1960 b)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA(Mueser et al, 1971) CALVERT (Mart|n & Drahos, 1986)
e ALBANY(Mayne & Swanson, 1985) O WEST POINT (Sherman & McAnear, 1973)
TAMPA (Sonnenfeld et al, 1985) HOUSTON (Focht et al, 1978)
ROORKEE (Mohan et al, 1978) MANHATTAN (Parsons, 1976)
AUGUSTA(Alperstein & Leifer, 1976) CHESAPEAKE (Mayne & Jones, 1980)
EDOGAWA (Inoue et al, 1977) & NEW BRUNSWICK (Keenan & Bozozuk, 1985)
BOSTONBLUE (Taylor, 1948) ARGENTINE LOESS (Bolognesl & Moretto, 1957)
0 YORKTOWN(Mayne, et al., 1987) MIOCENE (Gordon & Mayne, 1987)
FIG. 1--SPT data base listing of symbols and clay sites with oedometer results. References given in bibliography.

not report such data in the geotechnical literature. Reference
sources for these data are given in the Bibliography appended to
this paper.
The SPT resistances were obtained by the fall of a 63-kg (140-1b)
hammer falling 12 cm (30 in.). At each test, the sampler is driven
three successive increments of 15 cm (6 in.) each. The SPT-N value
is taken as the sum of the last two increments. Because of the inef-
ficiencies of the operator and equipment, only 35 to 80% of this
total energy is transmitted to the sampler, however. Typically, the
average transmitted energy is about 55 to 60% [10].
No distinction has been made between data derived from donut
hammers versus safety type hammers, primarily because the infor-
mation was not reported by the sources. Robertson et at. [I1] have
shown that safety hammers may typically be 50% more efficient
than donut hammers.
The CPT data from 40 different clays have been compiled from
the published literature. The sites, plasticity, indices, reference,
and symbols for each clay are listed in Ref 4. Plasticity indices of
the clays typically ranged from 3 to 90. The clays have been depos-
ited in a variety of geologic environments including terrestrial, ma-
rine, glacial, and alluvial.
For the CPT data, the clays were tested in the field with cones
having a 60 ° apex and a projected area of 10 cm 2, advanced at
approximately 2 cm/s. Most of the cone penetrometers (80%) were
of the Fugro electric type; some having been modified as piezo-
cones. The remaining 20% were mechanical Dutch or Begemann-
type cone penetrometers. Only the point resistances were reviewed
in this study although most of the cones also had 150-em2 friction
sleeves. Values of qc ranged from 0.1 to over 10 MPa at the clay
sites. The total resistance qc and net cone resistance (qc -- ~/z) are
considered in this study since both are used in common practice.
However, no corrections for unequal area projection and pore-
pressure effects as recommended by Jamiolkowski et al. [12] have
been made.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 MAYNE AND KEMPER ON PROFILING OCR 141

In-situ stress states ranged from normally consolidated (over- CPT- q° RESISTANCE (tsf or kg/cm')
consolidation ratio [OCR] = 1) to heavily overconsolidated (OCR
= 57). The apparent preconsolidation pressure (Op') from oedom-
eter tests varied from 20 to 4000 kPa. Of course, sample distur- 2 5 I0 20 5O tOO 2O0
bance effects and difficulties exist in the accurate determination of I000 _ = = = l I #, ,'_I0
%" from consolidation tests. The values of OCR considered herein
were those reported by the published source of data.
N= = to~

~
zN
020 U ~
5

Numerous important factors, such as differences in geology, cal-

(/)
U,I , ~/~
ibration, operators, drilling rigs, rods, clay sensitivity, mineralogy,
I--
1:7. 2
sample disturbance, and so forth, were beyond the scope of consid-
IO0 I
eration in this study. In some cases, it was necessary to interpolate ....
E
a,
data for purposes of comparison. Also, it is noted that in addition 0-5
to the normal scatter of data reported by each source, some error T
was likely incurred by the writer in scaling data from the original Z
graphs and figures. 0.2
t-
O') 10 03

Estimates of Undrained Strength 0.05 W

s. = N=
Since both the SPT and CPT are relatively quick tests, a com-
mon parameter often derived from these tests is the undrained 8z 0
W
z_
shear strength s~. A theoretical expression for s, from the cone =<
point resistance q~ is -I , J ~ I i , I Z
0.1 0.2 O.5 I Z 5 I0
qc -- Po
,= CPT- q= RESISTANCE (MN/mz)
s, -- - - (1)
Nk
FIG. 2--Comparison between undrained strengths from triaxial com-
pression and measured cone resistance. Mechanical cone data denoted by
where double enclosed symbols. Remainder are from electric cones.
Nk = bearing capacity factor, and
Po = total overburden factor.
by pore-pressure effects on unequal area [12,16,17]. However, this
The bearing capacity factor Nk has been observed to range from is only possible with piezocone equipment.
6 to 30 [1, 7-9]. The Po term may be interpreted as the total vertical In Fig. 2, data from mechanical cones are denoted by double
stress, horizontal stress, or octahedral stress, depending upon the- enclosed symbols. The remaining data are from electric cones. A
oretical assumptions [7,13,14]. In many cases, especially stiff significant distinction occurs between mechanical cones and elec-
clays, the Po term is relatively small with respect to qc and may even trical cones. For example, Figure 3 shows cone resistances from
be neglected as noted by Lunne and Kleven [8]. In very soft clays or mechanical CPTs are over twice those measured by electronic
very deep soundings, however, the value of Po is important [14]. CPTs for an organic alluvial clay in Washington, DC. A Bege-
The calculation of undrained strength from CPT data requires a mann-type mechanical cone and a Fugro-piezocone were used.
representative Nk value. Preferably, this Nk should be determined Even after correcting for pore-pressure effects (a = 0.65), the val-
by calibration with a reference strength that is appropriate for the ues still differ by a factor of 2.
particular loading conditions. The reference strengths that are The differences in responses of mechanical and electrical cones
most commonly adopted in practice include field vane (FV), un- have been discussed by Schmertmann [9], primarily from data ob-
confined compression (UC), unconsolidated-undrained(UU), and tained in sandy and silty deposits (Fig. 4). Data from clays tested
triaxial compression (TC), which are possibly not the most appro- by the author (Yorktown Formation and Potomac River) appear to
priate choices for simulating the stress paths of most geotechnical exhibit a similar trend with previous comparisons. Consequently,
problems. For comparative purposes, a consistent reference mechanical cones are characterized by point resistances the order
strength is necessary. of twice those obtained by electric cones.
If Po = 0 for simplicity [8,15], the expression for undrained IfPo = 3'z = total vertical stress is adopted, then the normalized
strength may be reduced to undrained strength ratio may be calculated

Su = q~/N~ (2) (s.lo~o') -- q~ -- 3'z (3)

where N= is the cone factor for this case.
For triaxial compression as the reference strength mode, the
cone data base compiled from 40 different clays and presented as
Fig. 2 indicates that 6 < Ncc < 34. The log-log axes are used in
Fig. 2 in order to show data that span over two orders of magnitude
(0.1 < qc < 11 MPa). Recent detailed studies of cone penetrome-
ters have shown the need for correction of point resistances caused
Nk O'vo
A comparison of laboratory TC strengths and the CPT data in
terms of net cone resistance is shown as Fig. 5. The cone factor Ark
varies between 6 and 25 with a best guestimate of about Nk = 15
for electric cones and Nk = 20 for mechanical cones. In Figs. 2 and
5, no distinction has been made between isotropic (CIUC) and an-
isotropic (CAUC) triaxial tests. However, a review of triaxial test

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
142 GEOTECHNICAL TESTING J O U R N A L

I LAW ENGINEERING AND TEST|NG"~

ANACOSTIA NAVAL AIR STATION
CCH,
OCT 17 1996.
FugPo Ptiz~QCr'$c Corm Hus~'~= I rmc.u.
- - E

In
!
iednon/col
CPT
DARK
GRAY I--
ORGANIC -5
SILTY
2:0 CLAY I
IOH)
O)

E O
30 t,Lm =
p[~ s 3Y - I0 <t

Electrical
CPTU
40
8
.J
<

50 -15

b
TM
2 5 I0 20 50 I00 200
-20

70 NORMALIZED NET CONE RESISTANCE = ( ~ )

0 I 2 3 MPo 0 0.5 MOo

POINT RESISTANCE PORE PRESSURE FIG. S--Normalized triaxial compression strength (CIUC and CA UC)
and normalized net cone resistance.
FIG. 3--Comparison of mechanical and electric CPT soundings in Poto-
mac River alluvium.

y I I I I mined from triaxial compression (TC) tests. For very stiff fissured
POTOMAC ORGANIC CLAY clays, there can exist scale effects, as related to the small size of the
cone penetrometer, which may require lower N~ factors than those
2.0i determined from TC tests.
-~ :,~-~ YORKTOWN SANDY CLAY Many empirical expressions for s, as a function of SPT-N value
.J oo have been proposed [1,2]. A statistical analysis of undrained tri-
~ u 1.s \ axial strength data on insensitive clays in the United Kingdom by
z~ Stroud [6] indicates that
z o @ ~X ,~ istignaledis clue to Continuous
o w • ~[~ ~ M ~VS, incremantaltip advance
w _1 s, = f i N (4a)
•
~
w
~ LC

B& ~ ~ ~ trend line where the factorf~ generally varies from 3.5 to 6.5 kPa (73 to 136
%
psf). For certain clays, a general trend for f l as a function of plas-
l I, l I m
0"50 lO0 150 200 250 ticity index was observed. An average value off1 = 4.4 kPa is sug-
gested by Stroud [6]. Other expressions for estimating s,, from N
qc (MECHANICAL CONE) kglcm 2 values have been given by Hara et al. [3] indicating an exponential
relationship
FIG. 4--Observed trend between mechanical and electric cone resis-
tances. Modified after Schmertmann [9]. s,,(kPa) = 29N °'72 (4b)

D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f I n - S i t u OCR
results from 42 different clays has shown that the undrained
strength from CAUC tests averages about 88% of the undrained The concepts of critical-state soil mechanics and (SHANSEP)
strength as determined from CIUC tests [18]. method can be shown to relate the normalized undrained strength
The observed variability of Nk factors indicates the need for site to effective overburden ratio (s,,/a~') with OCR according to [4,19]
specific calibration of the CPT to reference strengths measured in
the laboratory. In this study, attention has focused on s~ as deter- (s.la~o') = ( s j o ~ . ~ ' ) O C R A (5)

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 M A Y N E A N D KEMPER O N PROFILING OCR 143

where cone resistance is generally between 2 to 6 for OCR = 1. The

specific cone penetrometer can be calibrated at a specific site with
(s.hr.e') = normally consolidated strength ratio,
a series of consolidation tests on specimens taken from adjacent
A = strength rebound exponent, and
borings.
OCR = (a,'/a~o') = overconsolidation ratio.
A similar approach for SPT data may be followed as shown by
Fig. 7. Regression analyses on 110 data points indicate that, on the
Rearranging in terms of OCR
average, (r = 0.85)

OCR=(S./O~o'y/^ (6) OCR = O.193(N/a~o') °'689 (9a)

\Su/ ~vnc'/
Typical values of (s.la.~,) = 0.3 and A = 0.7 apply to triaxial
compression [18,19]. However, the appropriate values to use with
CPT and SPT would depend upon the actual (and unknown) stress
paths followed by these in-situ tests during penetration.
Equations 3, 4, and 6 imply that direct relationships between
OCR and normalized cone resistance (q~ -- 7z)/a~o" and between
OCR and normalized standard penetration resistance (N/a~o') may
be possible. A statistical analysis of the available 102 points con-
tained in cone data base indicates an average trend (r = 0.91)
OCR = 0,37(q~-L--~---~ L°~
\ Ovo' / OCR : K~(N/o~o')P=
where N is in blows/30 cm and o." in MPa. The observed deviation
from the assumed log-log relationship suggests that the proposed
power function for N values by Hara et al. [3] may be more appro-
priate for s. estimates. For a forced exponent = I, the regression
data indicates
OCR = 0.05 (N/a~o') (9b)
where a,,~' is in units of MPa. Therefore, a simple one-parameter
expression for OCR in terms of normalized N value may assume
the form
(7)
(9c)

Figure 6 shows that a general expression for CPT resistance is ap- where the atmospheric pressure (Pa = 1 tsf = 100 kPa) is intro-
proximately duced so that the equation is dimensionless. The empirical param-
eter ~ appears to vary between 0.2 and 1.0 for the clays reviewed. It
is important to note that the upper and lower bounds of the SPT
O C R = ~ ( q ~ - L - : - ~ ~) (8) data base range by a factor of 5 as compared with a range of 4 for
k O'vo' /
mechanical cones and about 2.5 for electric cones.
The net cone resistance has been normalized to the effective
overburden stress in order to provide dimensionless parameters.
For most of the data base, 0.3 < ~ < 0.8 for electric cones and
0.12 < r~ < 0.5 for mechanical type cones. The normalized net

~ = NORMALIZED SPT RESISTANCE

0
2 5 K) 2O 50 ©0

l i" I I " i q
v,
~ 100
_0

850
¢oi
20 OCR = K, Po ( N, ) ~ /
z

,,4"0 "

= I0

b
i
5 ° /', 6/'3f
2
n

,,,,,,,,
2 5 I0 20 50 I00 o ~ / AA . - - / - - - , / ./
I0 20 50 I00 200 500
~,J / = NORMALIZED NET CONE H(~f)
RESISTANCE ¢,; (aPa) = NORMALIZED SPT RESISTANCE

FIG. 6--Observed trend between laboratory determined OCR and nor- FIG. 7--Trend between laboratory measured OCR and normalized stan-
malized net cone resistance. Used by permission from ASCE. dard penetration resistance.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
144 GEOTECHNICAL TESTING JOURNAL

Direct T r e n d s for P r e c o n s o l l d a t l o n Stress Again, a similar trend should be observed for SPT resistance.
Figure 9 presents the observed relationship. A general expression is
Tavenas and Leroueil [20] observed a direct relationship be-
tween the laboratory preconsolidation pressure and cone resis- ap" = ~sNPa (12)
tance. For two sensitive Canadian clays, they noted that ap' =
q J 3 . A general expression appears to be where the value of r~ may be obtained by calibrating N values with
the results of oedometer tests performed on thin-walled tube sam-
ap" = q~/f3~ (10) pies. Comparing the observed bounds of the CPT and SPT data
bases, it is seen that the ratio q J N should be between 1.6 and 2.0.
where consistent units are used. Reviewing the available data in
This ratio is consistent with direct trends between measured q~ and
Fig. 8, it is observed that/3, typically varies between 2 and 6 for
N at clay sites reviewed by Robertson et al. [11].
electric cones and between 3 and 10 for mechanical cones. More
Regression analyses of Fig. 9 indicates (r = 0.90)
recently, Konrad and Law [21] have shown that if the cone resis-
tances are corrected for pore pressure effects, the parameter B, %,(kPa) = 67N °'83 (13a)
may lie in a narrower range of between 3.8 to 5.3.
It is noted that Eqs 8 and I0 cannot both be valid since this im-
or for a forced exponent = 1
plies that the preconsolidation pressure is proportional to the mea-
sured total resistance q~ as well as the net resistance q~ -- %. Simi- a,'(kPa) = 48N (13b)
lar arguments exists between Eqs 1 and 2 for representing s,.
Wroth [22] has discussed the theoretical justification for using net
cone resistance, and it is therefore recommended that this be used Disen~ion of SPT/CPT Profiling
in the interpretation of CPT data. In order to use CPT and SPT data for profiling in-situ OCRs in
A statistical study of 106 data points shown in Fig. 8 gives an
clays, site specific calibration with laboratory oedometer tests is re-
average relationship (r = 0.96)
quired. Although both tests are standardized, the penetration test
results are significantly affected by the specific equipment used.
ap' = 0.243(q~) °96 (II)
The SPT and mechanical CPT are also subject to variations caused
by operator performance. The electric cone is more accurate, yet
Neglecting the exponent term, a general trend for the preconsoli-
requires special care with electronics in the field.
dation pressure in terms of cone resistance appears to be ar, =
The SPT is particularly vulnerable to variability and operator
qc/4. influence [10,11]. Reproducibility of results depends upon many
factors including quality control, liners, number of rods, condition
of the rope, and so forth. In very soft clays, the method is not pre-
cise enough to accurately provide a measure of resistance and may
be denoted by weight of hammer (WOH) or weight of rods (WOR).
-~ CPT-qc RESISTANCE (tsf or kq/cn~) The degree to which repeatability of SPT results may be ex-
pected is illustrated in Fig. 10. These tests were performed in a very
J 2 5 I0 20 50 I00 200
o~
lo[--I I I I I ..... I ~/,,ll
..... 11_I~ ,.,("
o~
i,u
1/) 50 (t)
(tsf)

® * --20 50
o'p=K s
- ,o 20

8 ° 10
0.5 ,ooo [
0_ o. ¢~
50o 5
0,2 "J

2
o. N N!
,oo I
~ , N"~i~ - 0.5
11.¢~ 0,5

o i- I ,,-. 2 0 1-0"3z/0"3
2 K
0.2
/ - .
i "°~l'-I.......... I I - o.I ~ Jo
b 0.1 t tO -b~ 0.s I 2 5 I0 20 50 100
CPT- qc RESISTANCE (MPo) SPT-N VALUE (bpf)

FIG. 8--Apparent relationship between oedometer yield stress and cone FIG. 9--Apparent trend between oedometer yield stress and standard
resistance. Used by permission from ASCE. penetration resistance.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 MAYNE AND KEMPER ON PROFILING OCR 145

qt =CONE RESISTANCE(~) SPT RESISTANCE(~(~c~") O'p = PRECONSOLIDATION

PRESSURE (MPo)
60 I 2 3 0 I0 20 30 0 0.5 I 1.5

Norfolk I
I Yorktown 1
I ( t I
t
I
I
! i 1 .I'o
t I
I I t IA
t I
I I I !
I0 t I I / ~ MEAN AHD I
MEAN AND 1 I / I :1: ONE
!
E "J: ONE I I
STANDARD I I ~ STANO*,,O
OEVtKTION I t 0EVIATION
OF 18 l OF6Z I
12 SOUNDINGS " - ~ .4 BORINGS !
i q
! i
.I- I
I-- 14 t
(1. I
la t
t-~ I
/
I I
/ I
16 /
/
#
I I
!
18

FIG. lO--Summary of CPT, SPT, and laboratory data in sandy clay of Yorktown Formation.

sandy clay from Newport News, VA, termed the Yorktown Forma-
tion [21]. The sensitivity of the marine deposit is between 4 and 9,
as measured by limited field vane shear tests. Laboratory tests de-
termined the effective preconsolidation pressure to be on the order
of 860 kPa (18 ksf). Statistical analyses of the boring data gave a
mean N value and plus or minus one standard deviation of 14 +_ S
blows per 30 cm, corresponding to a coefficient of variation of
0.35. In comparison, electric CPTs at the same site indicated a
mean cone resistance (uncorrected) of about 2 MPa and coefficient
of variation of about 0.12. An analysis of Fig. 10 indicates that the
average OCR profile could be represented by Ks = 0.6 and ~c =
0.4.
The effects of pore pressures during cone penetration can sig-
nificantly affect the measured point and friction resistances
[12,16,17]. Consequently, the CPT data should be corrected for
pore pressures on unequal area projections. This is possible only
with piezocone equipment [7].
In addition to use of SPT and CPT for site characterization, the
author [24] has found significant merit in profiling the in-situ
OCR in clays by the flat dilatometer (DMT) and the electric piezo-
cone (CPTU). These devices require a higher level of sophistication
in the field, but the results are generally well worth the effort. The
use of several types of in-situ tests on the same site is extremely
helpful in developing stress history profiles.
Conclusions
A review of SPT data from S0 different clay deposits and CPT
data from 40 clays has been made where stress histories are known
from consolidation tests. The compiled data bases suggest the fol-
lowing:
1. Direct trends occur between the in-situ OCR and normalized
penetration resistance to effective overburden ratios (qc -- 7z)/o,o'
and N/o~o'. Site specific calibration is required for profiling the
stress history.
2. General trends exist between the effective preconsolidation
pressure o / and penetration resistances qc and N. The observed
relationships are site-specific and require calibration with labora-
tory consolidation tests.
3. Mechanical cone resistance in clays appears to be on the or-
der of twice the values as determined from electric cones. There-
fore, separate calibrations are required.
4. The observed bandwidths between upper and lower bounds
of the data bases indicate that the electric cone is more reliable and
repeatable than either the mechanical cone or standard penetra-
tion test.
Acknowledgments
Thanks and appreciation are given to Anne Bethoun and Ken
Ellis for preparing the manuscript and figures.
References
Ill Schmertmann, I., "Measurement of In Situ Shear Strength," Pro-
ceedings, In Situ Measurement of Soil Properties, Vol. II, ASCE, Ra-
leigh, NC, 1975, pp. 57-138.
[2] DeMello, V., "Foundations of Buildings on Clay," Proceedings, 7th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics, State-of-the-Art Vol-
ume, 1969, Mexico, pp. 49-136.
[3] Hara, A., Ohata, T., and Niwa, M., "Shear Modulus and Shear
Strength of Cohesive Soils," Soils and Foundations, Vol. 14, No. 3,
Sept. 1971, pp. 1-12.
[4] Mayne, P. W., "CPT Indexing of In Situ OCR in Clays," Proceed-
ings, Use of ln-Situ Test in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 1986,
VPI, Blacksburg, VA, pp. 780-793.
[5] Mitchell, J. K. and Gardner, W., "In Situ Measurement of Volume
Change Characteristics," Proceedings, ASCE In Situ Measurement
of Soil Properties, Vol. If, 1975, Raleigh, NC, pp. 274-345.
[6] Stroud, M., "SI~ in InsensitiveClays," Proceedings, European Sym-
posium on Penetration Testing, Vol. 2.2, Stockholm, Sweden, 1974,
pp. 367-375.
[7] Robertson, P. and Campanella, R., "Interpretation of Cone Penetra-
tion Tests: Clays," Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4,
Nov. 1983, pp. 734-745.
[8] Lunne, T. and Kleven, A., "Role of CPT in North Sea Foundation

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
146 GEOTECHNICAL TESTING JOURNAL
Engineering," Proceedings Cone Penetration Testing and Experi-
ence, ASCE, St. Louis, MO, 1981, pp. 76-107.
[9] Schmertmann, J., "Guidelines for Cone Penetration Tests," Federal
Highway Administration Report FHWA-TS-78-209, July 1978, pp.
69-77.
[10] Kovacs, W. and Salomone, L., "SPT Hammer Energy Measure-
ments," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering. Vol. 108, No. 4, April
1982, pp. 599-620.
[ll] Robertson, P., Campanella, R., and Wightman, A., "SPT-CPT Car-
relations," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 109, No. 11,
Nov. 1983, pp. 1449-1459.
[12] Jamiolkowski, M., Ladd, C. C., Germaine, J., and Laneellotta, R.,
"New Developments in Field and Lab Testing of Soils," Proceedings,
llth International Conference on Soil Mechanics, Vol. 1, San Fran-
cisco, 1985, pp. 57-154.
[13] Jamiolkowski, M., Lancellotta, R., Tordella, L., and Battaglio, M.,
"Undrained Strength from CPT," Proceedings, 2nd European Sym-
posium on Penetration Testing, Vol. 2, Amsterdam, The Nether-
lands, 1983, pp. 599-606.
[14] Keaveny, L and Mitchell, J., "Strength of Fine-Grained Soils Using
the Piezocone," Proceedings, Use of In Situ Tests in Geotechnical En-
gineering, ASCE, VPI, Blacksburg, 1981, pp. 668-685.
[15] Sanglerat, G., ThePenetrometerandSoilExploration Developments
in Geotechnical Engineering Series, Vol. 1, 1972, New York, Elsevier,
464 pp.
[•6] Lunne, T., Eidsmoen, T., Gillespie, D., and Howland, Jr., "Labora-
tory and Field Evaluation of Cone Penetrometers," Proceedings, Use
of In Situ Tests in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, VPI, Blacks-
burg, 1986, pp. 714-729.
[17] Robertson, P., Campanella, R., Gillespie, D., and Greig, J., "Use of
Piezometer Cone Data," Proceedings ASCE, Use of In Situ Tests in
Geoteehnical Engineering, Blacksburg, VA, 1986, pp. 1263-1280.
[18] Mayne, P. W., "Stress Anisotropy Effects on Clay Strength," Journal
of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. III, No. 3, March 1985, pp. 356-
366.
[19] Mayne, P. W., "Cam Clay Predictions of Undrained Strength," Jour-
nal of Geoteehnical Engineering, Vol. 106, No. GT 11, Nov. 1980.
[20] Tavenas, F. and Leroueil, S., "Clay Behavior and the Selection of De-
sign Parameters," Proceedings, European Conference on Soil Me-
chanics, Vol. 1, Brighton, England, 1979, pp. 281-291.
[211 Konrad, J. and Law, K., "Preconsolidation Pressure from Piezocone
Tests in Marine Clays," Geotechnique, Vol. 37, No. 2, June 1987, pp.
177-190.
[22] Wroth, C. P., "The Interpretation of In Situ Soil Tests," Geotech-
nique, Vol. 34, No. 4, Dec. 1984, pp. 449-489.
[23] Mayne, P., Swanson, P., and Frost, D., "Geotechnical Report CE-
BAF, Newport News, Virginia," Law Engineering Report NK5-1182
to Daniel, Mann, Johnson, Mendenhall, Washington, DC, Dec. 1986.
[24] Mayne, P. W., "Determining Preconsolidation Stress from DMT
Contact Pressures," Geotechnical Testing Journal Vol. t0, No. 3,
Sept. 1987, pp. 146-150.
Bibliography
Alperstein, R. and Leifer, S., "Site Investigation with Static Cone Pene-
trometer," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol. 102, No.
GTS, May 1976, pp. 539-555.
Bhandari, R., "Downdrag on Bored Pile in Soft Clay," Proceedings, Inter-
national Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, Vol.
III, University of Roila, MO, pp. 1019-1026.
Bolognesi, A. and Moretto, O., "Properties of the Gran Buenos Aires Sub-
soil," Proceedings, 1st Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics,
Vol. 1, Mexico, 1960, pp. 303-314.
Bolognesi, A. and Moretto, O., "properties and Behavior of Silty Soils
from Loess," Proceedings, 4th International Conference on Soil Me-
chanics, Vol. I, 1947, London, pp. 9-12.
Casagrande, L., "Subsoils and Foundation Design in Richmond, Vir-
ginia," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE,
Vol. 92, No. SM5, Sept. 1966, pp. 109-126.
Endo, M., Minou, A., Kawasaki, T., and Shibata, T., "Negative Skin
Friction in Clay," Proceedings, 7th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2, 1969, Mexico, pp.
85-92.
Fabius, M., "Experience with DMT in Routine Geotechnical Design,"
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
Proceedings, 37th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Toronto, 1984,
Session 54.
Fang, H,, "Geotechnical Properties and Foundation Problems of Shanghai
Soft Clays," ASCE Preprint 80-176, Portland Convention, April 1980.
Focht, J., Khan, F., and Gemeinhardt, P., "Performance of One Shell
Plaza Deep Mat," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 104, No.
GTS, May 1978, pp. 593-608.
Frost, D. and Mayne, P., "Geotechnical Studies, Smithsonian Support
Center, Suitland, Maryland," Law Engineering Report W4-4337 to Met-
calf Associates, Washington, DC, 8 March 1985.
Frost, D. and Mayne~ P., "Geotechnical Exploration, Mount Vernon
Square, Alexandria," Law Engineering Report W5-5040 to Wills & Van
Metre, Inc., Burke, VA, 29 Oct. t985.
Frost, D. and Mayne, P., "'Geotechnical Evaluation NRL Antenna, Mary-
land," Law Engineering Report B5-120 to Ford Aerospace, Mountain
View, CA, 6 May 1985.
Frost, D. and Mayne P., "Geotechnical Study Toys R Us, Lanham, Mary-
land," Law Engineering Report W5-5011/4830 to Casco Corporation,
St. Louis, MO, 16 Oct. 1985.
Gordon, D. and Mayne, P., "Geotechnical Exploration, Surry Power Sta-
tion Facility, Bacon's Castle, Virginia," Law Engineering Report W7-
5768 to Virginia Power, Glen Allen, VA, May 1987.
Gordon, D. and Mayne, P., "Report of Geotechnical Exploration, Execu-
tive Residence, Washington, DC," Law Engineering Report W6-537S to
National Park Service, National Capital Section, 29 May 1986.
Hanzawa, H., "Geotechnical Properties of Fao Clay, Iraq," Soils and
Foundations, Vol. 17, No. 4, Dec. 1977, pp. 1-16.
Inoue, Y., Tamaoki, K., and Ogai, T., "Settlement of Building Due to Pile
Downdrag," Proceedings, 9th International Conference on Soil Me-
chanics, Vol. 1, Tokyo, 1977, pp. 561-566.
Keenan, G. and Bozozuk, M., "Downdrag on a 3-Pile Group," Proceed-
ings, 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics, Vol. 3, 1985,
San Francisco, CA, pp. 1407-1412.
Lambe, T. and Whitman, R., Soil Mechanics, SI Version, MIT, Wiley and
Sons, New York, 1979, 34 pp.
Larson, T. and Masher, W., "Subsurface Exploration, Lever Brothers,
Baltimore, Maryland," Law Engineering Report B4-101 to Daniel Engi-
neering, Hopewell, VA, 25 Jan. 1985.
Lukas, R. and debussy, B., "Pressuremeter and Laboratory Test Correla-
tions for Clays," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,
ASCE, Vol. 102, No. GTg, Sept. 1976, pp. 945-962.
Mahar, L. and O'Neill, M., "Geotechnical Characteristics of Desiccated
Clay," Journal of GeotechnicalEngineering, Vol. 109, No. 1, Jan. 1983,
pp. 56-71.
Martin, R. and Drahos, E., "Pressuremeter Correlations for Preconsoli-
dated Clay," Proceedings Use of i n Situ Tests in Geotechnical Engineer-
ing, ASCE, Blacksburg, VA, June 1986, pp. 206-220.
Mayne, P. and Jones, J. "Report of Geotechnical Exploration, Virginia
Coal Terminal," Law Engineering Report W2-3644 to Sofas Associates,
New York, 9 Feb. 1983, 250 pp.
Mayne, P. and Jones, J., "Geotechnical Study, Solley Road Landfill, Anne
Arundel County, Maryland," Law Engineering Report Wl-3178,
Browning Ferris industries, 1982.
Mayne, P. and Jones, J., "Report of Field and Laboratory Testing, Calvert
Cliffs, Maryland," Law Engineering Report W0-2862 to Baltimore Gas
& Electric, Baltimore, MD, Nov. 1980.
Mayne, P. and Swanson, P., "Dynamic Response of Compressor Founda-
tion on Albany Clay," Law Engineering Report W9-2513 to Owens-
Coming, Delmar, New York, Sept. t979.
Mayne, P., Swanson, P., and Frost, D., "Geoteehnieal Report CEBAF,
Newport News, Virginia," Law Engineering Report NK5-1182 to Daniel,
Mann, Johnson, MendenhaU, Washington, DC, Dec. 1986.
Mohan, D., Jain, G., and Bhnadari, R., "Remedial Underpinning of Steel
Tank," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 104, No. GTS, May
1978, pp. 639-655.
Mueser, W., Rutledge, P., and Gould, J., "Final Report, Subsurface In-
vestigation, Vol. 3, WMATA, B&O Route," MRWJ Contract NTA-667
to National Capital Transportation Agency, Dec. t967.
Mueser, W., Rutledge, P., and Gould, J., "Pentagon Route, Volume 2,
Washington, DC," MRWJ Report to WMATA, Contract NTA-667,
Dec. 1967.
Mueser, W., Rutledge, P., and Gould, J., "Branch Route Subway Line,
Washington. DC," MRWJ Report to Washington Metro Area Transit
Authority 1971, Stations 158 to 169 (NTIS).

Mueser, W., Rutledge, P., and Gould, J., "'Huntington Route, Stations
269 to 556, Washington, DC, " MRWJ Report to WMATA, April 1971
(NTIS).
Parsons, J., "New York Glacial Lake Formation," Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 102, No. GT6, June 1976, pp. 605-638.
Schnabel, J., "Foundation Construction on Fill in Washington, DC Area,"
Proceedings, Performance of Earth and Earth Supported Structures,
Vol. 1, Part 2, ASCE, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, June 1972,
pp, 1019-t036.
Sherman, W. and McAnear, C., "Performance of Fill at West Point,"
Highway Research Record, No. 643, Washington, DC, 1973, pp. 35-44.
Skempton, A., "Horizontal Stresses in Overconsolidated Clay," Proceed-
ings, 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics, Vol. 1, Dunod
Press, Paris, 1961, pp. 351-357.
Sonnenfeld, S., Schmertmann, ]., and Williams, R., "A Bridge Site Inves-
tigation Using SPTs, MPMTs, and DMTs from Barges," Strength Test-
ing of Marine Sediments: Laboratory and In.Situ Measurements, STP
883, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, t985,
pp. 515-535.
Taylor, D. W., Fundamentals of Soil Mechanics, MIT, John Wiley and
Sons, New York, 1948, pp. 82-84.
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sun Jul 14 23:59:04 EDT 2013
Downloaded/printed by
Erza Rismantojo (Soilens, Pt.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
MAYNE AND KEMPER ON PROFILING OCR 147
Teixeira, A., "Case History of Building Underlain by Preconsolidated
Clay," Proceedings, 1st Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics,
Vol. 1, Mexico, 1960, pp. 201-215.
Teixeira, A., "Typical Subsoil Conditions in Santos, Brazil," Proceedings,
1st Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics, Vol. 1, Mexico, 1960,
pp. 149-177.
Ueshita, K,, Matsui, K., Ohoka, T., and Nagase, J., "Displacement of
Overconsolidated Clay During Construction," Proceedings, Settlement
of Structures, British Geotechnical Society, John Wiley and Sons, New
York, April 1974, pp. 234-241.
Watson, H., Crooks, J., Williams, R., and Yam, C., "Performance of Pre-
loaded Structures on Soft Soils in Trinidad," Geotechnique, Vol. 34,
No. 2, June 1984, pp. 239-258.
Wright, D. and Wilson, L., "Groote Schuur Hospital Foundation Design,"
Proceedings, 8th Regional Conference for Africa on Soil Mechanics, Vol.
1, Batkema, Harare, Zimbabwe, 1984, pp. 227-238.
Yegian, M. and Lasalvia, H., "Failure of an Embankment on Soft Clay,"
Proceedings, International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical
Engineering (1CCHGE], Vol. II, Rolla, MO, May 1984, pp. 701-705.