Soil Testing Archives - Page 2 of 3 - GEOTILL provides geotechnical, construction testing and Environmental services Indianapolis Indiana

Using a Compaction Test to Determine Site Safety Standards

Compaction is an engineering term used to describe the ability of a soil type to be treated with mechanical energy and compressed such that air voids are removed. With individual grains compressed to remove air voids, it becomes more difficult for the soil being compressed to 'settle' further on its own. The strength of the soil in loads other than compression can be increased because the individual particles within the soil become interlocked and friction can become a more important function of the soil behavior. Compacted soil, because air spaces between the particles are reduced has lower hydraulic conductivity (passes water less easily under a given pressure). Why do a Compaction Test? Compaction can be important when high loads such as building foundations may cause a soil to settle over time causing shifting or even collapse. It can be valuable for soil that you want to retain in place, such as along an embankment or behind a retaining wall to be compacted. The compaction process, by increasing the friction in the compacted soil helps to maintain against horizontal slippage which can either result in a landslide off from an embankment or in higher pressure behind a retaining wall, causing it to bow outwards. Because compaction lowers hydraulic conductivity, it can be useful, or even essential in the functioning of earthen dams, drainage ditches and levees. A measurement of compaction is the change in density, or weight per unit volume increase after the soil in question is compacted. That's why sometimes 'compaction' is also called 'densification'. This is actually not a correct designation as 'densification' actually includes both 'compaction' which is described above as well as 'consolidation'. Consolidation involves fluid flow out of the soil being densified, such as when you are treating clay heavy soils. Water is squeezed out from [...]

By smadi66|December 5th, 2019|Geotechnical Louisiana, Geotechnical Maine, Geotechnical Indiana, Geotechnical Massachusetts, Geotechnical Kentucky, Geotechnical Illinois, Geotechnical Maryland, Geotechnical Iowa, Geotechnical Kansas, Introductory, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Idaho|0 Comments

Soil Quality in Geological Engineering

Agronomists, Civil Engineers, Geological Engineers and more will often talk about 'Soil Quality'. As a result, there can be varying definitions of what 'quality' soil means. That means that there are a wide variety of tests to determine 'Soil Quality'. What Does Soil Quality Mean for You? For the Agronomist, Soil Quality refers to the capacity of soil to provide a kind of function related to growing capacity. This will take into account the soils ability to support life as in its chemical properties (does it have enough nitrogen etc.), it's biological properties (does it have the right bio-system to support the production of certain types of crops), will it retain the right amounts of water, is it's grain size suitable for tilling etc. There are many tests that will help one to evaluate the agricultural viability of soils. For the Civil and Geological Engineer some of these tests might be valuable. For instance, in making recommendations in how to reclaim a 'brown field' (a site that was formerly industrial that is now being re-developed for other purposes) it can be useful to identify the level of ability of an area to support specific types of grasses. When performing earthworks, it is not uncommon to use plantings such as trees as part of the anchor system to help to hold berms and such in place. Knowing Soil Quality in this respect can help to support a good decision with respect to the structural support that a living ecosystem can bring. Generally though, Engineering types are after more specific physical properties in order to 'do the math' on how an engineered system will interact with the soil conditions that are present. This enables engineers to either recommend changing the systems in place (such as by excavating large quantities of soil out, [...]

By smadi66|December 4th, 2019|Geotechnical Kentucky, Geotechnical Massachusetts, Geotechnical Michigan, Geotechnical Missouri, Geotechnical Maryland, Geotechnical Minnesota, Geotechnical Kansas, Geotechnical Mississippi, Introductory, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Louisiana, Geotechnical Maine|0 Comments

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Geotechnical Boring; Why CPT May be Your Better Option

As we noted in a previous post about Soil Quality, there are a wide range of reasons that soil needs to be tested. For some applications, it is important to get data about soil that is sub-surface, and in many cases getting data from deep under a site can be useful or essential. When most people imagine how you would gather data from soil that is deep underground, they imagine using a drilling rig of some kind. Sure enough, there are special kinds of boring tools that will let you drill deep into the ground and extract a sample of the soil at depth for analysis. Advantages & Disadvantages of Geotechnical Boring Using Geotechnical Boring, whether it be small-diameter or large-diameter equipment allows users to see the solid that is extracted. This can be useful for gaining an understanding of the sub-surface topology if a goal is to create a multi-dimensional map of the subsurface Geological conditions. There are significant disadvantages however to using Geotechnical Boring to obtain soil samples for testing. One disadvantage is that the operation of boring is for obtaining samples only, you can't gather data from the boring activity itself and therefore all of this investment in equipment, labor and time provides value only in that it presents a sample for testing. Another disadvantage is that the soil being sampled then needs to be tested using some type of laboratory equipment. This often means removing a large number of samples from the site, getting them safely in an organized way to a lab facility somewhere, hopefully nearby, and waiting for the lab results to come back. If there are apparent conflicts in data, or a particular part of the site needs more evaluation, the entire process needs to be started up from scratch again. Perhaps the [...]

By smadi66|December 4th, 2019|Geotechnical Pennsylvania, Introductory, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Oklahoma, Geotechnical Oregon, Geotechnical Rhode Island, Geotechnical South Carolina, Geotechnical South Dakota, Geotechnical Texas, Geotechnical Utah, Geotechnical Tennessee, Geotechnical Vermont|0 Comments

The Application of Dynamic Cone Penetration Testing (DCPT)

Assessing the level of compaction of sub-surface soils can be essential to designing and building structures, particularly those subject to transient or cycling loads. A perfect example is roadways. If the soil beneath a roadway is not compacted sufficiently, then over time the cycling loads of passing traffic will compact the soil further, leading to surface failure such as large cracks, potholes and displaced pavement. Assessing the compaction of non-cohesive soils such as fine sands is a difficult challenge. As we've noted in other blog posts, removing a sample from the ground and sending it to a lab is not only time consuming and expensive, but can be highly inaccurate in non-cohesive soils because the samples by necessity are disturbed from their sub-surface condition. The Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test (DCPT) is one of many forms of in-situ soil characteristic tests that are designed to assess soil density. It shares some characteristics of both SPT and CPT testing, which enables it to provide a useful and in the right application can deliver a complementary data set and is less expensive and troublesome than Nuclear Density testing. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is done by using a sample tube which has thick walls to prevent deformation during the test. To conduct a test, a borehole is drilled to a specified depth. The sample tube is driven into the bottom of the borehole using a drop hammer of a defined weight dropped a defined distance. The number of blows (N) needed to drive the sample tube 6, 12 and 18 inches is recorded. The SPT provides a rough indication of the soil density at depth. As noted in previous posts (link here), getting accurate data for soil density can be a complex challenge. SPT provides an estimate but is not as accurate as [...]

By smadi66|December 3rd, 2019|Geotechnical West Virginia, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Arizona, Geotechnical Arkansas, Geotechnical California, Geotechnical Colorado, Geotechnical Virginia, Geotechnical Washington, Geotechnical Wyoming, Geotechnical Wisconsin, Geotechnical Alabama|0 Comments

New Geotechnical Exploration Firm in Southeast US: PalmettoINSITU

Vertek S4 Push System In Action Extracting underground data to determine soil parameters in order to efficiently provide foundation requirements Vertek customer Michael Cox has launched PalmettoINSITU, LLC, a geotechnical exploration firm specializing in extracting and presenting more exact data from coastal, southeastern, and southwestern soils prior to development and construction projects. Geotechnical engineers will contract with PalmettoINSITU to extract underground data to determine soil parameters in order to efficiently provide foundation requirements for: Bridges, multi-story buildings, private residences, nuclear power plants, wind turbines, cellular communication towers, municipal water tanks, water treatment facilities, sinkholes, profiling top-of-rock, directional boring, and many other critical applications prior to development and construction. About Michael Cox: Michael Cox spent 13 years with S&ME, a global Top-100 engineering firm before launching PalmettoINSITU in June of 2014. Michael Cox graduated from Florida Institute of Technology with an MS in Information Technology and a BS in Computer Information Systems. Cox also earned an AS in Civil Engineering Technology, including AutoCAD and Surveying certificates from Trident Technical College in Charleston. Michael Cox is known as the "Indiana Jones" of capturing soil data in the geotechnical engineering space, due to his reputation and innovation for getting in and out of some of the most challenging site locations. Before beautiful residences, commercial buildings, or major facilities are built, their raw land is typically rough, wooded, wet, or otherwise a challenge to physically enter in order to begin testing the soil. Vertek's S4 Push System offers maximum flexibility to access these site locations due to application on a variety of equipment. Michael Cox earned over a decade of geotechnical experience working on the following projects: Norfolk Naval Shipyard (Virginia), Andrews Air Force Base (Maryland), The Boeing Facility (South Carolina), The Bellefonte Nuclear Station (Alabama), Robinson Nuclear Power Plant (South Carolina), The Google [...]

By smadi66|December 3rd, 2019|Geotechnical Minnesota, Geotechnical Mississippi, Geotechnical Nebraska, Soil Testing, Vertek Partners, Geotechnical Louisiana, Geotechnical Maine, Geotechnical Massachusetts, Geotechnical Michigan, Geotechnical Montana, Geotechnical Missouri, Geotechnical Maryland|0 Comments

What is Triaxial Testing and is it the Best Method for Testing Soil?

Those familiar with soil testing probably already know that there are a number of ways to test soil. One of the most common methods is the Standard Penetration Test, which is best known for its simplicity and versatility, but is held back by its lack of accuracy compared to more advanced options. More advanced methods include, of course, Cone Penetration Testing and Mud Rotary Drilling, both of which are common. Another common method is Triaxial Testing. What is Triaxial Testing? In order to conduct Triaxial Testing, you need a Triaxial Apparatus, which is made up of a Triaxial cell, universal testing machine and pressure control panel. For testing soil and other loose granular materials like sand and gravel, the material is placed in a cylindrical latex sleeve and submerged into a bath of water, or another liquid, which puts pressure on the sides of the cylinder. A circular metal plate at the top of the cylinder, called a platen, then squeezes the material. The distance the platen travels is measured, along with the net change in volume of the material. Like Cone Penetration Testing, Triaxial Testing is used to measure the properties of soils, but can also be used on more solid materials like rock. Typically, Triaxial Testing is used to solve problems of stability by: Determining the shear strength and stiffness of soil when retaining reservoirs of water Measuring stress/strain behavior Monitoring the internal response of the particulate medium It is also used for pore water pressure measurement and determining contractive behavior, which is common in sandy soil. As such, this soil testing method is well-suited to helping engineers improve their building designs while limiting structural/build failures by imparting a proper understanding of material behavior and an assessment of the characteristics of a build site. Primary benefits of Triaxial [...]

By smadi66|December 3rd, 2019|Geotechnical Iowa, Geotechnical Kansas, Introductory, Cone Penetration, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Louisiana, Geotechnical Indiana, Geotechnical Maine, Geotechnical Kentucky, Geotechnical Massachusetts, Geotechnical Michigan, Geotechnical Maryland, Geotechnical Minnesota|0 Comments

What Can You Reveal Using Fluorescence Detection?

Even if you use CPT technology daily to test soil, you may not be aware of the further advantages CPT testing has to offer beyond its more commonly used or basic geotechnical functions. Take fluorescence detection, for example. Fluorescence detection records a fluorescent response to a specific excitation of automatic carbons in a chemical. This excitation is caused by an ultraviolet light source. But you're probably wondering how fluorescence detection can help you. Read on to find out! The Common Uses of Fluorescence Detection Before delving into scenarios in which fluorescence detection is useful, let's take a closer look at how it works in relation to CPT. One method of fluorescence detection is done using handheld UV lights to investigate above ground contamination. With CPT, the UV light source is placed in the cone, with fiber-optic cables transmitting resulting fluorescence to the surface where it can be measured in voltage responses. At Vertek CPT, we use LEDs and mercury lamps to generate UV light. Whether above ground or below, fluorescence detection reveals two ranges of fluorescent emissions: 280-450 nm wavelengths and wavelengths above 475 nm. The test is capable of detecting a variety of chemicals within these ranges, including: Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) Coal tars (DNAPL compounds) if mixed with compounds, like fuels Creosote sites that contain naphtalene, anthracene, BTEX and pyrene Total petroleum hydrocarbon values (TPH) as low as 100 ppm in sandy soil Fluorescence detection is also able to detect a number of contaminants, such as jet fuel, diesel, unleaded gasoline, home heating oil and motor oil. As you can imagine, this makes fluorescence detection extremely beneficial at fuel spill sites and sites with leaking storage tanks. However, if you already use CPT testing regularly, it's worth considering fluorescence detection in other scenarios to add capability and additional [...]

By smadi66|December 3rd, 2019|Geotechnical Utah, Geotechnical Vermont, Geotechnical Virginia, Geotechnical Wisconsin, Geotechnical Washington, Geotechnical Alabama, Geotechnical Wyoming, Geotechnical West Virginia, Introductory, Cone Penetration, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Arizona, Geotechnical Arkansas|0 Comments

Should you Use a Sand Cone Test in Construction?

It may seem at times that there are almost too many soil testing methods, but many are developed to fit certain scenarios or address issues with other testing methods. This is the case with the sand cone test, which is used to determine soil compaction and is an alternative to using a nuclear density gauge. But does this mean the sand cone test is worth using when working on construction sites? The Pros and Cons of the Sand Cone Test There are many benefits to performing a sand cone test, especially for those relying on a nuclear density gauge. With a sand cone test, you can get similar results at a much lower cost, without the need for radioactive material. The cost of the sand cone test apparatus is also fairly low, making sand cone testing relatively inexpensive. The apparatus consists of a plastic container, a metal cone with a valve and a high density base plate. Its also relatively small and portable, making testing possible pretty much anywhere. The sand cone test has its fair share of negatives as well, including: Easy to compromise samples during testing. Soil samples are sensitive to vibrations, shifting of particles, and any errors in set up of the test site Samples that contain mixed particles can be less accurate Samples that contain too much moisture content can be less accurate Long result time: 20 minutes (vs. nuclear gauge which only takes 1 minute for results) Technicians, of course, should be aware of the limitations of the sand cone test as many factors can skew its results. In other words, the sand cone test may not be worth using when working on construction sites, except to confirm observations and inform opinions about soil moisture and density. This is especially true when you consider that [...]

By smadi66|December 3rd, 2019|Geotechnical Colorado, Geotechnical Delaware, Geotechnical Indiana, Geotechnical Idaho, Geotechnical Illinois, Geotechnical Georgia, Geotechnical Connecticut, Geotechnical Florida, Geotechnical Iowa, Introductory, Soil Testing, Geotechnical California|0 Comments

How to Interpret Soil Test Results from CPT Testing

Even if you already have a solid grasp of what Cone Penetration Testing is and how CPT rigs test soils, understanding soil test results is a bigger task. You likely already know that CPT rigs are equipped with automated interpretation programs, but that doesn't mean test results are easily readable right away. Fortunately, even if you aren't a technician, it is possible to gain some understanding into soil test results. Read on to find out how. The basics of soil test results At the most basic level, the results of CPT testing are based on the relationship between cone bearing, sleeve friction and pore water pressure. With these three measurements, you can learn quite a bit about soil composition and conditions. For example, friction ratio measured by the sleeve is used to determine soil type. Soil is then classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). CPT can also measure: Soil parameters Computer calculations of interpreted soil behavior types (SBT) Additional geotechnical parameters It's also possible to determine temperature shifts and zero load offset through the use of baseline readings. This essentially means comparing test results to those generated from initial testing before work begins on a site. With careful observation, it's possible to determine even more about the soil tested. Some examples include noting trends in water content to determine the type of soil (ie, sand does not retain water as well as clay) and knowing that larger values of cone resistance and sleeve friction usually indicate coarser soils, while lower values tend to indicate fine-grained soils. Although they won't put you on the level of a trained technician, these basics should make soil test results much easier to understand. More importantly, with this information in mind, you should have a much greater understanding of CPT testing as [...]

By smadi66|December 3rd, 2019|Geotechnical Maine, Geotechnical Michigan, Geotechnical Massachusetts, Geotechnical Missouri, Geotechnical Maryland, Geotechnical Minnesota, Geotechnical Kansas, Geotechnical Mississippi, CPT Data, Introductory, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Louisiana, Geotechnical Kentucky|0 Comments

Is a Sieve Analysis Accurate?

If you regularly use Cone Penetration Testing on the job, you probably already know that there are a number of alternative soil testing methods out there. Some of the more common procedures include the Standard Penetration Test, which has been covered before in this blog, and the sieve analysis, also known as the gradation test. Most commonly used in civil engineering, this basic soil testing method is used to assess the particle size distribution of soil and other granular material. But is sieve analysis accurate? As is the case with Standard Penetration Testing, sieve analysis can provide accurate results, but only in the right conditions or scenarios. In fact, sieve analysis can achieve optimal accuracy only if certain conditions are met. First off, sieve analysis needs a proper representative example of soil from the building site, meaning particles must be mixed well within the testing sample. The sample must also be of the right size, so it does not overload the sieve and skew the results. In terms of equipment, sieve analysis requires: Test sieves that conform to relevant standards Reliable sieve shaker and analytical balance Error-free evaluation and documentation Proper cleaning and care of equipment, especially sieves When these conditions are met, it is possible to get accurate and consistent results from sieve analysis, but only with coarse materials larger than #100 mesh. When it comes to finer materials smaller than #100 mesh, sieve analysis becomes less accurate. The reason for this is the mechanical energy used to move particles through the dry sieve can compromise particle size. Fortunately, this can be offset somewhat with wet sieve analysis as long as the testing particles aren't changed by the addition of water. Sieve testing is also less accurate for non-spherical particles as they may have trouble fitting through the mesh. [...]

By smadi66|December 2nd, 2019|Geotechnical West Virginia, Introductory, Soil Testing, Geotechnical Arizona, Geotechnical Arkansas, Geotechnical California, Geotechnical Colorado, Geotechnical Virginia, Geotechnical Washington, Geotechnical Wisconsin, Geotechnical Wyoming, Geotechnical Alabama|0 Comments