|
Author:
MUNIF CELEBI
|
2005-12-17 |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Dear all,
After calculation of Q (Normalized Cone Resistance) and F( Normalized Friction Ratio) if our results grater than 1000 for Q and grater than 10 for F, What does it mean.
MUNIF
|
|
| |
|
|
Follow-up:
| |
Author:
T. Stevens, UniSoft Ltd.
|
2006-06-01 |
|
| |
|
|
| |
June 1, 2006
Dear Mr. Celeby,
Thanks for sending me the CPTU soundings. I found the profile to consist of a one metre surficial sand layer on a 32 m thick layer of soft clay deposited directly on a sand layer at the end of the sounding. Because the cone stress is small, the friction ratio gets to exceed 10 % for some data points. The 10 % is the upper boundary for the Robertson classification chart. Presumably, Robertson did not have CPTU data with a friction ratio larger than 10 %. If the data are plotted in a Robertson chart with the friction ratio axis extended beyond 10 %, it looks logical to simply extrapolate Robertson's boundary lines for the different classification areas.
However, you can avoid the quandary by using the Eslami-Fellenius classification approach. The E-F classification is essentially the same as in the Robertson 1990 method, which supports the mentioned “logical” extrapolation of the boundaries.
Best regards,
Ted Stevens
|
|
| |
|
|
Return
to subject 'Investigations'
|
Follow-ups:
|
Subject:
Calculation Q and F 