A) Explain 3 types of boring for cohesive and cohesion less soil (include picture for

your explanation)
Cohesive soil
Auger boring

This method is fast and economical, using simple, light, flexible and inexpensive instruments for
large to small holes. It is very suitable for soft to stiff cohesive soils and also can be used to
determine ground water table. Soil removed by this is disturbed but it is better than wash boring,
percussion or rotary drilling. This method of boring is not suitable for very hard or cemented soils,
very soft soils, as then the flow into the hole can occur. This method is also not suitable for fully
saturated cohesion less soil.

Wash boring
It is a popular method due to the use of limited equipment. The advantage of this is the use of
inexpensive and easily portable handling and drilling equipment. Here first an open hole is formed
on the ground so that the soil sampling or rock drilling operation can be done below the hole. The
hole is advanced by chopping and twisting action of the light bit. Cutting is done by forced water
and water jet under pressure through the rods operated inside the hole. It can be done up to a depth
of 8m –10m excluding the depth of hole already formed beforehand. This method can be adopted
in soft to stiff cohesive soils and fine sand.

DISPLACEMENT BORING

It is combined method of sampling & boring operation. Closed bottom sampler, slit cup, or piston
type is forced in to the ground up to the desired depth. Then the sampler is detached from soil
below it, by rotating the piston, & finally the piston is released or withdrawn. Simple and economic
method if excessive caving does not occur. Therefore, not suitable for loose sand. Major changes
of soil character can be detected by means of penetration resistance. These are 25mm to 75mm
holes. It requires fairly continuous sampling in stiff and dense soil, either to protect the sampler
from damage or to avoid objectionably heavy construction pit.
Cohesionless soil

Percussion Drilling

Percussion drilling is a manual drilling technique in which a heavy cutting or hammering bit
attached to a rope or cable is lowered in the open hole or inside a temporary casing. Percussion
drilling is suitable for unconsolidated and consolidated formations: Sand, silt, stiff clays,
sandstone, laterite and gravel layers. Manual percussion drilling is generally used up to depths of
25 meters.

Hollow Flight Auger

A continuous spiral around a tube is used to transfer cuttings to the surface. A plug and spade auger
device can be used to drill soil below the control tube, or a continuous sample can be taken in a
central sampling barrel, or undisturbed samples driven ahead through the tube. SPT and
undisturbed samples are obtained through the hollow drill stem, which acts like a casing to hold
the hole open. This is frequently a slow process, and due to the very great torque required to drive
the auger may be uneconomic. This method is largely experimental at the moment.

Rotary Drilling

Rotary drilling method of boring is useful in case of highly resistant strata. It is related to finding
out the rock strata and also to access the quality of rocks from cracks, fissures and joints. The
broken rock or soil fragments are removed by circulating water or drilling mud pumped through
the drill rods and bit up through the bore hole from which it is collected in a settling tank for
recirculation. Water alone can be used if the depth is small and the soil are stable. This method is
suitable for boring holes of diameter 10cm, or more preferably 15 to 20cm in most of the rocks. It
is uneconomical for holes less than 10cm diameter. The depth of various strata can be detected by
inspection of cuttings.
 B) Differentiate between disturbed and undisturbed sample and give advantage and
disadvantage for each test

Disturbed Sample Undisturbed Sample

No change due to disturbance of the soil
Change in the stress condition
structure
Change in the water content and the void ratio No change in void ratio and water content
No change in constituents and chemical
Disturbance of the soil structure
properties
Chemical changes
No disturbance of the soil structure
Mixing and segregation of soil constituents

Disturbed Sample Undisturbed Sample

Split barrel sampler Thin wall Shelby sampler

Continuous auger Piston sampler

Bulk sampler Block sampler

C) Differentiate between laboratory test and in-situ test and give advantage and
disadvantages for each test.
DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN LABORATORY TEST AND IN-SITU TEST
Laboratory tests
Have well defined and controllable boundary
conditions, more rationale theory behind the
interpretation, but test smaller volume of soil.
ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGES FOR IN SITU TESTS
advantages
 direct-push soundings is that no
cuttings or spoil are generated
 Tests are carried out in place in the
natural environment without sampling
disturbance , which can cause
detrimental effects and modifications
to stresses, strains, drainage, fabric
and particle arrangement
 Detection of planes of weakness and
defects are more likely and practical
 Tests can be carried out in soils that
are either impossible or difficult to
sample without the use of expensive
specialized methods
In situ tests
Several in-situ tests define the geostratigraphy
and obtain direct measurements of soil
properties and geotechnical parameters. The
common tests include: standard penetration
(SPT), cone penetration test (CPT), piezocone
(CPTu), flat dilatometer (DMT), pressure
meter (PMT), and vane shear (VST). Each
test applies different loading schemes to
measure the corresponding soil response in an
attempt to evaluate material characteristics,
such as strength and/or stiffness
disadvantage
 direct-push methods is that hard
cemented layers and bedrock will
prevent further penetration
 Samples are not obtained; the soil
tested cannot be positively identified.
The exception to this is the SPT in
which a sample, although disturbed, is
obtained.
 The stress path imposed during testing
may bear no resemblance to the stress
path induced by full-scale engineering
structure
 Most push-in devices are not suitable
for a wide range of ground conditions
ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGES FOR LABORATORY TESTS
test advantages
 Simple and inexpensive
 Thin sample allows for rapid
drainage of fine grained
Direct Shear Test soils
 Easy to control drainage
 Useful stress-strain data
Triaxial Shear
 Can consolidate sample
Test
hydrostatically or to in situ
Ko st ate of stress
 Very rapid and inexpensive
Unconfined
Compression Test
 Very rapid and inexpensive
Lab Vane Shear
Test
disadvantage
 Only for drained conditions
 Failure plane forced to occur at
joint in box
 Non-uniform distribution of stress
and strain
 No stress-strain data
 Apparatus more complicated than
other types of tests
 Drained tests on fine grained soils
must be sheared very slowly
 Not applicable to soils with
fissures, silt seams, varves, other
defects, or less than 100%
saturation
 Sample disturbance not
systematically accounted for
 Not applicable to soils with
fissures, silt seams, varves, other
defects, or less than 100%
saturation
 Sample disturbance not
systematically accounted for
D) Explain in detail 3 types of in-situ test for cohesive and cohesion less soil

In-situ soil testing is an essential part of geotechnical engineering. While many devices have been
developed over the years for measuring soil properties in-situ, the pressure meter and the cone
penetrometer (CPT) are arguably the two most widely used in-situ soil testing devices. Unlike
many laboratory tests, pressure meter and CPT tests are indirect tests in that the measured data
needs to be interpreted to give fundamental soil properties. Due to similar mechanical action
generated by cavity expansion and cone penetration and pressure meter expansion, cavity
expansion theory has been used with considerable success in the interpretation of these two types
of in-situ soil tests (e.g. Wroth, 1984, Clarke, 1995, Yu and Mitchell, 1998; Lunne et al., 1997).
The purpose of this chapter is to summarize some key applications of cavity expansion solutions
to the interpretation of pressure meter and CPT tests in both day and sand.

Three types of in-situ test for cohesive soil and cohesion less soil:-

1. Pressure meter Testing

A pressure meter is defined as a cylindrical probe that has an expandable flexible membrane
designed to apply a uniform pressure to the wall of a borehole (Clarke, 1995). When a pressure
meter test is carried out in soils, the measured pressure displacement curve can be used to back-
ca1culate the mechanical properties of soils. The main advantages of the pressure meter test over
other in-situ tests are:

(i) the boundary conditions imposed by the pressure meter test are relatively well
defined

(ii) the pressure meter test can be used to measure both deformation and strength
parameters at the same time

(iii) The self-boring pressure meter potentially offers the does not approach to
undisturbed soil testing of any in-situ test due to its ability to tunnel into the
ground with minimal soil disturbance prior to a test being carried out (Mair and
Wood, 1987).
The basis of the test is the expansion of a long cylindrical membrane installed in the ground, and
therefore cavity expansion theory can be used to analyses the pressure meter test.

Depending on how the pressure meter is installed into the ground, the pressure meters can be
defined into three groups. They are pre-bored pressure meters, self-boring pressure meter, and
pushing-in pressure meters. The Menard pressure meter is the most well-known example of the
pre-bored pressure meters in which the device is lowered into a pre-formed hole. Cymometer and
PAF are two examples of the self-boring pressure meter where the pressure meter bores its own
way into the ground by a self-boring technique. The so- caIled cone or full-displacement pressure
meter can be grouped into the category of push-in pressure meter where the device is pushed into
the ground with a cone attached at the front of the pressure meter.

Procedure of Pressure meter Test

 2. Cone Penetrometer Testing

At the present time, the cone penetrometer test (CPT) is arguably the most widely used in-situ test
device in the world. In cone penetrometer testing, a cone on the end of a series of rods is pushed
into the ground at a constant rate and continuous or intermittent measurements are made of the
resistance to the penetration of the cone. Measurements are also made of either the combined
resistance to penetration of the cone and outer surface of the rods or the resistance of a surface
sleeve. The values of measured cone tip resistance and sleeve friction can be used to estimate soil
types. In addition, the cone tip resistance is also directly correlated to strength properties of soils.
With recent form of cone penetrometer (i.e. piezocones), measurement can also be made of pore
water pressure around the cone and shaft. This additional information may be used to correlate
with soil stress history and consolidation coefficients (Lunne et al., 1997).

Cone Penetration Test Procedure

 3. Standard Penetration Test

The standard penetration test (SPT) is performed during the advancement of a soil boring to
obtain an approximate measure of the dynamic soil resistance, as well as a disturbed drive sample
(split barrel type). The test was introduced by the Raymond Pile Company in 1902 and remains
today as the most common in-situ test worldwide. The procedures for the SPT are detailed in
ASTM D 1586 and AASHTO T-206. The SPT involves the driving of a hollow thick-walled tube
into the ground and measuring the number of blows to advance the split-barrel sampler a vertical
distance of 300 mm (1 foot). A drop weight system is used for the pounding where a 63.5-kg (140-
lb) hammer repeatedly falls from 0.76 m (30 inches) to achieve three successive increments of
150-mm (6-inches) each. The first increment is recorded as a seating, while the number of blows
to advance the second and third increments are summed to give the N-value ("blow count") or
SPT-resistance (reported in blows/0.3 m or blows per foot). If the sampler cannot be driven 450
mm, the number of blows per each 150-mm increment and per each partial increment is recorded
on the boring log. For partial increments, the depth of penetration is recorded in addition to the
number of blows. The test can be performed in a wide variety of soil types, as well as weak rocks,
yet is not particularly useful in the characterization of gravel deposits nor soft clays. The fact that
the test provides both a sample and a number is useful, yet problematic, as one cannot do two
things well at the same time.

Standard Penetration Test Procedure