CHAPTER 4 : SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
4.1 Purpose of Subsurface Investigation
Ø Before designing a foundation that can support structural load on top of it, we must
first understand the properties of the soil that will support the foundation we designed.
Ø Subsurface investigation is referred as the process of determining the layers of natural
soil deposits that will underlie a proposed structure and their physical properties.
Ø The purpose of a soil-investigation program is to obtain information that can help in
the following:
1. Selection of type and depth of foundation which is suitable for the proposed site.
2. Assessment of the ultimate load-bearing capacity of the foundation.
3. Estimation of the total settlement that may occurred to the proposed structure.
4. Analysis of potential foundation problems such as expansive soil, sanitary landfill,
collapsible soil and etc.
5. Establishment of ground water table.
6. Forecast of lateral earth pressure for structures such as retaining walls, bulkhead,
braced cuts and retaining walls.
7. Establishment of construction methods for changing subsoil conditions.
Ø Subsurface investigation may be necessary when additions and modifications to an
existing structure is contemplated.
Ø The soil at a proposed site is frequently different, thus the development of soil profile
may be changeable. The existing soil-mechanics theories are concerned with idealized
conditions.
Ø The application of these theories to foundation-engineering problems involves wise
judgment of the information on the proposed sites and the soil parameters obtained
from the field investigation. Good professional evaluation forms a major part of
geotechnical engineering, and it requires practice.
Elements to deal with Geotechinical Peoblems
Observation & Careful Interpretation
Pertinent Knowledge Information
Experience & Assessment
4.2 Subsurface Investigation Program
There are 3 steps involved in the subsurface investigation, which are the collection of
preliminary information, reconnaissance and site investigation.
4.2.1 Collection of Preliminary Information
In this step, information regarding to the type of proposed structure to be built and its general
use are acquired. For the construction of buildings, we should know the estimated column
loads and their spacing and the local building-code and the basement requirements. The
general idea of the topography and the type of soil to be encounter at the proposed site can be
obtained from the following sources :
Ø Geological Survey Maps
Ø Department of Agriculture’s Soil Conservation Service country soil reports.
Ø Agronomy maps published by agriculture departments.
Ø Hydrological information including records of stream flow, information on high flood
levels, tidal records and etc.
Ø Highway department soil manuals.
Figure 4.1: Geological map of Johor. Retrieved from Department of Geological Survey Malaysia, 1988.
• The information collected from these sources can be helpful in planning a site
investigation.
4.2.2 Reconnaissance
Visual inspection of the site should be made by the engineer to obtain the information
regarding :
1. The general topography of the site, possible existence of drainage ditches, abandoned
dumps of debris and other materials present at site.
2. Soil stratification from deep cuts.
3. The type of vegetation at the site and the nature of soil at site.
4. High-water marks on nearby buildings and bridge abutments.
5. Groundwater levels.
6. The types of construction nearby and the existence of cracks in walls or other
problems.
Figure 4.2: Topographic Map of Johor. Retrieved from “Specifying Site Investigation”, IEM-MSIA Workshop & Exhibition
on Site Investigation, Tropicana, Petaling Jaya, 13 – 14 Oct 2008.
4.2.3 Site Investigation
The investigation program consists of planning, making test boreholes, and collecting soil
samples at desired intervals for subsequent observation and laboratory tests. To determine the
approximate minimum depth of boring, we can use the rules established by the American
Society of Civil Engineers (1972) :
1. Determine the net increase in the effective stress, Δσ’, under a foundation with depth
as shown.
2. Estimate the variation of the vertical effective stress, σ’ₒ , with depth.
3. Determine the depth, D = D₁ , at which the effective stress increase Δσ’ is equal to
!
( )q
!"
(q = estimated net stress on the foundation).
4. Determine the depth, D = D₂ , at which Δσ’/ σ’ₒ = 0.05.
5. Choose the smaller of 2 depths, D₁ and D₂ , just determined as the approximate
minimum depth of boring required, unless bedrock is encountered.
Figure 4.3: Determination of the minimum depth of boring. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
According to Sowers and Sowers (1970), the depths of boring for a building with a width of
30m (approximate to 100ft) will be :
No. of stories Boring depth
(m)
1 3.5
2 6
3 10
4 16
5 24
Table 4.1: The recommended depth of boring. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
To determine the boring depth, the following rules are used :
• For light steel or narrow concrete buildings :
𝐷ᵇ
=𝑎
𝑆 ".'
where 𝐷ᵇ = depth of boring in metres
S = number of stories
a=3
• For heavy steel or wide concrete buildings :
𝐷ᵇ
=𝑏
𝑆 ".'
where b = 6 if 𝐷ᵇ is in metres.
Ø When deep excavations are predicted, the depth of boring should be at least 1.5 times
the depth of excavation.
Ø The subsoil conditions sometimes require the foundation load be transferred to
bedrock. The minimum depth of core boring into bedrock is 3m.
Ø The spacing of boreholes can be larger or smaller, and it is depended on the condition
of the subsoil.
Type of Project Spacing of Boreholes (m)
Multistory building 10 – 30
One-story Industrial Plants 20 – 60
Highways 250 – 500
Residential Subdivision 250 – 500
Dams and Dikes 40 - 80
Table 4.2: The spacing of borehole for different types of project. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th
edition
Ø In Malaysia, the boreholes can be done by referring to BS 5930. The 2 commonly
used methods for soil borings are rotary drilling method and wash boring.
Ø 3 things that must be taking care in boreholes :
- Levels and coordinates
- Samplers in good condition, clean and greased
- Samplers is sealed, labelled and stored properly.
4.2 Exploratory Borings in the Field
Ø Auger boring is the simplest method of making exploratory boreholes.
Ø There are 2 types of hand auger, which are posthole auger and helical auger.
Ø Hand augers cannot be used for advancing holes to depths more than 3 to 5m, but they
can be used for soil exploration work on small structures and some highways.
Figure 4.4: Typical rotary drilling rig. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
Figure 4.5: Hand auger: (a) posthole auger; (b) helical auger. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
4.3 Procedures for Sampling Soil
There are 2 types of soil samples, which are disturbed and undisturbed. Distributed samples,
which is from Split-Spoon Sampling can be used for the following types of laboratory test :
1. Grain-size analysis
2. Determination of liquid and plastic limit
3. Specific gravity of soil solids
4. Determination of organic content
5. Classification of soil
Ø However, disturbed soil samples cannot be used for consolidation, hydraulic conductivity
or shear strength test. These types of laboratory tests’ samples must be taken from
undisturbed soil samples.
Ø Undistributed soil samples can be taken from the following :
o Piston Sampler
o Thin Wall Sampler
o Continuous Sampler
o Mazier Sampler
4.3.1 Split-Spoon Sampling
Ø The soil samples obtained are generally disturbed, but still representative.
Ø The standard weight of the hammer is 622.72N (65kg), and the hammer is dropped for a
distance of 0.762m for each blow.
Ø The total penetration is 450mm and the number of blows required for the last 300mm is
recorded as standard penetration number, N at the depth.
Ø This field test is called standard penetration test (SPT).
Ø The standard practice now is to express the N-value to an average energy ration of 60%
(N₆ ₀ ).
Figure 4.6: Standard split-spoon sampler and spring core catcher. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th
edition
Ø Factors Affecting SPT Values :
Errors Consequence
Inadequate cleaning of borehole Wrong N-value, sludge trapped in sampler
Casing driven bottom of borehole Higher N-value in sand and lower N-value in
clay
Damaged tip of sampling spoons Higher N-value
Loose joints on connecting rods Higher N-value
Not using guide rod Higher N-value, eccentric blows
Water level in borehole below ground Lower N-value especially sand at bottom of
water level borehole, piping effect
Table 4.3: Factors affecting SPT values and its consequences. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
Ø Correction for N₆ ₀ in Granular Soil
- In granular soil, the effective overburden pressure, σ’ₒ will affect the value of N₆ ₀ .
The value of N₆ ₀ under different effective overburden pressure should be changed
to correspond to a standard value of σ’ₒ.
(N₁ )₆ ₀ = 𝐶, N₆ ₀
where (N₁ )₆ ₀ = value of N₆ ₀ corrected to a standard value of σ’ₒ
𝐶, = correction factor
N₆ ₀ = value of N obtained from field exploration
- According to Liao and Whitman (1986), the relationship for 𝐶, as following :
".4
1
𝐶, =
σ’ₒ
𝑃ₐ
where σ’ₒ is the effective overburden pressure and 𝑃ₐ = atmospheric pressure (100kN/𝑚6 )
Ø Correlation between N₆ ₀ and Relative Density of Granular Soil
- Kulhawy and Mayne (1990) modified an empirical relationship for relative density
which can be expressed as :
𝛔’ₒ
𝐷7 = 𝟏𝟐. 𝟐 + 𝟎. 𝟕𝟓 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝑵𝟔𝟎 + 𝟐𝟑𝟏𝟏 − 𝟕𝟏𝟏𝑶𝑪𝑹 − 𝟕𝟕𝟗 − 𝟓𝟎𝐶H 𝟐
𝑷ₐ
where 𝐷7 = relative density 𝑃ₐ = atmospheric pressure
σ’ₒ = effective overburden pressure
𝐶H = uniformity coefficient of sand
IJKLMNOMPQRSTQMN IJKOOHJK
OCR =
KUUKLTQVK MVKJWHJRKN IJKOOHJK
Ø Correlation between Angle of Friction and Standard Penetration Number
- The peak friction angle, ɸ’ , of granular soil has correlated with N₆ ₀ .
- The correlation between N₆ ₀ , σ’ₒ and ɸ’ is provided by Schmertmann (1975) :
".bc
𝑁₆₀
ɸ’ = 𝑡𝑎𝑛[!
𝛔’ₒ
12.2 + 20.3
𝑷ₐ
where 𝑁₆₀ = field standard penetration number
σ’ₒ = effective overburden pressure
𝑃ₐ = atmospheric pressure
ɸ’ = soil friction
Ø Correlation between Modulus of Elasticity and Standard Penetration Number
- The modulus of elasticity is important in estimating the elastic settlement of the
designed foundations.
- A first-order estimation of 𝐸O was given by Kulhawy and Mayne (1990) :
𝐸O
= ⍺ 𝑁₆₀
𝑃ₐ
where 𝑃ₐ = atmospheric pressure
⍺ = 5 for sands with fines ; ⍺ = 10 for clean normally consolidated sand ;
⍺ = 15 for clean overconsolidated sand
Example :
The following are the results of a standard penetration test in sand. Determine the corrected
standard penetration number, (N₁ )₆ ₀ , at various depths. Note that the water table was not
observed within a depth of 10.5m below the ground surface. Assume that the average unit weight
of sand is 18kN/𝑚b .
Depth, z (m) N₆ ₀
1.5 9
3.0 6
4.5 10
6.0 12
7.5 14
Solution :
".4
!
𝐶, = f’ₒ 𝑃ₐ = atmospheric pressure (100kN/𝑚6 )
gₐ
Now the following table can be prepared :
Depth, z (m) 𝛔’ₒ (kN/𝒎𝟐 ) 𝑪𝑵 𝑵₆₀ (N₁ )₆ ₀
1.5 27 1.9245 9 ≈ 17
3.0 54 1.3608 6 ≈8
4.5 81 1.1111 10 ≈ 11
6.0 108 0.9623 12 ≈ 11
7.5 135 0.8607 14 ≈ 12
Example :
Refer to previous example, estimate the average soil friction angle, ɸ’, from z = 0 to z = 7.5m.
Solution :
".bc
[! ,₆₀
ɸ’ = 𝑡𝑎𝑛 𝛔’ₒ 𝑃ₐ = atmospheric pressure (100kN/𝑚6 )
!6.6i6".b
𝑷ₐ
Now the following table can be prepared :
Depth, z (m) 𝛔’ₒ (kN/𝒎𝟐 ) 𝑵₆₀ ɸ’ (deg)
1.5 27 9 38.48
3.0 54 6 32.28
4.5 81 10 34.96
6.0 108 12 35.03
7.5 135 14 35.08
Average ɸ’ = 35.17˚
4.3.2 Sampling with a Scrapper Bucket
Ø Obtaining a sample by split spoon with a spring core catcher in the sand mixed with
pebbles may not practical as the pebbles may prevent the springs from closing.
Ø The scrapper bucket may be used to take undisturbed representative samples in this case.
Figure 4.7: Scrapper bucket. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
4.3.3 Sampling with a Thin-Walled Tube
Ø Often referred as Shelby tubes.
Ø Mostly used for obtaining undisturbed clayey soils
Ø For cohesive soils up to firm consistency (𝑁₆₀ ≤ 10)
Figure 4.8: Thin-walled tube. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
4.3.4 Sampling with a Piston Sampler
Ø If the soil samples are very soft or larger than 76.2mm in diameter, they will fall out of
the sampler.
Ø Piston can be used for such condition for very soft to soft cohesive soils with 𝑁₆₀ ≤ 2.
Figure 4.9: Piston sampler; (a) sampler at the bottom of borehole; (b) tube pushed into the soil hydraulically. Retrieved
from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
4.4 Observation of Water Tables
• The existence of a water level near a proposed foundation can crucially impacts the
foundation’s load bearing capacity and elastic settlement.
• The engineer must initiate the highest and lowest possible water levels during the life of
project.
• The water level in highly impermeable layers may not stabilize for a several weeks.
Therefore, a piezometer should be used for accurate and longer time measurement of
water level.
Figure 4.10: Casagrande-type piezometer. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition; “Site
Investigation and Interpretation”, JKR Sabah One-Day Short Course on Slope Engineering, Promenade Hotel, Kota
Kinabalu, Sabah, 30 June 2010.
4.5 Vane Shear Test
• Vane shear test (ASTM D-2573) can be used to determine the in-situ undrained shear
strength (𝐶H ) of very soft to firm clay.
• For actual design purposes, the undrained shear strength values obtained from the field
test are too high, and it is suggested to be corrected according to the equation :
𝐶H (LMJJKLTKR) = λ𝐶H(mno)
where λ = correction factor.
• According to Bjerrum (1972), λ can be expressed as :
λ = 1.7 − 0.54 log 𝑃𝐼(%)
• Morris and Williams (1994) proposed the following correlations :
λ = 1.18𝑒 ["."z({|) + 0.57 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑃𝐼 > 5)
λ = 7.01𝑒 ["."z(••) + 0.57 (𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐿𝐿 𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛 %)
• The field vane shear strength also can be related with preconsolidation pressure and
overconsolidation ratio of clay. Mayne and Mitchell (1988) proposed the following
empirical relationship :
".zb
σ’L = 7.04 𝐶H(UQKPR)
where σ’L = preconsolidation pressure (kN/𝑚6 )
𝐶H(UQKPR) = field vane shear strength (kN/𝑚6 ).
𝐶H(UQKPR)
𝑂𝐶𝑅 = 𝛽
σ’M
where σ’M = effective overburden pressure.
• The magnitude 𝛽 is developed by various researchers :
Mayne and Mitchell (1988) :
[".cz
𝛽 = 22 𝑃𝐼(%)
Hansbo (1957) :
222
𝛽 =
𝜔 (%)
Larsson (1980) :
1
𝛽 =
0.08 + 0.0055 (𝑃𝐼)
Figure 4.11: Field vane shear device. Retrieved from “Site Investigation and Interpretation”, JKR Sabah One-Day Short
Course on Slope Engineering, Promenade Hotel, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, 30 June 2010.
4.6 Cone Penetration Test
• It is a versatile sounding method that can be used to determine the materials in a soil
pofile and estimate their engineering properties.
• The cone penetrometers can be used to measure :
o Cone resistance (𝑞L ) to penetration developed by the cone, which is equal to the
vertical force applied to the cone, divided by its horizontally projected area.
o Frictional resistance (𝑓L ), which is the resistance measured by a sleeve located
above the cone with the local soil surrounding it. The frictional resistance is equal
to the vertical force applied to the sleeve, divided by its surface area.
• There are 2 types of penetrometers:
o Mechanical friction-cone penetrometer
o Electric friction-cone penetrometer
Figure 4.12: Mechanical friction-cone penetrometer. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
Figure 4.13: Electric friction-cone penetrometer. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
• The friction ratio is defined as
𝑓𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓L
𝐹J = =
𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑞L
• Anagnostopoulos et al. (2003) had expressed 𝐹J as
𝐹J % = 1.45 − 1.36 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝐷4" (𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑒)
𝐹J % = 0.7811 − 1.611 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝐷4" (𝑚𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑒)
where 𝐷4" = size through which 50% of soil will pass through (mm).
Figure 4.14: Cone penetrometer test with friction measurement. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition
• Correlation between Relative Density (𝐷J ) and 𝑞L for Sand
- Kulhawy and Mayne (1990) proposed the following relationship to correlate 𝐷J ,
𝑞L and the vertical effective stress σ’M :
𝑞L
1 𝑃S
𝐷J =
305𝑄L 𝑂𝐶𝑅!.z σ’M ".4
𝑃S
where OCR = overconsolidation ratio
𝑃S = atmospheric pressure
𝑄L = compressibility factor
Recommended values for 𝑄L : Highly compressible sand = 0.91
Moderately compressible sand = 1.0
Low compressible sand = 1.09
• Correlation between 𝑞L and Drained Friction Angle (ɸ’) for Sand
𝑞L
ɸ’ = 𝑡𝑎𝑛[! 0.1 + 0.38 𝑙𝑜𝑔
σ’M
• Correlation between 𝑞L and 𝑁’"
𝑞L
𝑃S S
= 𝑐𝐷4"
𝑁’"
where c = 5.44 and a = 0.26 (Kulhawy and Mayne, 1990).
• Correlations for Undrained Shear Strength (𝐶H ), Preconsolidation Pressure (σ’L ) and
Overconsolidation Ratio (OCR) for Clays
- The undrained shear strength, 𝐶H can be expressed as
-
𝑞L − σM
𝐶H =
𝑁“
where σM = total vertical stress
𝑁“ = bearing capacity factor
- The bearing capacity factor 𝑁“ may vary from 11 to 19 for normally consolidated
clays and 25 for overconsolidated clay. According to Mayne and Kemper (1988) :
𝑁“ = 15 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑒)
𝑁“ = 20 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑒)
- Mayne and Kemper (1988) also provided the following correlations for
preconsolidation pressure (σ’L ) and overconsolidation ratio (OCR) as
σ’L = 0.243 (𝑞L )".”’
where units for σ’L and 𝑞L are MN/𝑚6 .
𝑞L − σM !."!
𝑂𝐶𝑅 = 0.37
σ′M
where σM and σ′M = total and effective stress respectively.
4.7 Coring of Rocks
• The rock coring is necessary when a rock layer is encountered during a drilling operation.
• To core rocks, a core barrel is fixed to a drilling rod and the coring bit is connected to the
bottom of barrel.
• There are 2 types of core barrel : single-tube core barrel and double-tube core barrel.
• Rock cores acquired from single-tube core barrel are usually highly disturbed and
fractured because of torsion.
Figure 4.15: Rock coring; (a) single-tube core barrel; (b) double-tube core barrel. Retrieved from Principles of Foundation
Engineering, 8th edition
Reference
1. Department of Geological Survey, Malaysia, 1988. Geological Map of Peninsular
Malaysia (Based on 8th edition geological map, 1985).
2. Gue, S.S., "Site Investigation and Interpretation", JKR Sabah One-Day Short Course on
Slope Engineering, Promenade Hotel, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, 30 June 2010
3. Gue, S.S & Chow, C.M. (2009), "Site investigation for Building & Civil Works",
Association of Consulting Engineers Malaysia, Sarawak Branch - Swinbume University
of Technology, Sarawak Campus (ACEM- SUTS) 1-Day Joint Seminar On "Pile
Foundation Design", 2 November 2009
4. Liew,S.S. (2008), "Specifiying Site Investigation", IEM-MSIA Workshop & Exhibition
on Site Investigation, Tropicana, Petaling Jaya, 13-14 Oct 2008.
5. Braja M. Das, 2017, “Principles of Foundation Engineering”, Cengage Learning, Boston,
USA. 8th Edition.