Home Improved correlation of soil modulus with SPT N values
Article Open Access

Improved correlation of soil modulus with SPT N values

  • Jaydeep Dinkar Wagh ORCID logo and Abhay Namdeorao Bambole EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: July 4, 2024
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Determining soil “E” (modulus of deformation) value has been a persistent challenge in geotechnical engineering. Existing correlations between “E” and SPT (standard penetration test) “N” values for granular soils yield a notably broad spectrum of “E” values, leading to uncertainty and subjectivity in design. A comprehensive review of these correlations reveals significant limitations, such as limited data, small-scale or indirect tests, and other constraints. The present study highlights the deficiencies inherent in existing correlations and proposes a reliable correlation for granular soils. The present study utilizes the results of numerous large-scale load tests conducted on RCC (reinforced cement concrete) foundations resting on granular soils, at various locations in India and at a refinery site in Nigeria. These tests totalling 85 in number serve as a basis for developing an improved and reliable EN correlation for granular soils. Soil “E” values (secant) were back-calculated for each footing load test result and correlated with SPT “N” values. The correlation presented in this article is based on a sound large database and yields higher “E” values than those predicted by most available correlations. This advancement will lead to substantial cost savings and enhanced reliability in the design of foundations and substructures.

List of notations

B

Footing width (m)

C

Clay content (%)

D

Footing depth below the original ground (m)

E

Soil modulus of deformation (kN/m2)

E M

Constrained modulus (kN/m2)

G

Gravel content (%)

G.W.T

Depth to the groundwater table (m)

I f

Depth factor

I s

Steinbrenner influence factor

LL

Liquid limit (%)

M

Silt content (%)

N

Field SPT N value

PL

Plastic limit (%)

q 0

Footing pressure (kN/m2)

S

Sand content (%)

µ

Poisson’s ratio

1 Introduction

In geotechnical engineering, accurately determining soil parameters from field tests is vital for the design process. Standard penetration test (SPT) is one of the most widely employed field tests for assessing the engineering properties of soil. In this test, a standard size sampler is driven into the ground by the impact of a standard hammer, and the number of blows required to drive the sampler into the ground to a depth of 30 cm is known as the SPT N value. This value is then used to estimate the engineering properties of soil, including the crucial soil modulus (E), using correlations available in the literature. The “E” value is the slope of the stress–strain graph and is a measure of soil’s compressibility (strain) under the application of a load. It plays a pivotal role in predicting soil/ground deformation.

Numerous correlations exist in the literature for determining “E” from “N.” However, these correlations present a significantly wide range of “E” values, lacking guidance on which correlation to use in design. Consequently, practitioners adopt different correlations resulting in wide variations in outcomes and often overly conservative designs. A detailed review of available correlations reveals that these correlations have been derived from limited data, indirect tests, and small-scale tests or are afflicted by other limitations. The deficiencies of these correlations are summarized in Table 1 and discussed in Section 2 (past studies) of this article.

Table 1

Existing previously published correlations of SPT N and E values for granular soil

Sr. no. Soil type Correlation (E in kN/m2) Basis/Limitations/Remarks Contributors
1 1a Fine sand E = 490(N + 14.5)
  1. E is constrained tangent modulus (E M).

  2. E value is determined from laboratory oedometer tests.

  3. Schultze and Melzer (1965) noted that E values in this correlation are poor owing to sample disturbance.

  4. SPT (N) value was obtained from a standard dynamic cone penetrometer (blows per foot).

  5. Correlations are best-fit lines with scatter increasing for finer soils.

Schultze and Menzenback [3]
1b Fine sand above the ground water table (G.W.T.) E = 5,200 + 330 N
1c Fine sand below G.W.T. E = 7,100 + 490 N
1d Sand E = 3,900 + 450 N
1e Gravelly sand E = 4,300 + 1,180 N
1f Sand and gravel E = 3,800 + 1,050 N
1g Silty sand E = 2,400 + 530 N
1h Silt (PI < 15%) E = 1,200 + 580 N
1i Silt (PI > 15%) E = 400 + 1,150 N
2 Sand E = 720 (1 − µ 2) N
  1. Based on load–settlement curves proposed by Terzaghi and Peck (1948) [14]. Many contributors, including those in CIRIA report 143 [10] and Bowles [11], have referred to these curves as conservative.

Farrent [13]
3 Sand E 4 3 =44 N
  1. Correlation is developed based on data from Schultze–Menzenbak (Correlation 1) for fine sand and silt (PI < 15 %).

  2. All limitations outlined for Correlation 1 also pertain to this correlation.

Chaplin [4]
4 Dry sand E = (264.2 log(N) – 263.4 (q) + 375.6) σ 0.522
  1. E is tangent-constrained modulus (E M).

  2. N denotes blows from dynamic cone penetrometer tests.

  3. E determined in indirect manner from equations of Moussa derived by laboratory tests:

E = νσ w , where ν is determined from the void ratio with the aid of isotopic soundings and w = 0.522.
Schultze and Melzer [2]
5 5a Saturated sand E = 500 (N + 15)
  1. Based on screw plate load tests involving relatively small-sized circular plates (0.02-0.123 m 2) conducted below the water table.

Webb [16]
5b Clayey sand E = 330 (N + 5)
5c For average profiles E = 400 (N + 12)
6 6a Sand, normally consolidated NC E = 755(N + 25)
  1. E is a constrained modulus (E M).

  2. Based on data from seven case records of bridge footing settlement.

  3. Cone penetration data converted to SPT (N = q c/4.5).

  4. Often difficult to differentiate between NC and OC granular soils, to use the correlations.

  5. Even soil with SPT N value of 66 has been considered as NC.

D’Appolonia [5]
6b Sand, over-consolidated (OC) E = 1,050 N + 4,000 (Equation by Bowles from the plot of D’Appolonia)
  1. E is secant-constrained modulus (E M).

  2. Based on the measurement of footing settlements of a steel plant in Northern Indiana, USA, on natural dune sand and vibratory compacted sand.

  3. Often difficult to differentiate between NC and OC granular soils to use the correlations.

  4. Sudden increase in E value estimated using correlation 6b for OC soils compared to E value for NC soils obtained using Correlation 6a. The degree of consolidation in OC soils is not factored in Correlation 6b.

  5. Data of dry sand with groundwater table lowered by dewatering.

  6. Correlation is based on data of a single site only.

7 7a Silty sand, sand, gravel E = 700 N
  1. Derived from results of pressure meter tests.

  2. E is the pressure meter modulus (E p).

Yoshida and Yoshinaka [17]
7b E = 2,100 N
  1. E is obtained from horizontal loading on square plates of 30 cm width.

  2. This E value was shown to be 3 E p as evaluated in Correlation 7a.

8 8a Silt with sand E = 300 (N + 6) for N < 15
  1. Reported by Begemann [18] as used in Greece.

  2. Basis of this correlation is not provided in the report.

  3. Almost identical correlations were subsequently presented with the basis of formation, by contributors from Greece, Anagnostopoulos and Papadopoulos [15] for 3 different soil types.

Reported by Begemann [18] as being used in Greece
E = 4,000 + 300 (N – 6) for N > 15
8b Fine sand E = 350 (N + 6) for N < 15
E = 4,000 + 350 (N – 6) for N > 15
8c Medium sand E = 450 (N + 6) for N < 15
E = 4,000 + 450 (N – 6) for N > 15
8d Coarse sand E = 700 (N + 6) for N < 15
E = 4,000 + 700 (N–6) for N > 15
8e Sand with gravel E = 1,000 (N + 6) for N < 15
E = 4,000 + 1,000 (N – 6) for N > 15
8f Gravelly sand E S = 1,200 (N + 6) for N < 15
E = 4,000 + 1,200 (N – 6) for N > 15
9 Sand E = (35,000–50,000) (log(N))
  1. Correlation was based on USSR Practice. SPT blow counts considered in this may not be standard.

Trofimenkov [19]
10 Sand E s = 15,000 (ln(N)) to 22,000(ln(N))
  1. Correlation mentioned by Bowles [11]. Source could not be located.

Bowles [11]
11 11a Sand E = 500 N
  1. Correlation 11a is based on pressure meter tests.

  2. Correlation 11a was later updated to form correlation 11b, utilizing data of rebound and reloading pressure meter tests.

  3. As per Komornik [20], the E value obtained using rebound and reloading test data is 5–8 times higher than that obtained from initial loading.

Komornik et al. [21]
11b Sand E = 4,000 N Komornik [20]
12 All soils E = 35,000 N 0.8
  1. E is the dynamic modulus obtained from shear wave tests.

  2. Dynamic E values are suitable only for the design of sub-structures subjected to low-strain dynamic loads.

Ohsaki and Iwasaki [22]
13 Silica sand E = 16,900 N 0.9
  1. E is the dynamic modulus obtained from shear wave tests.

  2. Dynamic E values are suitable only for the design of sub-structures subjected to low-strain dynamic loads.

Ohsaki and Kawasaki [22]
14 Sand For driven piles:
  1. Correlation obtained using data from load tests on driven piles which are known to alter ground conditions during driving.

Poulos and Dais [23]
E = 55,000 (for N = 10) E = 70,000 (for N = 30) E = 110,000 (for N = 50)
Typical values:
E = 20,000 for N = 10, E = 50,000 for N = 30 E = 100,000 for N = 50
15 Sand E = 1,600 N
  1. Correlation is obtained from reloading data of pressure meter tests.

  2. Kishida and Nakai [24] states that reloading E is three times that of initial loading E, whereas, Komornik [20] suggests that reloading E is five to eight times higher than initial loading E.

Kishida and Nakai [24]
16 Sand E = 5,000 N modified to E = 3,600 N in 1977
  1. Correlation is based on published data of plate load tests (plates of diameter 0.3–0.76 m) and validated with case studies.

  2. Case studies used for validation involved large mat foundations, which exhibited relatively low settlements.

  3. Original correlation subsequently modified in 1977 based on six additional case records.

Parry [25]
17 Gravelly sand E = 1,500–2,500 N
  1. Correlation established based on a SCPT and E values derived from screw plate tests (involving relatively small-sized plates – 0.1 m2) in USA.

  2. This correlation was converted to SPT N values using the relation between SCPT and SPT N values.

  3. Based on tests conducted on filled up soils in a tank with small-sized footings (dia – 152 mm), the original correlation E = 2.5q c was revised in 1978 to E = 2.5q c for spread foundations and E = 3.5q c for strip foundations.

  4. Value of soil modulus E obtained using this correlation is used for the estimation of settlement using the Schmertmann [26] settlement equation.

Schmertmann et al. [26]
18 18a Sand (NC) E = 3,500 N
  1. Correlation is based on light-weight dynamic penetrometer (weight: 10 kg) and triaxial tests on sand samples of 430 mm diameter prepared by sedimentation.

Clayton et al. [27]
18b Sand (OC) E = 40,000 N
19 Sand E = 12,330 N + 18,852
  1. Correlation cited in CIRIA Report 143 (1995) [10] as obtained from data of load tests on driven piles which are known to alter ground conditions during driving.

Christoulas and Pachakis [28]
20 Dry fine sand or silty sand E = 7,000 (N 0.5)
  1. Correlation is based on data from a relatively small-sized screw plate (<150 mm diameter) load tests and pressure meter tests for 3 sites in Denmark.

  2. E denotes the pressure meter modulus (E p).

Denver [29]
21 Clay and sand E = 395,000 (N 0.68)
  1. E is the dynamic modulus obtained from shear wave tests.

  2. Dynamic E values are suitable only for the design of sub-structures subjected to low-strain dynamic loads.

Imai and Tonouchi [30]
22 Alluvial sand E = 400 N
  1. Correlation is based on data from pressure meter tests conducted in Japan.

  2. E denotes the pressure meter modulus (E p).

  3. Correlation is best-fit line to data with wide scatter.

Ohya et al. [31]
23 23a Fine to medium sand E = 500 N + 5,000
  1. E is tangent-constrained modulus (E M) obtained from laboratory oedometer tests on undisturbed and semi-disturbed samples.

  2. Correlation for sand was subsequently modified (Correlation 32).

Anagnostopoulos and Papadopoulos [15]
23b Sand E = 420 N + 3,900
23c Silt E = 300 N + 2,800
24 Sand E = 2,600–2,900 N
  1. Cited by Bowles [11]. Basis of correlation is not mentioned.

Bowles [11]
25 Alluvial sand E = 360 N
  1. Best-fit line from pressure meter test data with wide scatter.

Tsuchiya and Toyooka [32]
26 Glacial sand E = 660 N
27 Sand E = 400 N–5,300 N for N = 4
  1. Derived from compression index (Ic) values, which are based on data of 100 case records for foundation settlements collated by Burland and Burbidge [9].

  2. Due to spread of these case studies across various countries coupled with SPT tests conducted during early periods with lower rod energies, the consistency of SPT N values may vary.

  1. According to Stroud [8], N 60 values in modern UK practice are expected to be 0.8 times lower compared to the N values reported in earlier case studies.

CIRIA Report 143 (1995) [10]
E = 700 N–7,000 N for N = 10
E = 1,500 N – 10,000 N for N = 30
E = 2,300 N – 13,500 N for N = 60
Partially saturated sand and gravel E = 222 N 0.888
  1. Correlation cited by Akguner [33].

  2. Derived from horizontal loading on plates.

  3. Original data could not be located.

Wrench and Nowatzki [34]
29 Sand E = 60,000 + 3,200 N
  1. Correlation cited by Akguner [33].

  2. Derived from pile load tests with SPT N averaged along the pile shaft.

  3. Original data could not be located.

Bazaraa and Kurkur [35]
30 Granular cemented gneissic residual soil E = (29 N + 270) 98.7 for 15 < N < 30 (i) Correlation obtained from the data of three footing load tests (footings of diameter of 0.4, 0.8, and 1.6 m) in Brazil. Rocha Filho [6]
31 31a Silt, sandy silt E = 400 N
  1. Cited by Navfac Manual. The original source or basis could not be located.

Navfac Manual DM 7.01 [36]
31b Silty sand, fine to medium sand E = 700 N
31c Coarse sand E = 1,000 N
31d Sandy gravel E = 1,200 N
32 Sand E = 800 N + 7,500
  1. E is tangent-constrained modulus (E M)

  2. Updated from Correlation 23 by same contributors.

Papadopoulos and Anagnostopoulos [37]
33 33a Loose to dense sand E = 1,200 N + 18,000 N
  1. Correlation obtained based on records of bored pile load tests in Japan and previous E value correlations of D’Appolonia et al. [5], Kishida and Nakai [23], and Papadopoulos (1982) [15]. Correlations for very dense sand based on E values reported by AIJ, 2974.

  2. Additional correlations involving soil shear strengths inherent in the analysis will influence derived correlation.

  3. Correlation is the approximate best-fit line with wide scatter.

Yamashita et al. [38]
33b Very dense sand E = 3,920 N
34 Sand E = 1,800 N
  1. Based on a single chimney settlement data.

  2. N values of 8 to above 50 averaged as 30 over the influence zone.

  3. Subsurface layers of fine to coarse sand with occasional silt layers and frequent cobbles and boulders will introduce uncertainties in the derived correlation.

Davie and Lewis [7]
35 Clay and sand E = 3,000 N
  1. Correlation relies on load test data on driven piles which are known to alter ground conditions during driving.

  2. N value is along the pile–soil interface.

Decourt [39]
36 Piedmont sandy silt E = 220 N 0.82
  1. Correlation derived from relatively small dilatometer tests in Washington DC.

  2. E denotes the dilatometer modulus (E d). E 25 = 0.9 E d for NC and (2–10) E d for OC soils.

  3. Correlation reported to have been verified using analysis of data from eight locations (4 mats, 3 pile load tests, and 1 footing).

  4. Data from adjacent sites were utilized for locations with mat foundations.

Mayne and Frost [40]
37 37a NC sand E N 60 = 3 , 200 q net q ult 0.7
  1. Correlations obtained from EN graphs provided by Stroud [8] are presented in the equation form.

  2. Correlation graphs are based on foundation and plate load test data compiled by Burland and Burbidge [9].

  3. As per CIRIA Report 143 (1995) [10], significant assumptions were required to develop this correlation.

  4. Identification of q ult value involved in this correlation is subject to considerable uncertainty as per CIRIA Report 143, (1995) [10].

  5. Lower range of E values pertains to the dataset from Levy and Morton [41]. Total 17 tests were presented by Levy et al.; however, Stroud considered only ten (10) test results yielding a lower range of E values. Load settlement Graphs of the data set suggest the influence of onset of shear failure on the derived EN correlation.

  6. Twelve out of the 24 data points used in the development of correlation for OC sands are sourced from D’Appolonia’s work. Whereas a separate EN correlation (Correlation 6b) presented by D’Appolonia based on the same work is independent of pressure variations.

  7. Several case records with relatively low SPT N values of 10–14 are also included for developing correlation for OC soils, while one case record with SPT N of 44 is considered for NC soils.

  8. Correlation for NC sands is based on the limited data of 13 case records from 6 locations. Of these, 2 case records of Nonveiller [42] pertain to complex foundation conditions (Schmertmann [25]. Three case records of Farrent [13] pertain to subsurface conditions with cohesive soils (clay) below 10 m depth and intermediate soft rock layers, lying within the pressure influence zone of 24 m wide foundations.

Stroud [8]
37b OC Sand E N 60 = 4 , 500 q net q ult 0.7
38 38a Sand with fines E = 500 N
  1. The basis of these correlations could not be located.

  2. These correlations with SPT N are mentioned for first-order approximations only.

  3. Separate correlations of the constrained elastic modulus (M) with static cone penetration q c from calibration chamber tests provided in this reference.

Kulhawy and Mayne [1]
38b Clean sand E = 1,000 N
38c Clean OC Sand E = 1,500 N
39 Sand 900(N = 16)
  1. Correlation obtained as mode of 16 previous existing correlations.

El Sayed and El Kasaby [43]
40 40a Silts E = 400 N
  1. No data or basis shown for the correlations. Similar correlations are mentioned in Navfac Manual DM7.01 [36] (Correlation 30).

Sabatini et al. [44]
40b Sandy silt and fine sand E = 700 N
40c Coarse Sand E =1,000 N
40d Sandy gravel E =1,200 N
41 Cohesionless soil E = 1,000 (70 ln(N) − 100)
  1. Correlation obtained from data of load tests on driven concrete and steel piles at bridge locations in California, USA. Driven piles are known to alter ground conditions during driving.

  2. Correlations with a single SPT N assumed along the shaft and tip of piles for relatively long (6–29 m) piles.

  3. Mindlin’s closed-form solution which includes approximate corrections for layered soils has been utilized for analysis.

  4. The analysis involved other correlations of soil shear strength with SPT N along pile shaft.

  5. Correlation is best fit line with wide scatter.

Akguner and Olson [45]
42 Sand E = 500(N + 15)
  1. The original source or basis not mentioned. However, this correlation is similar to correlation of Webb (Correlation 5).

  2. E values obtained from this correlation can be increased by 1.5–3 times for OC sand, Robertson and Campanella [47]

Bowles [46]
43 Sand (saturated) E = 250(N + 15)
  1. The original source or basis not mentioned.

  2. E value from this correlation for saturated sand is exactly half of Webb’s correlation (Correlation 5). However, Webb’s original correlation was developed based on tests below G.W.T.

Bowles [46]
44 Clayey sand E = 320 (N + 15)
  1. The source or basis is not mentioned.

Bowles [46]
45 Gravelly sand E = 600 (N + 6) if N < 15
  1. The original source or basis of this correlation is not mentioned. However, it appears to be nearly similar to the correlations cited by Begemann [18] as being used in Greece (Correlation 7).

Bowles [46]
E = 600 (N + 6) + 2,000 if N > 15
46 Sand E s = 6,000 N
  1. Original source or basis is not mentioned.

Bowles [46]
47 Sand E = 10(N + 15)
  1. Basis of this correlation is not mentioned in reference. However, it appears to be based on past experience.

Bowles [46]
47 Clean sand E = 5,000 sqrtOCR + 1,200 N
  1. Source or basis is not mentioned.

Coduto [48]
48 Silty sand and clayey sand E = 2,500 sqrtOCR + 600 N
  1. Source or basis is not mentioned.

Coduto [48]

It is imperative to develop a new, reliable correlation based on representative tests and ample data. This study utilizes a large database of load tests conducted on reinforced cement concrete (RCC) footings resting on granular soils to establish a reliable correlation between “E” and “N” values. The proposed correlation offers the potential for significant cost reductions in the design of foundations and substructures.

2 Past studies

A number of E and SPT N correlations (>40) for granular soils have been published over the past 60 years. Figure 1 provides a graphical presentation of currently available correlations of EN values for granular soils. The limitations of these correlations are summarized in Table 1, revealing that these correlations are either based on non-representative indirect tests, small-scale tests, and limited data or possess other constraints.

Figure 1 
               Graphical illustration of the existing published correlations of E and SPT N values for granular soil.
Figure 1

Graphical illustration of the existing published correlations of E and SPT N values for granular soil.

Most of these correlations are best-fit lines with data exhibiting notable scatter. As noted by Kulhawy and Mayne [1], all existing EN correlations exhibit considerable scatter. Furthermore, Table 1 reveals that several correlations (correlations 1, 3, 4, 18, 23, and 32) rely on laboratory experiments, which can potentially yield inaccurate outcomes in granular soils due to the relatively small size of specimens (<100 mm) and inherent disturbances during sampling and testing. Schultze and Melzer [2] affirmed that the E values acquired from the earlier EN correlation (Correlation 1) by Schultze and Menzenbak [3], derived from laboratory tests, suffer from deficiencies due to sample disturbance. Nonetheless, the subsequent correlation (Correlation 4) introduced by Schultze and Melzer [2] relied on indirect methods using isotopic soundings and other correlations based on laboratory test data. Moreover, the N value of these correlations (Correlations 1 and 4) was obtained from the Dynamic Cone Penetration Test and not from the SPT. Chaplin [4] introduced a correlation (Correlation 3) using the fine sand and silt data from Schultze and Menzenbak [3], with all the limitations of Correlation 1 also implicitly applicable to this correlation.

A number of correlations presented in Table 1 are based on relatively small-scale tests or limited data. Correlations 5, 17, and 20 are based on screw plate tests with a screw diameter of 0.15–0.76 m. Correlations 7b and 16 are based on plate load tests with plate sizes of 0.3–0.76 m. Correlations 7a, 11, 15, 20, 22, 25, and 26 are based on a pressure meter test. Correlation 36 is based on a flat plate dilatometer test with a 0.06 m expandable membrane. One of the widely used correlations (Correlation 6), presented by D’Appolonia et al. [5], is based on foundation settlement data of compacted soil fill from a solitary site in USA. Rocha Filho’s [6] correlation (Correlation 30) is based on three footing load tests conducted at a site in Brazil. Correlation 34, developed by Davie and Lewis [7], is based on foundation settlement records of only one chimney structure in England.

Two correlations (Correlations 29 and 33) rely on vertical load tests conducted on relatively long bored piles, which inherently involve various assumptions/approximations during analysis. A few correlations (Correlations 14, 19, 33, 35, and 41) are derived from the load test on driven piles, which are known to alter ground conditions during pile driving. In several correlations (Correlations 1, 3, 4, 6, 23, and 32), the constrained modulus “E M” is designated as E, which is typically 20% lower than E M.

The most noteworthy attempt to establish a reliable correlation (Correlation 31) was undertaken by Stroud [8]. This correlation is based on historical case records of foundation settlement along with SPT N values, documented by Burland and Burbridge [9]. The stress dependency was emphasized by plotting EN values against q/q ult in this correlation. However, as per the CIRIA report by CIRIA report 143 [10], the development of this correlation necessitated several assumptions. Further limitations of the basis of this correlation are mentioned against this correlation in Table 1.

A few correlations (Correlations 12, 13, and 21), which yield notably high E values, were developed by measuring the shear wave velocity in a cross-hole seismic test. Nonetheless, these correlations are only suitable for the assessment and design of sub-structures subjected to low-strain dynamic loads. According to Bowles [11], the dynamic E values are typically 2.5–4 times higher than the static E values, as indicated in graphs presented by Arango et al. [12]. The source or basis of some correlations (Correlations 8, 31, 38, 40, 42 to 48) was either unmentioned or could not be found in the literature.

Correlation 2, which is presented by Farrent [13], relies on load–settlement curves of Terzaghi and Peck (1948) [14]. Several authors, including the CIRIA report 143 [10], Anagnostopoulos and Papadopoulos [15], and Bowles [11], have stated these curves as being conservative.

Komornik [21] introduced Correlation 11a based on the initial loadings of pressure meter tests. Komornik [20] subsequently updated the correlation by considering rebound and re-loading data of pressure meter tests and presented a new correlation (Correlation 11b). The E value obtained from the updated correlation is noted to be 5–8 times higher.

Schmertmann [26] introduced Correlation 17, which is derived from the standard cone penetration test (SCPT) and screw plate tests (using relatively small 0.1 m² plates) conducted in the USA. The resulting E value from this correlation is specifically intended for use within the Schmertmann [26] settlement equation.

2.1 Novelty statement

The present study has developed a precise and reliable correlation for determining the elastic modulus “E” for granular soils. This study relies on an extensive database comprising 85 footing load tests and accompanying SPT data conducted in India and Nigeria, as well as 5 footing load tests carried out by FHWA in the USA. The proposed correlation yields higher “E” values than a majority of the existing correlations. This improvement offers significant economic advantages in the design of foundations and substructures.

3 Footing load test details

3.1 Site details

The locations of footing load tests are distributed across different parts of India and at a refinery site in Nigeria. Tables 2 and 3 provide detailed information of these tests, including relevant soil properties and groundwater levels. As observed from the tables, a majority of the footing load tests in this study were conducted on fine-grained granular soils, such as silty sand, sandy silt, or silt. Table 2 presents the data for 19 footing load tests conducted in India, 7 tests at a refinery site in Nigeria, and 5 tests conducted in USA (by FHWA), while Table 3 presents the data exclusively for additional 59 tests conducted at the refinery site in Nigeria after dynamic compaction.

Table 2

Data for footing load test at 31 different locations in India

Sr. no. Project B (m) D (m) N G S M + C LL/PL G.W.T. (m)
1 Brys Buzz, Noida 1.5 2.5 10 0 80 20 NP 3.5
2 Ajnara, Noida 2 5.5 10 0 64 36 NP 2.0
3 ORB, Radiant, Noida 2 10 49 0 93 7 NP 12.9
4 ORB, Opulent, Noida 2 10 71 0 88 12 NP 12.5
5 Assotech BreezeFLT1, Gurgaon 1.5 7.5 21 0 70 30 NP 11.0
6 Assotech BreezeFLT2, Gurgaon 2 7.5 21 0 92 8 NP 10.9
7 AssotechBlith, Sec 99, Gurgaon 1.5 5 7 0 53 47 25/18 11.2
8 Gaur City Mall, Noida 2 10 15 2 84 14 NP 13.3
9 Gaursons, GY16 Area, Noida 2 3 11 1 92 17 NP 13.9
10 Equinox, Bangalore (FLT1) 2 6 18 0 85 15 NP 5.0
11 Equinox, Bangalore (FLT2) 2 6 18 0 85 15 NP 5.0
12 FHWA 3 m North, Texas, USA 3 0.8 17 0 85 15 NP 5.0
13 FHWA 1.5 m, Texas, USA 1.5 0.8 15 0 85 15 NP 5.0
14 FHWA 3 m South, Texas, USA 3 0.9 21 0 85 15 NP 5.0
15 FHWA 2.5 m, Texas, USA 2.5 0.8 15 0 85 15 NP 5.0
16 FHWA 1 m, Texas, USA 1 0.7 13 0 85 15 NP 5.0
17 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 1 2.5 1.5 5 0 98 2 NP 1.4
18 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 2 2.5 1.5 2 0 87 13 NP 1.5
19 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 3 2.5 1.5 2 0 95 5 NP 2.1
20 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 5 2.5 1.5 3 0 80 20 NP 1.8
21 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 6 2.5 1.5 5 0 77 33 NP 2.0
22 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 7 2.5 1.5 7 0 91 9 NP 1.5
23 Dangote Refinery, Nigeria FLT 8 2.5 1.5 7 0 86 14 NP 1.9
24 DLF (Cyber Park), Gurgaon 2.0 13 31 0 45 55 22/17 >25
25 DLF Midtown, Gurgaon-FLT1 3 13.5 28 4 25 71 27/20 20.0
26 DLF Midtown, Gurgaon-FLT2 3 13.5 32 3 23 74 27/20 20.0
27 Amaravati High-court-FLT1 2 7.4 31 0 99 1 NP 8.1
28 Amaravati High court-FLT2 2 7.0 25 26 69 5 NP 7.7
29 Bhivani Medical, Haryana, FLT1 1.5 2.0 4 0 6 94 NP 2.4
30 Bhivani Medical, Haryana, FLT2 1.5 2.0 5 11 29 60 NP 3.0
31 Bhivani Medical, Haryana, FLT3 1.5 2.0 7 0 35 65 NP 3.0
Table 3

Data of footing load tests conducted after dynamic compaction at 59 locations at Dangote Refinery, Nigeria

Sr. no. Footing load test B (m) D (m) N G S S + C LL/PL G.W.T. (m)
1 Tank 13A 3 1.5 18 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
2 Tank 13B 3 1.5 11 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.16
3 Tank 14A 3 1.5 9 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
4 Tank 15A 3 1.5 29 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
5 Tank 15B 3 1.5 29 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
6 Tank 16A 3 1.5 26 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
7 Tank 16B 3 1.5 26 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1
8 Tank 17A 3 1.5 14 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
9 Tank 17B 3 1.5 27 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
10 Tank 18B 3 1.5 31 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
11 Tank 19C 3 1.5 14 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.25
12 Tank 19D 3 1.5 10 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.31
13 Tank 23E 3 1.5 21 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
14 Tank 23F 3 1.5 11 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
15 Tank 25C 3 1.5 13 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
16 Tank 25D 3 1.5 21 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
17 Tank 26A2 3 1.5 21 0 77–98 2–33 NP 0.6
18 Tank 26B1 3 1.5 29 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
19 Tank 33A 3 1.5 15 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
20 Tank 33B 3 1.5 28 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
21 Tank 34A1 3 1.5 23 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
22 Tank 34A2 3 1.5 22 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
23 Tank 34B1 3 1.5 17 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
24 Tank 58A1 3 1.5 25 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1
25 Tank 27A 3 1.5 24 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
26 Tank 27B 3 1.5 29 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.28
27 Tank 35A 3 1.5 14 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
28 Tank 35B 3 1.5 17 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
29 Tank 36C 3 1.5 25 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
30 Tank 36D 3 1.5 23 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
31 Tank 38G 3 1.5 20 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
32 Tank 38H 3 1.5 21 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
33 Tank 39A 3 1.5 23 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
34 Tank 39B 3 1.5 26 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
35 Tank 41E 3 1.5 22 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
36 Tank 41F 3 1.5 24 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1
37 Tank 42A 3 1.5 23 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
38 Tank 42B 3 1.5 25 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
39 Tank 44E 3 1.5 25 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
40 Tank 44F 3 1.5 19 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
41 Tank 45A 3 1.5 22 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.35
42 Tank 45B 3 1.5 26 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
43 Tank 46C 3 1.5 22 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
44 Tank 46D 3 1.5 22 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.3
45 Tank 49A 3 1.5 13 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
46 Tank 49B 3 1.5 10 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1
47 Tank 50A 3 1.5 23 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1
48 Tank 50B 3 1.5 21 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1
49 Tank 52C 3 1.5 27 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.7
50 Tank 52D 3 1.5 28 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
51 Tank 53B 3 1.5 28 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.6
52 Tank 53D 3 1.5 16 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
53 Tank 54A 3 1.5 44 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
54 Tank 54B 3 1.5 30 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.2
55 Tank 54C 3 1.5 31 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.4
56 Tank 55A 3 1.5 48 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.0
57 Tank 55B 3 1.5 25 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.0
58 Diesel Tank A 3 1.5 15 0 77–98 2–33 NP 0.4
59 Diesel Tank-B 3 1.5 7 0 77–98 2–33 NP 1.1

3.2 Experimental setup of footing load tests

The footing load tests (85 tests) were conducted in accordance with ASTM D1195 (2004) and also conforms to IS1888 (1985) standards. The tests were performed on large square RCC footings ranging from 1.5 to 3 m in size. Figure 2 illustrates the typical setup of footing load tests. The data obtained from the 85 footing load tests and an additional five tests carried out by FHWA were collectively analysed for this study.

Figure 2 
                  (a) Typical setup of footing load test (India and Nigeria). (b) Setup of footing load test (Dangote refinery site, Nigeria).
Figure 2

(a) Typical setup of footing load test (India and Nigeria). (b) Setup of footing load test (Dangote refinery site, Nigeria).

4 Results and discussion

4.1 Pressure vs settlement curves of footing load tests

Pressure–settlement curves derived from footing load tests (31 tests) conducted at various locations across India, at a refinery site in Nigeria, and the USA (FHWA data) are presented in Figure 3. Conversely, Figure 4 exhibits pressure–settlement curves obtained from footing load tests (59 tests) conducted on dynamically compacted soil at the refinery site in Nigeria. The soil E values (secant) from each of the footing load test results were determined using the elastic settlement formula given by Bowles [11].

(1) S = q o B 1 μ 2 E mI s I f ,

where S is the settlement (m), q 0 is the footing pressure (kN/m2), B′ is B/2 (m), µ is the Poisson’s ratio of soil (assumed as 0.33), E is the soil modulus of deformation (kN/m2), I s is the Steinbrenner influence factor based on the footing size (B) and thickness of soil layer (H) (I s assumed as 0.43 for H = 2B), m is 4 for the centre of footing, and I f is the depth factor (adopted as 1.0 since test footing is at the ground surface).

Figure 3 
                  Footing load test results (pressure versus settlement curves – India, Nigeria, and USA-FWHA data).
Figure 3

Footing load test results (pressure versus settlement curves – India, Nigeria, and USA-FWHA data).

Figure 4 
                  Footing load test results (pressure versus settlement curves – Dangote refinery site, Nigeria – after dynamic compaction).
Figure 4

Footing load test results (pressure versus settlement curves – Dangote refinery site, Nigeria – after dynamic compaction).

The E value (secant) was calculated using equation (1), with the data point corresponding to a footing pressure of 0.5 times the ultimate bearing capacity (q ult). The selection of 0.5 q ult for the footing pressure is based on the commonly used factor of safety of 2 in the foundation design. The ultimate bearing capacity (q ult) is regarded as the pressure where a distinct change is observed in the slope of the pressure–settlement curves (Figures 3 and 4). The distinct change in the slope of the pressure–settlement curve indicates the onset of shear failure in soil.

4.2 Development of EN correlation for granular soils

The soil E values (secant) determined from the footing load tests were plotted with SPT N values obtained from tests conducted in close proximity, as depicted in Figure 5.

Figure 5 
                  Correlations between E and SPT N values (based on the results of footing load tests).
Figure 5

Correlations between E and SPT N values (based on the results of footing load tests).

A linear plot through the lower range of the data of Figure 5 establishes a lower-bound EN correlation, as depicted in Equation (2). Additionally, a linear plot representing all the data points establishes the best-fit correlation, expressed as Equation (3).

(2) E = 1 , 705 N + 7 , 705 ( in kN/m 2 ) ,

(3) E = 2 , 920 N + 41 , 287 ( in kN/m 2 ) .

The correlation established in this study is compared with existing correlations in Figure 6. As observed from the figure, even the lower bound correlation established in this study results in a higher E value than the majority of the existing correlations. Notably, the best-fit correlation from this study yields an E value that is more than double the lower bound value.

Figure 6 
                  Proposed correlations superimposed on existing previously published best-fit correlation.
Figure 6

Proposed correlations superimposed on existing previously published best-fit correlation.

A few existing correlations are found to yield higher E values than the value obtained using best fit correlation proposed in this study. Notably, these correlations yielding higher E values are associated with dynamic E values rather than static ones. It is an established fact that dynamic E values of soil are around 2.5–4 times higher than that of the static E value.

5 Conclusions

The primary objective of this study was to establish a reliable and sound correlation between the E value (secant) and the SPT N value for granular soils. To achieve this, the present study utilizes the data from 85 large-scale footing load tests conducted on granular soils, at various locations in India and at a refinery site in Nigeria and from 5 tests conducted by FHWA in USA. Based on the analysis of data of these footing load tests, the following conclusions are drawn:

  1. According to the findings of this study, a near lower-bound correlation was found between the E value (kN/m2) and the SPT N value, expressed as E = 1,705 N + 7,705. Furthermore, a best-fit correlation of E = 2,920 N + 41,287 was established. For design purposes, the best fit line should be used cautiously, and a lower-bound correlation is conservatively recommended.

  2. It is worth highlighting that the resulting E values are notably higher than those obtained by most of the available correlations. This has important practical implications, as higher E values result in lower estimated ground movements, leading to substantial cost reductions in the design of sub-structures. It is interesting to note that several other correlations yielding larger E values are primarily intended for low-strain dynamic applications.

  3. The E and N value correlation was not found to exhibit significant stress dependence within the common stress range (≤0.5 q ult) typically utilized for foundation and substructure designs, contrary to what was suggested by Stroud [8].

  4. It is noteworthy that a majority of the footing load tests in this study were conducted on fine-grained granular soils, such as silty sand, sandy silt, or silt, which are relatively more compressible among granular soils and which yield lower E values. Therefore, the lower-bound correlation derived in this study can be conservatively utilized for any granular soil.

  5. It is important to note that additional tests and research are required to ascertain whether separate correlations that produce higher E values can be developed for coarser categories of granular soils (medium to coarse-grained).

5.1 Relevance and potential applications

The findings of this study have significant practical relevance and potential applications in the field of foundation and sub-structure design. The following points highlight the practical implications:

  1. Reliable correlation: The study establishes a reliable correlation between the soil deformation modulus E and the SPT N value based on sound large-scale database. Overall, the study’s findings and the established correlation will enable engineers to more accurately estimate soil deformation modulus (E) based on readily available SPT N values. The correlations established in this study have the potential to enhance the reliability and efficiency of foundation designs, leading to substantial cost reductions in construction projects.

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to express their deep gratitude to Prof. D. M. Dewaikar and Prof. V. N. Deshmukh for their continuous guidance and valuable input. The authors also wish to thank Ms. Komal Joshi for the assistance rendered in the literature review.

  1. Funding information: Authors state no funding involved.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and consented to its submission to the journal, reviewed all the results and approved the final version of the manuscript. JDW and ANB worked in tandem in the research process. JDW conducted the literature review and analyzed the database used in this study, while ANB contributed to analyzing the database to establish the correlations presented in this study.

  3. Conflict of interest: Author J.D.W. is an employee of Geocon International Pvt. Ltd. The authors declare no other conflict of interest.

  4. Data availability statement: The data that supports the findings of this study are available from any of the authors upon reasonable request.

References

[1] Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW. Manual on estimating soil properties for foundation design. Final Report for Project 1493-6, EPRI.El-6800, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California, Prepared by Cornell University, Geotechnical Engineering Group, Ithaca, NY; 1990.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Schultze E, Melzer KJ. The determination of the density and the modulus of compressibility of non-cohesive soils by soundings. Int. Soc. for Soil Mech.Geotech Eng. 1965.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Schultze E, Menzenback E. Standard penetration and compressibility of soil. 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Paris; 1961.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Chaplin TK. The compressibility of granular soils, with some applications to foundation engineering. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Enigneering. Vol. 1. Wiesbaden; 1963. p. 215–9.Search in Google Scholar

[5] D’Appolonia DJ, D’Appolonia E, Brissette RF. Settlement of spread footings on sand. J Soil Mech Found Div. 1968;94(3):735–60.10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001137Search in Google Scholar

[6] Rocha Filho P. Discussion of settlement of foundations on sand and gravel by J.B.Burland & M.C. Burbidge, 1985. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Vol. 1633–1635; 1986. p. 79.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Davie JR, Lewis MR. Settlement of two tall chimney foundations. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Case Hist. in Geotech. Eng. 1988. June 1–5, St. Loui, Mo, Paper No. 6.45.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Stroud MA. The standard penetration test–its application and interpretationArup Geotechnics. In Proceedings of the ICE Conference on Penetration Test. in the U.K. Birmingham: United Kingdom, Thomas Telford, Ltd; 1989.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Burland JB, Burbidge MC. Settlement of foundations on sand and gravel. Proc Inst Civil Eng. 1985;78(6):1325–81. 10.1680/iicep.1985.1058.Search in Google Scholar

[10] CIRIA Report 143. Standard penetration test – Methods and use. London, UK: CIRIA; 1995.Search in Google Scholar

[11] Bowles JE. Elastic foundation settlements on sand deposits. J Geotech Eng. 1987;113(8).10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1987)113:8(846)Search in Google Scholar

[12] Arango I, Moriawaki Y, Brown F. In-situ and laboratory shear velocity and modulus. Proceedings ASCE Specialty Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics. Vol. 1; 1978. p. 198–212.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Farrent TA. The Prediction and field verification of settlements on cohesionless soils. Proceedings the Fourth Australia – New Zealand Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering; 1963.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Terzaghi K, Peck RB. Soil mechanics in engineering practice. New York, N.Y: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; 1964.Search in Google Scholar

[15] Anagnostopoulos AG, Papadopoulos BP. SPT and compressibility of cohesionless soils. In Proceedings 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Amsterdam: 1982. p. 24–7.Search in Google Scholar

[16] Webb DL. Settlements of structures on deep alluvial sandy sediments in Durban, South Africa, Brit. Geotechn. Soc. Conference on In-situ Investigations in Soils and Rocks, Session III, Paper 16. London, England: 1969. p. 13–5.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Yoshida I, Yoshinaka R. A method to estimate modulus of horizontal subgrade reaction for a pile. Soils Found. 1972;12(3):1–17. Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.10.3208/sandf1972.12.3_1Search in Google Scholar

[18] Begemann HKS. General report central and Western Europe. In Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Stockholm; 1974. p. 29–39.Search in Google Scholar

[19] Trofimenkov KG. Penetration testing in Eastern Europe. In Proceedings of the European Symposium on Penetration Testing (ESOPT). Vol. 2. Stockholm; 1974. p. 24–39.Search in Google Scholar

[20] Komornik A. Penetration testing in Israel. Proceedings 1st European Symposium on Penetration Test. (ESOPT I). Vol. 1; 1974. p. 185–92.Search in Google Scholar

[21] Komornik A, Wiseman G, Frydman S. A study of in-situ testing with the pressuremeter. Proceedings of the Conference on In-situ Investigations in Soils and Rock; 1970. p. 1452–4.Search in Google Scholar

[22] Ohsaki Y, Iwasaki R. On dynamic shear modulii and Poissons ratios of soil deposits. Soils Found. 1973;13(4):61–73. 10.3208/SANDF1972.13.4_61.Search in Google Scholar

[23] Poulos HG, Dais EH. Elastic solutions for soil and rock mechanics. New York: John Wile and Sons; 1974.10.1016/0148-9062(74)91768-9Search in Google Scholar

[24] Kishida H, Nakai S. Nonlinearity of relationship between subgrade reaction and displacement, Tshuchi-to-kiso. J Soil Mech Found Div. 1977;25(8):21–8 (in Japanese).Search in Google Scholar

[25] Parry RHG. Estimating bearing capacity of sand from SPT values. J Geotech Eng Div. 1977;103(9):1014–9.10.1061/AJGEB6.0000484Search in Google Scholar

[26] Schmertmann JH, Hartman JP, Brown PR. Improved strain influence factor diagrams. Technical Notes, ASCE, GIB; 1978. p. 1131–5.10.1061/AJGEB6.0000683Search in Google Scholar

[27] Clayton CRI, Hababa MB, Simons NE. Dynamic penetration resistance and the prediction of the compressibility of a fine-grained sand – a laboratory study. Geotechnique. 1985;35(1):19–31.10.1680/geot.1985.35.1.19Search in Google Scholar

[28] Christoulas S, Pachakis M. Pile settlements based on SPT results. Bulletin of the Public Works Research Center, Dept of Greece. 1987;3:221–6.Search in Google Scholar

[29] Denver H. Modulus of elasticity for sand determined by SPT and CPT. In Proceedings of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Vol. 1; 1982. p. 35–40.10.1201/9780203743959-5Search in Google Scholar

[30] Imai T, Tonouchi. K. Correlation of N value with S wave velocity and shear modulus. In Proceedings of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing (ESOPT II). Netherlands, Amsterdam; 1982. p. 67–72.10.1201/9780203743959-11Search in Google Scholar

[31] Ohya S, Imai T, Matsubara. M. Relationship between N value by SPT and LLT pressuremeter results. In Proceedings of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing. Netherlands, Amsterdam; 1982. p. 125–30.10.1201/9780203743959-21Search in Google Scholar

[32] Tsuchiya H, Toyooka Y. Comparison between N-value and pressuremeter parameters. Proceedings of 2nd European Symposium of Penetration test, ESOPT II. Amsterdam; 1982. p. 169–74.10.1201/9780203743959-29Search in Google Scholar

[33] Akguner BS. Elastic analysis of axial load-displacement behaviour of single driven piles. Ph.D. Thesis. USA: University of Texas at Austin; 2007.Search in Google Scholar

[34] Wrench BP, Nowatzki EA. A relation between deformation modulus and SPT N for gravels. Use of In-situ Tests in Geotechnical Engineering: Proc. In-situ 86. Blacksburg, Virginia: ASCE/Virginia Tech; 1986. p. 1163–77.Search in Google Scholar

[35] Bazaraa AR, ad Kurkur MM. N values used to predict settlements of Piles in Egypt. Engineering Environmental Science. 1986.Search in Google Scholar

[36] DM-7.01 Soil Mechanics, NAVFAC, Manual, USA; 1986.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Papadopoulos BP, Anagnostopoulos AG. Groundwater effects on settlement estimation. Proceedings X ECSMFE, Dublin. 1987;2:7256–729.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Yamashita K, Tomono M, Kakurai M. A method of estimating immediate settlement of piles and pile groups. Soils Found. 1987;27(1):61–76. 10.3208/sandf1972.27.61.Search in Google Scholar

[39] Decourt L. The standard penetration test: State of the art report. A.A. Balkema, Proc. Of 12th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Rio de Janiero, Brazil, August 13–18. Vol. 4; 1989. p. 2405–16.Search in Google Scholar

[40] Mayne PW, Frost DD. Dilatometer experience in Washington D.C., and Vicinity. USA: Transportation Research Record; 1989. p. 16–23.Search in Google Scholar

[41] Levy JF, Morton K. Loading tests and settlement observations on granular soils. Conf. Settlement of Structures. Cambridge; 1974. p. 43–52.Search in Google Scholar

[42] Nonveiler E. Settlement of a Grain Silo on Fine Sand. Proc. of 3rd European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engg. Weisbaden, Germany, Vol 1; 1963. p. 285–94.Search in Google Scholar

[43] El-Kasaby EA. Estimation of guide values for the modulus of elasticity of soil. Bulletin Faculty Eng, Assuit University. 1991;19(1):1–7.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Sabatini PJ, Bachus RC, Mayne PW, Schneider JA, Zettler JE. Geotechnical engineering circular No. 5: Evaluation of soil and rock properties. Report No. FHWA-IF-02-034, GeoSyntec Consultants Report Sponsored by U.S. Dot Office of Bridge technology. Washington D.C: Federal Highway Administration; 2002.Search in Google Scholar

[45] Akguner SM, Olson E. Empirical correlations of Young’s modulus for displacement of driven piles. Int Found Congress and Equip Expo. 2009. 10.1061/41022(336)35.Search in Google Scholar

[46] Bowles JE. Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th edn. New York, USA: McGraw Hill; 1988. p. 316.Search in Google Scholar

[47] Robertson PK, Campanella RG. Interpretation of cone penetration results, part 1: sand. Canad Geotech J. 1983;20(4):718–33. 10.1139/t83-078.Search in Google Scholar

[48] Coduto DP. Geotechnical engineering – Principals and practices. United States: Prentice Hall Inc; 1999.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-07-20
Revised: 2024-04-30
Accepted: 2024-05-16
Published Online: 2024-07-04

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Methodology of automated quality management
  3. Influence of vibratory conveyor design parameters on the trough motion and the self-synchronization of inertial vibrators
  4. Application of finite element method in industrial design, example of an electric motorcycle design project
  5. Correlative evaluation of the corrosion resilience and passivation properties of zinc and aluminum alloys in neutral chloride and acid-chloride solutions
  6. Will COVID “encourage” B2B and data exchange engineering in logistic firms?
  7. Influence of unsupported sleepers on flange climb derailment of two freight wagons
  8. A hybrid detection algorithm for 5G OTFS waveform for 64 and 256 QAM with Rayleigh and Rician channels
  9. Effect of short heat treatment on mechanical properties and shape memory properties of Cu–Al–Ni shape memory alloy
  10. Exploring the potential of ammonia and hydrogen as alternative fuels for transportation
  11. Impact of insulation on energy consumption and CO2 emissions in high-rise commercial buildings at various climate zones
  12. Advanced autopilot design with extremum-seeking control for aircraft control
  13. Adaptive multidimensional trust-based recommendation model for peer to peer applications
  14. Effects of CFRP sheets on the flexural behavior of high-strength concrete beam
  15. Enhancing urban sustainability through industrial synergy: A multidisciplinary framework for integrating sustainable industrial practices within urban settings – The case of Hamadan industrial city
  16. Advanced vibrant controller results of an energetic framework structure
  17. Application of the Taguchi method and RSM for process parameter optimization in AWSJ machining of CFRP composite-based orthopedic implants
  18. Improved correlation of soil modulus with SPT N values
  19. Technologies for high-temperature batch annealing of grain-oriented electrical steel: An overview
  20. Assessing the need for the adoption of digitalization in Indian small and medium enterprises
  21. A non-ideal hybridization issue for vertical TFET-based dielectric-modulated biosensor
  22. Optimizing data retrieval for enhanced data integrity verification in cloud environments
  23. Performance analysis of nonlinear crosstalk of WDM systems using modulation schemes criteria
  24. Nonlinear finite-element analysis of RC beams with various opening near supports
  25. Thermal analysis of Fe3O4–Cu/water over a cone: a fractional Maxwell model
  26. Radial–axial runner blade design using the coordinate slice technique
  27. Theoretical and experimental comparison between straight and curved continuous box girders
  28. Effect of the reinforcement ratio on the mechanical behaviour of textile-reinforced concrete composite: Experiment and numerical modeling
  29. Experimental and numerical investigation on composite beam–column joint connection behavior using different types of connection schemes
  30. Enhanced performance and robustness in anti-lock brake systems using barrier function-based integral sliding mode control
  31. Evaluation of the creep strength of samples produced by fused deposition modeling
  32. A combined feedforward-feedback controller design for nonlinear systems
  33. Effect of adjacent structures on footing settlement for different multi-building arrangements
  34. Analyzing the impact of curved tracks on wheel flange thickness reduction in railway systems
  35. Review Articles
  36. Mechanical and smart properties of cement nanocomposites containing nanomaterials: A brief review
  37. Applications of nanotechnology and nanoproduction techniques
  38. Relationship between indoor environmental quality and guests’ comfort and satisfaction at green hotels: A comprehensive review
  39. Communication
  40. Techniques to mitigate the admission of radon inside buildings
  41. Erratum
  42. Erratum to “Effect of short heat treatment on mechanical properties and shape memory properties of Cu–Al–Ni shape memory alloy”
  43. Special Issue: AESMT-3 - Part II
  44. Integrated fuzzy logic and multicriteria decision model methods for selecting suitable sites for wastewater treatment plant: A case study in the center of Basrah, Iraq
  45. Physical and mechanical response of porous metals composites with nano-natural additives
  46. Special Issue: AESMT-4 - Part II
  47. New recycling method of lubricant oil and the effect on the viscosity and viscous shear as an environmentally friendly
  48. Identify the effect of Fe2O3 nanoparticles on mechanical and microstructural characteristics of aluminum matrix composite produced by powder metallurgy technique
  49. Static behavior of piled raft foundation in clay
  50. Ultra-low-power CMOS ring oscillator with minimum power consumption of 2.9 pW using low-voltage biasing technique
  51. Using ANN for well type identifying and increasing production from Sa’di formation of Halfaya oil field – Iraq
  52. Optimizing the performance of concrete tiles using nano-papyrus and carbon fibers
  53. Special Issue: AESMT-5 - Part II
  54. Comparative the effect of distribution transformer coil shape on electromagnetic forces and their distribution using the FEM
  55. The complex of Weyl module in free characteristic in the event of a partition (7,5,3)
  56. Restrained captive domination number
  57. Experimental study of improving hot mix asphalt reinforced with carbon fibers
  58. Asphalt binder modified with recycled tyre rubber
  59. Thermal performance of radiant floor cooling with phase change material for energy-efficient buildings
  60. Surveying the prediction of risks in cryptocurrency investments using recurrent neural networks
  61. A deep reinforcement learning framework to modify LQR for an active vibration control applied to 2D building models
  62. Evaluation of mechanically stabilized earth retaining walls for different soil–structure interaction methods: A review
  63. Assessment of heat transfer in a triangular duct with different configurations of ribs using computational fluid dynamics
  64. Sulfate removal from wastewater by using waste material as an adsorbent
  65. Experimental investigation on strengthening lap joints subjected to bending in glulam timber beams using CFRP sheets
  66. A study of the vibrations of a rotor bearing suspended by a hybrid spring system of shape memory alloys
  67. Stability analysis of Hub dam under rapid drawdown
  68. Developing ANFIS-FMEA model for assessment and prioritization of potential trouble factors in Iraqi building projects
  69. Numerical and experimental comparison study of piled raft foundation
  70. Effect of asphalt modified with waste engine oil on the durability properties of hot asphalt mixtures with reclaimed asphalt pavement
  71. Hydraulic model for flood inundation in Diyala River Basin using HEC-RAS, PMP, and neural network
  72. Numerical study on discharge capacity of piano key side weir with various ratios of the crest length to the width
  73. The optimal allocation of thyristor-controlled series compensators for enhancement HVAC transmission lines Iraqi super grid by using seeker optimization algorithm
  74. Numerical and experimental study of the impact on aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA0012 airfoil
  75. Effect of nano-TiO2 on physical and rheological properties of asphalt cement
  76. Performance evolution of novel palm leaf powder used for enhancing hot mix asphalt
  77. Performance analysis, evaluation, and improvement of selected unsignalized intersection using SIDRA software – Case study
  78. Flexural behavior of RC beams externally reinforced with CFRP composites using various strategies
  79. Influence of fiber types on the properties of the artificial cold-bonded lightweight aggregates
  80. Experimental investigation of RC beams strengthened with externally bonded BFRP composites
  81. Generalized RKM methods for solving fifth-order quasi-linear fractional partial differential equation
  82. An experimental and numerical study investigating sediment transport position in the bed of sewer pipes in Karbala
  83. Role of individual component failure in the performance of a 1-out-of-3 cold standby system: A Markov model approach
  84. Implementation for the cases (5, 4) and (5, 4)/(2, 0)
  85. Center group actions and related concepts
  86. Experimental investigation of the effect of horizontal construction joints on the behavior of deep beams
  87. Deletion of a vertex in even sum domination
  88. Deep learning techniques in concrete powder mix designing
  89. Effect of loading type in concrete deep beam with strut reinforcement
  90. Studying the effect of using CFRP warping on strength of husk rice concrete columns
  91. Parametric analysis of the influence of climatic factors on the formation of traditional buildings in the city of Al Najaf
  92. Suitability location for landfill using a fuzzy-GIS model: A case study in Hillah, Iraq
  93. Hybrid approach for cost estimation of sustainable building projects using artificial neural networks
  94. Assessment of indirect tensile stress and tensile–strength ratio and creep compliance in HMA mixes with micro-silica and PMB
  95. Density functional theory to study stopping power of proton in water, lung, bladder, and intestine
  96. A review of single flow, flow boiling, and coating microchannel studies
  97. Effect of GFRP bar length on the flexural behavior of hybrid concrete beams strengthened with NSM bars
  98. Exploring the impact of parameters on flow boiling heat transfer in microchannels and coated microtubes: A comprehensive review
  99. Crumb rubber modification for enhanced rutting resistance in asphalt mixtures
  100. Special Issue: AESMT-6
  101. Design of a new sorting colors system based on PLC, TIA portal, and factory I/O programs
  102. Forecasting empirical formula for suspended sediment load prediction at upstream of Al-Kufa barrage, Kufa City, Iraq
  103. Optimization and characterization of sustainable geopolymer mortars based on palygorskite clay, water glass, and sodium hydroxide
  104. Sediment transport modelling upstream of Al Kufa Barrage
  105. Study of energy loss, range, and stopping time for proton in germanium and copper materials
  106. Effect of internal and external recycle ratios on the nutrient removal efficiency of anaerobic/anoxic/oxic (VIP) wastewater treatment plant
  107. Enhancing structural behaviour of polypropylene fibre concrete columns longitudinally reinforced with fibreglass bars
  108. Sustainable road paving: Enhancing concrete paver blocks with zeolite-enhanced cement
  109. Evaluation of the operational performance of Karbala waste water treatment plant under variable flow using GPS-X model
  110. Design and simulation of photonic crystal fiber for highly sensitive chemical sensing applications
  111. Optimization and design of a new column sequencing for crude oil distillation at Basrah refinery
  112. Inductive 3D numerical modelling of the tibia bone using MRI to examine von Mises stress and overall deformation
  113. An image encryption method based on modified elliptic curve Diffie-Hellman key exchange protocol and Hill Cipher
  114. Experimental investigation of generating superheated steam using a parabolic dish with a cylindrical cavity receiver: A case study
  115. Effect of surface roughness on the interface behavior of clayey soils
  116. Investigated of the optical properties for SiO2 by using Lorentz model
  117. Measurements of induced vibrations due to steel pipe pile driving in Al-Fao soil: Effect of partial end closure
  118. Experimental and numerical studies of ballistic resistance of hybrid sandwich composite body armor
  119. Evaluation of clay layer presence on shallow foundation settlement in dry sand under an earthquake
  120. Optimal design of mechanical performances of asphalt mixtures comprising nano-clay additives
  121. Advancing seismic performance: Isolators, TMDs, and multi-level strategies in reinforced concrete buildings
  122. Predicted evaporation in Basrah using artificial neural networks
  123. Energy management system for a small town to enhance quality of life
  124. Numerical study on entropy minimization in pipes with helical airfoil and CuO nanoparticle integration
  125. Equations and methodologies of inlet drainage system discharge coefficients: A review
  126. Thermal buckling analysis for hybrid and composite laminated plate by using new displacement function
  127. Investigation into the mechanical and thermal properties of lightweight mortar using commercial beads or recycled expanded polystyrene
  128. Experimental and theoretical analysis of single-jet column and concrete column using double-jet grouting technique applied at Al-Rashdia site
  129. The impact of incorporating waste materials on the mechanical and physical characteristics of tile adhesive materials
  130. Seismic resilience: Innovations in structural engineering for earthquake-prone areas
  131. Automatic human identification using fingerprint images based on Gabor filter and SIFT features fusion
  132. Performance of GRKM-method for solving classes of ordinary and partial differential equations of sixth-orders
  133. Visible light-boosted photodegradation activity of Ag–AgVO3/Zn0.5Mn0.5Fe2O4 supported heterojunctions for effective degradation of organic contaminates
  134. Production of sustainable concrete with treated cement kiln dust and iron slag waste aggregate
  135. Key effects on the structural behavior of fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete-ribbed slabs: A review
  136. A comparative analysis of the energy dissipation efficiency of various piano key weir types
  137. Special Issue: Transport 2022 - Part II
  138. Variability in road surface temperature in urban road network – A case study making use of mobile measurements
  139. Special Issue: BCEE5-2023
  140. Evaluation of reclaimed asphalt mixtures rejuvenated with waste engine oil to resist rutting deformation
  141. Assessment of potential resistance to moisture damage and fatigue cracks of asphalt mixture modified with ground granulated blast furnace slag
  142. Investigating seismic response in adjacent structures: A study on the impact of buildings’ orientation and distance considering soil–structure interaction
  143. Improvement of porosity of mortar using polyethylene glycol pre-polymer-impregnated mortar
  144. Three-dimensional analysis of steel beam-column bolted connections
  145. Assessment of agricultural drought in Iraq employing Landsat and MODIS imagery
  146. Performance evaluation of grouted porous asphalt concrete
  147. Optimization of local modified metakaolin-based geopolymer concrete by Taguchi method
  148. Effect of waste tire products on some characteristics of roller-compacted concrete
  149. Studying the lateral displacement of retaining wall supporting sandy soil under dynamic loads
  150. Seismic performance evaluation of concrete buttress dram (Dynamic linear analysis)
  151. Behavior of soil reinforced with micropiles
  152. Possibility of production high strength lightweight concrete containing organic waste aggregate and recycled steel fibers
  153. An investigation of self-sensing and mechanical properties of smart engineered cementitious composites reinforced with functional materials
  154. Forecasting changes in precipitation and temperatures of a regional watershed in Northern Iraq using LARS-WG model
  155. Experimental investigation of dynamic soil properties for modeling energy-absorbing layers
  156. Numerical investigation of the effect of longitudinal steel reinforcement ratio on the ductility of concrete beams
  157. An experimental study on the tensile properties of reinforced asphalt pavement
  158. Self-sensing behavior of hot asphalt mixture with steel fiber-based additive
  159. Behavior of ultra-high-performance concrete deep beams reinforced by basalt fibers
  160. Optimizing asphalt binder performance with various PET types
  161. Investigation of the hydraulic characteristics and homogeneity of the microstructure of the air voids in the sustainable rigid pavement
  162. Enhanced biogas production from municipal solid waste via digestion with cow manure: A case study
  163. Special Issue: AESMT-7 - Part I
  164. Preparation and investigation of cobalt nanoparticles by laser ablation: Structure, linear, and nonlinear optical properties
  165. Seismic analysis of RC building with plan irregularity in Baghdad/Iraq to obtain the optimal behavior
  166. The effect of urban environment on large-scale path loss model’s main parameters for mmWave 5G mobile network in Iraq
  167. Formatting a questionnaire for the quality control of river bank roads
  168. Vibration suppression of smart composite beam using model predictive controller
  169. Machine learning-based compressive strength estimation in nanomaterial-modified lightweight concrete
  170. In-depth analysis of critical factors affecting Iraqi construction projects performance
  171. Behavior of container berth structure under the influence of environmental and operational loads
  172. Energy absorption and impact response of ballistic resistance laminate
  173. Effect of water-absorbent polymer balls in internal curing on punching shear behavior of bubble slabs
  174. Effect of surface roughness on interface shear strength parameters of sandy soils
  175. Evaluating the interaction for embedded H-steel section in normal concrete under monotonic and repeated loads
  176. Estimation of the settlement of pile head using ANN and multivariate linear regression based on the results of load transfer method
  177. Enhancing communication: Deep learning for Arabic sign language translation
  178. A review of recent studies of both heat pipe and evaporative cooling in passive heat recovery
  179. Effect of nano-silica on the mechanical properties of LWC
  180. An experimental study of some mechanical properties and absorption for polymer-modified cement mortar modified with superplasticizer
  181. Digital beamforming enhancement with LSTM-based deep learning for millimeter wave transmission
  182. Developing an efficient planning process for heritage buildings maintenance in Iraq
  183. Design and optimization of two-stage controller for three-phase multi-converter/multi-machine electric vehicle
  184. Evaluation of microstructure and mechanical properties of Al1050/Al2O3/Gr composite processed by forming operation ECAP
  185. Calculations of mass stopping power and range of protons in organic compounds (CH3OH, CH2O, and CO2) at energy range of 0.01–1,000 MeV
  186. Investigation of in vitro behavior of composite coating hydroxyapatite-nano silver on 316L stainless steel substrate by electrophoretic technic for biomedical tools
  187. A review: Enhancing tribological properties of journal bearings composite materials
  188. Improvements in the randomness and security of digital currency using the photon sponge hash function through Maiorana–McFarland S-box replacement
  189. Design a new scheme for image security using a deep learning technique of hierarchical parameters
  190. Special Issue: ICES 2023
  191. Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements
  192. Visualizing sustainable rainwater harvesting: A case study of Karbala Province
  193. Geogrid reinforcement for improving bearing capacity and stability of square foundations
  194. Evaluation of the effluent concentrations of Karbala wastewater treatment plant using reliability analysis
  195. Adsorbent made with inexpensive, local resources
  196. Effect of drain pipes on seepage and slope stability through a zoned earth dam
  197. Sediment accumulation in an 8 inch sewer pipe for a sample of various particles obtained from the streets of Karbala city, Iraq
  198. Special Issue: IETAS 2024 - Part I
  199. Analyzing the impact of transfer learning on explanation accuracy in deep learning-based ECG recognition systems
  200. Effect of scale factor on the dynamic response of frame foundations
  201. Improving multi-object detection and tracking with deep learning, DeepSORT, and frame cancellation techniques
  202. The impact of using prestressed CFRP bars on the development of flexural strength
  203. Assessment of surface hardness and impact strength of denture base resins reinforced with silver–titanium dioxide and silver–zirconium dioxide nanoparticles: In vitro study
  204. A data augmentation approach to enhance breast cancer detection using generative adversarial and artificial neural networks
  205. Modification of the 5D Lorenz chaotic map with fuzzy numbers for video encryption in cloud computing
  206. Special Issue: 51st KKBN - Part I
  207. Evaluation of static bending caused damage of glass-fiber composite structure using terahertz inspection
Downloaded on 3.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/eng-2024-0046/html?lang=en&srsltid=AfmBOoqy-kKsTRhvF2PAaSkSZIaNEhradXfm6QoWG95mCzsxXhcOOp6G
Scroll to top button