Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Geotechnical characteristics of sensitive Leda clay at Canada test site in Gloucester, Ontario

1 Geosystems Group, School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332-0355 USA
2 ConeTec Group, Charles City, VA 23030 USA
3 ConeTec Group, Chicago, IL USA

Special Issues: Characterization and Engineering Properties of Natural Soils used for geotesting

In 1954, the Canadian Geotechnical Research Site No. 1 was established as a testing and experimentation site for the soft and highly sensitive Leda clays that were deposited within the now-drained Champlain Sea. The Gloucester test site has a shallow groundwater table taken as hydrostatic at 0.8 m and is underlain by a sequence of leached marine sediments that make-up the Leda clays and extend about 22 m below grade. Below that are dense glacial tills and limestone bedrock. Previous research studies at the site have included full-scale construction, monitoring, and instrumentation of shallow foundations, embankments, drilled shafts, and driven pilings. Recently, a series of in-situ tests in 2012 and 2014 included type 1 and 2 piezocone soundings, porewater dissipations, and both conventional downhole tests and continuous-interval shear wave velocity measurements have been undertaken. Selected results obtained from laboratory, in-situ testing, and geophysical tests over the past six decades are presented.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

Keywords clays; cone penetration; field testing, in-situ tests; piezocone; porewater pressures; sensitivity; shear wave velocity; triaxial tests; vane shear

Citation: Paul W. Mayne, Ethan Cargill, Bruce Miller. Geotechnical characteristics of sensitive Leda clay at Canada test site in Gloucester, Ontario. AIMS Geosciences, 2019, 5(3): 390-411. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.390

References

  • 1. Brooks GR (2014) Prehistoric sensitive clay landslides and paleoseismicity in the Ottawa valley, Canada. Landslides in Sensitive Clays: From Geosciences to Risk Management, Springer, London, 119–131.
  • 2. Demers D, Robitailler D, Locat P, et al. (2014) Inventory of large landslides in sensitive clay in the province of Quebec. Landslides in Sensitive Clays: From Geosciences to Risk Management, Springer, London, 77–90.
  • 3. McRostie GC, Crawford CB (2001) Canadian Geotechnical Research Site No. 1 at Gloucester. Can Geotech J 38: 1134–1141.    
  • 4. Bozozuk M (1972) The Gloucester test fill. PhD Dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Layfayette, IN, 184.
  • 5. Bozozuk M, Leonards GA (1972) The Gloucester test fill. Performance of Earth and Earth-Supported Structures, Part 1 (Proc. Spec. Conf. Purdue Univ.), ASCE, Reston, VA, 1: 299–317.
  • 6. Yafrate NJ, DeJong JT (2006) Interpretation of sensitivity and remolded undrained shear strength with full-flow penetrometers. Proceedings International Society for Offshore and Polar Engineering (ISOPE-06, San Francisco), 572–577.
  • 7. Leroueil S, Samson L, Bozozuk M (1983) Laboratory and field determination of preconsolidation pressures at Gloucester. Can Geotech J 20: 477–490.    
  • 8. Landon ME (2007) Development of a non-destructive sample quality assessment method for soft clays, PhD Dissertation, University Massachusetts Amherst, Department Civil & Environmental Engineering, 647.
  • 9. Perrier D (2016) Email communication and data transmission from Geological Survey of Canada, Quebec City (26 March 2016).
  • 10. Konrad JM (1987) Piezo-friction-cone penetrometer testing in soft clays. Can Geotech J 24: 645–652.    
  • 11. Agaiby SS, Mayne PW (2018) Interpretation of piezocone penetration and dissipation tests in sensitive Leda Clay at Gloucester Test Site. Can Geotech J 55: 1781–1794.    
  • 12. Nader A, Hache R, Fall M (2013) Cone and ball penetration tests in Ottawa's sensitive marine clays. Proceedings GeoMontreal 2013, 66th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Canadian Geotechnical Society, 519.
  • 13. McQueen W, Miller B, Mayne PW, et al. (2015) Piezocone dissipation tests at the Canadian Test Site No. 1, Gloucester, Ontario. Can Geotech J 53: 884–888.
  • 14. Styler MA, Mayne PW (2013) Site investigation using continuous shear wave velocity measurements during cone penetration testing at Gloucester, Ontario. Proceedings, GeoMontreal: 66th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, 345.
  • 15. Bechai M, Law KT, Craig CBH, et al. (1986) In-situ testing of marine clay for towerline foundations. Proceedings 39th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Ottawa, 115–122.
  • 16. Lutenegger AJ, Timian DA (1986) Flat plate penetrometer tests in marine clays. Proceedings 39th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Ottawa, 301–309.
  • 17. Lutenegger AJ (2015) Dilatometer tests in sensitive Champlain Sea clay: stress history and shear strength. Proceedings 3rd International Conference on the Flat Dilatometer, Rome.
  • 18. Yafrate NJ, DeJong JT (2007) Influence of penetration rate on measured resistance with full flow penetrometers in soft clay. Proceedings GeoDenver, ASCE GSP, Reston, VA.
  • 19. Nader A, Fall M, Hache R (2015) Characterization of sensitive marine clays by using cone and ball penetrometers: example of clays in Eastern Canada. Geotech Geol Eng 33: 841–864.    
  • 20. Eden WJ, Law KT (1980) Comparison of Undrained shear strength results obtained by different test methods in soft clays. Can Geotech J 17: 369–381.    
  • 21. Mayne PW, Peuchen J (2012) Unit weight trends with cone resistance in soft to firm clays. Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization 4 (Proc. ISC-4, Pernambuco), CRC Press, London, 1: 903–910.
  • 22. Mayne PW, Peuchen J (2018) Evaluation of CPTU Nkt cone factor for undrained strength of clays. Proceedings 4th International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing (Technical Univ. Delft), CRC Press/Balkema, 423–430.
  • 23. Agaiby SSW (2018) Advancements in the interpretation of seismic piezocone tests in clays and other geomaterials. PhD dissertation, School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA: 923.
  • 24. Mayne PW, Robertson PK, Lunne T (1998) Clay stress history evaluated from seismic piezocone tests. Geotech Site Charact (Proc. ISC-1, Atlanta), Balkema, Rotterdam, 2: 1113–1118.
  • 25. Mayne PW (2007) NCHRP Synthesis 368 on Cone Penetration Test. Transportation Research Board, National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 118.
  • 26. Burns SE, Mayne PW (2002) Analytical cavity expansion-critical state model for piezocone dissipation in fine-grained soils. Soils Found 42: 131–137.
  • 27. Law KT (1975) Analysis of embankments on sensitive clays. PhD Dissertation, The University of Western Ontario, 521.
  • 28. Lo KY, Bozozuk M, Law KT (1976) Settlement analysis of the Gloucester test fill. Can Geotech J 13: 339–354.    
  • 29. Hinchberger SD, Rowe RK (1998) Modelling the rate-sensitive characteristics of the Gloucester foundation soil. Can Geotech J 35: 769–789.    
  • 30. Radharkrishna HS, Cragg CBH, Tsang R, et al. (1986) Uplift and compression behavior of drilled piers in Leda clay. Proceedings 39th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Ottawa, 123–130.
  • 31. Hosseini MA, Rayhani MT (2015) Evolution of pile shaft capacity over time in soft clays: Case study: Leda clay. Proceedings GeoQuebec: 68th Canadian Geot Conference, Paper ID 793.
  • 32. Parez L, Faureil R (1988) Le piézocone. Améliorations apportées ála reconnsaissance de soils. Rev Fr Géotech 44: 13–27.

 

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved