Comparison of geotechnical uncertainties linked to different soil characterization methods
2016 (English)In: Geomechanics and Geoengineering, ISSN 1748-6025, E-ISSN 1748-6033, 1-15 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
One of the essential inputs in settlement prediction models is the soil modulus, which may be obtained from laboratory tests or estimated from in situ measurements. The total uncertainty in predicting the confined modulus of a sandy soil is quantified with data from side-by-side in situ testing using the standard penetration test, the static cone penetration test, the light dynamic probing and the laboratory oedometer test. To estimate transformation errors, correlations are proposed between in situ and laboratory data. The results indicate that similar magnitudes of total uncertainties are associated with the in situ methods, which are approximately twice as high as those from the direct oedometer method. The quantified uncertainties are an important input for reliability-based designs of foundations under similar soil conditions.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2016. 1-15 p.
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-161340DOI: 10.1080/17486025.2016.1184761ScopusID: 2-s2.0-84969753258OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-161340DiVA: diva2:794419
QC 201606082015-03-112015-03-112016-06-20Bibliographically approved