Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by O’Brien, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Newman, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications; 1990; v. 6; p. 39-53;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.ENG.1990.006.01.04
© 1990 Geological Society of London

Session 2: Pressuremeter Testing in Soils

Self-boring pressuremeter testing in London Clay

A. S. O’Brien & R. L. Newman

Geotechnical and Foundation Division, WS Atkins & Partners, Woodcote Grove, Ashley Road, Epsom, Surrey KT18 5BW, UK

With the large amount of literature on London Clay, it is generally assumed that its properties are both well understood and well documented. However, there are few reports of how man-made features, such as tunnels, can alter the in situ horizontal stress field and stiffness of London Clay. This paper describes the self-boring pressuremeter tests carried out at a site in north east London at locations in close proximity and remote from a London Underground Ltd tunnel. Two aspects are considered; firstly, the analysis, assessment and interpretation of data and, secondly, the effect of the tunnel on the profiles of in situ horizontal total stress and coefficient of earth pressure at rest.

The analysis of the test data has indicated that interaction between the instrument and the soil may effect the measured ‘lift off’ pressure. Methods of interpretating the test data are suggested. The variation with depth of the ratio of shear modulus (at a particular cavity strain) to mean effective stress proved to be a useful method of checking the reliability of the test data.

During the pressuremeter tests unload-reload loops were performed to measure shear modulus. Because of the nonlinear stress-strain behaviour of London Clay it is recommended that the magnitude of cavity strain imposed during the unload-reload loop is taken into account during the assessment of shear modulus. Finally, in situ stress and stiffness from the self-boring pressuremeter tests are compared with case history data.