In their discussion, the writers present selected results from their field experiences, in which they had used a self-boring pressuremeter (SBPM) extensively in Australia, for consideration. The author claims that in self-boring pressurement tests it is common practice to reduce the cell pressure after installation of the probe. However, according to the writers, this is not possible with the instrument the writers used in the Coode Island Silts and is also not understood to be possible with the Camkometer. The measured applied pressure-deformation behavior and the derived stress-strain curve for a typical test is presented in this paper. In contrast with the author's pressure curve, also included in this paper, the initial loading section of this curve shows no measurable deformation below an applied pressure of 165 kPa. The author's analysis and proposed correction procedure appear to depend upon the assumption of a Masing-type behavior, which does not not occur with the equipment and installation techniques used by the writers. On the basis of this particular set of tests and similar experience with other pressuremeter tests, the writers are led to the conclusion that the author's mathematical study of the disturbance effects in pressuremeter testing does not adequately model the the self-boring technique developed by Hughes and applied by the writers. In particular, disturbance due to the installation of the self-boring instrument seems to be minimal and to have no significant effect on the subsequent test results and their interpretation. It may, however, be that this study is applicable to the Menard-type pressuremeters where significant disturbance effects undoubtedly occur.

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00315389
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Report/Paper Numbers: ASCE15370
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: Feb 6 1981 12:00AM