MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2308884020 · doi:10.14288/1.0050444

Energy measurements and correlations of the standard penetration test (SPT) and the becker penetration test (BPT)

2009· article· en· W2308884020 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexander Sy

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandard penetration testPenetration testPenetration (warfare)StatisticsMathematicsMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringGeologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Standard penetration test (SPT) and the Becker penetration test (BPT) are two of the most widely used in-situ tests in North America. The SPT is most commonly used in sands and silty sands, while the BPT, being a large-scale penetration test, is more useful in gravelly soils. Both tests involve hammer impact on penetration rods, and the resulting penetration resistance or blow count is strongly influenced by the amount of hammer energy actually transferred into the drill rods. To make use of the large world-wide foundation performance data base currently available for the SPT, the BPT blow counts are commonly correlated to the SPT blow counts. Most of the existing correlations, however, have limited applications since they do not take into account the inherently variable output of the diesel hammer used in the Becker system and they ignore the soil friction acting on the Becker casing during driving. This research shows that the existing methods of SPT and BPT energy calibrations have serious shortcomings, and that a more fundamental approach of determining the transferred energy, based on force and acceleration measurements, should be adopted for both tests. The proposed approach provides a unified method of measuring transferred energy in the SPT and BPT, similar in principle to that currently used in dynamic testing of piles. At four research sites in Greater Vancouver, SPTs, BPTs and electric cone penetration tests were conducted. Dynamic measurements were also carried out which included force and acceleration near the top of the drill rods or pipes in the SPT and BPT, as well as bounce-chamber and combustion-chamber pressures in the double-acting diesel hammer during the BPT. An energy approach for correcting the measured BPT blow count to a reference energy level, similar in concept to that used for the SPT, is proposed. Factors affecting the BPT blow counts are investigated including hammer combustion conditions, different drill rigs, and different pipe sizes. The test results confirm that the measured transferred energy is a fundamental and useful parameter for normalizing the BPT blow counts to account for the variable energy output of the diesel hammer. The effect of casing friction in the BPT is investigated by field measurements and numerical analyses. New BPT-SPT correlations are proposed which consider the energy transfer in both tests and which, for the first time, account for casing friction in the BPT. It is shown that the proposed BPT-SPT correlations provide a rational framework for determining equivalent SPTN60 values from measured BPT blow counts, and can be applied with some confidence to gravel sites for which the BPT has proven to be a most practical and economical testing technique.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.156 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207