Cargando…

Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Dynamic resistance, which can be used to express strength in the unit of stress and improve the reliability of the dynamic cone penetration test (DCPT), has been estimated by numerous methods. This study aims to compare different dynamic resistance estimation methods by using an instrumented dynamic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Sang Yeob, Lee, Jong-Sub, Kim, Dong-Ju, Byun, Yong-Hoon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8124953/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33925195
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21093085
_version_ 1783693358828355584
author Kim, Sang Yeob
Lee, Jong-Sub
Kim, Dong-Ju
Byun, Yong-Hoon
author_facet Kim, Sang Yeob
Lee, Jong-Sub
Kim, Dong-Ju
Byun, Yong-Hoon
author_sort Kim, Sang Yeob
collection PubMed
description Dynamic resistance, which can be used to express strength in the unit of stress and improve the reliability of the dynamic cone penetration test (DCPT), has been estimated by numerous methods. This study aims to compare different dynamic resistance estimation methods by using an instrumented dynamic cone penetrometer (IDCP). DCPTs are conducted using a standard dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) and IDCP in the laboratory and field. Dynamic responses are obtained from the strain gauges and an accelerometer installed at the cone tip of the IDCP. The test results show that dynamic resistance is more efficient in distinguishing profiles than the dynamic cone penetration index. Among the methods to estimate the dynamic resistance at the cone tip, the force-velocity integration method and force integration method are more related to the conventional dynamic resistance considering the potential energy of the hammer than the force squared integration method. Additionally, the dynamic resistance estimated for a longer time period is more reliable, particularly for small driving rod lengths. Regarding the limitation of the dynamic response from an accelerometer in a previous study, the force-based dynamic resistance estimated for a longer time period can be used as the most reliable approach for further soil strength characterization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8124953
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81249532021-05-17 Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Kim, Sang Yeob Lee, Jong-Sub Kim, Dong-Ju Byun, Yong-Hoon Sensors (Basel) Technical Note Dynamic resistance, which can be used to express strength in the unit of stress and improve the reliability of the dynamic cone penetration test (DCPT), has been estimated by numerous methods. This study aims to compare different dynamic resistance estimation methods by using an instrumented dynamic cone penetrometer (IDCP). DCPTs are conducted using a standard dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) and IDCP in the laboratory and field. Dynamic responses are obtained from the strain gauges and an accelerometer installed at the cone tip of the IDCP. The test results show that dynamic resistance is more efficient in distinguishing profiles than the dynamic cone penetration index. Among the methods to estimate the dynamic resistance at the cone tip, the force-velocity integration method and force integration method are more related to the conventional dynamic resistance considering the potential energy of the hammer than the force squared integration method. Additionally, the dynamic resistance estimated for a longer time period is more reliable, particularly for small driving rod lengths. Regarding the limitation of the dynamic response from an accelerometer in a previous study, the force-based dynamic resistance estimated for a longer time period can be used as the most reliable approach for further soil strength characterization. MDPI 2021-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8124953/ /pubmed/33925195 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21093085 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Technical Note
Kim, Sang Yeob
Lee, Jong-Sub
Kim, Dong-Ju
Byun, Yong-Hoon
Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
title Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
title_full Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
title_fullStr Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
title_short Comparative Study on Estimation Methods of Dynamic Resistance Using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
title_sort comparative study on estimation methods of dynamic resistance using dynamic cone penetrometer
topic Technical Note
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8124953/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33925195
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21093085
work_keys_str_mv AT kimsangyeob comparativestudyonestimationmethodsofdynamicresistanceusingdynamicconepenetrometer
AT leejongsub comparativestudyonestimationmethodsofdynamicresistanceusingdynamicconepenetrometer
AT kimdongju comparativestudyonestimationmethodsofdynamicresistanceusingdynamicconepenetrometer
AT byunyonghoon comparativestudyonestimationmethodsofdynamicresistanceusingdynamicconepenetrometer