Does CPT Reference Value Drift Really Inform CPT Correctness?

Abstract

The two authors’ company (IGS) is an in situ testing and sampling contractor. Approximately 40% of the company’s business is cone penetration testing (CPT). The CPT cones they use are good quality commercial units supplied by the Dutch company Geomil, with qc capacities ranging from 3MPa to 100MPa. Both compression-type and subtraction-type cones are used. IGS undertakes their own in-house calibrations on all cones, using externally calibrated load cells, and a combination of dead weights and hydraulic load application. Calibration and adjustment is undertaken on every cone on an unusually frequent basis, explained in the paper, far more frequently than current standards or manufacturer recommendations require. At each calibration, the reference readings (sometimes known as baseline readings) of each cone’s tip qc, sleeve fs, and pore pressure U sensors are noted. And the slope of the applied-load/pressure-vs-cone-readout for each of these sensors (ie accuracy) is measured and adjusted to give as close as reasonably possible 100% accurate output. All of this is recorded for each cone. Thus the authors have a database of reference reading drift that can be compared to slope adjustments (ie calibration adjustments) that have been needed to achieve the desired cone accuracy. This paper graphically reports the data for tip and sleeve of eight typical CPT cones of the day-to-day types used by the company.

Full Paper