Keywords: CPTu, pore water pressure, liquefaction analysis, Canterbury earthquake sequence

Similar documents
LSN a new methodology for characterising the effects of liquefaction in terms of relative land damage severity

Soil Behaviour Type from the CPT: an update

Comparison between predicted liquefaction induced settlement and ground damage observed from the Canterbury earthquake sequence

Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice

Interpretation of Flow Parameters from In-Situ Tests (P.W. Mayne, November 2001)

Consideration of Ground Variability Over an Area of Geological Similarity as Part of Liquefaction Assessment for Foundation Design

CPT Data Interpretation Theory Manual

Soil type identification and fines content estimation using the Screw Driving Sounding (SDS) data

Minnesota Department of Transportation Geotechnical Section Cone Penetration Test Index Sheet 1.0 (CPT 1.0)

A practical method for extrapolating ambient pore pressures from incomplete pore pressure dissipation tests conducted in fine grained soils

Liquefaction potential of Rotorua soils

EVALUATION OF STRENGTH OF SOILS AGAINST LIQUEFACTION USING PIEZO DRIVE CONE

Pierce County Department of Planning and Land Services Development Engineering Section

Examples of CPTU results in other soil types. Peat Silt/ clayey sands Mine tailings Underconsolidated clay Other

Minnesota Department of Transportation Geotechnical Section Cone Penetration Test Index Sheet 1.0 (CPT 1.0)

IGC. 50 th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE ESTIMATION OF FINES CONTENT FROM CPT PARAMETERS FOR CALCAREOUS SOILS OF WESTERN INDIAN OFFSHORE

Evaluation of liquefaction resistance of non-plastic silt from mini-cone calibration chamber tests

GUIDANCE D. Part D: Guidelines for the geotechnical investigation and assessment of subdivisions in the Canterbury region.

Interpretation of in-situ tests some insights

Canadian Geotechnical Journal. CPT-based Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) Classification System an update

LIQUEFACTION RESISTANCE OF SILTYSAND BASED ON LABORATORY UNDISTURBED SAMPLE AND CPT RESULTS

POSSIBILITY OF UNDRAINED FLOW IN SUCTION-DEVELOPED UNSATURATED SANDY SOILS IN TRIAXIAL TESTS

Evaluation of Cone Penetration Resistance in Loose Silty Sand Using Calibration Chamber

CPT Applications - Liquefaction 2

SOME OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SILTY SOILS

3. EVOLUTION In 1948 the basic mechanical cone was developed (Figure 1) and this cone is still in use today as the

Evaluation of soil liquefaction using the CPT Part 2

Manual on Subsurface Investigations National Highway Institute Publication No. FHWA NHI Federal Highway Administration Washington, DC

SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOIL

LIQUEFACTION ASSESSMENT OF INDUS SANDS USING SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY

Challenges in the Interpretation of the DMT in Tailings

The LSN Calculation and Interpolation Process

CPTU crossing existing boreholes in the soil

Boreholes. Implementation. Boring. Boreholes may be excavated by one of these methods: 1. Auger Boring 2. Wash Boring 3.

Hawke s Bay Liquefaction Hazard Report - Frequently Asked Questions

Nonlinear shear stress reduction factor (r d ) for Christchurch Central Business District

Liquefaction induced ground damage in the Canterbury earthquakes: predictions vs. reality

Monotonic and dilatory excess pore water dissipations in silt following CPTU at variable penetration rate

Evaluation of Undrained Shear Strength of Loose Silty Sands Using CPT Results

Guidelines for Geotechnical Site Investigation for Residential Building Consents in Hastings District. (Draft)

Geotechnical Completion Report Knights Stream Park Stage3A Development (Lots 107 to 148)

(THIS IS ONLY A SAMPLE REPORT OR APPENDIX OFFERED TO THE USERS OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM

Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering 1.1 Geotechnical Engineering 1.2 The Unique Nature of Soil and Rock Materials

Calculation types: drained, undrained and fully coupled material behavior. Dr Francesca Ceccato

Assessment of cyclic liquefaction of silt based on two simplified procedures from piezocone tests

ISC 5 SELF-BORING PRESSUREMETER TESTS AT THE NATIONAL FIELD TESTING FACILITY, BALLINA 5 9 SEPT 2016

Interpretation of SCPTu Data in Stiff Soils and Soft Rock

Sensitivity of predicted liquefaction-induced lateral spreading displacements from the 2010 Darfield and 2011 Christchurch earthquakes

The CPT in unsaturated soils

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Interpretation

Comparison of existing CPT- correlations with Canterbury-specific seismic CPT data

PROBABILISTIC APPROACH TO DETERMINING SOIL PARAMETERS

Cyclic Triaxial Behavior of an Unsaturated Silty Soil Subjected to Suction Changes

Improvement mechanisms of stone columns as a mitigation measure against liquefaction-induced lateral spreading

SOIL MECHANICS AND APPLIED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING FUNDAMENTAL FACTS OF SOIL BEHAVIOR

Developments in geotechnical site investigations in Christchurch following the Canterbury earthquake sequence

Geotechnical characterization of a heterogeneous unsuitable stockpile

Mitigation of Liquefaction Potential Using Rammed Aggregate Piers

REPORT. Ngai Tahu Property Ltd. Wigram Skies Subdivision Geotechnical Assessment

CPT: Geopractica Contracting (Pty) Ltd Total depth: m, Date:

Delft University of Technology. Thermal Cone Penetration Test (T-CPT) Vardon, Phil; Baltoukas, Dimitris; Peuchen, Joek

Earthquake Commission. Darfield Earthquake Recovery Geotechnical Factual Report Avondale

Performance based earthquake design using the CPT

Faculty of Civil Engineering and Environmental, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Parit Raja, Batu Pahat Johor, Malaysia

Evaluation of soil liquefaction using the CPT Part 1

Geotechnical Properties of Sediments by In Situ Tests

Engineering Units. Multiples Micro ( ) = 10-6 Milli (m) = 10-3 Kilo (k) = Mega (M) = 10 +6

Sensitivity of predicted liquefaction-induced lateral displacements from the 2010 Darfield and 2011 Christchurch Earthquakes

CPT: _CPTU1. GEOTEA S.R.L. Via della Tecnica 57/A San Lazzaro di Savena (BO)

Rosemerryn Subdivision, Lincoln Stages 10 to 18 Geotechnical Investigation Report Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited

Influence of penetration rate on CPTU measurements in saturated silty soils

Investigation of Liquefaction Behaviour for Cohesive Soils

Set-up in Heavy Tamping Compaction of Sands

Conventional Field Testing & Issues (SPT, CPT, DCPT, Geophysical methods)

WORKSHOP ON PENETRATION TESTING AND OTHER GEOMECHANICAL ISSUES Pisa 14 June 2016 ROOM F8

Pore pressure response during high frequency sonic drilling and SPT

Use of CPT for design, monitoring, and performance verification of compaction projects

Chapter 12 Subsurface Exploration

Case Study - Undisturbed Sampling, Cyclic Testing and Numerical Modelling of a Low Plasticity Silt

(Refer Slide Time: 02:18)

MICRO TO MACRO ARE UK LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GI S SUITABLE FOR INVESTIGATING MASS SOIL PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS?

A. V T = 1 B. Ms = 1 C. Vs = 1 D. Vv = 1

Geology and Soil Mechanics /1A ( ) Mark the best answer on the multiple choice answer sheet.

Numerical analysis of effect of mitigation measures on seismic performance of a liquefiable tailings dam foundation

ABSTRACT. Use and Application of Piezocone Penetration Testing in Presumpscot Formation

Use of CPT in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering

FROST HEAVE. GROUND FREEZING and FROST HEAVE

Earthquake Commission Darfield Earthquake Recovery Geotechnical Factual Report New Brighton

Reliability of lateral stretch estimates in Canterbury earthquakes

The Casagrande plasticity chart does it help or hinder the NZGS soil classification process?

GUIDELINE FOR HAND HELD SHEAR VANE TEST

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Martin Achmus Institute of Soil Mechanics, Foundation Engineering and Waterpower Engineering. Offshore subsoil investigations

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING Volume 1, No 4, 2011

GUIDE TO CONE PENETRATION TESTING

Use of Dilatometer in Unusual Difficult Soils a Case Study

19 th ICSMGE - Seoul 2017 EGEL. Geo-Education. J. Carlos Santamarina KAUST

Effect of Frozen-thawed Procedures on Shear Strength and Shear Wave Velocity of Sands

Comparison of CPT Based Liquefaction Potential and Shear Wave Velocity Maps by Using 3-Dimensional GIS

Enhanced In-Situ Testing for Geotechnical Site Characterization. Graduate Course CEE 6423

Chapter 7 GEOMECHANICS

Transcription:

Hébert, M. C. (2013) Proc. 19 th NZGS Geotechnical Symposium. Ed. CY Chin, Queenstown The importance of accurate pore water pressure measurements when conducting CPTu as exemplified using data collected in Christchurch following the Canterbury earthquake sequence M C Hébert Golder Associates, Christchurch, NZ. mchebert@golder.co.nz Keywords: CPTu, pore water pressure, liquefaction analysis, Canterbury earthquake sequence ABSTRACT Piezocone penetration testing (CPTu) is a widely used investigation method for geotechnical analysis and liquefaction assessments. In addition to recording tip resistance (q c ) and sleeve friction (f s ), pore water pressure (u) is measured by a pressure transducer via a porous filter commonly located behind the cone tip. In this paper, data collected in Christchurch following the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence is used to exemplify the variable quality of CPTu data, focusing on pore pressure response. It has been found that if the probe is not properly maintained or prepared prior to testing, it can have undesirable effects on the measured CPTu data. A skilled operator could improve the quality of the CPTu sounding by monitoring the data and pausing the test to verify the pore pressure response. With accurately measured pore pressure response, dissipation tests can be conducted during CPTu. Dissipation tests can provide important geotechnical parameters such as ground water level and soil permeability. Accurate pore water pressure data can improve liquefaction analysis results by providing a representative groundwater level and providing a mean for a more accurate estimation of liquefiable layer thickness. Inaccurate pore pressure response during CPTu sounding can lead to incorrect interpretation of the data when describing soil behavior, especially for fine grained soils such as those found in Christchurch. Quality control is important when conducting CPTu to assure accurate pore pressure response recordings and effective dissipation testing. 1 INTRODUCTION The Piezocone penetration test (CPTu) has become a popular in-situ test for site investigations, liquefaction analysis and foundation design in Christchurch, following the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence. In addition to recording tip resistance (q c ) and sleeve friction (f s ), pore water pressure (u) is measured by a pressure transducer via a porous filter commonly located behind the cone tip. CPTu data can provide important geotechnical parameters. This paper discusses factors which hinder the quality of pore pressure data, and suggests ways to remediate them. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of pore water pressure data in distinguishing between soil behaviour types, for liquefaction analysis, and the effect of poorly collected porewater pressure data on geotechnical analysis. Following the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) released guidelines titled Guidance: Repairing and rebuilding houses affected by the Canterbury earthquakes. These guidelines are used by geotechnical engineers to investigate ground conditions for rebuilding and repairing all sites zoned residential in the greater Christchurch area. The guidelines promote CPTu as the preferred ground investigation method, where conditions permit. This has resulted in thousands of CPTu in the greater Christchurch area since 2010. The advantage of using CPTu is that the high resolution of the data can detect layers in the scale of tens of centimetres. This is particularly useful in Christchurch, which is known to be underlain by a series of inter-bedded coarse and fine grained sedimentary deposits (Forsyth et al 2008). Geotechnical parameters, such as soil behaviour type (SBT) and liquefaction potential

index (LPI), change both horizontally and vertically showing a significant variability at the scale of metres. CPTu may be applied to a variety of soil types but for sites with increased gravel content or gravel layers, the probe may not be able to penetrate with the potential to damage the cone. It is common practice in Christchurch to conduct piezocone tests up to a specific target depth or until probe refusal, which is generally at the underlying gravel layers or dense to very dense sands. CPTu may be performed in soft soils following drill-out through a gravel layer, but more commonly, borehole drilling with standard penetration tests is used for estimating the strength and the density beneath impenetrable gravel layers. 2 FACTORS AFFECTING THE COLLECTION OF PORE WATER PRESSURE DATA In Christchurch, several tests have been performed and although tip resistance and sleeve friction results are consistent and more or less comparable, pore water pressure is often not. This disparity may be attributed to a number of factors, some of which are described in the following sections. 2.1 Insufficient or Improper Maintenance of Equipment There are many companies that manufacture CPTu equipment, each with their own specifications. It is important for the CPTu operator to understand the limits of their equipment, so that they can obtain high quality data. Regular maintenance is important for data accuracy, and includes properly cleaning the probe after each use, inspection for wear and lubrication of the seals. The probe s electronic parts can be damaged from exposure to water if worn seals are not replaced, which could result in a seemingly functioning probe collecting inaccurate data. A transducer in the probe measures the pore water pressure through a porous filter. If the porous filter is damaged, it can change the pore water pressure response and reduce data quality. Due to the varying amounts of fine and granular soils in Christchurch, it is common practice to use the robust sintered metal porous filters, rather than the more fragile plastic or ceramic filters. The sintered metal porous filters can be reused but must be inspected regularly for damage by the CPTu operator (see Figure 1). Over time, the metal may smear and become less porous as it is pushed through abrasive soils. It may also become more porous if dented by gravel. After each sounding, the porous filters must be inspected for damage by the operator, deemed reusable or not, and if reusable, must be cleaned in an ultrasonic device, saturated and stored in an appropriate saturation fluid such as glycerine. Figure 1: Wear on porous filters. From left to right: a new porous filter, a worn filter which may be reusable at the discretion of the operator and an unusable worn filter. 2.2 Improperly Saturated Pore Water Pressure System The pore water pressure system on the CPTu probe must be properly saturated prior to testing. Entrapped air in the system can slow the pore water pressure response. An effective way to

saturate the system is to prepare the probe in a cup of warm glycerine. The porous stone should be stored in cold glycerine and then transferred to the cup with the probe, along with the conical tip. The operator should inspect the components to make sure they are free of air bubbles. Once all components are submerged in glycerine, the probe can be screwed together. Between each sounding, the probe must be cleaned and prepared again using a fresh saturated porous filter. 2.3 Cavitation Cavitation occurs when the pore pressure system is exposed to air, or when it is subjected to extreme negative pore water pressure values during testing. It can be due to an improperly saturated pore water pressure system, or when pushed through a dilatant soil without stopping in order to allow the negative pore pressure to recover to hydrostatic equilibrium. When cavitation occurs, air bubbles are formed in the fluid, which produces a slower pore water pressure response. This can occur in dilatant soils, such as dense granular sands or fine grained clay-like cohesive soils. It is possible to avoid cavitation by momentarily pausing penetration and allowing the system to recover from the extreme negative pore water pressure. 2.4 Lack of Dissipation Tests During testing, it is recommended to stop pushing at least once to allow the pore water pressure to recover to the hydrostatic equilibrium pressure at the stopped depth by performing dissipation tests. During testing in soils that are relatively undrained, pore water pressure fluctuates from the hydrostatic equilibrium pressure, and it may be difficult to identify the true hydrostatic gradient without any dissipation tests. The rate at which excess pore water pressure dissipates can provide useful geotechnical parameters, such as soil permeability (k) and coefficient of horizontal consolidation (c h ). Noting the depth at which a test was conducted together with the final equilibrium pore water pressure allows for the calculation of an accurate groundwater level (see Section 4.1 for discussion on the importance of groundwater level in liquefaction analysis). 2.5 Operator Skills It has been found that skilled operators with some knowledge of soil mechanics can help avoid the issues mentioned above. An operator with a better understanding of the recordings during testing could identify malfunctions in the equipment, erroneous data, depths where a dissipation test should performed, or where a simple pause of thrust should be done to allow pore water pressure to recover back to equilibrium. A skilled operator will properly maintain and setup the CPTu equipment in order to provide accurate and repeatable data. To avoid misinterpretation of CPTu results at a later stage, it is important to mitigate these issues during testing. 3 EFFECTS OF INACCURATE PORE WATER PRESSSURE MEASUREMENT Several CPTu results in similar soil formations, conducted after the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, were used and compared in order to demonstrate how the factors discussed in Section 2 affect the recorded pore water pressure. In each pair of results, the tests have been conducted by different contractors and within a distance of 50 m from each other. Cone resistance and sleeve friction traces were comparable in each pair of tests, suggesting that the soil conditions were similar. It would be expected that the pore water response should also be similar, however significant variation was observed. It is proposed that these differences are due to improperly saturated pore water pressure systems with a resulted cavitation effect, a slower pore water response and the lack of pauses during sounding. 3.1 The Effects of Cavitation Once cavitation has occurred, subsequently collected pore water pressure data is compromised and is likely to have unrealistically high negative values. Figure 2 illustrates pore water pressure data from two different test locations in Woolston, Christchurch, separated by 25 m. For the trace on the left, the pore water pressure response was

instantaneous, facilitating an accurate interpretation of the soil behaviour. A dilatant layer was encountered from approximately 1 m to 4 m below ground level (bgl). Between 4 m and 6 m bgl, the pressure started recovering to the hydrostatic pressure, and the test was paused at least twice to prevent cavitation and to allow for pore water pressure to recover. Between 6 m and 13 m bgl, there was relatively free draining soil where the pore water pressure remained mostly around the hydrostatic equilibrium. The record on the right represents a poorly collected data and does not provide an accurate representation of the pore water pressure response. The test was not paused to allow for pore water pressure recovery from the extreme negative values encountered in the dilatant layer near surface. In the relatively free draining layer between 6 and 13 m bgl, the trace on the right shows a slow recovery of the pore water pressure, but never actually reaching the hydrostatic line, which is an indication that cavitation has occurred. (a) Figure 2: Pore water pressure (MPa) traces for two sites shown to 20 m bgl depth. (a) an accurate trace of pore water pressure response and (b) a trace of record with cavitation effects. (b) 3.2 Sluggish Pore Water Pressure Response When the pore water pressure response is slow to change, it is referred to as a sluggish pore water pressure response. This is usually due to an improperly saturated pore water pressure system that contains some air. The effect on the test may not be as significant as with cavitation, but the quality of the data is still compromised. Figure 3 illustrates pore water pressure data from two piezocone cone penetration tests, separated by 1 m in New Brighton, Christchurch. The results shown on the left illustrate a properly saturated system. At 4 m bgl a dilatant band is encountered where an instantaneous drop in pore water pressure is visible. As expected, once the probe penetrated the layer and encountered relatively free draining soil, pore water pressure recovers until and following the hydrostatic gradient from approximately 6 to 14 m bgl. In the trace on the right, the same dilatant soil layer is encountered at approximately 4 m bgl. The transition into and out of that layer is sluggish, suggesting that the probe has not been properly prepared prior to testing.

(a) Figure 3: Pore water pressure (MPa) traces for two sites shown to 20 m bgl depth. (a) an accurate trace of pore water pressure response, and (b) an example of sluggish pore water pressure response. 3.3 Lack of Hydrostatic Equilibrium Reference Point In a relatively free draining soil, pore water pressure trace will follow the hydrostatic line. Upon entry in a relatively undrained soil, the pore water pressure may fluctuate from the hydrostatic gradient (see Section 2.4). A penetration rate of 20 mm/s is usually appropriate to allow for the pore water pressure to equilibrate to hydrostatic equilibrium upon entry into a free draining soil. Figure 4 shows pore water pressure data from two CPTu separated by 50 m in Edgeware, Christchurch. The trace on the left is the result of a properly saturated system, with dissipation testing conducted at 7 m bgl and 13 m bgl. The hydrostatic gradient can be identified on the trace from approximately 8 to 15 m bgl. The dissipation tests conducted provide the hydrostatic pressure at the tested depths, which confirms the location of the hydrostatic gradient. An accurate groundwater level and / or soil permeability can be interpreted from this data. The trace on the right does not appear to follow the hydrostatic gradient and the data was presented without any evidence of dissipation tests having been conducted. (b)

(a) Figure 4: Pore water pressure (MPa) records for two sites shown to 20 m bgl depth. (a) an accurate trace of pore water pressure response, with a reference to the hydrostatic line, and (b) data without a dissipation test and the equilibrium gradient cannot be identified. 4 CONSEQUENCES OF INACCURATE PORE WATER PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS ON GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS The following sections describe why accurate measurements and results of pore water pressure are important for geotechnical evaluation and analysis. 4.1 Pore Water Pressure Data in Liquefaction Analysis A representative groundwater level is required for liquefaction analysis. This can be determined by using good quality pore water pressure data, by providing the hydrostatic equilibrium pressure at certain depths, as discussed previously in Section 3.3. The groundwater level determined from the piezocone tests can be used together with the seasonal fluctuation data in order to select a representative groundwater level for liquefaction analysis purposes. Quality pore water pressure data can be used to identify layers with different soil behaviours. Figure 6 illustrates the CPTu data from a site in Edgeware, Christchurch. The transition zones when the probe enters different soil layers (e.g. 10 m and 12 m bgl) are gradual in the cone resistance and friction sleeve data. This is an expected response from the probe, as the conical tip feels the change in resistance in advance before actually penetrating it, while the 10 cm friction sleeve is too long to pick up intricacies in the soil column. The pore water pressure response, however, is instantaneous when entering different soil types provided the probe is maintained, properly prepared and the sounding is correctly supervised. These sharp changes in the pore water pressure response may help in identifying contacts between soil types and thin soil layers. This could be a useful analysis tool when evaluating and estimating the liquefaction potential, in order to better understand when a transition zone correction is required. Volumetric strain rates calculated during liquefaction analysis may be applied over the actual thickness of the liquefiable layer, and can be better estimated using the pore water pressure response, rather than the gradual transitions in the cone resistance and sleeve friction values. (b)

Figure 5: From left to right: cone resistance (MPa), sleeve friction (MPa), pore water pressure (MPa) traces for a site shown to 20 m bgl depth. 4.2 Pore Water Pressure Data and Soil Behaviour Type Accurate identification of soil behaviour is important for liquefaction analysis and foundation design in geotechnical evaluation process. When a piezocone penetration test is conducted in Christchurch, it is not a common practise to extract soil samples for laboratory testing, and estimation of the soil type. Therefore, piezocone data is essential and used to provide insight into the soil behaviour type. Using the proposed soil behaviour type chart as defined by Robertson (1990, Figure 6), most of the soils encountered in Christchurch fall into categories 4 and 5 of silt and sand mixtures. The soils that fall in these categories can exhibit either dilative or contractive behaviour, and drained or undrained behaviour (Robertson 2012). A study by Bol (2013) shows that pore water pressure data can be used to differentiate soil behaviour in fine grained soils. The new parameter proposed by Bol, which uses the rate of change in pore water pressure to adjust the Robertson & Wride (1998) soil behaviour type model, could be applied in Christchurch to differentiate the soils plotted in zones 4 and 5 above, using credible pore water pressure data. A parameter such as the one described by Bol could aid in the accurate identification of soil behaviour when differentiating soil behaviour using only tip resistance and sleeve friction is problematic.

Figure 6 Approximate boundaries between dilative-contractive behaviour and drained undrained CPTu response (after Robertson 2012). The majority of soils in Christchurch plot in zones 4 and 5. 5 CONCLUSIONS With qualified and well trained CPT operators, it is possible to achieve repeatable high quality pore pressure data by doing the following: Properly maintaining equipment Properly saturating the pore water pressure system before each test Conducting dissipation tests Preventing cavitation of the pore water pressure system Erroneous or unusual data must be identified in the field, before or during testing, and mitigated appropriately. Inaccurate data cannot always be identified by the geotechnical engineer and an initial interpretation during testing is essential to assure that the data provided is of high quality. Accurate pore water pressure data can improve liquefaction analysis by providing a representative groundwater level during testing and determining more accurate the liquefaction potential. Inaccurate pore pressure response during piezocone testing (CPTu) can lead to incorrect interpretation of the data when describing soil behavior, especially for fine grained soils such as those found in Christchurch. REFERENCES Bol, E. (2013) The influence of pore pressure gradients in soil classification during piezocone penetration test. Engineering Geology, 157:69-78 Forsythe, P. J., Barrell, D. J. A., Jongens, R. (compilers), 2008: Geology of the Christchurch area. 1:250 000 scale. GNS Science. MBIE (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment), December 2012, Repairing and rebuilding houses affected by the Canterbury earthquakes, Version 3, available from:www.dbh.govt.nz Robertson, P.K. (2012) Interpretation of in-situ tests some insights. Mitchell Lecture - ISC'4, Brazil Robertson, P.K. (1990) Soil classification using the cone penetration test. piezocone penetration test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 27(1): 151-158 Robertson, P.K., Wride, C.E. (1998) Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 35(3): 442-459