Dear Members of ISSMGE, Dear Colleagues, The last time I wrote directly to you in these columns about some of the activities of the ISSMGE was in June 2014. Many things have progressed since and you may be aware of some of them through your Member Society and/or through the activity of Technical Committees (TCs) to which you belong. The Board of ISSMGE met in Goiânia in September 2014, hosted by the Brazilian Geotechnical Society (ABMS) and in Wellington in February 2015, hosted by the New Zealand Geotechnical Society (NZGS), on the occasion of the 12th Australia and New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics. The 6 Board Level Committees (BLCs), AWAC, CAPG, IDC, PIC, TOC and YMPG, have also held a number of meetings, usually by teleconferences. The Chairs of the 6 BLCs were present or represented at our Board meetings. 2015 is an important year. It is the mid-term for the President and also for the ISSMGE cycle! Indeed, we shall have this year the 5 Regional Conferences on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, midway between the International Conferences of Paris (2013) and Seoul (2017). It is also the year where we have our mid-term ISSMGE Council meeting at which the 89 Member Societies will meet together! It will be held in Edinburgh on the 13th September 2015, hosted by the British Geotechnical Association, on the occasion of the European Regional Conference.

International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering If the quality of the distributed file is not satisfactory for you, please access ISSMGE website and download an electronic version.

www.issmge.org

Message from the President

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Select all items below

1 Message from the President

4 Research Highlights

Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

17 TC Corner

TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline

TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage

32 Conference report

The 6th International Geotechnical Symposium on Disaster Mitigation in Special Geo-environmental Conditions

35 Report from an ISSMGE Foundations Recipient

The 30th International Conference on Solid Waste Technology and Management

36 Hot News

Announcement from Whittles Publishing

International Course on Geotechnical and Structural Monitoring

38 Event Diary

45 Corporate Associates

48 Foundation Donors

E D I T O R I A L B O A R D

Frank, Roger (Ex-officio)

Gomes, Antonio Topa (Editor for Europe)

Gonzalez, Marcelo (Editor for South America)

Leung, Anthony Kwan (Editor for Europe)

Ng, Charles Wang Wai (Editor-in-Chief)

Ooi, Teik Aun (Editor for Asia)

Rujikiatkamjorn, Cholachat (Editor for Australasia)

Sanchez, Marcelo (Editor for North America)

Sfriso, Alejo O (Editor for South America)

Take, Andy (Editor for North America)

Taylor, Neil (Ex-officio)

Volume 9, Issue 2 Apri l 2015

ISSMGE Bulletin

The 5 Regional Conferences, themes, locations and dates are as follows: (1) Australasia:

The 12th Australia and New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics – The Changing Face of the Earth: Geo-Processes & Human Accelerations, Wellington, New Zealand, 22nd – 25th February 2015 (2) Africa:

The XVI African Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering - Innovative Geotechnics for Africa, Hammamet, Tunisia, 27th – 30th April 2015 (3) Europe:

The XVI European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering - Geotechnical Engineering for Infrastructure and Development, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, 13th – 17th September 2015 (4) Asia:

The 15th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering - New Innovations and Sustainability, Fukuoka, Kyushu, Japan, 9th – 13th November 2015. (5) North and South America:

The XV Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 15th – 18th November 2015 I do hope that many of you will be able to attend the Conference in your region and/or have been able to submit a written contribution. Obviously, many other Conferences, Symposia and events will take place (or have taken place) at National, Regional and International levels organised by the Members Societies of the ISSMGE. For more information, please go through the ‘Event Diary’ which is published on the ISSMGE Website and in each issue of the ISSMGE Bulletin. Some of these events are reported in the Bulletin. Among the many activities of the ISSMGE, I would like at this time to update you on Technical Committees and the ISSMGE Webinars, both of which were mentioned previously in my message of June 2014 (see: http://www.issmge.org/en/the-society/the-president/messages-from-the-president/656-message-from-the-president). The Guidelines for ISSMGE TCs and ISSMGE Honour Lectures were finalised in February by the TOC (Chair: Pierre Delage), approved by the Board and are now published (see: http://www.issmge.org/en/committees/technical-committees). They confirm that the activities of the TCs and the TC Chairs continue their work independently of the term of the ISSMGE Presidency. The Guidelines deal with the composition of the TCs and other matters for the creation, maintenance and dissolution of the TCs.

It is also important to note that the database of TC membership is now available and that the TCs’ Chairs and the Member Societies must use it in order to appoint or reappoint their members. They were informed of the creation of this database in October 2014 although a number of Member Societies have yet to upload the names of their TC members. From now on, this system will be the only mechanism of nominating TC members and it will allow the Member Societies to change their TC members with no delay.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 2

Message from the President (Con’t)

With the help of the IDC (Chair: Dimitrios Zekkos) and the company Geoengineer.org, a new series of ISSMGE Webinars has been implemented and is now running smoothly. The information for the launch of each ISSMGE webinar, which is delivered approximately every two months, appears on the ISSMGE website and is also sent to your Member Society for them to circulate. So far, in the new series, we have had 4 webinars:

“In situ testing in geomechanics: Questioning current engineering practice”, by Prof. Fernando Schnaid (Brazil), October 2014

“Geotechnical Aspects of Peats”, by Dr Cor Zwanenburg (The Netherlands), December 2014

“Introduction to Cone Penetration Testing”, by Prof. Peter Robertson (USA), February 2015

“Impacts of Liquefaction in the 2010-2011 Christchurch Earthquakes”, by Prof. Misko Cubrinovski (New Zealand), April 2015

I am truly grateful to the lecturers who thus accept to share their knowledge with all of us and devote their time to the ISSMGE. All presentations are available on our website together with the Q & A session which follows (see: http://www.issmge.org/en/resources/recorded-webinars). And more are to come … If you are interested in other activities, please do not hesitate to check the ISSMGE website, in particular the pages implemented by the corresponding BLC. I look forward to meeting and chatting with many of you at our upcoming Regional Conferences, in Hammamet, Edinburgh, Fukuoka or Buenos Aires! Do not hesitate to write to any one of us, the Board members or the BLC Chairs, if you wish to clarify something or if you wish to raise a question about ISSMGE and its governance! Roger Frank Paris, 18th April 2015

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 3

Message from the President (Con’t)

Introduction Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI) is a leading international centre for research and consulting within the engineering geosciences. The dedicated staff has passion and expertise in understanding the behaviour of soil, rock and snow, and to provide meaningful, reliable and cost-effective geo-solutions to clients globally. NGI is a private foundation with office and laboratory in Oslo and branch office in Trondheim, Norway. NGI also have daughter companies in Houston, Texas, USA, and in Perth, Western Australia. NGI's current organization with key personnel is shown below:

Examples of current and recent projects conducted by NGI are presented below and show a variety of challenges and disciplines we work with.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 4

Research Highlights Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

UDCAM and PDCAM Soil models accounting for cyclic degradation

Contacts: Hans Petter Jostad (hans.petter.jostad@ngi.no), Ana Page (ana.page@ngi.no), Hendrik Sturm (hendrik.sturm@ngi.no)

Offshore structures are subjected to combined static and cyclic loading due to the weight of the structure, wind, current and waves. The effect of cyclic degradation of the soil during these load conditions may be significant and therefore needs to be properly taken into consideration.

Figure 1. Example of a cyclic contour diagram. The strength, defined by the failure line, decreases significantly with the number of cycles

How do we account for cyclic degradation? We analyse the behavior of the soil under cyclic loading based on non-linear stress-strain relationships from cyclic contour diagrams. These contour diagrams are established from laboratory tests, and they contain information about the reduced strength, the increased cyclic strain amplitudes and increased permanent strains as function of number of cycles at different cyclic and average shear stress levels. Fig. 1 shows an example of a cyclic contour diagram. In order to calculate the cyclic degradation of the soil, the real cyclic load history is transformed into an idealized loading composition, where the design storm is divided into parcels of constant cyclic load amplitudes. An equivalent number of cycles, Neq, is used as a memory of the cyclic effect. A high Neq implies a high cyclic degradation of the soil, while Neq = 1 means no cyclic degradation. Fig. 1 shows the calculated distribution of the equivalent number of cycles, Neq, at the end of an applied cyclic load history. This procedure has been implemented into the finite element code PLAXIS as the UnDrained Cyclic Accumulation Model (UDCAM) and the Partially Drained Accumulation Model (PDCAM). These models allow us to apply the advantages of the FEM in combination with our well-proven calculation procedures. We can then calculate the cyclic degradation of the soil in any point of the soil and model the capacity and displacements of any foundation subjected to cyclic loading.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 5

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Applications UDCAM and PDCAM are applicable for general boundary value problems and have been proved especially suitable in the design of:

Monopiles, where the cyclic degradation of the soil varies along the pile. This is important for wind

turbines structures, since the permanent rotation of the structure can govern the design (Fig. 2)

Jack-up structures on bucket foundations: it is important to assign the correct rotational soil stiffness

to these structures, since the moment fixity at the bottom of the legs can govern structural

utilisations in the legs (Fig. 3)

Figure 2. Contour plot of total cyclic

shear strains at the end of the applied load history for a monopile

foundation

Figure 3. Distribution of the equivalent number of cycles, Neq, at the end of an applied cyclic load history for a bucket foundation.

Higher values of Neq imply higher cyclic degradation of the soil

What is cyclic degradation? Cyclic degradation is the reduction in strength and stiffness of the soil due to the generation of pore pressures under undrained and partly drained conditions and destructuration during cyclic loading. The generation of pore pressure results in reduced effective stresses in the soil and the development of permanent strains. Fig. 4 shows load-displacement curves of a model test with monotonic and cyclic loading on a gravity platform. The figure shows the reduced capacity during cyclic loading compared to monotonic loading, and the increase of the cyclic displacement amplitudes (or reduction in stiffness) and increased permanent displacement of the foundation with the number of applied load cycles.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 6

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Figure 4. Results of a model test with monotonic and cyclic loading on a gravity platform on clay The results show that the stiffness and strength are lower for cyclic loading and that the displacements increase with the number of cycles.

Subsea instrumentation and monitoring Contacts: Per Sparrevik (per.sparrevik@ngi.no) and James Michael Strout (james.michael.strout@ngi.no)

Background Offshore Wind Turbine Structures are tall and slender, thus relatively sensitive to the installations in regards to structural loading and structural response. In particular, when water depths and turbines are getting bigger the dynamic motions, settlements and possible tilting are particularly onerous for the generator and rotors. In addition, confirmation of foundation and structural performance are essential to verify design assumptions for large scale field developments. Finally, the instrumentation and monitoring data from current installations provide insight and a technical basis for optimizing future foundation and structural solutions.

Figure 5. Monopile foundation (left) and tripod jackets with pre-driven piles or suction caissons (right)

Understanding monitoring needs Presently the alternatives for offshore wind turbine foundations can be divided into three broad categories:

Monopiles /monopods (single pile/single suction anchor)

Jackets or tripods, with piles or suction caissons

Gravity base structures with skirts

These foundation solutions have many similar monitoring/instrumentation needs, as well as specific monitoring needs for piled foundations and caisson foundations: For all types of foundations:

Wind

Wave height

Tilt of tower

Scour and currents (if the seabed is prone for sediment transport)

Cyclic pore pressure along foundation elements (pile or caisson)

Strain/fatigue in critical structural members

Dynamic motion of the structure/tower at various levels Driven pile foundations (monopiles or jackets with three or more piles):

Axial strain along the pile (P-Y behaviour)

Lateral earth pressure along the pile (difficult)

Internal corrosion transition piece-pile top

Deformations/strain/integrity of grouted connections and transition pieces

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 7

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Caisson foundations (monopods or tripod/quadropod jackets):

Strain in connections between tower/ jacket structural elements and the caisson

Dynamic motion (rotation/linear) of the foundation

Load distribution, vertical earth pressure along the base of the caisson (if not grouted)

Settlement (shake down)

Figure 6. Caisson piezometers (8) on a tripod

jacket with caisson foundations Figure 7. Position of piezometer filters on the caisson

and routing of hydraulic lines to the sensor heads

Technology application example: pore pressure measurement in caissons Piezometers suitable for submerged installation generally consist of heavy duty filters at depth, communicating via piping to a measurement point positioned above the caisson (often on top of it). For skirted foundations it is usually the pore pressure at either sides of the skirt tip (0.5-1m from the tip) and the caisson pressure at the base which are of primary interest for monitoring (both direct response to transient overturning loads and possible cyclic pore pressure accumulation). The hydraulic piping from the piezometer filters are routed to a sensor head containing differential pressure sensors and other electronics. The sensor head can be hooked up in advance or after driving (piles). The termination can be equipped with a solenoid operated bypass valve (opens the piezometer line to sea) allowing for de-airing of the line and zero point check of the differential pressure sensor. By means of using differential pressure sensors and hydraulic lines saturated with seawater, the pore pressure is directly recorded and compensated for tidal and atmospheric pressure variations. Multiple piezometers and other sensors such as accelerometers can be integrated in the sensor head optimizing the configuration of the monitoring system.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 8

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Figure 8. Left: Data record from Ormen Lange down hole piezometer slope stability assessment with the sensor head at the seabed. The differential pressure sensor was equipped with solenoid operated bypass valve for automatic zero point checks and de-airing. Right: Data example from Femern large

scale tests pile piezometers showing pore pressure dissipation after driving

Considerations for the selection of sensors Some basic guidelines for sensor selection include:

Parameter to be measured: Determine the best method to obtain the required parameter(s) including how to get the desired accuracy and resolution.

Measuring range, precision and accuracy required: Cost is a function of the specifications - choose the specifications appropriate for the design and overall monitoring performance and not simply the very best sensor on the market (the sensor may not be the limiting factor).

Priority: Which priority do you give to this particular measurement? This may govern the type of equipment you choose with respect to price and redundancy.

Duration: For how long shall the measurement program last? Type of equipment, choice of materials, etc. will depend on this. Bear in mind, however, that a successful monitoring program which gives interesting data is often extended – be prepared for this.

Environmental: The environmental conditions must be taken into account when choosing materials, ruggedness of enclosures, barrier philosophy, physical mounting points and similar mechanical design properties.

Signal type: Which signal type (frequency, voltage, current, digital, optical etc.) is best suited for this particular application? Noise and cable lengths, will this system interface with other systems, and are there existing data architecture/interfaces which have to be complied with?

Sensor materials: Requirements regarding corrosion, pressure, size, electrical effects etc.

Sensor manufacturer: Previous experience with supplier.

Modifications and special calibrations: Are the intended sensors / instruments to be used under conditions outside of normal specifications? Contact the manufacturer or implement a dedicated test/verification program to establish suitability of the technology.

Dissemination of results The results of this study are introduced as part of the ‘Best Practice’ for instrumentation and monitoring system design at NGI. Our work is also made available to commercial projects providing design advice and monitoring solutions for offshore wind energy development.

Summary experience: The ‘10 commandments’ of subsea instrumentation 1. Provide for adequate planning and concept design development 2. Design for harsh conditions and rough handling 3. Plan for contingency, redundancy and back-up 4. Maintain barriers and control corrosion 5. Perform functional testing 6. Simplify the installation approach if possible 7. Work closely with the offshore contractor 8. Meet the delivery schedule 9. Make the data available 10. Mind the devil (he is in the details)

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 9

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

AEM Ground Investigations Contacts: Andreas Aspmo Pfaffhuber (andreas.a.pfaffhuber@ngi.no)

An AEM (Airborne Electromagnetic) ground survey along 32 km of a planned highway provides 3D bedrock topography and indicates areas with sensitive clay. Through a sophisticated integration of geophysical and geotechnical data, a full bedrock model was created for preliminary geotechnical design.

Figure 9. AEM Ground Investigation equipment underneath the helicopter

To complete the new E16 from Kløfta to Kongsvinger, some 50 km NE of Oslo, Norway, 32 km of the new motorway will connect Nybakk and Slomarka (Fig. 10). In this project, NGI supplies the geotechnical design as a sub-contractor to COWI. NGI carried out an AEM (Airborne Electromagnetic) survey using a Danish SkyTEM system with the aim to map depth to bedrock and get additional information about the extent of sensitive clay in the area.

Figure 10. Survey area 50 km NE of Oslo showing flight lines (red) and boreholes completed at the time of

the survey (green). Thin white lines mark power lines in the area

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 10

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

A total of 178 line-km were flown in three consecutive days in January 2013. The geology in the area is relatively complex with great variation in depth to bedrock along the route. Towards north-east, the bedrock lies a bit more shallow, whereas the clay layers around the rivers Vorma and Uåa can be up to 50 m thick. In these areas sensitive clay (quick clay) has previously been observed. To extract a 3D bedrock model from the AEM results existing bedrock tracking algorithms had to be further developed. As a first approximation, a predefined threshold resistivity is tracked throughout the 3D resistivity model. The depth to this layer is then assumed to represent the depth to the bedrock interface. Such an approach is usually successful for data within an area of homogeneous geology but the algorithm has only limited success for the extent of the entire survey. NGI therefore developed an algorithm that first determines a spatial threshold resistivity model based on available borehole data and then applies this resistivity model to track bedrock between borehole locations. The final result is a bedrock model that agrees with boreholes and "fills in the gaps" where no borehole data is available. Further to the bedrock model, areas with saline, marine clays and leached, potentially quick clays could be identified in the AEM data. Marine clays are characterized by very low resistivity due to their high salt content. The resistivity for sensitive clay is strongly site-dependent but is most often higher than for un-leached, marine clay. Other geological materials can show similar resistivity as sensitive clay, thus it is not possible to detect sensitive clay based on resistivity alone but resistivity models can prove valuable to plan detailed soil investigations.

Figure 11. Depth to bedrock in the central survey area obtained from a tuned interpolation algorithm using

AEM and borehole data. The grid resolution is 10 m Even though the AEM survey was carried out rather late in the project, it was possible to regain the survey costs through savings in the ground investigation programme as numerous planned boreholes could be omitted as the AEM bedrock model provided sufficient data. For future projects, we recommend to acquire airborne geophysical data early, in the ground investigation-planning phase, to both accelerate the investigation programme and to significantly reduce drilling costs.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 11

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Trondheim Harbour Geotechnical implications for environmental remediation

Contacts: Mari Moseid (mari.moseid@ngi.no), and Marianne Kvennaas (marianne.kvennaas@ngi.no)

Background and description In Norway, serious contamination of marine sediments has been found in fjords and coastal areas. The Ministry of the Environment has identified Trondheim harbour as one of Norway's prioritised harbours for remediation. Cleaner Trondheim Harbour is a collaboration between Trondheim municipality, Trondheim Port Authority and the Norwegian Environment Agency. A feasibility study, site investigations and risk assessments carried out during the time period 2002-2011 concluded that elevated concentrations of heavy metals, TBT and PAH in sediment formed a risk to human health, biota and contributed to contaminant transport outside the harbour. Based on Trondheim Municipality's remediation goals, operational constraints and site specific criteria, 4 sub-areas have been identified as sites where sediment remediation is necessary (Fig. 12).

Kanalen - the channel that goes through the city centre with floating docks for small boats, old kays sensitive to dredging and subsidence

Brattørbassenget - an area located at the terminals for fast boats, stabilised with rockfill

Nyhavna - the new harbour area located near a decommissioned submarine bunker, potential subaqueous disposal site for dredged material

Ilsvika – an area located adjacent to a housing and industrial area, prone to historic submarine quick clay slides

Figure 12. Left: Overview over the Ilsvika site showing the location of the field study site and the areas

where the slope angle exceeds 26.5° (1:2). Right: Trondheim harbour

Approach The sediment remediation solutions will include a combination of both dredging and capping the sediments with clean material. Specifications for the capping materials is based on the harbour's requirements which will include an assessment of which types of boats and the size of engine output that will be allowed in the different sub-areas. A local confined disposal facility (CDF) for the polluted dredged sediments is designed in the Nyhavna area. At the Silsvika site (Fig. 12 left), slope stability is an issue that limits the remedial measures that can be implemented. Thin capping (10 cm) has been studied in a 2000 m2 test site, which allowed to study cap efficiency and determine the areas where slope steepness will be limiting for the capping effort.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 12

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Significant achievements Balancing geotechnical constraints with environmental considerations to reduce the risk of legacy contaminants requires a multidisciplinary approach and innovative ways of applying traditional remedial measures like dredging, disposal and capping. A close collaboration between the geotechnical engineers and environmental engineers is a prerequisite to develop a feasible remedial action plan, accepted by both national environmental authorities, harbour authorities and the local community.

MAX IV Unique performance - strict vibrations demands

Contacts: Karin M. Norén-Cosgriff (karin.noren-cosgriff@ngi.no), and Amir M. Kaynia (amir.m.kaynia@ngi.no)

When the new synchrotron radiation facility MAX IV opens in Brunnshög Lund, Sweden in 2015 it will meet unique performance demands. The highly-demanding performance makes the facility sensitive to vibrations. Strict stability tolerances were therefore enforced, and a dynamic group was appointed to handle the structural and soil dynamic challenges. The dynamic group performed measurements of current vibration levels at the site, prediction of future vibration levels at the facility through calculations, and described cost effective counter-measures to reduce the vibration levels. NGI was appointed as partner to the dynamic group by the contractor, Peab, in 2011.

Figure 13. When the new synchrotron radiation facility MAX IV opens in Brunnshög Lund, Sweden in 2015 it will meet unique performance demands. The exterior has been designed by the architects Snøhetta (Oslo)

and Fojab (Malmö). (Illustration: Lund University) The unique performance of MAX IV gives the opportunity to focus the electron beam on a very small target area, resulting in an extremely good resolution. However, it also makes the facility sensitive to vibrations that can cause disturbance of the electron beam. As a target value and starting position for the design, the vibration limit value was set to RMS = 20-30 nm in the frequency range from 5 Hz to 100 Hz. The vibration target value applies for the beam lines and storage rings. 20-30 nm is roughly the size of a virus and about 4000 times smaller than the width of a single strand of human hair.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 13

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

A number of vibration sources may affect the facility. Possible sources were identified by the dynamic group, and the ones estimated to have greatest impact on the facility and to be most expensive to handle in future were chosen to be subject for analysis:

Traffic on E22, which passes the facility at about 100m distance

Wind load at the facade

People walking at the floors in the facility

Other internal loads such as fans and pumps (handled as unity loads)

Figure 14. Max IV may be affected by vibrations from many sources, e.g. traffic on E22, wind load at the

façade, people walking at the floors in the facility, and other internal loads as fans and pumps (illustration: NGI)

NGI's approach For safe design of dynamically loaded systems, properly accounting for their coupling to the ground is crucial. Modeling dynamic interaction between a structure and its soil foundation is in general a demanding task. For large and complicated structures, and particularly when the structures are also embedded into the soil, complexity, size of problem and computational efforts may be excessive. The approach NGI uses makes it possible to model very large structures with surrounding soil in 3D with manageable model size and computer time, and without influence of reflections from the computational boundaries. NGI's approach implies representing the soil surrounding the facility through stiffness matrices describing the dynamic properties of the soil. To determine the stiffness matrices, the ground is modelled as a horizontally layered unbounded medium, and rigorous solutions of the wave equations are obtained for each layer. The dynamic parameters that constitute input data to the calculations are determined from geotechnical investigations and geophysical measurements at the site. The resulting frequency dependent stiffness matrices are coupled to the nodes of the FE-model of the structure at the interface between the soil and the structure. Since the MAX IV structure is partly buried in the ground, the approach was further developed in the project to also accommodate buried structures.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 14

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

FE-model The 3D dynamic FE-model of the structure was developed by Creo Dynamics AB. The size of the structure described in the FE-model was 260m×220m×30m. Part of the soil just beneath the structure was included in this structure model in order to be able to evaluate the effect of soil stabilization. NGI modelled the surrounding soil as complex dynamic stiffness matrices. Since the matrices are frequency dependent, separate matrices were computed for each excitation frequency. The matrices were coupled to the FE-model of the structure and the total system was solved. The analysis was performed in the frequency domain by applying harmonic unity loads (1 N) in X-, Y- and Z-directions in selected positions. The analysis was carried out in the frequency range from 1 Hz to 30 Hz with 1 Hz resolution. The computation time with the method described was about four hours per frequency. If the surrounding soil had to be modelled by the conventional FE (including absorbing boundary domains), the model would be enormous and the computation time would be unaffordable.

Figure 15. FE-model of the 3 GeV Storage ring and linear accelerator. (illustration: Creo Dynamics AB)

Calculated vibration values The load case of one person walking on the floor in the facility was applied by scaling calculation results with load spectra from SS-ISO 10137-2008. The results show that vibrations caused by one person walking are well below the vibration target value.

The load case of traffic on E22 was applied by scaling calculation results for a model without the structure with free field measurement data collected before construction work started at the site. The results show that traffic on E22 lead to about the same vibration values in the construction as on the ground without construction (free field values).

Further, the results show good effect of the soil stabilization below the construction. For a case with four meters of soil stabilization, the vibration target value for the design will be exceeded in some parts of the construction. However, the frequency range of the design target value has been under discussion, and the calculations show that the design target value may be met if the lower frequency of the design target is changed to 10 Hz.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 15

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

Figure 16. Calculated RMS vibration displacement of the 3 GeV storage ring

concrete slab for the load case traffic on E22 Model with four meter soil stabilization

(illustration: NGI)

R&D-project - GeoFuture Contact: Suzanne Lacasse (suzanne.lacasse@ngi.no)

The primary objective of GeoFuture R&D-project is to supply the building, construction and transport industry with methods and tools for geotechnical design and calculations. The GeoFuture project proposes a 3-dimensional and integrated set of models to support civil engineering construction with geotechncial solutions.

Figure 17. GeoFuture project will advance the state-of-the-art of geotechnical foundations through new

developments on analysis methods, 3D data representation and system integration, validation and dissemination

GeoFuture will offer a complete integration of geotechnical calculations with handling of geotechnical data, selection of input parameters for analysis and 3D visualisation. Computer programs for stability, settlement, piles, excavation and bearing capacity calculations will be developed through the project. 3D calculations will exist for all five computer programs, so that the user will be able to choose to perform the calculation in 1D, 2D or 3D. GeoFuture will deliver a complete and seamless solution for life cycle management of 3D data with the development of a new and open 3D data model. A Knowledge-based system for assisting the practicing engineer to assess and verify geotechnical parameters and calculation results is also developed through the project. GeoFuture is a Norwegian research project financed by The Norwegian Research Council. The project has a budget of 22.4 mill. NOK (approx. 2.75 mill. Euro) and the project period is from 2011 to 2015. 12 partners participate in the project, representing industry, research institutions and public organisations. The partners include Skanska, Norconsult, Multiconsult, GeoVita, Vianova Systems, Vianova GeoSuite, AutoGRAF-föreningen, Norwegian Public Roads Administration, Norwegian National Rail Administration, NTNU, SINTEF Byggforsk and NGI. At the end of the GeoFuture project, methods and tools will exist to integrate 3D calculations within a complete 3D visualisation, based on advanced soil models for different foundation problems for the building, construction and transport industry. The main objective is a user friendly and seamless tool for geotechnical calculations and design, which will be commercialised through the existing framework of GeoSuite Toolbox.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 16

Research Highlights (Con’t) Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI)

ISSMGE Technical Committee 10, “Geophysical Testing in Geotechnical Engineering”, (TC 10) was established in 1989. The work of TC 10 was led by a Core Group, consisting of: Mr. Tony Butcher, United Kingdom, Dr. Amir Kaynia, Norway; Dr. K. Rainer Massarsch, Sweden (Chair); Dr. Nils Rydén, Sweden (Secretary, 2004 - 2005) & Dr. Anders Bodare (Secretary, 2001 – 2003); Prof. Kohji Tokimatsu, Japan and Dr. Bob Whiteley, Australia. A primary objective of TC 10 was to develop the Guidance Document “Seismic Cone Downhole Procedure to Measure Shear Wave Velocity - A Guideline”. A Task Force was set up to implement the development of a Guidance document on Seismic Cone Downhole Testing (SCPT). The members of the Task force were: Tony Butcher (Chairman), Richard Campanella, Amir Kaynia and K. Rainer Massarsch. A Draft of the document was presented at the TC 10 Member Meetings in, respectively, Prague and Porto, for the occasion of the 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization, organized by ISSMGE. Technical Committee on “Ground Property Characterization from In Situ Testing”, TC16, presently TC102. Thereafter, the Final Draft was submitted to TC 10 members and sister TCs for commenting. The final document was presented at the TC 10 Member Meeting, which was held in connection with the 16th ICSMGE, held in Osaka 2005. However, the document was never published in the proceedings of the Osaka conference. The activities of TC 10 have since been merged with those of ISSMGE TC102. Upon suggestion by ISSMGE President Roger Frank, and with the support of TC 102 chairman Antonio Viana da Fonseca, the document is endorsed by TC 102 and now formally published in this issue of ISSMGE Bulletin. The formal reference to the document is: Butcher, A. P., Campanella, R.G., Kaynia, A.M. and Massarsch, K. R., 2005. “Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity - a guideline”, prepared by ISSMGE TC10: Geophysical Testing in Geotechnical Engineering. ISSMGE Bulletin April 2015 issue.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 17

i)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline

Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity - a guideline

prepared by ISSMGE TC10: Geophysical Testing in Geotechnical Engineering

Procédé séismique de downhole de cône à la vitesse d’ondes de cisaillement de mesure - une directive a préparé par ISSMGE TC10 : Essai géophysique dans la technologie géotechnique

A.P. Butcher (BRE, UK), R.G. Campanella (University of British Columbia, Canada), A.M. Kaynia

(Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Norway) and K.R. Massarsch (Geo Engineering AB, Sweden)

Abstract

The International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Technical Committee No. 10: Geophysical Testing in Geotechnical Engineering has as part of its brief the task of drafting guidelines for geophysical techniques where no other national or international standards or codes of practice exist. This document is the first of these guidelines and concerns the use of the Seismic Cone to measure downhole seismic wave propagation.

Resume

La Société Internationale de Mécanique des Sols et de la Géotechnique, le Comité technique No. 10: L'essai géophysique dans la technologie géotechnique a en tant qu'élément de son dossier le charger des directives de rédaction pour des techniques géophysiques où aucune autre norme ou recueil d'instructions nationale ou internationale n'existe. Ce document est le premier de ces directives et concerne l'utilisation du cône séismique de mesurer la propagation séismique d’ondes de downhole.

Introduction This document is to provide guidance to practitioners and procurers on downhole seismic wave measurement using a seismic cone penetrometer. The guideline has been prepared by ISSMGE TC10: Geophysical Testing in Geotechnical Engineering and is a supplement to the International Reference Test Procedure (IRTP) for the electric Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and the Cone Penetration Test with Pore pressure (CPTU) as produced by the ISSMGE TC16. The document therefore follows, and should be used with, the CPT IRTP (1999). The addition of a seismic sensor (usually a geophone but may be an accelerometer or seismometer) inside the barrel of a standard electric CPT is termed a Seismic Cone Penetrometer Test (SCPT) (Robertson et al., 1986). Such a sensor allows the measurement of the arrival of vertically propagating seismic body waves, generated from a source on the ground surface, in addition to the usual cone parameters that are used for detailed stratigraphic logging. There are two types of seismic body waves, Pressure or Compression waves (P waves) as well as Shear waves (S waves) and seismic sensors react to both. The P wave always arrives first. In soils below the ground water table the P wave typically travels 2 or more times faster than the S wave, so separation of the two body waves is easy. Above the water table, however, the difference is small and separation of P and S waves may be very difficult, requiring specialized techniques. However the most significant difference between P and S waves is that S waves are reversible. Therefore using a source that can produce shear waves of opposite polarity facilitates the identification of S waves. Since shear waves travel through the skeletal structure of the soil at very small strains, one can apply simple elastic theory to calculate the average elastic small strain shear modulus, over the length interval of measurement, as the mass density times the square of the shear wave velocity. Thus, the shear wave velocity relates directly to stiffness (Massarsch, 2004) and may also be used to estimate liquefaction susceptibility in young uncemented sands (Youd et al., 2001).

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 18

ii)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

Definitions The following definitions will be used:

Accelerometer: Sensor that produces an output in response to a seismic wave by way of a change in capacitance caused by the relative movement of a mass and the sensor case. An accelerometer detects particle accelerations.

Array: group of devices at one location orientated orthogonally to each other.

Data recording equipment: Equipment to log the signals from the seismometers.

Geophone: Sensor that gives an output in response to seismic waves using the relative movement of a mass (magnet) moving within a coil fixed to the sensor case. A geophone detects particle velocities.

Hammer: Heavy mass to impact the Shear Beam as part of the Source.

Interval time: The difference in arrival times of seismic waves at the receivers at two depths/distances from the Source. The ‘true interval’ is the difference in arrival times between receivers at a fixed distance apart and the ‘pseudo interval’ is the difference in arrival times to the same receiver when placed at two different distances from the source.

Seismometer: Device that produces a calibrated self generated output response to imposed seismic waves and gives maximum output at its natural frequency or fundamental mode (goes into resonance) when activated by seismic waves. A seismometer can be an accelerometer, geophone or a sensor able to detect deflections in the range 0 to 250 Hz.

Seismometer natural frequency: Frequency at which the seismometer gives its maximum output and above which the seismometer response is constant.

Shear beam: Beam that forms part of the downhole seismic shear wave Source that is impacted by a Hammer to maximize S waves and minimize P waves.

Source: Device that, when activated, generates polarised shear waves that propagate into the ground. (A basic source will include a loaded Shear Beam, Hammer and a Trigger to activate the data recording equipment).

Trigger: Device attached to either the Shear Beam or the Hammer to initiate the data recording equipment at the instant the Shear Beam is struck by the Hammer.

Methodology During a pause in cone penetration, a shear wave can be created at the ground surface that will propagate into the ground on a hemi-spherical front and a measurement made of the time taken for the seismic wave to propagate to the seismometer in the cone. By repeating this measurement at another depth, one can determine, from the signal traces, the interval time and so calculate the average shear wave velocity over the depth interval between the seismometers. A repetition of this procedure with cone advancement yields a vertical profile of vertically propagating shear wave velocity. Fig. 1 shows two alternative schematic arrangements of the SCPT, and Fig. 2 shows a typical arrangement of the surface shear wave source.

Equipment The general arrangement of equipment is shown in Figs 1 and 2. Seismometer: The seismometer will typically have a natural frequency of less than 28 Hz and must fit inside the cone barrel. The seismometer must be mounted firmly in the cone barrel with the active axis in the horizontal direction and the axis alignment indicated on the outside of cone body. The cone barrel at the location of the seismometer should be of a greater diameter than the sections immediately below the location of the seismometer to ensure good acoustic coupling between the cone barrel and the surrounding soil.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 19

iii)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

Figure 1a. Schematic diagram of the seismic cone

test with required dimensions, D1, D2, and X Figure 1b. Schematic diagram of the dual array

seismic cone test with required dimensions, D1, D2, and X

Comment: Some seismic cones include 2 seismometers in an array in the horizontal plane set with their active axes orthogonally. This configuration allows compensation for possible rotation of the cone drive rods, (and the cone containing the seismometer) with the subsequent loss in response and also gives orthogonal seismic wave traces from the same source activation. In variable and layered ground conditions, with ambient noise or ground structures that would corrupt the received signals, wave characteristics of the source can be used to identify the shear wave amongst the other waves. The inclusion of a vertically orientated seismometer will allow the P wave element of the seismic wave to be assessed or P wave arrival measured if a P wave source is used. In many cases the combination of P and S wave data can enhance the identification of stratigraphic boundaries.

Axis of SCPT

D1

D2

CPT push

rods

X

SCPT at depth D1

SCPT at depth D2

Shear

beam

Assumed travel paths of seismic waves from shear beam to seismometers in

SCPT body at depths D1

and D2

L1

L2

Shear

beam

CPT push

rods

Receiver 1

Receiver 2

L2

L1

Assumed travel paths of seismic waves from shear beam to

seismometers in SCPT body

Axis of SCPT

Dual array SCPT body

D1

D2

X

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 20

iv)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

Shear

beam Distance (X) from the centre line of shear beam to insertion point of seismic cone

Shear

beam

Insertion point of seismic

cone

Figure 2. Typical downhole shear wave source setup with shear beam and fixed axis

swing hammers.

Shear Beam: The beam can be metal or wood encased at the ends and bottom with minimum 25 mm thick steel. The strike plates or anvils at the ends are welded to the bottom plate and the bottom plate should have cleats welded to it, to penetrate the ground and prevent sliding when struck. The shear beam is placed on the ground and loaded by the levelling jacks of the cone pushing equipment or the axle load from vehicle wheels. The ground should be prepared to give good continuous contact along the whole length of the beam to ensure good acoustic coupling between the beam and the ground. The Shear Beam should not move when struck by the hammers otherwise energy is dissipated and does not travel into ground and does not produce repeatable seismic shear waves. The anvils, on the ends of the Shear Beam, when struck in the direction of the long axis of the Shear Beam, will produce shear waves of opposite polarity.

Comment: The beam can be continuous (approximately 2.4 m long) i.e. greater than the width of a vehicle or equipment used to load the beam and 150 mm wide or alternatively can be two shorter beams placed and loaded so that the anvils oppose and can be struck by the hammers to produce shear waves of opposite polarity. Care must be taken to position the beams and strike direction to maximise S waves and minimise the production of P waves.

Heavy hammer(s): Heavy hammer(s) with head mass of between 5 to 15 kg to strike the plate or anvil on the end of the shear beam in a direction parallel to the long axis of the shear beam and the active axis of seismometer.

Comment: Two fixed axis hammers, one to strike each end of the beam in the specified directions, will significantly speed up the operation and give controllable and consistent source output. A typical setup is shown in Fig. 2.

Data recording equipment: The recording equipment can be a digital oscilloscope, a P.C. with installed A/D board and oscilloscope software or a commercial data acquisition system such as a seismograph. The

data recording equipment must be able to record at 50 s (microsecond) per point interval, or faster, to ensure clear uncorrupted signals and to start the logging of the seismometer outputs using an automatic trigger. An analogue anti-aliasing filter should be used to avoid corruption of signal frequencies above the device limits. Commercial data recording equipment usually include amplifiers and signal filters to help enhance recorded signals. The effect of these processes on the recorded signals must be considered before their use. For example, filtering can cause phase shift of signals and amplification is usually limited to a frequency range. In either case, the signals may not be directly comparable.

Comment: Experience has shown that there is a significant advantage to record the unprocessed data and then the effect of filtering and processing can be assessed during post processing. Most modern acquisition equipment allows the viewing of filtered signals during acquisition (to assess quality and repeatability) but saves the data un-filtered. Most modern acquisition equipment allows signal stacking to improve signal to noise ratio.

Trigger: The trigger can be fixed to the hammer head or the beam. The trigger is required to be very fast (less than 10 microsecond reaction time) and repeatable. When the hammer hits the shear beam, the electrical reaction of the trigger activates the trigger circuit that outputs to the signal recording equipment. A typical trigger circuit is given in Campanella & Stewart (1992). A seismic trigger mounted on the beam may be used if it is fast enough, repeatable and delay time is checked and known or a contact trigger that works the instant contact is made between the hammer and the anvil.

Comment: The use of 2 arrays of seismometers set in the cone barrel a fixed distance apart, say 0.5 m or 1.0 m, (termed a dual array seismic cone, see Fig. 1b) would enable the travel time of the shear wave to be measured between the seismometers from the same source activation thereby avoiding possible errors from selection of signal from different source activation, the speed of the trigger, and the accuracy of distance from the source to the receivers from successive pushes of the drive rods to each depth. In this case the seismometers must have identical response characteristics (natural frequency, calibration and damping). However if signals are to be stacked, that is the signals from successive source activations added together to improve signal to noise ratio, the trigger time must be repeatable.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 21

v)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

Test procedures At the start of the SCPT, the body of the cone should be rotated until the axis of a seismometer is parallel to the long axis of the shear beam. (a) The cone is pushed into the ground, monitoring the inclination of the cone barrel during the push.

Comment: It is important to know the exact location of the receivers in all three axes and the inclinometer in the cone barrel will give the horizontal component and the depth measuring system of the CPT the vertical component. (b) The penetration of the cone is stopped and the seismometer depth is recorded. The horizontal offset

distance, X, from cone to centre of the shear beam should also be recorded (see Fig. 1).

Comment: Typically this procedure is carried out at depths greater than about 2-3 m in order to minimize the interference of surface wave effects. If the seismic cone includes a fully operative electric cone then it will be advanced at 2 cm/s and stopped typically at a rod break at 1m intervals or for pore water pressure dissipation tests. If acceptable, such stoppages can also be used for downhole seismic wave measurements. Alternatively the seismic cone can be pushed to a predetermined depth at which the shear wave velocities are required and the measurements made. To avoid the possible effects of time between stopping, pushing and making measurements, it is advisable to keep this time interval consistent. The horizontal distance, X, between the entry point of the seismic cone and the source should be kept at around 1m. Greater distances will require the effects of curved travel paths, that particularly affect single array SCPT’s, to be addressed. It is advisable at the first depth of measurement to monitor the output of the receivers without activating the source to determine the ambient seismic noise in the ground and thereby enable the filtering, as far as possible, the ambient noise. Experience has shown that ambient noise can be reduced by retracting the cone pushing system, so that the drive rods are unloaded and there is no contact between the shear beam system and the cone drive rods through the cone drive vehicle, and the cone driving equipment motors are not running. (c) The shear beam is struck by the hammer and the trigger activates the recording equipment that then

displays the time based signal trace received by the seismometer.

Comment: For quality assurance, it is recommended to reset the trigger and repeat the procedure until a consistent and reproducible trace is obtained. The voltage-time traces should lie one over the other. If they do not, continue repeating until measured responses are identical. In the case of the dual array SCPT the traces from both the seismometers can be displayed together giving a rapid assessment of the shear wave propagation time. If the seismic wave velocity appears too high then there may be a connection between the cone drive system and the seismic cone so allowing the seismic waves to travel through the cone drive rods instead of the ground. (d) The trigger is reset and the shear beam is then struck by the hammer on the opposite end on the

other side of vehicle (causing initial particle motion in the opposite direction and a shear wave of

opposite polarity) and procedure in step (c)) is again completed.

(e) Show the traces from steps (c) and (d) together and identify the shear wave (usually clearly seen with

traces from the opposite polarity shear waves as a mirror image in time) and pick an arrival time. An

example of a pair of signals is shown in Fig. 3.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 22

vi)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

With reversed image traces, the first major cross-over can be taken as the “reference” arrival, or one trace may be used and an arrival pick made visually by an experienced operator. If the wave arrival point is not clear then a significant point that occurs on both traces can be used provided it occurs shortly after the likely wave arrival, later selections are likely to be affected by signal attenuation and dispersion. Alternately, a cross-correlation procedure may be used to find the interval travel time using the wave traces from strikes on the same side at successive depths (Campanella & Stewart, 1992). This technique is more complex, but eliminates the arbitrary visual pick of arrival time and is necessary if symmetry of reverse wave traces is lacking. If a dual array seismic cone is used then the wave traces from each seismometer can be compared to get the travel time between seismometers. Fig. 4 shows an example of ‘pseudo interval’ traces between 4 and 15 m depth. Comment: As depth increases the signal to noise ratio decreases. At large depths it may be necessary to increase signal/noise (depending on the amplification, resolution and accuracy of the data recording equipment). This can be achieved by using multiple source activation events (from 4 to 10) and adding (or stacking) the measured signals. This will reduce most of the random noise and increase signal/noise ratio.

Figure 3. An example of oppositely polarised shear wave traces with clear crossover of traces showing

the interval time T2 – T1

Figure 4. Example of ‘pseudo interval’ traces of shear waves at depths 4m to 15m

15

10

5

0

Dep

th (

m)

0 40 80 120 160

Time (milliseconds)

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 23

vii)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

t2-t1= 5.53ms T2 -T1 = 5.53ms

The average downhole shear wave velocity is calculated for the depth interval the cone has been driven between measurements or the fixed distance between the two seismometer sets in a dual array seismic cone. The average shear wave velocity for the given depth interval in units of m/s and assuming straight ray paths (see Fig. 1) is given by Equation (1):

(1) where L1 = calculated length, m of the straight travel path distance from source to receiver at shallower depth

(use horizontal offset, X, and vertical depth D1). L2 = calculated length, m of the straight travel path distance from source to receiver at greater depth (use

horizontal offset, X, and vertical depth D2). T1 = shear wave travel time from source to receiver at shallower depth (along wave path L1). T2 = shear wave travel time from source to receiver at greater depth (along wave path L2). T2 -T1 = interval travel time.

Reporting of results and interpretation procedures The following information shall be reported:

For each site: (a) Length of shear beam (lengths if two beams are used) and material and composition including anvils (b) Mass of swing hammers (c) Fixed or free pivot point of swing hammers (d) Trigger type and location. (for single seismometer seismic cones a typical trigger delay time) (e) Distance (X) of shear beam from insertion point of SCPT, and distance of impact points from the

insertion point of the SCPT (f) Type of receivers, their specifications, serial numbers and name of manufacturer and last dated

response calibration (g) Type, serial number and specification of data recording equipment and name of manufacturer

For each location: (h) Date and time of test (i) Identification of test (j) Altitude and location of insertion point of SCPT

For each depth: (k) Depth of receiver(s) from ground level (l) Direction of swing hammer action (m) Rate of sampling and sample length for each record. (n) Name of files where raw and processed data are recorded including media and location of storage (o) Type and specification of real time processing included in the recorded data (p) Type and specification of post measurement processing included in the presented data (q) Calculated propagation times of the shear waves and the depth range over which the measurement

was taken (r) Calculation of the Shear Wave velocities and the depth range over which the velocity was calculated The data files in n) should be stored for future access or for further processing until the end of the project or as specified by the client.

12

12S T-T

L-L=V

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 24

viii)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

Acknowledgements Drafts of this document were discussed at the TC 10 Members Meetings in Prague (2003) and Porto (2004). Valuable comments and suggestions for improvements were made by members of TC 10 as well as members of TC 16 ‘Ground Properties from In-situ Testing’ and TC 1 ‘Offshore and Nearshore Geotechnical Engineering’. Their contributions are acknowledged with gratitude.

References and further reading Butcher, A.P. and Powell, J.J.M., 1995. Practical considerations for field geophysical techniques used to

assess ground stiffness. Proc. Int. Conf. on Advances in Site Investigation Practice, ICE London, March 1995. Thomas Telford, pp. 701-714.

Campanella, R.G. and Stewart, W.P. 1992. Seismic Cone Analysis using digital signal processing for dynamic site characterization. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 29, No. 3, June 1992, pp.477-486.

IRTP, 1999:ISSMGE Technical Committee TC16 Ground Property Characterisation from In-situ Testing, 1999. International Reference Test Procedure (IRTP) for the Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and the Cone Penetration Test with pore pressure (CPTU). Proc. XII ECSMGE Amsterdam. Balkema. pp 2195-2222.

Massarsch, K. R. 2004. Deformation properties of fine-grained soils from seismic tests. Keynote lecture, International Conference on Site Characterization, ISC’2, 19 – 22 Sept. 2004, Porto, pp. 133-146.

Robertson, P.K., Campanella, R.G., Gillespie, D. and Rice, A. 1986. Seismic CPT to Measure In-Situ Shear Wave Velocity. ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 112, No. 8, August 1986, pp. 791-804.

Youd, T. L., Idriss, I. M., Andrus, R. D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Christian, J.T., Dobry, R., Liam Finn, W.D., Harder Jr.L.F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J.P., Liao, S.S.C., Marcuson III, W.F., Martin, G.R., Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R.B., and Stokoe II, K.H., 2001. Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127, No. 10, pp. 817-833.

Appendix

Maintenance, Checks and Calibrations: This appendix contains informative guidance on maintenance, checks and calibrations for the SCPT but excludes those parts that are common to the CPT and are included in the CPT IRTP (1999). 1. Seismometers The seismometers should be checked to ensure they comply to the manufacturers specification in response to seismic waves in regard to frequency, phase and damping before each profile. Where arrays of seismometers are used, such as for true interval time measurements, each seismometer must have an identical response, in laboratory test conditions, to seismic waves in regard to frequency, phase and damping. 2. Source and Triggers Where single seismometer seismic cones are used the source activation and trigger time delay will have to be quantified. The trigger delay time needs to be repeatable and not vary by more than 1%.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 25

ix)

TC Corner TC10 – Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity: A guideline (Con’t)

Foundation of ATC19 TC19, the Technical Committee for Geotechnical Engineering for Conservation of Cultural Heritage and Historical Sites had organized a symposium in Naples in 1996. Since then, JTC6, a Joint Technical Committee among three sister societies of Soil Mechanics, Rock Mechanics, and Engineering Geology was established in 2005. Since the TC19 had been dissolved in 2005 when the JTC6 was organized. The JTC6 was very slow with no activity for the following four years. In 2009, the TC301 for preservation of cultural heritage and historical sites was established within the organization of ISSMGE. The most members of TC301 are from Europe and were not interested in having workshop. The Asian region where so many sites of cultural heritage awaits for being studied and needs to have workshops to exchange experiences and to collect case studies. The Vice President for Asian region, Professor Askar Zhussupbekov had agreed to establish ATC19 on geotechnical engineering for conservation of cultural heritage and historical sites. ATC19 has been active since 2011 as follows:

2010/8: Establishment of ATC19

2011/5: ATC19 Symposium as Technical Session in the 14th Asian Regional Conference for Soil

Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering in Hong Kong

2012/10: Symposium in 4th Central Asian Regional Conference in Samarkand

2013/9: Technical Session in 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical

Engineering in Paris

2014/12: Workshop in Angkor, Cambodia

ATC19 Workshop in Angkor ATC19 organized a workshop in Angkor from December 2-4, 2014. Angkor is one of the most important archaeological sites in South-East Asia. Stretching over some 400 km2, including forested area, Angkor Archaeological Park contains the magnificent remains of the different capitals of the Khmer Empire, from the 9th to the 15th century. They include the famous Temple of Angkor Wat and, at Angkor Thom, the Bayon Temple with its countless sculptural decorations. Angkor, in Cambodia’s northern province of Siem Reap, is one of the most important archaeological sites of Southeast Asia. It extends over approximately 400 square kilometres and consists of scores of temples, hydraulic structures (basins, dykes, reservoirs, canals) as well as communication routes. For several centuries Angkor, was the center of the Khmer Kingdom.

Figure 1. Location of Angkor, Cambodia

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 26

x)

TC Corner TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage (2nd – 4th December 2014)

The ATC19 workshop consists of two parts of site visit of Angkor on December 1 and paper presentation and discussion at conference room of UNESCO-JASA Office, Siem Reap.

Site Visit (1st December, 2014) 8:30 – Leave Hotel 9:30 – Banteay Srey 11:30 – Angkor Wat Visit to Italian Team

Figure 2. Banteai Srey Figure 3. Site Visit in front of Angkor

Figure 4. Site Visit in front of the Moat of Angkor Wat

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 27

xi)

TC Corner TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage (2nd – 4th December 2014) (Con’t)

Program Workshop of ATC19 (2nd December, 2014) 08:30: Opening Address: Yoshi Iwasaki, Chair ATC19 08:35: Italian Contribution to Restoration of Angkor since 1995, by Valter M. Santoro, IGeS World srl - IGeS Ingegneria Geotecnica e Strutturale snc 09:05: Geotechnical Aspects of Angkor and Characteristics Elements of Authenticity, by Yoshi Iwasaki, Ph.D., PE 09:35: Development of Numerical Analysis for Earthen and Mason Structure Angkor by Tomofumi Koyama, Prof., Kansai Univ. 10:05: Numerical Simulation of N1 Tower, Prasat Suor Prat, Angkor by Ryota Hashimoto, Ph.D. Candidate, Kyoto Univ. 10:35: Countermeasures for Restoration of Central Tower, Bayon by Shunsuke Yamada Ph.D. Candidate, Waseda Univ. 11:05: Case Study in Estonia by Mait Mets, Prof. Estonian University of Life Sciences 11:35: History of Foundation in Tartu by Vello Pallav, Lect. Estonian University of Life Sciences 12:05: Discussion 12:30: Lunch 14:00-15:30: Workshop for Bayon Presentation to Advisory Member, UNESCO 16:00: Geotechnical Problems of Historical Structures in St-Petersburg and Yekaterinburg, Russia

by Askar Zhussupbekov, Prof. Eurasian National University, Kazakhstan

The site visit includes two temples of Angkor Wat and Bayon where high central towers of heights of 60 m and 42 m respectively stand upon foundation mound of manmade soils.

Figure 5. Lunch near the Angkor Wat

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 28

xii)

TC Corner TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage (2nd – 4th December 2014) (Con’t)

Figure 6. In front of Angkor Wat with central tower

with 60 m in height Figure 7. Bayon Temple with central tower with 42

m in height

Figure 8. NS section of Bayon Temple, Angkor Thom

Fig. 8 shows vertical section of the Bayon at the central temple in Angkor Thom. As you may understand the structures are made of masonry and manmade fill of very high mound with trenched foundation of about 15 m in thickness. The masonry tower has the dimensions of 32 m in height and 20 m in radius of the foundation. It results in bearing pressure of as large as 40 tons/m2, which is equivalent to Reinforced Concrete Building of 30 stories. At present, when you build a RC building with 30 stories on manmade fill, what kind of foundation system you prepare.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 29

xiii)

TC Corner TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage (2nd – 4th December 2014) (Con’t)

The ancient Khmer engineer did not use pile but direct foundation on the manmade fill. The construction steps for the foundation of Bayon are shown in Fig. 9.

Figure 9. Construction step of foundation for masonry structures in Bayon temple, Angkor

The central tower has been stable for more than 800 years since its construction approximately 1190 A.D. In 2012, Japanese Government Team for Safeguarding Angkor has carried out boring at the top of the filled mound.

Figure 10. Boring at the 3rd terrace of Bayon Figure 11. SPT N-values vs. water contents The results were shown in Fig.10. We found very large number of the SPT N-values reaching over N=100. The sampled core is very “dense sand” and the decrease of water contents of the samples corresponds to increase of the SPT N-values as shown in Fig. 11.

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

00 50 100 150 200 250

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

00 5 10 15 20

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

(%)

(m)(m)

Sand stone

Sand stone

Laterite

Equivalent N (blows/30cm) Water Contents

Compacted

Sand Fill

Compacted

Sand Fill

(m)

Man

mad

e G

roun

dN

atur

al G

roun

d

Stiff Clay

Sand

5 10 15 200

50

100

150

200

Equ

ival

ent

SPT

N(b

low

s/3

0cm

)

Water Contents(%)

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 30

xiv)

TC Corner TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage (2nd – 4th December 2014) (Con’t)

The secret of the strong stability is considered from hydrogen bonding among sand grains.

Figure 12. Angkor Wat (Central Tower: 65 m in height) Foundation system unknown

Preventive Conservation It is anticipated that the hydrogen bonding shall be lost due to heavy rain in the current trend of global warming climate. If the bonding is destroyed, the bonding strength of dense sand that is composed of surface tension shall be lost resulting in the failure of the bearing capacity to support heavy central tower. To prevent such foundation failure, it is now planned to monitor the effects of infiltration of rain water to the manmade sandy ground. In this way, the concept of “Preventive Conservation” is being proposed rather than conservation after recognition of deformation, damage or even failure.

The Authenticity of Angkor Monuments Cultural Heritage such as historical structures or monuments like in Angkor is basically recognized as valuable to be preserved in the future as “Heritage.” The very essence of the heritage that is to be preserved is called as the characteristic element of the authenticity of the heritage. In Angkor, as shown in Figs 8 and 9, the trenched foundation and high manmade soil mound at Bayon temple is the unique system that support heavy stone masonry and is identified as the characteristic element of the Angkor heritage. In the past, geotechnical engineering was considered as only to provide repairing technique for foundation of the upper structure of the cultural heritage. The foundation has been considered as only to support upper structure. However, the foundation is one of the important parts of the structure and the heritage structure should be evaluated including foundations as well. As shown above, geotechnical engineering could contribute in providing the fundamental knowledge to discuss the authenticity in addition to only repairing and strengthening foundation. Yoshinori Iwasaki, Chairman of ATC19

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 31

xv)

TC Corner TC19 – Asian Technical Committee (ATC): Workshop on Geo-Heritage (2nd – 4th December 2014) (Con’t)

The Sixth International Geotechnical Symposium (6IGS Chennai 2015) on Disaster Mitigation in Special Geoenvironmental Conditions was successfully held at Chennai, India, from January 21 to 23, 2015. The three day symposium was organized by Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras, Indian Geotechnical Society (IGS), Chennai Chapter and Deep Foundations Institute of India, with the support of Asian Technical Committee on Geotechnology for Natural Hazards (ATC-3) of ISSMGE. Kochi and Bangalore chapters of the Indian Geotechnical Society were the co-organizers of the symposium. The symposium focused on issues related to geotechnical aspects of disaster mitigation and control, providing a global perspective on current events and apprehension in the industry. It is sixth in the series of earlier symposia which were organized in various cities of Asia and Europe, including Incheon, South Korea (2013); Khabarovsk, Russia (2011); Harbin, China (2009); Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia (2007) and Astana, Kazakhstan (2005). The conference theme of disaster mitigation in special geoenvironmental conditions has renewed vigor and relevance because of the innumerable casualties and loss of public and private properties during earthquakes, tsunamis, floods and landslides during the recent past. The three-day symposium provided tremendous opportunity to the delegates from both academia and industry to exchange knowledge and experience on the recent advances and techniques in instrumentation, monitoring and various other researches focused on the geotechnical problems related to natural hazards. Prof. A. Sridharan, Former Deputy Director, IISc Bangalore, with his scholarly inaugural address opened the symposium. Prof. Ikuo Towhata, Vice President ISSMGE (Asia), Prof. A. Sriramarao, President IGS New Delhi, Prof. Askar Zhussupbekov, Immediate past Vice-President ISSMGE (Asia), Prof. K. Ramamurthy, Dean, IIT Madras, Prof. A. Meher Prasad, Head, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, and Dr. K.S. Ramakrishna, Chairman, DFI India, Chennai, graced the inaugural function held in the morning of 21 January 2015. Prof. A. Boominathan, Prof. R.G. Robinson, and Dr. Subhdeep Banerjee, from IIT Madras, highlighted various aspects of the symposium. The symposium offered ten keynote lectures and six invited theme lectures apart from more than seventy contributory presentations from different countries. Dr. Makoto Takao (Japan) delivered his keynote lecture “Geotechnical Hazards Evaluation for Nuclear Power Plant in Japan” during the first technical session of the symposium. The keynote lectures by Prof. Kyle M. Rollins (USA) on “Down drag and Lateral Resistance of Piles in Liquefied Sand” and by Prof. T.G. Sitharam (India) on “Case Studies of Seismic Microzonation for Reducing Earthquake Losses for Integrated Disaster Risk Management” were well received by the participants. A Special Session honoring Prof. Takaji Kokusho (Former Chairman of ATC-3, Japan) was organized in the late afternoon of Day 1 of the symposium, where he presented a keynote lecture on “Energy-based Liquefaction Potential Compared with Stress-based Evaluation”. The symposium showcased sixteen contributory presentations during the post lunch session that was organized as two parallel sessions on day one. Ten poster presentations deserved congratulations for their crispy nature. Prof. Buddhima Indraratna (Australia) delivered a Keynote Lecture on “Installation of a Permeable Reactive Barrier in the Containment of Acid Pollution” and Prof. Hemanta Hazarika (Japan) presented his lecture on “Resilient Breakwater against Level II Tsunami” during the first technical session on the second day of the symposium. The keynote lectures by Prof. Rashid Mangushev (Russia) on “Basic Structural and Technological Methods in Construction of Underground Spaces on Soft Soils” and the one presented by Prof. Askar Zhussupbekov (Kazakhstan) on “Investigations on Interaction of Conical Foundations and Soils” were the highlights of the afternoon session of day two. The evening session of day two was a tribute to Prof. Askar Zhussupbekov who turned sixty this year. Prof. Ikuo Towhata (Japan) delivered a keynote lecture on “Subsoil Improvement for Mitigation of Liquefaction-induced Damages to a House” on the first half of the third day of the symposium. Dr. V. R. Raju (Keller, Singapore) presented his keynote lecture on “Liquefaction Mitigation using Ground Improvement Technique”. A special session on landslides was organized in the second half of the morning session in which papers related to the recent landslide investigations in India and Malaysia were presented. Prof. Hemanta Hazarika organized this special session.

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 32

xvi)

Conference report The 6th International Geotechnical Symposium on Disaster Mitigation in Special Geo-environmental Conditions (6IGS CHENNAI 2015)

A cultural programme showcasing the classical, semi-classical and folk dance forms of India followed by a welcome dinner were organized during the evening of day one. A banquet dinner in the second day evening and a heritage tour on 24 January 2015 added flavor to the symposium that was otherwise rich by its technical presentations. The tour covered the heritage site Mahabalipuram, a temple town situated along the shores of the Bay of Bengal and a visual treat of south Indian culture at Dakshin Chitra. The proceedings of 6IGS Chennai contain 106 technical papers from 14 countries (Australia, Germany, India, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and United States). Topics covered by these papers are: Geotechnical problems related to natural hazards, Geoenvironmental Technology, Field instrumentation and Monitoring, Geotechnology under extreme environment and Geofoundations. The contributory papers on these themes were presented by the respective authors in eight technical sessions. These sessions were chaired and co-chaired by eminent persons of academia and industry from India and abroad. A total of 55 International delegates, and 160 National delegates participated in this symposium. AIMIL, New Delhi; HEICO, New Delhi; DFI India; Complete Instrumentation solutions, New Delhi; and Geomarine Consultants India Pvt Ltd, Chennai, participated in the exhibition organized as part of this three day international symposium. The symposium was financially supported by the Ministry of Earth Sciences, India; Deep Foundations Institute of India, Larsen & Toubro ECC limited, Chennai, India; Keller ground Engineering, India; Kazakhstan Geotechnical Engineering Society, Kazakhstan; Sarathy Geotech Engineering services, Bangalore; Sterlite Copper, Tuticorin, India; Zetas Zemin Teknolojisi A.S. Turkey; and Geo Foundations and Structures Pvt Ltd.Chennai, India. At the closing ceremony, Prof. D. S. Kim, KAIST Korea, invited the participants to the 19th ICSMGE conference to be held at Seoul.

Photo 1. Section of delegates Photo 2. Dignitaries on the dais during inaugural

session

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 33

xvii)

Conference report (Con’t)

The 6th International Geotechnical Symposium on Disaster Mitigation in Special Geo-environmental Conditions (6IGS CHENNAI 2015)

Photo 3. Prof. A. Sridharan –Inaugural speech Photo 4. Exhibition of 6IGS, Chennai

Photo 5. Prof. Ikuo Towhata delivering keynote

lecture Photo 6. Discussion during the conference

(Speaker is Prof. Rashid Mangushev) Prof. A. Boominathan, Chairman of Organizing Committee, 6IGS Professor, Geotechnical Engineering Division Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Madras Chennai 600 036, INDIA

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 34

xviii)

Conference report (Con’t)

The 6th International Geotechnical Symposium on Disaster Mitigation in Special Geo-environmental Conditions (6IGS CHENNAI 2015)

The International Conference on Solid Waste Technology and Management started on the 15th of March with an opening ceremony at 8:00 A.M with more than 500 participants. The program included two days of plenary sessions given by senior different universities covering different topics of the honour of great geotechnical and geoenvironmental issues that made great contribution to our field. The 3rd and 4th day were allocated for poster presentation, profession education short courses and field trip organized by different technical committees covering all aspect of geotechnical engineering. I presented my oral presentation on March 16, 2015 in the session 4B titled “Geotechnical and Mining Advances” and poster presentation on March 17, 2015 in the poster session 2. I attended most of the sessions and presentation given by my colleagues on the different topics of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering. During the sessions breaks, I had the chance to meet Ph.D. students from different areas of this world, communicate with them, and share my research interest and work. During this conference, I had the chance to meet the organizers and the chair, Prof. Ronald L. Mersky. The conference ended on the 18th of March with a closing ceremony and a summary. This conference gave me the opportunity to increase my knowledge in the different fields of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering as a Ph.D. student. It gave me the opportunity to meet leaders of academia and industry in this field. I had the chance to talk to many future research about potential future work and collaboration in the academia and industry fields. At the end, I would like to thank ISSMGE foundation for funding my trip.

Figure 1. Technical field trip Figure 2. Closing ceremony

Naveen BP Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 35

Report from an ISSMGE Foundations Recipient The 30th International Conference on Solid Waste Technology and

Management (15th – 18th Mar 2015)

Whittles Publishing is pleased to announce that Geomodels in Engineering Geology – An Introduction by Peter Fookes, Geoff Pettifer and Tony Waltham will be published during April.

This is a visual guide to varied geological/geomorphological types

Profusely illustrated with over 400 photographs and diagrams

The ideal first step to gain an overview of a site for investigation

ISBN 978-184995-139-5 297 × 210mm (landscape) 41 block models and maps over 370 photos softback £35 April, 2015 The book provides a valuable systematic guide to the evaluation and understanding of ground and worldwide environmental conditions of sites and their surroundings. This is done through a series of annotated block models and supporting photographs of common geological and geomorphological situations around the world, with basic text explanations and information on each principal block diagram and its annotated photographs. Contact: Whittles Publishing, Caithness, Scotland, KW6 6EG, UK. T: +44(0)1593 731333; F: +44(0)1593 731400; e-mail: info@whittlespublishing.com, website: www.whittlespublishing.com

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 36

Hot News Announcement from Whittles Publishing: Geomodels in Engineering Geology – An Introduction

INTERNATIONAL COURSE ON GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL MONITORING Location: Poppi, Tuscany (Italy) Date: June 4-6, 2015 Course Director: John Dunnicliff, Consulting Engineer Organizers: Paolo Mazzanti, NHAZCA S.r.l.

Web site: http://www.geotechnicalmonitoring.com/en/

Geological processes and exploitation of our planet’s resources continuously lead to potentially dangerous interactions with our lives. Monitoring the behavior of the ground and of structures and infrastructure is essential for safety reasons, quality control, optimization of construction and reduction of costs and time in engineering practice. Geotechnical and structural monitoring is crucial for a sustainable development. The Course: attendance at the course is a great opportunity to establish a valuable network with colleagues from all over the world, to meet manufacturers and see the most recent and innovative instrumentation, thanks to a large exhibition area. Course Emphasis: is on why and how to monitor field performance. The course will include planning monitoring programs, hardware and software, web-based and wireless monitoring, remote methods for monitoring deformation, vibration and offshore monitoring. Case histories presented by prominent international experts and discussion during the open forum will be an additional source of knowledge. Who: engineers, geologists and technicians who are involved with performance monitoring of geotechnical features of civil engineering, mining and oil & gas projects. Project managers and other decision-makers who are concerned with management of RISK during construction.

Figure 1. Participants of the course

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 37

Hot News (Con’t) International Course on Geotechnical and Structural Monitoring (4th – 6th June 2015)

ISSMGE EVENTS Please refer to the specific conference website for full details and latest information.

2015 XVI African Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering - Innovative Geotechnics for Africa Date: Monday 27 April 2015 - Thursday 30 April 2015 Location: Hammamet, Tunisia Language: English and French Organizer: ATMS Contact person: Mehrez Khemakhem Phone: +216 25 956 012 E-mail: organisation@cramsg2015.org Website: www.cramsg2015.org ISP7 - PRESSIO 2015 Date: Friday 01 May 2015 - Saturday 02 May 2015 Location: Hammamet, Tunisia Organizer: Tunisian Association of Soil Mechanics (ATMS) Contact person: Dr Wissem Frikha Address: Enit BP37, 1000 Le Belvedere, Tunis, Tunisia Phone: +21698594970 E-mail: Isp7_organisation@cramsg2015.org Website: http://www.cramsg2015.org/isp7-pressio2015/?lang=en 3rd Unsaturated Soil and Environmental Engineering Symposium Date: Tuesday 05 May 2015 Location: MTA-ATK-TAKI, II. Herman Otto str. 15. Institute for Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Budapest, Hungary Language: English, Hungarian Organizers: The Hungarian Soil Science Society; Institute for Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Centre for Agricultural Research of Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA ATK TAKI), Hungary; BME, Hungary; SZIE, Hungary Contact person: Zsofia Bakacsi Address: II. Herman Otto Str. 15, 1022, Budapest, Hungary Phone: +36 30 8447718 E-mail: Zsofi@rissac.hu International Conference CIGOS-PARIS 2015 Date: Monday 11 May 2015 - Tuesday 12 May 2015 Location: ENS Cachan, Cachan, Ile de France,France Language: English and French Organizer: ENS Cachan, ESTP, ECP, GCMM, AVSE E-mail: secretariat@cigos.org Website: http://www.cigos.org/

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 38

Event Diary

2015

Prague Geotechnical Days 2015 Date: Monday 11 May 2015 - Tuesday 12 May 2015 Location: Czech Academy of Sciences, Národní třída 3, Prague 1, Czech Republic Language: English Organizer: Czech & Slovak Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Arcadis CZ a.s. Contact person: David Mašín Address: Albertov 6, 12843, Prague 2, Czech Republic Phone: +420221951552 Fax: +420221951556 E-mail: masin@natur.cuni.cz Website: http://www.issmge.cz ISFOG 2015 Date: Wednesday 10 June 2015 - Friday 12 June 2015 Location: Holmenkollen Park Hotel Rica, Oslo, Norway Language: English Organizer: NGI Contact person: Vaughan Meyer - NGI Address: PO Box 3930 Ullevaal Stadion, N-0806, Oslo, Norway Phone: +47 22 02 30 00 Fax: +47 22 23 04 48 E-mail: isfog2015@ngi.no Website: www.isfog2015.no 3rd International Conference on the Flat Dilatometer DMT'15 Date: Monday 14 June 2015 - Wednesday 16 June 2015 Location: Parco dei Principi Grand Hotel & SPA, Rome, Italy Language: English Contact person: Simona Rebottini - Studio Prof. Marchetti Address: via Bracciano 38, 00189 Rome, Italy Phone: 0039 06 30311240 Fax: 0039 06 30311240 E-mail: simona@marchetti-dmt.it Website: www.dmt15.com International Symposium on Geohazards and Geomechanics Date: Thursday 10 September 2015 - Friday 11 September 2015 Location: University of Warwick campus, Coventry, United Kingdom Language: English Address: University of Warwick, Library Road, Coventry, CV4 7AL, Coventry, United Kingdom E-mail: C.Voulgari@warwick.ac.uk Website: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/eng/research/civil/geo/conference/ XVI European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Date: Sunday 13 September 2015 - Thursday 17 September 2015 Location: Edinburgh International Conference Centre, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom Language: English Organizer: British Geotechnical Association Contact person: Derek Smith Address: Coffey Geotechnics Limited, The Malthouse, 1 Northfield Road, RG1 8AH, Reading, UK Phone: +44 1189566066 Fax: +44 1189576066 E-mail: derek_smith@coffey.com Website: http://www.xvi-ecsmge-2015.org.uk/

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 39

Event Diary (Con’t)

2015

Workshop on Volcanic Rocks & Soils Date: Thursday 24 September 2015 - Friday 25 September 2015 Location: Isle of Ischia, Italy Language: English Organizer: Associazione Geotecnica Italiana (AGI) Contact person: Ms. Susanna Antonielli Address: Viale dell'Università 11, 00185, Roma, Italy Phone: +39 06 4465569 - +39 06 44704349 Fax: +39 06 44361035 E-mail: agi@associazionegeotecnica.it Website: http://www.wvrs-ischia2015.it/ 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering Date: Sunday 01 November 2015 - Wednesday 04 November 2015 Location: Christchurch, New Zealand Contact person: The Conference Company Address: PO Box 3727, Christchurch, New Zealand Phone: +64 3 365 2217 Fax: +64 3 365 2247 E-mail: 6icege@tcc.co.nz Website: http://www.6icege.com The 15th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering -New Innovations and Sustainability- Date: Monday 09 November 2015 - Friday 13 November 2015 Location: Fukuoka International Congress Center, Fukuoka, Kyushu, Japan Language: English Organizer: The Japanese Geotechnical Society Contact person: Toshifumi Mukunoki Address: 2-39-1 Kurokami, Chuou-ku, Kumamoto, JAPAN, 860-8555, Kumamoto, Japan Phone: +81-96-342-3535 Fax: +81-96-342-3535 E-mail: 15tharc@kumamoto-u.ac.jp Website: http://www.jgskyushu.net/uploads/15ARC/ XV Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Date: Sunday 15 November 2015 - Wednesday 18 November 2015 Location: Hilton Hotel, Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina Language: Spanish - Portuguese - English (simultaneous translation) Organizer: Argentinean Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Contact person: Dr. Alejo Oscar Sfriso Address: Rivadavia 926 Suite 901, C1002AAU, Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina Phone: +541143425447 Fax: +541143423160 E-mail: presidente@saig.org.ar Website: www.panam2015.com.ar

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 40

Event Diary (Con’t)

2015

Geo-Environment and Construction European Conference Date: Thursday 26 November 2015 - Saturday 28 November 2015 Location: Polis University, Tirana, Albania Language: Albanian, English Organizer: Polis University, Albanian Geotechnical Society and Co-PLAN Contact person: Msc. Eng. Erion Bukaçi Address: Polytechnic University of Tirana, Faculty of Civil Engineering,1001, Tirana, Albania E-mail: erion.bukaci@gmail.com, Correspondence and information, MSc. Eng. Erdi Myftaraga (erdi.myftaraga@hotmail.com), Prof. Dr. Luljeta Bozo (lulibozo@gmail.com) International Conference on Soft Ground Engineering ICSGE2015 Date: Thursday 03 December 2015 - Friday 04 December 2015 Location: Singapore, Singapore Language: English Organizer: Geotechnical Society of Singapore Contact person: Dr Kam Weng Leong Address: OPE3, Faculty of Engineering, NUS, 117578, Singapore E-mail: ICSGE2015@nus.edu.sg Website: http://www.geoss.sg/icsge2015 The 1st International Conference on Geo-Energy and Geo-Environment (GeGe2015) Date: 4th and 5th December 2015 Location: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST), Hong Kong Language: English Organizers: HKUST, Chongqing University, Hohai University and Zhejiang University in mainland China, and EPFL in Switzerland Contact person: Ms Shirley Tse Address: The Geotechnical Centrifuge Facility, HKUST, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong Phone: +852-2358-0216 Fax: +852-2243-0040 E-mail: gege2015@ust.hk Website: http://gege2015.ust.hk GIFT - Geotechnics for Infrastructure and Foundation Techniques Date: Thursday 17 December 2015 - Saturday 19 December 2015 Location: Govt. College of Engineering (Established 1853 AD), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA, India Language: English Organizer: Indian Geotechnical Society, Pune Chapter Contact person: Prof. Yashwant Apparao Kolekar Address: Associate Professor, Geotechnical Engineering Division, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Govt. College of Engineering, Wellsley Road, Shivajinagar, 411005, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA, INDIA Phone: +91-20-25507070 / +91-9420963672 Fax: +91-20-25507299 E-mail: igc2015pune@gmail.com Website: http://www.igc2015pune.in/GUI/index.aspx

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 41

Event Diary (Con’t)

2016 Under­ground Construction Prague 2016 Date: Monday 23 May 2016 - Wednesday 25 May 2016 Location: Clarion Congress Hotel Prague Prague, Czech Republic Language: English Organizer: Czech Tunnelling Association Contact person: SATRA, spol. s r. o. Address: Sokolská 32, 120 00, Prague 2, Czech Republic Phone: +420 296 337 181 Fax: +420 296 337 189 E-mail: ps2016@satra.cz Website: http://www.ucprague.com NGM 2016, The Nordic Geotechnical Meeting Date: Wednesday 25 May 2016 - Saturday 28 May 2016 Location: Harpan Conference Centre, Reykjavik, Iceland Language: English Organizer: The Icelandic Geotechnical Society Contact person: Haraldur Sigursteinsson Address: Vegagerdin, Borgartún 7, IS-109, Reykjavik, Iceland Phone: +354 522 1236 Fax: +354 522 1259 E-mail: has@vegagerdin.is Website: http://www.ngm2016.com SEAGC2016 Date: Tuesday 31 May 2016 - Friday 03 June 2016 Location: Dorsett Grand Subang, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia Language: English Organizer: Malaysian Geotechnical Society and Institution of Engineers, Malaysia Contact person: SEAGC2016 Secretariat Address: c/o IEM Training Centre Sdn Bhd, No.33-1A (1st Floor) Jalan 52/18, PO Box 224 (Jalan Sultan), 46720, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia Phone: +(603) 7958 6851 Fax: +(603) 7958 2851 E-mail: seagc2016@gmail.com / choy.iemtc@gmail.com Website: www.mygeosociety.org/SEAGC2016 GeoChina 2016 Date: Monday 25 July 2016 - Wednesday 27 July 2016 Location: Shandong, China Language: English Organizer: Shandong University in Cooperation with Shandong Department of Transportation and University of Oklahoma Contact person: Antony Warden Address: Shanghai, China Phone: +86-021-54721773 E-mail: geochina.sec@gmail.com Website: http://geochina2016.geoconf.org/

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 42

Event Diary (Con’t)

2016

3rd ICTG International Conference on Transportation Geotechnics Date: Sunday 04 September 2016 - Wednesday 07 September 2016 Location: Vila Flor Cultural Centre and University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal Language: English Organizer: Host: Portuguese Geotechnical Society and University of Minho Contact person: Prof. A. Gomes Correia (Chair) Address: University of Minho, School of Engineering, 4800-058, Guimarães, Portugal Phone: +351253510200 Fax: +351253510217 E-mail: agc@civil.uminho.pt Website: http://www.webforum.com/tc3 13th Baltic States Geotechnical Conference Date: Thursday 15 September 2016 - Saturday 17 September 2016 Location: Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania Language: English Organizer: Baltic Sea states Geotechnical Societies / Main organizer Lithuanian Geotechnical Society Contact person: Danutė Sližytė Address: Saulėtekio ave. 15-510, LT-10224, Vilnius, Lithuania Phone: +37068690044 Fax: +37052500604 E-mail: danute.slizyte@vgtu.lt Website: http://www.13bsgc.lt

NON-ISSMGE SPONSORED EVENTS

2015 Second International Course on Geotechnical and Structural Monitoring Date: Thursday 04 June 2015 - Saturday 06 June 2015 Location: Castle of Conti Guidi, Poppi (Arezzo), Italy Language: English Organizer: NHAZCA S.r.l. Contact person: Samuele Pietrini Address: Via Cori snc (Metro C Area), 00177, Roma (RM), Italy Phone: +39 06 9521 6501 E-mail: info@geotechnicalmonitoring.com Website: http://www.geotechnicalmonitoring.com/ SEC 2015 Symposium Date: Thursday 18 June 2015 - Friday 19 June 2015 Location: IFSTTAR, Marne La Vallée, France Language: English & French Organizer: IFSTTAR, CEREMA, PFC Contact person: Ms Séverine Beaunier - Ponts Formation Conseil Address: 15 rue de la Fontaine au Roi, 75011, Paris, FRANCE Phone: +33 1 44 58 28 07 E-mail: severine.beaunier@enpc.fr Website: http://sec2015.info/

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 43

Event Diary (Con’t)

2015

International Conference in Geotechnical Engineering - ICGE-Colombo 2015 Date: Monday 10 August 2015 - Tuesday 11 August 2015 Location: Colombo, Colombo, Sri Lanka Language: English Organizer: Sri Lankan Geotechnical Society Contact person: Eng. K. L. S. Sahabandu Address: Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau, 415, Bauddhaloka Mawatha, Colombo 7, Sri Lanka Phone: +94 11 2668803 Fax: +94 11 2687369 E-mail: gm@cecbsl.com ; sahabandukls@gmail.com Website: www.slgs.lk The 2nd International Symposium on Transportation Soil Engineering in Cold Regions (TranSoilCold2015) Date: Thursday 24 September 2015 - Saturday 26 September 2015 Location: Siberian State University of Railway Engineering, Novosibirsk, Russia Description: The 2nd International Symposium on Transportation Soil Engineering in Cold Regions Language: English, Russian Organizer: Universities of Russia, China, USA Contact person: Yury Moryachkov Address: Novosibirsk, Russia E-mail: transoilcold@inbox.ru Website: http://transoilcold2015.stu.ru/ 5th International Symposium on Geotechnical Safety and Risk (ISGSR 2015) Date: Tuesday 13 October 2015 - Friday 16 October 2015 Location: WTC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Language: English Organizer: KIVI, GEOSnet, Geo Impuls Contact person: Maarten Profittlich Address: Zekeringstraat 41A, 1014BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Phone: +31206510800 E-mail: nssmge@kivi.nl Website: www.isgsr2015.org

FOR FURTHER DETAILS, PLEASE REFER TO THE WEBSITE OF THE SPECIFIC CONFERENCE

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 44

Event Diary (Con’t)

S.N. Apageo S.A.S. ZA de Gomberville BP 35 - 78114 MAGNY LES HAMEAUX FRANCE

Deltares PO Box 177 2600 AB Delft, THE NETHERLANDS

Golder Associates Inc 1000, 940-6th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta CANADA T2P 3T1

Jan de Nul N.V. Tragel 60, B-9308 Hofstade-Aalst BELGIUM

NAUE GmbH Co KG Gewerbestrasse 2 32339 Espelkamp-Fiestel GERMANY

Norwegian Geotechnical Institute P.O. Box 3930 Ullevaal Stadion N-0806 OSLO NORWAY

SOLETANCHE BACHY SA 133 boulevard National, 92500 Rueil-Malmaison, FRANCE

Tensar International Ltd Cunningham Court Shadsworth Business Park Blackburn, BB1 2QX, UNITED KINGDOM

Terre Armée 1 bis rue du Petit Clamart Bâtiment C BP 135 78148 Velizy CEDEX FRANCE

Huesker Synthetic GmbH Fabrikstrasse 13-15 48712 Gescher GERMANY

Zetas Zemin Teknolojisi AS Merkez Mah. Resadiye Cad. No. 69/A Alemdag, Umraniye Istanbul, 34794 TURKEY

Siemens Energy Kaiserleistrasse10 63067 Offenbach GERMANY

International I.G.M. s.a.r.l. P.O.Box: 166129 Achrafieh Beirut LEBANON

TenCate Geosynthetics 9, rue Marcel Paul B.P. 40080 95873 Bezons Cedex FRANCE

RCF Ltd 4C Ologun Agbeje Victoria Island Lagos, Nigeria

Construtora Norberto Odebrecht Av. Rebouças, 3970 - 31º andar Pinheiros CEP-05402-600 São Paulo/SP BRAZIL

Coffey Geotechnics 8/12 Mars Road Lane Cove West NSW, 2066 AUSTRALIA

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 45

Corporate Associates

A.P. van den Berg IJzerweg 4 8445 PK Heerenveen THE NETHERLANDS

Huesker Ltda Rua Romualdo Davoli, 375 Cond. El Dorado CEP 12238.577 São José dos Campos SP BRAZIL

AECOM Asia Company Ltd 8/F, Tower 2, Grand Central Plaza 138 Shatin Rural Committee Road Shatin, NT HONG KONG

Dasan Consultants Co. Ltd Dasan B/D 107 Mujeong-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul 138-200 KOREA

Saegil Engineering and Consulting Co Ltd Hyunmin Building 6F 101 Ogeumno, Songpa-gu Seoul 138-828 KOREA

Vibropile Australia Attn: Serhat Baycan PO Box 253 Mulgrave, VIC 3170 AUSTRALIA

LLC “Bazis Design Academy” 3-A, “Nurly-Tau” Al - Farabi Ave., 5/1, Almaty KAZAKHSTAN

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd. 13 Fitzroy Street London W1T 4BQ UNITED KINGDOM

Geostroy, ZAO Zagorodny prospect, 27/21 St.Petersburg, 191187 RUSSIA

GHD Pty, Ltd. 57-63 Herbert Street Artarmon NSW 2064 AUSTRALIA

Taisei Corporation 1-25-1 Nishi Shinjuku Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo163-0606 JAPAN

Hayward Baker Inc. 1130 Annapolis Road, Suite 202 Odenton, MD 21113 UNITED STATES

Terrasol 42/52 Quai de la Rapée - CS7123075583 Paris CEDEX 12 FRANCE

LLC GEOIZOL Bolshoy PR PS h.25//2 lits E. 197198 Saint Petersburg

Novosibirsk Engineering Center Ltd. Televisionnaya Street,15 Novosibirsk 630048 RUSSIA

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 46

Corporate Associates (Con’t)

COMPLIMENTARY CORPORATE ASSOCIATES

GDS Instruments Unit 32 Murrell Green Business Park London RoadHook HampshireRG27 9GR UNITED KINGDOM

GTS - Geotechnical and Safety Contractors 29 rue des Taches 69800 SAINT PRIEST FRANCE

IPC Global 4 Wadhurst Drive Boronia Victoria, 3155 AUSTRALIA

LUSAS Forge House 66 High Street Kingston upon Thames SurreyKT1 1HN UNITED KINGDOM

TNO DIANA BV Delftechpark ISA Delft 2628XJ THE NETHERLANDS

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 47

Corporate Associates (Con’t)

The Foundation of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE) was created to provide financial help to geo-engineers throughout the world who wish to further their geo-engineering knowledge and enhance their practice through various activities which they could not otherwise afford. These activities include attending conferences, participating in continuing education events, purchasing geotechnical reference books and manuals.

Diamond: $50,000 and above

a. ISSMGE-2010 http://www.issmge.org/

b. Prof. Jean-Louis and Mrs. Janet Briaud https://www.briaud.comand http://ceprofs.tamu.edu/briaud/

Platinum: $25,000 to $49,999

Gold: $10,000 to $24,999 a. International I-G-M

http://www.i-igm.net/ b. Geo-Institute of ASCE

http://content.geoinstitute.org/

c. Japanese Geotechnical Society

http://www.jiban.or.jp/

d. The Chinese Institution of Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering – CCES

www.geochina-cces.cn/en

e. Korean Geotechnical Society www.kgshome.or.kr

f. Comité Français de la Mécanique des Sols et de Géotechnique

www.cgms-sols.org

Silver: $1,000 to $9,999 a. Prof. John Schmertmann

b. Deep Foundation Institute www.dfi.org

c. Yonsei University http://civil.yonsei.ac.kr

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 48

Foundation Donors

d. CalGeo – The California Geotechnical Engineering Association

www.calgeo.org

e. Prof. Ikuo Towhata http://geotle.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/

towhata@geot.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

f. Chinese Taipei Geotechnical Society www.tgs.org.tw

g. Prof. Zuyu Chen http://www.iwhr.com/zswwenglish/index.htm

h. East China Architectural Design and Research

Institutehttp://www.ecadi.com/en/ECADI

i. TC 211 of ISSMGE for Ground Improvement www.bbri.be/go/tc211

j. Prof. Askar Zhussupbekov www.enu.kz/en, www.kgs-astana.kz

k. TC302 of ISSMGE for Forensic Geotechnical Engineering

http://www.issmge.org/en/technical-committees/impact-on-society/163-forensic-geotechnical-engineering

l. Prof. Yoshinori Iwasaki yoshi-iw@geor.or.jpwww.geor.or.jp

m. Mr. Clyde N. Baker, Jr.

n. Prof. Hideki Ohta

o. Prof. Eun Chul Shin www.incheo@incheon.ac.kr n.ac.krecshin

p. Prof. Tadatsugu Tanaka

Bronze: up to $999

a. Prof. Mehmet T. Tümay http://www.coe.lsu.edu/administration_tumay.html mtumay@eng.lsu.edu

b. Nagadi Consultants (P) Ltd www.nagadi.co.in

c. Professor Anand J. Puppala

University of Texas Arlington http://www.uta.edu/ce/index.php

ISSMGE Bulletin: Volume 9, Issue 2 Page 49

Foundation Donors (Con’t)