Field Measurements in Geamechanics, -Myrvall (ed.

)
© 2003 Swets & Zeit/inger, Lisse, ISBN 90 5809 602 5

Piezometers in fully grouted boreholes

PE. Mikkelsen
Consulting Engineer. GeoMetron, Bellevue. WA. USA

G.E. Green
Consulting Engineel; Seattle, WA, USA

ABSTRACT: For decades it has been common practice in the geotechnical industry to install diaphragm
piezometers (pore pressure sensors) in boreholes using methods developed for standpipe piezometers in
saturated soil (Dunnicliff, 1988, 1993). Surrounding a diaphragm piezomcter with a poured-in sand
pocket and placing a bentonite seal above it is at best a laborious process and can in the worst case be
so difficult that the installation becomes a total failure. This paper argues that traditional methods
should be abandoned and that pneumatic and vibrating wire diaphragm piezometers can be more sim­
ply installed directly surrounding them with cement-bentonite grout in the borehole. The method is not
only easier and faster. but has a much better chance of succeeding in measuring the correct ground water
pressure. A review of key papers shows that this idea is not new, but that only recently have fully grouted
diaphragm piezometcrs begun to be employed in practice. The fully grouted method also makes it fea­
sible to install multiple piezometers and to install piezometers together with other instmments in a single
borehole. A review of traditional practice is provided as a background for understanding why it is time to
change. Note that the proposed fully grouted method of installation only applies to diaphragm piezome­
ters installed in saturated soils and generally excludes conventional standpipe piezometers. Application
to unsaturated soils, soils exhibiting positive gas pressures or large negative pressures (suctions) are
beyond the scope of this paper.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Why use a sand pocket?

Open standpipe piezometers shown schematically in Figure 1(a) rely on a sizable intake volume and a
narrow pipe diameter to obtain a reading of piezoil1etric head without significant time-lag (Hvorslev,
1951). The volume of sand surrounding the intake filter is a necessary, integral part of the piezometer.
The larger the sand volume, the more rapidly water can be delivered to the standpipe to equalize pres­
sure changes. The smaller the standpipe diameter the faster equalization occurs. In contrast, when
diaphragm piezometers are utilized to measure piezometric head, only an infinitely small volume of
water is required to activate the sensor diaphragm. For diaphragm piezometers such as vibrating wire
and pneumatic types in current use, the sand pocket normally specified around the sensor is unneces­
sary and the time-consuming installation step of sand (and bentonite seal) placement can be eliminated.
They can more simply and effectively be fully grouted into the borehole as shown in Figure l(b).

1.2 Why use a conventional bentonite seal?

Proper isolation of the piezometer sensor intake along the length oflhe borehole is necessary in order
to obtain a correct pore water pressure measurement. Sealing a conventional standpipe piezometer can
still be achieved by fully grouting the borehole above the sand and eliminating the conventional ben­
tonite seal shown in Figure l(a). The grout itselfforms an adequate low permeability seal. It is common
practice to place a bentonite pellet or chip seal above the sand. The bentonite is allowed to partially

545
 '2_ Water level
__

Fully
gI'outed
Bentonite
seal

Salld

(a) (b)

Figure 1. (a) Open standpipe piezometer (b) diaphragm piezometer.

hydrate before tremie-grouting the rest of the borehole. This practice should also be abandoned in order
to simplifY the installation procedure. The bentonite seal in Figure 1(a) is redundant, but is perceived to
be necessary to protect the sand from being disturbed during grouting and being grouted. Assuming the
sand zone to be saturated, grout with a creamy consistency would penetrate the sand only a few inches.
Grouting directly above the sand can be done provided excessive initial pump pressures are avoided and
the tremie is prevented from acting like a jet nozzle directly into the sand. Side port exits from the
tremie will prevent this. An extra few feet of sand can also help.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 Forgotten test results

In 1961 Penman demonstrated the vast difference in response times between open standpipe, twin-tube
hydraulic and diaphragm type piezometers. Various piezometers were pressed into reconstituted
London clay with a permeability of 3.4 X 1O-8cm!sec, essentially the same as bentonite clay.
Theoretical and experimental results showed how little time was required to equilibrate diaphragm sen­
sors during 20 and 30 psi loading steps and that they responded in a matter of minutes or less (Penman,
1961). The significance of this paper has been largely overlooked with respect to piezometer installa­
tion in boreholes. Whereas pushing or embedding piezometers directly into compacted or soft clay
without a sand-pocket is an accepted procedure, a borehole piezometer is not normally installed with­
out a substantial volume of sand around it. Current worldwide practice for installing standpipes and
diaphragm piezometers are essentially identical. Penman's 1961 paper demonstrates that diaphragm
sensors are clearly different from open standpipes and twin-tube hydraulic piezometers. His studies
demonstrated that a vibrating wire piezometer responds extremely rapidly if embedded directly in a clay
material similar to bentonite. Surrounding a diaphragm piezometer in the borehole with a cement­
bentonite grout with a similar low permeability is sound engineering.

2.2 Ignored theory

A diaphragm piezometer embedded directly in a low permeability saturated clay strata or a large mass
of low permeability cement-bentonite grout should respond instantly to a pore water pressure change.
Effective stress principles and consolidation theory are well understood and accepted in long-standing
soil mechanics practice. A saturated clay layer initially responds to an applied stress increment, D.(T, by
an increase in pore water pressure, D.u = D.(T throughout the layer. Unfortunately the application of
these principles to diaphragm piezometer equalization and appropriate installation details has been
largely ignored.

546
 Perched Watertable

Silty SAND Fully Grollted Bo re ho le

k - 10E-4 c:rnlsec k - 10E-5 c:mlsec:

SIItyCLAV
k - 10E-7 cmlsec: Ld - Vertical distance

Vibrating Wire
Piezometer
Rd - Radial distance

------.---------.-------...

Figure 2. Multi-level piezometer installation.

With the aid of Darcy's Law, Vaughan (1969, 1973) established that for very small diameter stand­
pipe piezometers the grouted section of the borehole can have a permeability greater than one or even
two orders of magnitude higher than the surrounding formation without degrading the measured pore
water pressure. This is particularly significant in fat clays with a permeability of to-8cm/sec or less.
Use of a higher permeability borehole seal is possible because of the much higher horizontal hydraulic
gradients adjacent to the piezometer than the vertical gradients along the grouted borehole. As illus­
trated in Figure 2, radial pressure gradients from the borehole wall to the piezometer are normally one
to- several orders of magnitude greater than those produced vertically from the sensor to some point
many feet above in another strata <R.! «L.v. Radial pressure gradients will control piezometer response.
Piezometer A will correctly measure the pore water pressure in the adjacent silty clay and piezometer B
will correctly measure the pore water pressure in the adjacent silty sand.

3 CEMENT-BENIONITE GROUTS

3.1 Basics
A bentonite grout backfill consisting of just bentonite and water may not be volumetrically stable and
introduces uncertainty about locally introduced pore pressures caused by the hydration process
(Mikkelsen, 2002). Introducing cement, even a small amoUllt, neutralizes the expansive properties of
the bentonite component once the cement-bentonite grout takes an initial set. The strength of the set.
grout can be designed to be similar to the surrounding ground by controlling the cement content and
adjusting the mix proportions. Controlling the compressibility (modulus) and the permeability is not so
easy. Weaker cementitious grouts tend to remain much stiffer than nonnally consolidated clays of sim­
ilar strengths. The bentonite solids content has the greatest influence on the permeability of cement­
bentonite grout, not the cement content.
Cement-bentonite grouts are easier to use than bentonite grouts, provide a long working time before
set and are more forgiving should the user deviate from the design recipe or mixing equipment and
method. It is easier to adjust the grout mix in the field for variations in temperature, pH and cleanliness
of the water. Pure bentonite grouts must be mixed and deployed by strictly following measured quanti­
ties and procedures that are not common among drillers doing test borings.

3.2 Strength and deformation considerations

The general rule for grouting any kind of instrument in a borehole is to mimic the strength and defor­
mation characteristics of the surrounding soil rather than the permeability. However, while it is feasible
to match strengths, it is unfeasible with the same mix design to match the deformation modulus of

547
 120

@I;'-p�indicator,y9��1
.- -- --�: .J -[�Dc[ei�on.T9a:4
[QuDDiclifh 1�8Cl.1

o
o 2 4 6 8 10 12

Water cement ratio by weight

Figure 3. 28-Day cement-bentonite grout strength vs. water- cement ratio. Data from authors personal files.

cement-bentonite to that of a clay for example. The practical thing to do is to approximate the strength
and minimize the area of the grouted annulus. In this way the grout column would only contribute a
weak force in the situation where it might be an issue.
Strength data collected informally from various sources over the years are summarized in Figure 3.
A trend line drawn through the data points illustrates the decrease in strength with increasing
water-cement ratio. The water cement ratio controls the strength of the set grout (Marsland, 1973).
Marsland's rule-of-thumb is to make the 7-day strength of the grout about one quarter that of the
surrounding soil.
Water and cement in proportions greater than 0.7 to 1 by weight will segregate without the addition of
bentonite or some other type of filler material (clay or lime) to suspend the cement uniformly. In all cases
sufficient filler is added to suspend the cement and to provide a thick-creamy-but-pumpable grout con­
sistency. The bentonite does not add significant strength to the grout. The background data for Figure 3
also suggests that the amount and type of bentonite or hydrated lime does not influence strength as long
as the grout is non-bleeding and pumpable. If the grout bleeds the water-cement ratio decreases and
strength increases. If fly ash were to be used as a substitute for cement the strength and modulus would
be expected to drop. Fly ash has a smaller amount of cementing agents (calcium and gypsum).

3.3 Mix design rules

In order to keep field procedures simple the emphasis should be on controlling the water- cement ratio.
This is accomplished by mixing the cement with the water first. W hen water and cement are mixed first,
the water· cement ratio stays fixed and the strength/modulus of the set grout is more predictable. Ifben­
tonite slurry is mixed first, the water-cement ratio cannot be controlled because the addition of cement
must stop when the slurry thickens to a consistency that is still pumpable.
Making cement-bentonite grout in the field is a straightforward process. The most effective mixing
is commonly done in a barrel or tub with the drill-rig pump, circulating the batch through the pump in
50 to 200 gallon quantities. The rig pump provides the kind of jet-mixing required to get the job done
quickly. Any kind of bentonite powder used to make drilling mud combined with Type 1 or 2 Portland
cement and water can be used, but the appropriate quantity of bentonite will vary somewhat depending
on grade of bentonite, mixing sequence, mixing effort (agitation), water pH and temperature.
Grout mixes should be controlled by weight and proportioned to give the desired strength of the set
grout. The conversion factors contained in Appendix H.IO in Dunnicliff (1988, 1993) are very helpful
in mix design. 1wo mixes are given in Table 1 that varies in 28-day strength from 50 psi to 4 psi for
water-cement ratios of 2.5 to 6.6 respectively.

548
Table I. Cement-bentonite grout, water and cement mixed first.

Application Grout for medium to hard soils I Grout for soft soils2

Materials Weight Ratio by weight Weight Ratio by weight

Water 30 gallons 2.5 75 gallons 6.6

Portland cement 94 1 94 I
Bentonite 25 Ibs. (as required) 0.3 39 0.4

I The 28-day compressive strength of this mix is about 50 psi, similar to very stiffto hard clay. The modulus is
about 1O,000psi.
2The 28-day strength of this mix is about4 psi, similar to very soft clay.

3.4 Example mixingprocedure

A rig pump with one suction hose and a return hose fitted with ajet nozzle in a 50-gallon barrel are the
minimum requirements for circulation batch mixing of grout. Paddle or high shear mixers can also be
used. A measured quantity of clean water goes into the mixing tublbarrel first and pumping and circu­
lation starts. Then the cement is gradually added to the water and mixed thoroughly. At this stage the
mix is like gray water. Next, bentonite powder is slowly added into the jetting area of the barrel, slowly
enough so clumps of bentonite do not form. This should be constantly checked by scraping the bottom
with a shovel. When clumps form, slow down and do not add any more powder until they are dissolved.
Keep adding bentonite until the watery mix transitions to an oily/slimy consistency. Observe the con­
sistency while mixing and let the grout thicken for another five to ten minutes. Generally, the mix thick­
ens some more with added mixing time. Add more bentonite as required. When it is smooth and like
thick cream or pancake batter, it is as heavy as is it feasible to pump. Drips of the grout should then
barely come off a dipped finger and form "craters" in the fluid surface. That is the correct consistency
for pumping the grout batch down the tremie-pipe. When possible, withdraw the tremie after each batch
an amount corresponding to the grout level in the boring to keep the pumping pressures as low as pos­
sible. When pumping grout 100 feet or more from the borehole, thinner consistency would be required,
but at the risk of some bleeding.
Old habits die hard, so that some users will insist on mixing water and bentonite powder first as rec­
ommended by Dunnicliff (1988, 1993). This practice should be abandoned for instrument grouts. This
is normally the way drilling mud is mixed and it yields more slurry per sack of bentonite than the above
method. Also, use of hydrated bentonite with cement added last is common practice in grouting tech­
nology for ground improvement. Such mixes are highly thixotropic and rely on industrial ty pe mixing
plants and methods. The cement content is difficult to control under ordinary field instrumentation
installation circumstances.
The amount of bentonite that is required for the above mixing procedure will vary due to factors men­
tioned earlier. The amount of bentonite shown in Table 1 should only be used as a guide and is also handy
for estimating material quantities shipped to the site. With this method more bentonite is required than if
water and bentonite was mixed f'trst. This is an advantage from the standpoint of wanting a low permeabil­
ity. When the bentonite solids content increases, the density increases and the permeability is lowered. It is
another reason for mixing water and cement before adding cement. A lower permeability is generally pre­
ferred since cement-bentonites have a higher penneability than high-density bentonite grout or chip seals.

4 DIAPHRAGM PIEZOMETERS IN FULLY GROUTED BOREHOLES

4.1 Recent experience

Increasingly, both single and multiple vibrating wire and pneumatic pressure sensors are being suc­
cessfully grouted directly into boreholes without sand pockets and bentonite seals. T he idea is not new.
Thirty years ago, Vaughan in L ondon demonstrated that even grouted multiple small-diameter stand­
pipes in clay were feasible (Vaughan, 1969). Tofani (2000) has used the procedure for 20 years in
California for both pneumatic and vibrating wire piezometers. M cKenna (1995) in Canada has adopted

549
 Table 2. Permeability, k, of some grouts.

Grout type Characteristics k (cm/sec) Source

-�-�----"---

Neat cement w/c ratio = 0.89 to 0.53 10-5 to 10-7 Baroid

Bentonite chips Hydrated 10-8 Baroid
Bentonite slurry 6% solids 10-5 Baroid
Bentonite slurry 20% solids 10-8 Baroid
Cement-bentonite water/solids = 4 to 1 10-6 Vaughan, 1969
Cement-bentonite w:c:b = 4:1:1 5 X 10-8 Vaughan, 1973
---------

the fully grouted installation of piezometer sensors following extensive field testing and McKenna and
others (1994) adopted combined inclinometer casing and diaphragm piezometers directly grouted into
the same borehole as standard procedures. The US Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District adopted
fully-grouted vibrating wire piezometer installations and included them with deep inclinometer casing
installations based on recommendations by the first author (USACE, 1999). But, because the geotech­
nical community seems to be so rooted in traditional thinking when it comes to sealing a piezometer in
a borehole, it is counter-intuitive 10 most engineers to simply grout the sensors in the boring.
Grout is perceived as a sealant that would prevent the sensor from registering the correct pore pres­
sure, should it get between the soil and the porous element on the piezometer tip. However, based
on research 40 years ago (Penman, 1961), that perception is incorrect. Despite research in the 1960s
that recognizes the feasibility of direct grouting, it remained largely unrecognized in 1988 when the
"redbook" was first published (Dunnicliff, 1988).

4.2 Grout permeability

Cement-bentonite grout is a porous solid with a permeability that lies somewhere in the cement and
bentonite range mentioned above. Typical published values of permeability are listed in Table 2.
Vaughan (1973) �uotes a coefficient of permeability for a pumpable cement-bentonite grout mix on the
order of 5 X 10 - cm/sec. For low bentonite solid contents the permeability can be expected to be close
to 1O-6cm/sec and for higher bentonite solids content it would be close to 1O-8cm/sec. So the issue is
really not if this method works, but how well does it work and what, if any, are the limitations involved
with the use of vibrating wire sensors or pneunlatic sensors.

4.3 Vibrating wire vs. pneumatic piezometers

Response tests (Penman, 1961; Tofani, 2000; McKenna, 1995; Mikkelsen and Slope Indicator Co.,
2000) all show that both vibrating wire and pneumatic sensors stabilize after a pressure change in a mat­
ter of seconds to several minutes. Examples of recent response testing on a vibrating wire piezometer
embedded in cement-bentonite grout are shown in Figures 4 and 5 (Mikkelsen and Slope Indicator Co.,
2000). However, it should be recognized that vibrating wire and other electrical sensors have an advan­
tage over pneumatic sensors. The volume of fluid displaced at a vibrating wire diaphragm during a pres­
sure change is extremely small, so that system equilibrium is rapid. During reading, no actual
displacement of the diaphragm occurs. In contrast, the diaphragm of a pneumatic sensor has to displace
a small amount of pore-fluid every time the sensor is activated to take a reading. Experience demon­
strates that a small amount of undisolved air must be present in the intake area of the sensor for it to
work properly in low permeability clay. A fully saturated pneumatic sensor embedded in clay must over­
come the total soil pressure for initial movement of the diaphragm. Obtaining a stable, reliable pore
water pressure reading is not only time-consuming, but also often nearly impossible to get. A pneumatic
piezometer should be installed without any special effort to remove all the air outside the diaphragm. It
is a necessary compromise with an obvious sacrifice in response in low permeability clay. In contrast,
a vibrating wire piezometer should be installed upside down, fastened to its cable and flooded with
water to discourage air from collecting against the diaphragm.
As a practical matter, lowering a diaphragm piezometer down a water or mud-filled borehole usually
requires added weight to keep the cable or tube straight and counteract buoyancy and borehole sticki­
ness. A short length of re-bar can be attached. A better method, especially for the pneumatic sensors, is
to enclose the sensor in a 1.5 to 2-inch diameter, sand-filled geo-textile (or canvas) sock. This will

550
 C-_-f�{�- t------i-n\. ---�I_---- -- f-----.

!� :�: : ...
f---__

J 10
f------+--4\+I-----
� -- ------··+----1K
� _____ �__
\I\""", -+--
� _
. ._ ....
...._.l_ �U:J.it
.. ::a_;a::a.� __
_

__ __
' ;
.
_____ �__
-:-, .�
.Ia._ .;;. U.i:hFt:a..
_ _ .......

5 Fe -Pi;;;';;;:;;;- �---- ---- ----- ��-- ---- -- - f----

L::--- Chamber
o .-... ,:::=-=:r:::: ..:.--.-: :
,- - - . -... -, ..., - .. -- ....... -.. '-' ,. ,-....'... .. ---.-. - .." - .. - , -._ - .. ---
..
.. - -, .. --_ _..... - ....-
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Elapsed time in minutes

Figure4. Vibrating wire piezometer response after 288 days cure. Piezometer embedded under 200 mm of cement­
bentonite grout inside chamber. Pressure applied above grout surface and piezometer response recorded.

11
::l
3
.�
.E

�
:;::;

:ll
2 --.- -- ---- - .r=·- --,;r�::; :=;�-I- --- 99.9% . -----\----1

c:
&' 1
:l
a:

+-��+----.- --
30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300
Curing time in days

Figure 5. Vibrating wire piezometer response time vs. grout curing time.

encourage entrapment of a small amount of free air. Diaphragm piezometers can be directly attached to
inclinometer casing during assembly without the re-bar or the sand-filled sack. As a final note, pneu­
matic piezometers are generally unsuitable for measuring negative (sub-atmospheric) pressure whereas
the vibrating wire piezometers are quite capable of measurements to 7 psi (50 kPa) below ambient
atmospheric pressure.

4.4 Cement-bentonite as a high air-entry filter

As a side issue, the cement-bentonite grout discussed herein also offers advantages of interest for pore
water suction measurements in partially saturated soils. During the preparation of this article it was
pointed out (Vaughan, 2001 ) that cement-based grouts have an air entry value up to about 1 00psi, a
property required for measurement of negative pore pressures. The grout, when set, becomes a perfectly
saturated porous material, a far easier task than pre-saturating a high-air entry ceramic filter and deploy­
ing it down a borehole. A vibrating wire piezometer fully grouted within cement-bentonite grout can
therefore be expected to measure negative pore water pressure or suction. Research is currently in
progress in the UK on the role of grouts surrounding directly grouted-in piezometer tips designed to
measure suction and the air entry value of grouts.

551
5 MULTIPLE PIEZOMETERS IN A BOREHOLE

5.1 Simplicity and reduced cost

The borehole is the highest cost component of an instrument installation, so that there is a great incen­
tive to put more than one sensor or more instrument types for that matter, in the same borehole. Debate
has surrounded this topic in the past, because of the perceived lack of ability to seal around multiple
cables, pipes and tubes in one boring. It is the author's opinion that most difficulties arise from dealing
with rigid standpipes and attempting to place multiple sandiberitonite seals. Elimination of multiple
rigid pipes, poured-in sand-pockets, bentonite layers and opportunity for multiple down-hole measure­
ments, are considerable benefits.
The ability to reliably install two, three or more piezometers in one borehole has enormous attrac­
tions. Vibrating Wire piezometer sensors in fully grouted boreholes practically eliminates the risk of
installation failure. The sensors should probably be spaced no closer than 10 to 20 feet apart. An option
exists for users who remain skeptical about introducing grout between the soil and the porous piezome­
ter filter. An enlarged porous pad directly attached to the piezometer sensor can be pressed directly
against the borehole wall by springs (Green, 2000). Mechanical and hydraulic jacks have been used in
Norway to achieve direct contact and a spring-actuated system was used successfully on a very deep
installation in Canada. Pneumatically released spring-loaded multi-level piezometers are now available
from Geokon for installation in fully grouted boreholes. Whether or not the spring-actuated system is
used should not detract from the data quality; its use may encourage skeptics to go fully grouted.

5.2 Installation methods

A number of basic installation methods can be successfully employed depending on drilling method,
borehole stability and user preferences. Variations in these methods may be appropriate.

• Install piezometers one by one from bottom up in an open borehole. Grout and withdraw tremie pipe
as grouting proceeds. Alternatively, attach piezometers to rigid trernie pipe and leave tremie pipe in
place.
• Install piezometers one by one from the bottom up inside casing or hollow stem auger. Attach
piezometers to rigid trernie pipe and leave in place while pulling casing or auger.
• Drill and grout hole and pull casing and auger. Install one by one from bottom up in grout filled hole.
Add weight to each piezometer as required to overcome viscous resistance while 10weri!1g piezometer.
• Attach directly to outside of inclinometer casing midway between casing couplings.

Figure 6. Multi-level piezometers in P V C pipe.

552
 • Attach directly to outside of corrugated polyethylene pipe (Sondex ) or similarly attach to magnet!
reed switch casing between magnet sensors so that pore water pressure and settlement are measured
along the same borehole.
• Build a series of vibrating wire piezometers into a coupled 2-inch PVC pipe so that piezometers and
cables are inside the PVC pipe, Figure 6. U seful in deep installations inside casing or augers to pre­
vent cable damage during casing or auger rotation during extraction. Tremie-grout outside the PVC
pipe. Telescoping couplings may be inserted to accommodate settlement.

6 CONCLUSIONS

• Theoretically, fully grouted diaphragm piezometers should correctly measure the pore water pressure
in the surrounding saturated soil. Effective stress concepts are well established and Darcy's Law
helps us understand the significance of how the larger radial pressure gradient at a particular
piezometer governs the measured pressure and that the smaller pressure gradients along a grouted
borehole severely limits the effect of leakage along the borehole.
• Empirical evidence from Penman (1961) and Vaughan (1969), and more recently by McKenna
(1995), Tofani (2000) and the first author, clearly demonstrate that grouted-in diaphragm piezome­
ters should and do work reliably. It is time for fully grouted diaphragm piezometers to be adopted in
general without further delay or pending further testing.
• A cement-bentonite grout mixture is the most reliable, versatile, easily mixed and readily pumpable
grout for piezometer grouting seals. Poured in place sand pockets placed around the piezometer tip
and sealed with compressed bentonite pellets or granular bentonite should be abandoned. Single
component bentonite sealing grouts are too difficult to control during mixing, may set up too quickly
and if thinned may remain too soft when set.
• Afully grouted diaphragm piezometer is simpler and easier to install and therefore is more reliable.
. 'It saves considerable field installation time and is less costly.
• Fully grouted installations facilitate placing multi-level piezometers in a single borehole and provide
great savings in drilling and instrument installation cost. They are much simpler and less costly than
other multi-level piezometer systems available ( e.g. Westbay and Waterloo).
• Multi-level piezometer installations provide more details of pore water pressure/depth profiles in
complex strata with irregular ground water regimes, often revealing unrecognized potential failure
mechanisms or explaining previously unexplained field behavior.
• Fully grouted installations open up the opportunity to place multiple instrument types in a single
. borehole, e.g. inclinometers and piezometers.

REFERENCES

Dunnicliff, 1. 1988, 1993. Geotechnical Instrumentation for Measuring Field Performance, New York, 1. Wiley.
Green, G E. 2000. Geotechnical Field Instrumentation: What's New in 2000. Geotechnical News, VoL 18, No.4,
.

Dec.: 26-30.
Hvorslev, M.J. 1951. Time Lag and Soil Permeability in Groundwater Observations. Bulletin No. 36, U.S. Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, ML
Marsland, A. 1973. Discussion, Principles of Measurement. In Field Instrumentation in Geotechnical Engineering:
531-532. British Geotechnical Society, London: Halsted Press a Division of John Wiley.
_ McKenna, G.T. 1995. Grouted-In Installation of Piezometers in Boreholes. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 32:
355-363 .
. McKenna, G.T., Livingstone, G. and Lord, T. 1994. Advances in Slope-Monitoring Instrumentation at Syncrude
_ Canada Ltd. Geotechnical News, VoL 1 2, No.3, Sept.: 69.
, Mikkelsen, P.E. and Slope Indicator Co. 2000. Grouting-in Piezometers. In Technical Note at w w w.slope.com.
2 pages.
: Mikkelsen, P.E. 2002. Cement-Bentonite Grout Backfill for Borehole Instruments. Geotechnical News, VoL 20,

No. 4, Decembe
'penman, A.D.M. 196 L A Study of the Response Time of Various Types of Piezometers. In Pore Pressure and Suction
in Soils. British Geotechnical Society: 53-58. London: Butterworths.

553