CHAPTER 3

ANALYSES OF STONE COLUMN UNIT CELL

3.1 General

Most of the stone column reinforced foundation analyses were carried out either in

axisymmetric unit cell or two-dimensional full-scale embankment system. Since the

nature of stone column is cylindrical influence and treated ground is usually wide,

both axisymmetric unit cell analysis and two-dimensional full-scale analysis are

needed. For these analyses, the Finite Element Method is one of the widely used

methods. Because of the composite nature of stone column treated soil, we need to

consider two different materials concurrently or an equivalent composite material.

The analytical methods for analysis of stone column reinforced foundations were

mostly based on the consideration of a single stone column. The field study of stone

column reinforced foundations indicated that stone columns help accelerate the rate

of consolidation of soft clay (Munfakh et al., 1983; Han & Ye, 1992). Han & Ye

(2001) reported the simplified method for consolidation rate of stone column

reinforced foundation based on drain well theory. The comparisons of the analytical

results and finite element analysis results on the performance of a single stone column

axisymmetric unit cell were studied in this chapter.

50
3.2 Stone Column Unit Cell

To analyse the performance of stone column reinforced foundation, the unit cell

approximation is used. The cylindrical unit cell model of stone column is idealized as

axisymmetric unit cell as shown in Fig. 3.1. Based on Barron (1947) solution of drain

well and nature of stone columns, the following assumptions are applied for

analytical solution (Han & Ye, 2001):

(a) Stone columns are free-draining at any time & each stone column has a

circular influence zone.

(b) Surrounding soil is fully saturated and water is incompressible.

(c) Stone column and surrounding soil only deform vertically (equal vertical

strain theory).

(d) The load is applied instantly through a rigid foundation and maintained

constant throughout the consolidation period.

(e) Total vertical stresses with stone column and surrounding soil,

respectively, are average and uniform.

The major differences between stone columns and drain wells include the

consideration of stiffness difference between stone column and surrounding soil and

the smaller diameter ratio (influence diameter/ column diameter) of stone columns.

Han & Ye (2001) introduced the modified coefficient of consolidations for the partial

differential equation governing the consolidation of stone column unit cell as:

51
 1 ∂u ∂ 2 u ∂ 2 u ∂u
cr′ ( + 2 ) + cv′ 2 = (3.1)
r ∂r ∂r ∂z ∂t

The modified coefficients of consolidation in the radial and vertical directions are

given as;

cr′ = ( k r / γ w )[mv ,c (1 − a s ) + mv ,s a s ] /[ mv ,s mv ,c (1 − a s )] (3.2)

cv′ = (k v / γ w )[mv ,c (1 − a s ) + mv , s a s ] /[ mv ,s mv ,c (1 − a s )] (3.3)

The coefficient of compressibility for soil and stone column material, respectively,

are expressed as:

(1 + v)(1 − 2v)
mv = (3.4)
E (1 − v)

The solution for the vertical flow follows Terzaghi 1D consolidation solution, while

that for radial flow follows Barron (1947) drain well solution. In both solutions,

modified coefficients of consolidation should be used for stone column reinforced

foundations. The 1D consolidation solution due to vertical flow can be obtained in

many soil mechanics books and can be applied for stone column reinforced

foundations by using modified coefficient of consolidation due to vertical flow ( cv′ )

instead of ( cv ) and the thickness of soil from a top drained horizontal surface to an

impervious bottom boundary. The average rate of consolidation in the radial direction

is given by:

52
U r = 1 − exp −[8 / F ( N )]Tr′ (3.5)

F ( N ) = [ N 2 /( N 2 − 1)] ln( N ) − (3N 2 − 1) /(4 N 2 ) (3.6)

′
Tr = cr′ t / d e
2
(3.7)

Where,

N = d e / d c (diameter ratio)

t = elapsed time

Applied Load

Stone Column

Surrounding Soil
H

dc

de

Figure 3.1 Axisymmetric Unit Cell Idealization of Stone Column

53
Since it is assumed that column-soil interface remains elastic and no slip occurs, the

displacements of stone column and soil at the interface are equal. In this unit cell

analysis, only the vertical deformations of the stone column-soil system are

considered, radial deformations are considered to be negligible. Since the beginning

of the consolidation, the vertical stress in the soil starts to transfer onto the stone

column. When the stress transfer becomes significant over time, the lateral stress also

increases the excess pore water pressure. The dissipation of excess pore water

pressure due to radial stress is accelerated by the drain behavior of stone column. The

variation of stress distribution and stress concentration ratio with time is significant in

stone column unit cell analysis (Han & Ye, 2001). Because of the ability to represent

the real stone column treated ground behavior, unit cell analysis is a reasonably

method for analyses of stone column reinforced foundation in many conditions.

3.3 Consolidation Analysis

3.3.1 Simplified Analytical Method

The simplified analytical method of stone column unit cell analysis is carried out by

using the available field data for stone column and soft clay. The analytical unit cell

model is considered with the homogeneous soft clay with stone column at the centre

of the cylindrical unit cell. The analysis with the different stone column diameter

ratios are done for comparison with the finite element solutions. The models are

idealized for realistic diameter ratios while the diameter of stone column is held

constant.

54
Since the radial flow in the vertically loaded unit cell is the dominant flow, the

consolidation due to vertical flow can be ignored. The calculation was done for the

average rate of consolidation due to radial flow of pore water. The excess pore water

pressure would dissipate through the stone column which is also a drainage channel.

As discussed earlier, the equal vertical strain theory is applied for the stone column

unit cell. The modified coefficient of consolidation for composite stone column unit

cell was determined by using Eqn. (3.2) and the rate of consolidation in the radial

direction is computed by using Eqn. (3.5) to (3.7).

The axisymmetric stone column unit cell is considered as linearly elastic associated

with constant constrained modulus, constant coefficient of consolidation and constant

permeability of soil which are employed for each unit cell model. In reality, the stone

column and surrounding soil have non-linear behavior. The material parameters such

as modular ratio, coefficient of compressibility and stiffness are stress-dependent in

nature. The analytical theory accounts for the above-mentioned parameters but not

their variability with time. The material parameters used and different unit cell

geometry data are reported in Table. 3.1 and Table. 3.2, respectively. Since the rate of

consolidation in the stone column unit cell also depends on the diameter ratio, the

different diameter ratios were tested for the comparison with the finite element

analysis.

The important purpose of stone columns is to induce excess pore water pressure,

when load is applied, from the surrounding soil and remove it through the stone

55
column drainage in order to accelerate the rate of consolidation. Thus, dominant

radial flow must occur towards the stone column when the unit cell is loaded with

vertical compression. Since the equal vertical strain condition and no horizontal

displacement are assumed, the rate of consolidation due to radial flow will be much

more significant in the consolidation computation. Therefore, it is presumed that the

horizontal permeability of the surrounding soil is higher than the vertical

permeability. The comparisons of the rate of consolidation due to radial flow for

analytical method and finite element method will assure the reliability of the unit cell

model in determining the rate of consolidation of the stone column treated soil.

3.3.2 Finite Element Method Analysis

The finite element method computations with Plaxis for the stone column unit cell

were carried out for comparison with the analytical solutions. The same stone column

unit cells used for the simplified analytical solutions were adopted to carry out the

finite element analysis using Plaxis program. The axisymmetric unit cell model was

idealized in Plaxis and consolidation analyses were performed using coupled

consolidation theory. The following assumptions are made in this analysis:

(f) Stone columns are saturated with water

(g) Small strain theory is valid

(h) The thickness of soil layer is constant during consolidation process

The stone column unit cell models for the different diameter ratios are studied for

comparison. The stone column unit cells were analyzed by axisymmetric model

56
composed of 15 nodes triangular elements. The 15 node triangle provides a fourth

order interpolation for displacements. Due to the rotational symmetry at the central

axis, the model is considered with radial element with effective radius ( re ) and stone

column radius ( rc ).

Homogenous soil layer is idealized for the surrounding soil in the unit cell. The rigid

plate is placed at the top boundary of the unit cell to ensure the equal vertical strain

consideration. The properties of the rigid plate is shown in Table.3.3. The

consolidation boundaries are applied in such a way that the consolidation due to

radial flow can be ensured. In order to compare the results obtained from the finite

element method to the simplified analytical theory, the rate of consolidation in the

radial direction is considered only. Since the finite element program Plaxis computes

the consolidation in both radial and vertical direction, the model is idealized to give

the consolidation due to radial flow. The boundary conditions applied to the unit cell

model is shown in Fig. 3.2.

The uniform load is applied to the model. The load is applied instantly through the

rigid plate and maintained constant during the consolidation period. In addition, the

rigid raft over the unit cell provides the equal vertical deformation for the model. The

stone column material is considered as drain material in the unit cell. The linear

elastic soil model is used to formulate the material modeling. The material parameters

and geometry data of the unit cell used in finite element analyses are the same as in

Table. 3.1 and Table. 3.2.

57
 Stone Column

: closed consolidation boundary

: rigid plate

: pore water flow

Figure 3.2 Boundary conditions of the stone column unit cell for axisymmetric model

58
The interface element can be used to control the dissipation of pore water pressure in

stone column unit cell model. Because of the conditions applied to the stone column

unit cell model, the pore water pressure dissipation occurs through the radial drainage

path into the stone column. The consolidation calculation is performed until minimum

pore water pressure is achieved. The results obtained from the finite element program

are compared to those from the simplified analytical solutions.

3.3.3 Results and Discussion

The results from simulation of the stone column unit cell in finite element analysis

and simplified analytical method by Han & Ye (2001) provide the behavior of the

stone column unit cell idealized as an axisymmetric model. The rate of consolidation

in terms of settlement at the top of the unit cell is evaluated. Comparison between

results from the finite element method analysis and Han & Ye’s analytical results on

the average rate of consolidation are presented in Figs. 3.3 to 3.8. The results from the

comparison of the 5-meter and 10-meter height stone column unit cells are presented

for various diameter ratios (N). The comparison indicates that good agreement for

average rate of consolidation is achieved between the simplified analytical solution

and the finite element solution. However, slight discrepancies exist between the two

methods for small diameter ratios. The differences become less significant when the

diameter ratio N increases.

It is observed that the finite element analysis results on the rate of consolidation is

slightly faster than the analytical results in the early phases and the rate become

59
slower in the later phases. This phenomenon may be due to the different assumptions

used in analytical method and finite element method. For instant, although the

simplified analytical method used does not consider the effect of well resistance, the

finite element program simulation accounted for possible real behaviors through its

construction stages. It is also reasonable that the well resistance in the stone column

develops over the time elapsed and subsequently the discharge capacity of the stone

column becomes slower in the later phase than in the earlier phase.

From the comparison figures, it is observed that the differences in rate of

consolidation between the analytical method and the finite element method reduce

when the diameter ratio (N) increases. Therefore, diameter ratio (N) plays an

important part in governing the rate of consolidation of stone column treated soil. The

examination of the rate of consolidation of stone column unit cell in terms of diameter

ratio by finite element method is shown in Fig 3.9. The comparison of results from

different diameter ratios indicates that the higher the diameter ratio, the slower the

rate of consolidation of the stone column treated soil. The results prove that the

lengthening of the drainage path in the surrounding soil will decrease the rate of

consolidation in stone column treated soil significantly.

60
 0

Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6
FEM
0.8 Analytical

1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Time Factor,Tr

Figure 3.3 Rate of Consolidation of Stone Column Reinforced Foundations in case of

H=5m, N=de/dc=3 and Ec/Es=10

0
Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6
FEM
0.8 Analytical

1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Time Factor,Tr

Figure 3.4 Rate of Consolidation of Stone Column Reinforced Foundations in case of

H=5m, N=de/dc=4 and Ec/Es=10

61
 0

Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6
FEM
0.8 Analytical

1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Time Factor,Tr

Figure 3.5 Rate of Consolidation of Stone Column Reinforced Foundations in case of

H=5m, N=de/dc=5and Ec/Es=10

0
Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6
FEM
0.8 Analytical

1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Time Factor,Tr

Figure 3.6 Rate of Consolidation of Stone Column Reinforced Foundations in case of

H=10m, N=de/dc=3and Ec/Es=10

62
 0

Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6
FEM
0.8 Analytical

1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Time Factor,Tr

Figure 3.7 Rate of Consolidation of Stone Column Reinforced Foundations in case of

H=10m, N=de/dc=4and Ec/Es=10
Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6
FEM
0.8 Analytical

1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Time Factor,Tr

Figure 3.8 Rate of Consolidation of Stone Column Reinforced Foundations in case of

H=10m, N=de/dc=5and Ec/Es=10

63
 0

Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

0.6 N=3
N=4
0.8 N=5

1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Time (day)

Figure 3.9 Influence of diameter ratio on rate of consolidation in case of

H=10m & Ec/Es=10

In addition, the rate of consolidation of stone column unit cell is also influenced by

the modular ratio as can be seen in Fig (3.10). The differences in stiffness of the stone

column material and the surrounding soil result in different stress concentrations and

subsequently in the rate of consolidation. It is found that the higher modular ratios

result in faster rate of consolidation in the stone column unit cell. The influence of

diameter ratio in the dissipation of excess pore water pressure is shown in Fig (3.11).

The results from the Figure show that the higher modular ratio, the faster the rate of

consolidation. But at larger diameter ratio, the rate of dissipation of excess pore

pressure becomes closer for the early stages of consolidation.

64
 0

Average Rate of Consolidation,Ur

0.2

0.4

Ec/Es=10
0.6
Ec/Es=20
0.8 Ec/Es=30
Ec/Es=40
1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Time (day)

Figure 3.10 Influence of modular ratio on rate of consolidation in case of

H=10m, N= de/dc=3

100
Excess Pore Pressure (kPa)

80

60

40 N=3
N=4
20 N=5

0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Time (day)

Figure 3.11 Influence of diameter ratio on dissipation of excess pore water pressure
in case of H=10m, N= de/dc=3 & Ec/Es=10

65
By comparing the results from the simplified analytical method and finite element

method, it is obvious that the stone columns are effective in accelerating the rate of

consolidation in soft cohesive soils. The major factors to consider in analyzing the

stone column reinforced foundation are the influence of the diameter ratios and the

difference in stiffness of the stone column material and the soils which constitute the

composite ground.

66
TABLES

67
 Table 3.1 Material Parameters used for analysis of Stone Column Unit Cell Models

γ unsat γ sat Kh E′
Model Type 3
Kv
ν′ Applied
K0
( kN / m ) ( kN / m ) ( m / day ) ( m / day )
3
( k P a) load (kPa)
Linear
Clay Undrained 15 15 3.00E-04 1.00E-04 3000 0.3 100 0.7
Elastic
Linear
Stone Drained 19 20 5 5 30000 0.3 100 0.7
Elastic

68
 Table 3.2 Geometry data for different Stone Column Unit Cell Models

Height Spacing de dc N
(m) (m) (m) (m) (de/dc)

Model-1 5-10 2.26 2.55 0.85 3

Model-2 5-10 3.01 3.40 0.85 4

Model-3 5-10 3.76 4.25 0.85 5

Table 3.3 Properties of Rigid Plate

EA EI
Material Type
(kN/m) (kN/m2/m)

Plate Elastic 1.05E+07 2189

69