Occurrence of Weak Deposits

Coastal Areas
Soft Marine Clay
( e.g. Vizag, Cochin, Kandala, etc. )
Loose Beach Sand
Alluvial Deposits
Low-lying Areas getting submerged by flood/tide
 Site location: Near by Khajod, Surat.

Site location: Rahul raj market,

3
Surat.
 Properties of Soft Clay

Moisture Content = Liquid Limit

Cohesion Strength = 10-20 kPa
SPT (N) Values = 0 to 2
Void Ratio = 0.8 to 1.2
 Problems with Soft Clay

Very Low Bearing Capacity

Capacit
Large Settlements ( both total and differential )
Long Term Settlements
Negative Skin Friction on Piles
Low Horizontal Load Capacity of Piles
Instability of Deep Excavation Slopes
High Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures
Lateral Flow under Surface Loading
 Properties of Loose Sand
Saturated Unit Weight = 18-20 kN/m3
Void Ratio = 0.75 to 0.85
Standard Penetration Test (N) Value = 4 to 10
Angle of friction () = 28 to 30
-5
Permeability (k) = 10 m/sec
 Problems with Loose Sand
Low Bearing Capacity ( local shear failure )
Higher Settlements
Susceptibility to Liquefaction
Temporary Support for Excavations
Higher Seepage in Excavations
Higher Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures
Stone column

8
Principle & Application
Principle
Stone columns are one of the method suited for soft clays and silts and also
for loosely silty sands.

The concept of stone column is to make a borehole and backfill with granular
materials

Application
improving slope stability of both embankment and natural slopes.
increasing bearing capacity.
reducing total settlement and differential settlements.
reducing liquefaction potential of sands.
increasing time rate settlement.
increasing relative density & stabilizing of collapsible soils.
9
10
 Clay Silt Sand Gravel Stone

100 100

80 80

60 Vibro Replacement 60
Percentage Passing

Vibro Compaction
40 40

20 20

0 0,002 0,006 0,02 0,06 0,2 0,6 2,0 6,0 20 60 0

Grain size [mm]

Figure Range of Soils Suitable for Treatment

Advantages (Slocombe, 2000) of the stone columns over conventional
methods of ground improvement technique may be described as follows:

Increase in load carrying capacity

Significant reduction of settlement
Being granular and free draining , consolidation
settlement will be minimum
Installation is relatively simple and involves low energy
input or moderate labour
Increase in resistance to liquefaction
Cost effective

12
 History

In France in 1830 (Adalier, 2004) stone column was applied to

improve native soil.

Stone columns (Black et al., 2006) have been in limited use in the U.S.
since 1972.

This method has been used extensively in Europe for site

improvement since the late 1950.

First recorded use of vibro float (Basarkar, 2009) in India was at

Madras in 1961.

In Gujarat, at Kandla, stone column first applied for oil storage tank
foundation(Desai et al. 1990).
13
 Applications of Vibro Replacement

Tank foundations Highway embankments Railway embankments

Others
Industrial structures
Bridge approaches

Reinforced earth walls Individual footings Runways

Installation Technique
(A) Vibro-compaction process

Figure The Vibro-compaction Process

soils containing less than 30-40% of fines
vibration and water jet
Relative density 70-90%
non cohesive soil 16
In non-cohesive granular soils, such as sand and
gravel, the passage of the vibrating probe causes a
liquefaction and an almost immediate densification
and settlement.
(B)Vibro-replacement process

Figure Vibro-replacement process

suitable for cohesive soil

Stone 12 -75 mm
No vibration
Water jet or air jet 20
Vibro-Replacement Procedures:

Stage1: The jet at the bottom of the

Vibroflot is turned on and lowered
into the ground
Stage2: The water jet creates a quick
condition in the soil. It allows the
vibrating unit to sink into the ground
Vibro-Replacement Procedures (cont.):

Stage 3: Granular material is poured from the

top of the hole.
Vibro-Replacement Procedures (cont.):

Stage 4: The vibrating unit is gradually raised

in about 0.3-m lifts and held vibrating for
about 30 seconds at each lift. This process
compacts the soil to the desired unit
weight.
Installation Methods Wet & Dry
Installation Process (Dry Bottom Feed Method)

Delivery and Compaction

Penetration Completion
Process of Stones
Installation Process (Wet Top Feed Method)

Penetration & Column

Completion
Flushing Construction
Typical Exposed Vibro Stone column
Depth Vibrators (Electrically Powered)
(C)Rammed Stone column

Figure Rammed stone column process

Rammer wt 10 kN
Ht of fall 1 m
Min blow 40 35
(D)Vibro-compozer Process

Figure Vibro-compozer process

Casing pipe driven through the vibrator
Sand poured by air blow
Pipe is again lowered to compact the sand 38
Advantages

More economical than piling

pile cap be eliminated as just granular layer is enough to trnafer the load to
the stone column
Significantly reduces consolidation settlement
Immediate Increase of shear strength and friction angle of treated soil
No waiting period after installation as compared to PVD. Embankment
construction can commence immediately after installation of stone column
to full height of embankment.
Better performance in liquefaction mitigation as compare to pile

39
Limitation

In soft clay soils, the bulging of stone columns will occur

Normally not adequate for shear strength of the soil in the range of 5-20
kN/m2

40
Concluding Remarks

Considering the time, cost, improvement achieved, environment aspect.

The stone column can be better serve the need.

No special equipment require for the rammed stone column as require for
the other methods like deep soil mixing, pre loading and vertical drain,
dynamic compaction.

Construction can be done immediately after the stone column completion,

which not possible for the pre loading and vertical drain.

Better performance in the seismic area as compare to pile.

No environment issue associated with the rammed stone column as

compared to deep blasting which propagate shock waves, could damage the
adjacent structure.

41
 The Basic Concept

Increase overall stiffness of compressible soils

Increase shear strength
Allow rapid consolidation by providing radial drainage
The stone column derives its axial capacity from the passive earth pressure developed
due to the bulging effect of the column and increased resistance to lateral deformation
under superimposed surcharge load (Malarvizhi and Ilamparuthi 2007).
 Load

Stone column

44
 Load

Stone column

45
 Load

rL rL

Stone column

46
 Flexible Semi Rigid Rigid

Stone Column Geosynthetic Encased Pile

Stone Column
 Flexible Semi Rigid Rigid

Stone Column Geosynthetic Encased Pile

Stone Column
 Penetration of surrounding soft soil into the stone column

About 20-30 % reduction in load carrying

capacity was observed with 10-15%
penetration of soil into the stone column.

Penetration of surrounding soft soil into the stone column

DESIGN APPROACHES
Table : Various design approaches for bearing capacity
Sr Approach Author
No.
1 Passive pressure approach Greenwood (1970)
2 General shear failure approach Madhav and Vitkar (1978)
3 Lateral limit state or Gibson and Anderson (1961)
Pressuremeter theory approach Amar and Jezequel (1972)
Peteur (1973)
Hughes & Withers (1974)
Hughes et al.(1975)
Mori (1979), Aboshi et al (1979)
4 Empirical approaches Thorburn & McVicar (1968)
Greenwood (1970)
Thorburn (1975)
Smoltzyk (1979) 54
(1) Passive pressure approach

qult = Pp = Z Kp + q Kp+2Cu

Figure : Granular pile under

strip footing
(After Greenwood, 1970)

Figure : Granular piles under wide spread load

(After Greenwood, 1970) 55
(2) General shear failure approach

A/B 1

Figure : Failure Mechanism (After Madhav and Vitkar, 1978 )

56
 for A/B 1
Figure : Failure Mechanism (After Madhav and Vitkar, 1978
57
)
qult = C2 Nc + (2 B/2) N + 2 Df Nq
Where;
qult = ultimate bearing capacity of granular pile
C1 = cohesion of granular pile
C2 = cohesion of soil
1 = unit weight of granular pile
2 = unit weight of soil
Df = depth of foundation
B = width of foundation
C1
Nc = C 2 Nc1 + Nc2

1
N = 2 N + N2
1

Nc1, Nc2, N1 , N2 are dimensionless factors

58
59
(3) Lateral limit state or Pressure meter theory approach:

qult = Kp rl (Schlosser and Juran, 1983).

60
rl for different soil

(i) For C- soil

rl =(ho + C cot) (1-sin)

1 Benguelin, Jezequel and Shield (1978)

2F

(ii) For freely draining soil i.e for cohesion less soil
'24
rl = 2b 24 Muller (1970)

b = 1.8 for homogeneous wet soils

= 3.5 for dry heterogenous soils
= 2.5 (average)

(iii) For cohesive soil

Amar and Jezequel (1972)

61
(4) Empirical approaches
(i)Thorburn & McVicar (1968)

Figure : Relation between undrained shear stress and allowable load on pile
(After Thorburn & McVicar,1968) 62
(ii) Charts proposed by Hughes and Withers (1974) and Thorburn (1975)

Figure : Relation between undrained shear

strength of cohesive soil at point of
maximum radial resistance and allowable
working load on granular pile (After,
Thorburn 1975)
Figure : Relation between undrained shear strength of cohesive deposit
63
and allowable vertical stress on granular pile (After Thorburn, 1975)
(iii) Charts proposed by Smoltzyk (1979)

Figure : Design charts for bearing capacity of granular piles (After smoltzyek, 1979)

64
Table : Ultimate bearing capacity by various approach

65
Settlement approaches of foundation on composite ground

(1) Analytical approach

(i) (Priebe,1995)

Where;
Streated = settlement of composite foundation
Suntreated = settlement of virgin soil
Kac = active earth pressure coefficient of stone column

= angle of internal friction of stone material in the range of 30 to 45

& poison ratio () 0.33.

(ii) (Greenwood and kirsch, 1984)

Where;
Ap = area of granular pile
A = area within unit cell
Ep = modulus of elasticity of granular pile
Es = modulus of eleasticity of soil 66
(2) Empirical approach
(i) Greenwood (1970)

67
(ii) Aboshi (1979)

68
(iii) Borges and Cardoso (2009)

Streated

Suntreated

Ccsoil
m
Cccol
As
r
A
1

0.0038m 0.3423
(0.125m 0.7742) 1 r

Where;
CCsoil = compression index of soil
CCcolumn = compression index of stone column

69
 (3) Experimental approach
(i) Rao and Ranjan (1989)

Where; Figure : Settlement of a subsoil stratum reinforced with

L = the settlement in the reinforced partially penetrating granular piles
layer having thickness L (After Rao and Ranjan, 1989)
L = The settlement of the
unreinforced virgin ground L
mvi = the coefficient of volume compressibility
of the unreinforced soil
mveqi = equivalent coefficient of volume compressibility
mvstone = coefficient of volume compressibility of stone column 70
 Table : Settlement of treated ground by various approaches
Sr
Approach Streated (m)
No
1 Analytical approach
(i) Priebe (1995) 0.113
(ii) Greenwood and kirsch (1984) 0.168
2 Empirical approach
(i) Greenwood (1970) 0.140
(ii) Aboshi (1979) 0.257
(iii) Borges and Cardoso (2009) 0.133
3 Experimental approach
(ii) Rao and Ranjan (1989) 0.312
4 IS 15284 (Part 1) (2003) 0.256

71
Design example as per IS 15284 (Part 1) (2003)

Data:
A stone column is to be designed for the foundation of oil storage tank considering the
following given data:
Depth of soft clay: H = 7 m,
undrainmed shear strength of clay: Cu = 18 kN/m2,
Bulk density of clay: b = 17.65 kN/m3,
Submerged density of surrounding soil: sub = 7.85 kN/m3,
ground Water Table (G.W.T.) at 1 m below Ground Level (G.L.),
Tank diameter: d =79 m,
Load intensity from tank = 147 kN/m2,
Tank
Diameter of the stone column: D = 0.9 m,
Angle of internal friction of surrounding soil: c = 42. Sand pad

D
Hard strata

De

72
Figure : Illustration of stone column parameter
Priebes Design Flow Chart
Stone Column
Soil Layout and
Parameters Parameters

Inverse of Area ratio, A/Ac

Compressibility ratio, Dc/Ds
Depth factor, fz

Design Chart of Priebe (1995)

Settlement Improvement Factor, n Load Ratio, m

Improved Stiffness, De Improved Strength

(cue, e)

Settlement & Consolidation

Calculation Stability Analysis
 Priebes Design Methodology

Insitu soil Stone columns Composite mass

Ds, Cu, s + Dc, c, d, s = De, Cue, e

Results in a new composite soil having improved

deformation and shear strength parameters

Improved shear strength and deformation parameters are

used in the stability and settlement analysis respectively