Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering
Erschienen in: International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering 6/2023

01.12.2023 | Original Paper

Experimental Observations on In-Situ Ground Response During Sequential Installation of Stone Column Improvement in the Saturated Ground

verfasst von: Ganesh Kumar Shanmugam, M. D. Godson, R. V. Yogesh, S. K. Jeeva, P. Madhiyarasu

Erschienen in: International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering | Ausgabe 6/2023

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The selection of stone column improvement for liquefaction mitigation is a well-established popular treatment technique. However, the installation benefits of stone column improvement need to be better explored to understand the sequential improvement in the ground during installation. In this experimental study, an attempt has been made to monitor ground response in terms of in-situ density, pore pressure, and acceleration response during the installation of stone columns. A saturated ground having 40% relative density representing a liquefiable deposit was prepared with 900 mm depth for experimental investigations. Two area replacement ratios, i.e. 5 and 7.5%, were used for comparing installation benefits. Further, the influence of installation patterns was studied by performing experiments on two different test tanks, keeping an area replacement ratio of 5%. The observations on the ground highlight that selecting a location for initial stone column installation influences the deformation and drainage conditions of the saturated ground. About 30–60% reductions in the generation of pore pressure response were observed after installing the initial stone column for the selected test conditions. In addition, installation patterns and a higher area replacement ratio facilitated uniformity in ground densification.
Vorheriger Artikel Evaluation of the Behavior of Geogrid-Reinforced Soil Walls Subjected to Rainfall Through Centrifuge Model Tests
Nächster Artikel Deformative Response of Sheltering Structures Under the Debris Flow Impact

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
1.
Ishihara K, Yoshimine M (1992) Evaluation of settlements in sand deposits following liquefaction during earthquakes. Soils Found 32(1):173–188CrossRef
2.
Bardet JP (1995) The Great Hanshin Earthquake Disaster (The 1995 South Hyogo Prefecture Earthquake): preliminary investigation report, February 10, 1995
3.
Sitar N (ed.) (1995) Geotechnical reconnaissance of the effects of the January 17, 1995. Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake Japan. Rep. No. UCB/EERC-95/0i, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr. (EERC), Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif
4.
Sugito M, Oka F, Yashima A, Furumoto Y, Yamada K (2000) Time-dependent ground motion amplification characteristics at reclaimed land after the 1995 Hyogoken Nambu Earthquake. Dev Geotech Eng 84:145–158
5.
Krinitzsky EL, Hynes ME (2002) The Bhuj, India, earthquake: lessons learned for earthquake safety of dams on alluvium. Eng Geol 66(3–4):163–196CrossRef
6.
Yoshimi Y, Kuwabara F (1973) Effect of subsurface liquefaction on the strength of surface soil. Soils Found 13(2):67–81CrossRef
7.
Tsukamoto Y, Ishihara K, Yamamoto M, Harada K, Yabe H (2000) Soil densification due to static sand pile installation for liquefaction remediation. Soils Found 40(2):9–20CrossRef
8.
Salem ZB, Frikha W, Bouassida M (2017) Effects of densification and stiffening on liquefaction risk of reinforced soil by stone columns. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 143(10):06017014CrossRef
9.
Frikha W, Bouassida M, Canou J (2013) Observed behaviour of laterally expanded stone column in soft soil. Geotech Geol Eng 31:739–752CrossRef
10.
Baez JI, Martin GR (1993) Advances in the design of vibro systems for the improvement of liquefaction resistance. In Symposium ground improvement, May, pp. 1–16
11.
Bayati H, Bagheripour MH (2019) Shaking table study on liquefaction behaviour of different saturated sands reinforced by stone columns. Mar Georesour Geotechnol 37(7):801–815CrossRef
12.
Schroeder WL, Byington M (1972) Experiences with compaction of hydraulic fills. In: Engineering Geology and Soils Engineering Symposium, Proceedings of the 6th Annual Idaho Department of Highways, University of Idaho, MoscowIdaho State University, Pocatello, April
13.
Westberg RJ, Ireland HO (1972) Sand compaction by vibroflotation at Cape May, New Jersey. In: Performance of Earth and Earth-Supported Structures, ASCE, p. 1037
14.
Engelhardt K, Golding HC (1975) Field testing to evaluate stone column performance in a seismic area. Geotechnique 25(1):61–69CrossRef
15.
Seed HB, Booker JR (1976) Stabilization of potentially liquefiable sand deposits using gravel drain systems. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, El Cerrito
16.
Kirsch K, Chambosse G (1981) Deep vibratory compaction provides foundations for two major overseas projects. Ground Eng 14(8):31–35
17.
Dobson T (1987) Case histories of the vibro systems to minimize the risk of liquefaction. In: Soil improvement: a ten year update, ASCE, p. 167–183
18.
Saito A, Taghawa K, Tamura T, Oishi H, Nagayama H, Shimaoka H (1987) A countermeasure for sand liquefaction: gravel drain method. Technical Rep, 51
19.
Rinne EE, Shields CS, Nardi CR (1988) Mitigation of liquefaction potential. In: Proceedings of 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, Vol. 3, p. 243–248
20.
Hayden RF, Welch CM (1991) Design and installation of stone columns at naval air station. Deep foundation improvements: design, construction, and testing. ASTM International, Philadelphia
21.
Mitchell JK, Wentz FJ (1991) Performance of improved ground during the Loma Prieta earthquake (vol. 91, no. 12). Earthquake Engineering Research Center University of California, Berkeley
22.
Murakami K, Nakano M (1993) The construction method preventing a manhole from floating due to liquefaction. In: Proceedings of 4th US–Japan Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Facilities and Countermeasures against Soil Liquefaction, Buffalo-NY, USA
23.
Raison CA, Slocombe BC, Bell AL, Baez JI (1995) North Morecambe Terminal, Barrow, ground stabilisation and pile foundations
24.
Baez JI, Martin G (1995) Permeability and shear wave velocity of vibro-replacement stone columns. Soil improvement for earthquake hazard mitigation. ASCE, Reston, pp 66–81
25.
Mitchell JK, Baxter CD, Munson TC (1995) Performance of improved ground during earthquakes. Soil improvement for earthquake hazard mitigation. ASCE, Reston, pp 1–36
26.
Adalier K (1996) Mitigation of earthquake induced liquefaction hazards. PhD Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
27.
Luehring R, Dewey B, Mejia L, Stevens M, Baez J (1998) Liquefaction mitigation of a silty dam foundation using vibro-stone columns and drainage wicks-a test section case history at salmon lake dam. In: Proceedings of the 1998 Annual Conference Association of State Dam Safety Officials, Las Vegas, NV, October, vol. 1, p. 1–14
28.
Kerwin ST, Stone JJ (1997) Liquefaction failure and remediation: king harbor Redondo beach, California. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 123(8):760–769CrossRef
29.
Boulanger RW, Meyers MW, Mejia LH, Idriss IM (1998) Behavior of a fine-grained soil during the Loma Prieta earthquake. Can Geotech J 35(1):146–158CrossRef
30.
Koelling MA, Dickenson SE (1998) Ground improvement case histories for liquefaction mitigation of port and near-shore structures. Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics III. ASCE, Reston, pp 614–626
31.
Ishihara K, Yamazaki F (1980) Cyclic simple shear tests on saturated sand in multi-directional loading. Soils Found 20(1):45–59CrossRef
32.
Baziar MH (1992) Engineering evaluation of permanent ground deformations due to seismically-induced liquefaction
33.
Adalier K, Elgamal A (2004) Mitigation of liquefaction and associated ground deformations by stone columns. Eng Geol 72(3–4):275–291CrossRef
34.
Jamshidi Chenari R, Karimpour Fard M, Jamshidi Chenari M, Shamsi Sosahab J (2019) Physical and numerical modeling of stone column behavior in loose sand. Int J Civ Eng 17:231–244CrossRef
35.
Tiznado JC, Dashti S, Ledezma C (2022) Centrifuge and numerical modeling of an embankment on liquefiable soils treated with dense granular columns. In: Geo-Congress, p. 486–494
36.
Watts KS, Johnson D, Wood LA, Saadi A (2000) An instrumented trial of vibro ground treatment supporting strip foundations in a variable fill. Geotechnique 50(6):699–708CrossRef
37.
Mitchell JK (2008) Mitigation of liquefaction potential of silty sands. In: Laier JE, Crapps DK, Hussein MH (eds) From research to practice in geotechnical engineering: Geotechnical Special Publication 180. ASCE, Reston, pp 433–451CrossRef
38.
Krishna AM, Madhav MR (2008) Densification and dilation effects of granular piles in liquefaction mitigation. Indian Geotech J 38(3):295–316
39.
Castro J, Sagaseta C (2012) Pore pressure during stone column installation. Proc Inst Civ Eng Ground Improv 165(2):97–109CrossRef
40.
Padmanabhan G, Shanmugam GK (2021) Liquefaction and reliquefaction resistance of saturated sand deposits treated with sand compaction piles. Bull Earthq Eng 19(11):4235–4259CrossRef
41.
Vijay Kumar SP, Ganesh Kumar S, Datta Gupta S (2022) Performance assessment of composite skirted ground reinforcement system in liquefiable ground under repeated dynamic loading conditions. Bull Earthq Eng 20:1397–1429CrossRef
42.
Xenaki VC, Athanasopoulos GA (2003) Liquefaction resistance of sand–silt mixtures: an experimental investigation of the effect of fines. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23(3):1–12CrossRef
43.
Whitman RV, Lambe PC (1986) Effect of boundary conditions upon centrifuge experiments using ground motion simulation. Geotech Test J 9(2):61–71CrossRef
44.
Lee CJ, Wei YC, Kuo YC (2012) Boundary effects of a laminar container in centrifuge shaking table tests. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 34(1):37–51CrossRef
45.
Bhattacharya S, Lombardi D, Dihoru L, Dietz MS, Crewe AJ, Taylor CA (2012) Model container design for soil-structure interaction studies. Role of seismic testing facilities in performance-based earthquake engineering: SERIES workshop. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 135–158CrossRef
46.
Lombardi D, Bhattacharya S, Scarpa F, Bianchi M (2015) Dynamic response of a geotechnical rigid model container with absorbing boundaries. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 69:46–56CrossRef
47.
Vaid YP Negussey D (1988) Preparation of reconstituted sand specimens. In: Advanced triaxial testing of soil and rock, ASTM STP, 977, p. 405–417
48.
Varghese RM, Madhavi Latha G (2014) Shaking table tests to investigate the influence of various factors on the liquefaction resistance of sands. Nat Hazards 73:1337–1351CrossRef
49.
Maheshwari BK, Singh HP, Saran S (2012) Effects of reinforcement on liquefaction resistance of Solani sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 138(7):831–840CrossRef
50.
Muley P, Maheshwari BK, Paul DK (2012) Effect of fines on liquefaction resistance of solani sand. In: Proceedings of 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, September
51.
Hughes JMO, Withers NJ, Greenwood DA (1975) A field trial of the reinforcing effect of a stone column in soil. Geotechnique 25(1):31–44CrossRef
52.
Hossain MZ, Abedin MZ, Rahman MR, Haque MN, Jadid R (2021) Effectiveness of sand compaction piles in improving loose cohesionless soil. Transp Geotech 26:100451CrossRef
53.
McCabe BA, Nimmons GJ, Egan D (2009) A review of field performance of stone columns in soft soils. Proc Inst Civ Eng Geotech Eng 162(6):323–334CrossRef
54.
Jamiolkowski M, Lo Presti DCF, Manassero M (2003) Evaluation of relative density and shear strength of sands from CPT and DMT. Soil behavior and soft ground construction. ASCE, Reston, pp 201–238CrossRef
55.
Youd TL, Idriss IM (2001) Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 127(4):297–313CrossRef
56.
Liao SS, Whitman RV (1986) Overburden correction factors for SPT in sand. J Geotech Eng 112(3):373–377CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Experimental Observations on In-Situ Ground Response During Sequential Installation of Stone Column Improvement in the Saturated Ground
verfasst von
Ganesh Kumar Shanmugam
M. D. Godson
R. V. Yogesh
S. K. Jeeva
P. Madhiyarasu
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2023
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering / Ausgabe 6/2023
Print ISSN: 2199-9260
Elektronische ISSN: 2199-9279
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-023-00489-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2023

International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering 6/2023 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

Experimental Investigation on the Applicability of a Novel Tire-Grid Used in Slope Stabilization Under Repeated Loads

Original Paper

Shear Strength Evaluation of Soil–Geosynthetic and Geosynthetic–Geosynthetic Interfaces of Closure Cover Systems

Original Paper

Soil-Reinforcement Interaction of a Geogrid–Geotextile Composite

Original Paper

Shear Strength Behavior of Soft Clay Reinforced with Ordinary and Geotextile-Encased Granular Columns

Technical Note

Effect of Geosynthetics on Swell Reduction During an Extreme Rainfall Event

Original Paper

A Sanding Technique to Improve the Pullout Behavior of Geogrids