CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL

Sufficient infrastructure of buildings, roads, tunnels, bridges and other civil

engineering works is the prime requirement for all round development of any country.
Earlier, there was no crisis of suitable land for the construction sites but now-a-days due
to rapid increase in infrastructure growth, particularly in metropolitan cities, there is
lack of suitable sites and consequently a dramatic rise in land prices. Therefore,
construction is now also being carried out on sites having extremely poor ground
conditions like soft clays. India has large coastline exceeding 6000km which are highly
compressible with low bearing capacity. This necessitated the use of land, which has
weak strata. Many of these areas are covered with thick soft marine clay deposit, with
very low shear strength and high compressibility

A stone column is one of the soil stabilization methods that are used to increase
strength, decrease the compressibility of soft and loose fine graded soils, accelerate a
consolidation process and thus reduce the settlements and liquefaction potential of soils.
They are mainly used for stabilization of soil such as soft clays, silts and silty-sands.
Subsurface soils whose undrained shear strength range from 7 to 50 kpa. Average depth
of stone column accomplished in India may be around 15.0 m or so, although with
equipment modification, higher depths beyond 20 m may become a possibility in future.
Stone columns are load bearing columns of well compacted aggregate installed in the
ground to serve various purposes such as reinforcement and densification such that
bearing capacity of soil is increased. It resists the vertical load by lateral bulging of the
column and also adds resistance to lateral deformation under superimposed load.
Because of the stiffness of the stone column when compared to that of the in-situ weak
soil, majority of the applied load will be taken by stone column, as a result less load is
transferred to the soil which leads to the reduction of settlements. For treatment of soft
soil, when stone column is installed in soft soil, the confinement offered by surrounding
soil may not be adequate and different modes of failure occurs like bulging, sliding and
general shear failure. To avoid lack of confinement, stone column is reinforced with

1
geotextile, due to this bearing capacity of ground improves. In this study model tests
have been performed on Stone columns with circular discs at a distance of D, D/2.

1.2 BASIC CONCEPTS

The design and construction of embankment pose little problem when the
underlying subsoil is good bearing stratum. Soft soil conditions however create several
complexities for the designer and field engineer. When faced with the situation of
constructing an embankment on soft subsoil, the following problems are encountered:
 Low shear strength
 Stability of embankment
 High compressibility and settlement of embankment
The design of embankments is based on bearing capacity, settlement and
stability considerations. All the conditions have to be satisfied with an adequate margin
of safety for each of the factors.

1.3 OBJECTIVES
The main objectives of this study area
1. To improve the bearing capacity and reduce the settlement.
2. To study the load-settlement responses of soft clay beds stabilized with and without
encasement of stone column through model tests and compare their response.
3. To study the bulging of the stone column.

1.4 STONE COLUMN

Stone columns are load bearing columns of well compacted aggregate installed
in the ground to serve various purposes such as reinforcement and densification such
that bearing capacity of soil is increased. It resists the vertical load by lateral bulging of
the column and also adds resistance to lateral deformation under superimposed load.
Because of the stiffness of the stone column when compared to that of the in-situ weak
soil, majority of the applied load will be taken by stone column, as a result less load is
transferred to the soil which leads to the reduction of settlements.

2
1.5 APPLICATIONS OF STONE COLUMNS
Stone columns are used in,
1. Enclosed buildings such as Shopping centers, halls, warehouses.
2. Railway embankments.
3. Special structures such as Wastewater treatment plants, silos, tanks, wind farms.
4. Reinforced Earth walls.
5. Highway Embankments.
6. Shipyards and ports.
7. Liquefaction mitigation and building support in seismic areas.

1.6 FUNCTIONS OF STONE COLUMNS

1. It increases bearing capacity of the soil.
2. Environmental friendly as the stone columns can be formed of recycled material
(crushed concrete, slag etc.
3. It reduces the total and differential settlements.
4. It reduces the liquefaction potential of soil.
5. They act as vertical drains and improve the drainage conditions.
6. It increases the stiffness of the soil.

1.7 STONE COLUMN TECHNIQUE APPLICABLE SOIL TYPES

Stone columns improve the performance of soils by densification of surrounding
granular soil and reinforcement of the soil with a stiffer, high shear strength column.
The expected improvement achieved in specific soil types are.
1. Soft, Non-Compactable, Weak Soils
2. Granular Soils with High Fines Content (in excess of 15%)
3. Organic Soils
4. Marine/Alluvial Clays
5. Liquefiable Soils
6. Waste Fills
7. Reclaimed Fly Ash/Pond Ash Ponds

3
1.8 REINFORCEMENT OF THE SOIL WITH STONE COLUMNS

Reinforcement of the soil with stone column provides basically to

1. Increase the load carrying capacity and stiffness.
2. Reduce the of foundation settlement.
3. Transfer the Stresses to deeper strata.
4. Improve the bearing capacity of the soil.
5. Accelerate the consolidation process.
6. Reduce the risk of liquefaction due to seismic activity.

1.9 METHODS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT

Ground Ground Ground
Reinforcement Improvement Treatment
• Stone Columns • Surface • Soil Cement
• Soil Nails Compaction • Lime Admixtures
• Micropiles • Drainage/Surcharge • Flyash
• Jet Grouting • Electro-osmosis • Dewatering
• Ground Anchors • Compaction • Heating/Freezing
• Geosynthetics grouting • Vitrification
• Fibers • Blasting
• Lime Columns • Dynamic
• Vibro-Concrete Column Compaction
• Mechanically Stabilized Earth
• Biotechnical

1.10 INSTALLATION METHODS OF STONE COLUMNS

The most commonly used methods for installation of Stone columns are,
1. Ramming Method.
2. Vibro compaction method

1.10.1 RAMMING METHOD

Rammed stone columns are constructed by either driving an open or closed end
pipe in the ground or boring a hole. The crushed stone is placed in the hole in
increments, and rammed in using heavy, falling weights. Since a casing is initially
placed into the sub-surface soils, potential hole collapse is eliminated. Therefore, this

4
technique has application in most soils treatable by the vibro techniques. Disturbance
and subsequent remolding of sensitive soils by the ramming operation, however, may
limit its utility in these soils.

Fig 1.1 Ramming method

1.10.2 VIBRO-DISPLACEMENT (DRY BOTTOM FEED METHOD)

1. Under combined effect of sustained vibrations, its own weight and the pull-
down force, the vibratory probe penetrates the soil down to the prescribed depth or
down to refusal. During penetration, the soil is displaced laterally without any spoil
extraction.
2. As the probe is lifted, the ballast material falls down by gravity in the void that
is created. The process is facilitated by continuous injection of compressed air. The
aggregates are inserted and compacted by extraction and re-penetration of the vibrating
probe through repeated incremental lifts of 30 to 50 cm, each cycle being repeated till
the probe reaches the surface.
3. The column diameter may vary depending on the initial stiffness/density of the
soil. Differential settlements are greatly reduced by allowing more stones to be placed
in weaker soil regions. The compaction process results in higher lateral expansion of
the columns. Over the length of the entire column, variable diameter could thus be
created due to variable layers with different soil conditions.

5
 Fig. 1.2 Vibro displacement bottom feed method

1.11 TYPES OF STONE COLUMNS

Based on the mode of load transfer stone columns are divided into two types:
1) Floating Stone column
2) End-Bearing Stone column

1.11.1 FLOATING STONE COLUMN

Sometimes the stone column that we install into the ground lies in the medium
stiff clay because of the absence of rock strata in the soil is called Floating stone column.
These stone columns transfer the load through the skin friction between the surrounding
clay and stone column. The ultimate load carried by the stone column is equal to the
load transferred by friction.

6
 Fig 1.3 Schematic diagram of Floating Stone column

1.11.2 END- BEARING STONE COLUMNS

These load bearing piles usually penetrating through the soft ground/weak strata
and resting on firm/stiff strata called end bearing stone columns. These columns
transmit the loads through their bottom tips. If hard stratum is located within a
reasonable depth, columns can be extended to the hard strata. The ultimate load carried
by the column equal to the load carried by the point or bottom end. Endbearing columns
are also known as point-bearing columns.

Fig 1.4 Schematic diagram of End bearing Stone column.

7
1.12 BASIC PARAMETERS OF STONE COLUMN
1.12.1 STONE COLUMN DIAMETER, D

Installation of stone columns in soft cohesive soils is basically a self

compensating process that is softer the soil, bigger is the diameter of the stone column
formed. Due to lateral displacement of stones during vibrations/ramming, the completed
diameter of the hole is always greater than the initial diameter of the probe or the casing
depending upon the soil type, its undrained shear strength, stone size, characteristics of
the vibrating probe/rammer used and the construction method.
Approximate diameter of the stone column in the field may be determined from
the known compacted volume of material required to fill the hole of known length and
maximum and minimum densities of the stone.

1.12.2 PATTERN

Stone columns should be installed preferably in an equilateral triangular pattern

which gives the densest packing although a square pattern may also be used.

Fig: 1.5 Triangular arrangement Fig: 1.6 Square arrangement

1.12.3 SPACING

The design of stone columns should be site specific and no precise guidelines
can be given on the maximum and the minimum column spacing. However, the column
spacing may broadly range from 2 to 3 depending upon the site conditions, loading
pattern, column factors, the installation technique, settlement tolerances, etc.

8
 For large projects, it is desirable to carry out field trials to determine the most
optimum spacing of stone columns taking into consideration the required bearing
capacity of the soil and permissible settlement of the foundation.

1.12.4 EQUIVALENT DIAMETER

The tributary area of the soil surrounding each stone column forms regular
hexagon around the column. It may be closely approximated by an equivalent circular
area having the same total area.
The equivalent circle has an effective diameter (De) which is given by following
equation:
D = 1.05 S for an equilateral triangular pattern, and
= 1.13 S for a square pattern
Where
S = spacing of the stone columns.
The resulting equivalent cylinder of composite ground with diameter De enclosing the
tributary soil and one stone column is known as the unit cell.

1.12.5 REPLACEMENT RATIO (As)

For purpose of settlement and stability analysis, the composite ground
representing an infinitely wide loaded area may be modeled as a unit cell comprising
the stone column and the surrounding tributory soil. To quantify the amount of soil
replaced by the stone, the term replacement ratio, as, is used. Replacement ratio (as) is
given by:
as = As/A = As/As+Ag
where
As, = area of the stone column,
Ag = area of ground surrounding the column, A
= total area within the unit cell.
The area replacement ratio may also be expressed as follows: as=
0.907 (D/S)2
where the constant 0.907 is a function of the pattern used which, in this case, is the
commonly employed equilateral triangular pattern.

9
1.12.6 STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTOR (n)
Stress concentration occurs on the stone column because it is considerably
stiffer than the surrounding soil. From equilibrium considerations, the stress in the
stiffer stone columns should be greater than the stress in the surrounding soil.
The stress concentration factor, n, due to externally applied load σ, is defined as the
ratio of average stress in the stone column, σs, to the stress, σg, in the soil within the unit
cell,
n = σs / σg
The value of n generally lie between 2.5 and 5 at the ground surface. The stress
concentration factor (n) increases with time of consolidation and decreases along the
length of the stone column. Higher n value at ground surface may result if load is applied
to the composite ground through a rigid foundation as compared to the flexible
foundation.
The stress concentration factor, n, may be predicted using elastic theory as a
function of the modular ratio of the stone and the clay assuming equal vertical
displacements. However, as the modular ratio can vary within wide limits.

1.13 TYPES OF LOADING

Stone column is usually loaded over an area greater than its diameter in which
case it experiences significantly less bulging leading to greater ultimate load capacity
and reduced settlements since the load is carried by both the stone column and the
surrounding soil.

Fig 1.7 Different types of loading applied to stone column

10
1.14 FAILURE MECHANISM OF STONE COLUMN

The possible modes of failure of stone columns are:

 Bulging Failure
 Pile Failure
 General Shear Failure

Fig 1.8 Failure mechanism of single stone column in a homogenous soft layer

Fig 1.9 Failure mechanism of single stone column in a non-homogenous soft layer

When the stone columns are installed in extremely soft soils, the lateral
confinement offered by the surrounding soil may not be adequate. Consequently, the
stone columns installed in such soils will not be able to develop the required loadbearing
capacity. In such situations, the bearing capacity of composite ground can be improved

11
by imparting additional confinement to the stone column by encasing the individual
stone columns using a geotextile. Most of the work done so far is limited to fully
penetrating columns; therefore, in this study model tests have been carried out on fully
penetrating columns.

CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE REVIEW
WORK CARRIED BY AUTHORS ON STONE COLUMN

S.R. Gandhi et al. [1] carried out the experimental studies to evaluate the
behaviour of stone column by varying spacing, shear strength of soft clay, moisture
content. The test results indicate that the failure is by bulging of the column with
maximum bulging at 0.5 to 1 times the column diameter below the top.

Karun Mani et al. [2] studied to improve soil stability, including its salient
features, design parameters, major functions and drawbacks and found out that stone
columns improves the bearing capacity and reduces the settlement of weak soil strata.

J.T. Shahu et al. [3] studied the effect of reinforcement and l/d ratio on the
bearing capacity of the composite soil and found that the bearing capacity of composite
soil increases with the increase in column length but the increase is not significant when
the length exceeds beyond six times the column diameter.

Kausar Ali et al. [4] conducted model tests on single floating as well as
endbearing stone columns with and without encasement by providing geosynthetic
encasement over varying column length and found that the tests indicate that the
encasement over the full column length gives higher failure stress as compared to the
encasement over partial length of column for both floating and end bearing columns.
Further, the performance of end-bearing columns was found to be better than the
floating columns.

12
 R. Shivashankar, et al. [5] investigated to improve the performance of stone
columns in extremely soft soils is being suggested by reinforcing the stone columns
with vertical nails driven along the circumference. They found that the behaviour of
composite ground is further improved with the number of nails. The depth of
embedment of nails required to significantly enhance the performance of the stone
columns is 3D to 4D.

N. Hataf et al. [6] studied the improvement of the bearing capacity of stone
columns reinforced with geosynthetics. Stone columns consist of a stiffer material or
aggregates, compared to the surrounding soils which are usually vibrocompacted into
the soil. These columns increase the bearing capacity of the soil significantly.

P.K. Jain et al. [7] Studied to improve the load carrying capacity on single
granular pile. Tests were performed with different diameters of granular piles with and
without geogrid encasement and concluded that the increase in the load carrying
capacity also increases as the diameter of the granular pile increases.

S.N. Malarvizhi et al. [8] studied the performance of soft clay bed stabilized
with single stone column and reinforced stone column having various slenderness ratios
using different type of encasing materials and found that encasing the stone column
with geogrids resulted in an increase of load carrying capacity irrespective of whether
the column is end-bearing or floating. In case of floating columns the l/d ratio has less
influence on the capacity of column for the lengths studied in this investigation.

S. Murugesan et al. [9] investigated the performance of the encased stone

column and evaluated through experimental studies and numerical simulations.
Pressure settlement response of geosynthetic encased stone columns generally shows
linear behaviour not indicating any catastrophic failure unlike the conventional stone
columns.

Siddharth Arora et al. [10] conducted tests on floating granular piles

constructed in soft black cotton soil and found that the ultimate load carrying capacity
of the granular pile increases as L/d ratio increases in both the cases i.e. without and
with geogrid encasement.

13
 Siva Gowri Prasad. S et al. [11] performed tests on stone columns with and
without geotextile encasement with different lengths of L/4, L/2, 3L/4 & L and found
that the tests indicate that the bearing capacity increases with increase of encasement
length.

Siva Gowri Prasad. S et al. [12] conducted tests on floating stone columns by
introducing lateral circular discs of geo-textile within the column at different spacings
and found that load carrying capacities with D/2 spacing shows better performance than
D spacing.

Uttam Kumar et al. [13] investigated the effect of diameters of geosynthetic

encased sand columns in soft soil deposit during loading. The load responses of sand
columns are also investigated with the variation of encasement length of the column.
He found that the performance of smaller diameter sand column is superior to that of
bigger diameter sand column.

Y. Mohammed et al. [14] studied the value of the stress concentration ratio, n,
which is defined as the ratio of vertical stress acting on the stone column to that acting
on the surrounding soil. They found out that the value of stress concentration ratio n
increases with increasing shear strength of the treated soil.

14
 CHAPTER-3
METHODOLOGY AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDY

3.1 METHODOLOGY

Material collection

Determination of basic properties of materials

clay

slag
Selection of materials
sand

Netlon mess

Experimental studies (lab)

Preparation & Construction of

Testing of geotextile
testing of clay stone column
encased stone column
bed &testing

Post-test analysis

Results &discussion

Conclusions

Fig: 3.1 Flowchart of methodology

15
3.2 MATERIALS USED: The materials used in this study are marine clay, stone
aggregates, silica manganese slag, sand, netlon mess.

3.2.1 MARINE CLAY

Marine clay is bought from Visakhapatnam port Trust at EQ – 3 berth near
Gnanapuram road area. The size of clay used for this study was sieved through 4.75mm
IS Sieve. The Fig.3.2 shows the marine clay used for the study. The properties of marine
clay are given in Table: 3.1.

Fig 3.2 Marine clay

Property of soil Values

Fines content (Silt+ Clay) 94%

Liquid limit (WL) 53.7 %

Plastic limit (WP) 20.78 %

Plasticity Index (IP) 32.92 %

Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) 27%

Maximum Dry Density (MDD) 1.47 g/cc

Soil classification (as per Indian Standard) CH

Shear strength 1.25Kpa

Specific Gravity 2.49

Table 3.1: Properties of Marine clay

16
3.2.2 SILICA-MANGANESE SLAG
Silica-Manganese slag is used as a stone material in this study. The slag is
collected from Sri Mahalaxmi Smelters (Pvt) Limited near Garbham (village), Garividi
(mandal), Vijayanagaram (Dt) and the aggregates of sizes between 4.75 mm and 10 mm
have been taken for the present study. Slag used for the present study is shown in Fig
3.3. The properties of the slag are shown in the Table 3.2.

Fig 3.3 Silica Manganese Slag

Property Value
Specific Gravity 2.79
Water absorption (%) 0.49
Density (kN/m3) 16.7

Table 3.2: Physical properties of Silica-Manganese slag

Table 3.3 Chemical properties of Silica manganese slag

17
3.2.3 SAND
The sand is brought from Nagavali river basin, near Sankili, Srikakulam (Dt).
The sand is used as filler in the aggregates and also as blanket for stone column. The
sand used in this study is sieved from 4.75mm IS Sieve and the sand is well graded.
The sand used is shown in the Fig 3.4.

Fig 3.4 Sand

3.2.4 NETLON MESS

The aperture size of mess is 2mm. There are made into circular discs as the
diameter of stone column. They are made from plastic and have all the properties of
plastic.

Fig 3.5 Netlon mess

18
3.3 TEST PROCEDURES
The following are the test procedures followed for the experiments performed in the
present study.
 Sieve analysis
 Atterberg’s limits
 Compaction Test for OMC and MDD
 Specific gravity test for marine clay
 Determination of Shear Strength of Soft Soil by Lab Vane Shear Test 
Specific gravity test of Silica manganese slag

3.3.1 SIEVE ANALYSIS

Sieve analysis is conducted according to IS 2720 (part-4) - 1985.

Procedure:
The set of sieves (aperture size of 4.75mm, 2.36mm, 1.18mm, 600μ, 300μ,
150 μ, 75μ) are arranged in descending order by size of mesh such that the
coarse soil at the top and fine at the bottom. Pan is placed at the bottom. Soil
sample of weight 1000g is taken. The soil is poured on to the top sieve and covered with
lid. The set of sieves are placed in a sieve shaker and shaked for 5 minutes.
The weight of soil retained on each sieve is measured.

Calculations: From the weight retained on each sieve, percentage weight, cumulative
percentage weight retained and percent finer are calculated.

3.3.2 ATTERBERG’S LIMITS

Cone Penetration Test

The liquid limit of a soil can also be determined by cone penetrometer (IS: 2720-
V)1985.
Procedure:
The soil sample is prepared as in the case of the Casagrande method. The soil
pat is placed in a cup of 50 mm internal diameter and 50 mm height. The cup is filled
with the sample, taking care so as not to entrap air. Excess of soil is removed and the
surface soil is levelled up. The cup is placed below the cone, and the cone gradually
lowered so as to just touch the surface of the soil in the cup. The graduated scale adjusted
19
to zero. The cone is released, and allowed to penetrate the soil for 30 seconds. The water
content at which the penetration is 20 mm is the liquid limit, a graph is drawn between
penetration and water content. From graph liquid limit = 72% Plastic limit:

Plastic limit is determined by rolling out soil till its diameter reaches approximately 3
mm and measuring water content for the soil which crumbles on reaching this diameter.
Plasticity index (Ip) was also calculated with the help of liquid limit and plastic limit
Ip = WL - WP
WL- Liquid limit
WP- Plastic limit
Plastic limit = 26% and Plasticity index = 46%

3.3.3 COMPACTION TEST FOR OMC AND MDD

Proctor test is conducted on the soil sample as per IS 2727 (par 7)-1980 (reaffirmed).

Procedure:
Weigh the empty proctor mould and also determine its volume. Fix the mould
to the base plate and the collar is attached. Apply a thin layer of oil to the inside surface.
About 2.5kgs of air-dried soil is taken and certain amount of water is added (based on
moisture content) and it is thoroughly mixed. The soil is compacted using the rammer
by dividing into 3parts and giving 25 blows each time. Detach the mould from the base
plate also the collar is removed and trim the soil on the top of the mould. Weigh the
mould with the compacted soil and small amount of soil is kept for moisture content.
Repeat the procedure by taking fresh soil samples by incrementing the water content by
2% each time based on the wet weight, until a peak value is obtained by at least two
compacted weights. The readings are recorded.
Calculations:
Bulk density (ρb) = (Wc2-Wc1) /V Dry
density (ρd) = bulk density/ (1+w) Graph:
Graph is plotted with dry density as ordinate and moisture content as abscissa. From the
curve optimum moisture content and maximum dry density are reported.
optimum moisture content (OMC) = 29.5% maximum
dry density (MDD) = 14.2kN/m3

20
 1.43
1.42
1.41
1.4
1.39
1.38
1.37
1.36
1.35
1.34
20 25 30 35
Water content (%)

Fig 3.6 Compaction curve for marine clay

3.3.4 SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF MARINE CLAY:

Procedure:
(1) Determine and record the weight of the empty clean and dry density bottle, w1.
(2) Place 10g of a dry soil sample in the density bottle. Determine and record the weight
of the density bottle containing the dry soil, w2.

(3) Add distilled water to fill about half to three-fourth of the density bottle. Soak the
sample for 10 minutes.
(4) Apply partial vacuum to the contents for 10 minutes, to remove entrapped air.
(5) Stop the vacuum and carefully remove the vacuum line from density bottle.
(6) Fill the density bottle with distilled (water to the mark), clean the exterior surface
of the density bottle with a clean, dry cloth .Determine the weight of the density
bottle and contents, w3.
(7) Empty the density bottle and clean it. Then fill it with distilled water only (to the
mark). Clean the exterior surface of the density bottle with a clean, dry cloth.
Determine the weight of the density bottle and distilled water, w4.
Calculations:
Calculating the specific gravity of the soil solids using the following formula:
Specific Gravity (G) = (w2-w1)/ {(w4-w1)-(w3-w2)} Where:
W1 = weight of density bottle.
W2 = weight of sample and density bottle.
W3 = weight of density bottle filled with water and soil

21
W4= weight of density bottle filled with water
Specific gravity (G27) = GT (GW atT0c/GW at 270c)
Where
GW is specific gravity of distilled water.
Specific gravity of the marine clay is obtained as 2.49

3.3.5 DETERMINATION OF SHEAR STRENGTH OF SOFT SOIL BY LAB

VANE SHEAR TEST:

Procedure:
1. Clean the apparatus thoroughly. Apply grease to the lead screw.
2. Measure the diameter and height of vane.
3. Fill up the sampling mould with remoulded soil at required density and moisture
content or the undisturbed soil sample level the surface of the sample with mould.
4. Mount the sampling tube with sample under the base of the unit and clamp it in
position.

5. Bring the maximum pointer into contact with the strain indication pointer. Note
down the initial reading of these pointers on the circular graduated scale.
6. Lower the bracket until the shear vanes go into the soil sample to their full length.
7. Operate the torque application handle until the specimen fails, which is indicated
by the return of the strain-indicating pointer of rotation of drum.
8. Note down the readings of the maximum pointer.
9. The difference between the two readings gives the angle of torque.
10. Repeat the steps 3 to 8 on a number of samples to obtain the average shear strength
of the sample.
Observation and Calculations:
Diameter of vane : 12mm
Height of vane : 23.6mm
Spring factor :2
Torque T = θxK/180
Where,
θ = difference of angles (angles of torque)
K = spring factor

22
From Vane shear test the shear strength of the marine clay is 30 kPa at 41% water
content.

3.3.6 SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SLAG:

Procedure:
1. About 2kg of the aggregate sample is washed thoroughly to remove fines, drained
and then placed in the wire basket and immersed in distilled water at a temperature
between 220 to 320C and a cover of at least 5 cm of water above the top of the
basket. Immediately after immersion the entrapped air is removed from the sample
by lifting the basket containing it 25mm above the base of the tank and allowing it
to drop 25 times at the rate of above one drop per second. The basket and the
aggregate should remain completely immersed in water for a period of 24 + ½ hour
afterwards.
2. The basket and the sample are then weighed while suspended in water at a
temperature of 220 to320 C in case it is necessary to transfer the basket and the
sample to a different tank for weighing, they should be jolted 25 times as described
above in the new tank to remove air before weighing.
3. The weight is noted while suspended in water = W1 g.
4. The basket and the aggregate are then removed from water and allowed to drain for
a few minutes, after which the aggregates are transferred to one of the dry absorbent
clothes. The empty basket is then returned to the tank of water, jolted 25
times and weighed in water= W2 g.
5. The aggregates placed on the absorbent clothes are surface dried till no further
moisture could be removed by this cloth. Then the aggregates are transferred to the
second dry cloth spread in single layer, covered and allowed to dry for at least 10
minutes until the aggregates are completely surface dry, 10 to 60 minutes drying
may be needed.
6. The aggregates should not be exposed to the atmosphere, direct sunlight or any other
sources of heat while surface drying. A gentle current of unheated air may be used
during the first ten minutes to accelerate the drying of aggregate surface.
7. The surface dried aggregates is then weighed= W3 g.

23
 8. The aggregate is placed in a shallow tray and kept in an oven maintained at a
temperature of 1100C for 24 hours. It is then removed from the oven, cooled in an
air-tight container and weighed= W4 g.
At least two tests should be carried out, but not concurrently.

Calculations:
Weight of saturated aggregate suspended in water with the basket =W1 g
Weight of basket suspended in water = W2 g
Weight of saturated aggregate in water = (W1 – W2) = Ws g
Weight of saturated surface dry aggregate in air = W3 g
Weight of water equal to the volume of the aggregate = (W3 – Ws) g

= W4/ W3-(W1 – W2)

(2) Water absorption = percentage by weight of water absorbed in terms oven dried
weight of aggregates
= (W3 – W4)/ W4 x100 percentage
Specific gravity of the silica manganese slag is obtained as 2.79.

3.4 EXPERIMENTAL TEST

• Tests to stabilize the marine clay by using stone column
• Based on the mode of load transfer stone columns are divided into two types:
1. Floating Stone column
2. End-Bearing Stone column
• In this study tests were conducted on Floating stone columns with different
lengths

• Testing on plain clay bed

• Testing of Floating plain stone column with slag

24
• Testing of Floating plain stone column with slag + sand

• Testing of encased Stone column with introduction of circular discs at distance “D”

• Testing of encased Stone column with introduction of circular discs at distance “D/2”

Fig: 3.7 Test setup with loading and Schematic diagram of loading frame

3.4.1 PREPARATION OF PLAIN CLAY BED

The air-dried and pulverized clay sample was mixed with required quantity of water. The moisture
content (44%) required for the desired shear strength was determined by conducting several vane shear
tests on a cylindrical specimen of 70 mm height and 38 mm diameter. After adding the water to the
clay powder it was thoroughly mixed to a consistent paste and this paste was filled in the tank in 50
mm thick layers to the desired height (H) of 200mm by hand compaction such that no air voids are left
in the soil. Before filling the soil in the tank, the inner surface of the tank wall was first coated with
silicon grease to minimize the friction between soil and the tank wall. And the stone column pipe is
placed middle of the tank. After preparation of clay bed, it is left for 24 hours and covered with wet
gunny cloth for moisture equalization

25
Fig: 3.8 Mixing of clay with water Fig: 3.9 clay bed prepared in the
cylindrical tank.

3.4.2 CONSTRUCTION OF PLAIN STONE COLUMN (STONE

AGGREGATES/ SLAG/SLAG+SAND).
Before construction of stone column, grease is applied in the inner surface of
the tank for reducing the friction between the soil and the tank. Clay bed is prepared to
a depth of 100mm and on this surface the perspex pipe of outer diameter 50 mm and 1
mm thick was placed at properly marked centre of the clay bed. Before placing the pip,
grease is applied to the outer surface. Around this pipe, clay bed was then filled in the
tank in 50 mm thick layers to the desired height of 300mm by hand compaction such
that no air voids are left in the soil. The stone column was casted in steps by compacting
the stone column material by using a 10 mm diameter steel rod with 10 blows from a
height of fall of 100 mm. After compaction of each layer the pipe is lifted such that
there will be 5mm overlap between the two layers and withdrawing the casing pipe
simultaneously for every 50 mm of depth along the length of column. After completion
of construction of stone column it is left covered with polythene cover for 24 hours to
develop proper bonding between the stone chips of the column and the soft soil. Fig:
3.11 shows the construction of plain stone Column with Stone Aggregates, Fig: 3.12
shows the construction of plain stone Column with Slag+ Sand.

26
Fig: 3.10 construction of plain stone Fig: 3.11 construction of plain stone
Column with Stone Aggregates. Column with Slag+ Sand.

3.4.3 CONSTRUCTION OF STONE COLUMN WITH CIRCULAR DISCS.

• Before construction of stone column, grease is applied in the inner surface of

the tank for reducing the friction between the soil and the tank.
• Clay bed is prepared to a depth of 100mm and on this surface the perspex pipe
of outer diameter 50 mm and 1 mm thick was placed at properly marked Centre
of the clay bed.
• Before placing the pipe, grease is applied to the outer surface. Around this pipe,
clay bed was then filled in the tank in 50 mm thick layers to the desired height
of 300mm by hand compaction such that no air voids are left in the soil.
• The stone column was casted in steps by compacting the Slag and Sand by using
a 10 mm diameter steel rod with 10 blows from a height of fall of 100 mm.
• For constructing the stone column with circular discs, first fill with slag and
sand and by keeping discs at specified distances from the surface of the clay bed
and the pipe is taken out gradually.

27
 Fig: 3.12 Stone column with circular discs

3.4.4 CLAY BED/STONE COLUMN TESTING

The Clay bed/Stone column to be tested is taken and a sand blanket of 20 mm
thick was laid on the surface of clay bed. The perspex circular disc of 12 mm thick and
having diameter of 100 mm which is double the diameter of stone column is placed at
center of the bed and is subjected to strain controlled compression loading in a
conventional loading frame at a rate of settlement of 0.24 mm/min. For every 1mm
settlement, corresponding loads are noted up to 20 mm settlement. Fig: 3.17 shows the
test setup arrangement.

28
 Fig: 3.13 Test setup arrangement

3.4.5 POST TEST ANALYSIS

After completion of the test, the stone column material from the column were
carefully taken out and a thin paste of Plaster of Paris was poured into the hole to get
the deformed shape of the column, and kept it for 24 hours. The soil outside the stone
column was carefully removed and the hardened Plaster of Paris is taken out and the
deformation properties are studied.

29
 CHAPTER-4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Tests were conducted on Plain Clay bed, Plain Stone column with Stone
aggregates, Silica-Manganese Slag, Slag + Sand, reinforced stone column for an
encasement length of D, D/2, 3D, and 4D. The Load carrying capacity & settlement is
determined by drawing a double tangent to Load - Settlement curve of clay bed and
stone columns having different encasement lengths are shown and discussed in
preceding sections.

4.1 LOAD SETTLEMENT RESPONSE OF PLAIN CLAY BED:

Fig 4.1 shows the Load-settlement curve obtained from load tests on clay bed.
The ultimate load carrying capacity in each case was determined by drawing double
tangent to the load settlement curve which is shown in figure.

The ultimate load carrying capacity of the clay bed is 8kg and the corresponding
settlement is 38 mm

Fig 4.1 Load-settlement curve of plain clay bed

30
4.2 LOAD SETTLEMENT RESPONSE OF PLAIN STONE
COLUMN WITH SLAG
Fig 4.2 shows the ultimate load carrying capacity of the clay bed is 10 KN.
The settlement at the ultimate load is 31 mm. Load carrying capacity is increased
by 25.0 % when compared to the Plain clay bed.

Fig 4.2 Load-settlement curve of plain stone column with Stone Aggregate

31
4.3 LOAD SETTLEMENT RESPONSE OF PLAIN STONE
COLUMN WITH SLAG + SAND
Fig 4.3 shows the ultimate load carrying capacity for stone column with sand is
10.8 KN. The settlement at the ultimate load is 25 mm. Load carrying capacity is
increased by 35.0% and 8.0% when compared to the Plain clay bed and stone column
with Slag respectively

Fig 4.3 Load-settlement curve of plain stone column with Slag + Sand

32
4.4 LOAD SETTLEMENT RESPONSE OF CLAY BED WITH STONE
COLUMN WITH CIRCULAR DISCS AT A DISTANCE “D”
Fig 4.5 shows the Load settlement response of clay bed with stone column
with circular discs at a distance “D” of the column length. The ultimate load
carrying capacity determined from load settlement curve is 12.8 KN and the
corresponding settlement is 20.5mm. Load carrying capacity is increased by 60.0
% when compared to the Plain clay bed.

Fig 4.5 Load settlement response of clay bed with stone column for an encasement
length of “D”

33
4.5 LOAD SETTLEMENT RESPONSE OF CLAY BED WITH
STONE COLUMN WITH CIRCULAR DISCS AT A DISTANCE
“D/2”

Fig 4.6 shows the Load settlement response of clay bed with stone column
encasement with circular discs at a distance of D/2. The ultimate load carrying
capacity determined from load settlement curve is 15 KN and the corresponding
settlement is 19mm. Load carrying capacity is increased by 87.5 % when compared
to the Plain clay bed.

Fig 4.6 Load settlement response of clay bed with stone column with circular discs at
a distance “D/2”

34
4.6 RESULTS
• Load tests have been done for different stone columns and the ultimate load
carrying capacities have been calculated from the load-settlement curve by
using double tangent method.
• The load carrying capacities of plain stone column with Slag, Slag+ Sand have
been increased by 25%, 35% compared to the plain clay bed.
• The load carrying capacities of stone column with introduction of circular discs
at a distance of D, D/2 have been increased by and 60.0%, 87.5% compared to
the Plain Clay bed.
• The load carrying capacity of stone column with circular discs at a distance of
D/2 has increased by 87.5% compared to plain clay bed.

4.7 FLOATING RESULTS COMPARISON

FLOATING STONE ULTIMATE LOAD SETTLEMENT (mm)

COLUMN CARRYING CAPACITY
(KN)

Plain Clay bed 8 38

Plain Stone column with Slag 10 31

Plain Stone column with 10.8 25

Slag + Sand

Stone column with circular 12.8 20.5

discs at distance “D”

Stone column with circular 15 19

discs at distance “D/2”

Table: 4.1 Floating results comparison

35
 CHAPTER-5

CONCLUSON

1. The load carrying capacity is increased by improving with the stone

column by 35% compared to plain clay bed.
2. Load carrying capacity of the stone column with circular discs at
distance “D” is increased by 60.0%.
3. Load carrying capacity of the stone column with circular discs at
distance “D/2” is increased by 87.5%.
4. The settlement is decreased with inclusion of stone column and also
with the introduction of circular discs.
5. This decrease in settlement due to introduction of circular discs at a
distance of “D” is about 46% when compared to the plain clay bed
6. This decrease in settlement due to introduction of circular discs at a
distance of “D/2” is about 50% when compared to the plain clay bed

36
 REFERENCES

[1]. A.P. Ambily, S.R. Gandhi, “Experimental and Theoretical Evaluation of Stone
Column in Soft Clay”, Indian Geotechnical Conference-2004, pp. 201-206.
[2]. Karun Mani, K. Nigee, “A Study on Ground Improvement Using Stone Column
Technique”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering
and Technology, Vol. 2, No. 11, 2013.

[3]. Kausar Ali, J.T. Shahu, & K.G. Sharma, “An Experimental Study of Stone
Columns In Soft Soils”, Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference, pp. 1517,
2011.

[4]. Kausar Ali, “Effect of Encasement Length on Geosynthetic Reinforced Stone

Columns”, IJRET, Volume: 03 Issue: 06, pp. 72-75, Jun-2014.

[5]. M.R. Babu, Dheerendra, R. Shivashankar, S. Nayak, J.A. Majeed “Load Settlement
Behavior of Stone Columns with Circumferential Nails”, Indian Geotechnical
Conference – 2010, pp. 16–18.

[6]. N. Hataf, N. Nabipour, “Experimental investigation on bearing capacity of

geosynthetic encapsulated stone columns”, Proceedings of the 18th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris 2013.

[7]. Rakesh Kumar and P.K. Jain, “Expansive Soft Soil Improvement by Geogrid
Encased Granular Pile”, International Journal on Emerging Technologies, Vol. 4,
No. 1, pp. 55-61, 2013.

[8]. S.N. Malarvizhi, and K. Ilamparuthi, “Load versus Settlement of Claybed

stabilized with Stone & Reinforced Stone Columns”. Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 322-329,
2004.

[9]. S. Murugesan, K. Rajagopal, “Experimental and Numerical investigations on the

behaviour of geosynthetic encased stone columns”, Indian Geotechnical
Conference-2009, pp.480-484.

[10]. Siddharth Arora, Rakesh Kumar and P.K. Jain, “Load - Settlement Behaviour of
Granular Pile in Black Cotton Soil” International Journal of Advances in
Engineering & Technology, Vol. 7, No 3, July, 2014.

[11]. S. Siva Gowri Prasad, G. Divya, P.V.V. Satyanarayana, “Improvement of marine

clay performance using geo-textile encased stone column”, International Journal
of Engineering Research and Applications, Vol. 5, No.10, pp.76-80, Oct-2015.

37
[12]. S. Siva Gowri Prasad, Y. Harish, P.V.V. Satyanarayana, “Stabilization of Marine
Clays with Geotextile Reinforced Stone Columns Using Silica-Manganese Slag as
a Stone Column Material”, International Journal of Computational Engineering
Research, Vol. 05, No. 09, pp. 5-12, Sep-2015.

[13]. Uttam Kumar, Y K. Tandel, ,and C H. Solanki, “Effect Of Geosynthetic

Encasement on Sand Column in Soft Soil”, International Journal of Structural and
Civil Engineering Research Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 141-146, Aug-2013.

[14]. Y. Mohammed, Fattah, T. Kais, and Mohammed Al-Waily “Stress Concentration

Ratio of Model Stone Columns in Soft Clays”, Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol.
34, No. 1, pp. 1-11.

38