Ground Improvement Technques
Ground Improvement Technques
Ground Improvement Technques
GROUND IMPROVEMENT
TECHNIQUES
FOR REDEVELOPEMENT IN
EARTHQUAKE PRONE AREAS
Presented by
1 Introduction 2
1.1 Earthquakes 2
2 Liquefaction 2
2.1 Cause 3
2.2 Effect 4
3.1 Vibroflotation 7
3.6 Grouting 12
4 Tests 15
6 Conclusion 18
7 Questions 18
1
1. Introduction
1964, Niigata, Japan, 1989, Loma Prieta, USA, 1995, Kobe, Japan, 2001, Bhuj,
Gujarat, 2008, Sichuan, China. These are only some of the most devastating
earthquakes in the last 50 yrs. It has taken scientists and engineers many decades to
merely understand the causes of this mass destruction and find viable safeguards
against them. Building an earthquake-safe structure is not enough. Even buildings
designed for earthquake loads collapse due to the state of the ground during an
earthquake. So, one of the most important things is to study the ground conditions and
improve them as a primary step to prevent earthquake damage.
1.1 Earthquakes
Stability of the Earth’s crust is an essential condition for the propagation of life on
our planet. The earth’s crust consists of seven tectonic plates which slide over the hot,
molten outer core. Such movement is believed to be the origin of tectonic
earthquakes. In effect, earthquakes are caused due to displacement of blocks along
faults.
Earthquakes are the strongest, quickest and most unexpected of natural calamities.
Low magnitude earthquakes may leave structures unaffected. However, the major
earthquakes may cause disastrous damages. Twisting, sinking, buckling, deformation
are some of the commonly seen effects. Earthquakes may damage lifelines (such as
roads, bridges, railway lines, pipes etc.) which may hinder attempts to help an
earthquake hit region.
There are a few other phenomena caused by earthquakes. These are indicative of
the extent of damage caused by earthquakes. These are:
1. Landslides
2. Ground shaking
3. Fire
4. Tsunami
5. Liquefaction
2. Liquefaction
Of all the other effects of earthquakes, liquefaction has many effects. In order to
minimize the damage caused by earthquakes, it will be necessary to discuss
2
liquefaction in great detail. We shall look into the cursory details about the cause and
effects of liquefaction before discussing the ground improvement techniques
Liquefaction has been observed in earthquakes for many years. In fact, written
records dating back hundreds and even thousands of years describe earthquake effects
that are now known to be associated with liquefaction.
2.1 Cause
3
2.2 Effect
4
2.2.3 Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading involves large horizontal displacement on the ground surface as
a result of liquefaction in a shallow underlying soil deposit. In large-magnitude
earthquakes, lateral spreading causes tremendous damage, often times disruptive and
pervasive though rarely catastrophic.
5
3. Ground Improvement Techniques
In the past, the conventional method for handling loose sands, soft clays and
poorly compacted fills which are susceptible to seismic damage was to undercut and
replace those materials or to bypass them with deep foundations. Today, geotechnical
and structural engineers have several options to improve soils in-place. We shall look
into some of these methods which have been employed over the years as
countermeasures for damage caused by earthquakes.
Structures founded on soils, especially if soft, tend to be subjected to stronger
shaking with longer-period motions while structures founded on hard rock itself face
least amplified shaking.
6
3.1 Vibroflotation or Vibro compaction or Sand Column
7
Stone columns technique is similar to vibro-compaction. The difference is in the
backfill that is used. Stone columns generally use gravel or crushed stone as backfill.
In general, stone columns can be installed in two ways: dry or wet method. In the dry
method, compressed air is used to assist the advance of the vibrator. The stone is fed
by pipes directly to the nose of the vibrator. Little soil is extracted during the
installation. Stone columns installed using dry methods are referred to as vibro-
displacement stone columns. The wet method uses water jets and the self-weight of
the vibrator to advance into the cavity. Unlike the dry method, some collapsible soils
are removed to the surface by the water. The stone is fed to the annulus of the
vibrator, which falls by gravity and vibrations to the cavity under the nose of the
vibrator. Stone columns installed using wet methods are referred to as vibro-
replacement stone columns.
In cohesionless soils (sands), the intense vibrations generated by the vibroflot
rearrange the loose particles into a much denser configuration. These dense sands
have higher bearing capacities, reduced static and seismic settlements and greater
liquefaction resistance.
For sites with cohesive soils (uncontrolled fill/alluvial deposits), stone columns
can be used for direct support of shallow foundations. Vibro-replacement results in
columns of stone throughout the weaker soil profile. The resulting matrix of columns
and original soil has composite elastic and shear moduli far greater than the original
deposit.
.
8
3. Making the bottom bulb by ramming the aggregate with tamper which has a 45
degrees beveled foot
4. Building the shaft with undulating layers in thin lifts (12 inches or less)
consisting of well-graded aggregate, typically stone as used for highway base course
material
Most Suitable Soil Cohesionless soil, waste fills, partly saturated soils,
Type soils with fines
Max effective 30 m, less at the surface, degree of improvement
treatment depth usually decreases with depth
Special materials
None
required
Special equipment
Tamper and crane
required
Properties of treated
Good improvement and reasonable uniformity
material
+ Rapid, simple, may be suitable for soils with
fines
Special advantages
– lack of uniformity with depth, not possible near
and limitations
existing structures, may granular backfill surface
layer
Relative Cost low
9
3.4 Vibratory Probe
The vibratory probe method uses heavy vibrator that is clamped to the upper end
of a long steel probe. Unlike the previous two methods, the vibratory probe method
induces vertical vibrations. The vibrator is mounted on the top of the probe and does
not penetrate the ground. Typical construction process includes the advance of the
probe to the desired depth and densification of the soil during extraction of the probe.
Backfill material is not commonly used for this method
Most Suitable
Saturated or dry clean sand
Soil Type
Max effective
20 m, ineffective in upper 3-4 m.
treatment depth
Special materials
None
required
Special
Vibratory pile driver or vibroflot equipment
equipment required
Properties of
Can obtain up to Dr = 80%
treated material
+ Rapid, simple, cheaper than VR stone columns,
Special compaction piles
advantages and – less effective than methods that employ compaction
limitations as well as vibration, difficult to penetrate stiff overlayers,
may be ineffective for layered systems
Relative Cost Moderate
10
Graph showing relation of grain size with technique
Of very great importance is the recognition that pore water pressure relief through
the use of vertical drainage materials will assist in preventing the set up of pore
pressures to cause liquefaction. This method is a low vibration method and can be
used in areas surrounding existing lifelines.
Gravel drain pipes are constructed using a casting auger. The casing is screwed
into the ground. Gravel and water are poured into the casing. As the casing is
removed, gravel is pushed out of the end of the casing and is compacted. In case of
liquefaction, large amount of water enters drain pipe from surrounding soil due to
excess pore water pressure. Since drain pipes are made of coarse gravel, water is
allowed to rise, thus preventing liquefaction.
11
3.5.2 Synthetic Drain Pipes
3.6 Grouting
12
3.6.1 Compaction Grouting
13
3.6.3 Jet Grouting
In jet grouting, high pressure (40 to 60 MPa) fluid jets are used to erode and
replace soil with grout. A small hole 90 to 150 mm is drilled and grout (water-cement
slurry) is jetted in through nozzles. Bentonite is added where low permeability is
required. This technique has been used successfully to underpin foundations, support
excavations, control ground water flow and strengthen soils.
Single, double or triple fluid methods can be used. Single fluid system uses only
grout. Double fluid system employs grout as well as pressurized air which are
released from two nozzles. Triple fluid system uses grout, pressurized air as well as
water.
Single fluid method is most effective is cohesionless soils.
In Situ Soil Mixing is also referred to as auger mixing, deep mixing method etc.
In situ soil mixing is the mechanical mixing of soil and stabilizer using rotating auger
and mixing-bar arrangements. Flat mixing bars attached to the auger shaft mix
injected stabilizer and soil. Upon reaching the designed depth, a second mixing
occurs as augers are withdrawn. The result is high strength or low permeability
columns and panels. Multiple columns and panels are commonly layedout in a
pattern.
In Situ Soil Mixing is used to create structural elements for foundations and
retaining walls, soil improvement, and in situ treatments of buried contaminates. It is
also used with specialized cementing and chemical reagents for hazardous waste
treatment, sludge stabilization / solidification, lagoon stabilization, chemical
oxidation, and for constructing underground vertical barriers for groundwater
containment.
14
4. Tests
Before we use any method of improvement , the soil at the site must be tested to
determine various conditions like at what depth liquefaction occurs, type of soil,
position of ground water table, etc .There are certain standard tests carried out such
as:
In this section we shall cover a few facts about the 1995 earthquake at Kobe,
Japan. This is a cursory study of the ground improvement techniques employed and
the performance of the same during this devastating earthquake.
15
5.2.1 Sand Drains
16
5.2.3 Deep Dynamic Compaction
5.2.5 Vibroflotation
17
Foundation: Piles and spread footings
Damage: Settlement, tilt, damage to pile heads
A vibro-rod steel hammer with an H-shaped cross section was used in a
square pattern at 2.6m spacing to 18m depth, 10m from building perimeter. The
projected steel plate wings were attached to increase the effectiveness of
compaction.
Some buildings show no damage. Maximum differential settlement was
90mm, maximum tilt was 1/265 although vertical settlements up to 38cm have
been reported. On the other hand, surrounding unimproved ground faced
settlement as large as 120 cm. Quay walls were largely displaced toward the sea.
Sand boils were also widespread in areas further inland.
6. Conclusion
From the above case studies, it is evident that the correct technique, if applied,
can not only limit damage but, in some cases, even prevent it. In this way, ground
improvement can prove to be a boon in earthquake prone areas for prevention as well
as cure.
7. Questions
18