1-Principles and Practice of Ground Improvement-Wiley (2015) - 3

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 1

GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS AND CLASSIFICATION 3

Table 1.2 Geotechnical Problems and Possible Causes


Problem Theoretical Basis Possible Causes
Bearing failure Applied pressure is higher than ultimate High applied pressure
bearing capacity of soil Inclined load
Small loading area
Low-strength soil
Large total and differential Hooke’s law and particle re-arrangement High applied pressure
settlements Large loading area
Highly compressible soil
Nonuniform soil
Large creep deformation
Hydrocompression High applied pressure is higher than High applied pressure
threshold collapse stress Collapsible soil
Water
Ground heave Swelling pressure is higher than applied Water
pressure Expansive soil
Frozen soil
Low temperature
Instability (sliding, Shear stress is higher than shear strength; High earth structure
overturning, and slope driving force is higher than resisting Steep slope
failure) force; driving moment is higher than High water pressure
resisting moment Soft foundation soil
High surcharge
High loading rate
Liquefaction Effective stress becomes zero due to Earthquake
increase of excess pore water pressure Loose silt and sand
High groundwater table
Erosion Shear stress induced by water is higher Running water
than maximum allowable shear High speed of water flow
strength of soil Highly erodible soil (silt and sand)
Seepage Dacy’s law High water head
Permeable soil

were several developments of ground improvement methods, including Mitchell (1981) in his state-of-the-art report for
including the steel reinforcement for retaining walls by Henri soil improvement, Hausmann (1990), Ye et al. (1994), the
Vidal in France, dynamic compaction by Louis Menard in International Society of Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
France, deep mixing in Japan and Sweden, and jet grouting Engineering (ISSMGE) TC17 committee (Chu et al., 2009),
in Japan. In 1986, J. P. Giroud acclaimed the development and the SHRP II R02 team led by Schaefer and Berg (2012).
from geotextiles to geosynthetics is a revolution in geotech- Clearly, each method of classification has its reasoning and
nical engineering (Giroud, 1986). advantages but also has its limitations. This situation re-
sults from the fact that several ground improvement meth-
ods can fit in one or more categories. For example, stone
1.4.2 Classification columns can serve the functions of densification, replace-
Many ground improvement methods have been used in ment, drainage, and reinforcement; however, the key func-
practice. The research team for the U.S. Strategic Highway tion of stone columns for most applications is replacement.
Research Program (SHRP) II R02 project Geotechnical In this book, the method of classification proposed by Ye
Solutions for Soil Improvement, Rapid Embankment et al. (1994) is adopted with some minor modifications. In
Construction, and Stabilization of the Pavement Working addition, the ground improvement methods can be grouped
Platform identified 46 ground improvement methods, as in terms of shallow and deep improvement in some categories
provided in Table 1.3 (Schaefer and Berg, 2012). or cut-and-fill improvement in other categories. In this book,
Different authors or organizations have classified ground shallow improvement is considered as having an improve-
improvement methods (Table 1.4) based on different criteria, ment depth equal or less than 3 m, while deep improvement

You might also like