1 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

2 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

INTR

ODUCTION
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil are reduced by
earthquake shaking or other rapid loading. Liquefaction and related phenomena have been
responsible for tremendous amounts of earthquake damage around the world.
In soil mechanics the term "liquefied" was first used by Hazen in reference to the 1918
failure of the Calaveras Dam in California. He described the mechanism of flow
liquefaction of the embankment dam as follows: If the pressure of the water in the pores is
great enough to carry all the load, it will have the effect of holding the particles apart and of
producing a condition that is practically equivalent to that of quicksand the initial

3 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

movement of some part of the material might result in accumulating pressure, first on one
point, and then on another, successively, as the early points of concentration were liquefied.
Liquefaction occurs in soils at or near saturation, especially the finer textured soils. The
water must nearly fill the space between the particles. The water exerts pressure on the soil
particles that influences how tightly the particles are pressed together. Prior to an
earthquake, the water pressure is relatively low and the contact force between particles is
higher. Earthquake shaking can cause the water pressure to increase to the point where the
soil particles can readily move with respect to each other while the contact force between
particles are loosen. When liquefaction occurs, the strength of the soil decreases and the
ability of the soil to support building foundations and bridges are reduced.

Figure 1.1 (a): Large contact force

available in between course soil particles
with less pore water pressure before
ground shaking.

Figure 1.1 (b): Contact force decreasing

between soil particles while water pressure
increasing after ground shaking.

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

Over the years, some of the most spectacular, and costly damage to the earth slopes and the
foundation of structures has been due to liquefaction of sands during earthquake. When an
earthquake shakes loose saturated sand, the grain structure of soil tends to consolidate into
more compact packing. Since all these movements happen rapidly, there is no chance to
reduce the volume through the dissipation of pore water pressure from within the soil mass.
Therefore, the incompressible pore fluid takes up the entire applied stress and consequently,
the effective stress approaches zero and ultimately the deposit "liquefies." Since a liquid has

4 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

no shear strength, occurrences of disastrous consequences due to the failure of earth slopes
and foundations are inevitable.
The devastating effects of liquefaction drew considerable attention of geotechnical
earthquake engineers. In 1964, the Good Friday earthquake (M= 9.2) in Alaska and the
Neegata earthquake (M = 7.5) in Japan occurred. Both earthquakes produced splendid
examples of liquefaction leading to slope failures as well as foundation failures of bridges
and buildings. Even the recent earthquakes of India such as Bihar Earthquake of 1988, Uttar
Kashi Earthquake of 1991, Bhuj Earthquake of 2001, etc. have witnessed the liquefaction of
soil leading to slope and foundation failures.
Figure: 2 when liquefaction occurs, the
strength of the soil decreases and, the ability
of a soil deposit to support foundations for
buildings and bridges are reduced as seen in
the photo of the overturned apartment
complex buildings in Niigata in 1964.
Figure: 2

Figure: 3 shows that sandy soil was

liquefied and behaved like fluid during the
Nisqually, Washington, and earthquake of
February 28, 2001. Many communities in
Kentucky are set on soft soils, especially
those along the Ohio and Mississippi River
Valleys. Those communities may also be

Figure: 3

prone to liquefaction hazards.

Strong ground motion can also trigger
landslide known as earthquake-induced
Itlandslides
has often--been
said with
that steep
the October,
in areas
slopes,
1989
earthquake
in
such asLoma
easternPrieta
Kentucky.
The slope
California
the 4 was
Geotechnical
failure shownwas
in Figure
caused by
Engineer's
earthquake
because
of the
the Nisqually
earthquake
of February
major
impact the deep soft soils had on
28, 2001.

Figure: 4

the bridge and roadway damage. This

was the United States warning to pay
more attention to the importance of soil-

5 | Page
structure interaction and the disastrous
M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled
of not
properly
designing
Experimental Investigation on Compactioneffects
and Strength
Behavior
of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated
Expansive
Soil
structures
constructed
over these types

of foundation materials.

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

Figure: 5

The earthquake picture illustrates the

permanent ground settlement due to
Figure: 6

liquefaction along the perimeter of Port

Island (artificial fill) during the 1995
Kobe Earthquake, where the shore line
moved 6 to 9 ft outward into the sea and
settled as much as 3 ft.
Ground

failure

occurs

due

liquefaction, Loma Prieta earthquake.

Figure: 7

6 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

to

Figure: 8

Earthquake ground shaking can do more than rattle your property at the surface. Under
certain conditions during moderate to great earthquakes, the earth supporting a home can
behave like a fluid (Liquefaction) or, in hillside terrain, can fail in blocks of earth and rock
that move downslope (Land sliding).
Ground shaking triggered liquefaction
in a subsurface layer of sand, producing
differential

lateral

and

vertical

movement in a overlying carapace of

un-liquefied sand and silt, which
moved from right to left toward the
Figure: 9

Pajaro River. This mode of ground

failure, termed "lateral spreading," is a
principal cause of liquefaction-related
earthquake damage.
Ground

failure

occurs

due

to

liquefaction as shown in the figure 10

Figure: 10

Loma Prieta earthquakes.

TYPES OF GROUND FAILURE DUE TO EARTHQUAKE INDUCED

LIQUEFACTION

7 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

Four primary types of ground failure are caused by liquefaction: lateral spread, ground
oscillation, flow failure, and loss of bearing strength. In addition, liquefaction may enhance
ground settlement and lead to eruption of sand boils (fountains of water and sediment
emanating from the pressurized, liquefied zone).

a) Lateral Spreads
Subsidence, or lowering of the ground surface, often occurs during earthquakes. This may
be due to downward vertical displacement on one side of a fault, and can sometimes affect a
huge area of land. Coastal areas can become permanently flooded as a result. Subsidence
can also occur as ground shaking causes loose sediments to settle and to lose their load
bearing strength (see liquefaction, below) or to slump down sloping ground. Lateral
spreading occurs where sloping ground starts to move downhill, causing cracks to open up,
that are often seen along hill crests and river banks.
Damage caused by lateral spreads, though seldom catastrophic, is severely disruptive and
often pervasive. For example, during the 1964 Alaska earthquake, more than 200 bridges
were damaged or destroyed by spreading of floodplain deposits toward river channels. The
spreading compressed the superstructures, buckled decks, thrust stringers over abutments,
and shifted and tilled abutments and piers. Similar damage occurred during the 1991 Costa
Rica earthquake and during many previous large earthquakes.

The great M7.9 Denali Fault, Earthquake

of November 3, 2002. Alaska.

b) Ground Oscillation

8 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

Where the ground is flat or the slope is too gentle to allow lateral displacement, liquefaction
at depth may decouple overlying soil layers from the underlying ground, allowing the upper
soil to oscillate back and forth and up and down in the form of ground waves. These
oscillations are usually accompanied by opening and closing fissures and fracture of rigid
structures such as pavements and pipelines.

c) Flow Failures
Flow failures are the most catastrophic ground failure caused by liquefaction. These failures
commonly displace large masses of soil tens of meters and in a few instances, large masses
of soil have traveled tens of kilometers down long slopes at velocities ranging up to tens of
kilometers per hour. Flows may be comprised of completely liquefied soil or blocks of intact
material riding on a layer of liquefied soil. Flows usually develop in loose saturated sands or
silt on slopes greater than 3 degrees.

d) Loss of Bearing Strength

When the soil supporting a building or other structure liquefies and loses strength, large
deformations can occur within the soil which may allow the structure to settle and tip.
Conversely, buried tanks and piles may rise buoyantly through the liquefied soil. For
example, many buildings settled and tipped during the 1964 Niigata, Japan earthquake. The
most spectacular bearing failures during that event were in the Kwangishicho apartment
complex where several four-story buildings tipped as much as 60 degrees. Apparently,
liquefaction first developed in a sand layer several meters below ground surface and then
propagated upward through overlying sand layers. The rising wave of liquefaction
weakened the soil supporting the buildings and allowed the structures to slowly settle and
tip.

9 | Page

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

FACTORS AFFECTING THE SUSCEPTIBILITY OF A SOIL TO
LIQUEFACTION:
There are several factors that can affect the susceptibility of a soil to liquefaction:
1) The particles size distribution of the soil: poorly-graded soils are most susceptible to
liquefaction.
2) Whether the soil is loose or dense: loose soils are much more susceptible to
liquefaction.
3) Whether the soil is saturated or not: only saturated soils can undergo liquefaction.

POSIBLE WAY OF LIQUEFACTION MITIGATION

There are basically three possibilities to reduce liquefaction hazards when designing and
constructing new buildings or other structures as bridges, tunnels, and roads.

a) Avoid Liquefaction Susceptible Soils: The first possibility is to avoid construction

on liquefaction susceptible soils. There are various criteria to determine the liquefaction
susceptibility of a soil. By characterizing the soil at a particular building site according
to these criteria one can decide if the site is susceptible to liquefaction and therefore
unsuitable for the desired structure.

b) Build Liquefaction Resistant Structures: If it is necessary to construct on

liquefaction susceptible soil because of space restrictions, favorable location, or other
reasons, it may be possible to make the structure liquefaction resistant by designing the
foundation elements to resist the effects of liquefaction.

c) Improve the Soil: The third option involves mitigation of the liquefaction hazards by
improving the strength, density, and/or drainage characteristics of the soil. This can be
done using a variety of soil improvement techniques.

BASIC OF COMPACTION GROUTING

10 | P a g e

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

Soil liquefaction is considered as one of the most significant geotechnical hazards and
recent large scale earthquakes, such as the 1995 Kobe Earthquake, 1999 Kocaeli Earthquake
and 2007 Niigataken Chuetsu oki Earthquake, have highlighted the need to mitigate the
damage. Currently, several remedial measures are available for treating or improving sites
susceptible to soil liquefaction. These measures include; densification, solidification,
replacement, lowering of water table, and dissipation of excess pore water pressure. In
selecting the appropriate remedial measures, various factors, such as effectiveness of
improvement, required areas and depth of improvement, effects on surrounding
environment, cost and ease of execution, and level of desired improvement, should be
considered.
Because of its versatility and economy in improving ground beneath and around existing
facilities, compaction grouting is gaining interest among engineers. Originally from the
United States, compaction grouting technology has been implemented in Japan only in the
early 1990s. Although initially developed for settlement control and re-leveling, the
technology has been used to solve a number of geotechnical problems, among them the
treatment of liquefiable soils. This paper discusses two case histories of compaction
grouting application as a remedial measure against liquefaction, with emphasis on the
lessons learned from the grouting process and the merits of compaction grouting as a
practical method of ground improvement.
Compaction grouting involves the injection of a very stiff grout (soil-cement-water mixture
with sufficient silt sizes to provide plasticity, together with sand and gravel sizes to develop
internal friction) that does not permeate the native soil, but results in controlled growth of
the grout bulb mass that displaces the surrounding soil. The primary purpose of compaction
grouting is to increase the density of soft, loose or disturbed soil, typically for settlement
control, structural re-leveling, increasing the soils bearing capacity, and mitigation of
liquefaction potential.
As shown in Figure, compaction grouting involves the installation of casing to the required
depth into a pre-drilled hole (70~100mm diameter). The stiff grout is then pumped through
the casing at high pressure until typically one of three criteria is reached, i.e., (1) target
volume; (2) maximum pressure; or surface (sub-surface) heave. The grouting is performed

11 | P a g e

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

in typically 0.3~0.9m intervals or stages, thus forming a column of interconnected grout
bulbs. At each stage, the soil particles are displaced radially from a growing bulb of grout
through cavity expansion effects into a closer spacing, thus increasing the density of the
adjacent soil around the bulb. Note that the strength of the grout is unimportant because the
purpose of the technique is to densify the surrounding soil by displacement. Compaction
grouting can either be performed top-down, i.e., from the upper to the lower limit of the
treatment zone or, more commonly, in a bottom-up process from the lower limit upwards.
Figure shows a typical process of injecting the grout.

12 | P a g e

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

There are many numbers of techniques for liquefaction mitigation is available now days.
Selection of the best ground improvement technique for any project requires a wide range of
knowledge, experience and skill in an array of ground improvement approaches. Subsurface
conditions can vary greatly within a single job site and the characteristics of the in situ soil
play a crucial role in determining which ground improvement method is best.

Table no: 1 Summary of Anti-Liquefaction Measures and their Effects

Sr.
No

Liquefaction
Countermeasure

Main Action
Against
Liquefaction

Densificatio
n

Lateral
Compaction

Drainage
and Pore
Pressure
Relief

Chemical
Grouting

cementation

No

No

No

Conventional
Piling

Bypass
liquefiable layer

Yes
for
driven pile

No

No

Stone Columns

Transfer load to
competent soil

Yes

Yes
(Medium)

Yes

Geopier

Transfer load to
Surrounding
Improved
Ground

Yes

Yes

Yes

Compaction
Piling

Densification

Yes

No

No

Resonant
Column

Densification

Yes

No

No

Dynamic
Compaction
Densification

Densification

Yes

slight

No

Vertical Drains

Pore
relief

no

No

Yes

Compaction
Grouting

Densification

Yes

Yes

No

Shallow soils

10

Jet Grouting

Transfer load to
competent soil

Yes
(slight

Yes
(slight)

No

Essentially used to
bypass liquefiable
soils

water

Remarks

Shallow Depths
Driven piles can
induce
localized
Densification
Proven performance
in
liquefaction
Zones
Proven performance
in
liquefaction
Zones
Effective
for
shallow depths but
laborious
Installation
Densification
is
achieved
for
Shallow depths
Shallow
dept
effectiveness < 8.0
meters
Effective for Rapid
Pore Pressure relief

13 | P a g e

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC LANDSLIDES

DEPTH OF ANALYSIS FOR LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION

Traditionally, a depth of 15 m has been used as the depth of analysis for the evaluation of
liquefaction. The Seed and Idriss EERI Monograph on Ground Motions and Soil
Liquefaction During Earthquakes (1982) does not recommend a minimum depth for
evaluation, but notes 12 m as a depth to which some of the numerical quantities in the
simplified procedure can be estimated reasonably. Liquefaction has been known to occur
during earthquakes at deeper depths than 15 m given the proper conditions such as lowdensity granular soils, presence of ground water, and sufficient cycles of earthquake ground
motion. Experience has shown that the 15 m depth may be adequate for the evaluation of
liquefaction potential in most cases; however, there may be situations where this depth may
not be sufficiently deep.
It is recommended that a minimum depth of 15 m below the existing ground surface or
lowest proposed finished grade (whichever is lower) be investigated for liquefaction
potential. Where a structure may have subterranean construction or deep foundations (e.g.,
caissons or piles), the depth of investigation should extend to a depth that is a minimum of 6
m below the lowest expected foundation level (e.g., caisson bottom or pile tip) or 15 m
below the existing ground surface or lowest proposed finished grade, whichever is deeper.
If, during the investigation, the indices to evaluate liquefaction indicate that the liquefaction
potential may extend below that depth, the exploration should be continued until a
significant thickness 3 m, to the extent possible) of no liquefiable soils are encountered.

14 | P a g e

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil

15 | P a g e

M. Tech, Dissertation Entitled

Experimental Investigation on Compaction and Strength Behavior of CementPolypropylene Fiber Treated Expansive Soil