Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Research Article
3D FE Analysis of an Embankment Construction on GRSC and
Proposal of a Design Method
Copyright © 2013 Yogendra K. Tandel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.
Stone column is often employed for strengthening of an embankment seated on deep soft clay. But in very soft clay having undrained
shear strength less than or equal to 15 kPa, stone column may not derive adequate load carrying capacity and undergo large
lateral deformation due to inadequate lateral confinement. In such circumstances, reinforcement to individual stone column by
geosynthetics enhances load carrying capacity and reduces lateral deformation. This paper addresses parametric study on behaviour
of embankment resting on Geosynthetic Reinforced Stone Column (GRSC) considering parameters such as stone column spacing
to diameter ratio, deformation modulus of stone column material, geosynthetic stiffness, thickness of soft clay, and height of
embankment by 3D numerical analysis. Finally, equation for Settlement Improvement Factor (SIF), defined as ratio between
settlement of embankment without treatment and with geosynthetic reinforced stone column, is proposed that correlates with
the major influence parameters such as stone column spacing to diameter ratio, deformation modulus of soft clay, and geosynthetic
stiffness.
Embankment
Em
Soft clay
GRSC
GRSCs 𝑍
𝑌
𝑋
0.15
Settlement (m)
0.3 0.25
0.45
Average settlement (m)
0.6 0.35
0.75
0.9
0.45
𝑆/𝑑 = 1.87 𝑆/𝑑 = 2.5
𝑆/𝑑 = 3.12 𝑆/𝑑 = 3.75
0.55
Figure 3: Settlement of natural ground surface for different 𝑆/𝑑
ratio.
0.65
1 2
2 4
Depth (m)
SIF
3 6
4 8
5 10
Figure 5: SIF for different 𝑆/𝑑 ratio. 𝑆/𝑑 = 1.87 𝑆/𝑑 = 2.5
𝑆/𝑑 = 3.12 𝑆/𝑑 = 3.75
2
90
Depth (m)
6
80
8
70 10
0 1 2 3 4
𝑆/𝑑 = 1.87 𝑆/𝑑 = 2.5
𝑆/𝑑 𝑆/𝑑 = 3.12 𝑆/𝑑 = 3.75
Figure 6: Effect of 𝑆/𝑑 ratio on degree of consolidation. Figure 9: Effect of 𝑆/𝑑 ratio on hoop force developed in geosyn-
thetic.
18
From this figure, it is clearly seen that 𝑆/𝑑 ratio has great effect
Excess pore pressure (kPa)
16
14 on settlement of the natural ground surface.
12 Average settlement and SIF for different 𝑆/𝑑 ratios are
10 shown in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. From Figure 4,
8 it is observed that as 𝑆/𝑑 ratio decreases from 3.75 to
6
2.50, about 45% reduction in average settlement occurred.
4
2
Figure 5 clearly indicates that SIF significantly increases with
0 decreasing 𝑆/𝑑 ratio.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Since stone column also act as drain, decreasing 𝑆/𝑑
Time (days) ratio increases the degree of consolidation. This is shown in
𝑆/𝑑 = 1.87 𝑆/𝑑 = 3.12
Figure 6, where the degree of consolidation at 300 days is
𝑆/𝑑 = 2.5 𝑆/𝑑 = 3.75 plotted for different 𝑆/𝑑 ratio. It is shown that larger 𝑆/𝑑 ratio
yielded lower degree of consolidation. This is because of lower
Figure 7: Effect of 𝑆/𝑑 ratio on excess pore pressure developed in load transfer to the columns. Variation of excess pore pressure
clay. with time is plotted in Figure 7 for various 𝑆/𝑑 ratios. As
ISRN Civil Engineering 5
0.3
0.4
0.5 2.7
0.6
SIF
0.7
2.8
0.8
0.3
0.44 0.4
0.5
0.46 0.6
0.7
0.8
0.48
𝐸fill = 30000 kPa
𝐸fill = 35000 kPa
0.5 𝐸fill = 40000 kPa
Settlement (m)
0.3
0.4
Average settlement (m)
0.44
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.45
𝑡 = 0.625 𝑡 = 2.5
𝑡 = 1.25 𝑡=5
Figure 16: Settlement of natural ground surface for different 𝑡.
0.46
𝑡
Figure 14: Average settlement for different deformation modulus of 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
embankment fills. 0.2
0.25
𝐸fill (kPa)
20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000
2.5 0.3
Average settlement (m)
0.35
2.6
0.4
2.7
0.45
SIF
0.5
2.8
0.55
2.9
Figure 17: Average settlement for different 𝑡.
3
geosynthetic stiffness, soft clay deformation modulus, and
Figure 15: SIF for different deformation modulus of embankment diameter of GRSC is introduced as defined by (1).
fills. For computing value of 𝑡, bench mark case stone column
diameter and soil deformation modulus were used. Typical
values of t for geosynthetic stiffness 500, 1000, 2000, 4000,
4.3. Influence of Deformation Modulus of Embankment Fills. and 8000 kN/m are 0.625, 1.25, 5, and 10, respectively. Con-
Settlement of natural ground surface, average settlement, sider
and settlement improvement factor for different values of 𝐽
deformation modulus of embankment fill are illustrated in 𝑡= . (1)
𝑑 ⋅ 𝐸𝑐
Figures 13, 14, and 15, respectively. As expected, embankment
fill deformation modulus has no significant influence on
Settlement on the natural ground surface for different
natural ground surface settlement.
value of 𝑡 is shown in Figure 16. This figure clearly indi-
cates that increasing geosynthetic stiffness imparts higher
4.4. Influence of Geosynthetic Stiffness. In this section, influ- confining pressure which leads to lower settlement. Average
ence of geosynthetic stiffness on settlement improvement settlement and SIF for different geosynthetic stiffness are
factor is studied for a wide range of stiffness from 500 plotted in Figures 17 and 18, respectively. Figure 18 reveals
to 8000 kN/m. A nondimensional parameter (𝑡) relating to that geosynthetic stiffness has great influence on SIF.
ISRN Civil Engineering 7
𝑡 16
3
Time (days)
𝑡 = 0.625 𝑡=5
𝑡 = 1.25 𝑡 = 10
𝑡 = 2.5
4
Figure 20: Effect of geosynthetic stiffness on excess pore pressure
developed in clay.
5
Horizontal deformation (mm)
Figure 18: SIF for different 𝑡. 0 20 40 60
0
110
2
100
Depth (m) 4
Degree of consolidation (%)
90
6
80
8
70
10
60 𝑡 = 0.625 𝑡 = 1.25
𝑡 = 2.5 𝑡=5
𝑡 = 10
50
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Figure 21: Effect of geosynthetic stiffness on horizontal deformation
𝑡 of stone column.
Figure 19: Effect of geosynthetic stiffness on degree of consolida-
tion.
to 3.75 times the diameter of stone column and remain more
or less constant below this depth. The variation of these
forcess follow the same trend as the horizontal deformation
Variation of degree of consolidation at 300 days is seen undergone by stone column.
in Figure 19. It is expected that the influence of geosynthetic
stiffness on degree of consolidation is negligible. The progres-
sive development of excess pore pressure with time is shown 4.5. Influence of Height of Embankment. The effect of
in Figure 20 for different geosynthetic stiffness. From this embankment height on settlement was investigated herein
figure, it is clear that with increasing 𝐽, excess pore pressure for three different heights 5 m, 7.5 m, and 10 m. As expected,
decreases. This happens due to reduced embankment load embankment height has remarkable effect on settlement
transfer to the soft clay when adopting stiffer geosynthetic for as observed in Figures 23 and 24. As embankment height
reinforcement. increases from 5 m to 7.5 m, average settlement increases
Horizontal deformation along the length of stone column by 45%. However, settlement improvement factor does not
is shown in Figure 21. As expected, horizontal deformation change significantly as predicted from Figure 25.
significantly reduces with increasing geosynthetic stiffness.
The hoop tension forces developed in the geosynthetic are 4.6. Influence of Thickness of Soft Clay. In this section,
shown in Figure 22. The forces are high within depth equal influence of soft clay thickness on the SIF is discussed. Three
8 ISRN Civil Engineering
2
Depth (m)
4
2.5
SIF
3
10
𝑡 = 0.625 𝑡 = 10
𝑡=5 𝑡 = 2.5
3.5
𝑡 = 1.25
Distance from symmetry axis (m) Figure 25: SIF for different height of embankment.
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25
0
0.25 Distance from symmetry axis (m)
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5
Settlement (m)
0.5
0
0.75
1 0.2
1.25
Settlement (m)
0.4
1.5
0.6
1.75
0.8
ℎ = 5m
ℎ = 7.5 m 1
ℎ = 10 m
1.2
Figure 23: Settlement of natural ground surface for different height
of embankment. 𝐻 = 5m
𝐻 = 10 m
𝐻 = 15 m
ℎ (m) Figure 26: Settlement of natural ground surface for different
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 thickness of soft clay.
0
𝐻 (m) 9
0 5 10 15 20 8 SIF = 15.575(𝑆/𝑑)−1.284
0 𝑅2 = 0.9981
7 SIF = 21.489(S/d)−1.425
SIF = 11.444(𝑆/𝑑)−1.155 𝑅2 = 0.9985
6
𝑅2 = 0.9985
SIF
5 SIF = 8.7292(𝑆/𝑑)−1.007
4 𝑅2 = 0.9967
0.2
3
SIF = 7.1754(S/d)−0.904
Average settlement (m)
2 𝑅2 = 0.9952
1
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
0.4 𝑆/𝑑
𝑡 = 0.625 𝑡=5
𝑡 = 1.25 𝑡 = 10
𝑡 = 2.5
0.6
Figure 29: Correlation between SIF and 𝑆/𝑑 for different value of 𝑡.
0.8 𝑡
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Figure 27: Average settlement for different thickness of soft clay. 25
𝐻 (m) 20
0 5 10 15 20
2
15
𝑅1
10 𝑅1 = 1.4997𝑡 + 7.071
2.5 𝑅2 = 0.9814
5
SIF
3
0
3.5
𝑡
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
−0.6
𝑆 𝑅2
SIF = 𝑅1( ) , (2)
𝑑 −1.4
𝑆 −0.19 ln(𝑡)−0.9806
SIF = 1.4997𝑡 + 7.071( ) . (4) Acknowledgment
𝑑
The authors are thankful to the anonymous reviewers for
their precise review and several suggestions for improving the
Results of SIF calculated from the proposed (4) are presentation in the paper.
compared with the existing projects, namely, Sinzhein 2000,
DA-Erweiterung Hamburg 2002 [23], and Waltershof 1996
[24]. The comparison is summarized in Table 3. The results
References
of different projects are indicative purpose only, as different [1] D. Greenwood, “Mechanical improvement of soils below
assumptions and parameters are considered in the present ground surface,” in Proceedings of Ground Engineering, pp. 11–
method. 22, The Institution of Civil Engineers, London, UK, 1970.
[2] J. M. O. Hughes, N. J. Withers, and D. A. Greenwood, “Field trial
of the reinforcing effect of a stone column in soil,” Geotechnique,
6. Conclusions vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 31–44, 1975.
[3] A. T. Yeung, “Design curves for prefabricated vertical drains,”
Effect of stone column spacing to diameter ratio, defor- Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, vol.
mation of stone column material and embankment fill, 123, no. 8, pp. 755–759, 1997.
geosynthetic stiffness, height of embankment, and soft clay [4] S. L. Shen, J. C. Chai, Z. S. Hong, and F. X. Cai, “Analysis of
thickness on settlement of embankment was carried out field performance of embankments on soft clay deposit with and
by employing three-dimensional finite element modelling. without PVD-improvement,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes,
The present study reveals that only two parameters, namely, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 463–485, 2005.
stone column spacing to diameter ratio and non-dimensional [5] J. Chu, S. W. Yan, and H. Yang, “Soil improvement by the
parameter 𝑡 (relating with geosynthetic stiffness, stone col- vacuum preloading method for an oil storage station,” Geotech-
nique, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 625–632, 2000.
umn diameter and soil modulus), have significant influence
on the settlement improvement factor. Finally, equation for [6] B. Indraratna, C. Bamunawita, and H. Khabbaz, “Numerical
modeling of vacuum preloading and field applications,” Cana-
settlement improvement factor is proposed which relates
dian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1098–1110, 2004.
with the previous two parameters. Additionally following
[7] H. Krenn and M. Karstunen, “Numerical modelling of deep
overall conclusions can be drawn from the present study. (1) mixed columns below embankments constructed on soft soils,”
Horizontal deformation of stone column can be reduced by in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Geotechnics
decreasing 𝑆/𝑑 ratio and/or increasing geosynthetic stiffness. of Soft Soils, pp. 159–164, Glasgow, Scotland, September 2008.
(2) Hoop force is higher for low 𝑆/𝑑 ratio and higher [8] J. Huang and J. Han, “3D coupled mechanical and hydraulic
geosynthetic stiffness. (3) Excess pore pressure reduces by modeling of a geosynthetic-reinforced deep mixed column-
increasing geosynthetic stiffness and/or reducing 𝑆/𝑑 ratios. supported embankment,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, vol.
(4) Degree of consolidation is increased with increasing 27, no. 4, pp. 272–280, 2009.
𝑆/𝑑 ratio but remains more or less constant for different [9] D. Alexiew, D. Brokemper, and S. Lothspeich, “Geotextile
geosynthetic stiffness. Encased Columns (GEC): load capacity, geotextile selection and
ISRN Civil Engineering 11
Rotating
Machinery
The Scientific
Engineering
Journal of Advances in
Journal of Mechanical
World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Sensors
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
International Journal of
Distributed Advances in
Sensor Networks
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Civil Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
Journal of
Robotics
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
http://www.hindawi.com
VLSI Design
Modelling &
International Journal of Simulation
International Journal of Navigation and in Engineering Advances in
Chemical Engineering Observation Acoustics and Vibration
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
Journal of
Control Science
and Engineering