Characteristics of Bored Piles Installed

Through Jet Grout Layer

C. E. Ho, M.ASCE1; C. H. Lim, M.ASCE2; and C. G. Tan, M.ASCE3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: When bored piles are installed through a jet grout layer, significant interaction may take place between the piles and the jet
grout. Field load tests have indicated that significant enhancement of the pile shaft capacity and axial stiffness was possible for both
compression and tension piles. The influence of the jet grout layer was more pronounced for piles under compression loading compared
with uplift loading. The effectiveness of the jet grout in transmitting load via shearing action was dependent on the thickness of the
grouted zone, the strength of the interlocks between individual jet grout columns forming the grout slab, as well as the interface bond
between the pile shafts and the grout. No apparent adverse effect on the performance of permanent foundations was envisaged as a result
of the presence of the jet grout layer. However, interpretation of pile behavior from load tests was complicated by the interaction between
the test pile and jet grout, resulting in overprediction of pile capacity and axial stiffness. The significance of the interaction has to be
carefully evaluated so that a correct interpretation of the true pile capacity and axial stiffness can be made.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0887-3828共2002兲16:4共160兲
CE Database keywords: Bored piles; Jet grouting; Shaft resistance, piles; Pile settlement; Uplift; Friction; Stiffness.

Introduction
Jet grouting is increasingly being adopted to form buried grout
struts or slabs in conjunction with conventional steel struts to
provide enhanced lateral support for deep excavations, particu-
larly in thick soft clays where basal instability becomes a critical
issue in excavation design. In such cases, the sequence of sub-
structure construction has to be carefully considered to avoid po-
tential problems of displacement of preinstalled foundations due
to jet grouting work. Experience with jet grouting work in Sin-
gapore has indicated that significant displacements may be gen-
erated in soft marine clays, if appropriate precautions were not
taken 共Tornaghi and Cippo 1985; Berry et al. 1987; Sugawara and
Shigenawa 1996; Ho 1995, 1998; Jayatharan and Soh 1997; Wang
et al. 1998兲. The ground displacements were caused by occasional
blockage of the sludge discharge in the annular space between the
borehole wall and the jet grouting rod, which prevented free flow
of the discharge up the borehole to the ground surface.
For substructure construction involving buried jet grout ele-
ments, a logical sequence would be: 共1兲 installation of the retain-
ing walls around the excavation; 共2兲 jet grouting to form buried
struts or slabs; 共3兲 installation of the foundations; and 共4兲 finally,
bulk excavation of the basement. Although the thickness of jet
grout layers vary considerably, typical values of between 1.5 and
3 m are commonly adopted. In this situation, the use of driven or
jacked piling systems may not be appropriate, because the pile
installation procedure may cause damage to the jet grout elements
already formed in the ground. It would also be difficult for driven
or jacked piles to penetrate the jet grout layer, because the jet
grouted soil mass has the consistency of a weak rock. Mean un-
confined compressive strengths of 1.57 MPa had been reported
for the resulting grouted marine clay using the double fluid sys-
tem 共Liang et al. 1993兲 and 1.4 MPa for the triple fluid system
共Lee et al. 1997兲.
Bored piles or barrettes may be more suitable for the founda-
tions in this case, as appropriate excavation techniques are avail-
able to allow the foundations to penetrate through the jet grout
layer without undue disturbance to the jet grout elements. How-
ever, the casting of foundations against the jet grout layer would
result in bonding of the foundation shafts to the jet grouted soil
mass. In order to investigate the significance of the interaction,
the results of load tests conducted on bored piles installed through
a jet grout layer were compared with other load tests conducted
on conventional piles. The behavior of both compression and ten-
sion piles were investigated.

1
Graduate Teaching Assistant and Doctoral Candidate, Dept. of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
284 Vassar St. G2, Cambridge, MA 02139. E-mail: chueuho@mit.edu
2
Associate, Ove Arup and Partners, Singapore.
3
Design Engineer, Geotech and Tunnels, Land Transport Authority,
Singapore.
Note. Discussion open until April 1, 2003. Separate discussions must
be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor.
The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible
publication on August 7, 2001; approved on February 26, 2002. This
paper is part of the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities,
Vol. 16, No. 4, November 1, 2002. ©ASCE, ISSN 0887-3828/2002/4-
160–168/$8.00⫹$.50 per page.
Geological Profile at Test Site
The test site was located at the Singapore Post Center project site.
The ground was generally flat at an average level of ⫹103.5
mOD with the water table at 1.0 to 1.5 m below existing ground.
The geological profile consisted of loose to medium dense, sandy,
clayey fill, several meters thick, with underlying deposits of soft
marine clay, peaty clay, organic clay, and fluvial sand of the Kal-
lang Formation, which extended to a depth of up to 31 m. The
upper and lower marine clay layers were very soft to firm and
were separated by a layer of stiff desiccated clay. At certain areas
of the site, only the upper marine clay layer was present. Both the
upper and lower marine clays were normally consolidated and of

160 / JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Field vane shear tests in soft marine clay
intermediate plasticity. The undrained shear strength generally in-
creased with depth as shown in Fig. 1. The desiccated clay was
overconsolidated and of low to intermediate plasticity. The stan-
dard penetration test 共SPT兲 blow counts in the desiccated clay
varied between 5 to 15 blows/0.3 m with an average of 9 blows/
0.3 m 共Fig. 2兲. The peaty clay, organic clay, and fluvial sand were
superficial deposits and generally occur in localized thin layers.
Beneath the marine clays was the old alluvium formation, an
overconsolidated sandy medium consisting of moderately dense
to very dense soil grains with differing degrees of cementation.
The characteristic soils were composed of poorly graded clayey
sands or sand-clay mixtures. The soil grains were very well com-
pacted, and permeability was very low. Typical SPT values gen-
erally vary with increasing depth below ground 共Fig. 3兲, with
blow counts between 25 and 100 blows/0.3 m. A zone of weath-
ered rock belonging to the Bukit Timah granite formation was
encountered below the old alluvium. The character of the granite
was extremely variable, ranging from completely weathered rock
with SPT values greater than 100 blows/0.3 m to moderately to
slightly fractured rock with rock quality designation 共RQD兲 of 30
to 100%. Point load index tests carried out on granite cores gave
I s(50) values ranging from 5.82 to 14.78 MPa, indicating uniaxial
compressive strengths of between 108 and 359 MPa.
Bored Pile Construction and Testing
A jet grout scheme was required to limit retaining wall deflections
and ground settlements caused by the 12 to 17 m deep excavation
Fig. 2. Standard penetration tests in desiccated clay
JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002 / 161
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168
Fig. 3. Standard penetration tests in old alluvium
for the basement at the Singapore Post Center site. The jet grout-
ing work was carried out within preinstalled diaphragm walls
forming the perimeter basement walls. The jet grout layer was
generally 3 to 4 m thick, with the top of the jet grout layer at
about 13 to 14 m below ground. Along the length of the site
facing the Paya Lebar mass rapid transit station and viaducts, 9 m
thick jet grout blocks were installed to provide enhanced support
共Ho et al. 1998a兲. Jet grouting was targeted at the soft upper
marine clay immediately above the stiff desiccated clay stratum.
The jet grout columns were 1.8 m in diameter and were arranged
in a triangular grid pattern at an equal spacing of 1.55 m 共Fig. 4兲.
This arrangement was to ensure that the circumference of each
column would touch each other at the common intersection of
three columns. The design unconfined compressive strength of the
jet grout was 600 kPa. The triple fluid system was adopted for
installation of the jet grout piles for better ground displacement
control 共Ho 1995兲.
The bored pile foundations were located in the area where the
design jet grout layer was 3 to 4 m thick. After completion of the
jet grout slabs, working bored piles were installed from the exist-
ing ground level using conventional flight augers and boring
buckets through the soil deposits. Rock sockets in the weathered
granite were drilled using a core barrel with tungsten carbide
impregnated button bits. Temporary steel casings were installed to
the top of the jet grout layer without penetrating it. Bentonite
slurry was used as stabilizing mud for excavation below the cas-
ing. Pile diameters ranged from 1.0 to 1.5 m, and installation
depths were between 30.7 and 61 m below the existing ground
level, depending on the thickness of soft clays encountered. Pile
Fig. 4. Layout of jet grout columns
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 5. Boring logs for test piles
cut-off levels were about 14 m below ground. Reinforcement was
provided for the full length of the piles. All piles were cast with
concrete of characteristic cube strength f cu ⫽35 MPa.
Preliminary load tests were conducted on three compression
preliminary test piles 共PTP1, PTP2, and PTP3兲 and one tension
pile 共PTPT1兲, all of which were installed prior to the jet grouting
works. Working load tests were conducted on two compression
working test piles 共BP135 and BP258兲 and two tension piles
共BP441 and BP579兲. For all compression piles selected for test-
ing, debonding of the pile section above the cut-off level was
implemented using a left-in permanent steel casing. In the case of
PTP2, the permanent casing was surrounded by cement-bentonite
grout, filling the annular space between the permanent casing and
the gap left by the withdrawal of the temporary casing. For ten-
sion piles BP441 and BP579, bithuthene tape was used to wrap
the entire length of the permanent casing prior to installation. Fig.
5 depicts the soil profiles based on the boring logs of the piles.
Details of pile installation and thickness of the various soil layers
encountered are summarized in Table 1. The maintained load
method was adopted for testing the piles.
Characteristics of Compression Bored Piles
The plots of applied load 共P兲 versus pilehead displacement 共d兲 for
the compression load tests are shown in Fig. 6. It was observed
that the performance of the preliminary piles 共PTP1, PTP2 and
PTP3兲 varied over a wide range, reflecting their increasing socket
lengths in the dense old alluvium 共Table 1兲. Although the working
piles 共BP135 and BP258兲 were both installed to similar depths,
the stiffer response of BP258 was a result of its larger diameter.
The settlements at the limit of linearity for all piles were very
162 / JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168
similar, ranging from 7.3 to 9.3 mm for the preliminary test piles
and 7.4 to 9.7 mm for the working piles. The settlements achieved
in the preliminary test piles at maximum test load were between
36.5 and 140.6 mm. For the working piles, the maximum settle-
ments were between 15.0 and 16.5 mm. However, only PTP1 and
PTP2 have settlements that reached a sufficiently large magnitude
to mobilize the toe resistance.
In an attempt to normalize the results for comparison between
the various pile diameters, the applied compressive stress at the
pile head 关 ␴ c ⫽ P/(␲D ⬘ 2 /4) 兴 was plotted against the pile head
settlement 共d兲 expressed as a percentage of the actual pile diam-
eter (D ⬘ ); D ⬘ was estimated using the measured pile overbreak
obtained from concreting records. It was assumed that the pile
overbreak was reasonably uniform over the length of the pile.
Hence, D ⬘ ⫽D 冑 (V act /V th ), where V act is the actual volume of
concrete poured and V th is the theoretical volume of concrete
calculated using the nominal pile diameter 共D兲. Fig. 7 shows that
the applied compressive stress at the limit of linearity were 4.57
to 7.04 MPa 共or 13.0 to 20.1% of the characteristic concrete cube
strength, f cu ) for the preliminary test piles, occurring at settle-
ments of 0.44 to 0.66% of the actual pile diameter (D ⬘ ). The
corresponding compressive stress and settlements attained at the
limit of linearity for the working piles ranged from 6.58 to 6.86
MPa 共or 18.8 to 19.6% of f cu ) and 0.45 to 0.66% of D ⬘ , respec-
tively. This indicated that the performance of compression piles
was not significantly different at serviceability conditions,
whether they were installed through a jet grout layer or not. The
design allowable compressive stress at the pile head is usually
limited to less than 25% of the characteristic cube strength of the
pile concrete, and this was generally satisfied in all cases. The
magnitude of pile settlements suggest that pile resistance was
dominated by shaft resistance, because full shaft resistance can be
 Table 1. Pile Installation Details and Soil Layers Encountered
Compression Piles Tension Piles
Test Pile Number PTP1 PTP2 PTP3 BP135 BP258 PTPT1 BP441 BP579
Nominal diameter, D 共m兲 1.35 1.2 1.5 1.35 1.5 1.0 1.2 1.0
Overbreak, 共percent兲 34.57 18.95 18.82 20.62 19.75 80.4 5.94 27.0
Total length, L 共m兲 48.8 44.6 48.1 48.7 48.2 38.1 43.4 39.6
Casing length, L c 共m兲 9.0 12.0 9.0 14.0 15.6 10.0 14.7 18.0
Layer thickness 共m兲
Fill 7 5 5 3 2 2.5 5 5
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Upper marine clay 12 12 12 10 12 18 9 7

Organic clay 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Jet grout layer 0 0 0 6 5 0 5 8
Dessicated clay 3 3 3 3 5 4.5 2 5
Lower marine clay 2.5 0 0 4 0 0 0 0
Peaty clay 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
Fluvial sand 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0
Old alluvium 22.3 24.6 27.1 22.7 24.2 2.5 22.1 14.6
Weathered granite 0 0 0 0 0 6.1 0 0
Ultimate shaft resistance, Q su 共kN兲 23,442 19,382 28,868 33,246 58,931 5,656 7,140 2,300
Actual pile diameter, D ⬘ 共m兲 1.566 1.309 1.635 1.483 1.641 1.343 1.235 1.127
Embedded length below casing, L ⬘ 共m兲 39.8 32.6 39.1 34.7 32.6 28.1 28.7 21.6
Length in jet grout layer, L j 共m兲 0 0 0 5.0 3.4 0 4.3 2.0
Average shear resistance, f su 共ave兲 共kPa兲 119.8 144.7 143.7 205.7 350.6 47.7 64.2 30.1
Note: PTP⫽preliminary test pile; BP⫽working test pile.

expected to be mobilized by a settlement of 0.5% of the pile
diameter for a standard pile. At maximum test load, the applied
stresses were 13.82 to 16.44 MPa 共or 39.5 to 46.9% of f cu ) for
the preliminary test piles and 10.22 to 10.73 MPa 共or 29.2 to
30.7% of f cu ) for the working piles. The corresponding maximum
d/D ⬘ ratios reached were 2.23 to 8.98% for the preliminary test
piles and 0.91 to 1.11% for the working piles. From Fig. 7, it can
be seen that for a given d/D ⬘ ratio, the piles installed through a
jet grout layer can sustain a higher level of applied stress.
To compare the axial stiffness response of the test piles, the
applied compressive stress at the pile head (␴ c ) was plotted
against the average axial strain (d/L), where L⫽overall pile
length 共Fig. 8兲. As can be seen for both preliminary and working
piles, the initial axial stiffness of the piles up to the limit of
linearity varied within a narrow range, between 33.1 to 44.8 GPa.
However, it was obvious that the axial stiffness of the working
piles were greater than that for the preliminary test piles beyond
the linear range, implying that increased resistance was acting on
the piles to restrict the pile settlement.
Experience with conventional bentonite slurry bored piles in-
stalled in the old alluvium had indicated that pile resistance in
compression was dominated by shaft resistance rather than toe
resistance 共Ho and Lim 1994, Ho et al. 2000兲. The contribution of
the toe resistance was small due to formation of soft toes arising
from pile construction under bentonite slurry. Hence, although the
presence of the jet grout layer was expected to increase the shaft
resistance of the piles, the toe conditions would probably remain
unchanged. Experience has indicated that the hyperbolic model
proposed by Chin 共1970兲 can give a reasonable estimate of the
ultimate shaft resistance, if the toe resistance is small and pile
behavior is dominated by shaft resistance 共Fleming 1992兲. To
investigate the significance of the additional shaft resistance con-
tributed by the jet grout layer, an estimate of the ultimate shaft
resistance (Q su ) of the test piles was obtained using this method.
Chin 共1970兲 indicated that the inverse slope of the initial straight
line in a stability plot of settlement per unit applied load (d/ P)

Fig. 6. Applied load versus pile head settlement Fig. 7. Applied compressive stress versus normalized settlement

JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002 / 163

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 8. Applied compressive stress versus average axial strain
versus settlement 共d兲 would give the ultimate shaft resistance of
the pile. The stability plots for the various test piles are depicted
in Fig. 9. The values of Q su obtained from the inverse slope of the
straight line drawn through the initial portion of the data are sum-
marized in Table 1.
The degree of mobilization of Q su can be represented by the
shear mobilization ratio ( P/Q su ). Fig. 10 shows the variation of
the shear mobilization ratio ( P/Q su ) with settlement 共d兲 normal-
ized to the actual pile diameter (D ⬘ ). If P/Q su ⬍1.0, pile perfor-
mance was dominated by shaft resistance, and toe resistance has
not been significantly mobilized. P/Q su ⬎1.0 indicates that the
ultimate shaft resistance (Q su ) has been mobilized, and signifi-
cant contribution of the toe resistance was involved. It was ob-
served from Fig. 10 that for the working piles, which were in-
stalled through a jet grout layer, the applied loads were very small
in relation to the available ultimate shaft resistance of the respec-
tive piles. In the case of the preliminary test piles, which were
constructed in the conventional way, both shaft resistance and toe
resistance were reasonably mobilized. The large settlement ratios
(d/D ⬘ ) registered for PTP1 and PTP2 suggested that toe resis-
tance was appreciably mobilized well before the full shaft resis-
tance was reached in comparison with PTP3. This was a reflection
of the difference in socket lengths in the dense old alluvium stra-
tum. In general, this comparative study indicated that the contri-
bution of the jet grout resistance to load carrying capacity was
very large and could alter the behavior of a pile significantly. Piles
cast against jet grout behave principally as friction piles with
Fig. 9. Stability plot for compression piles
164 / JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168
Fig. 10. Shear mobilization ratio versus normalized settlement
small contribution of load from toe resistance, because the en-
hanced pile stiffness would result in small settlements being
achieved.
Characteristics of Tension Bored Piles
Fig. 11 shows the load versus uplift displacement response of the
tension piles. The settlements at the limits of linearity for the
working piles 共4.3 to 4.5 mm兲 were slightly larger than that for
the preliminary test pile 共3.4 mm兲. There was no significant dif-
ference in behavior between the piles at serviceability conditions.
At maximum test load, the settlements were 193.1 mm for PTPT1
and 10.1 to 14.6 mm for BP441 and BP579, respectively. Ho
et al. 共1998b兲 reported that strain gauges implanted in PTPT1 had
suggested that significant cracking under tensile loading had
taken place at higher levels of load, hence the yielding behavior
indicated in Fig. 11. Evaluation of the data at displacements lower
than about 15 mm would be more meaningful.
Fig. 12 shows that both BP441 and BP579 exhibited much
stiffer response in comparison with PTPT1. At the limit of linear-
ity, the tensile stresses were 1.9 MPa 共or 5.4% of f cu ) for the
preliminary test pile and 2.75 to 3.41 MPa 共or 7.8 to 9.7% of f cu )
for the working piles. The corresponding uplift displacements
achieved were 0.25% of D ⬘ for the preliminary test pile and 0.36
to 0.38% of D ⬘ for the working piles. The maximum uplift dis-
placements for working piles represented only 1.2 and 0.9% of
D ⬘ for BP441 and BP579, respectively. The comparison indicated
that, for a given d/D ⬘ ratio, piles installed through a jet grout
Fig. 11. Applied uplift load versus displacement
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 12. Applied tensile stress versus normalized uplift displacement

Fig. 14. Stability plot for tension piles

layer can carry a higher level of tensile stress. Fig. 13 shows that
the initial axial stiffness for the piles were very similar over the
Frictional Resistance of Jet Grout
linear portion of the curve—21.3 GPa for the preliminary test pile
and 25.4 GPa to 32.9 GPa for the working piles. Beyond the
For comparison between the performance of the working piles
limits of linearity, the working piles continued to exhibit a high
and the preliminary test piles, the average ultimate shear resis-
stiffness response, whereas the axial stiffness of the preliminary
tance over the embedded pile length below the casing was deter-
test pile decreased substantially at an early stage of loading. The
mined. The skin friction resistance along the upper debonded
behavior was especially contrasting between PTPT1 and BP441,
length of the piles enclosed by the left-in casings (L c ) was as-
which have similar diameters and embedded lengths. The load
sumed to be insignificant. On this basis, the average ultimate
test data suggested that the restraint on the pile by the jet grout
shear resistance was given by f su (ave)⫽Q su /(␲D ⬘ L ⬘ ), where
was significant.
D ⬘ ⫽actual average oversized diameter of the pile, and L ⬘ is the
Ordinarily, one single line would be produced in a stability
embedded pile length below the casing bottom. 共i.e., L ⬘ ⫽L
plot in an uplift pile load test, because only the shaft resistance is
⫺L c ). The results are summarized in Table 1. For compression
involved 共Chin 1972; Chin and Vail 1973; O’Rouke and Kulhawy
piles, BP135 was comparable to PTP1, while BP258 was compa-
1985兲. However, if the test has been influenced by ground inter-
rable to PTP3, because they have similar pile diameters, although
action stresses, two lines would be obtained with the second line
the working piles were significantly shorter than the preliminary
having a slope that is smaller than that for the first line 共Ho 2001兲.
test piles. It was observed that the average ultimate shear resis-
The presence of the second line indicates that additional resis-
tance of BP135 共205.6 kPa兲 was 71.8% higher than PTP1 共119.7
tance was involved in the latter stages of the test due to interac-
kPa兲, although the embedded length of BP135 was 12.8% shorter
tion stresses. The inverse slope of the initial straight line in such
that of PTP1. Similarly, the average ultimate shear resistance of
cases would give a more reasonable estimate of the ultimate uplift
BP258 共350.6 kPa兲 was 144% higher than PTP3 共143.7 kPa兲,
resistance of the pile, because the interaction stresses are small at
although the embedded length of BP528 was 16.6% shorter than
the earlier stages of loading. The inverse slope of the second line
that of PTP3. It was apparent that the presence of the jet grout
may grossly overpredict the ultimate uplift resistance. For the
layer had a significant influence on the performance of the com-
present study, the ultimate uplift resistance (Q su ) was estimated
pression piles.
using the initial portion of the data 共Fig. 14兲. The results are
For the tension piles, BP441 was comparable to PTPT1, as
summarized in Table 1. The significance and magnitude of the jet
they have similar diameters and embedded shaft lengths. From
grout resistance is discussed in the section below.
Table 1, the average ultimate shear resistance of BP441 共64.2
kPa兲 was 34.6% higher than PTPT1 共47.7 kPa兲. Hence, it appears
that the influence of the jet grout layer on the tension piles was
less significant. This may be explained by the fact that the jet
grout layer was seated directly on the stiff desiccated clay stratum
共Fig. 5兲. Under compression loading, the jet grout layer can bear
against the desiccated clay at its base during load transfer be-
tween the pile shaft and the jet grout interface. Therefore, large
shear resistance can be mobilized in response to the applied
downward loading with the jet grout layer behaving like a very
hard stratum supported on the stiff desiccated clay. In the case of
tension loading, the jet grout layer was immediately overlain by
soft marine clay, which has very low strength. Upon application
of a tension force to the pile, the surrounding ground was subject
to uplift strains that would result in heaving of the jet grout layer.
Due to the low shear strength of the soft marine clay, limited
downward bearing resistance would be available for reacting
against the imposed uplift stresses, even though the pile shaft-jet
Fig. 13. Applied tensile stress versus average uplift axial strain
grout interface bond may be strong. Therefore, the effect of the jet

JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002 / 165

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 15. Position of bored pile in relation to jet grout columns
grout layer was very much smaller for tension loading in com-
parison with compression loading.
Two extreme possibilities may arise in the location of a pile in
relation to the jet grout columns. In the first case, the pile may be
installed exactly coinciding with a jet grout column, Fig. 15共a兲.
Alternatively, the pile may be located in such a way that it
straddles three jet grout columns, Fig. 15共b兲. The load along the
pile shaft embedded within the jet grout layer (⌬Q su ) would be
resisted initially at the pile shaft-jet grout interface and subse-
quently transferred to the jet grout column interfaces. If the bond
between the pile shaft and jet grout was weaker than the shear
resistance at the jet grout column interfaces as a result of the use
of bentonite slurry, then the resistance at the pile shaft interface
would govern. The ultimate shear resistance at the pile-grout in-
terface would then be computed as f su1 ⫽⌬Q su /␲D ⬘ L j , where
D ⬘ ⫽actual oversized pile diameter, and L j ⫽thickness of the jet
grout layer.
Field trials reported by Ho 共1995兲 on the site had indicated that
the formation of 1.8 m diameter jet grout columns in soft marine
clay may be marginally achievable. The intersection of adjacent
columns may be weak, and potential difficulty in attaining conti-
nuity at the column contacts may be envisaged at a spacing of
1.55 m. The jet grout column diameters may also be limited to
less than 0.9 m in the stiff desiccated clay. The quality of intact jet
grout material obtained within the grout column as well as at the
intersection points were, however, satisfactory with unconfined
compressive strength (q u ) ranging from 1.26 to 15.06 MPa.
Lower bound values lie between 1.26 and 3.84 MPa with a mean
of 2.67 MPa. The upper bound values ranged from 9.08 to 15.06
MPa with a mean of 12.5 MPa. These were all greater than the
design strength of q u ⫽600 kPa. The bond between the pile shaft
and jet grout may be appreciable due to roughening of the jet
grout surface by the boring action. In this condition, the weakest
link would be along the circumferencial perimeter of the jet grout
column共s兲. Assuming that the jet grout columns are of the same
diameter (D j ) and thickness (L j ), the shear resistance at the cir-
cumferential interfaces would theoretically be given by f su2
Table 2. Ultimate Unit Skin Friction at Jet Grout Interfaces
Rowe and Armitage
Horvath and Kenney regular clean sockets
Grout strength Q u 共MPa兲 f su ⫽0.25冑 q u 共kPa兲 f su ⫽0.45冑 q u 共kPa兲
1.26 281
3.84 489
9.08 753
15.06 970
166 / JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168
⫽⌬Qsu /␲D jL j for the single jet grout column arrangement and
f su3 ⫽⌬Q su /2␲D j L j for the triple jet grout column arrangement.
The ultimate unit skin friction ( f su ) at the pile shaft-jet grout
interface and at the jet grout column interfaces was estimated
using the methods of Horvath and Kenney 共1979兲, Rowe and
Armitage 共1987兲, and Kulhawy and Phoon 共1993兲 for rock socket
design. It was assumed that the jet grout material would behave as
a soft rock and that failure would occur in the grout material.
Horvath and Kenney 共1979兲 recommend f su ⫽0.25冑 q u , where q u
is the unconfined compressive strength of the rock. Rowe and
Armitage 共1987兲 suggest f su ⫽0.45冑 q u for regular clean sockets
and f su ⫽0.6冑 q u for clean rough sockets. Kulhawy and Phoon
共1993兲 proposed a generalized relationship of the form f su /p a
⫽2 冑 (q u /2p a ) for q u /2p a ⬎2, where p a ⫽atmospheric pressure.
The various values of f su for the range of jet grout strengths
obtained in the field trial are summarized in Table 2. It can be
seen that the method of Horvath and Kenney 共1979兲 tended to be
conservative compared to the other methods. Radhakrishnan and
Leung 共1989兲 and Littlechild et al. 共2000兲 had observed that pre-
dictions given by Horvath and Kenney 共1979兲 were too low for
hard rocks; however, data reported by Leung 共1996兲 suggested
that the results were more representative for weaker rocks with
q u ⬍5 MPa. The results of Kulhawy and Phoon 共1993兲 were very
similar to those of Rowe and Armitage 共1987兲 for regular clean
sockets. The highest f su values were predicted by Rowe and
Armitage 共1987兲 for rough clean sockets.
In comparing BP135 with PTP1, it was observed that there
was a difference of 9,804 kN in the ultimate shaft resistance be-
tween the two piles 共Table 1兲. The length of piles embedded in
old alluvium was in the order of 22 m. The thickness of desic-
cated clay encountered was also the same 共3 m兲 in both cases. The
thickness of lower marine clay for BP135 was 1.5 m more than
that for PTP1. Additionally, BP135 was embedded in 5 m of jet
grout below the debonded zone. Assuming that the difference in
the fill and soft clays above the jet grout level were not signifi-
cant, the increased resistance in BP135 can be attributed mainly
to the additional thickness of lower marine clay and the jet grout
layer. A field vane shear test carried out in the lower marine clay
gave a peak value of 26 kPa. Applying a correction factor ␮
⫽0.81 for an average plasticity index of 48.5% for the lower
marine clay as recommended by Bjerrum 共1972兲 gave a value of
21.06 kPa for the undrained shear strength of the material. The
contribution of the 1.5 m-thick lower marine clay was, therefore,
assessed to be 147.2 kN. Hence, if the outstanding difference of
9656.8 kN 共i.e., ⌬Q su ) could be accounted for by the 5 m-jet
grout layer, the minimum required bond strength ( f su1 ) at the pile
shaft-jet grout interface would be 414.5 kPa 共i.e., f su1
⫽⌬Q su /␲D ⬘ L j ). The corresponding average frictional resistance
at the jet grout column interfaces were estimated to be f su2
⫽341.5 kPa and f su3 ⫽170.8 kPa, respectively. These values
were in the lower range of f su values indicated in Table 2. This
Rowe and Armitage Kulhawy and Phoon
rough clean sockets f su /p a ⫽2 冑 (q u /2p a )
f su ⫽0.6冑 q u 共kPa兲 for q u /2p a ⬎2 共kPa兲
505 674 502
882 1,176 876
1,356 1,808 1,347
1,746 2,328 1,735
 implied that the strength of the jet grout encountered was rela-
tively weak and on the low side. The results were consistent with
the observations of Leung 共1996兲 for weak rocks with q u
⬍5 MPa.
For BP258 and PTP3, the difference in the shaft resistance was
30,063 kN. The socket length of PTP3 in old alluvium was 2.9 m
longer than BP258; however, the thickness of desiccated clay was
2 m greater for BP258. The SPT blow count for the old alluvium
was 26 blows/0.3 m over the region of the additional socket
length. The ratio of unit skin friction to SPT N value was assumed
to be f su /N⫽3.5, based on data from previous load tests on bored
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
piles similarly constructed in old alluvium 共Ho et al. 2000兲.
Therefore, the additional contribution of the 2.9 m-thick old allu-
vium was estimated to be 1355.6 kN. The average SPT blow
count in the desiccated clay was 9 blows/0.3 m. Based on the data
obtained by Ho and Lim 共1994兲, f su /N⫽2.0 was deemed to be
appropriate for desiccated clay of equivalent strength. The shear
resistance contributed by the 2 m of desiccated clay was deter-
mined to be 185.6 kN. The jet grout layer below the debonding
casing level was 3.4 m thick. Again, assuming that the upper
levels of fill and soft clays were superficial, it was estimated that
the contribution of the 3.4 m-thick jet grout layer (⌬Q su ) was
28,893 kN. The corresponding bond strength ( f su1 ) at the pile
shaft-jet grout interface would be 1,648.4 kPa 共i.e., f su1
⫽⌬Q su /␲D ⬘ L i ). The corresponding shear resistance at the jet
grout column interfaces was estimated to be f su2 ⫽15,02.8 kPa
and f su3 ⫽751.4 kPa, respectively. These values were consistent
with the range of f su given by Rowe and Armitage 共1987兲 for
regular clean sockets, as well as that given by Kulhawy and
Phoon 共1993兲.
For tension piles, comparison was made between PTPT1 and
BP441, which have approximately the same diameters and em-
bedded pile lengths. There was a difference of 1,484 kN between
the piles. Table 1 indicates that the desiccated clay layer encoun-
tered in PTPT1 was 4.5 m thick, whereas that in BP441 was only
2 m thick. The difference in the contribution of the desiccated
clay was estimated to be 202.1 kN, assuming an SPT blow count
of 9 blows/0.3 m 共Fig. 2兲 for the desiccated clay and a friction
ratio f su /N⫽2 as above. The embedment length of the piles in
old alluvium was 2.5 m for PTPT1 and 22.1 m for BP441. The
average SPT blow count for the thickness of old alluvium encoun-
tered was estimated to be 55 blows/0.3 m for PTPT1 and 60
blows/0.3 m for BP441 共Fig. 3兲. Ho and Lim 共1994兲 had reported
that a f su /N ratio of 0.76 was obtained in dense old alluvium for
PTPT1. Using this f su /N ratio, the difference in the frictional
resistance in the old alluvium was, therefore, assessed to be 3,469
kN. The main contribution to the shaft resistance in PTPT1 was a
6.1 m socket length in weathered granite with RQD of 30 to 90%.
Ho & Lim 共1994兲 indicated that the maximum measured unit skin
friction was only 136.8 kPa in the granite for PTPT1. The low
frictional value could be explained by the fact that the rock socket
was drilled under bentonite slurry using a core barrel with tung-
sten carbide impregnated button bits, which would have resulted
in a smoother borehole wall compared with a chiseled surface.
Furthermore, it was possible that bentonite was trapped in the
asperities in the rock face, so as to give a lower frictional resis-
tance at the interface. Using this lower bound resistance value, the
frictional resistance in the rock socket was estimated to be
3,520.8 kN. Assuming that all other soft clays and loose sands
were superficial, the outstanding difference of 1,737.9 kN can be
attributed to the 4.3 m-thick jet grout in BP441. The unit skin
resistance at the pile shaft-jet grout interface was assessed to be
f su1 ⫽104.2 kPa. The corresponding values for the single and
JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002 / 167
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168
triple jet grout column interfaces were f su2 ⫽71.5 kPa and f su3
⫽35.7 kPa. These values were extremely low and confirmed the
observation that the mobilization of shear in the jet grout layer
was ineffective due to the presence of the overlying soft marine
clay.
Practical Implications
The above analyses have shown that a jet grout layer can have a
significant influence on the performance of piles installed through
it. The available data suggested that pile shaft capacity and axial
stiffness would be increased. The settlement performance of both
compression and tension piles were not significantly different at
serviceability conditions, whether they were installed through a
jet grout layer or not. Mobilization of the jet grout resistance was
more effective under compression loading compared with uplift
loading.
Because jet grout struts or slabs are usually formed in weak
soils at some depth below the ground level, normally below the
base slab, the jet grout will be permanently connected to the piles.
A continuous jet grout layer would act like an equivalent struc-
tural slab. As a result, the foundations would behave like a piled
raft system during subsequent load application with greater load
sharing between piles. For both compression and uplift loading,
the significantly improved axial stiffness was likely to cause a
reduction in pile settlements, and differential settlements would
be minimized, although the significance may be less for tension
piles. The additional contribution of the jet grout resistance to the
pile shaft capacity would improve the overall factor of safety for
the foundation system for both compression and tension loading.
Deep excavations in soft clays can result in a condition of
basal instability, in which wall deflections and ground settlements
are large. A jet grout slab bonded to a mass of tension piles can
provide effective restraint to basal heave caused by stress relief at
the bottom of a temporary excavation. An increase in the factor of
safety against basal instability will result in a large reduction of
lateral earth pressures on the retaining walls; therefore, wall de-
flections and ground settlements will be decreased.
Based on the foregoing discussion, there appears to be no ad-
verse effect on the performance of the permanent foundation sys-
tem as a result of the presence of the jet grout layer. However, as
shown in earlier sections, the interaction between the jet grout and
a pile during a load test can result in overprediction of the pile
capacity and axial stiffness, both for compression and tension
loading. The effect would be greatest for load tests where the test
load is applied against a reaction pile system. There is currently
no clear solution to this problem. The significance of the interac-
tion has to be evaluated carefully so that a correct interpretation
of the true pile capacity and axial stiffness can be made.
Conclusion
A detailed analysis has been carried out on the results of load tests
conducted on compression and tension piles to study the behavior
of bored piles installed through a jet grout layer. It has been
shown that the presence of the jet grout can have a significant
influence on pile performance. In general, the data available sug-
gested that pile shaft capacity and axial stiffness would be in-
creased. The resistance contributed by the jet grout was dependent
on its thickness and strength, how well the pile shafts bonded to
the jet grout, as well as the effectiveness of the connection be-
 tween neighboring jet grout columns. The mobilization of shear
resistance in the jet grout was more effective under compression
loading compared with uplift loading.
It is likely that there will be no adverse effect on the perma-
nent foundation system as a result of the presence of the jet grout
layer. However, interaction between the jet grout and a pile during
a load test can result in overprediction of pile capacity and axial
stiffness, both for compression and tension loading. The signifi-
cance of the interaction has to be carefully evaluated so that a
correct interpretation of the true pile capacity and axial stiffness
can be made.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/19/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
References
Berry, G. L., Shirlaw, J. N., Hayata, K., and Tan, S. H. 共1987兲. ‘‘A review
of grouting techniques utilized for bored tunnelling with emphasis on
the jet grouting method.’’ Proc., Singapore Mass Rapid Transit Conf.,
MRTC, Singapore, 207–214.
Bjerrum, L. 共1972兲. ‘‘Embankments on soft ground.’’ Proc., Spec. Conf.
on Performance of Earth and Earth-Supported Structures, Vol. 2,
ASCE, New York, 1–54.
Chin, F. K. 共1970兲. ‘‘Estimation of the ultimate load of pile tests not
carried to failure.’’ Proc., 2nd Southeast Asian Conf. on Soil Engineer-
ing, SEAGS, Bangkok, 81–90.
Chin, F. K. 共1972兲. ‘‘The inverse slope as a prediction of ultimate bearing
capacity of piles.’’ Proc., 3rd Southeast Asian Conf. on Soil Engineer-
ing, SEAGS, Bangkok, 83–91.
Chin, F. K., and Vail, A. J. 共1973兲. ‘‘Behavior of piles in alluvium.’’ Proc.,
8th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2,
Part 1, ISSMPE, Cambridge, 47–52.
Fleming, W. G. K. 共1992兲. Proc., Int. Conf. on Piling: European Practice
and Worldwide Trends, Thomas Telford, London, 302–303.
Ho, C. E. 共1995兲. ‘‘An instrumented jet grouting trial in soft marine clay.’’
Verification of Geotechnical Grouting, Geotechnical Special Publica-
tion No. 57, M. J. Byle and R. H. Borden, eds., ASCE, Reston, Va.,
101–115.
Ho, C. E. 共1998兲. ‘‘A jet grout stabilized excavation beneath an existing
building.’’ Grouts and Grouting, Geotechnical Special Publication No.
80, L. Johnson and D. Berry, eds., ASCE, Reston, Va., 1–15.
Ho, C. E. 共2001兲. ‘‘Ground interaction effects in uplift pile load tests.’’
Proc., 54th Canadian Geotechnical Conf., CGS, Ottawa, 714 –721.
Ho, C. E., and Lim, C. H. 共1994兲. ‘‘Bearing capacity and settlement of
slurry bored piles in Singapore old alluvium.’’ Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on
Deep Foundation Practice, CI Premier, Singapore, 125–132.
Ho, C. E., Tan, C. G., and Lim, C. H. 共1998a兲. ‘‘Fan shaped jet grout strut
for improved excavation support.’’ Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground
Improvement Techniques, CI Premier, Singapore, 605– 612.
168 / JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES / NOVEMBER 2002
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2002, 16(4): 160-168
Ho, C. E., Lim, C. H., and Tan, C. G. 共1998b兲. ‘‘Large diameter slurry
bored piles in tension.’’ Proc., 3rd Int. Geot. Sem. on Deep Founda-
tions on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, Belgium, W. F. Van Impe and
W. Haegeman, eds., Balkema, The Netherlands, 129–136.
Ho, C. E., Tan, C. G., and Lim, C. H. 共2000兲. ‘‘Compression behavior of
instrumented bored pile installed through deep soft clay.’’ Proc., 53rd
Canadian Geotechnical Conf., CGS, Ottawa, 917–924.
Horvath, R. G., and Kenney, T. C. 共1979兲. ‘‘Shaft resistance of rock-
socketed drilled piers.’’ Proc., Symp. on Deep Foundations, ASCE,
New York, 182–214.
Jayatharan, K., and Soh, K. K. 共1997兲. ‘‘Excessive movement of retaining
structures in Singapore soft marine clay.’’ Proc., Int. Conf. on Foun-
dation Failure, IStructE, Singapore, 217–228.
Kulhawy, F. H., and Phoon, K. K. 共1993兲. ‘‘Drilled shaft side resistance in
clay soil to rock.’’ Design and Performance of Deep Foundations:
Piles and Piers in Soil and Soft Rock, Geotechnical Special Publica-
tion No. 38, ASCE, New York, 172–183.
Lee, Y., Chew, S. H., Lee, F. H., Yong, K. Y., and Yogarajah, I. 共1997兲.
‘‘Strength of jet grouted Singapore marine clay.’’ Proc., Int. Conf. on
Ground Improvement Techniques, CI Premier, Singapore, 297–304.
Leung, C. F. 共1996兲. ‘‘Case studies of rock-socketed piles.’’ Geotechnical
Engineering J., 27共1兲, 51– 67.
Liang, K. M., Ganeshan, V., and Oei, T. B. R. 共1993兲. ‘‘Soil improvement
for reconstruction of an open channel in Singapore marine clay.’’
Proc., 11th Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conf., SEAGS, Bangkok,
381–386.
Littlechild, B., Hill. S. J., Plumbridge, G. D., and Lee, S. C. 共2000兲.
‘‘Load capacity of foundations on rock.’’ New Technological and De-
sign Developments in Deep Foundations. Geotechnical Special Pub-
lication No. 100, N. Dennis, R. Castelli, and M. O’Neil, eds., ASCE,
Reston, Va., 140–157.
O’Rouke T. D., and Kulhawy F. H. 共1985兲. ‘‘Observations on load tests
for drilled shafts.’’ Proc., Drilled Piers and Caissons II, Denver,
Clyde N. Baker, ed., ASCE, New York, 113–128.
Radhakrishnan, R., and Leung, C. F. 共1989兲. ‘‘Load transfer behavior of
rock-socketed piles.’’ J. Geotech. Eng., 115共6兲, 755–768.
Rowe, R. K., and Armitage, H. H. 共1987兲. ‘‘A design method for drilled
piers in soft rock.’’ Can. Geotech. J., 24, 126 –142.
Sugawara, S., and Shigenawa, S. 共1996兲. ‘‘Large-scale jet grouting for
pre-strutting in soft clay.’’ Proc., Int. Conf. on Grouting and Deep
Mixing, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 353–356.
Tornaghi, R., and Cippo, A. P. 共1985兲. ‘‘Soil improvement by jet grouting
for the solution of tunnelling problems.’’ Proc., 4th Int. Symp. on
Mining and Metallurgy: Tunnelling, IMM, London, 265–276.
Wang, J. G., Oh, B., Lim, S. W., and Kumar, G. S. 共1998兲. ‘‘Studies on
soil disturbance caused by grouting in treating marine clay.’’ Proc.,
2nd Int. Conf. on Ground Improvement Techniques, CI Premier, Sin-
gapore, 251–258.