Forensic Engineering: Pathology of the Built Environment

Editors – Shen-en Chen et. al.

ASCE Special Publications 2009
available on-line: http://books.com.my/

Settlement Problems in Peat Due to Their High Compressibility and Possible

Solution Using Cement Columns

Sina Kazemian, Afshin Asadi, Bujang B. K. Huat, Arun Prasad and Irman B. A. Rahim

Civil Engineering Department, University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor,

Malaysia, PH (601) 7393-9404; FAX (603) 5636-8528; email:
sina.kazemian@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Tropical peat soils are considered as extremely soft, wet, unconsolidated

deposits. These kinds of soils are geotechnically problematic due to their high
compressibility or high settlement and low shear strength. Cement columns may be
used to improve the settlement problem of these soils. This paper describes the results
of the effects of cement columns on the compressibility of fibrous tropical peat soils.
Coefficient of consolidation, compression index, coefficient of secondary
compression, and coefficient of volume compressibility were obtained by a Rowe cell
test for both, untreated peat soil and peat soil treated with cement column. The results
indicate that installing cement columns and increasing cement ratio could reduce the
compressibility of peat soils and decrease its settlement dramatically.

INTRODUCTION

All soils with organic content of greater than 20% are known as organic soil.
Peat soil is an organic soil with organic content of more than 75% (Huat, 2004). Peat
soils have been classified to 10 degrees of humification (H1-H10) by Von post (1922)
based on degree of humification, botanical composition, water content and content of
fine and coarse fibers. In modern classification, they have been narrowed to 3 classes:
(i) Fibric or fibrous (least decomposed), (ii) Hemic or semi-fibrous, and (iii) Sapric or
amorphous (most decomposed) (Magnan, 1980).

Peat soils are found throughout the world and constitute 5 to 8% of the land surface of
the earth. The most extensive areas are located in the northern hemisphere (Mesri and
Ajlouni, 2007). In recent years, they are increasingly being utilized for the
construction purpose since the coverage of the soil is quite extensive.

Fibrous peat has high organic and fiber content with low degree of humification. The
behavior of fibrous peat is different from mineral soil because of different phase
properties and microstructure (Edil, 2003). Landva and Pheeney (1980) described

255
fibrous peat particles as consisting of fragments of long stems, thin leaves, rootlets,
cell walls and fibers, often very large.

a b

Figure 1. Scanning electron microphotograph of peat (a) vertical section and (b)
horizontal section (after Mesri and Ajlouni, 2007)

Since fibrous peat has hollow perforated cellular structures (Fig. 1) and a
network of fibrous elements in vertical and horizontal sections, it is most likely to
have very low shear strength, high compressibility and the long-term consolidation of
peat results in a large deformation. Peat lands have presented difficult subsurface
conditions for the construction of roads, dikes, housing developments, storage
facilities, industrial parks, and so on, including high initial costs and/or continued
maintenance operation for years (Colley, 1950; Hanrahan and Rogers, 1981). Peat
soils are geotechnically problematic soils as the compression and settlement processes
may take a considerably longer time and it increases when the ground water level
decreases. Besides settlement, stability problems during construction such as
localized bearing failures and slip failures need to be considered (Duraisamy et al,
2009). Figure 2 shows a badly damaged house constructed on peat soil due to
differential settlements.

Figure 2. A badly damaged house due to differential settlement in peat soil in

Sibu, Malaysia (after Huat, 2004).

Compressibility parameters of peat. High organic maters are indicator of high

compressibility and swell characteristics of the soils (Mesri and Ajlouni, 2007;
Kazemian et al., 2009). Tropical peat soils undergo large settlements in comparison to

256
clays when subjected to loading. The compression behavior of fibrous peat varies
from the compression behavior of other types of soils in two ways: first, the
compression of peat is much larger than of other soils and second, the creep
settlement plays a more significant role in determining the total settlement of peat.
The primary consolidation of the fibrous peat is very rapid, a large secondary
compression and even tertiary compression is also observed. Secondary compression
is generally found as the significant part of the total compression because the time
rate is much slower than the primary consolidation (Yulindasari, 2006).

Larson (2003) emphasized that the deep mixing method is today accepted world-wide
as a ground improvement technology in order to improve the permeability, strength
and compressibility properties of the soil. Binders, such as lime or cement are mixed
with the soil by rotating mixing tools. The stabilized soil, often produced column
shapes, has higher strength, lower compressibility, and lower permeability than the
original soil. Experience has been positive and the method has great development
potential. The method is undergoing rapid development, particularly with regard to its
applicability, cost effectiveness and export potential. Cement is one of the most
commonly used binders for deep mixing method. The reactions that provide effective
soil stabilization are (i) the reaction of cement with the water in the soil, (ii)
pozzolanic reactions between Ca(OH)2 from burnt lime or cement and pozzolanic
minerals in the soil, and (iii) ion exchange between calcium ions from lime or cement
and ions in the clay (Janz and Johansson, 2002).

This study is focused on the compressibility characteristics of fibrous peat from

consolidation tests. The main compre-ssibility parameters examined to assess the
effect of the cement column on consolidation and settlements of fibrous peat are:
coefficient of consolidation (cv), compression index (cc), coefficient of secondary
compression (cα) and coefficient of volume compressibility (mv).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND LABORATORY WORK

As mentioned earlier that settlement is affected by the compressibility

parameters in peat soils, this paper is mainly concerned with fibrous peat and presents
an interpretation of the compressibility parameters of fibrous peat soil before and
after installation of cement column with different cement-soil ratio by using the
results from Rowe cell consolidation test on undisturbed samples for investigating the
effects of cement column on settlement of the soil.

Sample preparation. Undisturbed samples of peat soil were collected from Jawa
Klang, Selangor, Malaysia using a sampling tube, sealed to prevent the loss or gain of
moisture and transported to UPM laboratory for testing taking all care not to disturb
the samples. Samples of size 150 mm diameter and 230 mm high were taken out from
the sampling tube using auger, top and bottom faces trimmed and the specimens
prepared were transferred to Row Cell for testing, following BS 1377-1. As fibrous
soil such as peat is easily disturbed, the trimming process was done carefully and
quickly to minimize any change in water content of the soil sample. All the tests
reported here were performed in the laboratory at a constant temperature at 20±2°C.

257
The height and diameter of each specimen was 50 and 150 mm respectively, as
shown in Figure 3(a).

a b

Figure 3. (a) A cylindrical specimen from the original soil sample after trimming
(b) Method used to set up cement column in the specimen.

In order to investigate the compressibility parameters of peat reinforced with

cement column, a smooth PVC tube of outer diameter 45 mm was used to remove a
core of peat soil from the center of the specimen. This annular opening was
subsequently filled by a cement-peat column. The dose of cement was at the rate of
250 kg/m3. The cement column was prepared by adding cement equal to 10, 20, 30
and 50% of the weight of the cement dose to the peat extracted from the sample. The
proportions of cement (as calculated above) and added to extracted peat with different
ratio are presented in Table 1. The diameter of cement column was 45 mm and the
area ratio of column to sample was 0.09 (Figure 3(b)).

Table 1. Mix Proportions of Cement-Peat Column.

Samples Mix Proportion
Control sample Untreated peat soil
Sample I Peat soil 90% & cement 10%
Sample II Peat soil 80% & cement 20%
Sample III Peat soil 70% & cement 30%
Sample IV Peat soil 50% & cement 50%

The samples were cured for 28 days in a soaking basin with natural peat water
(Figure 4) collected from peat site, before performing the compressibility test.

Peat water

Figure 4. Curing peat cement column specimen (Kazemian et al. 2008)

Testing programs. The physical properties of the natural peat soil determined were
organic content, water content, liquid limit and specific gravity in accordance with BS

258
1377-3(4) (1990), BS 1377-2(3) (1990), BS 1377-2(4) (1990) and BS 1377-2(8)
(1990) respectively. The fiber content of the peat samples was determined based on
test procedures following ASTM D 1997-91 and used to find the degree of humifi-
cation as per Von Post scale. The samples were then tested in a Rowe cell to
overcome most of the disadvantages of the conventional oedometer apparatus when
performing consolidation tests on soils with low permeability, including non- uniform
deposits. The two most important features of a Row cell is the ability to control
drainage and to measure pore water pressure during the course of consolidation tests
(Duraisamy et al., 2009).

The test set up comprised of a Rowe cell apparatus, gradually diverging system
(GDS), pressure and volume controllers and GDS laboratory software. The
consolidation pressure (σ) of 50, 100, 200 and 300 kPa was applied to the sample
surface either via a flexible diaphragm, using a hydraulic loading system, to give a
uniformly distributed pressure (free strain) or via a rigid plate to give uniform
settlement (equal strain). The bottom drain is provided with a tapping to a pressure
transducer. The consolidation test was performed on peat, a soil with low
permeability, based on BS 1377-6 (1990) and the compressibility parameters of the
specimen were calculated without having to remove it from its sampling tube. The
specimens therefore didn’t suffer disturbance due to preparation and the moisture
content of the soils at the respective test horizons could be reported. The
compressibility parameters of peat soil and soil with cement column were evaluated
to assess the effect of the cement column with different cement ratio. The parameters
evaluated are: (i) cv, (ii) cc, (iii) cα, and (iv) mv.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF UNTREATED (NATURAL) PEAT

Some preliminary tests, such as moisture content, specific gravity, degree of

humification, organic content, fiber content, pH, and bulk density were performed on
fibrous peat soil and the results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Physical Characteristics of Untreated Peat Soil.

Parameters Results
Moisture content (%) 524
Liquid limit (%) 169.6
Specific gravity 1.24
Degree of humification (%) H4
Organic content (%) 89.35
Fiber content (%) 94
Bulk density (kN/m3) 10.01
pH 4.8

The results present the characteristics and indications of the concentration at which all
of the organic compound are usually found in soils. It was observed that the results

259
agree well with the findings of Ajlouni (2000), Huat (2004), Alwi (2007), Kazemian
et al. (2009), and Kalantari and Huat (2009).

Compression index (cc). The cc is defined by the slope of the final part of the void
ratio versus logarithmic of consolidation pressure (log σ) curve. Based on Figure 5,
the cc values calculated from Rowe cell consolidation test results for the natural fibric
peat, sample I, II, III and IV were 1.79, 1.70, 1.46, 1.32, and 1.08 respectively, for σ
of 50 kPa. It implies that by increasing the cement ratio the cc is decreasing gradually.

The results do not follow closely the results reported by other researchers and the
reason may be that the reinforced peat specimens were cured in peat water and not
natural water as used by others.

2
1.8
Compresion Index, c c

1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Untreated Soil 10% cement 20% Cement 30% Cement 50% Cement

Figure 5. cc versus cement ratio.

Coefficient of consolidation (cv). There is a significant decrease in the cv of the

undisturbed samples with an increase in σ above the apparent pre-consolidation
pressure (σc) (Huat, 2004). Farrell et al., (1994) reported that this decrease is more
marked in the samples, which had higher organic contents.
Coefficient of consolidation,

5 50kPa
c v (m²/year)

4
100kPa
3
200kPa
2

1 300kPa

0
Untreated Sample I Sample II Sample III Sample IV
Soil

Figure 6. cv versus σ with different cement ratio.

260
For fibrous peat, the results (Figure 6) indicate that the cv decreases upon increasing
the σ and cement ratio. The cv decreased from 4.98 m2/year (50 kPa, no cement) to
about 4.2 m2/year (50 kPa, 50% cement). Also, at 300 kPa, it decreased from 2.79
m2/year (no cement) to 2.07 m2/year (50% cement) and the reduction was about 60%
by increasing σ from 50 to 300 kPa and cement ratio to 50%.

Coefficient of secondary compression (cα). The secondary compression and

associated settlement are often more significant for peat deposits than other
geotechnical materials for the following three reasons: (i) Tropical peat soils deposits
display the highest values of cc, (ii) These soils deposits have the highest values of
ratio of compressibility (cα /cc) and (iii) Primary consolidation of fibrous peat layers
in the field is completed commonly within a few weeks or months (Mesri and
Ajlouni, 2007). Primary consolidation and secondary compressions can take place
simultaneously. However, it is assumed that the secondary compression is negligible
during primary consolidation, and is identified after primary consolidation is
completed (Hobbs, 1986; Kogure et al., 1986).

0.12
Ratio of compressibility,

0.1
50kPa
0.08
100kPa
cα /c c

0.06
200kPa
0.04
0.02 300kPa

0
Untreated Sample I Sample II Sample III Sample IV
Soil

Figure 7. (cα /cc ) versus σ with different cement ratio.

The cα is determined from the slope of the e-log (t) curves during the period of 4
to 24 hours after load increment, assuming that the secondary compression would
have started 4 hours after loading. The soil with cα/cc values of more than 0.064 is
classified as soil with extremely high secondary compressibility (Mesri, 1973). The
secondary compression behavior of soils is completely explained and predicted by the
cα/cc law of compressibility (Mesri and Godlewski, 1979; Mesri et al., 1997).

Figure 7 shows the measured cα/cc of untreated fibrous peat and cement column
reinforced fibrous peat. cα/cc of untreated peat increased with increasing the σ
subsequently from 0.067 to 0.103 upon increase in σ from 50 to 300 kPa respectively.
On the other hand, the cα/cc is influenced by the addition of cement and it declined
from 0.067 to 0.037 for untreated and peat treated with 50% cement respectively at a
consolidation pressure of 50 kPa. Further, it decreased from 0.103 to 0.076 for
untreated and peat treated with 50% cement respectively at a consolidation pressure
of 300 kPa (Figure 7).

261
Coefficient of volume compressibility (mv). This parameter is very useful in
estimating the primary consolidation settlement. The e-σ' curve is used to obtain
coefficient of axial compressibility (av) and subsequently the mv, while the e-log σ is
used to obtain cc and σc.

It is observed that from mv versus σ plot (Figure 8) that mv gradually decreases upon
increase in the σ and cement ratio. Because of the hardened peat-cement matrix
formed by cement particles bonding with adjacent soil particles in the presence of
water in its pores, the compressibility characteristics of soils is improved. It was
observed that mv declined from 1.42x10-3 for untreated peat soil to 0.96x10-3 for peat
soil added with 50% cement at a σ of 50 kPa.

1.6
Coefficient ofvolume compressibility, m v

1.4
50kPa
1.2
1 100kPa
(m /MN)

0.8
200kPa
0.6
2

0.4 300kPa
0.2
0
Untreated Soil Sample I Sample II Sample III Sample IV

Figure 8. mv versus σ with different cement ratio.

It is apparent from the mv versus σ plot that the minimum consolidation pressure at 50
kPa was higher than the pre-consolidation pressure for the peat soil. Inversely, if
consolidation pressure is lower than the pre-consolidation pressure, the soil sample
would swell less and lower value would have been obtained for the mv under
consolidation pressure of 50 kPa.

As the sample consists predominantly of organic matter (table 2), it is obvious that
cement reacted with only water in the soil during the process of stabilization. Mixing
cement with water initiates a chemical process (hydration) which forms a hard cement
paste. Janz and Johansson, (2002) stated when a cement particle undergoes hydration
an extremely fine-pored cement gel forms around the particles. The reaction products
constituting the cement gel include CSH gel, ettringite, and mono sulfate. Since the
cement gel is porous and contains chemically combined water (water of
crystallization), its volume will be greater than that of cement particle prior to
reaction. Thus as the reaction between the cement and the water proceeds, the voids
between the cement particles will gradually be filled with cement gel. At the same
time the cement sets and gains strength and compressibility parameters of fibrous peat
soil like cv, cc, cα, and mv improved resulting in less compressibility and settlement.

CONCLUSIONS

262
This study was carried out to investigate the influence of the various quantities of
cement on compressibility parameters or settlement of tropical peat soil by installing
a cement-peat column in undisturbed peat soil.

The following conclusions are drawn based on this study:

1. The cc values from Rowe cell consolidation test for the natural fibric peat, sample
I, II, III and IV is 1.79, 1.70, 1.46, 1.32 and 1.08 respectively, for σ of 50 kPa. It
shows that by increasing the cement ratio, the cc decreased by 5 to 60%.

2. The cv of untreated peat soil is decreasing upon increase in consolidation pressure

and cement ratio.

3. The cα/cc increased with increase in consolidation pressure but decreased, along
with mv, with the increase in the cement content, showing that the settlement will
decrease with an increase in cement content.

4. It is apparent that the cement gel formed due to the reaction of cement with water
filled up the voids of the peat soil. At the same time, the hardened soil-cement
matrix formed due to the bonding of cement with the adjacent soil particles
improved the compressibility parameters (cα/cc, cc, cv, and mv) resulting in a
decreased settlement in fibrous peat.

REFERENCES
Ajlouni, M. A. (2000). “Geotechnical Properties of Peat and Related Engineering
Problems." PhD Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Alwi, A. (2007). “Ground Improvement on Malaysian Peat Soils Using Stabilized
Peat-Column Techniques.” PhD. Thesis, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
A.S.T.M. (1992). “American Society for Testing and Materials Annual.” Philadelphia,
PA., U. S. A.
B.S. 1377 (1990). “Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes.” British Standard Institution
(BSI.), London, U. K.
Colley, B. E. (1950). “Construction of highways over peat and muck areas.”
American highways, Washington, D.C., 29(1): 3–6.
Deboucha, S., Hashim, R., and Alwi, A. (2008). “Engineering Properties of Stabilized
Tropical Peat Soils,” The Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
(EJGE). Vol. 13, Bund. E.
Duraisamy, Y., Huat, B.B.K., and Muniandy R. (2009). “Compressibility Behavior of
Fibrous Peat Reinforced with Cement Columns” Geotechnical and Geological
Engineering Journal, DOI: 10.1007/s10706-009-9262-3.
Edil, T. B. (2003). “Recent Advanced in Geotechnical Characterization and Construc-
tion over Peat and Organic Soils.” In Proceeding of 2nd Int. Conf. on Advances
in Soft Soil Eng. and Tech., ed. Huat et al., Putra jaya, Malaysia, 3-25.
Edil, T. B. and Wang, X. (2000). “Shear Strength and K0 of Peats and Organic Soils.”
Geotechnics of high water content materials, ASTM STP 1374, West
Conshoho-cken, Pa., 209–225.

263
Hanrahan, E. T. and Rogers, M. G. (1981). “Road on peat: Observations and design.”
J. Geotech. Eng. Div., 107(10): 1403–1415.
Hobbs, N. B. (1986). “Mire Morphology and the Properties and Behavior of Some
British and Foreign Peats.” Q. I Eng. Geol., London, 19(1): 7-80.
Huat, B.B.K. (2004). “Organic and Peat soil Engineering.” University Putra
Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia.
Janz, M. and Johansson S. (2002). “The Function of Different Binding Agents in
Deep Stabilization,” Report 9, Swedish Deep Stabilization Research Center,
Linköping, Sweden.
Kalantari, B. and Huat, K. (2009). “Precast Stabilized Peat Columns to Reinforce
Peat Soil Deposits.” The Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
(EJGE), Vol. 14, Bund. B.
Kazemian, S., Asadi, A. and Huat, B.B.K. (2009). “Laboratory Study on
Geotechnical Characterization of Tropical Organic Soils and Peat.”
International Journal of Geotechnics and Environment. January, issue 1.
Kazemian, S., Huat B. B. K., Jit Ming Yeong, and Vahed, G. (2008). "Laboratory
Investigations on Shear Strength of Organic Soils and Peat Reinforced with
Cement Columns," Proc. of Int. Graduate Con. on Eng. and Sci. (IGCES) UTM,
Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Kogure, K., Yomuguchi, H., Ohira, Y. and Ishioroshi, H. (1986). “Physical and
Engineering Properties of Peat Ground.” Proceeding Advances in Peat land
Engineering. Ottawa, Canada, 95-100.
Landva, A. O., and Pheeney, P. E. (1980). “Peat Fabric and Structure.” Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 17(3), 416–435.
Larsson, S. (2003). “Mixing Processes for Ground Improvement by Deep Mixing”,
Doctoral thesis published in Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Magnan, J. P. (1980). “Classification Geotechnique Des Sols: 1- A Propos De La
Classification LPC.” Bulletin de Liaison des Laboratories des Ponts et
Chaussees, Paris, 19-24.
Mesri, G. & Ajlouni, M. (2007). “Engineering Properties of Fibrous Peats.” Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, U.S.A., Vol. 133,
No. 7.
Mesri, G. (1973). “Coefficient of Secondary Compression.” J. Soil Mech. and Found.
Div., 99(1), 123–137.
Mesri, G., and Godlewski, P. M. (1979). “Closure to Time and stress compressibility
interrelationship.” Journal Geotechnical Engineering Div., 105 (1): 106–113.
Mesri, G., Stark, T. D., Ajlouni, M. A., and Chen, C. S. (1997). “Secondary compr-
ession of peat with or without surcharging.” Journal Geotechnical
Geoenvironmental Engineering, 123 (5), 411–421.
Yulindasari (2006). “Compressibility Characteristics of Fibrous Peat Soil." Master of
Engineering Thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Von Post, L. (1922). “Sveriges Geologiska Undersoknings Torvinventering Och
Nagre av Dess Hittills Vunna Resultat, Sr. Mosskulturfor.” Tidskr 1: 1-27.

264