ABSTRACT
Stone column installation is commonly employed to prevent liquefaction. Stone columns mitigate liquefaction by means of mainly three mechanisms which are drainage, stiffening and densification. A factor of safety against liquefaction is used to quantify liquefaction potential. The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency of stone columns as a liquefaction remediation based on twenty four case studies. In these cases, SPT and CPT tests were recorded before and after stone columns installation. It was found that the installation of stone columns considerably increased soil density mainly in clean to slightly silty sand. The average rate of increase in the penetration resistance and were about 31.13% to 69.29% and 57.10% to 318.28%, respectively. Furthermore, the cyclic shear stress ratio of reinforced soil can be reduced by 13.5% to 77.5% due to the stiffening improvement of stone columns. Densification and stiffening mechanisms have been investigated through several approaches. Their individual and combined effects have been analysed. Comparative results indicate that considering the densification and stiffening effects in liquefaction analyses improved considerably the performance of stone columns.
List of Notation
= | tributary area which is equal to (As +Asc) | |
= | peak horizontal acceleration | |
= | plan area of the soil matrix | |
= | stone column area | |
BPT | = | Becker Penetration Test |
CPT | = | Cone Penetration Test |
= | borehole diameter correction | |
= | energy correction | |
CN | = | overburden blow count correction |
CR | = | drill rod length correction |
CRR | = | Cyclic Resistance Ratio |
CRRM = 7.5,1 atm | = | Cyclic Resistance Ratio of the soil adjusted to 1 atmosphere of effective overburden pressure for the earthquake magnitude M = 7.5 |
CS | = | sampler liner correction |
CSR | = | cyclic Shear Stress Ratio |
CSRSC | = | cyclic Shear Stress Ratio of reinforced soil by stone columns |
dSC | = | diameter of the stone column |
E | = | elastic modulus of the stone column |
FC | = | fine content |
F | = | factor of safety |
g | = | acceleration of gravity |
Gs | = | shear modulus of the initial soil |
Gs | = | shear modulus of the stone column |
= | shear modulus ratio | |
Gsc | = | equivalent shear modulus |
KG | = | shear stress reduction factor |
= | overburden correction factor for the overburden stresses | |
M | = | earthquake magnitude |
MSF | = | magnitude scaling factor for earthquakes of magnitude other than 7.5 |
N | = | SPT blow count value |
n | = | vertical stress ratio |
n0 | = | ground improvement factor |
N1,60 | = | corrected N values for overburden, energy, equipment and procedure effects |
N1,60,CS | = | corrected Nfor fines content FC |
qC | = | cone tip resistance |
qc1Ncs | = | equivalent clean-sand CPT penetration resistance |
rd | = | shear stress reduction factor |
SPT | = | standard penetration test |
Vs | = | shear wave velocity |
z | = | depth |
= | friction angle of stone column material | |
= | area replacement ratio | |
= | effective vertical overburden stress | |
= | vertical effective stress within the initial soil | |
= | vertical effective stress within the stone column | |
= | Waves’ length | |
V | = | Poisson’s ratio |
Vs | = | Poisson’s ratio of the initial soil |
VSC | = | Poisson’s ratio of the stone column |
= | equivalent clean sand adjustment | |
= | improvement factor | |
= | total vertical overburden stress | |
= | average cyclic shear stress | |
= | shear stress of initial soil | |
= | shear stress of stone column | |
= | shear strain ratio |
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Data availability statement
Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request.