COMPARISON OF PREDICTED SETTLEMENT BEHAVIOUR TO THE
FIELD MEASUREMENT OF STONE COLUMN IMPROVED GROUND
SELVEM S/O RAMAN
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
PSZ 19:16 (Pind.1/97)
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESISƇ
JUDUL:
COMPARISON OF PREDICTED SETTLEMENT BEHAVIOUR TO
THE FIELD MEASUREMENT OF STONE COLUMN IMPROVED
GROUND
SESI PENGAJIAN: 2005/06
Saya
SELVEM A/L RAMAN
(HURUF BESAR)
Mengaku membenarkan tesis (PSM/Sarjana/Doktor Falsafah)* ini disimpan di
perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti
berikut:1. Tesis adalah hakmilik Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
2. Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk
tujuan pengajian sahaja.
3. Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran antara
institusi pengajian tinggi.
4. **Sila tandakan (¥)
¥
SULIT
(Mengandungi maklumat berdarjah keselamatan atau
kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di dalam
AKTA RAHSIA RASMI 1972)
TERHAD
(Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD yang telah ditentukan
oleh organisasi/badan dimana penyelidikan dijalankan
TIDAK TERHAD
Disahkan oleh
_____________________________
(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)
Alamat Tetap:
No. 63, Taman Teluk Merbau,
43950 Sungai Pelek, Sepang,
Selangor Darul Ehsan
Tarikh : 19 Mei 2006
_____________________________
(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)
PM Dr. Aminaton Binti Marto
Tarikh : 19 Mei 2006
CATATAN: * Potong yang tidak berkenaan.
** Jika tesis ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak berkuasa /organisasi
berkenaan dengan menyatakan sekali sebab dan tempoh tesis ini perlu dikelaskan sebagai
SULIT atau TERHAD.
COMPARISON OF PREDICTED SETTLEMENT BEHAVIOUR TO THE
FIELD MEASUREMENT OF STONE COLUMN IMPROVED GROUND
SELVEM S/O RAMAN
A Project Report Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment of The
Requirement For The Award of The Degree of Master of
Engineering (Civil-Geotechnics)
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
MAY 2006
ii
“I declare that this project report is the result of my own research
except as cited in references. This report has not been accepted for
any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any
degree”.
Signature
:_______________________________
Name of Candidate: Selvem S/O Raman
Date
: May 2006.
iii
“I hereby declare that I have read this report and in my opinion
this report is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the
award of Master of Engineering (Civil-Geotechnics)”.
Signature
: ……………………………………….
Name of Supervisor : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Aminaton Marto
Date
: May, 2006
iv
Dedicated to my mother and late father
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to extend my greatest thanks to my mother who is the pillar of my
strength and existence. I would like to present this to my late father whom always would
want me to be someone great. I would like to present my effort to the lotus feet of god
for whom has made myself into who I am now. Special thanks and love goes to the one
whom had discovered the softest side in my heart.
Greatest appreciation goes to Ir. Balakrishnan who has contributed directly and
indirectly in my engineering lifefor moulding me into who I am today. Gratitude also
goes to GCU Geotechnics Sdn. Bhd. and for sponsoring me partly for this course. I
would like to thank my supervisor Associate Professor Dr. Aminaton Marto for her
guidance and for the precious time spent to make this project a success. I would also like
to thank all whom have contributed, be it directly or indirectly for this project report.
Thank you so much.
vi
ABSTRACT
Stone columns form one of the accepted methods of ground improvement at
which large size columns of coarse stones are installed into the ground by means of
special vibrators. It is found that, stone columns increase shear strength of the ground,
thus increasing bearing capacity and stability of the ground as well as to reduce
settlement. The stone column design using Priebe’s method has gained much
widespread use due to its simplicity. However it was found that the settlement
computed using Priebe’s method has always been higher than the field settlement
obtained. A comparison study was carried out between design settlement and field
settlement. Based on the comparison and back analysis it is found that the improvement
ratio of stone column increases with the increase of soil strength. This inherently
implies to that of larger corresponding stone column spacing. Based on the findings,
charts has been made to obtain a settlement reduction factor to be used in calculating
the settlement of the improved ground, resulting in increase in the spacing and reducing
the number of stone columns utilised. The time rate settlement was back calculated
using Asaoka’s method to assess actual coefficient of vertical and horizontal
consolidation. With this, the back calculated spacing together with the coefficient of
consolidation parameters were used to simulate back the field settlement to validify the
findings. Based on the simulation, it was found that the back calculated improvement
ratio and spacing are corresponding well with the actual field settlement. Therefore a
relationship was established for basic soil parameters and the parameters related to
stone column settlement details.
vii
ABSTRAK
Tiang batu adalah salah satu cara pemulihan tanah yang diterima secara umum di
mana batu-batu dimasukkan ke dalam tanah dengan mengunakan pengetar khas. Tidak
dapat dinafikan bahawa tiang batu menambahkan kekuatan ricih tanah dan secara
langsung menigkatkan keupayaan galas dan kestabilan tanah dan juga mengurangkan
enapan. Rekabentuk tiang batu mengunakan kaedah Priebe telah mendapat kegunaan
meluas
kerana
ia
adalah
satu
kaedah
yang
mudah
untuk
digunapakai.
Walaubagaimanapun Secara amnya enapan yang dikira mengunakan kaedah Priebe
selalunya lebih tinggi daripada enapan sebenar di tapak. Satu perbandingan telah
dilakukan diantara magnitud enapan yang dikira menggunakan kaedah Priebe dan
enapan sebenar di tapak. Melalui perbandingan dan pengiraan balik yang dibuat,
didapati bahawa nisbah pembaikan tiang batu meningkat dengan meningkatnya kekuatan
tanah. Ini secara tidak langsung berkait dengan peningkatan jarak antara tiang batu.
Daripada perbandingan dan pegiraan balik, sebuah carta telah di sediakan untuk
mendapatkan faktor pengurangan enapan dimana carta itu boleh digunakan dalam
pengiraan enapan yang secara tak langsung dapat menambahkan jarak antara tiang batu
dan seterusnya mengurangkan bilangan tiang batu yang diperlukan untuk mencapai
enapan yang sama. Kadar enapan juga dikira balik mengunakan kaedah Asaoka untuk
mendapatkan pekali pengukuhan tegak dan ufuk. Dengan mengunakan data pengiraan
balik ini, enapan sebenar di kira balik untuk mengetahui samaada data-data pengiraan
balik itu benar ataupun tidak. Daripada pengiraan balik, telah didapati bahawa, jarak
antara tiang batu dan nisbah pembaikan tiang batu berhubung rapat. Maka satu
hubungan telah dicapai untuk parameter asal tanah dan parameter enapan tiang batu.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER
1
2
TITLE
PAGE
DECLARATION 1
ii
DECLARATION 2
iii
DEDICATION
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
v
ABSTRACT
vi
ABSTRAK
vii
TABLE OF CONTENT
viii
LIST OF TABLES
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
xii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
xvi
INTRODUCTION
1
1.1
Introduction
1
1.2
Background of Study
3
1.3
Objectives of Study
4
1.4
Scope of Study
4
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMNS
6
2.1
Introduction
6
2.2
Available Design Methods
8
2.3
Priebe’s Method
9
ix
CHAPTER
TITLE
2.4
PAGE
Consolidation Rate of Stone Column Improved
round
G
16
2
2.5
3
STONE COLUMN CONSTRUCTION
20
3.1
Introduction
20
3.2
Vibro Replacement Method (Wet Method)
21
3.3
Vibro-Displacement Method (Dry Method)
22
3.4
Case Borehole Method or Rammed Columns
25
4
5
6
Findings by others
19
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
27
4.1
Introduction
27
4.2
Phase I : Literature and State of the Practice Review
27
4.3
Phase II : Data Collection
28
4.4
Phase III : Analysis of Data
29
SITE FOR CASE STUDY
30
5.1
Introduction
30
5.2
Subsoil Condition
32
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN
GROUND IMPROVEMENT
33
6.1
Introduction
33
6.2
Stone Column Design
34
6.2.1
Input
34
6.2.2
Analysis
43
6.2.3
Output
45
x
CHAPTER
TITLE
6.3
PAGE
Construction Method Implemented for Reference
Project
45
6.3.1
Stone Column Material
45
6.3.2
Sand for Working Platform and Drainage
46
6.3.3 Installation Method (Wet Top-Feed
Method)
6.3.4
6.4
7
8
Construction Tolerances
47
48
Instrumentation
48
ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
50
7.1
Introduction
50
7.2
Analysis Design Details
50
7.3
Results of Analysis
51
7.4
Discussion
57
CONCLUSION
61
8.1
Conclusion
61
8.2
Recommendation for Further Studies
62
REFERENCES
64
Appendices A-F
67 - 162
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
TITLE
PAGE
NO.
5.1
Location details of stone column improvement work
32
6.1
E
stimation of constrained modulus for clays
37
7.1
D values to be adopted in the design
51
7.2
Values of J, cv and ch adopted in the design
51
7.3
Back analysis summary of Pribe’s Method
53
7.4
Back analysis summary of Han and Ye’s method through
Asaoka’s method
7.5
53
Summary of relationship of stone column fundamental
properties and subsoil properties
57
xi
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
TITLE
PAGE
NO.
2.1
Application ranges for vibro techniques
7
2.2
Unit cell concept
8
2.3
Design chart for vibro replacement
11
2.4
Consideration of column compressibility
12
2.5
Determination of depth factor
15
2.6
Determination of depth limit value for depth factor
16
2.7
Typical embankment found on stone columns
18
3.1
Vibro replacement method (wet method)
22
3.2
Vibro replacement method (dry top-feed method)
23
3.3
Vibro replacement method (dry bottom-feed method)
24
3.4
Case borehole method (rammed columns)
26
4.1
Analysis procedure
29
5.1
Project location
31
6.1
Tip resistance and friction ratio CPT soil classification chart
36
6.2
Relative density relationship for moderately compressible,
uncemented, unaged quartz sands
6.3
Influence of compressibility on ucemented, unaged,
predominantly quartz sands
6.4
39
40
E
xpanded soil behaviour type classification chart with
equivalent overburden normalized friction angle and relative
density trends
6.5
41
Proposed correlation between cone bearing and peak friction
angle for quartz sands
42
6.6
Converting the multi layered subsoil into single layer
44
6.7
Typical instrumentation scheme at stone column improved
ground
7.1
Relationship between normalized improvement ratio and
49
xiii
undrained shear strength
7.2
Relationship between normalized spacing and undrained shear
strength
7.3
54
Relationship between normalized settlement reduction factor
and undrained shear strength
7.4
54
55
Relationship between normalized improvement ratio and
friction angle
55
7.5
Relationship between normalized spacing and friction angle
56
7.6
Relationship between normalized settlement reduction factor
and friction angle
56
xiv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
A
Grid area
Ac
Stone oClumn Area
c
C
ohesion
ch
C
oefficient of horizontal consolidation
cv
C
oefficient of vertical consolidation
d
D
epth of subsoil layer from ground
Dc
C
onstrained modulus of stone column material
Ds
C
onstrained modulus of subsoil
fd
epth factor
D
H
Thickness of subsoil
KaC
C
oefficient of active earth pr essure of column material
mv
C
oefficient of volume change
n
Settlement improvement ratio
Nk
oCne factor
Pc
Pressure within stone column along the depth
Ps
Pressure within soil in tributary area
qc
C
one friction
R
Settlement reduction factor
Su
nUdrained shear strength
Ur
egree of consolidation (radial only)
D
Urv
egree of consolidation (both radial and vertical)
D
Uv
D
egree of consolidation (vertical only)
D
C
oefficient of constrained modulus
Gig
Settlement of improved ground
Gog
Settlement of unimproved ground
Ic
F
riction angle of stone column material
Is
riction angle of subsoil
F
xv
Js
Bulk density of subsoil
Ps
Poisson’s ratio of stone column material
Vvo
Insitu overburden stress
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX
TITLE
PAGE
A
Analysis Summary
76
B
Analysis for H
C 254890 to H
C 255095
7
C
Analysis for H
C 26
1950 to H
C 26
3125
95
D
Analysis for H
C 27
2100 to H
C 27
2350
113
E
Analysis for H
C 297
250 to H
C 288250
130
F
Analysis for H
C 299400 to H
C 2996
25
146
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction
In quest of knowledge and demand, there is ever increasing awareness of new
technologies created or found by man. The field of geotechnical engineering is not
new to this phenomenon. Over the last century, the field of geotechnical engineering
has achieved many milestones with brilliant ideas and advancements. The ground
improvement techniques is one of the area which has attained lots of interest and
improvements due to an interesting fact that ‘anything can be constructed anywhere
if only proper foundation is laid’.
Many methods for ground modification and improvement are available
around the world now, including dewatering, compaction, preloading with and
without vertical drains, grouting, deep mixing, deep densification and soil
reinforcement are among those. Many of these techniques, such as dewatering,
compaction, preloading and grouting, have been used for many years. However,
there have been rapid advances in the areas of deep densification (vibro-compaction,
deep dynamic compaction, compaction piles, and explosive densification), jet and
compaction grouting, deep mixing, and vibro-replacement and vibro-displacement in
2
recent years. These methods have become practical and economical alternatives for
many ground improvement applications.
While most of these technologies were originally developed for uses other
than seismic risk mitigation, many of the recent advances in the areas of deep
densification, jet and compaction grouting, and deep mixing methods have been
spurred on by the need for practical and cost effective means for mitigating seismic
risks. Many of these methods have also been applied to increase the liquefaction
resistance of loose, saturated, cohesionless soils.
Ground improvement techniques basically utilize the effects of increasing
adhesion between soil particles, densification and reinforcement to attain on or more
of the following:
(1) increased strength to improve stability,
(2) reduced deformation due to distortion or compressibility of the soil mass,
(3) reduced susceptibility to liquefaction, and
(4) reduced natural variability of soils.
Of many techniques of ground improvements, stone column has gained lots
of popularity since it has been properly documented in the middle of the last century.
As in most new ground improvement techniques that were developed in foreign
countries, experience has preceded the development of theory and comprehensive
guidelines. Potential applications of stone column include the following :
(1) stabilizing foundation soils,
(2) supporting structures,
(3) landslide stabilization, and
(4) reducing liquefaction potential of clean sands.
The high potential for beneficial use of stone columns is mainly as a ground
improvement technique to strengthen weak and soft soil. This includes the area of
highway, railway and also airfield applications prompted a comprehensive
investigation to determine how and why the system works so well, and to develop
3
appropriate design and construction guidelines. This has resulted in many empirical
design concepts to be published for the purpose of designing the stone column.
1.2
Background of Study
Vibro replacement or stone column has been adapted and utilized as one of
the effective ground improvement method since early 1980’s. This can be referred
back to the ground improvement carried out at certain parts of North South
Expressway, Keretapi Tanah Melayu (KTM) double tracking between Seremban and
Rawang and many more locations throughout the country.
The stone column technology is not new as far as Malaysia is concern, simply
because of the history and the number of contractors engaged in this business. The
major players who were also pioneers in stone column construction in Malaysia are
Keller (M) Sdn. Bhd. and Bauer (M) Sdn. Bhd. There are many other local stone
column contractors now in the market besides these two foreign companies.
Even though the design of stone column is broadly based on empirical
methods, there are a lot of studies being carried out to date to improvise the design
and detailing of the stone columns to match the following details:
(1) local subsoil condition and
(2) local construction methodology.
Most of the cases, there are instrumentations carried out at those areas
improved by stone column but those data have never been utilized fully for the
purpose of improvising the design methodologies adopted. Thus it is appalling that
we, Malaysians have to rely heavily on the foreign research and approach to solve
our own problems.
4
Therefore, an attempt is being made to understand the major principle behind
the stone column ground improvement which is to reduce the total settlement, in
local geotechnical context.
The design works has been carried out based on certain subsoil parameters
derived from the soil investigation carried out at site. This design has been carried
out based on one of the empirical methods available. While the method is predicted
to provide relatively good assessment of the details needed, there is much to be done
to improvise the design approach by comparing the results with the field
instrumentation results. By doing so, it is assumed, at this stage that there could be
some improvement in the context of the detailing such as spacing and number of
stone columns.
1.3
Objectives of Study
The main objectives of the study are as follows:
(1) to predict the settlement behaviour of stone column improved ground
using Priebe’s Method (Priebe H. J., 1995),
(2) to compare the predicted settlement with the field settlement.
(3) to suggest improvisation in the design method adopted based on results
obtained in the comparison study.
1.4
Scope of Study
This study is confined to the following scopes:
(1) This study is to focus on the writer’s own design work carried out using
Priebe’s Method (Priebe H. J., 1995) only.
5
(2) The construction of stone column was carried out based on top feed vibro
replacement method (wet method).
(3) The data collected for the areas or locations of stone column ground
improvement in Malaysia only.
(4) The minimum number of data set is limited to 5 numbers.
(5) The study focuses only on the settlement behaviour of the stone columns.
CHAPTER 2
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMNS
2.1
Introduction
Soils with appreciable silt or clay content do not respond to deep vibratory
compaction. To improve these cohesive soil types to allow for any type of
construction, it is necessary to create stiff reinforcing elements in the soil mass. The
stone column technique, also known as vibro-replacement or vibro-displacement, is a
ground improvement process where vertical columns of compacted aggregate are
formed through the soils (Marzuki, 1994). These columns result in considerable
vertical load carrying capacity and improved shear resistance in the soil mass.
Contrary to vibro-compaction which densifies non cohesive soil by the aid of
vibrations and improves it directly, vibro-replacement improves non compactable
cohesive soil by means of installing of load bearing well compacted granular
columns (Nayak, 1982).
The method of analysis adopted in the design of stone columns ranges from
experience based semi-empirical design to finite element analyses. There are many
methods available based on previous experience, coupled with research for the
purpose of design. There are a lot of studies carried out in the past for the purpose of
7
estimation of the degree of improvement to be achieved for the volume of granular
material introduced into the ground. Generally the stone columns will improve three
areas of improvements in ground. Those are as follows:
(1) improve bearing capacity,
(2) improve overall stability and
(3) reduce total settlement.
Although the design method of stone column is less understood, it is as
empirical as the foundation design. The theoretical design of stone column with
regards to settlement criterion is a complicated matter altogether due to the variation
in the constituent material’s behaviour. Furthermore, the load carrying capacity and
settlement behaviour is also depends considerably on the methods of construction
and failure mechanisms of the columns (Madhira and Nagpure, 1996). Figure 2.1
shows the typical ranges of soils that can be treated with the vibro techniques.
Figure 2.1 : Application ranges for vibro techniques (Priebe 1998)
8
2.2
Available Design Methods
There are generally five basic methods of designing stone columns with
respect to settlement (Aboshi and Suematsu, 1984). Those methods are as follows:
(1) Equilibrium Method
(2) Priebe’s Method
(3) Granular Wall Method
(4) Greenwood Method
(5) Incremental Method and
(6) Finite Element Method
All those methods above are basically derived from unit cell idealisation
(Figure 2.2) whereby, stone column is modelled to be a concentric body in a
composite soil mass.
Figure 2.2 : U
nit Cell Concept (B arksdale and Bachus, 1983)
9
2.3
Priebe’s Method
Basically, the design method described herewith was developed some twenty
years ago and published. However, in the meantime it came to several adaptations,
extensions and supplements which justify a new and comprehensive description of
the method. It may he emphasized that Priebe’s method refers to the improving
effect of stone columns in a soil which is otherwise unaltered in comparison to the
initial state. In a first step a factor is established by which stone columns improve
the performance of the subsoil in comparison to the state without columns.
According to this improvement factor the deformation modulus of the composite
system is increased and subsequently settlements are reduced. All further design
steps refer to this basic principle.
In many practical cases the reinforcing effect of stone columns installed by
vibro replacement is superposed with the densifying effect of vibro compaction, i.e.
the installation of stone columns densifies the soil between. In this case, first of all
the densification of the soil has to be evaluated, and then the design of stone column
follows.
The system of stone column allows a more or less accurate evaluation only
for the well defined case of an unlimited load area on an unlimited column grid. In
this case a unit cell with the area A is considered consisting of a single column with
the cross section Ac and the tributary area of the surrounding soil.
Furthermore the following idealized conditions are assumed:
(1) The column is based on a rigid layer
(2) The column material is uncompressible
(3) The bulk density of column and soil is neglected
Hence, based on Priebe’s ideology, the column can never fail in end bearing
and any settlement of the load area results in a bulging of the column which remains
constant all over its length. The improvement of a soil achieved at these conditions
10
by the installation of stone columns is evaluated on the assumption that the stone
column material shears from the beginning whilst the surrounding soil reacts
elastically. Furthermore, the soil is assumed to he displaced already during the stone
column installation to such an extent that its initial resistance corresponds to the
liquid state i.e. the coefficient of earth pressure K = 1. The result of the evaluation is
expressed as basic improvement factor no.
no
ª1
º
A ·
§
f ¨ Ps ˜ c ¸
«
»
A 2
A¹
©
1 c «
1»
Ac · »
A «
§
« K ac ˜ f ¨ P s ˜ A ¸ »
©
¹ ¼
¬
(2.1)
Therefore,
A ·
§
f ¨ Ps ˜ c ¸
A¹
©
K aC
1 Ps
˜
1 P s 2 P s2
1 2P s ˜ §¨1 Ac ·¸
A¹
©
1 2P s I ·
§
tan 2 ¨ 45 c ¸
2¹
©
Ac
A
(2.2)
Where,
no = settlement improvement ratio
Ac = stone column area
A = grid area
P s = Poisson’s ratio
KaC = coefficient of active earth pressure for column material
Ic = friction angle of column material
Adopting Poisson’s ratio of P s
1
which is adequate for the state of final
3
settlement in most cases leads to a simple expression.
11
no
ª
A
5 c
«
A
A
1 c «
A«
§ Ac
« 4 ˜ K ac ˜ ¨ A
©
¬
º
»
1»
· »
¸ »
¹ ¼
(2.3)
The relationship between the improvement factor, no, the reciprocal area ratio
Ac
and the friction angle of the backfill material Ic is illustrated in Figure 2.3.
A
Consideration shall also be given to the column backfill material which is still
compressible. Therefore, any load causes settlements which are not connected with
bulging of the columns. Accordingly, in the case of soil replacement where the area
ratio amounts to
Ac
A
1 the actual improvement factor does not achieve an infinite
value as determined theoretically for non compressible material, but it coincides at
best with the ratio of the constrained modulus of column material and soil.
Figure 2.3 : Design chart for vibro replacement (Greenwood and Kirsch, 1983)
12
Figure 2.4 : Consideration of column compressibility (Priebe, 1995)
It is relatively easy to determine at which area ratio of column cross section
§ ·
¨A ¸
© ¹1
A
and grid size ¨ c ¸ the basic improvement factor corresponds to the ratio of the
constrained modulus of columns and soil
Dc
. For example, at P s
Ds
positive result of the following expression (with no
1
, the lower
3
Dc
) delivers the area ratio
Ds
§ Ac ·
¨ ¸ concerned. Thus,
© A ¹1
§ Ac ·
¨ ¸
© A ¹1
2
4 ˜ K aC ˜ no 2 5 1 ª 4 ˜ K aC ˜ no 2 5 º
16 ˜ K aC no 1
r ˜ «
» 2.4 ˜ K aC 1
2 ¬
4 ˜ K aC 1
4 ˜ K aC 1
¼
(2.4)
As an approximation, the compressibility of the column material can be
considered in using a reduced improvement factor n1 which results from the formula
developed for the basic improvement factor no when the given reciprocal area ratio
13
Ac
§A
is increased by an additional amount of '¨ c
A
© A
·
¸ . The additional amount on the
¹
D
§A ·
area ratio '¨ c ¸ depending on the ratio of the constrained modulus c can be
Ds
© A¹
readily extracted from Figure 2.4.
It is apparent that the compressibility of column material can be considered in
computing the improvement factor which will be addressed as n1 which results from
§A ·
the basic formula for no with additional amount of '¨ c ¸ . Therefore,
© A¹
§ Ac ·
¸
© A¹
'¨
1
§ Ac ·
¨ A¸
¹1
©
1
With the additional amount of area ratio, the modified area ratio
Ac
A
1
Ac
A
'§¨ c ·¸
A
© A¹
(2.5)
Ac
is then,
A
(2.6)
Subsequently, modified improvement ratio, n1 can be computed based on the
following formula:
no
º
ª 1
§
Ac ·
»
« f ¨¨ P s ˜ ¸¸
A¹
Ac « 2
»
©
1»
1 «
A
·
§
« K ac ˜ f ¨ P s ˜ Ac ¸ »
¨
«¬
A ¸¹ »¼
©
(2.7)
Neglecting bulk density of stone column and soil, means that the initial
pressure difference between the columns and the soil which creates bulging, depends
solely on the distribution of the foundation load on columns and soil. This value is
constant over the entire column length.
14
Since the pressure difference is a linear parameter in the derivations of the
improvement factor, the ratio of the initial pressure difference and the one depending
on depth, is expressed as depth factor fd, delivers a value by which the improvement
factor n1 increases to the final improvement factor n2 = fd x n1 because of the
overburden pressure. The depth factor fd can be computed based on the following
formula :
fd
1
K 1 6 J s ˜ 'd ˜
1 oC
K oC
Pc
(2.8)
Where,
K oC = coefficient of earth pressure at-rest for column material
K oC
1 sin I c
Ic = friction angle of column material
J s = bulk density of soil
'd = depth of subsoil layer from ground
Pc = pressure within the column along the depth
The single steps of the design procedure are not connected mathematically
and they contain simplifications and approximations. Therefore, at marginal cases
compatibility controls have to be performed which guarantees that no more load is
assigned to the columns than that they can hold depending on their stiffness. The
depth factor can also be approximated using Figure 2.5.
At increasing depths, the support by the soil reaches such an extent that the
columns do not bulge anymore. However, even then the depth factor will not
increase to infinity as results from the assumption of a linearly decreasing pressure
difference. Therefore, the first compatibility control limits the depth factor and
thereby the load assigned to the columns so that the settlement of the columns
resulting from their inherent compressibility does not exceed the settlement of the
composite system.
15
Figure 2.5 : Determination of depth factor (Priebe, 1995)
In the first place this control applies when the existing soil is considered quite
dense or stiff. Therefore it is necessary to apply the following compatibility control
limit to the depth factor.
Dc
fd
Pc
Ds
(2.9)
Ps
With Ps is pressure within the soil in tributary area, along the depth. The
maximum value of the depth factor can be drawn also from the diagram in Figure
2.6. By the way, a depth factor fd <1 should not be considered, even though it may
result from the calculation.
In this case the second compatibility control is
imperatively required which relates to the maximum value of the improvement factor
nmax. It guarantees that the settlement of the columns resulting from their inherent
compressibility does not exceed the settlement of the surrounding soil resulting from
its compressibility by the loads which arc assigned to both. It has to he observed that
16
the actual area ratio
value
Ac
has to be assigned in the formula and not the modified
A
Ac
.
A
The maximum value of improvement factor nmax can be estimated based on
the following formula:
nmax
1
Ac
A
§ Dc
·
¨¨
1¸¸
© Ds
¹
(2.10)
Figure 2.6 : Determination of depth L
imit value for depth factor (Priebe, 1995)
2.4
Consolidation Rate of Stone Column Improved Ground
Based on studies carried out by Han and Y
e (2001), the stone columns
accelerates the rate of consolidation of soft clays. Based on their study, the results
17
showed that stone column acts as drain wells where vertical and radial flows are
similar to those of Terzhagi 1D solution and the Barron solution for drain wells in
fine grained soils.
Therefore, the consolidation settlement calculation has been
carried out based on Han and Y
e’s ‘Simp
lified Method for Consolidation Rate of
Stone Column Reinforced Foundation’ published in 2001.
The following
relationship is still applicable to calculate time rate settlement of the stone column
improved ground:
U rv
1 1 U r 1 U v (2.11)
Where,
U rv = degree of consolidation (both radial and vertical)
U r = degree of consolidation (radial only)
U v = degree of consolidation (vertical only)
Even though the study shows that the drainage characteristics of stone
column follows closely to Terzhagi 1- dimensional solution and the Barron solution
for drain wells in fine grained soils, the following assumptions were also made in the
study. This is considering that the consolidation characteristics of a stone column
improved ground are different from those of fine grained soils with drain wells:
(1) Stone columns are free-draining at any time. Each of stone columns has a
circular influence zone.
(2) The surrounding soil is fully saturated, and water is incompressible.
(3) Stone columns and the surrounding soil only deform vertically and have
the equal strain at any depth.
(4) The load is applied instantly through a rigid foundation and maintained
constant during the consolidation period. At the moment of load being
applied, uniform excess pore water pressures within the surrounding soil
carry all the loads. At the moment of loading, however, the saturated soil
is under an undrained condition. The undrained elastic modulus of the
18
saturated soil is theoretically infinite under a condition with full
confinement, which results from the preceding assumption of 1
dimensional deformation.
Due to the significant difference of the
modulus between the surrounding soil and the stone column at the
moment of loading, it is reasonable to assume that excess pore water
pressures in the surrounding soil carry all the loads.
(5) The vertical stresses with stone columns and the surrounding soil,
respectively, are averaged and uniform.
There are two layers of soils that need to be considered in the settlement
analysis of the stone column improved area. Even though the stone columns are
terminated within the medium stiff or medium dense layer of soil, the subsoil below
the stone columns sometimes can undergo settlement depending on the quantum of
loading applied on the ground and subsequently stress concentration within the
ground. Therefore it is important to assess both the improved and unimproved
ground settlement wisely. Figure 2.7 shows the improved and unimproved zones of
subsoil.
The occurrence of unimproved ground sometimes is also due to the
limitation of the vibroflot which can only penetrate up to 21m depth only.
Improved Ground
U
nimproved Ground
Figure 2.7 : Typical Embankment found on stone columns (Raju, 2004)
19
2.5
Findings by Others
There are studies carried out by Goughnour and Bayuk (1979) show that the
disparity between theoretical approaches and field observations may be insignificant
where the total settlements are small but can be very significant for large structures
on very soft soils which yield potential settlements of 0.25m or more. This implies
that the area ratio is the prime determinant of the stress on the soil, whilst stiffness
ratio controls magnitude of settlements. The simplicity of Priebe’s method applying
an improvement ratio to conventional consolidation calculation is attractive and
makes it most widely used.
A study carried out by Raju in 1997 with regards to the behaviour of very soft
soils improved by stone columns. The study was conducted at New Shah Alam
Expressway (Kinrara and Kebun Interchanges) where the subsoil consists of very
soft cohesive soils having undrained shear strengths of less than 10kPa.
The
measured settlements which are in the order of 250 mm at Kinrara and 400 mm at
Kebun as compared to values of over 1.0 m in untreated areas imply an improvement
factor of 4 and 2.5 respectively. A comparison with the values as predicted by the
method of Priebe show that in general the predicted values are larger than those
measured on site. An exception would be the case where too large a spacing is used
and the soft material is squeezed out between the columns.
Bergado et al. (1991) reported that the computed settlement has always been
higher compared to the field measurement due to various reasons. He reported that
as the spacing of the column increased, the settlement of the treated ground
approaches the settlement of untreated ground. He also found that beyond
De
D
4.0 ,
the settlement of treated ground is almost the same as the settlement of untreated
ground.
CHAPTER 3
STONE COLUMN CONSTRUCTION
3.1
Introduction
As discussed in previous chapter, stone column do play vital part in
improving the subsoil characteristics by increasing bearing capacity, improving
overall stability and to reduce total settlement of the improved ground. These effects
can be achieved with proper construction of stone column.
Stone column construction involves the partial replacement of unsuitable
subsurface soils with a compacted vertical column of stone that usually completely
penetrates the weak strata. When jetting water is used the process is named vibroreplacement (or wet process). When used without jetting water in partially saturated
soils, the process is known as vibro-displacement (or the dry process).
According to Steuermen, the stone is densified by the use of a vibrating probe
originally developed in 1935 for the compaction of granular, cohesionless soils
(Bergado et. al., 1991). Although each specialty contractor identifies their vibrator
by a different name, the term Vibroflot is frequently used to describe the probe.
Rotation of eccentric weights within the body of the probe using either electric or
hydraulic power causes lateral vibration at the tip of the probe. In the wet process
21
the Vibroflot opens a hole by jetting, using large quantities of water under high
pressure. In the dry process, the probe displaces the native soil laterally as it is
advanced into the ground.
The probe typically varies in diameter from 300 mm to 460 mm depending on
the individual contractors' equipment. Due to soil erosion and lateral compaction,
the formed hole is slightly larger than the probe. To construct the column, the hole is
backfilled in 0.3 m to 1.2 m lifts with the probe usually being left in the hole. Stone
is dumped from the ground surface and allowed to fall through the annular space
provided between the probe and the sides of the enlarged hole.
In soils which will not collapse, the probe is sometimes removed before
adding the stone. Each lift is re-penetrated several times with the vibrating probe to
densify the stone and force it into the surrounding soil. The vibrating probe may also
be momentarily left in a stationary position to densify the stone. Successive lifts are
placed and densified until a column of stone has been formed up to the ground
surface of the native soil.
3.2
Vibro-Replacement Method (Wet Method)
This method is employed in soft relatively impervious and cohesive soil
generally in the range of strengths Su = 15 kPa to 50 kPa (Greenwood and Kirsch,
1983). These soils are readily penetrated with the low pressure large volume bottom
jets with the displaced material transported in the water flow surface. Resistant
layers are overcome by direct impact of the machine.
This method is also used at locations with high ground water table where
borehole stability is questionable. The wet method is usually the fastest of the three
methods, typically results in the largest diameter stone columns (typically 0.7 to
1.2m diameter), is capable of supporting the highest design load per column, and
allows the use of the widest range of stone / gravel material gradations. However
this method requires large quantity of water, 2000 to 4000 gallons per probe which
22
may affect trafficability and may require special care to avoid polluting
watercourses.
On reaching the desired depth a gravel backfill is tipped around the probe into
the annulus against continuing up-flow of water from the bottom jet. As gravel
accumulates at the base of the column, this motion together with vibration tends to
ram it into the sides of the hole.
Figure 3.1 : Vibro-replacement method (wet method)
(Bergado et. al., 1991)
Subsequently stone is added in 0.3 m to 1.0 m increments and densified with
a vibrator near the tip of the probe. With equilibrium column building begins as
further stones added.
Resistance encountered as the probe sinks at each level
(signaled by power consumption) indicates completion of the column to a diameter
depending upon the soil resistance and the shearing and flushing action.
3.3
Vibro-Displacement Method (Dry Method)
This method is employed in stable insensitive cohesive soils of strength in the
range of Su = 30 kPa to 60 kPa (Greenwood and Kirsch, 1983). The probe penetrates
23
the ground by both vibratory impact and by its weight. There is no removal of soil
which is displaced laterally involving local shearing like driven piling activity. This
method can be divided into two, namely, dry top-feed method and dry bottom-feed
method.
The dry top-feed method is quite the same as the wet method, except air is
used as a jetting medium. This method is much cleaner than the wet method and
does not need disposal of the jetting fluid. However this method can only be used if
the borehole can stand open when the probe is extracted so that the stone can be
tipped into the hole. In order to prevent the hole instability, the probe must be kept
in the hole and therefore limiting the stone / gravel size to 2.5cm to the probe hole
clearance.
Figure 3.2 : Vibro-displacement method (dry top-feed method)
(Bergado et. al., 1991)
On reaching the required depth, it is necessary to extract the vibroflot from
the hole to introduce backfill. Since the machine is necessarily a tight fit in the hole,
any tendency to fall to instability condition is further worsened by suction as the
probe is lifted, but compressed air from the bottom jet compensates the lift without
further collapse or instability.
24
Dry bottom-feed method is similar to the dry top-feed method except the
stone / gravel is conveyed to the tip of the probe using eccentric tube adjacent to the
probe. Therefore, the probe prevents caving of the hole. This method normally used
in very soft soils with high ground water table. Ground water aids initial penetration
of the probe and to facilitate movement of the stone / gravel through the tube to the
probe tip. The air pressure should be no more than 275 kPa to 415 kPa to prevent
fracturing of the clay mass and column construction (this limiting value tends to be
site specific and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis). Due to the absence of
the jetting fluid, the formed columns will have diameters that are approximately 15
mm to 25 mm smaller than the wet method.
Stone / Gravel
Figure 3.3 : Vibro-displacement method (dry bottom-feed method)
(Poorooshasb and Meyerhof (1993))
The dry bottom-feed method requires more equipment than the wet method.
However this method is much cleaner and does not require the disposal of a jetting
fluid and results in stone with fairly consistent diameters / sizes. The dry method
also does not introduce water into the soft cohesive material, thus do not contaminate
adjacent water causes.
25
3.4
Case-Borehole Method or Rammed Columns
In this method, the piles are constructed by ramming granular materials in the
pre-bored holes in stages using heavy falling weight, usually of 15 kN to 20 kN from
a height of 1.0 m to 1.5 m (Bergado et al., 1991). The method is good substitute for
vibrator compaction considering its low cost. However, disturbance and subsequent
remolding by the ramming operation may limit its applicability to sensitive soils.
The method is useful in developing countries utilizing only indigenous equipment in
contrast to the methods described above which require special equipment and trained
personnel.
26
1
6
2
7
3
8
4
5
9
Figure 3.4 Case borehole method (rammed columns)
(Abhoshi and Suematsu (1985)
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1
Introduction
The proposed research was conducted in three phases. A comprehensive
review of the current literature and state of practice forms the first phase. Phase II
includes the data collection of both design and field data. Phase III includes analysis
of data, interpretation of results, and conclusion.
4.1.1
Phase I : Literature and State of the Practice Review
A literature review was carried out to determine the state-of-the art for the
design and analysis of vibro-replacement. It encompasses review of published work.
The literature review includes a comprehensive assessment of experimental and
analytical work performed. The literature review also includes the stone column
construction techniques which very much will effect the performance of the stone
column composite ground.
28
4.1.2
Phase II : Data Collection
For selected sites of stone column improved ground, field measurement data
of settlement markers and rod settlement gauges were collected. Besides field data,
the design data of those sites were also collected. The design data also include the
subsoil data etc.
4.1.3
Phase III : Analysis of Data
To determine the effectiveness of the consolidation of the ground, the design
data was compared with the field data to obtain the comparison. This task involves
analyzing the field and design data in the perspective of the proposed concepts and
theoretical models.
Engineering correlations will be made between various
parameters based on the field and design data. For the design model used, the
constrained modulus, D and coefficient of horizontal consolidation, ch is obtained
using well established correlations.
These correlations were studied and tabulated. Comparison were then be
made between those sites investigated. From the various data correlations and the
analysis on the collected data, all the changes and effects were studied and a
comparison study was carried out. Based on the comparison, a conclusion was
derived at in the form of conceptual proposal of improvement of the design
principles with regards to the nature of soil and site condition. Figure 4.1 shows the
flowchart of the methodology adopted in this study.
29
Field Measurement
Settlement Marker
Rod Settlement Gauge
Design Data
Priebe’s Method
Comparison Study
Based on Design and
Field Settlement Data
Conclusion
Based on Comparison
Study
Figure 4.1: Analysis Procedure
CHAPTER 5
SITE FOR CASE STUDY
5.1
Introduction
The project selected for this study is Ipoh-Rawang Double Tracking Project.
This project connects Rawang and Ipoh towns with electrified trains for the
betterment of the public transport. This project also forms part of the Trans-Asia
Railway line which connects Kunming in China and Singapore. This project covers
a distance of approximately 150 km. the alignment of the new double track line
follows closely the existing single track line and in many locations one of the lines is
shared. The location map can be referred in Figure 5.1.
The alignment of the proposed railway traverses largely through tin mining
areas which has been heaviliy influenced by the tine mining activity in the past. The
subsoil consists of highly variable mixtures of extremely soft cohesive soils or very
loose cohesionless soils to very hard cohesive soil or very dense cohesionless soils.
The depth of these soil type ranges from 6 m to 24 m in certain extreme cases. Due to
variation in subsoil condition, numerous ground improvement techniques were
employed depending on subsoil condition.
Based on the details and also best
judgement and past experience, stone columns were employed at many locations
throughout the alignment.
31
The site was basically underlain by residual soil with clayey soil and sandy
soil forms major composition. The subsoil generally consists of very soft to soft clay
and loose sand which will lead to extensive settlement if left untreated. Therefore it
requires accurate testing methods which cause minimum disturbance to soil and
maximum subsoil data as much as possible. Therefore cone penetration test with
pore pressure measurements (CPTU) was carried out as it provides continuous
subsoil profile along the depth of penetration.
Project Location
Figure 5.1 : Project Location
The exact location of the site is as given in the Table 5.1. Five sites were
identified and chosen for the study. These sites were chosen based on the availability
of the settlement data. The details of the improvement work are given in Table 5.1.
The fill height at the stone column improved areas varies depending on the vertical
profile for which the railway tracks were designed for.
The ground improvement works were designed to the performance criteria of
the project. Briefly stating, these specifications prescribe limits on total settlement
(maximum post construction settlement of 25 mm over 6 months of commercial rail
32
service) and differential settlements (maximum differential settlement of 10 mm over
a length of 10 m along the embankment centerline). The stone column ground
improvement system was designed to achieve these performance criteria.
Table 5.1 : Location Details of stone column improvement work
Location
CH254890
to
CH255095
CH261950
to
CH263125
CH272100
to
CH272350
CH297250
to
CH299250
CH299400
to
CH299625
5.2
(m)
Stone
Column
Diameter
(m)
Stone
Column
Spacing
(m)
2.0
0.8
1.80
3.0
0.8
2.00
3.0
0.8
2.00
2.0
0.8
2.00
1.8
0.8
2.00
Fill
Height
Subsoil Condition
The generalized subsoil profile of the stone column improved ground consists
of cohesive soils with undrained shear strength less than 50 kPa and cohesionless
soils with friction angle of less than 28q. This basically confirms to the termination
criteria of stone column of cone sleeve friction, qc of 1 MPa to 2 MPa in cohesive
soils and qc of 5 MPa in cohesionless soils.
CHAPTER 6
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND
IMPROVEMENT
6.1
Introduction
Stone column improved ground settlement is indeed very interesting area
whereby a composite ground comprises of stone column and in-situ soil settles
proportionately to the stress applied above.
Load carrying capacity of a stone
column is attributed to frictional properties of the stone mass, cohesion and frictional
properties of soils surrounding the column, flexibility or rigidity characteristics of the
foundation transmitting stresses to the improved ground and the magnitude of lateral
pressure developed in the surrounding soil mass and acting on the sides of the stone
column due to interaction between various elements in the system.
The stone
column derives its axial capacity from the passive earth pressure developed due to
the bulging effect of the column and increased resistance to lateral deformation under
superimposed surcharge load.
Presently, available methods for calculating settlement can be classified as
either simple, approximate methods which make important simplifying assumptions
or sophisticated methods based on fundamental elasticity and/or plasticity theory
(such as finite elements) which model material and boundary conditions. These
34
approaches for estimating settlement assume an infinitely wide, loaded area
reinforced with stone columns having a constant diameter and spacing. For this
condition of loading and geometry the extended unit cell concept is theoretically
valid and has been used by the Japanese, Priebe, Goughnour and in the finite element
method (Bergado et. al., 1991) to develop theoretical solutions for predicting
settlement. The reduction in settlement can be approximately considered due to the
spreading of stress in groups of limited size.
Stone column also have secondary roles. It acts as vertical drain and thus
speeding up the process of consolidation, replaces the soft soil by a stronger material
and initial compaction of soil during the process of installation thereby increasing the
unit weight.
6.2
Stone Column Design
Based on Priebe’s method, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet was created to
carry out design work. This spreadsheet was prepared based on the stone column
design formula (Priebe’s formula) in Chapter 2. The spreadsheet can be divided into
input, analysis and output sections. These sections are discussed next.
6.2.1
Input
This section contains the following details:
(1) embankment geometry
(2) loadings
(3) subsoil Strata and Properties
(4) stone Column Properties
35
The embankment geometry section consists of height and width of the
embankment to be constructed above the stone column improved ground. This
provides the loading on the composite ground. The input parameters shall be:
(1) top width of the embankment
(2) embankment side slope gradient
(3) design embankment height
By providing the above details, the spreadsheet calculates the base width of
the embankment. This in particular is very important in calculating the imposed
stress on the composite ground.
In the loadings section, all the loadings, the embankment loading and other
types of loadings, if any, to be calculated and totaled up for further analysis.
In subsoil strata and properties section, the following parameters were
considered:
(1) soil layer thickness
(2) soil type
(3) constrained modulus
(4) soil unit weight
(5) soil undrained shear strength, if cohesive
(6) soil phi value, if cohesionless
(7) coefficient of vertical and horizontal consolidation.
All the above parameters shall be deduced from proper soil investigation
works.
In the reference project, Cone Penetrometer Test with pore pressure
measurement (CPTU) was used extensively.
Cone Penetrometer Test (CPTU)
normally preferred more than conventional boreholes for ground improvement
scheme design. This is mainly because of the capability of the equipment to provide
more detailed and accurate results in comparison to the conventional boreholes.
36
The soil layer thickness and soil type can be correlated from well established
details by Robertson and Campanella (1983). The basic chart to estimate the type of
soil is as in Figure 6.1.
Based on Figure 6.1, the soil composition based on the parameters obtained
from CPTU such as cone resistance and friction ratio.
Figure 6.1 : Tip Resistance and Friction Ratio CPT Soil Classification Chart
(Robertson and Campanella, 1983)
37
The constrained modulus, D, which is equal to the reciprocal of the
oedometer vertical coefficient of volume change, mv, can be obtained from the
CPTU data by means of correlations. The constrained modulus is used to check the
deformation of the subsoil for one dimensional case such as embankment loading.
For other than one dimensional loading, Young’s Modulus may be more appropriate.
Since the project reference is dealing with anything but embankment, it is then
appropriate to use constrained modulus.
D
1
mv
(6.1)
D
D ˜ qc
(6.2)
Where,
D = constrained modulus
mv = coefficient of volume change
D = coefficient
qc = cone friction
D is given by Sanglerat (1975) for cohesive soil as in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1 : Estimation of constrained modulus for clays (Sanglerat, 1975)
(1 bar = 100 kPa)
qc(bar)
D
qc < 7
3< D <8
7 < qc < 20
2< D <5
qc > 20
1 < D < 2.5
qc < 20
3< D <6
Silts of low plasticity
qc > 20
1< D <3
(ML)
qc < 20
2< D <6
Soil Type
CLAY of low plasticity
(CL)
Highly plastic silts and
clays (MH, CH)
38
2< D <8
Organic silts (OL)
50 < w < 100
1.5 < D < 4
Peat and Organic CLAY
100 < w < 200
1 < D < 1.5
(Pt, OH)
w > 200
0.4 < D < 1
qc < 12
qc < 7
D for sand can be approximated from the following formula suggested by
Vesic (1970),
D
§ § Dr · 2 ·
2¨1 ¨
¸ ¸
¨ © 100 ¹ ¸
©
¹
(6.3)
Dr is the relative density of sand. The value approximated from the equation
gives a range of about 2.25 to 4.
The most common relationship to estimate the undrained shear strength, Su of
cohesive subsoil from CPTU data is :
Su
q c V vo
Nk
(6.4)
Where Nk is called the cone factor and V vo is the insitu vertical stress where qc
is measured. The cone factor which varies mainly varies between 10 and 20 should
preferably be obtained from empirical correlation with the strength test used in that
area. Robertson and Campanella (1983) recommended to use Nk = 15 for preliminary
assessment of Su. However, since Nk is sensitivity dependent, it should be reduced to
around 10 when dealing with a sensitive clay (Jean-Louis Briaud and Jerome Miran,
1991).
However, for all practical purpose, based on the past experience, the
following approximation has been adopted:
Su
qc
20
(6.5)
39
As for the friction angle of cohesionless soil, there are few established charts
shown in Figure 6.2 to 6.5 which can be used for approximation. However, these
charts shall be used with care as those were produced with regards to the different
subsoil details it represents.
Figure 6.2 : Relative density relationship for moderately compressible, uncemented,
unaged quartz sands (Jean-Louis Briaud and Jerome Miran, 1991)
40
Figure 6.3 : Influence of compressibility on uncemented, unaged, predominantly
quartz sands (Jean-Louis Briaud and Jerome Miran, 1991)
41
Figure 6.4 : Expanded soil behaviour type classification chart with equivalent
overburden normalized friction angle and relative density
trends (Jean-Louis Briaud and Jerome Miran, 1991)
42
Figure 6.5 : Proposed correlation between cone bearing and peak friction angle for
quartz sands (Robertson and Campanella, 1983)
43
6.2.2
Analysis
The analysis carried out for the design of stone column composite ground
comprises of three parts, namely :
(1) Composite subsoil parameters
(2) Settlement analysis
(3) Time-rate settlement analysis
The subsoil parameters at at-rest state will change after the inclusion of stone
column carried out. The after-state or improved ground is called composite ground,
consists of original subsoil, remoulded subsoil and the stone column itself.
Therefore, the stress-strength parameters of the composite ground are then called
composite parameters. The composite parameters are computed based on area ratio
method and load distribution ratio method.
The difference in settlement computation between improved ground and
unimproved ground is the improvement factor, n.
The settlement of the stone
column improved ground thus is calculated based on the following formula as
suggested by Aboshi and Suematsu (1985):
G ig
VH
Dn
Where,
G ig = settlement of stone column improved ground
V = total stress exerted on the subsoil layer
H = thickness of the subsoil layer
D = constrained modulus
n = improvement factor
(6.6)
44
The settlement of the unimproved ground below the stone column is then
calculated based on the following formula:
G og
VH
(6.7)
D
Where,
G og = settlement of stone column improved ground
The stress transfer down into the ground is computed using the Boussinesq
theory of stress transfer into the subsoil (Abhijit and De (1996)).
The time rate settlement analysis is then carried out based on assumption that
the stone column acts as vertical drain in helping to dissipate pore pressure
effectively. This has been reported by Han and Ye, (2001) as given in Chapter 2.
The whole subsoil is then characterized as single layer of subsoil with the thickness
of the whole improved ground changed into single layer thickness using guidelines
provided in Federal Highway Administration, America (FHWA) design manual as
below:
cv 2 ¢ cv1 ¢ cv 3
cv1
H1
cv2
H2
cv3
H3
Ht
§c
H 2 H 1 ¨¨ v 2
© cv1
·
§c
¸¸ H 3 ¨¨ v 2
¹
© cv 3
·
¸¸
¹
Figure 6.6 : Converting the multi layered subsoil into single layer
(Jean-Louis Briaud and Jerome Miran, 1991)
45
6.2.3
Output
The most important detail in an analysis is the output, whereby the input is now
in a form of workable solution. Referring back to Chapter 2, stone column can be
utilized to achieve the following:
(1) Improve bearing capacity,
(2) Improve overall stability and
(3) Reduce total settlement.
Therefore, for the purpose of both item 1 and 2 above, it is necessary to find the
composite subsoil parameters such as improved unit weight, undrained shear strength
and friction angle. Then both the bearing capacity and overall stability problems be
modeled and analysed effectively. The spreadsheet is also prepared to calculate and
provide the settlement magnitude based on subsoil layering and also the settlement
curve which provides details of the period of settlement to occur and percentage of
settlement to occur within certain time period.
6.3
Construction Method Implemented For Reference Project
6.3.1
Stone Column Material
Stone columns were formed by deep vibratory compaction using imported
crushed stone. The stones were sampled at the source and tested by the contractor
and the results produced to determine suitability.
46
6.3.2 Sand for Working Platform and Drainage
The sand used for the working platform consists of hard, natural or
manufactured sand free from organics, trash or other deleterious materials. The sand
is well-graded, contain less than 15 percent passing the Number 200 sieve, and have
a mean diameter of at least 0.2 mm.
6.3.3 Installation Method (Wet Top-Feed Method)
Stone columns were installed by jetting, using vibratory probes 360 mm
to 480 mm in diameter (not including the fins).
The vibrator was capable of
developing the required vibration characteristics at a frequency of 1600 rpm to 3000
rpm. The vibrator was driven by a motor having at least a 60 hp rating that is
capable of developing a minimum centrifugal force, in starting, of 15 tons gyrating
about a vertical axis.
The minimum double amplitude (peak to peak measurement) of the probe
tip was kept to be not less than ten (10) mm in the horizontal direction when the
probe is in a free suspended position.
The probe was made sure of producing and/or complying with the
following:-
i.
Produce approximately circular holes.
ii.
The probe and follower tubes were of sufficient length to reach the
elevations required. The probe, used in combination with the flow rate
and available pressure to the tip jet, was capable of penetrating to the
required tip elevation.
47
iii.
The probe had visible external markings at one (1) meter increments to
enable measurement of penetration and repenetration depths.
iv.
Sufficient quantity of wash water provided to the tip of the probe to
widen the probe hole to a diameter at least 305 mm greater than the probe
to allow adequate space for stone backfill placement around the probe.
The flow of water from the bottom jet was maintained at all times during
backfilling to prevent caving or collapse of the hole and to form a clean
stone column.
An average flow of 11 – 15 m3/hr of water was
maintained throughout construction. The flow rate will generally be
greater as the hole is jetted in, and decrease as the stone column comes
up.
v.
After forming the hole, the vibrator was lifted up a minimum of 3 m,
dropped at least twice to flush the hole out. The probe was not and shall
not, however, be completely removed from the hole to prevent hole
collapsing.
vi.
The stones were filled in the hole in 0.61 m to 1.22 m lifts to form the
column. The stones will be compacted in lifts by repenetrating it at least
twice with the horizontally vibrating probe so as to density and force the
stone radially into the surrounding in-situ soil.
The stone in each
increment was repenetrated a sufficient number of times to develop a
minimum ammeter reading on the motor of at least 40 amps more than
the free-standing (unloaded) ampere draw on the motor, but no less than
80 amps total.
vii.
Stone column was installed in such a way that each completed column
will be continuous throughout its length.
48
6.3.4
Construction Tolerances
The stone columns were installed by adhering to the following tolerances:
i.
Horizontal control
maximum of 150 mm in any
direction
ii.
Verticality
maximum of 3% deviation from
the verticality as indicated by the
tilt of vibrator and follower
tubes.
iii.
Top of column
maximum of 75 mm above
designed levels.
iv.
average diameter
minimum of 800 mm
The average effective stone column diameter was calculated using the inplace density of the stone and the weight of stone used to fill the hole.
For
calculation of constructed column diameter, the in-place density was assumed to be
equal to 80 percent of the relative density determined by using the loose and
compacted densities of the stone.
The weight of stone required to construct the
stone column were based on the equivalent number of full buckets dumped down the
hole and the loose stone density determined earlier.
6.4
Instrumentation
Instrumentation plays a vital role in any geotechnical problems. Through
instrumentation, performance of a geotechnical solution can be gauged effectively.
This could prevent any failure and mishaps associated with it. It is also better, if not
important, to install instruments for the purpose of gauging validity of the input
parameters used for the purpose of design. As much as this could help to rationalize
49
the design values with the field values, it could also provide some assurance of the
solution itself in future.
As for the reference project, there are two types of instruments installed for
those purposes mentioned above.
Those instruments are settlement markers or
survey markers and rod settlement gauges or settlement plates.
Settlement markers are installed on the surface of the embankment to
measure settlement at large (this may well include settlement of the subsoil and also
settlement within the embankment itself), rod settlement gauges are installed to
measure the settlement that occurs below the embankment only. Therefore it is
important that rod settlement gauges are installed if not, together with settlement
markers as reference points. The typical instrumentation scheme at stone column
improved ground is shown in Figure 6.7 below.
Figure 6.7 : Typical instrumentation scheme at stone column
improved ground
CHAPTER 7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
7.1
Introduction
The analysis was carried out based on the stone column design and
construction for the reference project. The analysis was conducted based on the rod
settlement gauge data available. The settlement marker data was also utilized as for
a reference. The analysis was carried out based on the following list of procedure.
7.2
Analysis Design Details
The analysis was carried out based on derived subsoil parameters as
discussed in Chapter 6. However, due to easiness of the analysis and design, there
are certain values and details which were generalized after some trial stone columns
have been installed at site. The main parameters that were in need of generalization
is the constraint modulus coefficient, D , soil bulk density, J, and the coefficient of
consolidation, cv and ch.
51
The value of D adopted for the reference project is as in Table 7.1. These
values are average values obtained from Table 6.1.
Table 7.1 : D values adopted in the design
Soil Type
D
Clay
5.0
Silt
4.0
Sand
3.0
Soil unit weight and the coefficient of vertical and horizontal consolidation
were approximated and adopted in the design based on past experience and best
judgment. Table 7.2 presents the soil unit weight and coefficient of vertical and
horizontal consolidation in relation to cone friction resistance, qc value adopted in
this reference project.
Table 7.2 : Values of J, cv and ch adopted in the design
Cone
Soil
Coefficient of
Coefficient of
Friction
Unit
Vertical
Horizontal
Resistance,
Weight,
qc(MPa)
J(kN/m3)
cv(m2/year)
ch(m2/year)
< 0.2
14
1
3
0.2 – 0.3
15
2
4
0.3 – 0.8
16
3
6
0.8 – 2.0
17
4
8
> 2.0
18
5
10
Consolidation, Consolidation,
The analysis was carried out using both Priebe’s Method and Han and Ye’s
Method to confirm the design parameters. The stone column ground improvement
design was carried out to achieve the project performance criteria. The analysis was
conducted separately for Priebe’s method for estimating total settlement and Han and
52
Ye’s Method for estimating time rate settlement. Similarly back analysis was carried
out for both these methods.
The following assumptions were made in order to carry out the analysis:
(1) The stones used are of similar size.
(2) The soil parameters assumed are conforming to the actual subsoil
parameters.
(3) The effects of soil loosening in sandy material while installation is
negligible.
(4) The stone columns are of the same diameter throughout the depth.
(5) The rod settlement gauge data is valid and correct.
(6) Stone columns were installed using wet method only.
The summary of analysis can be referred in Appendix A. Appendix B to F
can be referred for details of analysis for each location respectively.
7.3
Results of Analysis
The analysis was divided into two parts consist of total settlement and time
rate settlement. The total settlement was back analysed to obtain actual improvement
ratio, n and time rate settlement was back analysed using Asaoka’s method to obtain
actual coefficient of consolidations. Based on back analysis results on the field total
settlement, the required spacing was obtained together with the reduction factor
which can be incorporated into the settlement calculation.
The actual coefficient of consolidation was obtained from back analysis on
the field settlement data and used together with the derived actual spacing required to
simulate back the actual field settlement for the purpose of verification of the back
analysis data. Table 7.3 and 7.4 shows the summary of the design and actual data
obtained through the back analysis carried out.
53
Table 7.3 : Back Analysis Summary of Priebe’s Method
Design
Location
CH254890
TO
CH255095
CH261950
TO
CH263125
CH272100
TO
CH272350
CH297250
TO
CH299250
CH299400
TO
CH299625
Field
Back Analysis
Improvement Settlement
Ratio
Reduction
n
Factor
Spacing
Settlement
(m)
(mm)
Improvement
Ratio
n
1.80
83.0
1.97 - 2.03
48.0
3.41 - 3.51
1.73
2.3 4.5
2.00
64.3
1.74 - 1.76
32.0
3.49 - 3.53
2.01
2.2 2.8
2.00
88.1
1.73 - 1.89
29.0
5.26 - 5.73
3.04
2.0 4.5
2.00
68.0
1.76 - 1.81
24.0
4.99 - 5.13
2.83
2.0 3.5
2.00
56.1
1.77 - 2.14
20.0
4.91 - 6.0
2.80
2.0 3.5
Settlement
(mm)
Spacing
(m)
Table 7.4 : Back Analysis Summary of Han and Ye’s Method through
Asaoka’s Method
Design
Location
CH254890 TO CH255095
CH261950 TO CH263125
CH272100 TO CH272350
CH297250 TO CH299250
CH299400 TO CH299625
cv
(m2/yr)
1
2
2
1
2
ch
(m2/yr)
3
4
4
3
4
Back Analysis
cv
(m2/yr)
6.57
4.37
12.04
4.14
6.10
ch
(m2/yr)
11.36
7.30
12.28
7.66
9.28
ch/cv
1.73
1.67
1.02
1.85
1.52
For better use of the analysis results for the purpose of design, it is vital to
find relationship of the reduction factor to the fundamental properties of the subsoil.
Therefore the back analysed properties have been correlated with undrained shear
strength for cohesive soils and friction angle for cohesionless soils. Figure 7.1 to 7.8
show the trends for the purpose of reference.
54
0.60
Normalised Improvement Ratio, n/Cu
0.50
0.40
0.30
(n/Cu)=4.2407C
-1.02
u
R2 =0.9399
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Undrained Shear Strength, Cu, kPa
Design
Field
Figure 7.1 : Relationship between normalized improvement
ratio and undrained shear strength
0.50
0.45
Normalised Spacing, S/Cu
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
(S/Cu) =9.6093C
-1.381
u
2
R =0.9892
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0
10
20
30
40
50
Undrained Shear Strength, Cu, kPa
Design
Field
Figure 7.2 : Relationship between normalized spacing and
undrained shear strength
60
55
Normalised Settlement Reduction Factor,R/Cu
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
(R/Cu) =3.046C
-1.0928
u
2
R =0.9251
0.10
0.05
0.00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Undrained Shear Strength, Cu, kPa
Figure 7.3 : Relationship between normalized settlement
reduction factor and undrained shear strength
14.00
Normalised Improvement Ratio, n/tan I '
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.485
0.49
0.495
0.5
0.505
0.51
0.515
0.52
0.525
0.53
Soil Friction Angle, tan I '
Design
Field
Figure 7.4 : Relationship between normalized improvement ratio
and friction angle
0.535
56
5.00
4.50
Normalised Spacing, S/tan I '
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.485
0.49
0.495
0.5
0.505
0.51
0.515
0.52
0.525
0.53
0.535
Soil Friction Angle, tan I '
Design
Field
Figure 7.5 : Relationship between normalized spacing and friction angle
Normalised Settlement Reduction Factor, R/tan I '
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.485
0.49
0.495
0.5
0.505
0.51
0.515
0.52
0.525
0.53
0.535
Soil Friction Angle, tan I '
Figure 7.6 : Relationship between normalized settlement reduction factor and
friction angle
57
Table 7.5 shows the summary of the relationship obtained from the charts
plotted above.
Table 7.5 : Summary of relationship of stone column fundamental properties
and subsoil properties
Details
R2
Relationship
Relationship between normalized improvement ratio and undrained shear strength
n
Cu
4.2407C u1.02
0.9399
Relationship between normalized spacing and undrained shear strength
S
Cu
9.6093C u1.381
0.9892
R
Cu
3.046C u1.0928
0.9251
Relationship between normalized settlement reduction factor and undrained shear
strength
7.4
Discussion
Based on the comparison study carried out on the instrumentation data, the
field settlement is much lower than the computed settlement. This finding agrees
with the finding by Bergado et. al. (1991). The actual settlement is amounting to
about 42.3% of the estimated settlement, on the average. The difference in the
predicted and measured settlements can probably be attributed to the fact that during
the installation of the stone columns, rapid consolidation of the subsoil was already
taking place (even before the construction of embankment has started).
This
beneficial effect has not been considered in the design calculation.
It was observed that through the back calculation, the actual improvement
ratio is higher than the design improvement ratio. This concurs well with Raju’s
(1997) findings as stated in Chapter 2. However as the soil undrained shear strength
increases, the difference in the values of both design and actual improvement ratio
get closer, indicating that the improvement ratio calculated by Priebe’s method tend
to predict the actual value at higher undrained shear strength. On the average the
improvement ratio in the field is higher by approximately 2.5 times the design
improvement ratio. This probably associated to the size of the stone column installed
58
into the ground which might be larger than that it has been designed for due to lower
confinement pressure at lower undrained shear strength. As the actual diameter of
the stone column increases comparing to the design diameter, the replacement ratio
also tend to increase, thus reducing the settlement of the subsoil.
As the settlement reduces, the actual spacing required to achieve the reduced
settlement is also increase. This can be seen from Figure 7.2, where the required
spacing to achieve the actual settlement in the field is much larger than the computed
spacing corresponding to the computed settlement using Priebe’s method.
Correspondingly, the settlement reduction factor tends to follow the similar
trend, reducing with the increase in the undrained shear strength of the subsoil. This
shows that the priebe’s method overestimates settlement by large at lower undrained
shear strength of the subsoil.
In sandy soil, the actual improvement ratio in the field tends to be higher than
the design improvement ratio. This may be attributable to the diameter of the
columns at site to be larger than the design diameter of the column. Besides that,
both being granular nature, the sandy stratum will also tend to provide infill and
increase the interlocking of the stone column material.
The actual required spacing of the stone column also appears to be having
some increase with regards to the subsoil property, but it is quite not conclusive that
the results obtained are very small in difference. Similar can be said about the
settlement reduction factor for the sandy soil where the results are staggered and
appeared to be not having a trend. This is due to lack of data on the sandy soil with
regards to the property i.e. the data sample consists of only two friction angles.
It is also observed that the improvement ratio in clay layer is much higher
than in sand layer. This maybe due to sand layer having the same modulus ratio
whereas clay layer has much lower modulus, thus allowing for more improvement
due to difference in modulus.
59
Based on the summary of the relationship obtained, it can be seen that the
results are very reliable with R2 value to be very high, i.e. above 0.9. Therefore it is
suggested that the relationship obtained for clayey soil can be used for the design
work. However, due to lack of data, there could not be any relationship obtained for
sandy soil.
The result of the analysis generally implies that as the soil strength increases,
the amount of settlement corresponding to that soil stiffness decreases depending on
the stress state of the soil itself. The settlement can now be calculated incorporating
the settlement reduction factor based on the subsoil properties for both cohesive and
cohesionless, treated subsoil layers based on the results obtained. Therefore, the total
settlement can now be reproduced as:
G ig
VH
Ds Rn
(7.1)
Where,
Gig = Settlement of improved ground
V = Stress on the point of interest within ground
H = Thickness of the subsoil
R = Settlement reduction factor
n = settlement improvement ratio
Ds = Constraint modulus of soil within tributary area
The above relationship can be used with the aid of the respective figures to
obtain settlement at each layer of different types of subsoil to closely match the field
settlement. This can help in reducing the spacing required for the stone columns
with regards to settlement.
Based on the back analysis carried out on the time rate analysis using
Asaoka’s approach, the coefficient of vertical and horizontal consolidation of the
ground found to increase after stone column construction, probably due to smearing
effect by the vibroflot and also the cross sectional area of the column could be larger
into the ground where the soft cohesive soil is due to less lateral confinement. On
60
the average the coefficient of horizontal consolidation is about 1.6 times the
coefficient of vertical consolidation. This is lower than the assumed relationship of 2.
This could be attributable to lower permeability of subsoil between the stone
columns.
The design was remodeled and the settlement curve was then simulated back
and matched with the field settlement data. This exercise was carried out to assess
the validity of the back analysed parameters. The remodeled curves matched well
with the field settlement curve proving that the back analysed improvement ratio and
spacing obtained are in order.
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSION
8.1
Conclusion
There results obtained from the analysis carried out can now be concluded based
on the discussion in Chapter 7. The results of the analysis can be concluded as follows:
(1) The field settlement is much lower than the calculated value based on Priebe’s
Method. The difference in the magnitude is about 42.3% on the average.
(2) The actual improvement ratio, n is much higher than the computed value based
on Priebe’s method at lower undrained shear strength value. On the average, the
actual improvement factor is higher by about 2.5 times of the computed value.
The relationship obtained between the improvement ratio and the undrained
shear strength is
n
Cu
4.2407C u1.02 .
62
(3) The improvement ratio of cohesive soil is found to be higher than the
improvement ratio for cohesionless soil based on the field settlement data
obtained and analysed.
(4) The actual spacing required to produce the field settlement is found to be higher
than the calculated spacing. The actual spacing required based on the undrained
shear strength of the subsoil can be computed using
S
Cu
9.6093C u1.381 .
(5) The settlement reduction factor is higher at lower undrained shear strength value
and reducing with the increase of undrained shear strength. The settlement
reduction factor can be used in the calculation of the settlement to produce
estimated settlement approaching field settlement. The relationship obtained
between the settlement reduction factor and undrained shear strength is
R
Cu
3.046C u1.0928 .
(6) The coefficient of vertical and horizontal consolidation in the field is found to be
higher than the estimated values. On the average the coefficient of horizontal
consolidation is about 1.6 times the coefficient of vertical consolidation.
8.2
Recommendations for Further Studies
It is suggested that further study can be extended to the following area and scope:
(1) The stone column design i.e. spacing is controlled by three factors i.e. settlement,
bearing capacity and overall stability of the improved ground. Therefore it is
important that the effect of the other two factors to be studied in order to arrive at
an exclusive conclusion.
63
(2) To study the effect of the stone column size in the ground to the settlement and
subsequently the spacing of the stone columns.
(3) To study the effect of the installation method other than wet process to be studied
with regards to settlement.
(4) To conduct more studies of similar nature to establish and prove further on the
existing findings.
(5) To carry out more detailed instrumentation scheme to further verify and prove
the outcome of this study.
64
REFERENCES
Abhijit S. and De P. K. (1996) The Stress Concentration Ratio in Soil – Stone Column
Interaction. Twelft South East Asian Geotechnical Conference, Kuala Lumpur.
Aboshi, H. and Suematsu, N. (1985) The State of the Art on Sand Compaction Pile
Method. Geotechnical Seminar on Soil Improvement Methods. Nanyang
Technological Institute, Singapore.
Barksdale R. D. and Bachus R. C. (1983) Design and Construction of Stone Columns.
Volume 1, Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of
Transportation.
Bergado D. T., Alfaro M. C. and Chai J. C. (1991) The Granular Pile : Its Present State
and Future Prospects for Improvement of Soft Bangkok Clay. Geotechnical
Engineering Journal. Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok.
Greenwood D. A. and Kirsch K. (1983) Specialist Ground Treatment by Vibratory and
Dynamic Methods. Thomas Telford. London.
Goughnour R. R. and Bayuk A. A. (1979) A Field Study of Long-Term Settlement of
Loads Supported by Stone Colums in Soft ground. International Conference on Soil
Reinforcement : Reinforcement Earth and Other Techniques, Vol. 1, Paris.
65
Jean-Louis Briaud and Jerome Miran (1991) The Cone Penetration Test. The Federal
Highway Administration, Washington D. C.
Jie Han and Shu-Lin Ye (2001) Simplified Method for Consolidation Rate of Stone
Column Reinforced Foundations. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, ASCE.
Mohd. Marzuki Bin Mohamed, (1994) Application of Stone Column in Karstic
Formation. IKRAM Seminar on Engineering in Karstic Formation.
Madhira R. Madhav and Nagpure D. D. (1996) Design of Granular Piles for
Embankments on Soft Ground. Twelft South East Asian Geotechnical Conference,
Kuala Lumpur.
Nayak N. V. (1982) Recent Innovations in Ground Improvement by Stone Columns.
Symposium on Recent Developments in Ground Improvement Techniques,
Bangkok.
Poorooshasb H. B. and Meyerhof G. G. (1993) Consolidation Settlement of Rafts
Supported by Stone Columns. Ground Engineering Journal.
Priebe H. J. (1993) Design Criteria for Ground Improvement by Stone Columns. Fourth
National Conference, Ground Improvement, Lahore, Pakistan.
Priebe H. J. (1995) The Design of Vibro Replacement. Ground Engineering Journal.
Priebe H. J. (1998) Vibro Replacement to Prevent Earthquake Induced Liquifaction.
Geotechnique-Colloquium, Darmstadt, Germany.
66
Raju V. R. and Hoffman G. (1996) Treatment of Tin Mine Tailings Deposits in Kuala
Lumpur Using Vibro Replacement. Twelft South East Asian Geotechnical
Conference, Kuala Lumpur.
Raju V. R. (1997) The Behaviour of Very Soft Soils Improved by Vibro Replacement.
Ground Improvement Conference, London.
Raju V. R., Wegner R. and Hari Krishna Y. (2004) Ground Improvement Using Vibro
Replacement in Asia 1994 to 2004 – A 10 Year Review. Keller Foundozani,
Germany.
Rao S. N., Reddy K. M., and Kumar P. H. (1995) Studies of Stone Columns in Soft
Clays. Ground Engineering.
Robertson P. K. and Campanella R. G. (1983) Interpretation of Cone Penetration Test.
Canadian Geotechnical Engineering Journal, Vol. 20, Canada.
Sanglerat G. (1972) The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration. Elsevier Publishing
Company, Amsterdam.
Vesic A. S. (1970) Tests on Uninstrumented Piles, Ogeechee River Site. American
Society of Civil Engineers, United States of America.
SP
ACIN
G
(m
)
1.80
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
SE
N
M
E
L
T
(m
)
m
83.0
64.3
88.1
68.0
56.1
DE
SIG
N
1.97 -2.03
1.74 -1.76
1.73 -1.89
1.76 -1.81
1.77 -2.14
n2
SE
N
M
E
L
T
(m
)
m
48.0
32.0
29.0
24.0
20.0
FIE
D
L
ACKAN
B
AY
S
L IS
n2
RE
DU
CT
N
IO
FACT
R
O
3.41 -3.51
1.73
3.49 -3.53
2.01
5.26 -5.73
3.04
4.99 -5.13
2.83
4.91 -6.0
2.80
CH254890 O
TCH255095
CH261950 O
TCH263125
CH227100 O
TCH227350
CH297250 O
TCH299250
CH299400 O
TCH299625
CAT
O
L
N
IO
cv
(m
2/y
r)
1
2
2
1
2
DE
SIG
N
ch
(m
2/y
r)
3
4
4
3
4
cv
(m
2/y
r)
6.57
4.37
12.04
4.14
6.10
ACKAN
B
AL
SIS
Y
ch
(m
2/y
r)
11.36
7.30
12.28
7.66
9.28
1.73
1.67
1.02
1.85
1.52
1.56
ch/cv
HAN AND YE'S METHOD (TIME RATE SETTLEMENT) (BACK ANALYSIS USING ASAOKA'S INTERPRETATION)
CH254890 O
TCH255095
CH261950 O
TCH263125
CH227100 O
TCH227350
CH297250 O
TCH299250
CH299400 O
TCH299625
CAT
O
L
N
IO
PRIEBE'S METHOD (SETTLEMENT)
ANALYSIS SUMMARY
APPENDIX A
SP
ACIN
G
(m
)
2.3 -4.5
2.2 -2.8
2.0 -4.5
2.0 -3.5
2.0 -3.5
67
Cu design n field n design Ac/A field Ac/A
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
30
2.01
3.47
0.152
0.061
10
1.97
3.41
0.154
0.024
25
1.74
3.49
0.124
0.064
50
1.76
3.53
0.123
0.105
10
1.73
3.51
0.125
0.025
10
1.76
4.99
0.125
0.040
50
1.81
5.13
0.122
0.126
10
1.77
4.96
0.125
0.040
Cu design n field n design Ac/A field Ac/A
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
28
2.03
3.51
0.152
0.078
28
2.02
3.49
0.151
0.093
28
1.76
3.53
0.123
0.094
26
1.89
5.73
0.119
0.126
28
1.77
3.41
0.123
0.100
26
1.73
3.49
0.119
0.126
26
1.80
5.09
0.123
0.126
26
2.14
6.00
0.123
0.126
28
1.84
5.16
0.120
0.126
26
1.84
4.91
0.123
0.126
chainage Fill Height
(1)
255005
2
2
262100
3
3
272300
3
298800
2
2
299550
1.8
chainage Fill Height
(1)
255005
2
2
262100
3
272300
3
3
3
298800
2
299550
1.8
1.8
1.8
R Design Spacing Field Spacing
(7)
(8)
(9)
1.73
1.80
2.5
1.73
1.80
2.3
2.01
2.00
2.3
3.04
2.00
2.0
3.04
2.00
2.2
3.04
2.00
2.0
2.83
2.00
2.0
2.80
2.00
2.0
2.80
2.00
2.0
2.80
2.00
2.0
2.58
R Design Spacing Field Spacing
(7)
(8)
(9)
1.73
1.80
2.9
1.73
1.80
4.5
2.01
2.00
2.8
2.01
2.00
2.2
3.04
2.00
4.5
2.83
2.00
3.5
2.83
2.00
2.0
2.80
2.00
3.5
2.37
(3)
(2)
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.07
(3)
(2)
0.07
0.20
0.07
0.04
0.17
0.18
0.04
0.18
(5)
(2)
0.005
0.015
0.005
0.002
0.012
0.012
0.002
0.012
(5)
(2)
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.005
(4)
(2)
0.12
0.34
0.14
0.07
0.35
0.50
0.10
0.50
(4)
(2)
0.13
0.12
0.13
0.22
0.12
0.13
0.20
0.23
0.18
0.19
(6)
(2)
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.005
(6)
(2)
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.003
0.004
(7)
(2)
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.11
0.10
0.11
(7)
(2)
0.06
0.17
0.08
0.04
0.30
0.28
0.06
0.28
(8)
(2)
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.08
(8)
(2)
0.06
0.18
0.08
0.04
0.20
0.20
0.04
0.20
(9)
(2)
0.09
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.08
(9)
(2)
0.10
0.45
0.11
0.04
0.45
0.35
0.04
0.35
68
n/Cu
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0
10
20
Design
Field
Cu, kPa
30
40
Normalised Improvement Ratio vs Undrained Shear Strength
50
60
69
Ar/Cu
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
0
10
20
Design
Field
Cu, kPa
30
40
Normalised Area Ratio vs Undrained Shear Strength
50
60
70
S/Cu
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0
10
20
Design
Field
Cu, kPa
30
40
Normalised Spacing vs Undrained Shear Strength
50
60
71
R/Cu
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0
10
20
Cu, kPa
30
40
Normalised Settlement Reduction Factor vs Undrained Shear Strength
50
60
72
n/Phi
0.00
25.5
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
26
26.5
Design
Field
Phi, degree
27
27.5
Normalised Improvement Ratio vs Friction Angle
28
28.5
73
Ar/Phi
0.000
25.5
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
26
26.5
Design
Field
Phi, degree
27
27.5
Normalised Area Ratio vs Friction Angle
28
28.5
74
S/Phi
0.00
25.5
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
26
26.5
Design
Field
Phi, degree
27
Normalised Spacing vs Friction Ratio
27.5
28
28.5
75
R/Phi
25.5
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
26
26.5
Phi, degree
27
27.5
Normalised Settlement Reduction Factor vs Friction Ratio
28
28.5
76
77
APPENDIX B
ANALYSIS FOR
CH254890 TO CH255095
78
KELLER-BAUER CONSORTIUM
ELECTRIFIED DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT BETWEEN RAWANG AND IPOH
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH254890 TO CH255095
EMBANKMENT GEOMETRY
TOP WIDTH (B) =
14.9 m
EMBANKMENT SLOPE (1:?) =
2
DESIGN EMBANKMENT HEIGHT(H) =
2 m (GL TO TOP RAIL LEVEL)
EMBANKMENT BASE WIDTH (W) =
16.9 m
LOADINGS
FILL UNIT WEIGHT =
20 kN/m3
FILL LOAD =
40 kPa
TOTAL DESIGN LOAD =
40 kPa
SUBSOIL STRATA & PROPERTIES
SOIL
LAYER
BOTTOM
THK
TYPE
CONSTRAINED
UNIT
Su
PHI
Cv
Cr
MODULUS
WEIGHT
(MPa)
kN/m3
kPa
degree
m2/yr
m2/yr
30
3
6
28
5
10
LEVEL
(m)
(m)
1
1.5
1.5
CLAY
2.40
16
2
4
2.5
Silty SAND
3.00
17
3
6
2
CLAY
1.00
14
4
9.5
3.5
SAND
3.60
17
DRAINAGE LENGTH (VERTICAL)=
10
28
1
3
5
10
2.8 m
DESIGN Cv =
1 m2/yr
DESIGN Cr =
3 m2/yr
GROUND WATER TABLE =
1 mbgl
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
1.8 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
9.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN =
3.24
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
0.155
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
0.217
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
0.357
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
SOIL
THK
LAYER
1.87
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSIBILIT
THK
(CUM)
(Ac/A)1
Dc/Ds
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
n1
(m)
(m)
1
1.5
1.5
0.90
42
0.113
0.152
1.85
2
2.5
4
0.88
33
0.143
0.152
1.85
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
Pc/Ps
Pc
COMP. PARAMETERS
GAMMA n(max)
n2
kPa
kPa
6.6
142.2
6.2
7.31
2.01
6.6
142.4
7.2
6.02
2.03
m
UNIT WT.
Cu
Phi
kN/m3
kPa
deg.
0.46
17.4
25.4
21.1
0.46
17.9
0.0
33.9
3
2
6
0.96
100
0.047
0.154
1.86
6.6
141.6
4.2
16.36
1.97
0.46
16.3
8.5
21.2
4
3.5
9.5
0.85
28
0.173
0.151
1.84
6.6
142.7
7.2
5.15
2.02
0.46
17.9
0.0
33.9
79
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
DEPTH
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
STRESS
TOTAL
CONSOL.
INCR.
SETTL.
SETTL.
(kPa)
n2
(mm)
(mm)
0.5
1
40.00
2.01
4.1
1
1
39.99
2.01
4.1
1.5
1
39.95
2.01
4.1
2
2
39.86
2.03
3.3
2.5
2
39.71
2.03
3.3
3
2
39.48
2.03
3.2
3.5
2
39.19
2.03
3.2
4
2
38.81
2.03
3.2
4.5
3
38.36
1.97
9.7
9.7
5
3
37.84
1.97
9.6
9.6
5.5
3
37.27
1.97
9.5
9.5
6
3
36.64
1.97
9.3
9.3
6.5
4
35.97
2.02
2.5
7
4
35.27
2.02
2.4
7.5
4
34.54
2.02
2.4
8
4
33.80
2.02
2.3
8.5
4
33.05
2.02
2.3
9
4
32.30
2.02
2.2
9.5
4
31.55
2.02
2.2
TOTAL
83.0
38.1
SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT RESULTS
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
38 mm
CONSOLIDATION SETTL. UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN =
37 mm
(ASSUME 1 YR FROM THE END OF CONSTRUCTION OF EMBANKMENT)
TIME FOR 90 % CONSOLIDATION OF TREATED GROUND =
EST. SETTL. DURING 1ST 6 MTHS OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN OPERATION =
35 DAYS
1.0 mm
80
CH254890 TO CH255095
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
38.1 mm
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
2.03 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
2.54
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
1.55 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
4.65 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.39
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.8 m
TIME INTERVAL =
1 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
1
0.000551
2.6
0.003077
6.1
8.6
3.3
3.3
2
0.001102
3.7
0.006155
11.8
15.1
5.7
5.7
3
0.001654
4.6
0.009232
17.1
21.0
4
0.002205
5.3
0.01231
22.2
26.3
10.0
10.0
5
0.002756
5.9
0.015387
26.9
31.2
11.9
11.9
6
0.003307
6.5
0.018464
31.4
35.8
13.6
13.6
7
0.003859
7.0
0.021542
35.5
40.0
15.3
15.3
8
0.00441
7.5
0.024619
39.4
44.0
16.8
16.8
9
0.004961
7.9
0.027697
43.1
47.6
18.2
18.2
10
0.005512
8.4
0.030774
46.6
51.1
19.5
19.5
11
0.006064
8.8
0.033851
49.8
54.2
20.7
20.7
12
0.006615
9.2
0.036929
52.9
57.2
21.8
21.8
13
0.007166
9.6
0.040006
55.7
60.0
22.8
14
0.007717
9.9
0.043083
58.4
62.6
23.8
23.8
15
0.008269
10.3
0.046161
61.0
65.0
24.8
24.8
16
0.00882
10.6
0.049238
63.3
67.2
25.6
25.6
17
0.009371
10.9
0.052316
65.6
69.3
26.4
26.4
18
0.009922
11.2
0.055393
67.7
71.3
27.2
27.2
19
0.010474
11.5
0.05847
69.6
73.1
27.9
27.9
20
0.011025
11.8
0.061548
71.5
74.8
28.5
28.5
21
0.011576
12.1
0.064625
73.2
76.5
29.1
29.1
22
0.012127
12.4
0.067703
74.8
78.0
29.7
29.7
23
0.012679
12.7
0.07078
76.4
79.4
30.2
30.2
24
0.01323
13.0
0.073857
77.8
80.7
30.7
30.7
25
0.013781
13.2
0.076935
79.1
81.9
31.2
31.2
26
0.014332
13.5
0.080012
80.4
83.1
31.6
31.6
27
0.014884
13.8
0.08309
81.6
84.1
32.1
32.1
28
0.015435
14.0
0.086167
82.7
85.1
32.4
32.4
29
0.015986
14.3
0.089244
83.8
86.1
32.8
32.8
30
0.016537
14.5
0.092322
84.8
87.0
33.1
33.1
31
0.017089
14.7
0.095399
85.7
87.8
33.5
33.5
32
0.01764
15.0
0.098477
86.6
88.6
33.7
33.7
33
0.018191
15.2
0.101554
87.4
89.3
34.0
34.0
34
0.018742
15.4
0.104631
88.1
90.0
34.3
34.3
35
0.019294
15.7
0.107709
88.9
90.6
34.5
34.5
36
0.019845
15.9
0.110786
89.5
91.2
34.7
34.7
37
0.020396
16.1
0.113864
90.2
91.8
35.0
35.0
38
0.020947
16.3
0.116941
90.8
92.3
35.2
35.2
39
0.021499
16.5
0.120018
91.3
92.8
35.3
35.3
40
0.02205
16.8
0.123096
91.9
93.2
35.5
35.5
41
0.022601
17.0
0.126173
92.4
93.7
35.7
35.7
42
0.023152
17.2
0.12925
92.8
94.1
35.8
35.8
43
0.023704
17.4
0.132328
93.3
94.4
36.0
36.0
44
0.024255
17.6
0.135405
93.7
94.8
36.1
36.1
45
0.024806
17.8
0.138483
94.1
95.1
36.2
36.2
46
0.025357
18.0
0.14156
94.4
95.4
36.4
36.4
47
0.025909
18.2
0.144637
94.8
95.7
36.5
36.5
48
0.02646
18.4
0.147715
95.1
96.0
36.6
36.6
49
0.027011
18.5
0.150792
95.4
96.2
36.7
36.7
50
0.027562
18.7
0.15387
95.7
96.5
36.8
36.8
51
0.028114
18.9
0.156947
95.9
96.7
36.8
36.8
52
0.028665
19.1
0.160024
96.2
96.9
36.9
36.9
53
0.029216
19.3
0.163102
96.4
97.1
37.0
37.0
54
0.029767
19.5
0.166179
96.6
97.3
37.1
37.1
55
0.030319
19.6
0.169257
96.8
97.4
37.1
37.1
56
0.03087
19.8
0.172334
97.0
97.6
37.2
37.2
57
0.031421
20.0
0.175411
97.2
97.8
37.2
37.2
58
0.031972
20.2
0.178489
97.4
97.9
37.3
37.3
59
0.032524
20.3
0.181566
97.5
98.0
37.3
37.3
60
0.033075
20.5
0.184644
97.7
98.2
37.4
37.4
61
0.033626
20.7
0.187721
97.8
98.3
37.4
37.4
62
0.034177
20.9
0.190798
98.0
98.4
37.5
37.5
63
0.034729
21.0
0.193876
98.1
98.5
37.5
37.5
64
0.03528
21.2
0.196953
98.2
98.6
37.6
37.6
65
0.035831
21.4
0.20003
98.3
98.7
37.6
37.6
66
0.036382
21.5
0.203108
98.4
98.7
37.6
37.6
67
0.036934
21.7
0.206185
98.5
98.8
37.7
37.7
68
0.037485
21.8
0.209263
98.6
98.9
37.7
37.7
69
0.038036
22.0
0.21234
98.7
99.0
37.7
37.7
70
0.038587
22.2
0.215417
98.8
99.0
37.7
37.7
71
0.039139
22.3
0.218495
98.8
99.1
37.8
37.8
72
0.03969
22.5
0.221572
98.9
99.2
37.8
37.8
73
0.040241
22.6
0.22465
99.0
99.2
37.8
37.8
74
0.040792
22.8
0.227727
99.0
99.3
37.8
37.8
75
0.041343
22.9
0.230804
99.1
99.3
37.8
37.8
76
0.041895
23.1
0.233882
99.1
99.3
37.8
37.8
77
0.042446
23.2
0.236959
99.2
99.4
37.9
37.9
78
0.042997
23.4
0.240037
99.2
99.4
37.9
37.9
8.0
0.0
8.0
22.8
SETTLEMENT (mm)
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
TIME (days)
60
LOCATION : CH254890 TO CH255095
70
80
90
81
82
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
Location
Mainline
Chainage
255005
Time
(Days)
0
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
30
32
33
34
35
36
40
41
42
43
51
54
57
61
64
68
71
77
80
83
Fill Height Settlement
(m)
(mm)
0.0455
0.0
0.5387
4.5
0.5411
4.8
0.8815
7.2
0.8884
8.9
0.9032
10.6
0.8504
13.2
0.8504
14.1
1.1844
15.7
1.4324
17.3
1.4288
20.1
1.4268
23.1
1.4250
23.7
1.3984
24.2
1.4315
23.9
1.4286
24.1
1.4278
24.4
1.3510
25.7
1.3494
26.4
1.3470
27.0
1.4191
26.9
1.4180
27.3
1.4176
27.4
1.4166
27.1
1.3783
29.0
1.3767
29.3
1.4301
29.1
1.4280
29.4
1.4269
29.7
1.4255
31.4
1.4228
31.9
1.4175
31.8
1.4213
31.9
1.4310
32.2
1.4193
32.6
1.4088
32.9
1.4181
33.2
1.4156
33.5
1.4124
33.6
1.3970
33.6
1.3949
34.1
1.3938
34.4
1.3925
34.7
SPR N 45
83
86
90
93
97
100
105
109
112
116
119
124
127
131
138
145
153
155
159
163
167
170
174
182
186
189
195
198
205
209
216
224
230
237
244
251
259
263
270
279
287
295
299
306
313
320
327
334
345
351
355
362
1.3918
1.3887
1.7596
1.7812
1.7800
1.7861
1.7835
1.5590
1.5623
1.5581
1.5440
1.5382
1.5088
1.5070
1.5038
1.5554
1.6148
1.6118
1.7592
1.7672
1.7602
1.9712
1.9706
1.9701
1.9698
1.9591
1.9620
1.9580
1.9650
1.9792
2.0141
1.9870
1.9817
1.9837
1.9787
1.9778
1.9783
1.9710
1.9761
1.9610
1.9622
1.9600
1.9581
1.9627
1.9741
1.9581
1.9752
1.9678
1.9643
1.9713
1.9961
34.9
35.3
35.8
36.4
36.7
37.3
37.6
37.9
38.0
38.2
38.0
37.8
38.0
38.2
38.3
38.6
38.9
39.2
39.5
39.8
40.1
40.3
40.5
40.7
40.9
41.0
41.2
41.3
41.0
41.2
41.4
41.4
41.5
41.6
41.8
42.1
42.4
42.5
42.7
42.9
43.3
43.5
43.9
43.9
44.2
44.4
44.5
44.8
44.9
45.1
45.2
84
371
379
383
391
398
405
413
420
426
433
440
447
454
461
468
474
481
487
495
502
509
516
523
530
537
544
551
558
565
572
579
587
594
601
607
615
622
629
636
643
650
657
664
671
678
685
692
699
706
713
720
1.9667
1.9620
1.9667
1.9717
1.9788
1.9704
1.9778
1.9783
1.9617
1.9689
1.9604
1.9845
1.9770
1.9728
1.9751
1.9718
1.9774
1.9732
1.9696
1.9738
1.9726
1.9729
1.9716
1.9745
1.9699
1.9728
1.9717
1.9752
1.9726
1.9760
1.9731
1.9755
1.9707
1.9728
1.9765
1.9709
1.9770
1.9718
1.9756
1.9715
1.9762
1.9707
1.9750
1.9724
1.9771
1.9709
1.9748
1.9730
1.9762
1.9707
1.9735
45.3
45.5
45.7
45.8
45.9
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.6
45.9
46.2
46.1
46.3
46.1
46.0
46.2
46.3
46.6
46.5
46.7
46.8
46.7
46.6
46.9
46.8
46.6
46.7
46.5
46.8
46.6
46.9
46.7
46.5
46.4
46.6
46.8
46.9
47.2
47.1
47.3
47.4
47.7
47.8
47.6
47.5
47.3
47.0
47.1
46.9
46.8
46.6
85
727
734
741
748
788
789
790
791
792
793
795
796
797
798
802
809
816
823
832
839
846
853
860
867
874
881
888
895
902
909
916
923
929
937
944
951
958
965
972
979
986
993
1000
1007
1014
1021
1028
1035
1042
1063
1077
1.9708
1.9738
1.9693
1.9751
1.9731
1.9751
1.9774
1.9762
1.9730
1.9707
1.9782
1.9662
1.9660
1.9729
1.9751
1.9731
1.9734
1.9782
1.9849
1.9828
1.9862
1.9819
1.9849
1.9808
1.9831
1.9804
1.9838
1.9813
1.9835
1.9823
1.9847
1.981
1.9828
1.9855
1.9823
1.9847
1.9809
1.9835
1.9803
1.9825
1.9844
1.9809
1.9857
1.9805
1.9829
1.984
1.9812
1.9805
1.9826
1.9843
1.98
46.5
46.2
46.3
46.1
46.1
45.7
46.0
44.9
44.5
44.5
44.5
44.5
44.4
45.4
45.7
45.7
43.7
44.5
46.2
46.8
47.1
47.6
47.4
47.2
47.0
47.1
46.9
47.0
46.7
46.6
46.4
46.5
46.3
46.2
46
45.9
46.1
46.4
46.5
46.3
46.2
46
45.9
46.1
45.8
45.7
45.9
45.6
45.3
45.5
45.2
86
1091
1105
1119
1140
1154
1168
1182
1203
1217
1231
1.9853
1.9848
1.9851
1.9819
1.984
1.9815
1.9856
1.9798
1.9862
1.9854
45.4
45.1
45
45.2
44.8
45.4
45
44.7
45.1
44.8
87
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
SPR N 45
Location
Mainline
Chainage
255005
Time (Days)
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
720
660
600
540
480
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
2.40
2.00
Fill Height, (m)
1.60
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.00
Time (Days)
Settlement (mm)
720
660
600
540
480
420
60.0
360
50.0
300
40.0
240
30.0
180
20.0
120
10.0
60
0
0.0
88
Interpretation by Asaoka's method
Si
0.0
33.5
38.0
40.7
41.6
43.9
45.2
46.0
46.6
46.6
46.6
47.8
47.8
Si-1
0
33.5
38
40.7
41.6
43.9
45.2
46
46.6
46.6
46.6
47.8
47.8
Si
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Si-1
E = 0.7119
41
Asaoka's Construction
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
89
90
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
CH254890 TO CH255095
LOCATION :
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
1.8 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
9.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
3.24
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
0.155
ASAOKA'S INTERPRETATION
Terz
agh
i,
cv
4H 2
ln ȕ
S 2 ǻt
Terz
agh
i and Barron,
Fn
n
E =
't =
H =
ln E
't
S 2 cv
4H 2
§ n2 ·
§ 3n2 1·
¨
¸
¨
ln
n
¨ n2 1¸
¨ 4n2 ¸
¸
©
¹
©
¹
De
D
0.7119
60 day
s
2.8 m
D =
0.8 m
De =
2.034 m
n =
2.5425
F(n) =
0.3926
cv =
6.57 m2/y
r
ch =
11.36 m2/y
r
0.164383562 y
rs
8ch
2
De Fn
CH254890 TO CH255095
UNIT WEIGHT =
40 degrees
1.5
2.5
2
3.5
2
3
4
(m)
1
LAYER
9.5
6
4
1.5
(m)
(CUM)
0.85
0.96
0.88
0.90
(Ac/A)1
28
100
33
42
0.173
0.047
0.143
0.113
0.151
0.154
0.152
0.152
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
1.84
1.86
1.85
1.85
n1
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESS
1.87
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
THK
0.357
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
THK
0.217
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
SOIL
0.155
3.24
0.333
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
POISSON RATIO =
FRICTION ANGLE =
Dc/Ds
19 kN/m3
COLUMN DEPTH =
100 MPa
9.5 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
0.8 m
1.8 m
DIAMETER(D) =
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
LOCATION :
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
Pc/Ps
142.7
141.6
142.4
142.2
kPa
Pc
7.2
4.2
7.2
6.2
kPa
GAMMA
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
fd
4.2
15.2
5.1
6.3
5.15
16.36
6.02
7.31
fd(max) n(max)
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
2.02
1.97
2.03
2.01
n2
91
1.97
1.97
38.36
37.84
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
2.2
83.0
TOTAL
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.5
9.3
9.5
9.6
9.7
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.3
4.1
2.02
2.02
2.02
2.02
2.02
2.02
2.02
1.97
1.97
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.01
4.1
4.1
(mm)
SETTL.
TOTAL
DESIGN
6.02
16.36
5.15
3.41
3.49
3.49
3.41
3.51
3.47
7.31
6.02
16.36
5.15
3.51
3.41
3.49
5.15
16.36
6.02
7.31
n(max)n(adopted
3.47
n2
Case 2: Maximum Criteria
7.31
3.51
n(max)n(adopted
3.47
n2
Case 1 : Minimum Criteria
28
100
33
42
Dc/Ds
28
100
33
42
Dc/Ds
0.155
0.155
0.155
0.155
Ac/A
0.093
0.024
0.078
0.061
Ac/A
BACK-ANALYSIS (USING IMPROVEMENT FACTOR)
31.55
32.30
33.05
33.80
34.54
35.27
35.97
36.64
37.27
38.81
39.19
39.48
39.71
39.86
39.95
2.01
1
39.99
40.00
1
1
2.01
n2
0.5
INCR.
(kPa)
STRESS
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
DEPTH
TOTAL FIELD SETTLEMENT =
TOTAL
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
S
m
A
2.3
4.5
2.5
2.9
m2
5.4
20.6
6.5
8.3
S
m
A
48.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.6
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.4
2.4
2.4
(mm)
SETTL.
m2
38.1
9.3
9.5
9.6
9.7
(mm)
SETTL.
CONSOL.
48.0 mm
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
n2
FIELD
%
3.49
3.49
3.49
3.49
3.49
3.49
3.49
3.41
3.41
3.41
3.41
3.51
3.51
3.51
3.51
3.51
3.47
3.47
3.47
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
72.85
IN n2
(BACKCALC) INCREASE
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
1.73
FACTOR
REDUCTION
92
93
LOCATION :
CH254890 TO CH255095
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
DIAMETER=
SPACING=
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
F(N) =
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
TIME INTERVAL =
TIME
(DAYS)
Tv
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
225
240
255
270
285
300
315
330
345
360
375
390
405
420
435
450
465
480
495
510
525
540
555
570
585
600
615
630
645
660
675
690
705
720
735
750
765
780
795
810
825
840
855
870
885
900
915
930
945
960
975
990
1005
1020
1035
1050
1065
1080
1095
1110
1125
1140
1155
1170
0
0.034439
0.068878
0.103316
0.137755
0.172194
0.206633
0.241071
0.27551
0.309949
0.344388
0.378827
0.413265
0.447704
0.482143
0.516582
0.55102
0.585459
0.619898
0.654337
0.688776
0.723214
0.757653
0.792092
0.826531
0.860969
0.895408
0.929847
0.964286
0.998724
1.033163
1.067602
1.102041
1.13648
1.170918
1.205357
1.239796
1.274235
1.308673
1.343112
1.377551
1.41199
1.446429
1.480867
1.515306
1.549745
1.584184
1.618622
1.653061
1.6875
1.721939
1.756378
1.790816
1.825255
1.859694
1.894133
1.928571
1.96301
1.997449
2.031888
2.066327
2.100765
2.135204
2.169643
2.204082
2.23852
2.272959
2.307398
2.341837
2.376276
2.410714
2.445153
2.479592
2.514031
2.548469
2.582908
2.617347
2.651786
2.686224
48.0
0.8
4.5
6.6
0.0
5.09
6.36
6.57
11.36
1.15
2.8
mm
m
m
m2/yr
m2/yr
m
m2/yr
m2/yr
m
15 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
Uv
Tr
%
0.0
20.9
29.6
36.2
41.8
46.7
51.1
55.0
58.7
62.0
65.1
67.9
70.6
73.0
75.2
77.3
79.2
80.9
82.5
83.9
85.2
86.4
87.5
88.5
89.4
90.2
91.0
91.7
92.3
92.9
93.4
93.8
94.3
94.7
95.0
95.3
95.6
95.9
96.2
96.4
96.6
96.8
97.0
97.2
97.3
97.5
97.6
97.7
97.8
97.9
98.0
98.1
98.2
98.3
98.4
98.4
98.5
98.6
98.6
98.7
98.7
98.8
98.8
98.9
98.9
99.0
99.0
99.0
99.1
99.1
99.1
99.1
99.2
99.2
99.2
99.2
99.3
99.3
99.3
0
0.018055
0.03611
0.054165
0.07222
0.090274
0.108329
0.126384
0.144439
0.162494
0.180549
0.198604
0.216659
0.234714
0.252768
0.270823
0.288878
0.306933
0.324988
0.343043
0.361098
0.379153
0.397208
0.415262
0.433317
0.451372
0.469427
0.487482
0.505537
0.523592
0.541647
0.559702
0.577756
0.595811
0.613866
0.631921
0.649976
0.668031
0.686086
0.704141
0.722196
0.74025
0.758305
0.77636
0.794415
0.81247
0.830525
0.84858
0.866635
0.88469
0.902744
0.920799
0.938854
0.956909
0.974964
0.993019
1.011074
1.029129
1.047184
1.065238
1.083293
1.101348
1.119403
1.137458
1.155513
1.173568
1.191623
1.209678
1.227732
1.245787
1.263842
1.281897
1.299952
1.318007
1.336062
1.354117
1.372172
1.390226
1.408281
Ur
%
Urv
%
SETTL.
(mm)
0.0
11.8
22.2
31.3
39.4
46.6
52.9
58.4
63.3
67.6
71.4
74.8
77.8
80.4
82.7
84.7
86.5
88.1
89.5
90.8
91.8
92.8
93.7
94.4
95.1
95.6
96.2
96.6
97.0
97.4
97.7
97.9
98.2
98.4
98.6
98.8
98.9
99.0
99.1
99.2
99.3
99.4
99.5
99.5
99.6
99.6
99.7
99.7
99.8
99.8
99.8
99.8
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
30.2
45.2
56.2
64.8
71.5
76.9
81.3
84.8
87.7
90.0
91.9
93.5
94.7
95.7
96.5
97.2
97.7
98.2
98.5
98.8
99.0
99.2
99.4
99.5
99.6
99.7
99.7
99.8
99.8
99.8
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
14.5
21.7
27.0
31.1
34.3
36.9
39.0
40.7
42.1
43.2
44.1
44.9
45.5
45.9
46.3
46.7
46.9
47.1
47.3
47.4
47.5
47.6
47.7
47.7
47.8
47.8
47.9
47.9
47.9
47.9
47.9
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
TOTAL
SETTL.
(mm)
0.0
14.5
21.7
27.0
31.1
34.3
36.9
39.0
40.7
42.1
43.2
44.1
44.9
45.5
45.9
46.3
46.7
46.9
47.1
47.3
47.4
47.5
47.6
47.7
47.7
47.8
47.8
47.9
47.9
47.9
47.9
47.9
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
Settlement (mm)
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
540
480
Field Data
Time (Days)
Settlement Comparison for Design and Field Settlement Data
720
660
Design Data
94
1320
1260
1200
1140
1080
1020
960
900
840
780
600
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
95
APPENDIX C
ANALYSIS FOR
CH261950 TO CH263125
96
KELLER-BAUER CONSORTIUM
ELECTRIFIED DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT BETWEEN RAWANG AND IPOH
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH261950 TO CH263125
EMBANKMENT GEOMETRY
TOP WIDTH (B) =
14.9 m
EMBANKMENT SLOPE (1:?) =
2
DESIGN EMBANKMENT HEIGHT(H) =
3 m (GL TO TOP RAIL LEVEL)
EMBANKMENT BASE WIDTH (W) =
18.9 m
LOADINGS
FILL UNIT WEIGHT =
20 kN/m3
FILL LOAD =
60 kPa
TOTAL DESIGN LOAD =
60 kPa
SUBSOIL STRATA & PROPERTIES
SOIL
LAYER
BOTTOM
THK
TYPE
CONSTRAINED
UNIT
Su
PHI
Cv
Cr
MODULUS
WEIGHT
(MPa)
kN/m3
kPa
degree
m2/yr
m2/yr
25
2
4
28
5
10
5
10
LEVEL
(m)
(m)
1
1.5
1.5
CLAY
2.50
15
2
4
2.5
Silty SAND
3.60
17
3
6.5
2.5
Clayey SILT
4.00
17
DRAINAGE LENGTH (VERTICAL)=
50
2.3 m
DESIGN Cv =
2 m2/yr
DESIGN Cr =
4 m2/yr
GROUND WATER TABLE =
1 mbgl
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
6.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN =
4
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
0.217
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
0.357
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
SOIL
THK
LAYER
1.68
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSIBILIT
THK
(CUM)
(Ac/A)1
Dc/Ds
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
n1
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
Pc/Ps
Pc
COMP. PARAMETERS
GAMMA n(max)
Phi
kPa
deg.
16.6
21.9
18.6
1.5
1.5
2.5
4
0.85
28
0.173
0.123
1.66
6.4
230.6
7.2
4.37
1.76
0.40
17.8
0.0
33.2
3
2.5
6.5
0.84
25
0.193
0.123
1.66
6.4
230.8
7.2
4.02
1.76
0.40
17.8
43.9
18.5
0.124
1.67
6.4
5.2
Cu
kN/m3
2
0.118
230.1
UNIT WT.
1
40
kPa
m
(m)
0.89
kPa
n2
(m)
5.90
1.74
0.40
97
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
DEPTH
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
STRESS
TOTAL
CONSOL.
INCR.
SETTL.
SETTL.
(kPa)
n2
(mm)
(mm)
0.5
1
60.00
1.74
6.9
6.9
1
1
59.99
1.74
6.9
6.9
1.5
1
59.94
1.74
6.9
6.9
2
2
59.85
1.76
4.7
2.5
2
59.68
1.76
4.7
3
2
59.43
1.76
4.7
3.5
2
59.10
1.76
4.7
4
2
58.67
1.76
4.6
4.5
3
58.15
1.76
4.1
4.1
5
3
57.54
1.76
4.1
4.1
5.5
3
56.86
1.76
4.0
4.0
6
3
56.09
1.76
4.0
4.0
6.5
3
55.27
1.76
3.9
3.9
TOTAL
64.3
40.8
SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT RESULTS
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
41 mm
CONSOLIDATION SETTL. UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN =
39 mm
(ASSUME 1 YR FROM THE END OF CONSTRUCTION OF EMBANKMENT)
TIME FOR 90 % CONSOLIDATION OF TREATED GROUND =
EST. SETTL. DURING 1ST 6 MTHS OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN OPERATION =
38 DAYS
1.4 mm
98
CH261950 TO CH263125
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
40.8 mm
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
2.26 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
2.83
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
2.86 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
5.72 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.47
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.3 m
TIME INTERVAL =
1 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1
0.001442
4.3
0.003068
5.1
9.2
3.7
3.7
2
0.002883
6.1
0.006135
9.9
15.4
6.3
6.3
0.0
3
0.004325
7.4
0.009203
14.5
20.9
8.5
4
0.005767
8.6
0.012271
18.9
25.8
10.6
10.6
5
0.007208
9.6
0.015339
23.0
30.4
12.4
12.4
8.5
6
0.00865
10.5
0.018406
27.0
34.6
14.1
14.1
7
0.010092
11.3
0.021474
30.7
38.5
15.7
15.7
8
0.011533
12.1
0.024542
34.2
42.2
17.2
17.2
9
0.012975
12.9
0.027609
37.6
45.6
18.6
18.6
10
0.014417
13.5
0.030677
40.8
48.8
19.9
19.9
11
0.015858
14.2
0.033745
43.8
51.8
21.1
21.1
12
0.0173
14.8
0.036812
46.7
54.6
22.3
22.3
13
0.018742
15.4
0.03988
49.4
57.2
23.4
23.4
14
0.020183
16.0
0.042948
52.0
59.7
24.4
24.4
15
0.021625
16.6
0.046016
54.4
62.0
25.3
25.3
16
0.023067
17.1
0.049083
56.7
64.2
26.2
26.2
17
0.024508
17.7
0.052151
58.9
66.2
27.0
27.0
18
0.02595
18.2
0.055219
61.0
68.1
27.8
27.8
19
0.027392
18.7
0.058286
63.0
69.9
28.6
28.6
20
0.028833
19.2
0.061354
64.9
71.6
29.3
29.3
21
0.030275
19.6
0.064422
66.7
73.2
29.9
29.9
22
0.031717
20.1
0.06749
68.4
74.8
30.5
30.5
23
0.033158
20.5
0.070557
70.0
76.2
31.1
31.1
24
0.0346
21.0
0.073625
71.5
77.5
31.7
31.7
25
0.036042
21.4
0.076693
73.0
78.8
32.2
32.2
26
0.037483
21.8
0.07976
74.4
80.0
32.7
32.7
27
0.038925
22.3
0.082828
75.7
81.1
33.1
33.1
28
0.040367
22.7
0.085896
76.9
82.2
33.6
33.6
29
0.041808
23.1
0.088963
78.1
83.2
34.0
34.0
30
0.04325
23.5
0.092031
79.2
84.1
34.3
34.3
31
0.044692
23.9
0.095099
80.3
85.0
34.7
34.7
32
0.046133
24.2
0.098167
81.3
85.8
35.1
35.1
33
0.047575
24.6
0.101234
82.2
86.6
35.4
35.4
34
0.049017
25.0
0.104302
83.1
87.4
35.7
35.7
35
0.050458
25.3
0.10737
84.0
88.1
36.0
36.0
36
0.0519
25.7
0.110437
84.8
88.7
36.2
36.2
37
0.053342
26.1
0.113505
85.6
89.4
36.5
36.5
38
0.054783
26.4
0.116573
86.3
89.9
36.7
36.7
39
0.056225
26.8
0.119641
87.0
90.5
37.0
37.0
40
0.057667
27.1
0.122708
87.7
91.0
37.2
37.2
41
0.059108
27.4
0.125776
88.3
91.5
37.4
37.4
42
0.06055
27.8
0.128844
88.9
92.0
37.6
37.6
43
0.061992
28.1
0.131911
89.5
92.4
37.8
37.8
44
0.063433
28.4
0.134979
90.0
92.9
37.9
37.9
45
0.064875
28.7
0.138047
90.5
93.2
38.1
38.1
46
0.066317
29.1
0.141114
91.0
93.6
38.2
38.2
47
0.067758
29.4
0.144182
91.5
94.0
38.4
38.4
48
0.0692
29.7
0.14725
91.9
94.3
38.5
38.5
49
0.070642
30.0
0.150318
92.3
94.6
38.6
38.6
50
0.072083
30.3
0.153385
92.7
94.9
38.8
38.8
51
0.073525
30.6
0.156453
93.1
95.2
38.9
38.9
52
0.074967
30.9
0.159521
93.4
95.5
39.0
39.0
53
0.076408
31.2
0.162588
93.8
95.7
39.1
39.1
54
0.07785
31.5
0.165656
94.1
95.9
39.2
39.2
55
0.079292
31.8
0.168724
94.4
96.2
39.3
39.3
56
0.080733
32.0
0.171792
94.7
96.4
39.4
39.4
57
0.082175
32.3
0.174859
94.9
96.6
39.4
39.4
58
0.083617
32.6
0.177927
95.2
96.8
39.5
39.5
59
0.085058
32.9
0.180995
95.4
96.9
39.6
39.6
60
0.0865
33.2
0.184062
95.7
97.1
39.7
39.7
61
0.087942
33.4
0.18713
95.9
97.3
39.7
39.7
62
0.089383
33.7
0.190198
96.1
97.4
39.8
39.8
63
0.090825
34.0
0.193265
96.3
97.6
39.9
39.9
64
0.092267
34.3
0.196333
96.5
97.7
39.9
39.9
65
0.093708
34.5
0.199401
96.7
97.8
40.0
40.0
66
0.09515
34.8
0.202469
96.8
97.9
40.0
40.0
67
0.096592
35.0
0.205536
97.0
98.1
40.1
40.1
68
0.098033
35.3
0.208604
97.2
98.2
40.1
40.1
69
0.099475
35.6
0.211672
97.3
98.3
40.1
40.1
70
0.100917
35.8
0.214739
97.4
98.4
40.2
40.2
71
0.102358
36.1
0.217807
97.6
98.4
40.2
40.2
72
0.1038
36.3
0.220875
97.7
98.5
40.2
40.2
73
0.105242
36.6
0.223943
97.8
98.6
40.3
40.3
74
0.106683
36.8
0.22701
97.9
98.7
40.3
40.3
75
0.108125
37.1
0.230078
98.0
98.8
40.3
40.3
76
0.109567
37.3
0.233146
98.1
98.8
40.4
40.4
77
0.111008
37.6
0.236213
98.2
98.9
40.4
40.4
78
0.11245
37.8
0.239281
98.3
99.0
40.4
40.4
SEE\TTLEMENT (mm)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
TIME (days)
60
LOCATION : CH261950 TO CH263125
70
80
90
99
100
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
Location
Mainline
Chainage
262100
Time
(Days)
0
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
37
38
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
47
48
49
51
52
53
54
Fill Height Settlement
(m)
(mm)
0.3603
0.0
0.3561
0.7
0.3570
1.3
0.3603
1.2
0.3592
1.5
0.3577
2.0
0.4842
2.6
0.4816
3.0
0.8731
3.2
0.8786
3.1
0.8740
3.5
0.8746
3.7
0.8653
3.3
0.8623
3.7
0.8616
4.4
0.8730
6.2
0.8702
6.8
0.8671
7.5
1.5404
10.4
1.5381
11.0
1.5373
11.6
1.5354
12.4
1.4999
12.6
1.4983
13.0
1.5120
13.3
1.5178
12.6
1.5167
12.4
1.5148
12.4
1.5043
11.0
1.5125
11.5
1.8621
11.5
1.9525
11.8
1.9426
12.0
1.8545
13.6
1.8627
13.9
1.8807
14.5
1.8853
14.9
1.8505
14.9
1.8523
15.1
1.8561
15.5
1.8440
15.9
2.2543
16.3
2.2377
16.6
SPR N 118
101
55
56
58
61
65
68
74
77
80
83
87
90
94
97
102
105
109
112
116
124
128
135
138
147
152
156
160
164
167
171
174
178
182
186
192
195
202
207
214
222
228
235
242
249
256
261
268
277
285
293
297
2.2161
2.2110
2.2040
2.2107
2.3473
2.3399
2.3557
2.3472
2.3461
2.3751
2.3739
2.3730
2.3704
2.3680
2.3643
2.3620
2.3631
2.3662
2.3735
2.5761
2.5808
2.5755
2.5733
2.5768
2.5708
2.5662
2.5665
2.5705
2.5702
2.5658
2.5695
2.5695
2.5657
2.5657
2.5694
2.5657
2.5617
2.5707
2.5619
2.5714
2.5671
2.5629
2.5667
2.5631
2.5615
3.1590
3.1518
3.1561
3.1484
3.1524
3.1537
15.7
16.0
16.1
16.5
15.0
14.6
15.0
15.3
15.8
16.3
16.5
17.1
17.8
18.1
18.5
18.7
19.0
19.5
19.5
20.2
20.5
20.8
21.1
21.5
21.9
22.4
23.5
23.7
24.2
24.5
24.8
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.2
25.5
25.6
25.8
26.0
26.2
26.1
26.2
26.4
26.6
26.8
26.9
27.2
27.5
27.8
28.0
28.2
102
304
311
318
325
332
338
345
352
360
369
377
381
389
396
403
409
416
423
430
437
444
451
458
465
471
478
485
492
499
506
513
520
527
534
541
548
556
563
570
577
584
590
598
605
612
619
626
633
640
648
654
3.1481
3.1447
3.1597
3.1508
3.1561
3.1530
3.1508
3.1481
3.1438
3.1384
3.1365
3.1326
3.1315
3.1398
3.1337
3.1424
3.0524
3.0425
3.0478
3.0557
3.0557
3.0589
3.0533
3.0493
3.0444
3.0489
3.0419
3.0474
3.0445
3.0477
3.0459
3.0491
3.0495
3.0479
3.0442
3.0498
3.0434
3.0465
3.0499
3.0456
3.0487
3.0446
3.0484
3.0455
3.0494
3.0435
3.0477
3.0446
3.0488
3.0439
3.0474
28.3
28.3
28.5
28.8
28.9
29.2
29.4
29.5
29.8
30.0
30.5
30.5
30.4
30.4
30.5
30.6
30.2
30.4
30.6
30.3
30.5
30.4
30.2
30.1
29.8
30.0
30.1
29.9
30.1
30.2
30.3
30.6
30.4
30.2
30.1
30.3
30.4
30.7
30.5
30.8
30.6
30.7
31.0
31.1
30.9
30.7
30.6
30.8
30.5
30.4
30.2
103
661
668
675
682
689
696
703
710
717
724
731
738
745
752
759
767
773
780
787
794
801
808
815
822
829
836
844
850
857
864
871
878
885
892
899
906
914
920
927
934
941
948
955
962
969
976
983
990
996
1004
1011
3.0421
3.0483
3.0432
3.0468
3.0426
3.0490
3.0437
3.0492
3.0436
3.0455
3.0506
3.0445
3.0474
3.0436
3.0459
3.0466
3.0452
3.0481
3.0457
3.0486
3.0450
3.0499
3.0435
3.0492
3.0447
3.0480
3.0489
3.0477
3.0410
3.0477
3.0468
3.0499
3.0456
3.048
3.0454
3.0472
3.0485
3.0457
3.0479
3.0474
3.0445
3.0442
3.0489
3.0447
3.0479
3.0455
3.0488
3.0446
3.0482
3.046
3.0481
30.3
30.1
30.4
30.4
30.7
30.8
31.1
30.9
31.1
31.0
30.7
30.8
30.6
30.5
30.3
31.2
31.0
30.9
31.1
31.2
31.1
30.9
30.8
31.5
30.4
30.5
30.7
30.8
30.6
30.2
30.5
30.1
30
29.7
29.6
29.5
29.3
29.4
29.7
29.6
29.8
29.5
29.2
29.1
29.3
29.4
29.6
29.7
29.9
30.2
30.1
104
1018
1025
1032
1043
1057
1071
1085
1106
1120
1134
1148
1169
1183
1197
1211
1225
3.0506
3.0473
3.0464
3.0458
3.0442
3.0485
3.0434
3.0439
3.0445
3.0472
3.0433
3.0488
3.0456
3.0505
3.045
3.0436
30.3
30.2
30.1
30.2
30.8
30.4
30.7
30.3
30
29.8
30.1
29.7
30
30.5
30.3
30.2
105
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
SPR N 118
Location
Mainline
Chainage
262100
Time (Days)
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
720
660
600
540
480
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
3.60
3.20
2.80
Fill Height, (m)
2.40
2.00
1.60
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.00
Time (Days)
Settlement (mm)
720
660
600
540
480
35.0
420
30.0
360
25.0
300
20.0
240
15.0
180
10.0
120
5.0
60
0
0.0
106
Interpretation by Asaoka's method
Si
0.0
16.5
19.5
25
26.4
28.3
29.8
30.4
30.6
30.8
31.1
31.5
31.5
Si-1
0
16.5
19.5
25
26.4
28.3
29.8
30.4
30.6
30.8
31.1
31.5
31.5
Si
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
E =0.7151
24
25
Si-1
26
Asaoka's Construction
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
107
108
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
CH261950 TO CH263125
LOCATION :
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
6.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
ASAOKA'S INTERPRETATION
Terzaghi,
cv
4H 2
ln ȕ
S 2 ǻt
Terzaghi and Barron,
Fn
n
E =
't =
H =
2
ln E
't
S 2cv
4H
2
2
§ n ·
§ 3n 1·
¨
¨ n2 1¸
¸lnn ¨
¨ 4n2 ¸
¸
©
¹
©
¹
De
D
0.7151
60 days
2.3 m
D =
0.8 m
De =
2.26 m
n =
2.825
F(n) =
0.4686
cv =
4.37 m2/yr
ch =
7.30 m2/yr
4
0.126
0.164383562 yrs
8ch
D2 Fn
CH261950 TO CH263125
19 kN/m3
1.5
2.5
2.5
2
3
(m)
1
LAYER
6.5
4
1.5
(m)
(CUM)
THK
40
28
25
0.89
0.85
0.84
(Ac/A)1
0.193
0.173
0.118
0.123
0.123
0.124
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
1.66
1.66
1.67
n1
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRES
1.68
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
THK
0.357
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
SOIL
0.217
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
4
0.126
Dc/Ds
40 degrees
0.333
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
POISSON RATIO =
FRICTION ANGLE =
100 MPa
UNIT WEIGHT =
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
6.5 m
2 m
0.8 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
DIAMETER(D) =
LOCATION :
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
6.4
6.4
6.4
Pc/Ps
230.8
230.6
230.1
kPa
Pc
7.2
7.2
5.2
kPa
GAMMA
1.1
1.1
1.0
fd
3.9
4.3
6.3
4.02
4.37
5.90
fd(max) n(max)
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
1.76
1.76
1.74
n2
109
1.76
1.76
58.15
57.54
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
3.9
64.3
TOTAL
4.0
4.0
4.1
4.1
4.6
4.7
4.7
4.7
4.7
6.9
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.74
6.9
6.9
(mm)
SETTL.
TOTAL
DESIGN
4.37
4.02
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.49
5.90
4.37
4.02
3.53
3.53
4.02
4.37
5.90
n(max)n(adopted
3.49
n2
Case 2: Maximum Criteria
5.90
3.53
n(max)n(adopted
3.49
n2
Case 1 : Minimum Criteria
25
28
40
Dc/Ds
25
28
40
Dc/Ds
0.126
0.126
0.126
Ac/A
0.105
0.094
0.064
Ac/A
BACK-ANALYSIS (USING IMPROVEMENT FACTOR)
55.27
56.09
56.86
58.67
59.10
59.43
59.68
59.85
59.94
1.74
1.5
1.74
1
1
59.99
60.00
1
0.5
INCR.
LAYER
n2
(kPa)
STRESS
SOIL
(m)
DEPTH
TOTAL FIELD SETTLEMENT =
4.0
4.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
S
m
A
2.2
2.3
2.8
m2
4.8
5.3
7.9
S
m
A
32.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
(mm)
SETTL.
TOTAL
m2
33.9
3.9
4.0
4.0
4.1
4.1
6.9
6.9
6.9
(mm)
SETTL.
CONSOL.
32.0 mm
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
FIELD
%
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.53
3.49
3.49
3.49
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
100.82
IN n2
(BACKCALC) INCREASE
n2
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.01
FACTOR
REDUCTION
110
111
LOCATION :
CH261950 TO CH263125
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
L CO
A
T
O
NSO
LID
N SE
O
T
A
LE
T
ME
NT=
ME
IA
D
R=
T
SP
CN
A
I G=
SIGN CO
E
D
.O
F
E
FCO
NSO
LD
N (V
IO
T
A
RT
E
ICL
A)=
SG
E
D
I N CO
.O
F
E
FCO
NSO
LID
N (RD
O
T
A
L)=
IA
LN
A
IV
U
Q
E
E TD
.F
IA
O
RIB
T
RYA
A
T
U
RE
e)=
(D
A
. RA
IA
D
eD
(D
IO
T
)/=
MO
. CO
D
.O
F
E
FCO
NSO
LID
N (V
O
T
A
RIC
E
TA
L)=
MO
. CO
D
.O
F
E
FCO
NSO
LID
N (RA
O
T
A
IL)=
D
(N)=
F
RA
D
INA
GELE
NGT
H=
32.0 mm
0.8 m
2.8 m
4.4 m2/y
r
0.0 m2/y
r
3.16 m
3.96
4.37 m2/y
r
7.30 m2/y
r
0.73
2.3 m
IMEINT
T
RV
E
L=
A
IME
T
S)
Y
A
(D
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
225
240
255
270
285
300
315
330
345
360
375
390
405
420
435
450
465
480
495
510
525
540
555
570
585
600
615
630
645
660
675
690
705
720
735
750
765
780
795
810
825
840
855
870
885
900
915
930
945
960
975
990
1005
1020
1035
1050
1065
1080
1095
1110
1125
1140
1155
1170
15 D
S
Y
A
vT
RE
T
DP
T
A
RT
O
N
IO
U
v
r
T
%
0
0.033949
0.067898
0.101846
0.135795
0.169744
0.203693
0.237641
0.27159
0.305539
0.339488
0.373437
0.407385
0.441334
0.475283
0.509232
0.54318
0.577129
0.611078
0.645027
0.678976
0.712924
0.746873
0.780822
0.814771
0.848719
0.882668
0.916617
0.950566
0.984515
1.018463
1.052412
1.086361
1.12031
1.154258
1.188207
1.222156
1.256105
1.290054
1.324002
1.357951
1.3919
1.425849
1.459797
1.493746
1.527695
1.561644
1.595593
1.629541
1.66349
1.697439
1.731388
1.765337
1.799285
1.833234
1.867183
1.901132
1.93508
1.969029
2.002978
2.036927
2.070876
2.104824
2.138773
2.172722
2.206671
2.240619
2.274568
2.308517
2.342466
2.376415
2.410363
2.444312
2.478261
2.51221
2.546158
2.580107
2.614056
2.648005
0.0
20.8
29.4
36.0
41.5
46.4
50.7
54.7
58.3
61.6
64.7
67.5
70.1
72.6
74.8
76.9
78.7
80.5
82.1
83.5
84.9
86.1
87.2
88.2
89.1
90.0
90.7
91.4
92.1
92.6
93.2
93.6
94.1
94.5
94.8
95.2
95.5
95.8
96.0
96.3
96.5
96.7
96.9
97.1
97.2
97.4
97.5
97.6
97.8
97.9
98.0
98.1
98.2
98.2
98.3
98.4
98.5
98.5
98.6
98.6
98.7
98.7
98.8
98.8
98.9
98.9
99.0
99.0
99.0
99.1
99.1
99.1
99.1
99.2
99.2
99.2
99.2
99.3
99.3
r
U
rv
U
%
0
0.029967
0.059935
0.089902
0.119869
0.149837
0.179804
0.209771
0.239739
0.269706
0.299673
0.329641
0.359608
0.389576
0.419543
0.44951
0.479478
0.509445
0.539412
0.56938
0.599347
0.629314
0.659282
0.689249
0.719216
0.749184
0.779151
0.809118
0.839086
0.869053
0.89902
0.928988
0.958955
0.988922
1.01889
1.048857
1.078825
1.108792
1.138759
1.168727
1.198694
1.228661
1.258629
1.288596
1.318563
1.348531
1.378498
1.408465
1.438433
1.4684
1.498367
1.528335
1.558302
1.588269
1.618237
1.648204
1.678171
1.708139
1.738106
1.768074
1.798041
1.828008
1.857976
1.887943
1.91791
1.947878
1.977845
2.007812
2.03778
2.067747
2.097714
2.127682
2.157649
2.187616
2.217584
2.247551
2.277518
2.307486
2.337453
SE
L.
T
%
0.0
27.8
47.9
62.4
72.9
80.4
85.9
89.8
92.6
94.7
96.2
97.2
98.0
98.6
99.0
99.3
99.5
99.6
99.7
99.8
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
L
A
T
O
SE
L.
T
(mm)
m
( m)
0.0
42.8
63.2
75.9
84.1
89.5
93.0
95.4
96.9
98.0
98.6
99.1
99.4
99.6
99.7
99.8
99.9
99.9
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
13.7
20.2
24.3
26.9
28.6
29.8
30.5
31.0
31.3
31.6
31.7
31.8
31.9
31.9
31.9
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
0.0
13.7
20.2
24.3
26.9
28.6
29.8
30.5
31.0
31.3
31.6
31.7
31.8
31.9
31.9
31.9
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
32.0
Settlement (mm)
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
480
420
360
ield Settlement a
F
Dta
Time (Days)
Settlement Comparison
780
720
660
600
ackA
B
naly
sisSettlement a
Dta
112
1320
1260
1200
1140
1080
1020
960
900
840
540
300
240
180
120
60
0
113
APPENDIX D
ANALYSIS FOR
CH272100 TO CH272350
114
KELLER-BAUER CONSORTIUM
ELECTRIFIED DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT BETWEEN RAWANG AND IPOH
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH272100 TO CH272350
EMBANKMENT GEOMETRY
TOP WIDTH (B) =
14.9 m
EMBANKMENT SLOPE (1:?) =
2
DESIGN EMBANKMENT HEIGHT(H) =
3 m (GL TO TOP RAIL LEVEL)
EMBANKMENT BASE WIDTH (W) =
18.9 m
LOADINGS
FILL UNIT WEIGHT =
20 kN/m3
FILL LOAD =
60 kPa
TOTAL DESIGN LOAD =
60 kPa
SUBSOIL STRATA & PROPERTIES
SOIL
LAYER
BOTTOM
THK
TYPE
CONSTRAINED
UNIT
MODULUS
WEIGHT
(MPa)
kN/m3
SAND
9.00
17
CLAY
1.00
14
Silty CLAY
4.00
18
9.00
17
LEVEL
(m)
(m)
1
1
1
2
3
2
3
4
1
4
6
2
SAND
DRAINAGE LENGTH (VERTICAL)=
Su
PHI
Cv
Cr
kPa
degree
m2/yr
m2/yr
26
5
10
28
3
6
26
5
10
10
2
4
2.4 m
DESIGN Cv =
2 m2/yr
DESIGN Cr =
4 m2/yr
GROUND WATER TABLE =
1 mbgl
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
6 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN =
4
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
0.217
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
0.357
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
SOIL
THK
LAYER
1.68
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSIBILITY
THK
(CUM)
(Ac/A)1
Dc/Ds
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
n1
(m)
(m)
1
1
1
0.69
11
0.459
0.119
1.64
2
2
3
0.96
100
0.047
0.125
1.68
3
1
4
0.84
25
0.193
0.123
1.66
4
2
6
0.69
11
0.459
0.119
1.64
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
Pc/Ps
Pc
COMP. PARAMETERS
GAMMA n(max)
n2
m
UNIT WT.
Cu
Phi
kN/m3
kPa
deg.
kPa
kPa
6.4
233.3
17.0
2.27
1.89
0.39
17.8
0.0
32.0
6.4
229.4
4.2
13.44
1.73
0.40
16.0
8.8
18.7
6.4
230.8
8.2
4.02
1.77
0.40
18.4
0.0
33.2
6.4
233.3
7.2
2.27
1.73
0.39
17.8
0.0
32.0
115
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
DEPTH
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
STRESS
TOTAL
CONSOL.
INCR.
SETTL.
SETTL.
(kPa)
n2
(mm)
(mm)
0.5
1
60.00
1.89
1
1
59.99
1.89
1.8
1.8
1.5
2
59.94
1.73
17.3
2
2
59.85
1.73
17.3
17.3
17.3
2.5
2
59.68
1.73
17.2
17.2
3
2
59.43
1.73
17.2
17.2
3.5
3
59.10
1.77
4.2
4.2
4.1
4
3
58.67
1.77
4.1
4.5
4
58.15
1.73
1.9
5
4
57.54
1.73
1.8
5.5
4
56.86
1.73
1.8
6
4
56.09
1.73
1.8
TOTAL
88.1
77.2
SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT RESULTS
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
77 mm
CONSOLIDATION SETTL. UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN =
74 mm
(ASSUME 1 YR FROM THE END OF CONSTRUCTION OF EMBANKMENT)
TIME FOR 90 % CONSOLIDATION OF TREATED GROUND =
EST. SETTL. DURING 1ST 6 MTHS OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN OPERATION =
38 DAYS
2.7 mm
116
CH272100 TO CH272350
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
77.2 mm
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
2.26 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
2.83
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
2.86 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
5.72 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.47
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.4 m
TIME INTERVAL =
1 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
0
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1
0.00141
4.2
0.003068
5.1
9.1
7.0
2
0.002821
6.0
0.006135
9.9
15.3
11.9
11.9
3
0.004231
7.3
0.009203
14.5
20.8
16.1
16.1
4
0.005641
8.5
0.012271
18.9
25.8
19.9
19.9
5
0.007051
9.5
0.015339
23.0
30.3
23.4
23.4
6
0.008462
10.4
0.018406
27.0
34.5
26.7
26.7
7
0.009872
11.2
0.021474
30.7
38.5
29.7
29.7
8
0.011282
12.0
0.024542
34.2
42.1
32.5
9
0.012693
12.7
0.027609
37.6
45.5
35.2
35.2
10
0.014103
13.4
0.030677
40.8
48.7
37.6
37.6
11
0.015513
14.1
0.033745
43.8
51.7
39.9
39.9
12
0.016923
14.7
0.036812
46.7
54.5
42.1
42.1
13
0.018334
15.3
0.03988
49.4
57.1
44.1
44.1
14
0.019744
15.9
0.042948
52.0
59.6
46.0
46.0
15
0.021154
16.4
0.046016
54.4
61.9
47.8
47.8
16
0.022565
16.9
0.049083
56.7
64.1
49.5
49.5
17
0.023975
17.5
0.052151
58.9
66.1
51.1
51.1
18
0.025385
18.0
0.055219
61.0
68.0
52.6
52.6
19
0.026795
18.5
0.058286
63.0
69.9
54.0
54.0
20
0.028206
18.9
0.061354
64.9
71.6
55.3
21
0.029616
19.4
0.064422
66.7
73.2
56.5
56.5
22
0.031026
19.9
0.06749
68.4
74.7
57.7
57.7
23
0.032437
20.3
0.070557
70.0
76.1
58.8
58.8
24
0.033847
20.8
0.073625
71.5
77.5
59.8
25
0.035257
21.2
0.076693
73.0
78.7
60.8
60.8
26
0.036667
21.6
0.07976
74.4
79.9
61.7
61.7
27
0.038078
22.0
0.082828
75.7
81.0
62.6
62.6
28
0.039488
22.4
0.085896
76.9
82.1
63.4
63.4
29
0.040898
22.8
0.088963
78.1
83.1
64.2
64.2
30
0.042309
23.2
0.092031
79.2
84.0
64.9
64.9
31
0.043719
23.6
0.095099
80.3
84.9
65.6
65.6
32
0.045129
24.0
0.098167
81.3
85.8
66.3
33
0.046539
24.3
0.101234
82.2
86.6
66.9
66.9
34
0.04795
24.7
0.104302
83.1
87.3
67.4
67.4
35
0.04936
25.1
0.10737
84.0
88.0
68.0
68.0
36
0.05077
25.4
0.110437
84.8
88.7
68.5
68.5
37
0.052181
25.8
0.113505
85.6
89.3
69.0
69.0
38
0.053591
26.1
0.116573
86.3
89.9
69.4
69.4
39
0.055001
26.5
0.119641
87.0
90.5
69.9
69.9
40
0.056411
26.8
0.122708
87.7
91.0
70.3
70.3
41
0.057822
27.1
0.125776
88.3
91.5
70.7
70.7
42
0.059232
27.5
0.128844
88.9
92.0
71.0
71.0
43
0.060642
27.8
0.131911
89.5
92.4
71.4
71.4
44
0.062053
28.1
0.134979
90.0
92.8
71.7
71.7
45
0.063463
28.4
0.138047
90.5
93.2
72.0
72.0
46
0.064873
28.7
0.141114
91.0
93.6
72.3
47
0.066283
29.0
0.144182
91.5
93.9
72.6
72.6
48
0.067694
29.3
0.14725
91.9
94.3
72.8
72.8
49
0.069104
29.7
0.150318
92.3
94.6
73.1
73.1
50
0.070514
30.0
0.153385
92.7
94.9
73.3
73.3
51
0.071924
30.3
0.156453
93.1
95.2
73.5
73.5
52
0.073335
30.5
0.159521
93.4
95.4
73.7
73.7
53
0.074745
30.8
0.162588
93.8
95.7
73.9
73.9
54
0.076155
31.1
0.165656
94.1
95.9
74.1
74.1
55
0.077566
31.4
0.168724
94.4
96.2
74.3
74.3
56
0.078976
31.7
0.171792
94.7
96.4
74.4
74.4
57
0.080386
32.0
0.174859
94.9
96.6
74.6
74.6
58
0.081796
32.3
0.177927
95.2
96.8
74.7
74.7
59
0.083207
32.5
0.180995
95.4
96.9
74.9
60
0.084617
32.8
0.184062
95.7
97.1
75.0
75.0
61
0.086027
33.1
0.18713
95.9
97.3
75.1
75.1
62
0.087438
33.4
0.190198
96.1
97.4
75.2
75.2
63
0.088848
33.6
0.193265
96.3
97.6
75.4
75.4
64
0.090258
33.9
0.196333
96.5
97.7
75.5
75.5
65
0.091668
34.1
0.199401
96.7
97.8
75.6
75.6
66
0.093079
34.4
0.202469
96.8
97.9
75.6
75.6
67
0.094489
34.7
0.205536
97.0
98.0
75.7
68
0.095899
34.9
0.208604
97.2
98.2
75.8
75.8
69
0.09731
35.2
0.211672
97.3
98.3
75.9
75.9
70
0.09872
35.4
0.214739
97.4
98.3
76.0
76.0
76.0
71
0.0
7.0
32.5
55.3
59.8
66.3
72.3
74.9
75.7
0.10013
35.7
0.217807
97.6
98.4
76.0
72
0.10154
35.9
0.220875
97.7
98.5
76.1
73
0.102951
36.2
0.223943
97.8
98.6
76.2
76.2
74
0.104361
36.4
0.22701
97.9
98.7
76.2
76.2
75
0.105771
36.7
0.230078
98.0
98.8
76.3
76.3
76
0.107182
36.9
0.233146
98.1
98.8
76.3
76.3
77
0.108592
37.2
0.236213
98.2
98.9
76.4
76.4
78
0.110002
37.4
0.239281
98.3
98.9
76.4
76.4
76.1
SEE\TTLEMENT (mm)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
TIME (days)
60
LOCATION : CH272100 TO CH272350
70
80
90
117
118
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
Location
Mainline
Chainage
272300
Time
(Days)
0
3
7
10
14
17
22
25
29
32
36
41
44
48
55
58
67
72
76
80
84
87
91
94
102
106
112
115
121
125
132
139
146
153
160
167
176
185
195
204
209
216
223
Fill Height Settlement
(m)
(mm)
2.6555
0.0
2.6539
0.8
2.6950
5.8
3.1802
8.5
4.2377
12.5
4.2653
14.2
4.2900
16.7
4.2861
17.8
4.2831
18.2
4.2924
19.0
4.2901
19.6
4.2864
20.0
4.2903
20.8
4.2865
21.1
4.2871
21.4
4.2823
21.8
4.2837
22.2
4.2889
22.6
4.2847
22.8
4.2849
22.2
4.2889
22.7
4.2879
22.9
4.5916
23.2
4.5830
22.9
4.5991
23.2
4.5989
23.4
4.5941
23.5
4.5930
23.8
4.5993
24.0
4.5989
24.2
4.5975
24.4
4.5921
24.8
4.5894
25.1
4.5874
25.2
4.5833
25.2
4.5801
25.3
4.5759
25.4
4.5723
25.7
4.5706
25.9
4.5635
26.3
4.5622
26.5
4.5571
26.8
4.5529
26.9
SPR 151A
119
230
237
244
251
258
265
272
279
286
293
300
307
314
322
328
335
342
349
356
363
370
377
384
391
398
405
412
419
426
433
440
447
454
461
468
476
482
489
496
503
510
517
524
531
539
546
553
560
568
574
581
4.5602
4.8351
4.8358
4.8391
4.8323
4.8298
4.8252
4.8209
4.8151
4.8115
4.8152
4.8021
4.8021
4.8148
4.7992
4.8199
4.8511
4.8429
4.8379
4.8301
4.8379
4.8413
4.8447
4.8499
4.8460
4.8514
4.8497
4.8461
4.8303
4.8474
4.8501
4.8465
4.8539
4.8472
4.8450
4.8487
4.8510
4.8489
4.8451
4.8483
4.8448
4.8475
4.8450
4.8508
4.8460
4.8491
4.8449
4.8506
4.8440
4.8478
4.8425
27.0
27.2
27.5
27.5
27.5
27.6
27.7
28.0
28.2
28.5
28.6
28.7
28.7
28.8
29.0
28.9
28.7
28.0
28.6
28.4
28.3
28.2
28.5
28.3
28.1
28.2
28.0
27.8
28.1
28.0
28.2
28.4
28.6
28.3
28.1
28.2
27.9
28.0
27.8
28.1
28.2
28.0
27.9
27.6
27.5
27.8
27.9
27.7
27.6
27.4
27.3
120
588
595
602
609
616
623
630
637
644
651
658
665
672
679
687
693
700
707
714
721
728
735
742
749
756
764
770
777
784
791
798
805
812
819
826
834
840
847
854
861
868
875
882
889
896
903
910
916
924
931
938
4.8487
4.8440
4.8492
4.8449
4.8510
4.8475
4.8448
4.8423
4.8461
4.8492
4.8456
4.8478
4.8460
4.8449
4.8487
4.8461
4.8492
4.8451
4.8476
4.8448
4.8480
4.8464
4.8492
4.8461
4.8503
4.8479
4.8471
4.8460
4.8484
4.8503
4.8476
4.8490
4.8163
4.8478
4.8184
4.8481
4.8460
4.8493
4.8449
4.8478
4.8500
4.8480
4.8459
4.8496
4.8450
4.8471
4.8494
4.8460
4.8479
4.8460
4.8451
27.5
27.2
27.1
26.9
26.8
27.0
26.7
26.4
26.3
26.1
26.2
26.0
25.9
25.7
25.8
26.1
26.2
26.3
26.5
26.6
26.9
27.0
27.2
27.4
27.5
27.8
27.9
27.7
27.6
27.4
27.3
27.5
27.6
27.7
28.0
28.1
27.9
27.8
27.7
28.1
28.2
28.4
28.5
28.6
28.3
28.2
28.0
27.9
28.1
28.2
28.1
121
945
952
959
969
983
1004
1018
1032
1046
1060
1074
1095
1109
1123
1137
1151
4.8488
4.8460
4.8480
4.8490
4.8439
4.8482
4.8436
4.8441
4.8443
4.8481
4.8454
4.8505
4.8472
4.8441
4.8494
4.8479
28.0
27.9
28.0
27.4
27.8
27.6
27.9
27.7
27.5
27.8
27.6
28.0
27.7
28.2
27.9
28.0
122
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
SPR 151A
Location
Mainline
Chainage
272300
Time (Days)
720
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
720
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
660
600
540
480
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
5.20
4.80
4.40
4.00
Fill Height, (m)
3.60
3.20
2.80
2.40
2.00
1.60
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.00
Time (Days)
Settlement (mm)
660
600
540
480
35.0
420
30.0
360
25.0
300
20.0
240
15.0
180
10.0
120
5.0
60
0
0.0
123
Interpretation by Asaoka's method
Si
0.0
25.7
27.5
28.7
28.9
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
Si-1
0
25.7
27.5
28.7
28.9
29
29
29
29
Si
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Si-1
26
E = 0.4285
Asaoka's Construction
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
124
125
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH272100 TO CH272350
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
6 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
ASAOKA'S INTERPRETATION
Terzaghi,
cv =
− 4H 2
ln ß
π 2 ?t
Terzaghi and Barron,
−
8ch
ln β π 2 cv
=
+
∆t
4H 2 D2 F(n)
 n2 
 3n2 −1


−
F(n) = 
ln
n
(
)
 n2 −1
 4n2 





n =
β =
∆t =
De
D
0.4285
60 days
H =
2.4 m
D =
De =
2.26 m
0.8 m
n =
2.825
F(n) =
cv =
0.4686
ch =
12.04 m2/yr
12.28 m2/yr
0.164383562 yrs
4
0.126
CH272100 TO CH272350
Dc/Ds
2 m
1
2
1
2
2
3
4
(m)
1
LAYER
6
4
3
1
(m)
(CUM)
0.69
0.84
0.96
0.69
(Ac/A)1
11
25
100
11
1.68
0.459
0.193
0.047
0.459
0.119
0.123
0.125
0.119
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
1.64
1.66
1.68
1.64
n1
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSI
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
THK
0.357
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
THK
0.217
SOIL
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
4
0.333
40 degrees
100 MPa
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
POISSON RATIO =
FRICTION ANGLE =
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
19 kN/m3
6 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
COLUMN DEPTH =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
DIAMETER(D) =
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
LOCATION :
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
Pc/Ps
Pc
233.3
230.8
229.4
233.3
kPa
7.2
8.2
4.2
17.0
kPa
GAMMA
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.2
fd
1.7
3.9
15.6
1.7
2.27
4.02
13.44
2.27
fd(max) n(max)
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
1.73
1.77
1.73
1.89
n2
126
1.89
2
2
2
2.5
1.73
3
4
4.5
1.73
4
4
6
1.8
88.1
1.73
TOTAL
1.8
1.8
1.9
4.1
4.2
17.2
17.2
17.3
17.3
1.8
1.8
(mm)
SETTL.
TOTAL
DESIGN
4.02
2.27
3.41
3.49
2.27
2.27
3.41
3.51
2.27
13.44
4.02
2.27
3.51
3.41
3.49
3.49
4.02
13.44
5.73
n(max) n(adopted)
5.73
n2
Case 2: Maximum Criteria
2.27
13.44
3.51
n(max) n(adopted)
5.73
n2
11
25
100
11
Dc/Ds
11
25
100
11
Dc/Ds
Case 1 : Minimum Criteria
0.246
0.126
0.126
0.468
Ac/A
0.126
0.100
0.025
0.126
Ac/A
BACK-ANALYSIS (USING IMPROVEMENT FACTOR)
56.09
1.73
1.73
57.54
4
56.86
58.15
4
5
1.77
5.5
58.67
1.77
1.73
59.68
3
59.10
59.43
2
2
3
1.73
3.5
59.85
1.73
1.89
59.99
1
59.94
60.00
1
1
n2
1.5
0.5
INCR.
(kPa)
STRESS
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
DEPTH
TOTAL FIELD SETTLEMENT =
TOTAL
2.0
2.0
4.0
4.0
1.1
1.4
2.0
2.0
1.0
S
m
A
2.0
2.2
4.5
m2
4.0
5.0
19.8
4.0
S
m
A
29.0
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.4
1.4
5.6
5.7
5.7
5.7
0.6
0.6
(mm)
SETTL.
m2
77.2
4.1
4.2
17.2
17.2
17.3
17.3
(mm)
SETTL.
CONSOL.
29.0 mm
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
n2
FIELD
%
5.73
5.73
5.27
5.27
5.27
5.27
5.39
5.39
5.26
5.26
5.26
5.26
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
203.82
IN n2
(BACKCALC) INCREASE
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
FACTOR
REDUCTION
127
LOCATION : CH227100 TO CH227350
TIME
RATE
TREATED
128
SETTLEMENT
PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
29.0 mm
DIAMETER=
0.8 m
SPACING=
4.5 m
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
12.0 m2/yr
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
0.0 m2/yr
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
5.09 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
6.36
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
12.95 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
0.00 m2/yr
F(N) =
1.15
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.4 m
TIME INTERVAL =
15 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
15
0.092404
34.3
0
0.0
34.3
9.9
9.9
30
0.184808
48.4
0
0.0
48.4
14.0
14.0
0.0
45
0.277212
58.8
0
0.0
58.8
17.1
17.1
60
0.369615
67.2
0
0.0
67.2
19.5
19.5
75
0.462019
73.9
0
0.0
73.9
21.4
21.4
90
0.554423
79.3
0
0.0
79.3
23.0
23.0
105
0.646827
83.6
0
0.0
83.6
24.2
24.2
120
0.739231
86.9
0
0.0
86.9
25.2
25.2
135
0.831635
89.5
0
0.0
89.5
26.0
26.0
150
0.924039
91.6
0
0.0
91.6
26.6
26.6
165
1.016443
93.1
0
0.0
93.1
27.0
180
1.108846
94.3
0
0.0
94.3
27.4
27.4
195
1.20125
95.3
0
0.0
95.3
27.6
27.6
210
1.293654
96.1
0
0.0
96.1
27.9
27.9
225
1.386058
96.7
0
0.0
96.7
28.0
28.0
240
1.478462
97.2
0
0.0
97.2
28.2
28.2
255
1.570866
97.5
0
0.0
97.5
28.3
28.3
270
1.66327
97.9
0
0.0
97.9
28.4
28.4
285
1.755673
98.1
0
0.0
98.1
28.5
28.5
300
1.848077
98.3
0
0.0
98.3
28.5
28.5
315
1.940481
98.5
0
0.0
98.5
28.6
28.6
330
2.032885
98.7
0
0.0
98.7
28.6
28.6
345
2.125289
98.8
0
0.0
98.8
28.7
28.7
360
2.217693
98.9
0
0.0
98.9
28.7
28.7
375
2.310097
99.0
0
0.0
99.0
28.7
28.7
390
2.402501
99.1
0
0.0
99.1
28.7
28.7
405
2.494904
99.2
0
0.0
99.2
28.8
28.8
420
2.587308
99.2
0
0.0
99.2
28.8
28.8
435
2.679712
99.3
0
0.0
99.3
28.8
450
2.772116
99.3
0
0.0
99.3
28.8
28.8
465
2.86452
99.4
0
0.0
99.4
28.8
28.8
480
2.956924
99.4
0
0.0
99.4
28.8
28.8
495
3.049328
99.4
0
0.0
99.4
28.8
28.8
510
3.141731
99.5
0
0.0
99.5
28.8
28.8
525
3.234135
99.5
0
0.0
99.5
28.9
28.9
540
3.326539
99.5
0
0.0
99.5
28.9
28.9
555
3.418943
99.5
0
0.0
99.5
28.9
28.9
570
3.511347
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
585
3.603751
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
600
3.696155
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
615
3.788559
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
630
3.880962
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
645
3.973366
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
660
4.06577
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
675
4.158174
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
690
4.250578
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
705
4.342982
99.6
0
0.0
99.6
28.9
28.9
720
4.435386
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
735
4.527789
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
750
4.620193
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
765
4.712597
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
780
4.805001
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
795
4.897405
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
810
4.989809
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
825
5.082213
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
840
5.174617
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
855
5.26702
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
870
5.359424
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
885
5.451828
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
900
5.544232
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
915
5.636636
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
930
5.72904
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
945
5.821444
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
960
5.913848
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
975
6.006251
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
990
6.098655
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1005
6.191059
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1020
6.283463
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1035
6.375867
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1050
6.468271
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1065
6.560675
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1080
6.653078
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1095
6.745482
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
1110
6.837886
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1125
6.93029
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1140
7.022694
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1155
7.115098
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
1170
7.207502
99.7
0
0.0
99.7
28.9
28.9
27.0
28.8
28.9
28.9
28.9
Settlement (mm)
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
540
480
Field Data
Time (Days)
Settlement Comparison for Design and Field Settlement Data
660
600
Design Data
129
1260
1200
1140
1080
1020
960
900
840
780
720
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
130
APPENDIX E
ANALYSIS FOR
CH297250 TO CH299250
131
KELLER-BAUER CONSORTIUM
ELECTRIFIED DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT BETWEEN RAWANG AND IPOH
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH297250 TO CH299250
EMBANKMENT GEOMETRY
TOP WIDTH (B) =
14.9 m
EMBANKMENT SLOPE (1:?) =
2
DESIGN EMBANKMENT HEIGHT(H) =
2 m (GL TO TOP RAIL LEVEL)
EMBANKMENT BASE WIDTH (W) =
16.9 m
LOADINGS
FILL UNIT WEIGHT =
20 kN/m3
FILL LOAD =
40 kPa
TOTAL DESIGN LOAD =
40 kPa
SUBSOIL STRATA & PROPERTIES
SOIL
LAYER
BOTTOM
THK
TYPE
CONSTRAINED
UNIT
Su
PHI
Cv
Cr
MODULUS
WEIGHT
(MPa)
kN/m3
kPa
degree
m2/yr
m2/yr
10
1
3
26
5
10
5
10
LEVEL
(m)
(m)
1
1.5
1.5
CLAY
1.00
14
2
4
2.5
Silty SAND
3.00
16
3
7.5
3.5
Clayey SILT
4.50
17
DRAINAGE LENGTH (VERTICAL)=
50
2.1 m
DESIGN Cv =
1 m2/yr
DESIGN Cr =
3 m2/yr
GROUND WATER TABLE =
1 mbgl
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
7.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN =
4
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
0.217
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
0.357
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
SOIL
THK
LAYER
1.68
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSIBILIT
THK
(CUM)
(Ac/A)1
Dc/Ds
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
n1
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
Pc/Ps
Pc
kPa
COMP. PARAMETERS
GAMMA n(max)
n2
m
Cu
Phi
kN/m3
kPa
deg.
8.8
18.7
(m)
1
1.5
1.5
2
2.5
4
0.88
33
0.143
0.123
1.67
6.4
153.6
6.2
5.06
1.80
0.40
17.2
0.0
32.1
3
3.5
7.5
0.82
22
0.218
0.122
1.66
6.4
154.0
7.2
3.67
1.81
0.40
17.8
43.9
18.4
0.96
100
0.047
0.125
1.68
6.4
152.9
kPa
UNIT WT.
(m)
4.2
13.44
1.76
0.40
16.0
132
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
DEPTH
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
STRESS
TOTAL
CONSOL.
INCR.
SETTL.
SETTL.
(kPa)
n2
(mm)
(mm)
0.5
1
40.00
1.76
11.3
11.3
1
1
39.99
1.76
11.3
11.3
1.5
1
39.95
1.76
11.3
11.3
2
2
39.86
1.80
3.7
2.5
2
39.71
1.80
3.7
3
2
39.48
1.80
3.7
3.5
2
39.19
1.80
3.6
4
2
38.81
1.80
3.6
4.5
3
38.36
1.81
2.4
2.4
5
3
37.84
1.81
2.3
2.3
5.5
3
37.27
1.81
2.3
2.3
6
3
36.64
1.81
2.2
2.2
6.5
3
35.97
1.81
2.2
2.2
7
3
35.27
1.81
2.2
2.2
7.5
3
34.54
1.81
2.1
2.1
TOTAL
68.0
45.4
SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT RESULTS
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
45 mm
CONSOLIDATION SETTL. UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN =
41 mm
(ASSUME 1 YR FROM THE END OF CONSTRUCTION OF EMBANKMENT)
TIME FOR 90 % CONSOLIDATION OF TREATED GROUND =
EST. SETTL. DURING 1ST 6 MTHS OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN OPERATION =
52 DAYS
3.0 mm
133
CH297250 TO CH299250
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
45.4 mm
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
2.26 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
2.83
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
1.43 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
4.29 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.47
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.1 m
TIME INTERVAL =
1 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1
0.000895
3.4
0.002301
3.9
7.1
3.2
3.2
2
0.001791
4.8
0.004602
7.6
12.0
5.4
5.4
3
0.002686
5.8
0.006902
11.1
16.3
4
0.003581
6.8
0.009203
14.5
20.3
9.2
5
0.004477
7.5
0.011504
17.8
24.0
10.9
10.9
6
0.005372
8.3
0.013805
21.0
27.5
12.5
12.5
7
0.006268
8.9
0.016105
24.0
30.8
14.0
14.0
8
0.007163
9.5
0.018406
27.0
33.9
15.4
15.4
9
0.008058
10.1
0.020707
29.8
36.9
16.8
16.8
10
0.008954
10.7
0.023008
32.5
39.7
18.0
18.0
11
0.009849
11.2
0.025309
35.1
42.4
19.2
19.2
12
0.010744
11.7
0.027609
37.6
44.9
20.4
20.4
13
0.01164
12.2
0.02991
40.0
47.3
21.5
21.5
14
0.012535
12.6
0.032211
42.3
49.6
22.5
22.5
15
0.01343
13.1
0.034512
44.5
51.8
23.5
23.5
16
0.014326
13.5
0.036812
46.7
53.9
24.5
24.5
17
0.015221
13.9
0.039113
48.7
55.9
25.4
25.4
18
0.016116
14.3
0.041414
50.7
57.8
26.2
26.2
19
0.017012
14.7
0.043715
52.6
59.6
27.1
27.1
20
0.017907
15.1
0.046016
54.4
61.3
27.9
27.9
21
0.018803
15.5
0.048316
56.2
63.0
28.6
28.6
22
0.019698
15.8
0.050617
57.9
64.5
29.3
29.3
23
0.020593
16.2
0.052918
59.5
66.0
30.0
30.0
24
0.021489
16.5
0.055219
61.0
67.5
30.7
30.7
25
0.022384
16.9
0.057519
62.5
68.9
31.3
31.3
26
0.023279
17.2
0.05982
64.0
70.2
31.9
31.9
27
0.024175
17.5
0.062121
65.4
71.4
32.5
32.5
28
0.02507
17.9
0.064422
66.7
72.7
33.0
33.0
29
0.025965
18.2
0.066723
68.0
73.8
33.5
33.5
30
0.026861
18.5
0.069023
69.2
74.9
34.0
34.0
31
0.027756
18.8
0.071324
70.4
76.0
34.5
34.5
32
0.028651
19.1
0.073625
71.5
77.0
35.0
35.0
33
0.029547
19.4
0.075926
72.6
77.9
35.4
35.4
34
0.030442
19.7
0.078226
73.7
78.9
35.8
35.8
35
0.031338
20.0
0.080527
74.7
79.8
36.2
36.2
36
0.032233
20.3
0.082828
75.7
80.6
36.6
36.6
37
0.033128
20.5
0.085129
76.6
81.4
37.0
37.0
38
0.034024
20.8
0.08743
77.5
82.2
37.4
37.4
39
0.034919
21.1
0.08973
78.4
82.9
37.7
37.7
40
0.035814
21.4
0.092031
79.2
83.7
38.0
38.0
41
0.03671
21.6
0.094332
80.0
84.3
38.3
38.3
42
0.037605
21.9
0.096633
80.8
85.0
38.6
38.6
43
0.0385
22.1
0.098934
81.5
85.6
38.9
38.9
44
0.039396
22.4
0.101234
82.2
86.2
39.2
39.2
45
0.040291
22.6
0.103535
82.9
86.8
39.4
39.4
46
0.041186
22.9
0.105836
83.6
87.3
39.7
39.7
47
0.042082
23.1
0.108137
84.2
87.9
39.9
39.9
48
0.042977
23.4
0.110437
84.8
88.4
40.2
40.2
49
0.043873
23.6
0.112738
85.4
88.9
40.4
40.4
50
0.044768
23.9
0.115039
86.0
89.3
40.6
40.6
51
0.045663
24.1
0.11734
86.5
89.8
40.8
40.8
52
0.046559
24.3
0.119641
87.0
90.2
41.0
41.0
53
0.047454
24.6
0.121941
87.5
90.6
41.2
41.2
54
0.048349
24.8
0.124242
88.0
91.0
41.3
41.3
55
0.049245
25.0
0.126543
88.5
91.4
41.5
41.5
56
0.05014
25.3
0.128844
88.9
91.7
41.7
41.7
57
0.051035
25.5
0.131144
89.3
92.1
41.8
41.8
58
0.051931
25.7
0.133445
89.8
92.4
42.0
42.0
59
0.052826
25.9
0.135746
90.1
92.7
42.1
42.1
60
0.053721
26.1
0.138047
90.5
93.0
42.3
42.3
61
0.054617
26.4
0.140348
90.9
93.3
42.4
42.4
62
0.055512
26.6
0.142648
91.2
93.6
42.5
42.5
63
0.056408
26.8
0.144949
91.6
93.8
42.6
42.6
64
0.057303
27.0
0.14725
91.9
94.1
42.8
42.8
65
0.058198
27.2
0.149551
92.2
94.3
42.9
42.9
66
0.059094
27.4
0.151851
92.5
94.6
43.0
43.0
67
0.059989
27.6
0.154152
92.8
94.8
43.1
43.1
68
0.060884
27.8
0.156453
93.1
95.0
43.2
43.2
69
0.06178
28.0
0.158754
93.3
95.2
43.3
43.3
70
0.062675
28.2
0.161055
93.6
95.4
43.4
43.4
71
0.06357
28.4
0.163355
93.9
95.6
43.4
43.4
72
0.064466
28.6
0.165656
94.1
95.8
43.5
43.5
73
0.065361
28.8
0.167957
94.3
96.0
43.6
43.6
74
0.066256
29.0
0.170258
94.5
96.1
43.7
43.7
75
0.067152
29.2
0.172558
94.7
96.3
43.8
43.8
76
0.068047
29.4
0.174859
94.9
96.4
43.8
43.8
77
0.068943
29.6
0.17716
95.1
96.6
43.9
43.9
78
0.069838
29.8
0.179461
95.3
96.7
44.0
44.0
7.4
0.0
7.4
9.2
SEE\TTLEMENT (mm)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
TIME (days)
60
LOCATION : CH297250 TO CH299250
70
80
90
134
135
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
Location
Mainline
Chainage
298800
Time
(Days)
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
12
13
14
16
20
23
34
37
41
48
55
59
65
66
67
68
69
70
72
73
74
75
76
77
80
90
97
104
111
118
125
132
139
146
Fill Height Settlement
(m)
(mm)
1.2834
0.0
1.2767
0.2
1.2624
0.3
1.2624
0.6
1.2699
0.3
1.2769
0.6
1.2904
0.6
1.2704
0.5
1.2702
0.4
1.2624
0.1
1.2602
0.3
1.2607
0.3
1.2524
0.4
1.2528
0.2
1.2609
0.3
1.2446
0.2
1.2624
0.6
1.2675
0.6
1.2679
0.7
1.2675
0.6
1.2678
0.6
1.6395
18.2
1.6404
19.7
1.6159
19.4
1.9874
22.9
1.9924
23.0
1.9709
23.2
1.9704
23.2
1.9660
23.5
1.9704
23.3
1.9809
23.3
1.9604
23.2
1.9704
23.4
1.9604
23.2
1.9701
22.5
1.9724
23.5
1.9704
23.0
1.9704
23.2
1.9546
23.0
1.9667
23.4
1.9526
22.9
1.9627
23.2
1.9704
23.2
SPR 313A
136
153
160
167
174
181
188
195
202
209
216
223
230
237
244
251
258
265
272
279
286
293
301
308
315
322
329
336
343
350
357
364
371
378
385
392
399
406
413
419
426
434
441
448
455
462
469
476
483
490
497
504
1.9704
1.9724
1.9724
1.9704
1.9624
1.9702
1.9604
1.9704
1.9724
1.9664
1.9724
1.9704
1.9754
1.9704
1.9704
1.9704
1.9687
1.9704
1.9595
1.9624
1.9704
1.9704
1.9724
1.9695
1.9660
1.9704
1.9704
1.9727
1.9627
1.9727
1.9527
1.9667
1.9707
1.9715
1.9720
1.9707
1.9709
1.9701
1.9627
1.9627
1.9627
1.9624
1.9424
1.9627
1.9595
1.9599
1.9622
1.9625
1.9504
1.9589
1.9524
23.2
23.4
23.0
23.0
23.4
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.5
23.1
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.2
23.4
23.2
23.0
23.2
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.3
23.1
23.2
23.1
23.2
23.1
23.1
22.7
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.0
23.2
23.1
23.4
23.1
23.2
23.4
23.2
23.1
23.2
137
511
518
525
532
539
546
553
560
567
574
586
600
621
635
649
663
677
698
712
726
740
754
768
1.9580
1.9527
1.9564
1.9495
1.9527
1.9401
1.9581
1.9425
1.9396
1.9624
1.9604
1.9504
1.9627
1.9567
1.9627
1.9529
1.9409
1.9595
1.9601
1.9527
1.9405
1.9507
1.9527
23.2
23.5
23.4
23.7
23.4
23.3
23.5
23.7
23.8
23.1
23.7
23.8
23.4
23.8
23.4
23.7
23.7
23.5
23.2
24.0
24.0
24.0
23.7
138
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
SPR 313A
Location
Mainline
Chainage
298800
Time (Days)
480
540
600
660
720
780
840
480
540
600
660
720
780
840
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
2.40
2.00
Fill Height, (m)
1.60
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.00
Time (Days)
Settlement (mm)
420
30.0
360
25.0
300
20.0
240
15.0
180
10.0
120
5.0
60
0
0.0
139
Interpretation by Asaoka's method
Si
0.0
21.8
22.5
22.9
23.4
23.5
23.5
23.7
23.8
23.8
23.9
24.0
24.0
24.0
Si-1
0
21.8
22.5
22.9
23.4
23.5
23.5
23.7
23.8
23.8
23.9
24
24
24
Si
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
E = 0.6833
Si-1
23
Asaoka's Construction
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
140
141
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH297250 TO CH299250
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
7.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
ASAOKA'S INTERPRETATION
Terzaghi,
cv =
− 4H 2
ln ß
π 2 ?t
Terzaghi and Barron,
−
8c
ln β π 2cv
=
+ 2 h
2
∆t 4H
D F(n)
 n2 
 3n2 −1

F(n) =  2 ln(n) −
2 
 n −1
 4n 
n =
β =
∆t =
H =
De
D
0.6833
60 days
2.1 m
D =
0.8 m
De =
2.26 m
n =
2.825
F(n) =
0.4686
cv =
4.14 m2/yr
ch =
7.66 m2/yr
0.164383562 yrs
4
0.126
CH297250 TO CH299250
Dc/Ds
40 degrees
1.5
2.5
3.5
2
3
(m)
1
LAYER
7.5
4
1.5
(m)
(CUM)
0.82
0.88
0.96
(Ac/A)1
22
33
100
1.68
0.218
0.143
0.047
0.122
0.123
0.125
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
1.66
1.67
1.68
n1
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSI
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
THK
0.357
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
THK
0.217
SOIL
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
4
0.333
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
POISSON RATIO =
FRICTION ANGLE =
100 MPa
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
7.5 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
2 m
0.8 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
DIAMETER(D) =
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
LOCATION :
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
6.4
6.4
6.4
Pc/Ps
Pc
154.0
153.6
152.9
kPa
7.2
6.2
4.2
kPa
GAMMA
1.1
1.1
1.1
fd
3.5
5.2
15.6
3.67
5.06
13.44
fd(max) n(max)
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
1.81
1.80
1.76
n2
142
1.76
1.80
1.80
39.71
39.48
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
1.81
1.81
37.27
36.64
3
3
3
3
3
6
6.5
7
7.5
2.1
68.0
TOTAL
2.2
1.81
1.81
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
3.6
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.7
11.3
11.3
11.3
(mm)
SETTL.
TOTAL
DESIGN
5.06
3.67
5.13
3.67
5.06
4.99
13.44
5.06
3.67
5.09
5.13
5.13
5.09
13.44
n(max) n(adopted)
4.99
n2
Case 2: Maximum Criteria
13.44
5.09
n(max) n(adopted)
4.99
n2
22
33
100
Dc/Ds
22
33
100
Dc/Ds
Case 1 : Minimum Criteria
0.195
0.127
0.126
Ac/A
0.126
0.126
0.040
Ac/A
BACK-ANALYSIS (USING IMPROVEMENT FACTOR)
34.54
35.27
1.81
1.81
37.84
3
35.97
1.81
38.36
3
5
1.80
1.80
1.80
5.5
38.81
39.19
39.86
1.76
1.76
39.99
1
39.95
40.00
1
1
n2
1.5
0.5
INCR.
(kPa)
STRESS
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
DEPTH
TOTAL FIELD SETTLEMENT =
TOTAL
2.6
4.0
4.0
1.6
2.0
2.0
S
m
A
2.0
2.0
3.5
m2
4.0
4.0
12.5
S
m
A
24.0
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
4.0
4.0
4.0
(mm)
SETTL.
m2
38.4
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
11.3
11.3
11.3
(mm)
SETTL.
CONSOL.
24.0 mm
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
n2
FIELD
%
5.13
5.13
5.13
5.13
5.13
5.13
5.13
5.09
5.09
5.09
5.09
5.09
4.99
4.99
4.99
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
183.35
IN n2
(BACKCALC) INCREASE
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
FACTOR
REDUCTION
143
144
L O C A T I O N :C H 2 9 7 2 5 0 T O C H 2 9 9 2 5 0
TIME
RATE
TREATED
SETTLEMENT
PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
24.0 mm
DIAMETER=
0.8 m
SPACING=
3.5 m
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
4.1 m2/yr
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
0.0 m2/yr
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
3.96 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
4.94
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
4.14 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
7.66 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.93
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.1 m
TIME INTERVAL =
15 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0
0
0.0
0
15
0.03858
22.2
0.020125
16.0
34.6
8.3
8.3
30
0.07716
31.3
0.04025
29.4
0.0
51.5
0.0
12.4
0.0
12.4
0.0
45
0.115739
38.4
0.060375
40.6
63.4
15.2
15.2
60
0.154319
44.2
0.0805
50.1
72.2
17.3
17.3
75
0.192899
49.4
0.100625
58.1
78.8
18.9
18.9
90
0.231479
54.0
0.12075
64.7
83.8
20.1
20.1
105
0.270059
58.1
0.140874
70.4
87.6
21.0
21.0
120
0.308639
61.9
0.160999
75.1
90.5
21.7
21.7
135
0.347218
65.3
0.181124
79.1
92.7
22.3
22.3
150
0.385798
68.5
0.201249
82.4
94.5
22.7
22.7
165
0.424378
71.4
0.221374
85.2
95.8
23.0
23.0
180
0.462958
74.0
0.241499
87.6
96.8
23.2
23.2
195
0.501538
76.4
0.261624
89.6
97.5
23.4
23.4
210
0.540117
78.6
0.281749
91.2
98.1
23.5
23.5
225
0.578697
80.6
0.301874
92.6
98.6
23.7
23.7
240
0.617277
82.3
0.321999
93.8
98.9
23.7
23.7
255
0.655857
84.0
0.342124
94.8
99.2
23.8
23.8
270
0.694437
85.4
0.362249
95.6
99.4
23.8
23.8
285
0.733016
86.7
0.382374
96.3
99.5
23.9
23.9
300
0.771596
87.9
0.402498
96.9
99.6
23.9
23.9
315
0.810176
89.0
0.422623
97.4
99.7
23.9
23.9
330
0.848756
90.0
0.442748
97.8
99.8
23.9
23.9
345
0.887336
90.8
0.462873
98.2
99.8
24.0
24.0
360
0.925916
91.6
0.482998
98.5
99.9
24.0
24.0
375
0.964495
92.3
0.503123
98.7
99.9
24.0
24.0
390
1.003075
92.9
0.523248
98.9
99.9
24.0
24.0
405
1.041655
93.5
0.543373
99.1
99.9
24.0
24.0
420
1.080235
94.0
0.563498
99.2
100.0
24.0
24.0
435
1.118815
94.5
0.583623
99.4
100.0
24.0
24.0
450
1.157394
94.9
0.603748
99.5
100.0
24.0
24.0
465
1.195974
95.3
0.623873
99.5
100.0
24.0
24.0
480
1.234554
95.6
0.643997
99.6
100.0
24.0
24.0
495
1.273134
95.9
0.664122
99.7
100.0
24.0
24.0
510
1.311714
96.2
0.684247
99.7
100.0
24.0
24.0
525
1.350294
96.4
0.704372
99.8
100.0
24.0
24.0
540
1.388873
96.7
0.724497
99.8
100.0
24.0
24.0
555
1.427453
96.9
0.744622
99.8
100.0
24.0
24.0
570
1.466033
97.1
0.764747
99.9
100.0
24.0
24.0
585
1.504613
97.3
0.784872
99.9
100.0
24.0
24.0
600
1.543193
97.4
0.804997
99.9
100.0
24.0
24.0
615
1.581772
97.6
0.825122
99.9
100.0
24.0
24.0
630
1.620352
97.7
0.845247
99.9
100.0
24.0
645
1.658932
97.9
0.865372
99.9
100.0
24.0
24.0
660
1.697512
98.0
0.885497
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
675
1.736092
98.1
0.905621
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
690
1.774672
98.2
0.925746
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
705
1.813251
98.3
0.945871
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
720
1.851831
98.4
0.965996
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
735
1.890411
98.4
0.986121
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
750
1.928991
98.5
1.006246
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
765
1.967571
98.6
1.026371
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
780
2.00615
98.6
1.046496
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
795
2.04473
98.7
1.066621
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
810
2.08331
98.8
1.086746
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
825
2.12189
98.8
1.106871
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
840
2.16047
98.9
1.126996
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
855
2.199049
98.9
1.147121
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
870
2.237629
98.9
1.167245
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
885
2.276209
99.0
1.18737
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
900
2.314789
99.0
1.207495
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
915
2.353369
99.1
1.22762
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
930
2.391949
99.1
1.247745
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
945
2.430528
99.1
1.26787
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
960
2.469108
99.2
1.287995
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
975
2.507688
99.2
1.30812
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
990
2.546268
99.2
1.328245
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1005
2.584848
99.2
1.34837
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1020
2.623427
99.3
1.368495
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1035
2.662007
99.3
1.38862
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
1050
2.700587
99.3
1.408744
100.0
100.0
24.0
1065
2.739167
99.3
1.428869
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1080
2.777747
99.3
1.448994
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1095
2.816327
99.4
1.469119
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1110
2.854906
99.4
1.489244
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1125
2.893486
99.4
1.509369
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1140
2.932066
99.4
1.529494
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1155
2.970646
99.4
1.549619
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
1170
3.009226
99.4
1.569744
100.0
100.0
24.0
24.0
Settlement (mm)
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
540
480
Field Data
Time (Days)
Settlement Comparison for Design and Field Settlement Data
660
600
Design Data
145
1260
1200
1140
1080
1020
960
900
840
780
720
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0
146
APPENDIX F
ANALYSIS FOR
CH299400 TO CH299625
147
0
KELLER-BAUER CONSORTIUM
ELECTRIFIED DOUBLE TRACK PROJECT BETWEEN RAWANG AND IPOH
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH299400 TO CH299625
EMBANKMENT GEOMETRY
TOP WIDTH (B) =
14.9 m
EMBANKMENT SLOPE (1:?) =
2
DESIGN EMBANKMENT HEIGHT(H) =
1.8 m (GL TO TOP RAIL LEVEL)
EMBANKMENT BASE WIDTH (W) =
16.5 m
LOADINGS
FILL UNIT WEIGHT =
20 kN/m3
FILL LOAD =
36 kPa
TOTAL DESIGN LOAD =
36 kPa
SUBSOIL STRATA & PROPERTIES
SOIL
LAYER
BOTTOM
THK
TYPE
CONSTRAINED
UNIT
MODULUS
WEIGHT
(MPa)
kN/m3
SAND
3.00
17
CLAY
1.00
14
SAND
7.80
18
3.60
17
LEVEL
(m)
(m)
1
1
1
2
3
2
3
5
2
4
6
1
SAND
DRAINAGE LENGTH (VERTICAL)=
Su
PHI
Cv
Cr
kPa
degree
m2/yr
m2/yr
26
5
10
2
4
28
5
10
26
5
10
10
2.3 m
DESIGN Cv =
2 m2/yr
DESIGN Cr =
4 m2/yr
GROUND WATER TABLE =
1 mbgl
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
6 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN =
4
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
0.217
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
0.357
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
SOIL
THK
LAYER
1.68
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSIBILITY
THK
(CUM)
(Ac/A)1
Dc/Ds
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
n1
(m)
(m)
1
1
1
0.88
33
0.143
0.123
1.67
2
2
3
0.96
100
0.047
0.125
1.68
3
2
5
0.72
13
0.393
0.120
1.64
4
1
6
0.85
28
0.173
0.123
1.66
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
Pc/Ps
Pc
COMP. PARAMETERS
GAMMA n(max)
n2
m
UNIT WT.
Cu
Phi
kN/m3
kPa
deg.
kPa
kPa
6.4
138.2
17.0
5.06
2.14
0.40
17.8
0.0
32.1
6.4
137.6
4.2
13.44
1.77
0.40
16.0
8.8
18.7
6.4
139.6
8.2
2.49
1.84
0.39
18.4
0.0
33.1
6.4
138.4
7.2
4.37
1.84
0.40
17.8
0.0
32.1
148
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
DEPTH
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
STRESS
TOTAL
CONSOL.
INCR.
SETTL.
SETTL.
(kPa)
n2
(mm)
(mm)
0.5
1
36.00
2.14
1
1
35.99
2.14
2.8
2.8
1.5
2
35.95
1.77
10.2
2
2
35.86
1.77
10.1
10.2
10.1
2.5
2
35.72
1.77
10.1
10.1
3
2
35.50
1.77
10.0
10.0
3.5
3
35.22
1.84
1.2
4
3
34.86
1.84
1.2
4.5
3
34.43
1.84
1.2
5
3
33.94
1.84
1.2
5.5
4
33.40
1.75
2.7
6
4
32.81
1.75
2.6
TOTAL
56.1
40.4
SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT RESULTS
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
40 mm
CONSOLIDATION SETTL. UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN =
39 mm
(ASSUME 1 YR FROM THE END OF CONSTRUCTION OF EMBANKMENT)
TIME FOR 90 % CONSOLIDATION OF TREATED GROUND =
EST. SETTL. DURING 1ST 6 MTHS OF COMMERCIAL TRAIN OPERATION =
37 DAYS
1.4 mm
149
CH299400 TO CH299625
TIME RATE SETTLEMENT
TREATED PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
40.4 mm
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
2.26 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
2.83
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
2.86 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
5.72 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.47
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.3 m
TIME INTERVAL =
1 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.8
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1
0.001527
4.4
0.003068
5.1
9.3
3.8
2
0.003054
6.2
0.006135
9.9
15.6
6.3
3
0.004582
7.6
0.009203
14.5
21.1
8.5
4
0.006109
8.8
0.012271
18.9
26.1
10.5
10.5
5
0.007636
9.9
0.015339
23.0
30.6
12.4
12.4
6
6.3
8.5
0.009163
10.8
0.018406
27.0
34.9
14.1
14.1
7
0.01069
11.7
0.021474
30.7
38.8
15.7
15.7
8
0.012218
12.5
0.024542
34.2
42.4
17.1
17.1
9
0.013745
13.2
0.027609
37.6
45.8
18.5
18.5
10
0.015272
13.9
0.030677
40.8
49.0
19.8
19.8
11
0.016799
14.6
0.033745
43.8
52.0
21.0
21.0
12
0.018326
15.3
0.036812
46.7
54.8
22.1
22.1
13
0.019854
15.9
0.03988
49.4
57.4
23.2
23.2
14
0.021381
16.5
0.042948
52.0
59.9
24.2
24.2
15
0.022908
17.1
0.046016
54.4
62.2
25.1
25.1
16
0.024435
17.6
0.049083
56.7
64.4
26.0
17
0.025963
18.2
0.052151
58.9
66.4
26.8
26.8
18
0.02749
18.7
0.055219
61.0
68.3
27.6
27.6
19
0.029017
19.2
0.058286
63.0
70.1
28.3
28.3
20
0.030544
19.7
0.061354
64.9
71.8
29.0
21
0.032071
20.2
0.064422
66.7
73.4
29.7
29.7
22
0.033599
20.7
0.06749
68.4
74.9
30.3
30.3
23
0.035126
21.1
0.070557
70.0
76.4
30.9
24
0.036653
21.6
0.073625
71.5
77.7
31.4
31.4
25
0.03818
22.0
0.076693
73.0
79.0
31.9
31.9
26
0.039707
22.5
0.07976
74.4
80.1
32.4
32.4
27
0.041235
22.9
0.082828
75.7
81.3
32.8
32.8
28
0.042762
23.3
0.085896
76.9
82.3
33.3
33.3
29
0.044289
23.7
0.088963
78.1
83.3
33.7
33.7
30
0.045816
24.1
0.092031
79.2
84.2
34.0
34.0
31
0.047343
24.5
0.095099
80.3
85.1
34.4
34.4
32
0.048871
24.9
0.098167
81.3
86.0
34.7
34.7
33
0.050398
25.3
0.101234
82.2
86.7
35.0
34
0.051925
25.7
0.104302
83.1
87.5
35.3
35.3
35
0.053452
26.1
0.10737
84.0
88.2
35.6
35.6
36
0.054979
26.5
0.110437
84.8
88.8
35.9
35.9
37
0.056507
26.8
0.113505
85.6
89.5
36.1
36.1
38
0.058034
27.2
0.116573
86.3
90.0
36.4
36.4
39
0.059561
27.5
0.119641
87.0
90.6
36.6
36.6
40
0.061088
27.9
0.122708
87.7
91.1
36.8
36.8
41
0.062616
28.2
0.125776
88.3
91.6
37.0
42
0.064143
28.6
0.128844
88.9
92.1
37.2
37.2
43
0.06567
28.9
0.131911
89.5
92.5
37.4
37.4
44
0.067197
29.2
0.134979
90.0
92.9
37.6
37.6
45
0.068724
29.6
0.138047
90.5
93.3
37.7
37.7
46
0.070252
29.9
0.141114
91.0
93.7
37.9
47
0.071779
30.2
0.144182
91.5
94.0
38.0
38.0
48
0.073306
30.5
0.14725
91.9
94.4
38.1
38.1
49
0.074833
30.9
0.150318
92.3
94.7
38.3
38.3
50
0.07636
31.2
0.153385
92.7
95.0
38.4
38.4
51
0.077888
31.5
0.156453
93.1
95.3
38.5
38.5
52
0.079415
31.8
0.159521
93.4
95.5
38.6
38.6
53
0.080942
32.1
0.162588
93.8
95.8
38.7
38.7
54
0.082469
32.4
0.165656
94.1
96.0
38.8
38.8
55
0.083996
32.7
0.168724
94.4
96.2
38.9
38.9
56
0.085524
33.0
0.171792
94.7
96.4
39.0
39.0
57
0.087051
33.3
0.174859
94.9
96.6
39.0
39.0
58
0.088578
33.6
0.177927
95.2
96.8
39.1
39.1
59
0.090105
33.9
0.180995
95.4
97.0
39.2
60
0.091632
34.1
0.184062
95.7
97.2
39.3
39.3
61
0.09316
34.4
0.18713
95.9
97.3
39.3
39.3
62
0.094687
34.7
0.190198
96.1
97.5
39.4
39.4
63
0.096214
35.0
0.193265
96.3
97.6
39.4
39.4
64
0.097741
35.3
0.196333
96.5
97.7
39.5
39.5
65
0.099269
35.5
0.199401
96.7
97.9
39.5
39.5
66
0.100796
35.8
0.202469
96.8
98.0
39.6
67
0.102323
36.1
0.205536
97.0
98.1
39.6
39.6
68
0.10385
36.3
0.208604
97.2
98.2
39.7
39.7
69
0.105377
36.6
0.211672
97.3
98.3
39.7
39.7
70
0.106905
36.9
0.214739
97.4
98.4
39.8
39.8
71
0.108432
37.1
0.217807
97.6
98.5
39.8
39.8
72
0.109959
37.4
0.220875
97.7
98.6
39.8
73
0.111486
37.6
0.223943
97.8
98.6
39.9
39.9
74
0.113013
37.9
0.22701
97.9
98.7
39.9
39.9
75
0.114541
38.2
0.230078
98.0
98.8
39.9
39.9
76
0.116068
38.4
0.233146
98.1
98.8
39.9
39.9
77
0.117595
38.7
0.236213
98.2
98.9
40.0
40.0
78
0.119122
38.9
0.239281
98.3
99.0
40.0
40.0
26.0
29.0
30.9
35.0
37.0
37.9
39.2
39.6
39.8
SEE\TTLEMENT (mm)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
TIME (days)
60
LOCATION : CH299400 TO CH299625
70
80
90
150
151
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
Location
Mainline
Chainage
299560
Time
(Days)
0
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
27
29
31
33
36
38
40
43
44
45
47
54
59
61
62
63
64
65
66
68
71
72
73
75
Fill Height Settlement
(m)
(mm)
0.2365
0.0
0.2555
0.4
0.2472
0.4
0.2246
0.6
0.2175
0.6
0.2156
0.5
0.2455
0.1
0.7928
0.8
0.7719
1.1
0.7958
1.4
0.7952
1.4
0.7958
1.1
1.5964
15.0
1.5947
15.4
1.5827
15.7
1.6053
15.8
1.5878
16.2
1.5746
15.9
1.5715
16.3
1.5855
15.9
1.5718
15.9
1.5910
16.4
1.5880
16.4
1.5852
16.6
1.5878
16.7
1.5780
16.3
1.3455
15.9
1.3350
15.9
1.3358
15.9
1.3280
15.9
1.3418
15.8
1.6175
16.5
1.6315
16.9
1.5883
17.0
1.8230
18.2
1.8355
18.4
1.8210
18.8
1.8356
18.6
1.8415
18.7
1.7958
18.4
1.8315
18.6
1.8050
18.8
1.7955
18.8
SPR314A
152
76
77
79
80
82
84
87
89
94
96
103
110
117
124
131
138
145
152
159
166
173
180
187
194
201
208
215
222
229
237
243
250
257
264
271
279
285
292
303
310
317
324
331
338
345
352
356
366
373
377
387
1.8055
1.8278
1.8020
1.8418
1.8020
1.8205
1.7958
1.8435
1.8046
1.8160
1.8110
1.8046
1.8046
1.8035
1.8015
1.8155
1.8075
1.8175
1.7911
1.7955
1.8075
1.8155
1.8015
1.8210
1.8205
1.8155
1.8210
1.8210
1.8210
1.8232
1.8105
1.8235
1.8210
1.8155
1.7888
1.8170
1.7984
1.7995
1.7990
1.8156
1.8000
1.7998
1.7993
1.7944
1.8175
1.7920
1.7920
1.8175
1.8175
1.8075
1.7746
19.0
18.9
18.8
19.0
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.4
18.4
18.6
18.6
18.6
18.9
18.7
18.7
19.0
18.7
19.8
18.9
19.8
18.9
18.9
18.7
18.9
18.7
18.7
18.7
18.9
18.7
18.7
18.7
18.7
18.7
18.6
18.8
18.7
18.6
18.5
18.7
18.6
18.6
18.6
18.7
18.8
18.6
18.4
18.9
19.0
19.0
19.3
153
394
401
408
415
422
429
436
443
450
457
464
471
478
485
492
499
506
513
520
527
534
541
548
555
562
569
576
583
590
598
605
612
619
626
633
640
647
654
661
668
675
682
689
696
703
710
716
723
731
738
745
1.7715
1.7710
1.7746
1.7993
1.8075
1.8012
1.7996
1.8040
1.8235
1.8105
1.8075
1.8055
1.8015
1.7910
1.7886
1.8026
1.8155
1.8115
1.8210
1.8110
1.8217
1.7910
1.8135
1.8040
1.8038
1.8046
1.8040
1.8040
1.8110
1.8096
1.8040
1.7950
1.8105
1.8110
1.8040
1.8105
1.8060
1.8110
1.8109
1.8110
1.8110
1.8060
1.8101
1.8135
1.8110
1.7910
1.8110
1.8120
1.8075
1.8040
1.8055
18.8
19.2
19.7
18.6
18.9
18.5
18.5
18.8
18.7
18.8
18.7
18.8
18.9
18.9
18.7
19.3
18.7
19.0
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.7
18.8
18.9
19.3
19.3
19.3
19.3
18.8
18.9
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
19.3
18.9
18.8
19.0
18.6
18.8
18.7
18.8
19.0
18.7
18.8
19.0
19.1
154
752
759
766
773
780
787
794
801
808
815
822
829
836
843
850
857
864
871
883
897
918
932
946
960
974
995
1009
1023
1037
1051
1065
1.8010
1.7960
1.7950
1.7909
1.8040
1.8140
1.7920
1.8060
1.7947
1.7920
1.8018
1.7917
1.7860
1.7917
1.7937
1.7810
1.7720
1.7946
1.7946
1.7855
1.7742
1.7620
1.7952
1.8060
1.7920
1.8040
1.8091
1.7910
1.7910
1.7920
1.8017
18.8
18.7
18.9
18.8
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.9
19.0
19.3
19.0
19.6
18.9
19.2
19.4
18.7
18.9
19.0
18.9
19.2
19.6
19.0
19.0
19.3
18.9
19.6
19.6
19.6
19.2
155
Project
Ipoh - Rawang Double Tracking Project
Rod Settlement Gauge Number
SPR314A
Location Mainline
Chainage 299560
Time (Days)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
660
720
780
840
900
960
1020 1080 1140
660
720
780
840
900
960 1020 1080 1140
2.00
Fill Height, (m)
1.60
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.00
Time (Days)
0.0
Settlement (mm)
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
540
600
156
Interpretation by Asaoka's method
Si
0.0
17.0
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.1
19.3
19.3
19.4
19.6
19.6
19.6
Si-1
0
17
18
18.5
19
19.1
19.3
19.3
19.4
19.6
19.6
19.6
Si
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
15
16
17
18
19
β = 0.6263
20
Si-1
Asaoka's Construction
21
22
23
24
25
157
158
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
LOCATION :
CH299400 TO CH299625
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
DIAMETER(D) =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
2 m
COLUMN DEPTH =
6 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
19 kN/m3
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
100 MPa
FRICTION ANGLE =
40 degrees
POISSON RATIO =
0.333
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
ASAOKA'S INTERPRETATION
Terzaghi,
cv =
− 4H 2
ln ß
π 2 ?t
Terzaghi and Barron,
−
8c
ln β π 2cv
=
+ 2 h
2
∆t 4H
D F(n)
 n2 
 3n2 −1

F(n) =  2 ln(n) −
2 
 n −1
 4n 
n =
β =
∆t =
H =
De
D
0.6263
60 days
2.3 m
D =
0.8 m
De =
2.26 m
n =
2.825
F(n) =
0.4686
cv =
6.10 m2/yr
ch =
9.28 m2/yr
0.164383562 yrs
4
0.126
CH299400 TO CH299625
Dc/Ds
2 m
1
2
2
1
2
3
4
(m)
1
LAYER
6
5
3
1
(m)
(CUM)
0.85
0.72
0.96
0.88
(Ac/A)1
28
13
100
33
1.68
0.173
0.393
0.047
0.143
0.123
0.120
0.125
0.123
del(A/Ac) Mod(Ac/A)
1.66
1.64
1.68
1.67
n1
CORR. FOR COLUMN COMPRESSI
BASIC IMPROVEMENT FACTOR (n0) =
THK
0.357
Ko EARTH PRESSURE COEFF. (Koc) =
THK
0.217
SOIL
0.126
PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE COEFF.(Kac) =
4
0.333
40 degrees
100 MPa
AREA REPLACEMENT RATIO (Ac/A) =
TRIBUTARY AREA FOR SINGLE COLUMN (A)=
POISSON RATIO =
FRICTION ANGLE =
CONSTRAINED MODULUS =
19 kN/m3
6 m
UNIT WEIGHT =
COLUMN DEPTH =
0.8 m
COLUMN SPACING (S) =
DIAMETER(D) =
SOIL IMPROVEMENT DESIGN USING STONE COLUMN (PRIEBE METHOD)
LOCATION :
DESIGN OF STONE COLUMN GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
Pc/Ps
Pc
138.4
139.6
137.6
138.2
kPa
7.2
8.2
4.2
17.0
kPa
GAMMA
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.3
fd
4.3
2.0
15.6
5.2
4.37
2.49
13.44
5.06
fd(max) n(max)
CORR. FOR OVERBURDEN
1.84
1.84
1.77
2.14
n2
159
35.95
35.86
35.72
35.50
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
4
4
6
2.6
56.1
TOTAL
2.7
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
10.0
10.1
10.1
10.2
2.8
2.8
(mm)
SETTL.
TOTAL
DESIGN
1.75
1.75
1.84
1.84
1.84
1.84
1.77
1.77
1.77
1.77
2.14
2.14
n2
2.49
4.37
5.16
4.91
5.06
4.37
2.49
4.96
5.06
13.44
2.49
4.37
4.96
5.16
4.91
4.91
5.16
13.44
6.00
n(max) n(adopted)
6.00
n2
Case 2: Maximum Criteria
5.06
13.44
4.96
n(max) n(adopted)
6.00
n2
28
13
100
33
Dc/Ds
28
13
100
33
Dc/Ds
Case 1 : Minimum Criteria
0.146
0.352
0.126
0.155
Ac/A
0.126
0.126
0.040
0.126
Ac/A
BACK-ANALYSIS (USING IMPROVEMENT FACTOR)
32.81
33.40
34.43
33.94
3
3
5
5.5
34.86
35.22
36.00
35.99
1
1
1
1.5
0.5
INCR.
(kPa)
STRESS
SOIL
LAYER
(m)
DEPTH
TOTAL FIELD SETTLEMENT =
TOTAL
2.0
3.4
1.4
4.0
3.2
1.9
1.2
2.0
1.8
S
m
A
2.0
2.0
3.5
m2
4.0
4.0
12.6
4.0
S
m
A
20.0
0.9
0.9
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
1.0
1.0
(mm)
SETTL.
m2
40.4
10.0
10.1
10.1
10.2
(mm)
SETTL.
CONSOL.
20.0 mm
SETTLEMENT OF COMPOSITE GROUND (ALONG EMBANKMENT CENTERLINE)
n2
FIELD
%
6.00
4.91
4.91
5.16
5.16
5.16
5.16
4.96
4.96
4.96
4.96
6.00
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
180.45
IN n2
(BACKCALC) INCREASE
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
FACTOR
REDUCTION
160
LOCATION
TIME
: CH299400 TO CH299625
RATE
TREATED
161
SETTLEMENT
PORTION
TOTAL CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT =
20.0 mm
DIAMETER=
0.8 m
SPACING=
3.5 m
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
6.1 m2/yr
DESIGN COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
0.0 m2/yr
EQUIVALENT DIA. OF TRIBUTARY AREA(De)=
3.96 m
DIA. RATIO(De/D) =
4.94
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (VERTICAL)=
6.10 m2/yr
MOD. COEFF. OF CONSOLIDATION (RADIAL)=
9.28 m2/yr
F(N) =
0.93
DRAINAGE LENGTH =
2.3 m
TIME INTERVAL =
15 DAYS
TREATED PORTION
TIME
Tv
(DAYS)
Uv
Tr
%
TOTAL
Ur
Urv
SETTL.
SETTL.
%
%
(mm)
(mm)
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
15
0.047388
24.6
0.024381
19.0
38.9
7.8
7.8
30
0.094777
34.7
0.048762
34.4
57.2
11.4
11.4
0.0
45
0.142165
42.5
0.073143
46.8
69.4
13.9
13.9
60
0.189554
49.0
0.097524
56.9
78.0
15.6
15.6
75
0.236942
54.6
0.121906
65.1
84.1
16.8
16.8
90
0.284331
59.6
0.146287
71.7
88.6
17.7
17.7
105
0.331719
64.0
0.170668
77.1
91.8
18.4
18.4
120
0.379108
68.0
0.195049
81.4
94.1
18.8
18.8
135
0.426496
71.5
0.21943
85.0
95.7
19.1
19.1
150
0.473885
74.7
0.243811
87.8
96.9
19.4
19.4
165
0.521273
77.5
0.268192
90.1
97.8
19.6
19.6
180
0.568661
80.1
0.292573
92.0
98.4
19.7
19.7
195
0.61605
82.3
0.316954
93.5
98.9
19.8
19.8
210
0.663438
84.3
0.341335
94.8
99.2
19.8
19.8
225
0.710827
86.0
0.365717
95.7
99.4
19.9
19.9
240
0.758215
87.5
0.390098
96.6
99.6
19.9
19.9
255
0.805604
88.9
0.414479
97.2
99.7
19.9
19.9
270
0.852992
90.1
0.43886
97.7
99.8
20.0
20.0
285
0.900381
91.1
0.463241
98.2
99.8
20.0
20.0
300
0.947769
92.0
0.487622
98.5
99.9
20.0
20.0
315
0.995158
92.8
0.512003
98.8
99.9
20.0
20.0
330
1.042546
93.5
0.536384
99.0
99.9
20.0
20.0
345
1.089934
94.1
0.560765
99.2
100.0
20.0
20.0
360
1.137323
94.7
0.585147
99.4
100.0
20.0
20.0
375
1.184711
95.2
0.609528
99.5
100.0
20.0
20.0
390
1.2321
95.6
0.633909
99.6
100.0
20.0
20.0
405
1.279488
96.0
0.65829
99.7
100.0
20.0
20.0
420
1.326877
96.3
0.682671
99.7
100.0
20.0
20.0
435
1.374265
96.6
0.707052
99.8
100.0
20.0
20.0
450
1.421654
96.9
0.731433
99.8
100.0
20.0
20.0
465
1.469042
97.1
0.755814
99.9
100.0
20.0
20.0
480
1.516431
97.3
0.780195
99.9
100.0
20.0
20.0
495
1.563819
97.5
0.804576
99.9
100.0
20.0
20.0
510
1.611207
97.7
0.828958
99.9
100.0
20.0
20.0
525
1.658596
97.9
0.853339
99.9
100.0
20.0
540
1.705984
98.0
0.87772
99.9
100.0
20.0
20.0
555
1.753373
98.1
0.902101
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
570
1.800761
98.2
20.0
0.926482
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
585
1.84815
98.4
0.950863
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
600
1.895538
98.4
0.975244
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
615
1.942927
98.5
0.999625
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
630
1.990315
98.6
1.024006
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
645
2.037704
98.7
1.048388
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
660
2.085092
98.8
1.072769
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
675
2.132481
98.8
1.09715
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
690
2.179869
98.9
1.121531
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
705
2.227257
98.9
1.145912
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
720
2.274646
99.0
1.170293
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
735
2.322034
99.0
1.194674
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
750
2.369423
99.1
1.219055
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
765
2.416811
99.1
1.243436
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
780
2.4642
99.2
1.267817
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
795
2.511588
99.2
1.292199
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
810
2.558977
99.2
1.31658
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
825
2.606365
99.2
1.340961
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
840
2.653754
99.3
1.365342
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
855
2.701142
99.3
1.389723
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
870
2.74853
99.3
1.414104
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
885
2.795919
99.3
1.438485
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
900
2.843307
99.4
1.462866
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
915
2.890696
99.4
1.487247
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
930
2.938084
99.4
1.511629
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
945
2.985473
99.4
1.53601
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
960
3.032861
99.4
1.560391
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
975
3.08025
99.5
1.584772
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
990
3.127638
99.5
1.609153
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1005
3.175027
99.5
1.633534
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1020
3.222415
99.5
1.657915
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1035
3.269803
99.5
1.682296
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1050
3.317192
99.5
1.706677
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1065
3.36458
99.5
1.731058
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1080
3.411969
99.5
1.75544
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1095
3.459357
99.5
1.779821
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1110
3.506746
99.6
1.804202
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1125
3.554134
99.6
1.828583
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1140
3.601523
99.6
1.852964
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1155
3.648911
99.6
1.877345
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
1170
3.6963
99.6
1.901726
100.0
100.0
20.0
20.0
Settlement (mm)
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
540
480
Field Data
Time (Days)
Settlement Comparison for Design and Field Settlement Data
660
600
Design Data
162
1260
1200
1140
1080
1020
960
900
840
780
720
420
360
300
240
180
120
60
0