Accès libre

Settlement Analysis of a Sandy Clay Soil Reinforced with Stone Columns

, ,  et   
06 nov. 2022
À propos de cet article

Citez
Télécharger la couverture

Figure 1

Geometry and boundary conditions for scenario 1 (a) and scenario 2 (b).
Geometry and boundary conditions for scenario 1 (a) and scenario 2 (b).

Figure 2

Vertical settlements evaluated for scenarios 1 (a) and 2 (b).
Vertical settlements evaluated for scenarios 1 (a) and 2 (b).

Figure 3

Vertical settlement below the center of the foundation footing and at the tip of the stone column.
Vertical settlement below the center of the foundation footing and at the tip of the stone column.

Figure 4

Effect of stone column spacing (S, taken as interaxial distance) on vertical settlements as a function of depth.
Effect of stone column spacing (S, taken as interaxial distance) on vertical settlements as a function of depth.

Figure 5

Effect of stone column diameter (D) on vertical settlements as a function of depth.
Effect of stone column diameter (D) on vertical settlements as a function of depth.

Figure 6

Effect of stone column length (L) on vertical settlement.
Effect of stone column length (L) on vertical settlement.

Figure 7

Effect of stone column optimal design parameters on settlement.
Effect of stone column optimal design parameters on settlement.

Material properties used in the model_

Material properties Symbol Unit Soft clay Stone columns Gravel filling
Initial void ratio eo - 0.7 0.8 0.6
Unit weight γ kN/m3 16 22.5 18
Overconsolidation ratio OCR - 1 1 1
Lateral earth pressure coefficient at rest Ko - 1 0.2175 0.1473
Poisson's ratio v - 0.4 0.18 0.25
Stiffness modulus for unloading/reloading Eur MPa 13.02 210 180
Stiffness modulus for primary loading E50 MPa 1.86 90 35
Oedometric modulus Eoed MPa 5.56 60 45
Power for stress-level dependency m - 0.5 0.6 0.6
Cohesion c kPa 40 4 7
Friction angle ° 5 48 40
Dilation angle ψ ° 0 18 10
Failure ratio Rf - 0.9 0.9 0.9
Layer thickness z m 30 10 1