You are on page 1of 12

Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu - Page 1 of 12

Dynamic Replacement Ground Improvement – Field
Performance Versus Design Predictions for the
Alexandria City Centre Project in Egypt
P.K. Wong, Coffey Geosciences Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia
M. Lacazedieu, Menard Soltraitement, Nozay, France

Abstract
This paper describes the use of a partially penetrating Dynamic Replacement (DR) ground
improvement solution at a site in Egypt. It presents conventional and numerical analyses
used in the design. Field monitoring results are compared to the analysis results, and material
parameters back analysed for calibration of the design model for later stages of the project.
An interesting finding on the ground improvement at this site was that significantly higher
than predicted strength gain was achieved on the soft soils. This beneficial effect is postulated
to be caused by the high lateral stresses produced by the DR installation process.

Project Background
A very large shopping centre was constructed on a 220,000m2 site in Alexandria, Egypt. The
initial earthworks contract required reclamation of part of a lake. Very soft, compressible
organic clay deposits existed up to 9m in places beneath the lakebed. The specification
required the site to be raised by 2m above the lake water level. The design criteria was for
post-construction settlement under the specified loads to not cause the site to drop below the
design level, and for differential settlements to be within design tolerance. In particular,
proposed tiled floors required stringent differential settlement limits of 1 in 1000.
The design column load was 700kN, and columns were to be supported on shallow footings
founded at 1.5m depth below bulk earthworks level. However, as the layout of the buildings
was not finalised at the time of the earthworks design, the challenge was to come up with an
economical earthworks/ground treatment strategy to enable shallow footings to be adopted at
the site, irrespective of the building column locations.

Site Conditions
The site is situated east of Alexandria on the Cairo Desert Road, on the edge of Lake
Maryout, in the Western Nile deltaic zone of Egypt. A significant part of the site is below the
existing lake level, with an average water depth of 1.5m.
The subsurface profile at the site is characterised by three main units as summarised below:
Unit 1
Very soft clay with organic matter
4m to 9m thick (typically 7m)
Unit 2
Stiff silty clay and clayey silt
5m to 9m thick
Unit 3
Very dense silty sand
not penetrated

Cr/(1 + e0) Modified Creep Coefficient. Figure 1 – Typical Piezocone Test Results It was obvious that Unit 1 will control site settlement and will govern the design of ground improvement works. it was decided to adopt Dynamic Replacement as the ground improvement solution for Phases 1 and 2 of the project (72.000m2 of on-grade car parking area) due to its relative speed of construction and economy.0 m2/year 0. Wn Liquid Limit. ch Modified Compression Index. Based on the laboratory testing results. cv Horizontal Coefficient of Consolidation. stone columns are introduced into the ground by a heavy weight dropped repeatedly onto a gravel layer while the craters created by the impact of the heavy weight are backfilled with gravel during the process as shown in Figure 2. have higher load carrying capacity. IP Bulk Unit Weight. The resulting stone columns are significantly larger in diameter. is a “marriage” of Dynamic Compaction (dropping of a heavy weight from a substantial height to cause deep compaction of the ground) and Stone Columns (gravel columns placed in the ground using a vibrating probe to increase the stiffness and strength of the ground).3 0. more . γb Vertical Coefficient of Consolidation.000m2 of building area and 50. Cc /(1 + e0) Modified Recompression Index. Cα /(1+ e0) 76% to 130% 102% to 146% 35% to 43% 67% to 106% 14. In Dynamic Replacement. WP Plastic Index.Page 2 of 12 A typical piezocone test result is shown in Figure 1. pioneered by Menard. The Dynamic Replacement (DR) technique.015 Design of Dynamic Replacement Following preliminary assessment of a number of ground improvement options which included vacuum consolidation and rigid inclusion methods. however. WL Plastic Limit. the following soil properties were adopted for Unit 1: Moisture content.03 0.0 m2/year 10.5 kN/m3 2.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu .

012 m2 13.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . Wong & Stone (1987)). Some previous usage of Dynamic Replacement have been reported by Juillie and Sherwood (1983). is that there is a limiting depth to which the DR stone columns can be installed. The design solutions are summarised in Table 1 below: Table 1 – Summary of Design Solutions Proposed Development Approximate Area Settlement Limit DR Spacing DR Diameter Wick Drain Spacing (square grid) Phase 1 Buildings 70. Lee and Lo (1985). The disadvantage of Dynamic Replacement. The design of wick drain spacing took into account soil disturbance and discharge capacity of the drains using the procedures described by Hansbo et al (1981). Differential settlement 1:1000 5. Barron (1948). it was also necessary to preload the site. 20mm under 700kN column load. Figure 2 – Dynamic Replacement Installation To meet the stringent post-construction settlement criteria. and as described in Fell. and at which the gravel near the top of the columns will tend to heave rather than being pushed downwards by the falling weight.5m at surface 1. and hence more economical compared with the conventional Stone Column ground treatment method.1 Phase 2 Car park 41. prefabricated wick drains were installed to increase the rate of consolidation even though the DR columns would already facilitate radial drainage to occur in the soft clay.Page 3 of 12 rapid to install.5mm under uniform live load of 20kPa.5m 2.25 . The preload and wick drain spacing were designed using conventional one-dimensional and radial drainage theory (Schmertmann (1955). 34mm creep over 50 years.370 m2 100mm over 50 years 7m 2. And to meet the limited time programme. however.5m at surface 1. and Varaksin et al (1994).

from which calculated settlement is plotted against applied effective stress.5 Diagonal lines representing effective stresses imposed by the fill depending on unit weight of fill (note “bent” lines below water table due to buoyancy effect) 4. 6.5 Embankment Height (m) Total Fill Thickness Required to Achieve A Particular Height Above Ground Level 5.0 -1. the maximum depth of penetration of the DR columns was assessed to be 6.5 Water Level for this Example 1.5 3.5 2.0 0. with the final submerged part of the fill exerting only the buoyant weight. and with sufficient preload to ensure that the post-construction settlement criteria would be met. Due to the relatively large anticipated settlement. this effect can produce over-estimation of settlement.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . To assess the amount of fill required to bring the site to the required grade level taking into account settlement and the buoyancy effect below the water level.7m thick working platform to provide access.2m thickness of the soft clay layer (for a design soft clay thickness of 7m) untreated.0 -0.5 0 50 100 150 -1.5m. and the total fill thickness can be read off the diagonal lines that are governed by the unit weight of the fill as shown in Figure 3. thereby leaving about 2. an iterative approach was need to assess the amount of fill required to bring the site to the required design level. If not taken into account.0 4.5 Assessed Settlement -2.0 5. a spreadsheet was developed.0 Figure 3 – Graphical Assessment of Settlement and Required Fill Thickness .Page 4 of 12 An important aspect of the design was that the DR columns would not be fully penetrating.0 3.5 Applied Pressure (kPa) 0. One Dimensional Settlement Analysis Initial settlement predictions were made using conventional one-dimensional consolidation theory.0 1. After placement of a 1.0 2. One complication is that the effective stress induced in the soft clay layer due to the filling is also a function of the settlement.

Ignoring the effect of the DR columns. The various soil units were subdivided and the adopted analysis parameters are shown in Table 2. An unload/reload modulus of 10 times the first time loading modulus was adopted for the soft clay.8m and 0. the settlement ratio of the treated to untreated soil layer may be expressed as Es/Eeq. The soil modulus can be assessed from the one-dimensional consolidation parameters described earlier by considering the appropriate stress level.2m. . one-dimensional consolidation parameters were converted to three-dimensional elastic parameters according to the appropriate settlement relationship with stress level and preload history.8m of treated zone and 1.5m dia.45MPa in this case. the computed settlements were 0.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . and was found to be approximately 0.32m in the lower 2. For the initial settlement assessment. For this project.8MPa and Es/Eeq was computed to be 0. and usually if the columns are installed to the full depth of the consolidating layer. the elastic modulus of the treated zone may be expressed as follows: Eeq = Ec {ar2 +Es/Ec(1 – ar2)} where: [Eq.32m in the upper and lower sub-layers.23m and 0.75m. Applying the reduction factors with the DR columns introduced. Three-Dimensional Numerical Analysis To assess the effectiveness of the DR ground improvement strategy to meet the differential settlement criteria.2m.5m square grid spacing. we adopted a settlement reduction factor of 0. Applying these to the above equation.1623 in this case for 2. comprising 0. giving a total estimated consolidation settlement of 0. Together with an estimated immediate settlement of 0.28. They concluded that significant settlement reductions can only be achieved if the columns are closely spaced with a diameter to spacing ratio of 5 or less. For the soft clay layer.2m (including preload) was predicted to be 0. Most of the published design solutions on stone columns are based on relatively small diameter columns that penetrate the full depth of the soft clay layer. 1] Eeq = equivalent modulus of the treated soil mass Ec = modulus of the DR columns Es = modulus of the soft soil ar = DR replacement ratio = 0.1m in the soft clay layer was estimated. From compatibility of strain.3m as shown in Figure 4.Page 5 of 12 The next problem was the assessment of the likely settlement reduction that could be achieved with the proposed DR columns. DR columns at 5. An initial assumption was then made that the DR columns would be constructed to give a column modulus of 50MPa. a consolidation settlement of 1. As settlement is inversely proportional to soil stiffness.0 for the remaining untreated 2. Eeq was computed to be 1. three-dimensional numerical analysis was carried out using the commercially available software package 3D FLAC (Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua.5 for the partially penetrating DR solution proposed. it was decided that the soft clay layer may be divided into two sub-layers representing the treated and untreated zones. A 3D FLAC model was set up based on a building column spacing of 7.78m in the upper 4.2m thickness of the soft clay layer. ITASCA (1999)).3 for the upper 4. Balaam et al (1977) presented some numerical analysis results for partially penetrating stone columns.55m or an overall settlement reduction factor of 0. the total settlement due to placement of about 6.

5 30.Page 6 of 12 7.0 .0 14.8 to 4.7 5.4 0.6 18.0 18.0 17.5 7.0 18.75 (unload/reload) 14. 2B.4 (unload/reload) 14.4 0.44 4.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . 2c 5.0 Unit 3 - Rigid Base - DR Columns - 50.5 Unit 2A 2.5m Figure 4 – 3D FLAC Model Table 2 – Soil Parameters Adopted for 3D FLAC Analysis Unit Layer Thickness (m) Drained Young’s Modulus Unit Weight γb (kN/m3) E′ (MPa) Compacted Fill 2. 1c Unit 2a.5 Unit 1C 2.475 4.0 Unit 2B 2.3m Pad Footings Stage 2 and Stage 3 Fill Dynamic Replacement Columns Stage 1 Fill Unit 1a.0 Unit 2C 3.0 18 Unit 1A 2.475 4. 1B.2 0.5 16.0 20 Working Platform 1.75 (unload/reload) 14.5 Unit 1B 2.

Alternative phases of filling and pounding were performed until completion of DR columns.5m spacing. but was subsequently found during construction to be not required. The DR column and footing pattern adopted in the model was selected to enable differential settlement to be assessed. The pounding then forced the material to the desired depth.2m including the working platform. the vertical effective stress increase within any given horizontal plane in the soft clay layer was relatively uniform laterally. The results of the 3D analysis indicate the following: • Calculated settlements from initial filling matched those calculated using onedimensional consolidation theory. • At the maximum fill thickness (under maximum preload) of 6.} . • The design post-construction settlement and differential settlement criteria were met. which would result in a greater thickness of untreated soft clay (Sub-layer 1C) below the DR columns. This contingency plan was to be put into place if the settlement monitoring results indicated it to be necessary. and confirmed the ability of the DR columns and the overlying compacted fill layer to spread the load and settlement uniformly to meet the stringent differential settlement criteria.3 was adopted for all soil layers. (c) levels Deleted: {Marc: The paragraph below is just a sample of what I have in mind. except near the edge of the DR columns. Sensitivity analyses were also carried out to assess the potential situation where the soft clay layer was greater than 7m. for column loads occurring either directly over the DR columns or between DR columns. At the beginning of the works. this considered the following aspects: • Number of blows and impact energy • Stages for filling DR columns • Suitability of grid and phases of filling and pounding Heave tests were realised by executing a DR column while recording the following parameters: (a) diameter of print after each blow.3m for the design preload. Each DR column was prepared by a pre-excavation which was partially filled by crushed limestone. (b) depth of print after each blow. To overcome this problem.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . • Irrespective of the footing locations relative to the DR columns. The results of the sensitivity analyses indicated that the post-construction settlement would exceed the design criteria if the soft clay layer is more than 8.5m diameter DR column at 5. and contigency plans devised for higher preload and/or closer DR column spacing to be adopted in areas found to have greater clay thickness than the design value. Please amend as required. preliminary heave tests were carried out to determine the optimal procedure for Dynamic Replacement. which confirmed that the equivalent elastic parameters were appropriately converted from the 1D parameters. the vertical stress increase in the DR columns was 250kPa compared to 50kPa in the soft clay sub-layer 1A. a detailed program of friction cone tests was conducted prior to construction. All vertical boundaries on this model were modelled as symmetrical boundaries to model repetition of this column loading pattern over an infinite plan area.Page 7 of 12 A Poisson’s Ratio of 0. Dynamic Replacement Construction Dynamic Replacement columns were driven into the soil by pounding with a 15 tonne pounder dropped from a height of 20m. indicating a load carrying ratio of 5:1 for the 2.

the actual thickness of the soft clay is probably 0. The optimal parameters were those immediately before which the pounding resulted in heave or volume displacement rather than in effective penetration of the material in the soil. and monitoring were carried out as summarised in Table 3 below: Table 3 – Summary of Testing and Instrumentation Type of Testing and Instrumentation Phase 1 Buildings Phase 2 Car Park 17 9 3 2 33 6 sets 10 7 6 3 15 2 sets 3 20 5 11 4 Cone Penetration Tests Before Construction Vane Shear Tests Before Construction Boreholes Inclinometers Surface Settlement Plates Downhole Extensometers Downhole Pore Pressure Gauges Cone Penetration Tests Through DR Columns After Construction Vane Shear Tests After Consolidation The testing and monitoring results are discussed in the following subsections.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu .4m to 5. the assessed soft clay thickness was well within the critical thickness found during the sensitivity analyses as discussed above.7m As the testing was carried out after placement of the 1. Instrumentation and Monitoring To confirm the design assumptions and to enable decisions to be made on when the preloads could be removed.7m thick working platform.2m to 0. the crater volume was computed and corrected considering the heave volume by plotting effective penetration volume versus the number of blows.4m with an average of 6. and the test results confirmed the earlier findings and adopted design parameters as summarised in Table 4. Utilising these parameters. Deleted: Three Deleted: ???? linear metres of Deleted: week/day etc .2m Phase 2 – 4. detailed testing.Page 8 of 12 of all benchmarks during the test after two consecutive blows. instrumentation. Two specialised 80 tonne cranes were used for the project. Cone Penetrometer Testing Cone penetrometer testing was carried out to better identify the soft clay thickness across the site.8m to 7. The testing showed the following range of clay thickness: Phase 1 – 4. In any case. which corresponded to a treated area ranging from 450 m2 per shift per rig for Phase 1 to 700 m2 per shift per rig for Phase 2.7m with an average of 5. Laboratory Testing A number of laboratory consolidation tests were carried out from thin wall tube samples recovered from the boreholes.3m more than that shown by the CPT results due to punching in of the fill material and/or immediate settlement under the weight of the working platform. (d) penetration of the pounder. The average production rate reached was about 15 DR columns per shift per rig.

and no refusal of the cone occurred as may have been expected for compacted rock fill. .03 0. This indicated that there was a significant degree of particle breakdown due to the dynamic pounding process. Settlement Monitoring Results The settlement versus time plots of the Phase 1 preload were compared with the design prediction as shown in Figure 5.5m with an average of 6.3m to 6.Page 9 of 12 Table 4 – Results of Laboratory Consolidation Testing No.286 0.376 0.057 0.046 0. particularly if the construction programme has to be tightly controlled.432 0. of Tests Range Mean Standard Deviation Phase 1 Phase 2 Cc/(1+eo) Cr/(1+eo) Cc/(1+eo) Cr/(1+eo) 10 (1 unusual low result ignored) 9 0. However. Such variation due to uncertainties in design parameters and soil variability is an important factor to bear in mind in design.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu .348 0.5m.5 months which compared well with actual performance except statistically there was a variation of about ±0. • The time for 90% consolidation (from the last lift) according to the design was 3. and the design modulus of 50MPa used for the original design may have been optimistic.025m Drainage via the DR columns was ignored.01 These test results compared reasonably well with the originally adopted design values.1m less than the design depth of 6.017 to 0.029 0.018 to 0.287 to 0.013 0. an interesting finding of the CPT was that the cone resistance through the limestone DR columns was only 8MPa to 13MPa.065 0.15m to 6.042 0.4m – 6.5 months.4m The results indicate that the average as-constructed depth of the DR columns was only 0. The following comparison between the predicted and measured settlement were observed from Figure 5: • Settlement were generally underestimated by about 200mm.25 to 0. DR Stone Column Depth Constructed The CPT carried out through the DR columns constructed indicated the following column depths were achieved: Phase 1 Phase 2 – 6. This aspect is further discussed in the back-analysis of the monitoring results presented below.8m with an average of 6. It is worth noting at this point that the adopted design cv and ch values of 2m2/year and 10m2/year were used with the following assumptions in the original design of the wick drains for radial drainage: • • • • Ratio of smeared zone to in-situ permeability = 0.25 Ratio of smeared zone to wick drain radius = 3 Equivalent wick drain radius = 0. This is considered reasonable given the significantly closer wick drain spacing compared to the DR column spacing.

Page 10 of 12 From the results of the downhole extensometer results.5m2/year and 7. That is. lower cv and ch values of 1.200 Settlement (m) 0. Units 1A & 1B) were higher than those predicted. For the soft clay at this site. a 25% reduction from the original design values). Time (days) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0. 0.400 Measured Settlement Predicted Settlement 0. it was observed that the actual settlements within the DR column treated soil layers (i. Back-analysis of the results using Equation 1 indicated that the use of an elastic modulus of 25MPa would have provided a closer match with the measured results.100 Initial settlement of about 0.000 Figure 5 – Settlement Monitoring Results (Phase 1) It would appear that had a harder gravel been used for the DR columns compared to the soft limestone which broke down under the DR process. and it was concluded from the post-construction CPT results that the elastic modulus of the DR columns was over-estimated during the design.500 0.3m (compared to 6.5m2/year were also adopted for subsequent stages of the project (i.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu .e. resulting in an estimated vertical effective stress increase of about 100kPa after accounting for settlement and buoyant weight effects below the water level.e. an expected undrained shear strength increase corresponding to this .2m adopted in the original design) of fill (including preload) was placed in Phase 1.300 Legend: 0. There is also another possible alternative explanation for the additional settlement observed. To allow for variability of soil permeability. The back-analysis provided a useful calibration of the design.2m (estimated by survey) due to placement of 1. the compaction of the large diameter DR columns is likely to have had significant impact on increasing the lateral effective stress of the soil as discussed below.700 0. and the lower DR column modulus was subsequently used for Phase 2 of the project with close agreement between predicted and measured settlement.900 1.000 0.600 0. This value is consistent with the CPT resistance measured through the DR columns.7m of working platform above lakebed before instrumentation installed. Undrained Shear Strength Increase A total of 6. a stiffer reinforced soil mass could have been produced and resulting settlement would be expected to be lower than those measured.800 Approximate time of last lift 0.

3 for normally consolidated clay. We consider this aspect to be worthy of further research by both theoretical and field studies. • The three-dimensional numerical analyses carried out provided the confidence that the Dynamic Replacement design solution will meet the stringent tolerance on differential settlement irrespective of the building column locations relative to the DR columns. We believe that there is a strong possibility that the DR process caused an over-consolidation effect by increasing the bulk effective stress of the soft soil. it is considered that such increase may be due to high lateral effective stress increase caused by creation of the large diameter DR columns.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . (su/σv’)nc where: (su/σv’)oc (su/σv’)nc OCR m [Eq. then the stress increase would reduce with distance away from the DR columns.3. . we can assess the equivalent over-consolidation ratio (OCR) using the following equation developed by Jamiolkowski et al (1985): (su/σv’)oc = OCRm . It should be pointed out that the field measurements were rather limited in this respect. From a theoretical viewpoint.8 Using the limited field vane test results and adopting the ratio (su/σv’)nc = 0. Conclusion The building and car park for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project were completed successfully following the Dynamic Replacement (DR) and preload ground treatment at the site. elastic analysis may be used to assess complex soil-structure interaction problems on soft ground. as there are obvious benefits with respect to higher strength increase and over-consolidation effects in reducing post-construction settlement. The following conclusions are drawn from the field performance versus design predictions for this project: • Provided appropriate elastic modulus values are chosen at the correct stress levels. 2] = shear strength ratio for over-consolidated soil = shear strength ratio for normally-consolidated soil = over-consolidation ratio = an exponent found by Jamiolkowski et al (1985) to be about 0. However. five field vane tests carried out after the preloading gave surprisingly high shear strength increases ranging from about 70kPa to 85kPa near the top of the soft clay layer to about 40kPa at depth.4.1 to 3.Page 11 of 12 vertical effective stress increase would have been about 30kPa using a ratio of su/σv’ = 0. The surprisingly high shear strength increase was discounted during construction and design refinement for subsequent stages as it was not a critical issue at the time. On reflection. the equivalent OCR values for the soil clay at this site after preloading would range from about 2. The shopping centre has extensive tiled floors that are reported by the developer of the project to be performing to expectation with no obvious signs of settlement or differential settlement. if the above lateral stress increase mechanism were true. These are considered to be plausible values and are consistent with the small creep settlement observed following primary consolidation under the preload. and one would also expect that.

Wong. and Kok. J. (1948) Consolidation of fine-grained soils by drain wells.. Proc. ASCE. (Pub. S.W. R. Fell. Trans. ASCE. B.A. Int.Page 12 of 12 • • • • • Good match was found between field performance and the wick drain design regarding the rate of consolidation. 11th ICSMFE. Helsinki. Finite Elements in Eng. R. Jamiolkowski. Symp. Singapore 27-29 November 1985. and Lo. The overall magnitude of settlement was under-predicted by about 25%.. & Spaulding. 1-13. The calibration carried out using the field data in Phase 1 was an important success factor for later stages of the project.). USA. User Manual. (Ed.). ITASCA Group. (1976) Analysis of granular pile behaviour using finite elements.K. R. & Stone. 19 – 30. Institution of Civil Engineers. Proceedings of an extension course on soil slope instability and stabilisation. This aspect is considered to be worthy of further theoretical and field research. The higher observed settlement compared to those predicted is assessed to be caused by (i) lower stiffness of the DR column material than originally assumed.C. vol 113. Vol. and Sherwood.Ref: 132 Wong and Lacazedieu . Booker. M. Varaksin. 1201.. 120.. C.. (1955) The undisturbed consolidation of clay. L. Lee. References: Balaam.P. M. (1981) Consolidation by vertical drains. Balkema 231-278. and Fell. (1983) Improvement of Sabkhas soil of the Arabian Gulf coast.). J. This process is also thought to increase the over-consolidation ratio of the soft soil and has the beneficial effect of reducing post-construction settlement. Australia Barron.L. This additional strength increase is thought to be attributable to a significant lateral effective stress increase associated with the installation of the large diameter DR columns.E. Liausu. and Poulos. S. Balkema 781 – 785. Third International Geotechnical Seminar on Soil Improvement Methods.. (Pub. Walker. A. J. Germaine.R. 45-66. Geotechnique 31. Berger. Juillie. Conf. (1985) Ground improvement by dynamic replacement and mixing. ITASCA (1999) 3D FLAC – Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua.G. P.M. and Lancellotta. Schmertmann.. Hansbo. D.. C. Dynamic Replacement can be used effectively to strengthen soft grounds to enable rapid construction of fill platform and preloads. 718-754. although it was later found to be prudent to allow for possible soil permeability variations. Proceedings of seminar organised by the Geotechnical Division of the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers on “Ground Improvement Methods” 103 – 116. P.. and (ii) likely higher bulk effective stress increase due to installation of the large diameter DR columns. (1994) Optimisation of dynamic consolidation and dynamic replacement pillars to limit surface deformations of man made fills overlaying heterogeneous soft subsoil. Ladd. S. Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. H. Jamiolkowski. K. Adelaide. (1985) New developments in field and laboratory testing of soils. It is possible that higher consolidation related strength increase could be achieved in soft clays using the DR process compared with conventional preload type solutions.. I. . P (1987) Slope instability in soft ground. P. Trans. N.. On Vertical Drains.A. R.