Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Study of the soil consolidation using reinforced jet grouting by geophysical

and geotechnical techniques: ‘‘La Normal” building complex (Granada)
A. Barrios Padura a, J. Barrios Sevilla a, J. García Navarro b,*, E. Yanes Bustamante c, E. Parra Crego d
a
Department of Architectural Constructions I, School of Architecture, University of Seville, Seville, Spain
b
Department of Construction and RR, Polytechnic University of Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
c
Department of Continuous Fluids Mechanics, Theory of Structures and Soil Engineering, School of Quantity Surveyor, University of Seville, Seville, Spain
d
Department of Industrial Technology, Polytechnic School, Alfonso X El Sabio University, Madrid, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A great number of damages and injuries affecting buildings are originated either in the foundations or at
Received 17 August 2007 the supporting ground. This involves a rehabilitation using different techniques of reinforcing and under-
Received in revised form 13 July 2008 pinning so as to give the stability back to the architectural collection of buildings. This activity has a great
Accepted 14 July 2008
social impact and relevance when dealing with monumental or emblematic constructions where the
Available online 20 September 2008
adopted solution needs to be efficient and safe, and therefore it implies the development of studies before
and after the process of rehabilitation to ensure the durability of the intervention.
Keywords:
This article shows the research works been done to check the suitability of the adopted solution to con-
Historical buildings
Soil consolidation
solidate the ground in the restoration of the emblematic building of ‘‘La Normal” in Granada. Reinforced
Oedometric tests jet grouting has been used with the incorporation of fuse elements inserted in the sleeve pipe. It has been
Geophysical tests defined as a ‘‘fuse” since it is a helicoidal tube made of a synthetic material, which can be deformed lon-
Jet grouting gitudinally but not transversely and incorporates a spiral steel collar acting as a bellow. With this system,
Pipes with fusible elements the excessive ground rigidity is avoided as a consequence of the injections which could affect the building
if settlements are produced. Seismic techniques have been used, such as the Cross-hole and Down-hole
and pressuremetric tests have been carried out to determine the consolidation degree achieved on the
supporting soil using reinforced injections.
The works carried out serve as a basis to establish actuating and control criteria in soil consolidation
treatments using cement–bentonite reinforced jet grouting.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and background
On September 30th, 1846 the school group ‘‘Teachers of La Nor-
mal” was created. It had different offices until 1933 when a definite
centre was established on the Gran Vía of Colón. This centre was
created as a cultural complex dedicated to the instruction of pri-
mary school teachers, and included a library, a book deposit, a mu-
sic school, etc. [1].
The building has a rectangular plan with 3000 m2
(75 m  40 m) in surface, and two squared courtyards (of side
17 m) symmetrically set along the transversal axes. Each courtyard
is built with arcades supported on 20 marble columns (five per
side) and pillars at the corners. The different classrooms are lo-
cated around these courtyards at the different floors forming the
building complex (Fig. 1).
The two longer sides of the plan follow the slope of the hillside
on which it is located, in such a way, that to achieve a horizontal
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 913365863; fax: +34 913363688.
E-mail address: justo.gnavarro@upm.es (J.G. Navarro).
platform, it had been packed and filled in between the upper and
lower height so as to raise the level of the site. The result is a build-
ing where the main façade (lower height of the hillside) is elevated
regarding the Avda. Gran Vía de Colón, separated with a stone
retaining wall (Fig. 2).
This building is crowned with four towers situated on the four
corners and one central one at the main façade, showing a monu-
mental appearance. A staircase leaned to the building in front of
the central tower allowed the horizontal platform to be reached
and gives access to a marvellous imperial staircase located be-
tween the two courtyards. The construction is made with ceramic
brick masonry crowned by stone ashlars at the corners. The slabs
respond to a diverse typology: in some cases they are formed by
wooden beams with brick lining, and in the upper floors and roofs,
metal beams and ceramic brick lining are used as a consequence of
the repair works carried out in the 20th century.
In 1989, when the building changed into administrative use,
housing the offices of the Councillors of the Andalucian Govern-
ment in Granada, the corresponding rehabilitation project was car-
ried out. This project consisted mainly in the construction of two

0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.07.011
1390 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400

Fig. 1. La Normal, left interior courtyard.

Fig. 2. General aspect of the building complex of La Normal, from the Gran Vía de Colón.

basements in the body of the main façade and a basement in each
of the two lateral aisles so as to increase the office space and to
‘‘lower” the building down to the height of the Gran Vía. At the
same time, the imperial staircase was eliminated giving way to
the lifts, a distributing hall and the access control, as well as mez-
zanines. In short, the building was rehabilitated providing the dif-
ferent facilities and installations necessary for the new
administrative use.
Although the building had gone through two main underpin-
ning interventions, it presented cracks and a slight inclination of
the central tower due to possible unsettlement of the ground
which were intensified with the beginning of the rehabilitation
works. These failures could especially be seen in the central tower
and the bearing walls, in the arches and in some slabs where struc-
tural movements can be seen [2]. Therefore, in spite of the earlier
interventions performed, as this construction is located in an area
of high seismic risk, there is an urgent need to carry out a thorough
research on the origins of these failures [3]. In addition, the geo-
technical survey carried out earlier had been incomplete and did
not acknowledge the mud soil (15 m deep) on which the building
is placed and which is the cause of the differential settlement pro-
ducing the fissures and slight inclination.
2. Aims and methodology
The research lines developed are the following:
– A geotechnical research is carried out to determine and char-
acterise the soil stratigraphy until a depth of 25 and 50 m.
This is based on the idea that the geological formation of
the hillside slope has a much greater non-consolidated pack-
ing thickness at the interior of the built perimeter than the
one derivated from the topography of the site. Under this
type of soil, unfit ground lies [4–7].
– Knowledge of the groundwater table and its possible evolu-
tion through time is necessary.
 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400 1391

– It is important to check if the ground can be consolidated by Table 1

means of reinforced injections [8]. For this reason, the Test bores

variation in depth of the Gd module [dynamic module of Test bore no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

transversal rigidity Gd = Ed/2(1 + y)] from which the dynamic Initial height (m) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 0 6.3 6.3 6.3
module of longitudinal soil deformation – both treated and Final height measured 50 20 30 20 25 30 31 30
not treated soils – needs to be determined. Therefore, a seis- from bore mouth (m)
mic survey is needed to calculate the stiffness module of the 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
subsoil under the foundations of the second basement. Initial height (m) 6.3 0 6.3 6.3 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.27
– Since the former values are dynamic, and so as to establish Final height measured from 30 30 20 20 30 26 29 30
correlations with static values and to increase our knowl- bore mouth (m)
edge of the soil characteristics, it is necessary to know the
limit pressure (LP) of these soils, as well as its pressuremet-
ric module (Em), and hence, it is necessary to carry out pres-
suremetric tests [9,10]. This test consists on the introduction In some of the stretches the presence of carbonated nodules can
a elastic pressuremetric probe inside the drill bore. Once at be recorded, corresponding to the period of the Quaternary era
the desired depth, this probe is inflated with pressured gas with moisture deficit.
so that the rubber membrane expands producing a lateral
thrust on the soil. This deformation can be then be measured – The values of bulk density of these materials fluctuate in
regarding each pressure interval. With the data obtained between 1.97 t/m3 (test bore S-6 from 19.2 m to 19.8 m)
from the deformation produced, the deformation module is and 2.75 t/m3 (test bore from 24.35 m to 24.60 m S-3),
stated as well as the soil flucency pressure and the ultimate – The results of the simple compressive strength tests vary
soil fluency, allowing the calculation of the soil bearing from qu = 46 kPa (S-4 from 18.6 m to 19.2 m) to qu = 120 kPa
capacity in real situation. (S-1 from 49.8 m to 50.1 m). The most frequent ones are
the values lower than 100 kPa (77 % of the performed
tests).
3. Geotechnical characterization – The obtained data from the direct cut tests consolidated and
drained indicate cohesion values in between 13 kN/m2 (S-8
A geotechnical recognition campaign was planned based on 16 from 15 m to 15.60 m) and 68 kN/m2 (S-12 from 13.2 m to
test bores – 12 inside and 4 outside – to a depth deeper than 20 m. 13.8 m), and friction angles in between 30.96° (S-12 from
This is done to ensure the examination of all the thicknesses of the 13.2 m to 13.80 m) and 39.52° (S-6 from 19.2 m to 19.8 m).
packings, and to detect possible soft areas penetrating into the Due to the difficulty of the test because of the soil character-
lower strata. Four of those test bores were fitted with a piezometer istics, the obtained data have been cautiously processed.
pipe to know the depth of the groundwater table and later to carry – The groundwater table stabilized at a depth of 16.2 m in
out complementary geophysical tests. relation to the contour elevation of the courtyards
To perform this test bore campaign a TP50 probe placed on cat- (+6.30 m), maintaining such a height during the first fifteen
erpillar wheels, Tecoinsa brand and with a rotating head of speeds months of the research process (Fig. 3).
and maximum traction of 8000 Kg was used.
The test bores were distributed in the following order, indicat- From the data gathered, a series of main aspects for the soil con-
ing the heights at the collar of the bore and the measurements solidation project can be inferred:
from the bore collar: The first aspect to be considered is the packing thickness.
From the tests performed in this phase corresponding to group
Group A, ‘‘Interior courtyards”: they are the highest, at 6.30 m A, ‘‘Interior Courtyards”, at 6.3 m over the Gran Vía, it can be
over Gran Vía street. They are S-1 (50 m), S-2 (20 m), S-3 seen that the interior of the building, and more precisely in
(30 m), S-4 (20 m), S-6 (30 m), S-7 (31 m), S-8 and S-9 (30 m), the area of the courtyards and galleries, the thickness of the pac-
S-11 and S-12 (20 m). kings is between 7.05 m and 8.50 m, counted from the level of
Group B, ‘‘Intermediate exteriors”: situated at 3.27 m under the the actual slabs. The minimum values obtained in the SPT tests
previous height. They are S-13 (30 m), S-14 ( 26 m), S-15 (29 m) performed at 13.8 m in depth are N = 6 (two tests) and N = 7
and S-16 (30 m). (four tests) being the minimum values more frequent. Under
Group C, ‘‘Lower exteriors”: or access to the basement, situated 13.80 m are N = 4 (three tests) and N = 5 (four tests). Lower than
3.03 m lower than the group B (height of Gran Vía). They are the 21 m deep the results of the N tests are low (between 4 and 10).
test bores S-5 (25 m) and S-10 (30 m) (Table 1). These results are extremely relevant as they show that the soil,
instead of improving with depth, it is progressively more
The most relevant data obtained in this survey are the following: inadequate.
Looking now at the test bores being done in Group B ‘‘intermedi-
– At the S-10, soft areas appear in between 16 and 24 m. ate exteriors”, placed 3.27 m bellow the former ones, minimum val-
– The packings found are made of lime sand of a brownish col- ues of N = 6 (one test) and N = 7 (one test) up to 10.5 m in depth are
our with the presence of compact gravel (limestone, schist, obtained. Bellow 15 m the values are N = 6 (on test) and N = 7
etc.) and debris of other construction materials, with dark (one test). The packing shows a thickness of in between 1.60 and
stains coming from organic origin and with an average thick- 4.50 m.
ness of 2–4 m depending on the areas. The data obtained for Group C ‘‘lower exterior”, basement ac-
– Underneath the level of the packing, an alluvial material cess, situated at the contour elevation of Gran Vía (sS-5 and S-
appears with alternating strata of lime sand with gravel, 10), show minimum values of N up to 7.50 m deep: N = 4 (one test)
sand mud, and slime mud of different colours and tones. It and of N = 5 (one test). Bellow 7.50 m the values are N = 3 (one test)
is a deposit of flood plains, with plots of gravels and sand and N = 4 (two tests). Therefore, the tests next to Gran Vía and at
of thickness 1–2 m intercalated in stretches of mud and the external built perimeter confirm the tendency that the soil
slime with 2–8 m thick. worsens until 30 m deep.
1392 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400

The maximum preconsolidation pressure obtained has been of

254.3 kPa in the test corresponding to the bore number 3 in be-
tween 24.33 m and 24.60 in depth. Since water appears in this
test bore at 21.65 m deep and since the soil density is of
20.6 kN/m3, the pressure due to the in situ effective, vertical
stress of the soil would be 21.65  20.6 + (24.33  21.65) 
10.6 = 474 kPa. This situation in which the preconsolidation pres-
sure is lower than the pressure due to the dead load of the soil is
systematically reproduced in all the test bores. Even more, it
shows extreme cases such as the one of S-6, where the preconsol-
idation pressure is only 69.1 kPa at depths in between 27.60 and
27.90. Therefore, the soils are basically consolidated ones and
should be referred as ‘‘subconsolidated”. These soils which have
not been submitted to pressures higher than their dead load
throughout its geological history are extremely deformable under
new loads.
The values of the Compression Index (Cc) vary between a mini-
mum of 0.064 (low deformability) in the test bore number 15 – in
between 13.20 m and 13.80 m in depth (SPT = 61) – and a maxi-
mum of 0.256 (high deformability) corresponding to the test bore
S-3 in between 24.33 m and 24.60 m deep (the STP closest value is
of 11). The most frequent values of Cc are of 0.12 and 0.13 (average
deformability).
Statistically, the correlations Cc = 0.0097 (wL-16.4) allow to
know Cc regarding Liquid Limit (wL), and the correlation
Cc = 0.99w1.315 permits the determination regarding the natural
moisture (w). From the tests performed the representatives values
wL = 30 and w = 20 can de inferred, therefore:

C c ¼ 0:0097ð30  16:4Þ ¼ 0:13

C c ¼ 0:99  0:21:315 ¼ 0:12

Fig. 3. Results of pressuremeter test. As a consequence, in relation to settlement, a representative va-

4. Results of the consolidation tests using the oedometer
From the different analysis and tests performed for the soil
characterization the most relevant ones are those carried out with
the oedometer (Table 2):
lue the compression index Cc = 0.125 can be considered.
For increases in strength over the preconsolidation pressure,
the soil will experiment deformations corresponding to the oedo-
metric new load curve with Cc = 0.13, which can be considered
as a low average value. In other words, it is a soft soil that
poorly recuperates from deformation but it shows a slight
preconsolidation.

Table 2
List of oedometric tests

Test bore no. 2 2 3 4 6

Depth 16.20–16.80 19.20–19.80 24.33–24.60 18.60–19.20 27.6–27.9
Preconsolidation pressure (kN/m2) 169.7 149.1 254.3 119.9 69.1
Compression index, 0.157 0.13 0.256 0.12 0.12
Cc
Oedometric module 9882 11375 7149 11469 10391
(kN/m2)
7 8 11 11 12
Depth 16.20–16.80 25.80–26.40 13.55–13.80 17.40–18.00 16.20–16.64
Preconsolidation pressure (kN/m2) 80.9 126.2 85.9 120.7 99.9
Compression index, 0.19 0.09 0.123 0.131 0.136
Cc
Oedometric module 7281 14286 10413 10799 9532
(kN/m2)
15
Depth 13.20–13.80
Preconsolidation pressure (kN/m2) 135.9
Compression index, 0.064
Cc
Oedometric module 22937
(kN/m2)
 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400
Fig. 4. Oedometric curve.
For strength increases lower than the consolidation pressures,
the soil researches reduced deformations in the unload curve, cor-
responding to the so-called swelling index, Cs (Fig. 4).
Fig. 5. Location of the injection pipes with fuse elements.
1393
5. Underpinning concept for the consolidation project
From the conclusions drawn, two of them are extremely rele-
vant for understanding the successive failure of the underpinnings
earlier performed – both jet-grouting and superficial ones – as well
as for carrying out an underpinning which immobilizes the build-
ing and allows the construction of the designed basements without
loosing any useful surface [11–13].
The first of the conclusions is that the soil is unfit and its char-
acteristics decrease with the depth – in the 50 m recognized up to
almost negligible values. The second conclusion is that a great frac-
tion of these soils is consolidated and sensitive, in such a way that
any alteration of its tensional state leads to high deformations, and
practically to the collapse of the ground.
Therefore, the question is double: on the one hand, how
to underpin historical walls prolonging them to the subsoil (pack-
ing) in order to delimit the basements to be constructed? On the
other hand, in which way can the underpinning consolidate the
ground without affecting lower subconsolidated and sensitive
soils.
The solution offered is the creation of ‘‘new” walls under the old
ones by improving the packing with reinforced injections anchor-
ing them to the old ones. In addition, a prolongation in depth of
this treatment is proposed using tubular bellow reinforcement or
‘‘fuses” which would not break the transmission of stresses to
the lower strata through the reinforcement, but would prevent
the transmission of stresses to the subconsolidated and sensitive
strata [14,15] (Figs. 5 and 6).
The solution offered was novel for the time it was built (year
2002) and it needs preliminary tests, an adequate control in the
construction phase by precise levelling, and in addition it needs
1394 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400
Fig. 6. Detail of the fuse and section of the post of the reinforced injections.
final tests to determine the degree of consolidation with these jet
grouting injections.
6. Pressuremetric tests
Prior to the actual testing, a previous trial-treatment was car-
ried out to test the suitability of this solution, especially in the cen-
tral tower area presenting the greatest damages (cracks, falls, etc.).
To check the improvements being produced by this treatment,
three pressuremetric tests were performed [9,10] up to a depth
of 24 m, so as to confirm if the on site stiffness module had
increased.
The test bores S-1 and S-2 were located very close to the façade
and the S-3 was carried out at a distance of 8 m from both, at the
main access to the building in an area which had not been treated
(Fig. 7).
When at the lowest part of the building, the packing is reduced
to a stratum of 1.00–1.20 m showing underneath this height the
typical soil of this part of the city: alluvial deposits of the Vega Alta
of Granada from the Pleistocenic–Holocenic era. Basically the
stratigraphic sequence is constituted by alluvial sediments with a
great development at the flood plains, that is, mud-lime soils with
small overlapping levels of sands and gravel forming positive se-
quences. These sequences present at their bases a layer of gravel
and sands with a maximum thickness of 1 m, and the rest of the
sequence, up to 3 or 6 m, correspond to mud-lime soils with fre-
quent processes of edaphization forming real paleosoils.
This general scheme of the geological formation named Vega
Alta is recognized in the three tests described, with clear areas of
brown red mud-slime patches over the sand and gravel in a mud
matrix. At the same time, the presence of slime-mud is observed
in depths 16.15–20.20 m in the test number 1 and from 14.40 m
to 17.50 m in the test number 2.
In addition, there is a difficult correlation between the different
intercalations, because in very small horizontal distance looses of
granular levels and/or stickings are observed – which is character-
istic of the alluvial deposits. In short, there is no correlation be-
tween the strata in near test bores.
In each of the perforations carried out, eleven pressuremetric
tests were performed starting from height 2 m, every 2 m in
depth, adding up to a total of 33 tests. The equipment used is
one probe OYO4181 Elastometer 2HQ with semi-rigid cases,
formed by a pressuremetric probe, a high pressure pipe, a cable
for the data collection, register and data storage and a manual
pump. As it is well known, the test consists of placing an increasing
lateral load on the soil by using a cylindrical unicellular radial
dilatable probe which is introduced in the bore. The results are ex-
pressed in a graphic form, where an elastic area is recognized cor-
responding to the pressuremetric module. At the limit of this
elastic zone, the fluency pressure appears (Pf) and at the end of
 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400
Fig. 7. Location of the test bores for the pressuremetric tests.
the plastic zone the ultimate pressure (PL) is observed. From all the
above, it can be inferred that the pressuremetric modulus is equiv-
alent to a pseudoelastic transversal deformation module, and the
limit pressure corresponds to the soil fracture.
The results obtained in the pressuremetric tests, referred to Me-
nard values, are shown in Fig. 7.
As can be seen in Fig. 7a, the modulus are included between
10,000 and 20,000 kPa up to 10 m deep, with a value of
36,998 kPa at 4 m in depth. Between 12 and 16 m higher values
are registered – 24,800 and 47,900 kPa – with lower values ob-
served once again at 18–24 m – in between 10,507 and 15,466 kPa.
In a similar way to the S-1 (7a), the modulus are low until a
depth of 9 m, being in between 8825 and 18,723 kPa, except for
the test made at 3 m in depth which registers a value of
47,000 kPa. This is analogous to the one registered in S-1 at
4000 m, possibly due to the effect of the layers of superficial jet
grouting, between 3 and 4 m deep in both tests.
From 11 to 23 m, the values of the modulus are clearly higher,
being included between 23,207 and 38,022 kPa, with the exception
of the test carried out at 21 m which registers a much lower value
of 13,189 kPa (Fig. 8).
Differently from the two first tests, but with a similar strati-
graphic pattern, the values of the pressuremetric modulus – equiv-
alent to a modulus of pseudoelastic transversal deformation – do
not show any peak or value significantly higher in the first 8 m,
showing values of 11,499 and 15,169 kPa. In between 10 and
16 m higher values are observed, ranging from 25,392 to
55,582 kPa which correspond to intercalations of mud-slime areas.
Finally, the values continue to decrease between 18 and 24 m,
showing values of 7491 and 21,341 kPa, similar in pattern to those
shown in S-1 at the same depth.
From the results obtained, the following interesting data can be
inferred:
(a) The fracture pressure is always maintained over 800 kPa,
except for test bore S3, corresponding to a non-treated area,
where at 24 m deep in relation to the mouth of the opening
1395
(height 30 m in relation to the floor of the courtyard) is of
just 68 kPa.
(b) The average fracture pressure in the treated areas ranges
from 1572 kPa for the test bore S2 (right pillar of the central
tower seen from the façade) and 1652 kPa for the S1 test
bore (left pillar).
(c) The pressuremetric modulus show average values at the
treated areas of 23,838 kPa for the S1 test bore and of
23,319 kPa for the S2, and a total mean value of 23,500 kPa.
The Ep/Pl relation characteristic of the tested soil considering it
an alluvial soil, as in this case, oscillates between 5 and 8, whereas
in the overconsolidated soils it ranges between 1 and 30.
The comparative analysis between the obtained results of other
tests performed and the typical values of other types of soils leads
us to the following conclusions:
– The treated soils can be considered equivalent, regarding
their pressuremetric properties, to mud-firm marls.
– The Ep/Pl characterizes the overconsolidated soil (it is
important to remember that is a ‘‘subconsolidated”).
– In the S3 test bore drilled in the non-treated soil, the limit
pressure is of just 69 kPa at a depth of 30 m in relation to
the courtyard floors. This is equivalent to that of a mud-
slime soil of soft consistency (Figs. 9 and 10).
7. Analysis of the soil consolidation by means of geophysical
tests
Once the efficiency of the system (first phase) has been proved,
the definitive consolidation of the subsoil (second phase) using
reinforced injections started. These reinforced injections included
a stable mixture of cement–bentonite and tubular bellow rein-
forcement or fuses, which were inserted intercalating the corre-
sponding non-treated areas. In order to check the efficiency of
the treatment, the dynamic stiffness modulus under the founda-
tions is determined, carrying out a Cross-hole and Down-hole
1396 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400

Fig. 9. Comparison of the pressuremetric modulus of the three test bores.

Fig. 8. Obtained pressuremetric modulus. (a) Modulus corresponding to test 1. (b)

Modulus corresponding to test number 2. (c) Modulus corresponding to test
number 3.

seismic survey. This is done before and after the treatment so that
the soil improvement can easily be assessed.
The geophysical prospection works have been placed in the two
courtyards and at the second basement of the building. They have
included seven Cross-hole tests; four in both courtyards and three
in the second basement, and finally two Down-hole tests were also Fig. 10. Comparison of the limit pressure of the three test bores.
 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400 1397

Fig. 11. Location of the test holes for the geophysical survey.

Table 3 Table 4
Characteristics of the seismic tests: cross-hole (XH) and down-hole (DH) Rigidity modulus obtained in the second basement

Code Emitter probe Receiver probe Separation Height Searched Height G (XH-AB) with G (XH-CB) w/out G (XH-CD) with
(m) (m) depth (m) (m) treatment (Gpa) treatment (Gpa) treatment (Gpa)
XH_A-B A B 5.5 5.7 24 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 1st 2nd
XH_C-B C B 6 5.7 24 Phase Phase Phase Phase Phase Phase
XH_C-D C D 5.5 5.7 24
6.7 5.7 5.3 8.1 6.8 5 3.1
XH_1-2 1 2 5.5 0.2 19
7.7 1.2 2.1 2.4 0.8 1.5 1.9
XH_3-4 3 4 7.2 0.2 20
8.7 1 2.1 0.6 0.6 1.6 2.3
XH_7-8 7 6 5.5 0.2 26
9.7 1.2 2.1 0.6 0.7 1.7 1.9
XH_9-8 9 8 7.2 0.2 19
10.7 1.8 2.1 0.6 0.6 1.3 2.2
DH_A A 3.5 5.7 24
11.7 1 2.1 0.4 0.6 1.4 1.7
DH_D D 4 5.7 24
12.7 1.1 1.7 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.3
13.7 1.5 2.1 0.5 0.5 1.1 1.7
14.7 1.1 1.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.2
15.7 0.9 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.8 1
carried out in the second basement. A total of 156 linear metres of 16.7 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.7 0.6 1.1
Cross-hole tests have been performed and 48 linear metres of 17.7 0.6 1.2 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.9
Down-hole tests (Fig. 11). 18.7 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.5 1.2
The equipment used to collect the data has been a multicanal 19.7 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.9
20.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.5 1.2
seismograph OYO (McSEIS 160 model) provided with filtering 21.7 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 1.1
systems, signal reinforcing and recording in magnetic support. 22.7 0.5 1 0.7 0.7 0.6 1
The source of energy used for the Cross-hole tests was a pneu- 23.7 0.5 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.8 1
matic hammer and for the Down-hole tests an 8 Kg pounder 24.7 0.6 0.7 1 1 1 1
25.7 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9
was used blowing on a 20  20 cm piece to generate compression
26.7 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9
waves. 27.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9
The results of the different seismic tests are presented in nu- 28.7 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6
meric form and in graphs. The height in relation to the courtyards 29.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4
is shown on the tables, as are the time of arrival of the P waves (ob-
tained from the Down-hole tests) and S waves (obtained from the
Cross-hole tests) and the speed of both P and S waves. 8. Results discussion
Table 3 shows the characteristics of the tests performed and Ta-
ble 4 shows the values of the elastic rigidity modulus (G) obtained Analyzing the data collected by the Cross-hole test (Fig. 13), the
for the Cross-hole tests performed in the second basement. Table 5 following results are obtained:
is a comparison between the rigidity modulus of both the injected  The natural untreated soil presents S wave speeds around
soil and the non-injected soil. Fig. 12 shows the comparison of the 500 m/, showing lower values such as 466 m/s at the 29.7 m
improvement of the soil rigidity modulus in both phases in terms height in relation to the courtyard floor, as can be seen in the
of percentages. C–D Cross-hole tests.
1398 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400

Table 5
Comparison of the soil rigidity modulus in the injected soil (XH-CD) and in the non-injected one (XH-CB)

Height Increase of Vs 1st phase (m/ Rigidity module non-injected soil Rigidity module injected soil XH_CD 1st Improvement rigidity module first
(m) s) (%) XH_CB (Gpa) phase (Gpa) treatment (%)
8.7 58 0.6 1.6 174
9.7 42 0.6 1.7 176
10.7 45 0.6 1.3 131
11.7 69 0.4 1.4 215
12.7 37 0.4 0.9 107
13.7 46 0.5 1.1 135
14.7 20 0.5 0.8 59
15.7 10 0.6 0.8 34
Average value 129

Height Increase of Vs 2nd phase Rigidity module non-injected soil Rigidity module injected soil XH_CD 2nd Improvement rigidity module second
(m) (m/s) (%) XH_CB (Gpa) phase (Gpa) treatment (%)
8.7 90 0.6 2.3 300
9.7 68 0.6 1.9 211
10.7 90 0.6 2.2 300
11.7 88 0.4 1.7 290
12.7 64 0.4 1.3 197
13.7 83 0.5 1.7 271
14.7 45 0.5 1.2 134
15.7 24 0.6 1 69
Average value (partial) 222

16.7 21 0.7 1.1 62

17.7 34 0.5 0.9 97
18.7 44 0.5 1.2 130
19.7 23 0.5 0.9 68
20.7 28 0.7 1.2 80
21.7 23 0.7 1.1 66
22.7 18 0.7 1 54
Average value (total) 155

Non-injected soil density 19 kN/m3.

Injected soil density 21 kN/m3.

Fig. 12. Comparison of the improvement of the soil rigidity modulus (XH-AB).

These especially low speeds confirm in turn two basic aspects
which, although known from the geotechnical survey, are still
fundamental:
– The natural soil is inadequate throughout the analyzed
depth.
– Its unfitness not only does not reduce with the depth but it
increases.
 It is proved that:
– For the tests carried out in the first phase, located
second basement, the area injected presented S
speeds of 650 and 800 m/s. In this injected area, a
of approximately 10 m (height 16 meters) was
ved;
– For the tests performed in the second phase, placed at the
second basement, the injected area shows S wave speeds
in between 650 and 1000 m/s up to an approximate depth
of 17 m ( height 23 m).
 It can be observed that:
– The natural soil free of injections (XH-CB) has values of the
rigidity modulus in between 400 and 700 MPa;
– For the tests performed during the first phase (XH-AB, XH-
CD, XH S1-S2, etc.), both at the basement and the courtyard,
at the the rigidity modulus can be observed as generally higher
wave than 900 MPa in the injected zone (up to height 11 in the
depth courtyards and up to the 16 m in the second basement).
obser – For the tests carried out in the second phase (XH-AB and XH-
CD) the rigidity modulus in the reinjected area, reaching up
 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400 1399

Fig. 13. Graphs corresponding to the tests performed.

to 16 m, shows values near 2000 MPa. In the injected zone,  The calculations of the rigidity modulus improvement have
between 16 and 23 m, the rigidity modulus is close to been carried out by comparing the results obtained in the
1000 MPa. Cross-hole tests AB and CD, performed on the injected soil, with
1400 A.B. Padura et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1389–1400
those of the Cross-hole CB, carried out on natural soil not
affected by the injections. From these results, the following
can be drawn:
– The area injected in the second basement, regarding the
Cross-hole tests AB and CD performed during the first phase
of the geophysical study reaches the height of 16 m
approximately, showing an average improvement value of
the rigidity modulus of 129% for the XH_CD, and of 136%
for the XH_AB.
– The injected area in the second basement, according to the
Cross-hole tests made during the second phase, has reached
height 23 m approximately, showing an average improve-
ment degree, for the soil included in between the height
8 and 23 m, of 155% for the 0XH_CD and of 167% for
the XH_AB up to 16 meters deep. In the reinjected area
(between height 8 and 16 m) the improvement degree
obtained is of 222% for the XH_CD and of 264% for the XH_AB.
9. Conclusions
From the research carried out and the works been done, the fol-
lowing conclusions can be drawn. These conclusions can be used to
establish applicable criteria in the restoration or rehabilitation of
old buildings:
(i) To determine the geotechnical characterization of the sub-
soil up to 40 or 50 m in depth is of great importance, so as
to determine the possible presence of inadequate soils. This
research work has shown important thicknesses of soil inca-
pable of bearing transmitted loads, which in turn was gener-
ating settlements, falls, cracks and other damages in the
building.
(ii) In addition to generic analysis and tests, geophysical tech-
niques such as Cross-hole and Down-hole have been used.
These allow us to determine the inappropriateness of the
soil, which in this case is located at depths of 20–30 m.
(iii) The data obtained with the SPT tests and the oedometric and
geophysical tests helped in designing a new system of rein-
forced jet grouting of cement–bentonite, with tubular rein-
forcement including bellows or fuses. These injections
break the transmission of strengths to the lower strata leav-
ing these areas without treatment, and therefore preventing
the transmission of stresses to the subconsolidated strata.
This solution represents a novelty in the applied treatment,
and five years after the works have finished the building
does not present any failure or damage proving the effi-
ciency of the intervention.
(iv) The pressuremetric and geophysical survey been done has
permitted the assessment of the soil improvement of up to
155% and 167% with the first injection and up to 222% and
264% in the reinjected areas.
Acknowledgements
This research Project has been possible thanks to the financial
support of the Junta de Andalucía and the collaboration of
VORSEVI, S.A. Company.
References
[1] Lafuente Alcántara et al. Historia de Granada. Diputación de Granada;
1990.
[2] Vlčko J. Engineering geological failures on historic structures and historic sites.
Acta Geologica Universitatis Comenianae 1999;54:5–25. Bratislava (Eslovaquia).
[3] Arcos H, Porcu MC. Movimientos sísmicos y estructuras murarias. Consorcio de
Compensación de Seguros 2003.
[4] Jiménez Salas JA, Justo Alpañés J. Geotecnia y Cimientos. Tomos I, II y III.
Editorial Rueda; 1975, 1980, 1981.
[5] Holtz RD, Kovacs WD. Introduction to geotechnical engineering. Prentice Hall;
1981.
[6] Atkinson JH, Bransby PL. The mechanics of soils. UK: McGraw-Hill; 1978.
[7] Aysen A. Soil mechanics: basic concepts and engineering applications. UK: Taylor
Francis; 2002.
[8] Menard L, Broise Y. Theoretical and practical aspects of dynamic consolidation.
Géotechnique 1975;25(1):3–18.
[9] The 2007 annual book of ASTM standards, vol. 04.08. Soil and rock (I). p. D420–
D5611. ASTM.
[10] Normas EN. PNE-prEN ISO 22476-1. Investigación y ensayos geotécnicos.
Ensayos de campo. Parte 1: Ensayos de penetración con el cono eléctrico y el
piezocono.Normas EN. EN ISO 22476-2:2005. Investigación y ensayos
geotécnicos. Ensayos de campo. Parte 2: Ensayo de penetración dinámica.
(ISO 22476-2:2002) (Ratificada por AENOR en agosto de 2006).Normas EN.
UNE-EN ISO 22476-3:2006. Investigación y ensayos geotécnicos. Ensayos de
campo. Parte 3: Ensayo de penetración estándar (ISO 22476-3:2005).Normas
EN. PNE-prEN ISO 22476-4. Investigación y ensayos geotécnicos- Ensayos de
campo. Parte 4: Ensayo presiométrico de Menard.Normas EN. PNE-prEN ISO
22476-5. Investigación geotécnica y ensayos- Ensayos de campo. Parte 5:
Ensayo con dilatómetro flexible.Normas EN. PNE-prEN ISO 22476-7.
Investigación geotécnica y ensayos- Ensayos de campo. Parte 7: Ensayo de
perforación tipo jack.Normas EN. PNE-prEN ISO 22476-12. Investigación y
ensayos geotécnicos. Ensayos de campo. Parte 12: Ensayo de penetración
mecánica con el cono (CPT) (ISO/DIS 22476-12:2006).
[11] Komiya K, Soga K, Akagi H, Jafari MR, Bolton MD. Soil consolidation associated
with grouting during shield tunnelling in soft clayey ground. Géotechnique
2001;51(10):835–46.
[12] Rodríguez Ortiz JM, Serra Gesta J, Oteo Mazo C. Curso aplicado de
Cimentaciones, 6a edición. Colegio Oficial de Arquitectos de Madrid; 1995.
[13] Brauman V, Dupeuble P. The jet-grouting process and its utilization in some
European countries. Proceedings, ‘‘In situ” soil and rock reinforcement
international conference, Paris; 1984.
[14] Hilmer K, Knapee M. Jet-grouting: a method to protect ancient constructions.
Proceedings. Athens: Engineering Geology of Ancient Works, Monuments, and
Historical Sites; 1988.
[15] Lunardi P, Louis C. Consolidation des sols par la technique du jet-grouting. Etat
des connaissances et des expériences. Colloque Int. Renforcement des Sols et
des Roches, 9–11 October 1984. Paris; 1984.