287B - PB - 4out - Same - 50835 - ASCE - Vol - 01 - Final - Job - Process Cyan - 08/07/2012 - 05:31:52

Laboratory and Field Trials for Deep Dry Soil Mixing to Stabilize a Live Laboratory and Field Trials
Laboratory and Field Trials for Deep Dry Soil Mixing to Stabilize a Live
Railway Embankment Across Thrandeston Bog Railway Embankment Across Thrandeston Bog
Nigel Pye1, Anthony O’Brien2, Robert Essler3 and Dan Adams4 Nigel Pye1, Anthony O’Brien2, Robert Essler3 and Dan Adams4
1 1
Associate Geotechnical Engineer, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon, CR0 Associate Geotechnical Engineer, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon, CR0
2EE, United Kingdom; nigel.pye@mottmac.com 2EE, United Kingdom; nigel.pye@mottmac.com
2 2
Director Geotechnical Engineering, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon, Director Geotechnical Engineering, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon,
CR0 2EE, United Kingdom; anthony.obrien@mottmac.com CR0 2EE, United Kingdom; anthony.obrien@mottmac.com
3 3
Director, RD Geotech, East Barn, Calton, Skipton, BD23 4AF, United Kingdom; Director, RD Geotech, East Barn, Calton, Skipton, BD23 4AF, United Kingdom;
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
robert.essler@rdgeotech.co.uk robert.essler@rdgeotech.co.uk
554A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4 4
Environmental Systems Manager, Keller Geotechnique, Templar House, 1 Sandbeck Court, Environmental Systems Manager, Keller Geotechnique, Templar House, 1 Sandbeck Court,
Sandbeck Way, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS22 7BA, United Kingdom; dan.adams@keller.co.uk Sandbeck Way, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS22 7BA, United Kingdom; dan.adams@keller.co.uk
ABSTRACT: This paper describes the laboratory and field testing undertaken for ABSTRACT: This paper describes the laboratory and field testing undertaken for
the design and construction of a dry soil mixing scheme for Thrandeston Bog railway the design and construction of a dry soil mixing scheme for Thrandeston Bog railway
embankment stabilisation. The results of laboratory mixed samples are presented for embankment stabilisation. The results of laboratory mixed samples are presented for
varying quantities of cement binder mixed with Peat and Clay. Field test results from varying quantities of cement binder mixed with Peat and Clay. Field test results from
Pull Out and Push In Resistance Testing in soilmix columns are also presented and Pull Out and Push In Resistance Testing in soilmix columns are also presented and
the results compared for the varying cement binder dosages in both Peat and Clay. It the results compared for the varying cement binder dosages in both Peat and Clay. It
is concluded that replication of the mixing energy used in the preparation of is concluded that replication of the mixing energy used in the preparation of
laboratory mixed materials is a critical factor in predicting field strengths, whilst the laboratory mixed materials is a critical factor in predicting field strengths, whilst the
water cement ratio is significant factor in the resulting soilmix column strength. water cement ratio is significant factor in the resulting soilmix column strength.
INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION
The application of dry soil mixing at Thrandeston Bog represents the first major The application of dry soil mixing at Thrandeston Bog represents the first major
United Kingdom use of the technique to stabilize an existing live railway United Kingdom use of the technique to stabilize an existing live railway
embankment founded on an extensive thickness of soft clay and peat. embankment founded on an extensive thickness of soft clay and peat.
Over a length of some 650 metres, in 1847 the Great Eastern Railway from London Over a length of some 650 metres, in 1847 the Great Eastern Railway from London
to Norwich was constructed on embankment, up to 5 metre high, crossing a 10 metre to Norwich was constructed on embankment, up to 5 metre high, crossing a 10 metre
deep bog of peat and soft clays at Thrandeston. deep bog of peat and soft clays at Thrandeston.
Construction of the railway was problematic with repeated slope failures and Construction of the railway was problematic with repeated slope failures and
embankment settlement. More than 150 years on, the embankment continued to embankment settlement. More than 150 years on, the embankment continued to
prove a challenge. The tracks and overhead line equipment required continual prove a challenge. The tracks and overhead line equipment required continual
maintenance and the fear of embankment failure was present with ongoing slope maintenance and the fear of embankment failure was present with ongoing slope
movements. movements.
The dry soil mixing scheme comprised the installation of around 11,500, 600 mm The dry soil mixing scheme comprised the installation of around 11,500, 600 mm
diameter soilmix columns (total meterage 75,000). The columns were installed in diameter soilmix columns (total meterage 75,000). The columns were installed in
554 554
287B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Northeastern Univ Library on 06/06/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Laboratory and Field Trials for Deep Dry Soil Mixing to Stabilize a Live Laboratory and Field Trials for Deep Dry Soil Mixing to Stabilize a Live
Railway Embankment Across Thrandeston Bog Railway Embankment Across Thrandeston Bog
Nigel Pye1, Anthony O’Brien2, Robert Essler3 and Dan Adams4 Nigel Pye1, Anthony O’Brien2, Robert Essler3 and Dan Adams4
1 1
Associate Geotechnical Engineer, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon, CR0 Associate Geotechnical Engineer, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon, CR0
2EE, United Kingdom; nigel.pye@mottmac.com 2EE, United Kingdom; nigel.pye@mottmac.com
2 2
Director Geotechnical Engineering, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon, Director Geotechnical Engineering, Mott MacDonald Limited, 8 – 10 Sydenham Road, Croydon,
CR0 2EE, United Kingdom; anthony.obrien@mottmac.com CR0 2EE, United Kingdom; anthony.obrien@mottmac.com
3 3
Director, RD Geotech, East Barn, Calton, Skipton, BD23 4AF, United Kingdom; Director, RD Geotech, East Barn, Calton, Skipton, BD23 4AF, United Kingdom;
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
robert.essler@rdgeotech.co.uk robert.essler@rdgeotech.co.uk
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4 4
Environmental Systems Manager, Keller Geotechnique, Templar House, 1 Sandbeck Court, Environmental Systems Manager, Keller Geotechnique, Templar House, 1 Sandbeck Court,
Sandbeck Way, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS22 7BA, United Kingdom; dan.adams@keller.co.uk Sandbeck Way, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS22 7BA, United Kingdom; dan.adams@keller.co.uk
ABSTRACT: This paper describes the laboratory and field testing undertaken for ABSTRACT: This paper describes the laboratory and field testing undertaken for
the design and construction of a dry soil mixing scheme for Thrandeston Bog railway the design and construction of a dry soil mixing scheme for Thrandeston Bog railway
embankment stabilisation. The results of laboratory mixed samples are presented for embankment stabilisation. The results of laboratory mixed samples are presented for
varying quantities of cement binder mixed with Peat and Clay. Field test results from varying quantities of cement binder mixed with Peat and Clay. Field test results from
Pull Out and Push In Resistance Testing in soilmix columns are also presented and Pull Out and Push In Resistance Testing in soilmix columns are also presented and
the results compared for the varying cement binder dosages in both Peat and Clay. It the results compared for the varying cement binder dosages in both Peat and Clay. It
is concluded that replication of the mixing energy used in the preparation of is concluded that replication of the mixing energy used in the preparation of
laboratory mixed materials is a critical factor in predicting field strengths, whilst the laboratory mixed materials is a critical factor in predicting field strengths, whilst the
water cement ratio is significant factor in the resulting soilmix column strength. water cement ratio is significant factor in the resulting soilmix column strength.
INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION
The application of dry soil mixing at Thrandeston Bog represents the first major The application of dry soil mixing at Thrandeston Bog represents the first major
United Kingdom use of the technique to stabilize an existing live railway United Kingdom use of the technique to stabilize an existing live railway
embankment founded on an extensive thickness of soft clay and peat. embankment founded on an extensive thickness of soft clay and peat.
Over a length of some 650 metres, in 1847 the Great Eastern Railway from London Over a length of some 650 metres, in 1847 the Great Eastern Railway from London
to Norwich was constructed on embankment, up to 5 metre high, crossing a 10 metre to Norwich was constructed on embankment, up to 5 metre high, crossing a 10 metre
deep bog of peat and soft clays at Thrandeston. deep bog of peat and soft clays at Thrandeston.
Construction of the railway was problematic with repeated slope failures and Construction of the railway was problematic with repeated slope failures and
embankment settlement. More than 150 years on, the embankment continued to embankment settlement. More than 150 years on, the embankment continued to
prove a challenge. The tracks and overhead line equipment required continual prove a challenge. The tracks and overhead line equipment required continual
maintenance and the fear of embankment failure was present with ongoing slope maintenance and the fear of embankment failure was present with ongoing slope
movements. movements.
The dry soil mixing scheme comprised the installation of around 11,500, 600 mm The dry soil mixing scheme comprised the installation of around 11,500, 600 mm
diameter soilmix columns (total meterage 75,000). The columns were installed in diameter soilmix columns (total meterage 75,000). The columns were installed in
554 554
Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012 555 GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012 555
panels along both sides of the embankment to improve the geotechnical properties of panels along both sides of the embankment to improve the geotechnical properties of
the underlying soil. the underlying soil.
Following initial ground investigations a major laboratory and field trial was Following initial ground investigations a major laboratory and field trial was
undertaken to identify the optimum binder type and dosage rate necessary to achieve undertaken to identify the optimum binder type and dosage rate necessary to achieve
the required strength improvement of the soft soils. the required strength improvement of the soft soils.
To support this, laboratory mixing of peat and clay derived from the site, was To support this, laboratory mixing of peat and clay derived from the site, was
undertaken creating a suite of 205 samples with differing binder contents that were undertaken creating a suite of 205 samples with differing binder contents that were
tested at different ages from 1 day to 90 days. tested at different ages from 1 day to 90 days.
The field trials encompassed soil mixing within peat and clay. Three different The field trials encompassed soil mixing within peat and clay. Three different
binder quantities were investigated within the peat and two within the clay. The binder quantities were investigated within the peat and two within the clay. The
findings of in-situ tests (including pull out resistance and push in tests) and findings of in-situ tests (including pull out resistance and push in tests) and
laboratory tests are presented confirming that both the clay and peat materials reacted laboratory tests are presented confirming that both the clay and peat materials reacted
positively to commercially economic quantities of binder. positively to commercially economic quantities of binder.
GROUND CONDITIONS GROUND CONDITIONS
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Ground investigations for the project were undertaken across the site as a whole, Ground investigations for the project were undertaken across the site as a whole,
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
although particular focus was given to investigations in the areas of the proposed although particular focus was given to investigations in the areas of the proposed
field trials. The investigations comprised a combination of four cable tool boreholes field trials. The investigations comprised a combination of four cable tool boreholes
to obtain material for laboratory testing and eight cone penetration tests to quantify to obtain material for laboratory testing and eight cone penetration tests to quantify
the undrained shear strength of the soft ground. The field trial areas were split into the undrained shear strength of the soft ground. The field trial areas were split into
two zones, one where the ground conditions comprised predominantly peat (‘Peat two zones, one where the ground conditions comprised predominantly peat (‘Peat
trial area’) and a second location where the ground conditions comprised trial area’) and a second location where the ground conditions comprised
predominantly soft clay (‘Clay trial area’). predominantly soft clay (‘Clay trial area’).
Overall the ground investigations in the ‘Peat trial area’ identified the following Overall the ground investigations in the ‘Peat trial area’ identified the following
sequence of materials: sequence of materials:
 0.0 metres to 0.4 metres of soft brown Clay;  0.0 metres to 0.4 metres of soft brown Clay;
 0.4 metres to between 4.0 metres and 5.5 metres very soft amorphous and fibrous  0.4 metres to between 4.0 metres and 5.5 metres very soft amorphous and fibrous
Peat; and Peat; and
 below 4.0 metres to 5.5 metres Upper Chalk.  below 4.0 metres to 5.5 metres Upper Chalk.
In the ‘Clay trial area’ the following ground conditions were identified: In the ‘Clay trial area’ the following ground conditions were identified:
 0.0 metres to 8.0 metres soft brown Clay, with lenses of very soft amorphous and  0.0 metres to 8.0 metres soft brown Clay, with lenses of very soft amorphous and
fibrous Peat; and fibrous Peat; and
 below 8.0 metres Upper Chalk  below 8.0 metres Upper Chalk
A near surface groundwater table characterised the whole of the site and was A near surface groundwater table characterised the whole of the site and was
encountered within 0.5 metres of the ground surface. encountered within 0.5 metres of the ground surface.
GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES
The geotechnical properties of the soft ground have been determined from both The geotechnical properties of the soft ground have been determined from both
laboratory testing and cone penetration testing (CPT). Table 1 summarises the typical laboratory testing and cone penetration testing (CPT). Table 1 summarises the typical
range of index properties derived from the ground investigations. range of index properties derived from the ground investigations.
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
288A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
panels along both sides of the embankment to improve the geotechnical properties of panels along both sides of the embankment to improve the geotechnical properties of
the underlying soil. the underlying soil.
Following initial ground investigations a major laboratory and field trial was Following initial ground investigations a major laboratory and field trial was
undertaken to identify the optimum binder type and dosage rate necessary to achieve undertaken to identify the optimum binder type and dosage rate necessary to achieve
the required strength improvement of the soft soils. the required strength improvement of the soft soils.
To support this, laboratory mixing of peat and clay derived from the site, was To support this, laboratory mixing of peat and clay derived from the site, was
undertaken creating a suite of 205 samples with differing binder contents that were undertaken creating a suite of 205 samples with differing binder contents that were
tested at different ages from 1 day to 90 days. tested at different ages from 1 day to 90 days.
The field trials encompassed soil mixing within peat and clay. Three different The field trials encompassed soil mixing within peat and clay. Three different
binder quantities were investigated within the peat and two within the clay. The binder quantities were investigated within the peat and two within the clay. The
findings of in-situ tests (including pull out resistance and push in tests) and findings of in-situ tests (including pull out resistance and push in tests) and
laboratory tests are presented confirming that both the clay and peat materials reacted laboratory tests are presented confirming that both the clay and peat materials reacted
positively to commercially economic quantities of binder. positively to commercially economic quantities of binder.
GROUND CONDITIONS GROUND CONDITIONS

Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Ground investigations for the project were undertaken across the site as a whole, Ground investigations for the project were undertaken across the site as a whole,
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
although particular focus was given to investigations in the areas of the proposed although particular focus was given to investigations in the areas of the proposed
field trials. The investigations comprised a combination of four cable tool boreholes field trials. The investigations comprised a combination of four cable tool boreholes
to obtain material for laboratory testing and eight cone penetration tests to quantify to obtain material for laboratory testing and eight cone penetration tests to quantify
the undrained shear strength of the soft ground. The field trial areas were split into the undrained shear strength of the soft ground. The field trial areas were split into
two zones, one where the ground conditions comprised predominantly peat (‘Peat two zones, one where the ground conditions comprised predominantly peat (‘Peat
trial area’) and a second location where the ground conditions comprised trial area’) and a second location where the ground conditions comprised
predominantly soft clay (‘Clay trial area’). predominantly soft clay (‘Clay trial area’).
Overall the ground investigations in the ‘Peat trial area’ identified the following Overall the ground investigations in the ‘Peat trial area’ identified the following
sequence of materials: sequence of materials:
 0.0 metres to 0.4 metres of soft brown Clay;  0.0 metres to 0.4 metres of soft brown Clay;
 0.4 metres to between 4.0 metres and 5.5 metres very soft amorphous and fibrous  0.4 metres to between 4.0 metres and 5.5 metres very soft amorphous and fibrous
Peat; and Peat; and
 below 4.0 metres to 5.5 metres Upper Chalk.  below 4.0 metres to 5.5 metres Upper Chalk.
In the ‘Clay trial area’ the following ground conditions were identified: In the ‘Clay trial area’ the following ground conditions were identified:
 0.0 metres to 8.0 metres soft brown Clay, with lenses of very soft amorphous and  0.0 metres to 8.0 metres soft brown Clay, with lenses of very soft amorphous and
fibrous Peat; and fibrous Peat; and
 below 8.0 metres Upper Chalk  below 8.0 metres Upper Chalk
A near surface groundwater table characterised the whole of the site and was A near surface groundwater table characterised the whole of the site and was
encountered within 0.5 metres of the ground surface. encountered within 0.5 metres of the ground surface.
GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES
The geotechnical properties of the soft ground have been determined from both The geotechnical properties of the soft ground have been determined from both
laboratory testing and cone penetration testing (CPT). Table 1 summarises the typical laboratory testing and cone penetration testing (CPT). Table 1 summarises the typical
range of index properties derived from the ground investigations. range of index properties derived from the ground investigations.

556 GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012 556 GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012
Table 1. Peat and clay index properties. Typical range and maximum values. Table 1. Peat and clay index properties. Typical range and maximum values.
Moisture Liquid Plasticity pH Organic Moisture Liquid Plasticity pH Organic
content (%) Limit (%) Index (%) content (%) content (%) Limit (%) Index (%) content (%)
Peat 130 to 424 - - 6.5 to 7.3 80 Peat 130 to 424 - - 6.5 to 7.3 80
21 to 54 43 to 51 23 to 28 21 to 54 43 to 51 23 to 28
Clay 7.3 to 7.7 14 to 26 Clay 7.3 to 7.7 14 to 26
(max 464) (max 280) (max 68) (max 464) (max 280) (max 68)
The Clay material was typically intermediate, high and very high plasticity and The Clay material was typically intermediate, high and very high plasticity and
although it may be inferred from the results that the Clay is very sensitive, this was although it may be inferred from the results that the Clay is very sensitive, this was
not the case. not the case.
The undrained shear strength of the soft ground was derived from the CPT’s The undrained shear strength of the soft ground was derived from the CPT’s
adopting a cone factor of 15. The strengths of the Peat were generally in the range of adopting a cone factor of 15. The strengths of the Peat were generally in the range of
2 kPa to 20 kPa and whilst these are associated with the low consolidation pressures 2 kPa to 20 kPa and whilst these are associated with the low consolidation pressures
due to the low unit weight of the peat, they may also in part reflect the influence of due to the low unit weight of the peat, they may also in part reflect the influence of
excess pore pressures acting on the back of the cone during cone penetration. excess pore pressures acting on the back of the cone during cone penetration.
The strengths of the Clay are generally 15 to 50 kPa. The strength profiles are The strengths of the Clay are generally 15 to 50 kPa. The strength profiles are
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
illustrated on Figure 1 and for the Peat show that the highest material strengths are illustrated on Figure 1 and for the Peat show that the highest material strengths are
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
found immediately beneath a temporary working platform installed as part of the found immediately beneath a temporary working platform installed as part of the
investigation works at a depth of approximately 1.0 metre below ground level and investigation works at a depth of approximately 1.0 metre below ground level and
thereafter the strength rapidly decreases to values of typically between 5 and 10 kPa. thereafter the strength rapidly decreases to values of typically between 5 and 10 kPa.
Undrained Shear Strength (kPa) Undrained Shear Strength (kPa)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
1 1
Peat trial area - average of 6 Peat trial area - average of 6
2 tests 2 tests
Clay trial area - average of 2 Clay trial area - average of 2
3 tests 3 tests
Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
FIG. 1. Undrained shear strength profiles from cone penetration tests. FIG. 1. Undrained shear strength profiles from cone penetration tests.
LABORATORY MIX TRIAL LABORATORY MIX TRIAL
Introduction Introduction
Laboratory mix trials were conducted using the materials obtained from the ground Laboratory mix trials were conducted using the materials obtained from the ground
investigation boreholes sunk in the trial areas and elsewhere on the site. Sample investigation boreholes sunk in the trial areas and elsewhere on the site. Sample
preparation of the laboratory mixed material was undertaken in general accordance preparation of the laboratory mixed material was undertaken in general accordance
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Table 1. Peat and clay index properties. Typical range and maximum values. Table 1. Peat and clay index properties. Typical range and maximum values.
Moisture Liquid Plasticity pH Organic Moisture Liquid Plasticity pH Organic
content (%) Limit (%) Index (%) content (%) content (%) Limit (%) Index (%) content (%)
Peat 130 to 424 - - 6.5 to 7.3 80 Peat 130 to 424 - - 6.5 to 7.3 80
21 to 54 43 to 51 23 to 28 21 to 54 43 to 51 23 to 28
Clay 7.3 to 7.7 14 to 26 Clay 7.3 to 7.7 14 to 26
(max 464) (max 280) (max 68) (max 464) (max 280) (max 68)
The Clay material was typically intermediate, high and very high plasticity and The Clay material was typically intermediate, high and very high plasticity and
although it may be inferred from the results that the Clay is very sensitive, this was although it may be inferred from the results that the Clay is very sensitive, this was
not the case. not the case.
The undrained shear strength of the soft ground was derived from the CPT’s The undrained shear strength of the soft ground was derived from the CPT’s
adopting a cone factor of 15. The strengths of the Peat were generally in the range of adopting a cone factor of 15. The strengths of the Peat were generally in the range of
2 kPa to 20 kPa and whilst these are associated with the low consolidation pressures 2 kPa to 20 kPa and whilst these are associated with the low consolidation pressures
due to the low unit weight of the peat, they may also in part reflect the influence of due to the low unit weight of the peat, they may also in part reflect the influence of
excess pore pressures acting on the back of the cone during cone penetration. excess pore pressures acting on the back of the cone during cone penetration.
The strengths of the Clay are generally 15 to 50 kPa. The strength profiles are The strengths of the Clay are generally 15 to 50 kPa. The strength profiles are
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
illustrated on Figure 1 and for the Peat show that the highest material strengths are illustrated on Figure 1 and for the Peat show that the highest material strengths are
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
found immediately beneath a temporary working platform installed as part of the found immediately beneath a temporary working platform installed as part of the
investigation works at a depth of approximately 1.0 metre below ground level and investigation works at a depth of approximately 1.0 metre below ground level and
thereafter the strength rapidly decreases to values of typically between 5 and 10 kPa. thereafter the strength rapidly decreases to values of typically between 5 and 10 kPa.
Undrained Shear Strength (kPa) Undrained Shear Strength (kPa)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
1 1
Peat trial area - average of 6 Peat trial area - average of 6
2 tests 2 tests
Clay trial area - average of 2 Clay trial area - average of 2
3 tests 3 tests
Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
FIG. 1. Undrained shear strength profiles from cone penetration tests. FIG. 1. Undrained shear strength profiles from cone penetration tests.
LABORATORY MIX TRIAL LABORATORY MIX TRIAL
Laboratory mix trials were conducted using the materials obtained from the ground Laboratory mix trials were conducted using the materials obtained from the ground
investigation boreholes sunk in the trial areas and elsewhere on the site. Sample investigation boreholes sunk in the trial areas and elsewhere on the site. Sample
preparation of the laboratory mixed material was undertaken in general accordance preparation of the laboratory mixed material was undertaken in general accordance

with the EuroSoilStab Laboratory procedure for test samples (column application), with the EuroSoilStab Laboratory procedure for test samples (column application),
using Portland Cement (BSEN 197-1 CEM1) as the binder in the following dosages: using Portland Cement (BSEN 197-1 CEM1) as the binder in the following dosages:
 150 kg/m3, 200 kg/m3, 250 kg/m3 and 300 kg/m3; and  150 kg/m3, 200 kg/m3, 250 kg/m3 and 300 kg/m3; and
It was also recognised that organic soils can react better to a slag-cement binder It was also recognised that organic soils can react better to a slag-cement binder
than cement only treatment. However, in this instance, a pre-blended mix of assured than cement only treatment. However, in this instance, a pre-blended mix of assured
consistent quality could not be procured at a commercially acceptable rate, hence a consistent quality could not be procured at a commercially acceptable rate, hence a
cement only binder was adopted. cement only binder was adopted.
The samples were prepared with a tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for The samples were prepared with a tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for
preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment consists of a large bowl with a tool that preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment consists of a large bowl with a tool that
rotates within the bowl. The mixer had four blades and a rotation of around 70 rpm. rotates within the bowl. The mixer had four blades and a rotation of around 70 rpm.
In total 205 cylindrical samples were prepared and then tested at the ages of 1, 3, 7, In total 205 cylindrical samples were prepared and then tested at the ages of 1, 3, 7,
14, 28 and 90 days following mixing. 14, 28 and 90 days following mixing.
The laboratory strength of the mixed material was derived from multistage The laboratory strength of the mixed material was derived from multistage
undrained triaxial compression tests in accordance with British Standard 1377: Part undrained triaxial compression tests in accordance with British Standard 1377: Part
7: 1990 Methods of test for soil for civil engineering purposes. The multistage 7: 1990 Methods of test for soil for civil engineering purposes. The multistage
triaxial tests were undertaken at cell pressures of 50 kPa, 100 kPa and 150 kPa. triaxial tests were undertaken at cell pressures of 50 kPa, 100 kPa and 150 kPa.
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Laboratory test data for Peat Laboratory test data for Peat
A total of 135 tests were undertaken on Peat mixed with varying cement dosages. A total of 135 tests were undertaken on Peat mixed with varying cement dosages.
A summary of the undrained shear strength results is presented in Table 2. A summary of the undrained shear strength results is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Summary of range of laboratory strength data for Peat and Clay. Table 2. Summary of range of laboratory strength data for Peat and Clay.
Soil Binder 1 day 3 day 7 day 14 day 28 day 90 day Soil Binder 1 day 3 day 7 day 14 day 28 day 90 day
type dosage strength strength strength strength strength strength type dosage strength strength strength strength strength strength
(kg/m3) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kg/m3) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
Peat 150 30 - 41 45 - 56 61 - 74 53 - 66 63 - 81 63 - 77 Peat 150 30 - 41 45 - 56 61 - 74 53 - 66 63 - 81 63 - 77
Clay 150 - - 128 - 173 98 - 159 99 - 134 64 - 77 Clay 150 - - 128 - 173 98 - 159 99 - 134 64 - 77
Peat 200 42 - 63 85 - 101 90 - 133 87 - 119 88 - 131 69 - 87 Peat 200 42 - 63 85 - 101 90 - 133 87 - 119 88 - 131 69 - 87
Clay 200 - - 106 - 134 214 - 252 299 - 362 - Clay 200 - - 106 - 134 214 - 252 299 - 362 -
Peat 250 50 - 83 110 - 153 121 - 162 122 - 179 116 - 148 100 - 132 Peat 250 50 - 83 110 - 153 121 - 162 122 - 179 116 - 148 100 - 132
Clay 250 - - 227 - 276 323 - 430 576 - 674 - Clay 250 - - 227 - 276 323 - 430 576 - 674 -
Peat 300 31 - 40 40 - 48 90 - 132 117 - 163 191 - 235 189 - 235 Peat 300 31 - 40 40 - 48 90 - 132 117 - 163 191 - 235 189 - 235
Clay 300 - - 475 - 532 284 - 332 346 - 375 - Clay 300 - - 475 - 532 284 - 332 346 - 375 -
The following points can be identified from the testing: The following points can be identified from the testing:
 in general terms with increasing cement content, the higher the undrained shear  in general terms with increasing cement content, the higher the undrained shear
strength. The exception to this is with the 300 kg/m3 mix where a delayed initial strength. The exception to this is with the 300 kg/m3 mix where a delayed initial
reaction occurred with the lowest 3, 7 and 14 day strengths. Thereafter the long reaction occurred with the lowest 3, 7 and 14 day strengths. Thereafter the long
term strengths were the highest; term strengths were the highest;
 with the exception of the samples with 300 kg/m3 of cement, the majority of the  with the exception of the samples with 300 kg/m3 of cement, the majority of the
strength gain occurred during the first 7 days after mixing. Post 7 days mixing the strength gain occurred during the first 7 days after mixing. Post 7 days mixing the
strength gain is limited and there is no indication of a second stage chemical strength gain is limited and there is no indication of a second stage chemical
reaction. In comparison between 28 and 90 day strengths there is little difference, reaction. In comparison between 28 and 90 day strengths there is little difference,
although slightly surprising, the long term strengths at 90 days are generally although slightly surprising, the long term strengths at 90 days are generally
lower than the corresponding 28 day strengths. This is considered to be related to lower than the corresponding 28 day strengths. This is considered to be related to
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
with the EuroSoilStab Laboratory procedure for test samples (column application), with the EuroSoilStab Laboratory procedure for test samples (column application),
using Portland Cement (BSEN 197-1 CEM1) as the binder in the following dosages: using Portland Cement (BSEN 197-1 CEM1) as the binder in the following dosages:
 150 kg/m3, 200 kg/m3, 250 kg/m3 and 300 kg/m3; and  150 kg/m3, 200 kg/m3, 250 kg/m3 and 300 kg/m3; and
It was also recognised that organic soils can react better to a slag-cement binder It was also recognised that organic soils can react better to a slag-cement binder
than cement only treatment. However, in this instance, a pre-blended mix of assured than cement only treatment. However, in this instance, a pre-blended mix of assured
consistent quality could not be procured at a commercially acceptable rate, hence a consistent quality could not be procured at a commercially acceptable rate, hence a
cement only binder was adopted. cement only binder was adopted.
The samples were prepared with a tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for The samples were prepared with a tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for
preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment consists of a large bowl with a tool that preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment consists of a large bowl with a tool that
rotates within the bowl. The mixer had four blades and a rotation of around 70 rpm. rotates within the bowl. The mixer had four blades and a rotation of around 70 rpm.
In total 205 cylindrical samples were prepared and then tested at the ages of 1, 3, 7, In total 205 cylindrical samples were prepared and then tested at the ages of 1, 3, 7,
14, 28 and 90 days following mixing. 14, 28 and 90 days following mixing.
The laboratory strength of the mixed material was derived from multistage The laboratory strength of the mixed material was derived from multistage
undrained triaxial compression tests in accordance with British Standard 1377: Part undrained triaxial compression tests in accordance with British Standard 1377: Part
7: 1990 Methods of test for soil for civil engineering purposes. The multistage 7: 1990 Methods of test for soil for civil engineering purposes. The multistage
triaxial tests were undertaken at cell pressures of 50 kPa, 100 kPa and 150 kPa. triaxial tests were undertaken at cell pressures of 50 kPa, 100 kPa and 150 kPa.
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Laboratory test data for Peat Laboratory test data for Peat
A total of 135 tests were undertaken on Peat mixed with varying cement dosages. A total of 135 tests were undertaken on Peat mixed with varying cement dosages.
A summary of the undrained shear strength results is presented in Table 2. A summary of the undrained shear strength results is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Summary of range of laboratory strength data for Peat and Clay. Table 2. Summary of range of laboratory strength data for Peat and Clay.
Soil Binder 1 day 3 day 7 day 14 day 28 day 90 day Soil Binder 1 day 3 day 7 day 14 day 28 day 90 day
type dosage strength strength strength strength strength strength type dosage strength strength strength strength strength strength
(kg/m3) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kg/m3) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
Peat 150 30 - 41 45 - 56 61 - 74 53 - 66 63 - 81 63 - 77 Peat 150 30 - 41 45 - 56 61 - 74 53 - 66 63 - 81 63 - 77
Clay 150 - - 128 - 173 98 - 159 99 - 134 64 - 77 Clay 150 - - 128 - 173 98 - 159 99 - 134 64 - 77
Peat 200 42 - 63 85 - 101 90 - 133 87 - 119 88 - 131 69 - 87 Peat 200 42 - 63 85 - 101 90 - 133 87 - 119 88 - 131 69 - 87
Clay 200 - - 106 - 134 214 - 252 299 - 362 - Clay 200 - - 106 - 134 214 - 252 299 - 362 -
Peat 250 50 - 83 110 - 153 121 - 162 122 - 179 116 - 148 100 - 132 Peat 250 50 - 83 110 - 153 121 - 162 122 - 179 116 - 148 100 - 132
Clay 250 - - 227 - 276 323 - 430 576 - 674 - Clay 250 - - 227 - 276 323 - 430 576 - 674 -
Peat 300 31 - 40 40 - 48 90 - 132 117 - 163 191 - 235 189 - 235 Peat 300 31 - 40 40 - 48 90 - 132 117 - 163 191 - 235 189 - 235
Clay 300 - - 475 - 532 284 - 332 346 - 375 - Clay 300 - - 475 - 532 284 - 332 346 - 375 -
The following points can be identified from the testing: The following points can be identified from the testing:
 in general terms with increasing cement content, the higher the undrained shear  in general terms with increasing cement content, the higher the undrained shear
strength. The exception to this is with the 300 kg/m3 mix where a delayed initial strength. The exception to this is with the 300 kg/m3 mix where a delayed initial
reaction occurred with the lowest 3, 7 and 14 day strengths. Thereafter the long reaction occurred with the lowest 3, 7 and 14 day strengths. Thereafter the long
term strengths were the highest; term strengths were the highest;
 with the exception of the samples with 300 kg/m3 of cement, the majority of the  with the exception of the samples with 300 kg/m3 of cement, the majority of the
strength gain occurred during the first 7 days after mixing. Post 7 days mixing the strength gain occurred during the first 7 days after mixing. Post 7 days mixing the
strength gain is limited and there is no indication of a second stage chemical strength gain is limited and there is no indication of a second stage chemical
reaction. In comparison between 28 and 90 day strengths there is little difference, reaction. In comparison between 28 and 90 day strengths there is little difference,
although slightly surprising, the long term strengths at 90 days are generally although slightly surprising, the long term strengths at 90 days are generally
lower than the corresponding 28 day strengths. This is considered to be related to lower than the corresponding 28 day strengths. This is considered to be related to

the change in material properties with age. At a young age the mixed material the change in material properties with age. At a young age the mixed material
fails in a ductile manner, with compression and bulging during testing. With fails in a ductile manner, with compression and bulging during testing. With
increasing age the material became more brittle with compound ductile and increasing age the material became more brittle with compound ductile and
brittle failure and in the long term, the predominant mechanism was a brittle brittle failure and in the long term, the predominant mechanism was a brittle
failure; and failure; and
 the scatter in strength data for a particular binder dosage increases with  the scatter in strength data for a particular binder dosage increases with
increasing cement content. increasing cement content.
In Figure 2 the material strength data is plotted with respect to the water cement In Figure 2 the material strength data is plotted with respect to the water cement
ratio. The data points represent the average of the strengths and water cement ratio’s ratio. The data points represent the average of the strengths and water cement ratio’s
at the different ages of testing, although for reasons of clarity, the age at testing is not at the different ages of testing, although for reasons of clarity, the age at testing is not
distinguished. The figure illustrates that with increasing cement content (i.e. lower distinguished. The figure illustrates that with increasing cement content (i.e. lower
water:cement ratio) there is a progressive increase in the undrained shear strength of water:cement ratio) there is a progressive increase in the undrained shear strength of
the treated material. the treated material.
700 700
600 Peat 150 kg/m3 600 Peat 150 kg/m3
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Peat 200 kg/m3 Peat 200 kg/m3
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Shear Strength (kPa)

500 500
Clay 150 kg/m3 Clay 150 kg/m3
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Water Cement Ratio (%) Water Cement Ratio (%)
FIG. 2. Plot of undrained shear strength versus water cement ratio for Peat and FIG. 2. Plot of undrained shear strength versus water cement ratio for Peat and
Clay samples. Clay samples.
Laboratory test data for Clay Laboratory test data for Clay
A total of 70 tests were undertaken on Clay mixed with varying cement dosages. A A total of 70 tests were undertaken on Clay mixed with varying cement dosages. A
summary of the undrained shear strength test results is also presented in Table 2. The summary of the undrained shear strength test results is also presented in Table 2. The
following points can be identified from the testing: following points can be identified from the testing:
 in general, with increasing cement content, the higher the shear strength;  in general, with increasing cement content, the higher the shear strength;
 the samples mixed with 200 kg/m3 and 250 kg/m3 both illustrated progressive  the samples mixed with 200 kg/m3 and 250 kg/m3 both illustrated progressive
strength gain with age. However, the samples mixed with 150 kg/m3 illustrated a strength gain with age. However, the samples mixed with 150 kg/m3 illustrated a
progressive reduction in strength with age. For the 150 kg/m3 samples, there was progressive reduction in strength with age. For the 150 kg/m3 samples, there was
a loss of strength of around 50% between the 7 day and 90 day strengths. The a loss of strength of around 50% between the 7 day and 90 day strengths. The
300 kg/m3 samples also exhibited a reduction in strength with age, with a sharp 300 kg/m3 samples also exhibited a reduction in strength with age, with a sharp
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
the change in material properties with age. At a young age the mixed material the change in material properties with age. At a young age the mixed material
fails in a ductile manner, with compression and bulging during testing. With fails in a ductile manner, with compression and bulging during testing. With
increasing age the material became more brittle with compound ductile and increasing age the material became more brittle with compound ductile and
brittle failure and in the long term, the predominant mechanism was a brittle brittle failure and in the long term, the predominant mechanism was a brittle
failure; and failure; and
 the scatter in strength data for a particular binder dosage increases with  the scatter in strength data for a particular binder dosage increases with
increasing cement content. increasing cement content.
In Figure 2 the material strength data is plotted with respect to the water cement In Figure 2 the material strength data is plotted with respect to the water cement
ratio. The data points represent the average of the strengths and water cement ratio’s ratio. The data points represent the average of the strengths and water cement ratio’s
at the different ages of testing, although for reasons of clarity, the age at testing is not at the different ages of testing, although for reasons of clarity, the age at testing is not
distinguished. The figure illustrates that with increasing cement content (i.e. lower distinguished. The figure illustrates that with increasing cement content (i.e. lower
water:cement ratio) there is a progressive increase in the undrained shear strength of water:cement ratio) there is a progressive increase in the undrained shear strength of
700 700
600 Peat 150 kg/m3 600 Peat 150 kg/m3

Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40

500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Water Cement Ratio (%) Water Cement Ratio (%)
FIG. 2. Plot of undrained shear strength versus water cement ratio for Peat and FIG. 2. Plot of undrained shear strength versus water cement ratio for Peat and
Clay samples. Clay samples.
Laboratory test data for Clay Laboratory test data for Clay
A total of 70 tests were undertaken on Clay mixed with varying cement dosages. A A total of 70 tests were undertaken on Clay mixed with varying cement dosages. A
summary of the undrained shear strength test results is also presented in Table 2. The summary of the undrained shear strength test results is also presented in Table 2. The
following points can be identified from the testing: following points can be identified from the testing:
 in general, with increasing cement content, the higher the shear strength;  in general, with increasing cement content, the higher the shear strength;
 the samples mixed with 200 kg/m3 and 250 kg/m3 both illustrated progressive  the samples mixed with 200 kg/m3 and 250 kg/m3 both illustrated progressive
strength gain with age. However, the samples mixed with 150 kg/m3 illustrated a strength gain with age. However, the samples mixed with 150 kg/m3 illustrated a
progressive reduction in strength with age. For the 150 kg/m3 samples, there was progressive reduction in strength with age. For the 150 kg/m3 samples, there was
a loss of strength of around 50% between the 7 day and 90 day strengths. The a loss of strength of around 50% between the 7 day and 90 day strengths. The
300 kg/m3 samples also exhibited a reduction in strength with age, with a sharp 300 kg/m3 samples also exhibited a reduction in strength with age, with a sharp

fall between 7 and 14 days, rising thereafter to 28 days. It is not clear why this fall between 7 and 14 days, rising thereafter to 28 days. It is not clear why this
should have been the case, although it was noted that 7 day 300 kg/m3 samples should have been the case, although it was noted that 7 day 300 kg/m3 samples
were tested at an axial displacement rate of between 0.74 %/min and 0.77 %/min were tested at an axial displacement rate of between 0.74 %/min and 0.77 %/min
as opposed to a rate of 1.8 %/min to 2.0 %/min for all the other samples. as opposed to a rate of 1.8 %/min to 2.0 %/min for all the other samples.
In Figure 2 the strength data is also plotted with respect to the water:cement ratio. In Figure 2 the strength data is also plotted with respect to the water:cement ratio.
As with the Peat material, the lower the water:cement ratio the higher the strength of As with the Peat material, the lower the water:cement ratio the higher the strength of
FIELD TRIALS FIELD TRIALS

The intent of the field trial was to test the preferred binder dosages derived from The intent of the field trial was to test the preferred binder dosages derived from
the laboratory trials and confirm the field strength achieved in areas dominated by the laboratory trials and confirm the field strength achieved in areas dominated by
both Peat and Clay. The field trials were split into the ‘Peat trial area’ and ‘Clay trial both Peat and Clay. The field trials were split into the ‘Peat trial area’ and ‘Clay trial
area’, although the majority of the trial works were undertaken in the ‘Peat trial area’ area’, although the majority of the trial works were undertaken in the ‘Peat trial area’
as this material was both more prevalent across the site and less receptive to as this material was both more prevalent across the site and less receptive to
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
treatment with cement than the Clay. treatment with cement than the Clay.
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cement mixing tool and blade rotation number Cement mixing tool and blade rotation number
The cement mixing tool comprised six blades and the columns were installed such The cement mixing tool comprised six blades and the columns were installed such
that an average blade rotation number (as defined by CEN TC 288 Execution of that an average blade rotation number (as defined by CEN TC 288 Execution of
special geotechnical works – deep mixing) of at least 200 revolutions per metre for special geotechnical works – deep mixing) of at least 200 revolutions per metre for
clays and between 200 and 400 in peat, was achieved. A minimum tool rotation clays and between 200 and 400 in peat, was achieved. A minimum tool rotation
speed of 120 revolutions per minute was also required. No assessment was made of speed of 120 revolutions per minute was also required. No assessment was made of
the influence of varying either the blade rotation number or lift speed on the the influence of varying either the blade rotation number or lift speed on the
undrained shear strength of the soilmix material. undrained shear strength of the soilmix material.
Assessment of dry soilmix column strength from ColPT and RColPT testing Assessment of dry soilmix column strength from ColPT and RColPT testing
A total of forty six vane column penetration tests were undertaken within the A total of forty six vane column penetration tests were undertaken within the
soilmix columns through both Peat and Clay materials, comprising column push in soilmix columns through both Peat and Clay materials, comprising column push in
tests (ColPT) and reverse column or pull out tests (RColPT). The testing was tests (ColPT) and reverse column or pull out tests (RColPT). The testing was
undertaken in accordance with Section 2, Appendix B of SGF Report 4:95E. The undertaken in accordance with Section 2, Appendix B of SGF Report 4:95E. The
force required to either push in or pull out the vane was then converted into an force required to either push in or pull out the vane was then converted into an
undrained shear strength for the mixed material based upon an Nk value of 10 and a undrained shear strength for the mixed material based upon an Nk value of 10 and a
vane surface area of 0.0072 m2 for the ColPT and 0.007 m2 for the RColPT’s. vane surface area of 0.0072 m2 for the ColPT and 0.007 m2 for the RColPT’s.
Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT and RColPT Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT and RColPT
testing testing
A series of twenty eight column penetration tests and ten reverse column tests were A series of twenty eight column penetration tests and ten reverse column tests were
undertaken within the soilmix columns in Peat, details of which are summarised undertaken within the soilmix columns in Peat, details of which are summarised
below: below:
 225 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 tests at 7 and 15 days;  225 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 tests at 7 and 15 days;
 275 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 tests at 3, 7 and 14 days; and  275 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 tests at 3, 7 and 14 days; and
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
fall between 7 and 14 days, rising thereafter to 28 days. It is not clear why this fall between 7 and 14 days, rising thereafter to 28 days. It is not clear why this
should have been the case, although it was noted that 7 day 300 kg/m3 samples should have been the case, although it was noted that 7 day 300 kg/m3 samples
were tested at an axial displacement rate of between 0.74 %/min and 0.77 %/min were tested at an axial displacement rate of between 0.74 %/min and 0.77 %/min
as opposed to a rate of 1.8 %/min to 2.0 %/min for all the other samples. as opposed to a rate of 1.8 %/min to 2.0 %/min for all the other samples.
In Figure 2 the strength data is also plotted with respect to the water:cement ratio. In Figure 2 the strength data is also plotted with respect to the water:cement ratio.
As with the Peat material, the lower the water:cement ratio the higher the strength of As with the Peat material, the lower the water:cement ratio the higher the strength of
FIELD TRIALS FIELD TRIALS

The intent of the field trial was to test the preferred binder dosages derived from The intent of the field trial was to test the preferred binder dosages derived from
the laboratory trials and confirm the field strength achieved in areas dominated by the laboratory trials and confirm the field strength achieved in areas dominated by
both Peat and Clay. The field trials were split into the ‘Peat trial area’ and ‘Clay trial both Peat and Clay. The field trials were split into the ‘Peat trial area’ and ‘Clay trial
area’, although the majority of the trial works were undertaken in the ‘Peat trial area’ area’, although the majority of the trial works were undertaken in the ‘Peat trial area’
as this material was both more prevalent across the site and less receptive to as this material was both more prevalent across the site and less receptive to
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
treatment with cement than the Clay. treatment with cement than the Clay.
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cement mixing tool and blade rotation number Cement mixing tool and blade rotation number
The cement mixing tool comprised six blades and the columns were installed such The cement mixing tool comprised six blades and the columns were installed such
that an average blade rotation number (as defined by CEN TC 288 Execution of that an average blade rotation number (as defined by CEN TC 288 Execution of
special geotechnical works – deep mixing) of at least 200 revolutions per metre for special geotechnical works – deep mixing) of at least 200 revolutions per metre for
clays and between 200 and 400 in peat, was achieved. A minimum tool rotation clays and between 200 and 400 in peat, was achieved. A minimum tool rotation
speed of 120 revolutions per minute was also required. No assessment was made of speed of 120 revolutions per minute was also required. No assessment was made of
the influence of varying either the blade rotation number or lift speed on the the influence of varying either the blade rotation number or lift speed on the
undrained shear strength of the soilmix material. undrained shear strength of the soilmix material.
Assessment of dry soilmix column strength from ColPT and RColPT testing Assessment of dry soilmix column strength from ColPT and RColPT testing
A total of forty six vane column penetration tests were undertaken within the A total of forty six vane column penetration tests were undertaken within the
soilmix columns through both Peat and Clay materials, comprising column push in soilmix columns through both Peat and Clay materials, comprising column push in
tests (ColPT) and reverse column or pull out tests (RColPT). The testing was tests (ColPT) and reverse column or pull out tests (RColPT). The testing was
undertaken in accordance with Section 2, Appendix B of SGF Report 4:95E. The undertaken in accordance with Section 2, Appendix B of SGF Report 4:95E. The
force required to either push in or pull out the vane was then converted into an force required to either push in or pull out the vane was then converted into an
undrained shear strength for the mixed material based upon an Nk value of 10 and a undrained shear strength for the mixed material based upon an Nk value of 10 and a
vane surface area of 0.0072 m2 for the ColPT and 0.007 m2 for the RColPT’s. vane surface area of 0.0072 m2 for the ColPT and 0.007 m2 for the RColPT’s.
Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT and RColPT Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT and RColPT
testing testing
A series of twenty eight column penetration tests and ten reverse column tests were A series of twenty eight column penetration tests and ten reverse column tests were
undertaken within the soilmix columns in Peat, details of which are summarised undertaken within the soilmix columns in Peat, details of which are summarised
below: below:
 275 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 tests at 3, 7 and 14 days; and  275 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 tests at 3, 7 and 14 days; and

 275 kg/m3 – RColPT’s 5 tests at 3 and 7 days (note, three tests failed as either the  275 kg/m3 – RColPT’s 5 tests at 3 and 7 days (note, three tests failed as either the
vane could not be pulled through the column or the vane strand snapped during vane could not be pulled through the column or the vane strand snapped during
pull-out). pull-out).
The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure 3. The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure 3.
The figure shows the average of the four or five tests undertaken on a particular The figure shows the average of the four or five tests undertaken on a particular
binder dosage at 3, 7, 14 or 15 days. binder dosage at 3, 7, 14 or 15 days.
The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figures 3: The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figures 3:
 the averaged undrained shear strength results are largely within the range of  the averaged undrained shear strength results are largely within the range of
around 160 kPa to 260 kPa, irrespective of the binder dosage. Indeed, there is around 160 kPa to 260 kPa, irrespective of the binder dosage. Indeed, there is
little discernable difference in undrained shear strength between the three little discernable difference in undrained shear strength between the three
differing binder dosages, although a binder dosage of 225 kg/m3 yields the lower differing binder dosages, although a binder dosage of 225 kg/m3 yields the lower
results and the binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the higher values; results and the binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the higher values;
 with respect to undrained shear strength and age of testing, again there is little  with respect to undrained shear strength and age of testing, again there is little
discernable difference in undrained shear strength with age over the 14/15 day discernable difference in undrained shear strength with age over the 14/15 day
period that the testing was undertaken. Initial strength was rapid with little period that the testing was undertaken. Initial strength was rapid with little
strength gain after 3 to 7 days; and strength gain after 3 to 7 days; and
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
 for the soilmix columns with a binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the RColPT’s derived  for the soilmix columns with a binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the RColPT’s derived
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
slightly lower undrained shear strengths compared with the ColPT’s. slightly lower undrained shear strengths compared with the ColPT’s.
2 2
Undrained shear stength (kN/m ) Undrained shear stength (kN/m )
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500
1.0 1.0
1.5 ColPT 225 at 7 days 1.5 ColPT 225 at 7 days

ColPT 225 at 15 days ColPT 225 at 15 days
Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
RColPT 275 at 3 days RColPT 275 at 3 days
3.5 RColPT 275 at 7 days 3.5 RColPT 275 at 7 days
4.0 4.0
3 3
Cement contents in kg/m Cement contents in kg/m
4.5 4.5
FIG. 3. Soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT’s and RColPT’s. FIG. 3. Soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT’s and RColPT’s.
Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Clay from ColPT testing Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Clay from ColPT testing
A series of eight column penetration tests were undertaken within the soilmix A series of eight column penetration tests were undertaken within the soilmix
columns in Clay, details of which are summarised below: columns in Clay, details of which are summarised below:
 150 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 7 days; and  150 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 7 days; and
 250 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 13 days.  250 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 13 days.
The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
 275 kg/m3 – RColPT’s 5 tests at 3 and 7 days (note, three tests failed as either the  275 kg/m3 – RColPT’s 5 tests at 3 and 7 days (note, three tests failed as either the
vane could not be pulled through the column or the vane strand snapped during vane could not be pulled through the column or the vane strand snapped during
pull-out). pull-out).
The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure 3. The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure 3.
The figure shows the average of the four or five tests undertaken on a particular The figure shows the average of the four or five tests undertaken on a particular
binder dosage at 3, 7, 14 or 15 days. binder dosage at 3, 7, 14 or 15 days.
The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figures 3: The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figures 3:
 the averaged undrained shear strength results are largely within the range of  the averaged undrained shear strength results are largely within the range of
around 160 kPa to 260 kPa, irrespective of the binder dosage. Indeed, there is around 160 kPa to 260 kPa, irrespective of the binder dosage. Indeed, there is
little discernable difference in undrained shear strength between the three little discernable difference in undrained shear strength between the three
differing binder dosages, although a binder dosage of 225 kg/m3 yields the lower differing binder dosages, although a binder dosage of 225 kg/m3 yields the lower
results and the binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the higher values; results and the binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the higher values;
 with respect to undrained shear strength and age of testing, again there is little  with respect to undrained shear strength and age of testing, again there is little
discernable difference in undrained shear strength with age over the 14/15 day discernable difference in undrained shear strength with age over the 14/15 day
period that the testing was undertaken. Initial strength was rapid with little period that the testing was undertaken. Initial strength was rapid with little
strength gain after 3 to 7 days; and strength gain after 3 to 7 days; and
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
 for the soilmix columns with a binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the RColPT’s derived  for the soilmix columns with a binder dosage of 275 kg/m3 the RColPT’s derived
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
slightly lower undrained shear strengths compared with the ColPT’s. slightly lower undrained shear strengths compared with the ColPT’s.
2 2
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500
1.0 1.0

Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)

RColPT 275 at 3 days RColPT 275 at 3 days
3.5 RColPT 275 at 7 days 3.5 RColPT 275 at 7 days
4.0 4.0
3 3
Cement contents in kg/m Cement contents in kg/m
4.5 4.5
FIG. 3. Soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT’s and RColPT’s. FIG. 3. Soilmix column strength in Peat from ColPT’s and RColPT’s.
Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Clay from ColPT testing Assessment of dry soilmix column strength in Clay from ColPT testing
A series of eight column penetration tests were undertaken within the soilmix A series of eight column penetration tests were undertaken within the soilmix
columns in Clay, details of which are summarised below: columns in Clay, details of which are summarised below:
 150 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 7 days; and  150 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 7 days; and
 250 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 13 days.  250 kg/m3 – ColPT’s 4 at 13 days.
The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure The undrained shear strength profiles from these tests are summarised on Figure

4. The figure shows the average of the four tests undertaken on a particular binder 4. The figure shows the average of the four tests undertaken on a particular binder
dosage at either 7 or 13 days. dosage at either 7 or 13 days.
The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figure 4. The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figure 4.
However it is noted that there are only two data sets for the soilmix columns in Clay However it is noted that there are only two data sets for the soilmix columns in Clay
hence fewer definitive conclusions can be drawn: hence fewer definitive conclusions can be drawn:
 the strength profiles with depth are very similar for both sets of data, with  the strength profiles with depth are very similar for both sets of data, with
undrained shear strengths generally in the range of 200 kPa to 600 kPa. The undrained shear strengths generally in the range of 200 kPa to 600 kPa. The
exception to this being from 1.0 metre to 2.0 metres below ground level where exception to this being from 1.0 metre to 2.0 metres below ground level where
the undrained shear strengths dipped to around 100 kPa. Although not identified the undrained shear strengths dipped to around 100 kPa. Although not identified
by the ground investigations in the ‘Clay trial area’ this maybe a reflection of a by the ground investigations in the ‘Clay trial area’ this maybe a reflection of a
higher organic content within the Clay. Conversely, this may be due to presence higher organic content within the Clay. Conversely, this may be due to presence
of a firm clay desiccated crust with a lower moisture content insufficient to of a firm clay desiccated crust with a lower moisture content insufficient to
hydrate the cement binder, or a less thorough mixing of the firm clay; and hydrate the cement binder, or a less thorough mixing of the firm clay; and
 the highest strengths are derived from the columns with a cement dosage of 150  the highest strengths are derived from the columns with a cement dosage of 150
kg/m3 as opposed to the tests on materials with 200 kg/m3. This may however be kg/m3 as opposed to the tests on materials with 200 kg/m3. This may however be
a function of the age at which the materials were tested. The 150 kg/m3 soilmix a function of the age at which the materials were tested. The 150 kg/m3 soilmix
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
columns were tested at 13 days as opposed to 7 days for the 200 kg/m3 soilmix columns were tested at 13 days as opposed to 7 days for the 200 kg/m3 soilmix
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
columns. Testing at 13 days on the 200 kg/m3 soilmix columns was not columns. Testing at 13 days on the 200 kg/m3 soilmix columns was not
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
undertaken due to the perceived risk that the columns would be inherently too undertaken due to the perceived risk that the columns would be inherently too
strong at 13 days to allow successful testing to be undertaken. strong at 13 days to allow successful testing to be undertaken.
2 2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
1 1
2 2
3 Clay ColPT 150 3 Clay ColPT 150

Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
kg/m3 at 13 days kg/m3 at 13 days
5 5
6 6
7 7
FIG. 4. Soilmix column strengths in Clay from ColPT’s FIG. 4. Soilmix column strengths in Clay from ColPT’s
CONCLUSIONS FROM THE LABORATORY AND FIELD TRIALS CONCLUSIONS FROM THE LABORATORY AND FIELD TRIALS
The intent of the laboratory trial was to identify the optimum binder dosage to use The intent of the laboratory trial was to identify the optimum binder dosage to use
in the field trial areas that were predominantly either Peat or Clay and binder dosages in the field trial areas that were predominantly either Peat or Clay and binder dosages
to attain the design strengths. The aim of the field trial was confirm the binder to attain the design strengths. The aim of the field trial was confirm the binder
dosage for the permanent works embankment stabilisation. This section provides dosage for the permanent works embankment stabilisation. This section provides
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
4. The figure shows the average of the four tests undertaken on a particular binder 4. The figure shows the average of the four tests undertaken on a particular binder
dosage at either 7 or 13 days. dosage at either 7 or 13 days.
The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figure 4. The following comments can be made regarding the data plotted on Figure 4.
However it is noted that there are only two data sets for the soilmix columns in Clay However it is noted that there are only two data sets for the soilmix columns in Clay
hence fewer definitive conclusions can be drawn: hence fewer definitive conclusions can be drawn:
 the strength profiles with depth are very similar for both sets of data, with  the strength profiles with depth are very similar for both sets of data, with
undrained shear strengths generally in the range of 200 kPa to 600 kPa. The undrained shear strengths generally in the range of 200 kPa to 600 kPa. The
exception to this being from 1.0 metre to 2.0 metres below ground level where exception to this being from 1.0 metre to 2.0 metres below ground level where
the undrained shear strengths dipped to around 100 kPa. Although not identified the undrained shear strengths dipped to around 100 kPa. Although not identified
by the ground investigations in the ‘Clay trial area’ this maybe a reflection of a by the ground investigations in the ‘Clay trial area’ this maybe a reflection of a
higher organic content within the Clay. Conversely, this may be due to presence higher organic content within the Clay. Conversely, this may be due to presence
of a firm clay desiccated crust with a lower moisture content insufficient to of a firm clay desiccated crust with a lower moisture content insufficient to
hydrate the cement binder, or a less thorough mixing of the firm clay; and hydrate the cement binder, or a less thorough mixing of the firm clay; and
 the highest strengths are derived from the columns with a cement dosage of 150  the highest strengths are derived from the columns with a cement dosage of 150
kg/m3 as opposed to the tests on materials with 200 kg/m3. This may however be kg/m3 as opposed to the tests on materials with 200 kg/m3. This may however be
a function of the age at which the materials were tested. The 150 kg/m3 soilmix a function of the age at which the materials were tested. The 150 kg/m3 soilmix
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
columns were tested at 13 days as opposed to 7 days for the 200 kg/m3 soilmix columns were tested at 13 days as opposed to 7 days for the 200 kg/m3 soilmix
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
columns. Testing at 13 days on the 200 kg/m3 soilmix columns was not columns. Testing at 13 days on the 200 kg/m3 soilmix columns was not
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
undertaken due to the perceived risk that the columns would be inherently too undertaken due to the perceived risk that the columns would be inherently too
strong at 13 days to allow successful testing to be undertaken. strong at 13 days to allow successful testing to be undertaken.
2 2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
1 1
2 2

Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)

5 5
6 6
7 7
FIG. 4. Soilmix column strengths in Clay from ColPT’s FIG. 4. Soilmix column strengths in Clay from ColPT’s
CONCLUSIONS FROM THE LABORATORY AND FIELD TRIALS CONCLUSIONS FROM THE LABORATORY AND FIELD TRIALS
The intent of the laboratory trial was to identify the optimum binder dosage to use The intent of the laboratory trial was to identify the optimum binder dosage to use
in the field trial areas that were predominantly either Peat or Clay and binder dosages in the field trial areas that were predominantly either Peat or Clay and binder dosages
to attain the design strengths. The aim of the field trial was confirm the binder to attain the design strengths. The aim of the field trial was confirm the binder
dosage for the permanent works embankment stabilisation. This section provides dosage for the permanent works embankment stabilisation. This section provides

concluding remarks on the findings of the field and laboratory testing. concluding remarks on the findings of the field and laboratory testing.
It has been noted elsewhere in the published literature (e.g. Terashi 2005, It has been noted elsewhere in the published literature (e.g. Terashi 2005,
EuroSoilStab and Kitazume et al. 2002) that the chemical reactions between a EuroSoilStab and Kitazume et al. 2002) that the chemical reactions between a
cement binder and Peat or Clay will yield differing material strengths for the same cement binder and Peat or Clay will yield differing material strengths for the same
binder content and this, as expected, has been confirmed by the findings of the binder content and this, as expected, has been confirmed by the findings of the
soilmix trials both in the laboratory and in the field. Strength gain by the introduction soilmix trials both in the laboratory and in the field. Strength gain by the introduction
of the cement binder is significantly more effective in Clay materials that have of the cement binder is significantly more effective in Clay materials that have
relatively lower moisture contents in comparison to the Peat which had much higher relatively lower moisture contents in comparison to the Peat which had much higher
moisture contents. The difference in organic content between the Clay and Peat will moisture contents. The difference in organic content between the Clay and Peat will
also invariably be a contributing factor to the difference in strengths. also invariably be a contributing factor to the difference in strengths.
It has also been demonstrated in laboratory testing (Åhnberg and Johansson (2005) It has also been demonstrated in laboratory testing (Åhnberg and Johansson (2005)
that there can be significant strength gain with age, although for the testing that there can be significant strength gain with age, although for the testing
undertaken for this project strength gains after 30 days with a cement only binder undertaken for this project strength gains after 30 days with a cement only binder
were negligible in Peat. It is not possible to draw a similar conclusion for the Clay as were negligible in Peat. It is not possible to draw a similar conclusion for the Clay as
only very limited long term testing was undertaken adopting a single binder dosage. only very limited long term testing was undertaken adopting a single binder dosage.
Furthermore the greater the binder dosage the greater the strength gain with age, Furthermore the greater the binder dosage the greater the strength gain with age,
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
although this is a non-linear relationship. although this is a non-linear relationship.
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
With regards to comparisons between laboratory and field testing, historic With regards to comparisons between laboratory and field testing, historic
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
published data shows that laboratory strengths are usually higher than field strengths, published data shows that laboratory strengths are usually higher than field strengths,
with laboratory strengths typically in the range of 2 to 3 times higher than field with laboratory strengths typically in the range of 2 to 3 times higher than field
strengths. For the Peat material with a binder dosage of 250 kg/m3, 14 day laboratory strengths. For the Peat material with a binder dosage of 250 kg/m3, 14 day laboratory
strengths were typically in the range of 140 kPa to 170 kPa, whilst the field strengths strengths were typically in the range of 140 kPa to 170 kPa, whilst the field strengths
were typically 200 kPa to 220 kPa. were typically 200 kPa to 220 kPa.
Likewise, for the Clay mixed samples, laboratory strengths at 7 days with a binder Likewise, for the Clay mixed samples, laboratory strengths at 7 days with a binder
content of 200 kg/m3 gave undrained shear strengths of between 106 kPa and 134 content of 200 kg/m3 gave undrained shear strengths of between 106 kPa and 134
kPa as opposed to field strengths of largely greater than 250 kPa. kPa as opposed to field strengths of largely greater than 250 kPa.
In general the following can be ascribed as influencing the ratio between the In general the following can be ascribed as influencing the ratio between the
laboratory and field strengths: laboratory and field strengths:
 relative mix energy used in the laboratory and the field;  relative mix energy used in the laboratory and the field;
 empirical correlations used to derive field strength from insitu testing;  empirical correlations used to derive field strength from insitu testing;
 the type of mixing undertaken;  the type of mixing undertaken;
 the confining pressure during curing in the laboratory and the field;  the confining pressure during curing in the laboratory and the field;
 the temperature during curing in the laboratory and the field; and  the temperature during curing in the laboratory and the field; and
 quantity of binder injected during mixing.  quantity of binder injected during mixing.
Of these factors the relative mix energy used in the laboratory and field trial and Of these factors the relative mix energy used in the laboratory and field trial and
quantity of binder injected during mixing are considered to have the greatest effects. quantity of binder injected during mixing are considered to have the greatest effects.
With respect to the mix energies, the laboratory samples were prepared with a With respect to the mix energies, the laboratory samples were prepared with a
tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment
consists of a large bowl with a tool that rotates within the bowl. Commercially consists of a large bowl with a tool that rotates within the bowl. Commercially
available mixing tools typically have four blades and can have a rotation of 70 rpm. available mixing tools typically have four blades and can have a rotation of 70 rpm.
Conversely, the field mixing tool has six blades and rotates at, at least 120 rpm. The Conversely, the field mixing tool has six blades and rotates at, at least 120 rpm. The
mixing energy in the field is therefore significantly greater than that experienced in mixing energy in the field is therefore significantly greater than that experienced in
the preparation of the laboratory samples. the preparation of the laboratory samples.
The mixing time was commensurate with the guidance given in EuroSoilStab The mixing time was commensurate with the guidance given in EuroSoilStab
(2002), on the basis that mixing was continued until visually the mixed material (2002), on the basis that mixing was continued until visually the mixed material
showed homogeneity or mixing undertaken for around 5 minutes. It is however noted showed homogeneity or mixing undertaken for around 5 minutes. It is however noted
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
concluding remarks on the findings of the field and laboratory testing. concluding remarks on the findings of the field and laboratory testing.
It has been noted elsewhere in the published literature (e.g. Terashi 2005, It has been noted elsewhere in the published literature (e.g. Terashi 2005,
EuroSoilStab and Kitazume et al. 2002) that the chemical reactions between a EuroSoilStab and Kitazume et al. 2002) that the chemical reactions between a
cement binder and Peat or Clay will yield differing material strengths for the same cement binder and Peat or Clay will yield differing material strengths for the same
binder content and this, as expected, has been confirmed by the findings of the binder content and this, as expected, has been confirmed by the findings of the
soilmix trials both in the laboratory and in the field. Strength gain by the introduction soilmix trials both in the laboratory and in the field. Strength gain by the introduction
of the cement binder is significantly more effective in Clay materials that have of the cement binder is significantly more effective in Clay materials that have
relatively lower moisture contents in comparison to the Peat which had much higher relatively lower moisture contents in comparison to the Peat which had much higher
moisture contents. The difference in organic content between the Clay and Peat will moisture contents. The difference in organic content between the Clay and Peat will
also invariably be a contributing factor to the difference in strengths. also invariably be a contributing factor to the difference in strengths.
It has also been demonstrated in laboratory testing (Åhnberg and Johansson (2005) It has also been demonstrated in laboratory testing (Åhnberg and Johansson (2005)
that there can be significant strength gain with age, although for the testing that there can be significant strength gain with age, although for the testing
undertaken for this project strength gains after 30 days with a cement only binder undertaken for this project strength gains after 30 days with a cement only binder
were negligible in Peat. It is not possible to draw a similar conclusion for the Clay as were negligible in Peat. It is not possible to draw a similar conclusion for the Clay as
only very limited long term testing was undertaken adopting a single binder dosage. only very limited long term testing was undertaken adopting a single binder dosage.
Furthermore the greater the binder dosage the greater the strength gain with age, Furthermore the greater the binder dosage the greater the strength gain with age,
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
although this is a non-linear relationship. although this is a non-linear relationship.

Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
With regards to comparisons between laboratory and field testing, historic With regards to comparisons between laboratory and field testing, historic
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
published data shows that laboratory strengths are usually higher than field strengths, published data shows that laboratory strengths are usually higher than field strengths,
with laboratory strengths typically in the range of 2 to 3 times higher than field with laboratory strengths typically in the range of 2 to 3 times higher than field
strengths. For the Peat material with a binder dosage of 250 kg/m3, 14 day laboratory strengths. For the Peat material with a binder dosage of 250 kg/m3, 14 day laboratory
strengths were typically in the range of 140 kPa to 170 kPa, whilst the field strengths strengths were typically in the range of 140 kPa to 170 kPa, whilst the field strengths
were typically 200 kPa to 220 kPa. were typically 200 kPa to 220 kPa.
Likewise, for the Clay mixed samples, laboratory strengths at 7 days with a binder Likewise, for the Clay mixed samples, laboratory strengths at 7 days with a binder
content of 200 kg/m3 gave undrained shear strengths of between 106 kPa and 134 content of 200 kg/m3 gave undrained shear strengths of between 106 kPa and 134
kPa as opposed to field strengths of largely greater than 250 kPa. kPa as opposed to field strengths of largely greater than 250 kPa.
In general the following can be ascribed as influencing the ratio between the In general the following can be ascribed as influencing the ratio between the
laboratory and field strengths: laboratory and field strengths:
 relative mix energy used in the laboratory and the field;  relative mix energy used in the laboratory and the field;
 empirical correlations used to derive field strength from insitu testing;  empirical correlations used to derive field strength from insitu testing;
 the type of mixing undertaken;  the type of mixing undertaken;
 the confining pressure during curing in the laboratory and the field;  the confining pressure during curing in the laboratory and the field;
 the temperature during curing in the laboratory and the field; and  the temperature during curing in the laboratory and the field; and
 quantity of binder injected during mixing.  quantity of binder injected during mixing.
Of these factors the relative mix energy used in the laboratory and field trial and Of these factors the relative mix energy used in the laboratory and field trial and
quantity of binder injected during mixing are considered to have the greatest effects. quantity of binder injected during mixing are considered to have the greatest effects.
With respect to the mix energies, the laboratory samples were prepared with a With respect to the mix energies, the laboratory samples were prepared with a
tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment tub/paddle mixer conventionally used for preparing plaster or mortar. The equipment
consists of a large bowl with a tool that rotates within the bowl. Commercially consists of a large bowl with a tool that rotates within the bowl. Commercially
available mixing tools typically have four blades and can have a rotation of 70 rpm. available mixing tools typically have four blades and can have a rotation of 70 rpm.
Conversely, the field mixing tool has six blades and rotates at, at least 120 rpm. The Conversely, the field mixing tool has six blades and rotates at, at least 120 rpm. The
mixing energy in the field is therefore significantly greater than that experienced in mixing energy in the field is therefore significantly greater than that experienced in
the preparation of the laboratory samples. the preparation of the laboratory samples.
The mixing time was commensurate with the guidance given in EuroSoilStab The mixing time was commensurate with the guidance given in EuroSoilStab
(2002), on the basis that mixing was continued until visually the mixed material (2002), on the basis that mixing was continued until visually the mixed material
showed homogeneity or mixing undertaken for around 5 minutes. It is however noted showed homogeneity or mixing undertaken for around 5 minutes. It is however noted

that the mixing time in the laboratory can be relatively long compared to the mixing that the mixing time in the laboratory can be relatively long compared to the mixing
time for the same volume of soil in the field. time for the same volume of soil in the field.
With respect to the quantity of binder, in the laboratory this can be tightly With respect to the quantity of binder, in the laboratory this can be tightly
controlled and the quantity of binder measured prior to mixing. However, in the field controlled and the quantity of binder measured prior to mixing. However, in the field
the quantity of binder injected is less precise. Whilst the mixing equipment is fitted the quantity of binder injected is less precise. Whilst the mixing equipment is fitted
with sensors to measure the quantity of binder, it is reasonable to expect that there with sensors to measure the quantity of binder, it is reasonable to expect that there
could be more binder injected than the target amount, which was permitted under the could be more binder injected than the target amount, which was permitted under the
projects specification, such that the injected binder content was required not to projects specification, such that the injected binder content was required not to
deviate by -10% to +30% of the design binder content. Nevertheless, the injection of deviate by -10% to +30% of the design binder content. Nevertheless, the injection of
more binder than the design target would inevitably result in higher strengths. more binder than the design target would inevitably result in higher strengths.
It is however noted that overall, during the main works the amount of cement It is however noted that overall, during the main works the amount of cement
actually injected (based upon a reconciliation of the cement delivery notes) exceeded actually injected (based upon a reconciliation of the cement delivery notes) exceeded
the amount of cement recorded on the column installation records by approximately the amount of cement recorded on the column installation records by approximately
nine percent. Of this nine percent, it has been estimated that six percent of the nine percent. Of this nine percent, it has been estimated that six percent of the
difference is related to extra cement injected as part of the soil mixing operations. On difference is related to extra cement injected as part of the soil mixing operations. On
average this equates to around 45 kg to 50 kilograms per column. This will lead to average this equates to around 45 kg to 50 kilograms per column. This will lead to
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
enhanced field strengths compared to laboratory mix strengths. enhanced field strengths compared to laboratory mix strengths.
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
In consideration of the field tests results, it should also be recognised that field In consideration of the field tests results, it should also be recognised that field
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
strength verification is largely based on in-situ testing (ColPT’s and RColPT’s) from strength verification is largely based on in-situ testing (ColPT’s and RColPT’s) from
which a direct strength measurement cannot be made. Empirical correlations are used which a direct strength measurement cannot be made. Empirical correlations are used
to related pull out or push in resistance to undrained shear strength. This introduces to related pull out or push in resistance to undrained shear strength. This introduces
an important element of uncertainty that reduces the ability to directly compare an important element of uncertainty that reduces the ability to directly compare
strengths from very different tests. strengths from very different tests.
In relation to the remaining three items, it is difficult to quantify individually the In relation to the remaining three items, it is difficult to quantify individually the
contribution that these factors may have on the overall strength of the laboratory contribution that these factors may have on the overall strength of the laboratory
samples. Nevertheless, there is clearly a difference in the type of mixing being samples. Nevertheless, there is clearly a difference in the type of mixing being
undertaken in the laboratory compared to field conditions. The confining pressure of undertaken in the laboratory compared to field conditions. The confining pressure of
the laboratory prepared samples was also substantially lower during curing than is the laboratory prepared samples was also substantially lower during curing than is
experienced in the field. The curing temperatures were also different in the experienced in the field. The curing temperatures were also different in the
laboratory compared to the field. Overall, these factors will also contribute to laboratory compared to the field. Overall, these factors will also contribute to
differences in laboratory and field material strengths. differences in laboratory and field material strengths.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Network Rail for approval in publication of the The authors would like to thank Network Rail for approval in publication of the
paper. paper.
REFERENCES REFERENCES
Åhnberg, H., and Johansson, S.E. (2005). “Increase in strength with time in soils Åhnberg, H., and Johansson, S.E. (2005). “Increase in strength with time in soils
stabilised with different types of binder in relation to the type and amount of stabilised with different types of binder in relation to the type and amount of
reaction products.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice reaction products.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice
and Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden. and Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden.
British Standard 1377: Part 7: 1990 “Methods of test for soil for civil engineering.” British Standard 1377: Part 7: 1990 “Methods of test for soil for civil engineering.”
purposes. purposes.
BS EN 197-1:2000 “Cement. Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for BS EN 197-1:2000 “Cement. Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for
common cements.” common cements.”
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
that the mixing time in the laboratory can be relatively long compared to the mixing that the mixing time in the laboratory can be relatively long compared to the mixing
time for the same volume of soil in the field. time for the same volume of soil in the field.
With respect to the quantity of binder, in the laboratory this can be tightly With respect to the quantity of binder, in the laboratory this can be tightly
controlled and the quantity of binder measured prior to mixing. However, in the field controlled and the quantity of binder measured prior to mixing. However, in the field
the quantity of binder injected is less precise. Whilst the mixing equipment is fitted the quantity of binder injected is less precise. Whilst the mixing equipment is fitted
with sensors to measure the quantity of binder, it is reasonable to expect that there with sensors to measure the quantity of binder, it is reasonable to expect that there
could be more binder injected than the target amount, which was permitted under the could be more binder injected than the target amount, which was permitted under the
projects specification, such that the injected binder content was required not to projects specification, such that the injected binder content was required not to
deviate by -10% to +30% of the design binder content. Nevertheless, the injection of deviate by -10% to +30% of the design binder content. Nevertheless, the injection of
more binder than the design target would inevitably result in higher strengths. more binder than the design target would inevitably result in higher strengths.
It is however noted that overall, during the main works the amount of cement It is however noted that overall, during the main works the amount of cement
actually injected (based upon a reconciliation of the cement delivery notes) exceeded actually injected (based upon a reconciliation of the cement delivery notes) exceeded
the amount of cement recorded on the column installation records by approximately the amount of cement recorded on the column installation records by approximately
nine percent. Of this nine percent, it has been estimated that six percent of the nine percent. Of this nine percent, it has been estimated that six percent of the
difference is related to extra cement injected as part of the soil mixing operations. On difference is related to extra cement injected as part of the soil mixing operations. On
average this equates to around 45 kg to 50 kilograms per column. This will lead to average this equates to around 45 kg to 50 kilograms per column. This will lead to
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
enhanced field strengths compared to laboratory mix strengths. enhanced field strengths compared to laboratory mix strengths.
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
In consideration of the field tests results, it should also be recognised that field In consideration of the field tests results, it should also be recognised that field
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
strength verification is largely based on in-situ testing (ColPT’s and RColPT’s) from strength verification is largely based on in-situ testing (ColPT’s and RColPT’s) from
which a direct strength measurement cannot be made. Empirical correlations are used which a direct strength measurement cannot be made. Empirical correlations are used
to related pull out or push in resistance to undrained shear strength. This introduces to related pull out or push in resistance to undrained shear strength. This introduces
an important element of uncertainty that reduces the ability to directly compare an important element of uncertainty that reduces the ability to directly compare
strengths from very different tests. strengths from very different tests.
In relation to the remaining three items, it is difficult to quantify individually the In relation to the remaining three items, it is difficult to quantify individually the
contribution that these factors may have on the overall strength of the laboratory contribution that these factors may have on the overall strength of the laboratory
samples. Nevertheless, there is clearly a difference in the type of mixing being samples. Nevertheless, there is clearly a difference in the type of mixing being
undertaken in the laboratory compared to field conditions. The confining pressure of undertaken in the laboratory compared to field conditions. The confining pressure of
the laboratory prepared samples was also substantially lower during curing than is the laboratory prepared samples was also substantially lower during curing than is
experienced in the field. The curing temperatures were also different in the experienced in the field. The curing temperatures were also different in the
laboratory compared to the field. Overall, these factors will also contribute to laboratory compared to the field. Overall, these factors will also contribute to
differences in laboratory and field material strengths. differences in laboratory and field material strengths.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Network Rail for approval in publication of the The authors would like to thank Network Rail for approval in publication of the
paper. paper.
REFERENCES REFERENCES
Åhnberg, H., and Johansson, S.E. (2005). “Increase in strength with time in soils Åhnberg, H., and Johansson, S.E. (2005). “Increase in strength with time in soils
stabilised with different types of binder in relation to the type and amount of stabilised with different types of binder in relation to the type and amount of
reaction products.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice reaction products.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice
and Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden. and Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden.
British Standard 1377: Part 7: 1990 “Methods of test for soil for civil engineering.” British Standard 1377: Part 7: 1990 “Methods of test for soil for civil engineering.”
purposes. purposes.
BS EN 197-1:2000 “Cement. Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for BS EN 197-1:2000 “Cement. Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for
common cements.” common cements.”

CEN TC 288 (2002). “Execution of special geotechnical works – deep mixing.” CEN TC 288 (2002). “Execution of special geotechnical works – deep mixing.”
EuroSoilStab (2002). “Design Guide Soft Soil Stabilisation.” EuroSoilStab (2002). “Design Guide Soft Soil Stabilisation.”
Kitazume, M., Katsuumi, T., and Mori, H. (2002). “The deep mixing method. Kitazume, M., Katsuumi, T., and Mori, H. (2002). “The deep mixing method.
Principle, design and construction.” A A Balkema. Principle, design and construction.” A A Balkema.
Svenska Geotekniska Foreningen (Swedish Geotechnical Society), (1997). “Lime Svenska Geotekniska Foreningen (Swedish Geotechnical Society), (1997). “Lime
and Lime Cement Columns” Report 4:95E. and Lime Cement Columns” Report 4:95E.
Terashi, M. (2005). “Keynote lecture: design of deep mixing in infrastructure Terashi, M. (2005). “Keynote lecture: design of deep mixing in infrastructure
applications.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice and applications.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice and
Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden. Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden.
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
CEN TC 288 (2002). “Execution of special geotechnical works – deep mixing.” CEN TC 288 (2002). “Execution of special geotechnical works – deep mixing.”
EuroSoilStab (2002). “Design Guide Soft Soil Stabilisation.” EuroSoilStab (2002). “Design Guide Soft Soil Stabilisation.”
Kitazume, M., Katsuumi, T., and Mori, H. (2002). “The deep mixing method. Kitazume, M., Katsuumi, T., and Mori, H. (2002). “The deep mixing method.
Principle, design and construction.” A A Balkema. Principle, design and construction.” A A Balkema.
Svenska Geotekniska Foreningen (Swedish Geotechnical Society), (1997). “Lime Svenska Geotekniska Foreningen (Swedish Geotechnical Society), (1997). “Lime
and Lime Cement Columns” Report 4:95E. and Lime Cement Columns” Report 4:95E.
Terashi, M. (2005). “Keynote lecture: design of deep mixing in infrastructure Terashi, M. (2005). “Keynote lecture: design of deep mixing in infrastructure
applications.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice and applications.” International Conference on Deep Mixing Best Practice and
Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden. Recent Advances. Stockholm, Sweden.
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40

287B - PB - 4out - Same - 50835 - ASCE - Vol - 01 - Final - Job - Process Cyan - 08/07/2012 - 05:31:52

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

287B - PB - 4out - Same - 50835 - ASCE - Vol - 01 - Final - Job - Process Cyan - 08/07/2012 - 05:31:52

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laboratory and Field Trials for Deep Dry Soil Mixing to Stabilize a Live Laboratory and Field Trials

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUND CONDITIONS GROUND CONDITIONS

GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES

GROUND CONDITIONS GROUND CONDITIONS

GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES GEOTECHICAL PROPERTIES

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

LABORATORY MIX TRIAL LABORATORY MIX TRIAL

LABORATORY MIX TRIAL LABORATORY MIX TRIAL

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

600 Peat 150 kg/m3 600 Peat 150 kg/m3

Shear Strength (kPa)

600 Peat 150 kg/m3 600 Peat 150 kg/m3

Peat 200 kg/m3 Peat 200 kg/m3

Peat 250 kg/m3 Peat 250 kg/m3

Shear Strength (kPa)

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

FIELD TRIALS FIELD TRIALS

FIELD TRIALS FIELD TRIALS

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

1.5 ColPT 225 at 7 days 1.5 ColPT 225 at 7 days

1.5 ColPT 225 at 7 days 1.5 ColPT 225 at 7 days

2.5 ColPT 275 at 3 days 2.5 ColPT 275 at 3 days

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

3 Clay ColPT 150 3 Clay ColPT 150

3 Clay ColPT 150 3 Clay ColPT 150

kg/m3 at 13 days kg/m3 at 13 days

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

although this is a non-linear relationship. although this is a non-linear relationship.

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

You might also like