CONTENTS

1.0 DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY........................................................................... 6-1

1.1 Description ............................................................................................................ 6-1

1.1.1 Column-supported Embankments ...................................................................... 6-1
1.1.2 Support Columns ............................................................................................... 6-2
1.1.3 Load Transfer Platform ...................................................................................... 6-3
1.2 Historical Overview ............................................................................................. 6-3
1.3 Focus and Scope ................................................................................................... 6-6
1.4 Glossary ................................................................................................................ 6-6
1.5 Primary References ............................................................................................. 6-7

2.0 FEASIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................... 6-9

2.1 Applications .......................................................................................................... 6-9

2.2 Advantages and Disadvantages of CSE ........................................................... 6-10
2.2.1 Advantages ....................................................................................................... 6-10
2.2.2 Potential Disadvantages ................................................................................... 6-11
2.3 Feasibility Evaluations....................................................................................... 6-11
2.3.1 Geotechnical Considerations ........................................................................... 6-12
2.3.2 Environmental Considerations ......................................................................... 6-12
2.3.3 Site Consideration ............................................................................................ 6-12
2.4 Limitations .......................................................................................................... 6-13
2.5 Alternative Improvement Methods .................................................................. 6-13

3.0 MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION .............................................................. 6-14

3.1 Columns .............................................................................................................. 6-14

3.1.1 Materials .......................................................................................................... 6-14
3.1.2 Construction ..................................................................................................... 6-15
3.1.3 Column Caps .................................................................................................... 6-15
3.2 Load Transfer Platforms ................................................................................... 6-16
3.2.1 Materials .......................................................................................................... 6-16
3.2.2 Construction ..................................................................................................... 6-17

6-i
4.0 DESIGN CONCEPTS ........................................................................................... 6-19

4.1 Design Steps ........................................................................................................ 6-19

4.1.1 Design CSE with or without LTP .................................................................... 6-22
4.2 Column Design ................................................................................................... 6-22
4.3 Lateral Extent of Columns ................................................................................ 6-24
4.4 Lateral Spreading .............................................................................................. 6-25
4.5 Critical Height .................................................................................................... 6-27
4.6 Load Transfer Platform Design ........................................................................ 6-28
4.6.1 Generalized Adapted Terzaghi Method ........................................................... 6-33
4.6.2 Generalized Parabolic Method ......................................................................... 6-34
4.6.3 Geosynthetic Properties ................................................................................... 6-36
4.7 Beam Method ..................................................................................................... 6-37
4.8 Reinforcement Total Design Load.................................................................... 6-39
4.9 Global Stability................................................................................................... 6-40

5.0 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS AND QUALITY ASSURANCE ....... 6-42

5.1 CSE Performance Specification........................................................................ 6-42

5.2 LTP Method Specification ................................................................................ 6-42
5.3 Quality Assurance .............................................................................................. 6-43

6.0 COST DATA .......................................................................................................... 6-46

6.1 Access and Mobility ........................................................................................... 6-46

6.2 Column Cost ....................................................................................................... 6-46
6.3 LTP Cost ............................................................................................................. 6-46

7.0 CASE HISTORIES ................................................................................................ 6-48

7.1 Garden State Parkway Bridge over Mullica River ......................................... 6-48
7.1.1 Project Summary.............................................................................................. 6-48
7.1.2 Ground Conditions ........................................................................................... 6-49
7.1.3 Ground Modification Solution ......................................................................... 6-49

6-ii
 7.2 US 61 Bridge over Mississippi River ................................................................ 6-50
7.2.1 Project Summary.............................................................................................. 6-51
7.2.2 Ground Conditions ........................................................................................... 6-51
7.2.3 Ground Modification Solution ......................................................................... 6-53

8.0 EXAMPLE PROBLEMS ...................................................................................... 6-56

8.1 Example Problem 1 ............................................................................................ 6-56

8.1.1 Problem Statement ........................................................................................... 6-56
8.1.2 Solution ............................................................................................................ 6-57
8.2 Example Problem 2 ............................................................................................ 6-64

9.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 6-68

6-iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 6-1. Column-supported embankment. ........................................................................ 6-1

Figure 6-2. Column-supported embankment with geosynthetic reinforcement. ................... 6-2
Figure 6-3. Westway terminal project. .................................................................................. 6-4
Figure 6-4. New Jersey Light Rail project. ............................................................................ 6-5
Figure 6-5. CSE with column caps. ..................................................................................... 6-16
Figure 6-6. Load transfer platform reinforcement placement. ............................................. 6-17
Figure 6-7. Load transfer platform select fill placement. .................................................... 6-18
Figure 6-8. Limit state failure modes. .................................................................................. 6-20
Figure 6-9. Serviceability state. ........................................................................................... 6-21
Figure 6-10. Column layout and definition sketch for inputs to critical height and
adapted Terzaghi method. .............................................................................................. 6-23
Figure 6-11. Lateral extent of columns. ............................................................................... 6-25
Figure 6-12. Lateral spreading. ............................................................................................ 6-26
Figure 6-13. Definition sketch for load and displacement compatibility (LDC) method. ... 6-30
Figure 6-14. Triangular column arrangements with biaxial geogrid. .................................. 6-36
Figure 6-14. Beam method. ................................................................................................. 6-38
Figure 6-15. Variables used in global stability analysis. ..................................................... 6-40
Figure 6-17. 3D numerical model of MSE wall and CMCs. ............................................... 6-49
Figure 6-18. CMC installation Phase 2. ............................................................................... 6-50
Figure 6-19. Cross section of column supported approach embankment, US 61. ............... 6-52
Figure 6-20. Cross section of load transfer platform, US 61. .............................................. 6-53
Figure 6-21. Pile columns and (near) pile caps installed, US 61. ........................................ 6-54
Figure 6-22. Completed north approach embankment and approach spans, US 61. ........... 6-55
Figure 6-23. General cross-section. ..................................................................................... 6-57
Figure 6-24. Unit cell for triangular column spacing. ......................................................... 6-58
Figure 6-25. GeogridBridge spreadsheet, Example Problem 1, no bridging layer. ............. 6-60
Figure 6-26. GeogridBridge spreadsheet, Example Problem 1, with bridging layer. .......... 6-61
Figure 6-27. Lateral spreading. ............................................................................................ 6-62

6-iv
Figure 6-28. Lateral spreading geosynthetic. ....................................................................... 6-63
Figure 6-29. GeogridBridge spreadsheet, Example Problem 2, no bridging layer. ............. 6-65
Figure 6-30. GeogridBridge spreadsheet, Example Problem 2, with bridging layer. .......... 6-66

LIST OF TABLES

Table 6-1. Possible Column Types ...................................................................................... 6-15

Table 6- ......................................................................................................... 6-39
Table 6-3. Brief Summary of US 61 Project Stratigraphy ................................................... 6-51

6-v
1.0 DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

The problems associated with constructing highway embankments over soft compressible
soils (e.g., large settlements, embankment instability, and the long period of time required for
consolidation of the foundation soil) have led to the development and extensive use of many
of the ground modification techniques in use today. Prefabricated vertical drains (PVDs),
surcharge loading, geosynthetic reinforcement, stone columns, deep soil mixing, and
lightweight fill have all been used to solve the settlement and stability issues associated with
construction of embankments on marginal soils. However, when time constraints are critical
to the success of the project, owners have resorted to another innovative approach: column
supported embankments (CSE) with or without a geosynthetic reinforced load transfer
platform (LTP). In the last 25 years, this technology has been used successfully by over a
dozen state DOTs.

1.1 Description

1.1.1 Column-supported Embankments

CSEs consist of stiff vertical columns that are designed to transfer the load of the
embankment through the soft compressible soil layer to a firm foundation. Selection of the
type of column used for the CSE will depend on the design loads, constructability of the
column, cost, etc., and will be discussed in more detail in Sections 2 and 3. The load from the
embankment must be effectively transferred to the columns to prevent punching of the
columns through the embankment fill causing differential settlement at the surface of the
embankment. If the columns are placed close enough together, soil arching will occur and the
full embankment load will be transferred to the columns. A CSE is illustrated in Figure 6-1.

Figure 6-1. Column-supported embankment.

6-1
The columns in Figure 6-1 are spaced relatively close together (i.e., 4 to 6 feet), and some
battered columns may be required at the sides of the embankment to prevent lateral
spreading. In order to significantly reduce the number of columns required to support the
embankment and increase the efficiency of the design, a load transfer platform (LTP) either
geosynthetically reinforced or with no reinforcement may be used. A CSE with geosynthetic
reinforcement is schematically shown in Figure 6-2.

Surcharge, q

n Select Fill &

1 Geosynthetic
H = H1 + H2 General Embankment Fill Reinforcement
H2

H1
Upper Sand dw
Layer(s), if present

Columns
Soft Soil
Layer(s)

Bearing Layer
Figure 6-2. Column-supported embankment with geosynthetic reinforcement.

1.1.2 Support Columns

The support columns that are used with this technology include steel H-piles, steel pipe piles,
auger cast piles, precast concrete piles, and timber piles. Conventional steel and concrete
piles often provide higher axial load capacity than is required for CSEs and are, therefore,
less economically attractive compared to timber piles and newer formed-in-place column
types.

The newer formed-in-place column types that have been used for columns in CSEs include:
soil mix columns, aggregate columns, and cement based columns. These columns are
discussed in the Chapter 7 Soil Mixing and Chapter 5 Aggregate Columns. The selection of
the column will depend on the design loads, foundation support layer, any stiff intermediate
layers that need to be penetrated, special equipment requirements, speed of installation, and
local availability and cost of the columns. The requirements and selection of the columns will
be covered in detail in Sections 2 and 3. It is important to note here that the technology is not

6-2
dependent on any one column type, thereby allowing the contractor to select the most
economical column based on the design and performance requirements established for the
project by the specifying agency.

1.1.3 Load Transfer Platform

The load transfer platform (LTP) is used to efficiently transfer the embankment or structure
load to the columns without allowing unacceptable deformations to occur between columns
that would reflect to the surface of the embankment. Three types of load transfer platforms
are available. A reinforced concrete structural mat may be used to transfer the embankment
load to the columns. This requires a structural design of the mat to assure that the load is
effectively transferred to the columns. Concrete mats have generally been found to be
economically cost prohibitive and will not be discussed further in this chapter.

The second and third types of LTPs consist of select granular structural fill either reinforced
with one or more layers of geosynthetic, or without reinforcement. The remainder of this
chapter will focus on the design and construction of granular LTPs. The design of the load
transfer platform will be covered in detail in Section 4. Currently, there are two fundamental
approaches to geosynthetic reinforced LTPs: the catenary method and the beam method. The
catenary method considers the reinforcement to act as one layer at the interface between the
subgrade and columns and the embankment. Select fill may or may not be used above the
geosynthetic and the geosynthetic acts as a catenary. The beam method considers multiple
(i.e., 3 or more) layers of reinforcement spaced vertically, typically 8 to 16 inches apart
within the LTP to create a beam of reinforced soil.

1.2 Historical Overview

The first documented use, for a highway application, of CSE with geosynthetic reinforcement
was in 1984 for a bridge approach embankment in Europe (Reid and Buchanan 1984).
Concrete piles were used as the columns for the project. Each column had a reinforced
concrete pile cap. The clear span between pile caps varied from 6.6 to10 feet. One layer of
geosynthetic reinforcement was used to create the load transfer platform. The height of the
embankment was 30 feet.

The first application of CSE with geosynthetic reinforcement in the United States was in
1994 for the Westway Terminal in Philadelphia, PA. This project involved the support of a
large diameter tank for the storage of molasses. The foundation consisted of vibro-concrete
columns (VCC) and an LTP, and is shown in Figure 6-3.

6-3
 Figure 6-3. Westway terminal project.

The LTP consisted of a well graded granular fill, reinforced with three layers of geogrid
reinforcement. The CSE was selected over a more conventional pile foundation with a
concrete mat because of both time and cost savings.

One of the first (2001) transportation-related projects in the United States to use CSE was for
an embankment over soft soils, at a river crossing, for the New Jersey Light Rail (Young et
al. 2003). The foundation for the embankment consisted of VCC and an LTP. The VCCs
were placed on a 6.6 to 10 feet center-to-center triangular spacing. The LTP was 3 feet thick,
and was reinforced with three layers of geogrid. A well-graded granular soil was used as
structural fill for the LTP. A typical cross-section of the project is shown in Figure 6-4. The
CSE was selected for this project to eliminate the “bump” at the end of the bridge without
having to wait for the foundation soil to consolidate.

6-4