See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351105993

DISTRIBUTION OF STRESSES BELOW FOOTINGS SUPPORTED BY STONE

COLUMNS

Article  in  Journal of Engineering Science and Technology · April 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 248

2 authors:

Ameer Abdullah Ahmed Mohammed Yousif Fattah

University of Technology-Iraq University of Technology, Iraq
5 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS    432 PUBLICATIONS   2,656 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Soil Mechanics View project

ASSESSMENT OF WATER CONTENT FOR SUB-PAVEMENT LAYERS USING GPR View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ameer Abdullah Ahmed on 27 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021) 1719 - 1732
© School of Engineering, Taylor’s University

DISTRIBUTION OF STRESSES BELOW

FOOTINGS SUPPORTED BY STONE COLUMNS

AMEER A. AHMED*, MOHAMMED Y. FATTAH

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq

*Corresponding Author: 40081@uotechnology.edu.iq

Abstract
The behaviour of a circular footing supported by a single floating stone column
in soft clay soils of low undrained shear strength, cu = 20 kN/m2, is studied
through finite element analysis to determine the effect of soil improvement on
the distribution of stresses below the isolated footings supported by the composite
soil system. The studied cases consist of 1 m diameter circular stone column Ds
having different lengths Ls of (4, 6 and 8) m. The studied diameters of footing Df
are (1.0 , 1.2 , 1.4 , 1.6 , 1.8 , 2.0, 2.5 and 3.5) m which cover the range of area
ratios, Ar%=(Area of stone column)/(Area of footing) , from (8.16 to 100)%. A
total of 36 cases were analysed by ANSYS 18 workbench CAD program for
treated and untreated soil to investigate these cases. The adopted axisymmetric
modelling takes into account the contact between the target stone column and the
surrounding contact clay soil. The results of the study revealed that the stress
distribution below footings is not uniform in both stone and clay areas and the
value of the stress concentration ratio (n) is dependent on the normalized normal
stress q/cu levels and n increase with the increasing of the area ratio.
Keywords: Area ratio, Finite element, Stone column, Stress concentration ratio.

1719
1720 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

1. Introduction
Soft soils are presented in many places around the world, these soils are characterised
by their low mechanical shear strength, typically cu ≤ 25 kN/m2 and high
compressibility which in turn leads to many foundation problems from the
geotechnical engineering point of view. Many techniques were adopted for the sake
of enhancing the properties of these soils to enhance its mechanical properties. The
best technique used for the improvement of these soils depends on the project’s
importance and budget. The stone column is one of these methods used to increase
the load carrying capacity and reduce the value and time of settlement of soft soil
especially for large areas and under embankments because of its low costs in
comparison with other used techniques.
The use of the stone column technique for the treatment of soft soil has proven to
be successful in increasing bearing capacity, reducing total and differential
settlements and decreasing the time of consolidation and enhancing slope stability of
both embankments and slopes. These columns are made of granular compacted
material, cheaper and easy to install. In addition, the stone columns are
environmentally friendly in comparison with other ground improvement techniques.
Stone columns repeatedly used for the stabilization of soft soils. For the support
of different structures, the use of stone columns is increasing day by day [1, 2].
One of the earliest studies was carried out by Hughes and Withers [3], they
reported that the bulging failure is the dominated type of failure in stone columns
when the critical length (4 × stone diameter) is exceeded they arrived at this
conclusion through model and field observations.
The stress concentration ratio “n” is defined as the ratio of the stresses on stone
column’s area divided by the stresses on the soft clay area it is an indicator of the
degree of improvement of stone columns since the stresses will passes through the
stiffer material hence reducing the amount of settlement of the soft clay area [4].
Fattah et al. [4] studied the value of stress concentration ratio, n through a
laboratory model test. The load applied through a specially manufactured setup to
measure the load applied directly on stone column and the total load applied to the
composite soil-stone system through two proving rings. The foundation steel plates
have 220 mm diameter and 5 mm thickness. These plates contain 1, 2, 3, and 4
holes. The centre to centre spacing between all holes are equals twice the stone
column diameter, D. Crushed stone was installed in very soft clays having
undrained shear strength ranging between 6 and 12 kPa. The stone columns made
of. Two lengths to diameter ratios L/D = 6 and 8, respectively. The experimental
tests showed that the stone columns with L/D = 8 provided a stress concentration
ratio n of 1.4, 2.4, 2.7, and 3.1 for the soil having a shear strength cu=6 kPa, treated
with single, two, three, and four columns, respectively. The values of n were
decreased to 1.2, 2.2, 2.5, and 2.8 when the L/D = 6. The values of n increase when
the shear strength of the treated soil was increased to 9 and 12 kPa.
A review to analyse the behaviour of stone columns used in different types of
constructions such as oil storage tanks, embankments, buildings etc was presented
by Singh and Sahu [5]. The consequence of without encased and encased stone
columns on several types of construction are studied. The effect of various
diameters with various depths in the ground also reviewed. For the encasement

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 Distribution of Stresses Below Footings Supported by Stone Columns 1721

different types of geosynthetics are used for improvement of the results. For the
prediction of the settlement of foundations reinforced with stone column number
of numerical and physical approaches are done. The work dealt with several
theories that exist from past to present which helps in understanding the
enhancements by stone columns in boosting soft soils. In the development of
geotechnical properties, physical modelling has an important role.
Znamenskii and Sayed [6] carried out three-dimensional numerical studies on a
stone column under footing on the composite soil. A comparison between the
numerical model and different analytical methods to represent a footing on the soft
clay soil reinforced by a group of stone columns. Numerical results showed good
convergence with experimental.
The main goal of this research is to clarify the variation of stresses below a
foundation supported by a single floated stone column in soft clay. These stresses
variation will suggest, if it is suitable, to adopt a single constant value for stress in
the stone and clay area and the reliability of adopting this approximation.

2. Verification of ANSYS Program

The output results of the ANSYS 18 Workbench were validated by comparing the
results obtained from a finite element model of an axisymmetric single floated stone
column with experimental load-settlement test carried out by Rao et al. [7]. The
experimental model consists of a single floated stone column of 25 mm in diameter
and 225 mm in length constructed at the centre of the bed of clay of height 350 mm
inside a cylindrical steel tank of diameter of 650 mm. The load was gradually
applied through a rigid steel plate of diameter 50 mm. Table 1 shows the properties
of stone column and soft clay materials.
A similar validation work was carried out by Ambily and Gandhi [8], they
validated PLAXIS program with the load-settlement results from the experimental
work of Rao et al, their PLAXIS axisymmetric finite element model and result are
shown in Fig. 1 along with the current results of ANSYS 18. The ANSYS 18 finite
element results show a good agreement with experiment’s results conducted by Rao
et al. [7] indicating the accuracy of the model in this study.

Table 1. Physical properties of the soft clay and

stone materials for experimental work of Rao et al. [7].
Material Clay Stone column
Young’s Modulus (kN/m2) 4000 45000
Poisson’s Ratio 0.45 0.3
Initial Cohesion (kN/m2) 20 0
Angle of Internal Friction (Deg.) 0 38

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

1722 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

(a) Ambily geometry, (b) Compare of results

mesh and dimensions. between Rao’s experimental
work VS PLAXIS
and ANSYS 18 Workbench.

Fig. 1. Validation of ANSYS program with Rao et al experimental work.

3. Problem Description
The variation of stresses beneath the footing which is supported by the composite
of clay and stone columns is studied by using ANSYS Workbench 18.0 software.
The problem consists of a single circular concrete footing of thickness 500 mm and
having different diameters of (1.0, 1.2, 1.4 ,1.6, 1.8, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.5 m). The footing
is supported by a single floating stone column of diameter 1.0 m and having
length(s) of 4, 6 and 8 m, these lengths are beyond the critical length (4Ds) as
suggested by Hughes and Withers [3] to ensure that the failure will be in bulging
of stone column. The clay boundary is 8.0 m in diameter from the Y-axis symmetry
line and 12.0 m in depth. The schematic dimensions are shown in Fig. 2 which
shows half the structure due to using axisymmetric analysis instead of using 3D
analysis, this simulation will minimize the time and amount of data required to
solve the problem. The soft clay material has an undrained shear strength of 20
kN/m2 and Poisson’s ratio of 0.499. Bowels [9] stated that the modulus of elasticity
of soft clay is assumed to be 500 times its shear strength as suggested by empirical
correlations. The physical properties of the soft clay and backfill material of the
stone column are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Physical properties of the soft clay and stone materials.

Material Clay Stone column
Unit Weight (kN/m3) 19 21
Young’s Modulus (kN/m2) 10000 100000
Poisson’s Ratio 0.4999 0.35
Initial Cohesion (kN/m2) 20 0
Angle of Internal Friction (Deg.) 0 45
Dilatancy Angle (Deg.) 0 15
Residual Cohesion (kN/m2) 20 0
Residual Friction Angle (Deg.) 0 30

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 Distribution of Stresses Below Footings Supported by Stone Columns 1723

Fig. 2. Problem schematic diagram.

4. Program Data
The Ansys 18 workbench software is used in the analysis of the problem. The Mohr-
Coulomb failure criterion is adopted for the clay and stone materials. The element
used in the analysis is (PLANE183) with the axisymmetric option, the degrees of
freedom for the element Ux and (Ux and Uy) is restrained in the right and bottom
boundaries, respectively. The element size is 100 mm in length to obtain a regular
and uniform shape for all elements and to increase the accuracy of the output. The
total number of elements is ranging from 4674 to 4739 while the total number of
nodes is ranging from 14501 to 14722 due to changing in footing’s diameter. The
surface-to-surface contact elements (CONTA172) and (TARGE169) are used to
simulate the boundary between stone column and clay soil and also between the
concrete footing and stone and clay, the type of the contact was chosen as bonded
type as the stone will penetrate the clay layer.
Figure 3 represents the finite element mesh. A construction geometry path was
inserted between two points starting from the symmetry line of the bottom of footing
and the edge of the footing, the number of points between these limits was chosen in
such a manner that the length of each segment will be 10 mm in length so that for
different footing diameters, the induced stresses and deformations can be compared
for the same point location. So, for a footing of diameter 600 mm, the number of
points is 59 to produce a total number of 60 sublines of the length of 10 mm for each.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

1724 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

Fig. 3. Finite elements mesh for stone and concrete and the clay materials.
The boundary condition was applied to the structure by assuming the inner and
outer vertical lines with zero horizontal displacements (Ux = 0) and free to displaced
in the Y-direction for the clay and concrete while the bottom boundary of the clay
was assumed with both horizontal and vertical displacement equal to zero (Ux = Uy
= 0). During the non-linear loading process, the load was applied gradually to the top
of concrete footing in the global Y-direction in one ramped single step in the form of
pressure stresses so that the pressure for every sup-step is equal to (1.0 kN/m2), for
all load cases until reaching the desired total load or reaching a high value of
deformation. This means that for a total pressure of 600 kN/m2, the number of sub-
steps was 600 in total, therefore the auto time stepping was turned to off during the
solution process.

5. Results and Discussion

After the completion of the data insertion, the solving process was started until
obtaining a solution for the problem. The results of the load-deformation were
normalized to get a better understanding of the effect of variation of stresses beneath
the footing in both the stone and soft clay areas. The applied stresses were normalized
by dividing them by the clay shear strength (q/cu) and the vertical axis was
normalized by dividing the deformation values by the diameter of the isolated footing
(s/Df) to have dimensionless values which will be more efficient in comparison
between the different cases.
Figure 4 shows the results of normalized treated and untreated load-settlement
curves. It is worth mentioning that the untreated load settlement relation consists
of six curves representing the variant diameters of the single footing but when they
are normalized, they are transformed into one curve.
From Fig. 4, it is clear that under the same normalized q/cu values, the
normalized settlement decreases with decreasing the footing’s diameter. On the
other hand , for the same normalized s/Df values, the normalized q/cu increases
with decreasing the footing’s diameter, this is because with quantizing the diameter
of stone column (Ds) and increasing the footing’s diameter, and for the same stress
values applied on the footing, the corresponding area ratio Ar%=(Area of stone
column)/(Area of footing) will decrease and this will result in increasing the
stresses transmitted to the clay area and increasing the amount of deformation of
the composite structure.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 Distribution of Stresses Below Footings Supported by Stone Columns 1725

Fig. 4. Normalized pressure-settlement chart

for different area ratio on treated soil, Ls/Ds = 8.

Figure 5 shows the stress contour at q/cu = 12 for the composite structure for
two cases of area ratio Ar% of 16% and 51% respectively having the same length
to diameter ratio Ls/Ds of 8 and stone diameter of 1 m. These figures show that the
stresses within stone column is larger than the stresses within the clay soil because
of the stiffer material of the stone.

(a) Area ratio = 16%. (b) Area ratio = 51%.

Fig. 5. Stress contours for stone
column having Ds = 1 m, Ls/Ds = 8 and q/cu = 12.

Figure 6(a) shows the vertical stresses distribution beneath the circular footing,
for low stresses q/cu ≤ 5 kN/m2, for Ls/Ds = 8 case. These stresses are transferred
from the concrete circular footing(s) to the stone column and the surrounding soft
clay soil. It is noticed that the vertical stress is almost uniform within the interior
zone of footing above the stone column area, the largest the footing size, the most
uniform and flatten value of stresses for approximately 80 percent of the footing

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

1726 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

diameter, after that the stresses increase until reaching the edge of the stone column
when the stress increases rapidly to its maximum value for all different types of
footings diameters. Then the stress decreases rapidly to its minimum value when
passing the stone column zone and reaching soft clay zone, the stresses within the
clay zone in general, tend to vary from increasing to decreasing until reaching the
edge of the footing when the stresses again increase to a maximum value and
sometimes higher than that recorded for the columns zone when the footing
diameter is larger two times than the stone diameter.
Figure 6(b) shows the vertical stresses distribution beneath the circular footing,
for high stresses q/cu > 5 kN/m2, these stresses are transferred from the concrete
circular footing(s) to the stone column and the surrounding soft clay soil. It is
noticed that the vertical stress distribution is similar in behaviour for that described
for low stresses but there are differences between the maximum stresses at the
contact area between the stone column and soft clay.
The stresses are falling from their maximum values to their minimum values, this
is because the column undergoes the large portion of the stresses in comparison with
the weaker clay layer. Then the stresses increase to their maximum values within soft
clay zone, the stresses in general tend to increase until reaching the edge of the footing
when the stresses show their maximum values. Figures 7-12 show the same behaviour
for footing diameter 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0, 2.2, 2.5 and 3.5 m, respectively.

Fig. 6(a). Stress Fig. 6(b). Stress

distribution for Df = 1.2 m, q/cu = (1-5). distribution for Df = 1.2 m, q/cu = (1-15).

Fig. 7(a). Stress Fig. 7(b). Stress

distribution for Df = 1.4 m, q/cu = (1-5). distribution for Df = 1.4 m, q/cu = (1-15).

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 Distribution of Stresses Below Footings Supported by Stone Columns 1727

Fig. 8(a). Stress distribution Fig. 8(b). Stress distribution

for Df = 1.6 m, q/cu = (1-5). for Df = 1.6 m, q/c = (1-15).

Fig. 9(a). Stress distribution Fig. 9(b). Stress distribution

for Df = 1.8 m, q/cu = (1-5). for Df = 1.8 m, q/cu = (1-15).

Fig. 10(a). Stress distribution for Fig. 10(b). Stress distribution for
Df = 2.0 m, q/cu = (1-5). Df = 2.0 m, q/cu = (1-15).

Fig. 11(a). Stress distribution for Fig. 11(b). Stress distribution for
Df = 2.5 m, q/cu = (1-5). Df = 2.5 m, q/cu = (1-15).

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

1728 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

Fig. 12(a). Stress distribution Fig. 12(b). Stress distribution

for Df = 3.5 m, q/cu = (1-5). for Df = 3.5 m, q/cu = (1-15).

The stress concentration ratio (n) is used to define the benefit of using stone
columns by comparing the ratio of stresses transferred to stone or sand column to
the stresses transferred to the surrounding clay layer in the unit cell concept, which
represents the group of stone columns spread in the large area i.e., n = (stresses on
stone column)/(stresses on soft clay). The area ratio (Ar%) is also used in the unit
cell to describe the area of stone column to that of the total area of the unit cell.
However, for a single stone column, the boundary condition is not the same as the
unit cell concept and we need to adjust the equation into a more presenting form
which simulates the existing case, but the derivation of the equation is the same.
Because the stresses are not uniformly distributed above the columns and clay
layer therefore to calculate the stress concentration ratio (n) we should calculate the
summation of the stress’s areas of that of stone column and clay separately for a
given chart.
In a single stone column, the stress concentration ratio will be equal to the
summation of stresses, obtained from the program, transferred to the stone column
divided by the summation of stresses transferred to the clay, i.e.,
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
𝑛𝑛 = (1)
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓

The area ratio for a single stone column should be as described in Eq. (2),
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴% = (2)
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓

Figures 13-15 show the variation of stress concentration ratio, n with the
normalized applied stresses (q/cu) plotted for different area ratios Ar% which are
calculated according to Eq. (2).
Figure 13 shows the results for stone column of length to diameter ratio, Ls/Ds
= 8, it is clear that for a given area ratio Ar% and normalized vertical stresses up to
q/cu = 5, the stress concentration ratio, (n) is generally constant, with the increasing
of the applied vertical stresses, the n values increase linearly with the increase of
the applied stresses. The higher the normalized stress, the higher the stress
concentration ratio value. This suggests that for a given area ratio, (n) value is
dependent on the stress level and it is not constant during the entire loading process
except at low-stress level q/cu < 5.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 Distribution of Stresses Below Footings Supported by Stone Columns 1729

For a given stress level, the maximum area ratio exhibits the maximum n values
for all normalized stress levels. The effect of area ratio on the n values is clear in
the high-stress levels in comparison with that calculated at low stresses.
For Ls/Ds = 8, the n values (for area ratio of 69.44%) increases from minimum
of 5.38 at q/cu = 3 to 19.26 at q/cu = 25 while its values (for area ratio of 39.06%)
increases from minimum of 1.67 at q/cu = 2 to 9.98 at q/cu = 25.

Fig. 13. Variation of n with q/cu for different area ratios, Ls/Ds = 8.
Figures 14 and 15 show the variation of (n) with q/cu for Ls/Ds = 6 and Ls/Ds
= 4, both figures have a similar behaviour to Fig. 13.
For Ls/Ds = 6, the n values (for area ratio of 69.44%) increases from a minimum
of 5.23 at q/cu = 3 to 18.45 at q/cu = 25 while its values (for area ratio of 39.06%)
increases from a minimum of 1.69 at q/cu = 2 to 9.78 at q/cu = 25.
For Ls/Ds = 4, the n values (for area ratio of 69.44%) increases from a minimum
of 6.26 at q/cu = 2 to 18.95 at q/cu = 25 while its values for area ratio of 39.06%
increases from a minimum of 1.68 at q/cu = 2 to 9.59 at q/cu = 25.

Fig. 14. Variation of n with q/cu for different area ratios, Ls/Ds = 6.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

1730 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

Fig. 15. Variation of n with q/cu for different area ratios, Ls/Ds = 4.
Figure 16 shows the variation of stress concentration ratio (n) with area ratio
Ar% for different normalized loading levels q/cu for the case of stone length to
diameter ratio Ls/Ds = 8, the figure reveals that the n value increases with the
increasing of the area ratio and it is dependent on the stress level, the higher the
stress level, the higher the n values. This is true for all area ratios. At low-stress
level q/cu < 5, the behaviour is convergent.

Fig. 16. Variation of n with area ratios for different q/cu, Ls/Ds = 8.

Fig. 17. Variation of n with area ratios for different q/cu, Ls/Ds = 6.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 Distribution of Stresses Below Footings Supported by Stone Columns 1731

Fig. 18. Variation of n with area ratios for different q/cu, Ls/Ds = 4.

Figures 17 and 18 show similar behaviour for variation of stress concentration

ratio n with area ratio for length to diameter Ls/Ds of 6 and 4, respectively.
Fattah et al. [10] concluded that the value of stress concentration ratio n
increases with increasing the shear strength of the treated soil.
Paul and Sindhu [11] concluded that the n value was found to increase as the
number of columns was increased. Also, an l/D (length to diameter) ratio of 6
showed more n value than an l/D of 5. Also, triangular pattern of arrangement
showed more n value than square pattern.

6. Conclusions
All the results obtained in this study are from finite element analysis for the
soil properties and boundary conditions. So, the results are restricted to
these conditions.
• Under the same normalized q/cu values, the normalized settlement decreases
with decreasing the footing’s diameter. On the other hand, for the same
normalized s/Df values, the normalized q/cu increases with decreasing the
footing’s diameter.
• The vertical stress is almost uniform within the interior zone of footing above
the stone column area, the largest the footing size, the most uniform and
flatten value of stresses for approximately 80 percent of the footing diameter,
after that the stresses increase until reaching the edge of the stone column
when the stress increases rapidly to its maximum value for all different types
of footings diameters.
• The stress concentration, n value is initially constant for all area ratios when q/cu
≤ 5, after that it increases with the increase of the stress level and it is dependent
on the stress level, the higher the stress level, the higher the n values.
• For a given stress level, the maximum area ratio exhibits the maximum n values.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

 1732 A. A. Ahmed and M. Y. Fattah

References
1. Bergado, D.T.; Anderson, L.R.; Miura, N.; and Balasubramaniam, A.S. (1996).
Soft ground improvement in lowland and other environments. New York:
American Society of Civil Engineers.
2. Fattah, M.Y.; Al-Neami, M.A.; and Al-Suhaily, A.S. (2017). Estimation of
bearing capacity of floating group of stone columns. Engineering Science and
Technolgy, an International Journal, 20(3), 1166-1172.
3. Hughes, J.M.O.; and Withers, N.J. (1974). Reinforcing of soft cohesive soils
with stone columns. Ground Engineering, 7(3), 42-49.
4. Fattah, M.Y.; Shlash, K.T.; and Al-Waily, M.J.M. (2011). Stress concentration
ratio of model stone columns in soft clays. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 34(1),
50-60.
5. Singh, I.; and Sahu, A.K. (2019). A review on stone columns used for ground
improvement of soft soil. Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Civil,
Structural, and Environmental Engineering (CSEE’19). Rome, Italy, ICGRE
132(1-5).
6. Znamenskii, V.V.; and Sayed, D.A. (2019). Comparison between analytical
method and numerical model for footings on soft clay supported by stone
columns. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1425(1), 12075.
7. Rao, S.N.; Madhiyan, M.; and Prasad, Y.V.S.N. (1992). Influence of bearing
area on the behaviour of stone columns. Proceedings of the Indian Geotechnical
Conference. Calcutta, India, 235-237
8. Ambily, A.P.; and Gandhi, S.R. (2007). Behavior of stone columns based on
experimental and FEM analysis. Journal of Geotechnical and Geo
Environmental Engineering, 133(4), 405-415.
9. Bowles, J.E. (1997). Foundation analysis and design (5th ed.). Singapore, :
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
10. Fattah, M.Y.; Shlash, K.T.; and Al-Waily, M.J. (2013). Experimental evaluation
of stress concentration ratio of model stone columns strengthened by additives.
International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics(ICE), 13(3), 79-98.
11. Paul, J.; and Sindhu, A.R. (2018). Study on stress concentration ratio of stone
column reinforced soft clay. International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology (IRJET), 5(4), 3535-3539.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology April 2021, Vol. 16(2)

View publication stats