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

net/publication/332425703

Use of recycled materials in floating stone columns

Article  in  Construction Materials · April 2019

DOI: 10.1680/jcoma.18.00086

CITATIONS READS

4 1,047

2 authors:

Mohsen Shahverdi Abdolhosein Haddad

Semnan University Semnan University
2 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    95 PUBLICATIONS   834 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Behavior of bucket foundation in loose sand View project

Soil Improvement Technology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohsen Shahverdi on 12 December 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Cite this article Research Article Keywords: geotechnical engineering/
Shahverdi M and Haddad A Paper 1800086 models (physical)/recycling & reuse of
Use of recycled materials in floating stone columns. Received 27/10/2018; materials
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Construction Materials, Accepted 08/04/2019
https://doi.org/10.1680/jcoma.18.00086
ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Construction Materials

Use of recycled materials in

floating stone columns
Mohsen Shahverdi Abdolhosein Haddad
Graduate student, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Semnan University, Associate Professor, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Semnan University,
Semnan, Iran Semnan, Iran (corresponding author: haddad@semnan.ac.ir)
(Orcid:0000-0002-7612-6780)

In this research, to improve the bearing capacity of a soft clay bed, the performance of floating stone columns
constructed of recycled aggregates from demolition waste was investigated. For this purpose, a single stone column
with three types of materials, including recycled crushed brick (CB), recycled crushed concrete (CC) and gravel as
natural aggregates was modelled. Furthermore, the quality of the recycled aggregates used was evaluated by
aggregate index tests such as the aggregate crushing value and the aggregate impact value. The results of the
recycled aggregate index tests demonstrated a poorer performance of these materials compared to the natural
aggregate. Despite this, the bearing capacity of the clay bed reinforced with the floating column, which was filled
with CB or CC, was approximately five times the bearing capacity of the unreinforced clay bed. Moreover, the
loading results showed that the floating stone columns constructed of a type of aggregate delivered a better
performance in comparison with the columns constructed of a combination of several types of recycled aggregates
together or a combination of natural and recycled aggregates.

Notation σv limiting axial stress in the column when it

Ar area replacement ratio approaches shear failure due to bulging (kPa)
Cu undrained shear strength of clay (kPa) ϕ angle of internal friction of soil (deg)
D diameter of footing (mm) ϕc angle of internal friction of the granular column
Dr (%) relative density of stone column material (deg)
d diameter of stone column (mm)
dm diameter of model stone column (mm)
dp diameter of prototype stone column 1. Introduction
ds aggregate size diameter (mm) Currently, environmental aspects have been considered in the
g function construction of geotechnical structures such as stone columns.
hn variables Stone columns provide an ideal opportunity to use recycled
kp col passive pressure coefficient of the stone column aggregates (Egan and Slocombe, 2010). As the construction of
k0 coefficient of earth pressure at rest a large number of stone columns requires the use of a vast
L length of the stone column (mm) amount of natural aggregates, the environmental aspects have
M1 mass of the test specimen (g) been considered for the use of recycled materials in stone
M2 mass of the material passing the 2·36 mm sieve (g) columns in areas with a shortage of natural aggregate
Nc bearing-capacity factor resources. Additionally, the use of recycled materials in stone
n prototype stone column diameter/model test column columns will contribute to the management of construction
diameter and demolition wastes through waste reuse and recycling. To
pd dry-index density (kg/m3) replace natural aggregates with recycled aggregates in different
pmax maximum index density of aggregates (kg/m3) constructional areas, numerous studies, including those by
pmin minimum index density of aggregates (kg/m3) Rahardjo et al. (2013), Rahman et al. (2014), Disfani et al.
Q force (N) (2014), Santos et al. (2013), Yeung et al. (2006) and Arulrajah
qs frictional resistance of the column et al. (2012) have been conducted.
qsafe safe bearing capacity (kPa)
qu applied vertical load (N) In most studies, the use of recycled aggregates has led to a
Rc (%) relative compaction of the stone column relatively good performance. However, limited studies have
γ′ effective unit weight of soil within the influence been carried out on the use of recycled materials in geotech-
zone (kN/m3) nics (Vieira and Pereira, 2015). In geotechnology, studies con-
σr passive pressure of soil (kPa) ducted on the use of alternative materials and innovative

1
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

engineering have greatly contributed to studies related to sus- Table 1. Details of laboratory model tests
tainability (Basu et al., 2015). Test Relative
number Material type of the column density
Investigations conducted on recycled aggregates for the con-
1 Unreinforced clay bed —
struction of stone columns can be divided into two general cat-
2 100% gravel 75·2
egories: (a) investigating a component or specimen of the 3 100% CC 74·2
structure (direct shear test); (b) investigating the entire geotech- 4 100% CB 71·2
nical structure (plate load test). McKelvey et al. (2002) showed 5 50% CC + 50% CB 74·7
in a large direct shear test that building debris and crushed 6 40% CC + 40% CB + 20% gravel 67·7
7 25% CC + 25% CB + 50% gravel 73·1
concrete (CC) tended to reduce in volume under shearing at
8 10% CC + 10% CB + 80% gravel 77·4
high pressures. The use of CC and recycled railway ballast in
the construction of stone columns was suggested by Serridge
(2005). Moreover, procedures affecting the design of stone measure the quality of materials such as ACV and AIV. Then,
columns using recycled aggregates were outlined by Jefferson plate loading tests were carried out on the single floating stone
et al. (2010). Laboratory modelling of stone columns con- column model and an unreinforced clay bed. A general scheme
structed of tyre chips conducted by Ayothiraman and Soumya of the laboratory equipment for the modelled stone column is
(2014) and Mazumder et al. (2018) also led to confirm the shown in Figure 1.
possibility of fractional or full replacement of stone aggregates
with waste tyre chips in stone columns. Through laboratory
modelling of stone columns made of recycled aggregates, 2.1 Materials used
Amini (2016) demonstrated that a combination of crushed The properties of the material used in the foundation bed are
brick (CB) and CC could be employed as the filler material of listed in Table 2. The clay soil of the local site, of which more
end-bearing columns. Demir et al. (2016) modelled stone than 75% had passed through sieve 200, was used as the foun-
columns made of both recycled and natural aggregates, report- dation bed. Three types of materials, including gravel (natural
ing that the performance of the columns made of recycled con- quartzite aggregate), CB and CC (recycled aggregates) col-
crete and natural aggregates were closely similar. lected from building debris, crushed by mechanical equipment,
were used to model the stone column. The gradation curve of
Studies conducted so far, such as that by Amini (2016), have the clay and the materials constituting the stone column are
only investigated the performance of recycled aggregates in shown in Figure 2. The materials of all stone columns were
end-bearing stone columns. In the study of Demir et al. (2016),
the influence of using a column made of a combination of
recycled aggregates or a mixture of recycled and natural aggre-
gates was not considered. In addition, the Building Research
Establishment (BRE) (BRE, 2000) standard introduces aggre- Loading frame
gate index tests including aggregate crushing value (ACV) and
aggregate impact value (AIV) for the evaluation of aggregates Hydraulic jack
in stone columns. The data obtained from the index tests do
Load cell
not directly simulate the behaviour of materials in a geotechni-
Footing diameter,
cal structure because the conditions of loading and interaction LVDT
D = 100
of materials with other materials are not considered. To
1700
address the shortcomings, such as shortage of natural aggre-
gate resources and better management of construction solid
wastes, the aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of Stone column

a floating stone column made of a type of recycled aggregate Test tank 360

and a mixture of recycled aggregates with natural aggregates 880

for improving the weak bed of soft clay. Furthermore, the

60
results obtained from laboratory modelling are compared with
Clay soil 300
the analytical methods of previous research and case studies.

580
2. Experimental programme and materials
Details of the physical modelling of the stone column are pre- Figure 1. Schematic diagram of test set-up (dimensions in mm)
sented in Table 1. At first, index tests were conducted to

2
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

Table 2. Properties of clay gradually applied load. Both tests can be obtained from
Parameters Value Equation 1

Optimal moisture: % 16 M2
1: AIV or ACV ¼  100
Test bed moisture content: % 30 M1
Liquid limit: % 26·5
Plastic limit: % 6
Plasticity index: % 20·5 where M1 is the mass of the test specimen and M2 is the mass
Specific gravity 2·65 of the material passing the 2·36 mm sieve.
Degree of saturation: % 80
Maximum dry unit weight: kN/m3 17·3
The results of the AIV and ACV tests are presented in Tables 4
Soil unit weight of modelling box: kN/m3 17
In situ vane shear strength: kPa 4 and 5, respectively. The BRE (2000) standard recommends a
Unified Soil Classification System symbol CL maximum AIV or ACV of 30% as the acceptance index for the
materials of stone columns. The results of the experiments
indicated that the CB had more vulnerability than gravel, CC
chosen in such a way as to have the same gradations, and even and the combination of CB and CC.
after mixing materials, the grain sizes were in the range of
2–9·5 mm and the uniformity coefficient was equal to 1·7. 3. Model set-up and rest procedure
Materials constituting the columns were classified as poorly
graded gravel (GP) according to ASTM D 2487-11 (ASTM, 3.1 Model dimensions and modelling
2011). Table 3 shows the maximum and minimum unit weights considerations
of aggregates and the relative density (Dr) of stone columns. In this modelling, the steel cylindrical tank has a diameter of
As can be seen, the densities of the columns constructed were 580 mm and a height of 880 mm. The length and diameter of
high. At a relative density of 75·2, the direct shear friction the column are, respectively, L = 360 mm and d = 60 mm,
angle of gravel aggregates was 45° through the direct shear test. maintaining an L/d ratio of 6. This ratio is the optimal length
of the column, causing a bulging failure in the column to
occur (Dash and Bora, 2013; Hughes et al., 1975; McKelvey
2.2 Aggregate index tests et al., 2004)
The AIV and the ACV tests were performed in accordance
with the standard BSI (1990a) and (1990b), respectively. The The diameter of the rigid circular footing is D = 100 mm,
AIV gives a relative measure of the resistance of an aggregate which is equal to D = 1·6d. Approximately, the best replace-
to a sudden shock or impact and the ACV gives a relative ment area ratio (area of column/area of footing) is between 30
measure of the resistance of an aggregate to crushing under a and 40% (Black et al., 2011). In this modelling, the

100
Recycled and natural aggregates
90 Clay soil
80
70
Percentage finer

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0·01 0·1 1 10
Particle size: mm

Figure 2. Particle-size distribution curve for all stone columns and clay

3
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

Table 3. Material density of the stone column

Material Pmin: kg/m3 pd: kg/m3 Pmax: kg/m3 Dr: % Rc: %

Gravel 1500 1642 1695 75·2 96·9

CB 836 950 1007 71·2 94·4
CC 1180 1313 1367 74·4 96·1
50% CC + 50% CB 975 1137 1205 74·7 94·4
40% CC + 40% CB + 20% gravel 1076 1174 1228 68·0 95·6
25% CC + 25% CB + 50% gravel 1211 1313 1356 73·0 96·9
10% CC + 10% CB + 80% gravel 1372 1500 1542 77·0 97·2

Table 4. Results of the AIV test 3.2 Preparation of the clay bed
Maximum AIV Before preparing the test bed, the Proctor compaction test
Test recommended along with the vane shear test were performed for clay soil. It
number Material AIV: % by BRE (2000) was concluded that the clay soil with 30% moisture content
has about 4 kPa undrained shear strength. Therefore, for the
1 Gravel 15·2 <30
2 CB 31·7 <30 construction of the clay bed with low undrained shear strength,
3 CC 26·0 <30 water, equivalent to 30% of the dry weight of the soil, was
4 50% CB + 50% CC 29·2 <30 added to the soil and the mixture was mixed by hand. Then,
the inner surface of the tank wall was lubricated with silicon
grease to reduce the friction of the soil with the wall of the
Table 5. Results of the ACV test tank during the soil settlement. After that, the paste was
placed in the tank in layers with a thickness of 100 mm.
Maximum ACV
Test recommended Finally, to obtain an equivalent and uniform moisture content
number Material ACV: % by BRE (2000) in the total soil mass, the surface of the clay bed was covered
with plastic and left in a suitable position for a week. The
1 Gravel 23·2 <30
undrained shear strength (Cu) of the test bed was obtained at
2 CB 45·0 <30
3 CC 27·7 <30 about 4 kPa by conducting the laboratory vane shear test
4 50% CB + 50% CC 34·0 <30 (vane diameter = 10 mm).

3.3 Construction of the stone column

replacement area ratio is 0·36. In practice, the diameter of the
The stone column was constructed in the centre of the test tank
prototype stone column is d = 0·6–1 m and the stone particle
by the replacement technique. For this purpose, first, the pipe
diameter (ds) is between 20 and 50 mm; thus, in the prototype
was lubricated with grease to easily penetrate into the clay bed
stone column, the ratio of d/ds is usually between 12 and 40
without disturbance to the surrounding soil. Then, the pipe was
(Muir Wood et al., 2000). In the present tests (dm = 60 mm,
placed in the centre of the test tank and pushed to a depth of
ds = 2–9·5 mm), this ratio varies from 6 to 30.
360 mm by hand. After that, the soil inside the pipe was
scooped out. For each test, the amount of aggregate needed to
In examining the boundaries of the test tank, the rupture
obtain a high relative density and a specific gradation was
surface in the clay bed typically extended over a distance of
measured before pouring aggregates into the pipe (Table 3).
about four to five times the footing width (Chummar, 1972;
Next, the aggregates were charged into the pipe in layers of
Selig and McKee, 1961). The diameter of the test tank was
50 mm. Then the aggregates were compacted using a 2 kg cir-
about six times the diameter of the footing and was about
cular steel tamper. After that, the pipe was slowly raised up
10 times the diameter of the column, thus the slip planes did
such that a 25 mm overlap between the aggregates and the sur-
not affect the rigid boundary. In all experiments, the height of
rounding soil was achieved. Finally, this process was continued
the clay bed and the length of the stone column were fixed
until the aggregates were completely used. Figure 3 depicts the
at 660 and 360 mm, respectively. Since the failure zone below
constructed sample plan of the stone column.
a pile was limited to a maximum depth of two times its
diameter (2d) (Meyerhof and Sastry, 1978) and in the experi-
mental model, the distance between the column tip and the 3.4 Test procedure
rigid bed is five times the diameter of the column (5d), The short-term loading of the column and the surrounding
the flotation of the column was guaranteed and the size of the soil was applied in a strain-controlled manner by a steel plate
modelling considered did not affect the boundary conditions. 100 mm in diameter and a hydraulic jack. After the

4
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

Main load cell

LVDT LVDT

Loading plate
(D = 10 cm)

Figure 3. Top view of a stone column

construction of each column and before loading, the test bed

was loaded with a surcharge of 2·5 kN/m2 for 4 h. This was
conducted to eliminate the local disturbances and create uni-
Figure 4. Photographic view of the experimental set-up
formity in the soil bed (Malarvizhi and Ilamparuthi, 2007).
Then the load was applied at a rate of 2 mm/min. This rapid
rate of loading causes the friction angle of the soil to tend to
zero, and a soil with poor resistance is simulated (Dash and 70
Bora, 2013). Finally, the loading of the foundation was contin- 100% gravel
Unreinforced clay bed
ued until the settlement became 40 mm. 60
100% CB
100% CC
A photograph of the test set-up is shown in Figure 4. A load 50
Bearing pressure: kPa

cell with a capacity of 20 000 N and a precision of 0·22 N was

used. Two linear variable differential transducers (LVDTs) 40
were placed on the footing facing each other to measure the
settlement. The LVDTs and the load cell data were connected 30
to a data-acquisition system. Eventually, to record the load−
deformation data, a data-acquisition system was connected to 20
a computer.
10
4. Results and discussion
0
4.1 Construction of a stone column using a type 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
of material Footing settlement, S/D: %
The performance of stone columns constructed of a type of
recycled and natural materials have been analysed in this Figure 5. Footing pressure−settlement characteristics of the
paper. For this purpose, the pressure−settlement characteristics constructed stone column with a type of material
curve of the footing for the floating columns constructed of
CB, CC and gravel and unreinforced clay are presented in
Figure 5. From the figure, it is observed that, regardless of the the surrounding soil. In addition, due to the nature of the
type of material, all stone columns have improved the initial interlocking of the compacted aggregates, all columns
foundation-bearing capacity. At the beginning of the loading, tolerate more stresses than soil under equivalent strain.
the slope of the graphs is steep; the gap between the curves of
the stone column and the unreinforced clay bed indicates the It could be seen that all columns behaved approximately alike
difference in the stiffness between the column materials and until the settlement of 5% of the footing diameter. Then the

5
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

slope of the curve of the columns constructed of CC and CB Load

decreased after 5% settlement of the footing diameter. These
unexpected behaviours of the recycled materials in the floating
stone column can be ascribed to the different conditions gov-
erning the aggregates in the floating column relative to the
conditions governing the aggregates in the index tests. Bulging
According to Table 3, the difference between the maximum
Passive pressure of soil
and minimum unit weights of CB is less than that of other
materials. As a result, the interlocking of the compacted aggre-
gates under loading are mobilised earlier and their frictional
resistance is activated sooner. Then, due to the weakness of the
CB, this material is dilated sooner. In the stone column, the
mechanism that primarily leads to improvement is the bulging
of the stone column (Barksdale and Bachus, 1983). Due to the (a)
weak properties of the CB, the column constructed of CB has
more of a tendency to expand to a lower depth than the other Load
materials. As the depth of the soil increases, the surcharge
pressure increases and, in this area, the bulging of the column
made of CB is higher than that of other columns; this causes
passive resistance from the surrounding soil of the column to
be mobilised, and thereby confinement occurs more often and Bulging
Passive pressure of soil
that leads to the increasing foundation-bearing capacity. In
addition, the angle of the CBs can be effective in interlocking
with the surrounding soil. Figure 6 shows the bulging of the
stone column made of gravel and CBs schematically.

4.2 Stone columns constructed of a combination

of materials
The aim in this section is to combine recycled aggregates with
natural aggregates to achieve the optimal amount of their com-
position and compare them with columns made of a certain
type of materials. The pressure−settlement characteristics of a
combination of different materials are shown in Figure 7. It
can be observed that the bearing capacity of the foundation
bed with the stone columns made of a combination of several
materials has also increased. In general, with almost each per-
centage of gravel combined with recycled aggregates, floating
columns exhibit a specific performance.
4.3 Bearing-capacity increase
To measure the increase in the bearing capacity due to the
stone column, the bearing-capacity improvement factor (IF) is
defined as the ratio of the bearing pressure of the reinforced
bed to the unreinforced clay bed at an equal footing settle-
ment. Figure 8 shows the variations of bearing-capacity IF,
with the footing settlement for the columns constructed using
a certain type of material and a combination of different
materials. At the beginning of the loading, the slope of the IF
factor increased because the columns, at first, tolerated a
greater share of the stresses. As the settlement increased, the
slope of the IF factor was reversed, indicating the transfer of
stresses from the column to the surrounding soil due to
(b)
Figure 6. Schematic view of stone column bulging: (a) stone
column constructed of CB or CC material and (b) stone column
constructed of natural aggregate
aggregates dilation and, consequently, the excessive expansion
of the column. In the rest of the settlement, the curve was
accompanied by fluctuations in the bearing capacity, which
could be due to a redistribution of aggregates, and then the
interlocking of aggregates of the stone columns and the soil
after displacement.
Generally, the slope of the curves increased until the 5% settle-
ment of footing diameter. In this settlement, the column stress
reached yield strength. Hence, the ultimate load which the
column can carry before the failure of column material is at a
5% settlement of the footing diameter. The yield strength for
the columns made of a type of aggregate was more than the
other columns with composite materials. After the column
yielded, the curve slope of the column constructed of CB and

6
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

50 recycled materials and natural material and also the columns

45 made of two or three types of materials had a bearing capacity
40
of approximately five and two times more than that of the
unreinforced bed, respectively, in the settlement of 5%. This
Bearing pressure: kPa

35
different reaction displayed by the column made of a type of
30
material can be due to the good interaction and the interlock-
25 ing of particles which are of the same type. Moreover, another
20 reason for this can be the presence of weak recycled aggregates
15 Unreinforced clay bed
between strong gravel aggregates, causing the weak material to
10 50% CB + 50% CC be crushed sooner and become finer, and thereby not be able
40% CC + 40% CB + 20% gravel
to establish a proper interlocking.
5 25% CC + 25% CB + 50% gravel
10% CC + 10% CB + 80% gravel
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Footing settlement, S/D: % 4.4 Comparison of the experimental model with
theory and case studies
The theoretical bearing capacity of the laboratory modelling of
Figure 7. Footing pressure−settlement characteristics of the
constructed stone column with a combination of different the reinforced bed with the stone columns is estimated by the
materials simple analysis of the IS 15284 code (BIS, 2003). The
maximum stress that can be borne by a stone column based on
the bulging is obtained using Equation 2

6
100% gravel
2: σ v ¼ ðσ r0 þ 4Cu Þkp col
100% CB
100% CC
5 50% CB + 50% CC
40% CC + 40% CB + 20% gravel
25% CC + 25% CB + 50% gravel where the initial radial effective strength, calculated from the
10% CC + 10% CB + 80% gravel following equation
4

0
σr0 ¼ 2k0 γ0 d
3
IF

2 kp col can be estimated by

1 1 þ sin ϕc
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Footing settlement, S/D: %
Figure 8. Variation of improvement with footing settlement for
all columns constructed
CC experienced a steeper reduction in the slope compared to
the other columns. This can be attributed to the lesser stiffness
of CB and CC than other materials. After that, with the
increase in loading and given that the stone column is con-
sidered a flexible column, the columns and the soil yielded at
the same level of strain (Han, 2014). From the figure, it is
observed that the columns made of one type of material have a
better performance than the columns constructed of a combi-
nation of several types of recycled and natural materials. The
reinforced bed with the columns constructed of a type of
kp col ¼
1  sin ϕc
35 40 45 where ϕc is the angle of internal friction of the column
material, which is ϕc ¼ 45 for gravel aggregates with a density
equal to the stone column, and d is the diameter of the test
column. The test bed soil has Cu = 4 kPa and γ′ = 7·2 kN/m3,
and with the assumption of k0 = 1, the limiting axial stress on
the column is σv = 98·5 kPa. Considering a factor of safety (FS)
of 2·5, a safe bearing capacity is achieved at σV safe =
39·4 kPa. The theoretical safe bearing capacity, which the clay
bed tolerates under the undrained condition, is qsafe =
(Cu*Nc)/FS where Nc and FS are, respectively, considered to be
5·14 and 2·5. According to the experimental parameters,
qsafe = 8·22 and the theoretical bearing capacity IFthe = 4·8,
showing a good agreement with the experimental IF shown in
Figure 8.
Dimensional analysis provides scaling laws that can convert
data from a test model into design information for a large

7
Construction Materials Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad

Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com

Author copy for personal use, not for distribution

prototype (Fakher and Jones, 1996). The stone column
response depends on the physical parameters including the
diameter of the column (d), the length of the column (L),
the angle of internal friction of the stone aggregate and the
soil (ϕ), the unit weight of the aggregate soil and the
aggregate (γ), the coefficient of earth pressure at rest (k0) and
the undrained shear strength of the clay soil (Cu).
The function (F) governing the foundation system is as follows
3: F ðQ; Cu ; d; γ; ϕ; L; k0 Þ ¼ 0
With the scale factor of 1/n 3 for force, the experimental force is
compared with the loading force of case studies. The compari-
son of data from the results of the in situ load tests on stone
columns with the experimental results of columns made of
gravel aggregate is presented in Table 6. The ultimate load
carried by the column made of gravel occurred in the
equivalent settlement of 5%. It can be seen from the data
reported by Han and Ye (1993) and Lillis et al. (2004) that the
experimental results are very close to these results. This can be
attributed to the similarity of the conditions of column place-
ment in a soft clay bed for both experimental models and case
studies.

The F function contains seven parameters, including two main 5. Conclusions

dimensions, namely, force (Q) and length (L). Hence, with This study has investigated the comparison of the perform-
regard to the seven independent parameters, five dimensionless ances of a floating stone column constructed with recycled
variables can be written; therefore, Equation 3 can be trans- aggregates and natural aggregates. For this purpose, an initial
formed into Equation 4 assessment of the material was performed with the AIV and
 
L Cu Q ACV index tests. Then, the stone columns modelled with
4: gðh1 ; h2 ; h3 ; . . . ; hn Þ ¼ g ; k0 ; ; 3; ϕ
d γd γd recycled and natural aggregates were placed under static
loading. The main results of the material index tests and the
results of the loaded floating stone columns are briefly sum-
If the geometric scale is 1/n, then the geometric dimensions
marised as follows.
of the model (m) will be n-times smaller than a prototype
column (p) with a diameter d
& Aggregates crushing value and impact value tests
dp have demonstrated that gravel and CC can be used
5: ¼n
dm as fillers of stone column material, while CB has not
achieved the acceptable criterion to be considered as
the filler.
& All floating stone columns, regardless of the type of
The variable Q/γd 3 can be called a dimensionless variable.
Hence materials used in them, have increased the bearing capacity
    of the clay bed by at least two times.
Q Q & Static loading results indicate that the bearing capacities of
6: ¼
γd 3 m γd 3 p the clay beds reinforced with the columns constructed of
CB, CC and gravel are the same and approximately five
times the unreinforced clay bed. The rate of increase and
Assuming that the soil bed used in the model and prototype decrease in the bearing capacity IF in all columns is
has the same unit weight (γ) (Pinto, 1999), Equation 6 can be approximately the same.
& Due to the weakness of the CBs, the column
written as follows
constructed of CB has more of a tendency to expand
Qp dp3 in the lower depths than the column constructed of
7: ¼ 3 ¼ n3
Qm dm gravel. Due to the fact that the surcharge pressure
is greater in the greater depth of the soil, the passive

Table 6. Comparison of ultimate capacity from field tests and experimental model
Ultimate load Ultimate capacity Ultimate capacity
of model stone measured in of model Type of
column: N References Field test details Scale factor: n field: kN tests (n 3): kN column

233 Han and Ye (1993) D = 800 mm 800/60 = 13·333 450 552 Floating
L/D = 11·25
Lillis et al. (2004) D = 610 mm 610/60 = 10·167 266 245 Floating
L/D = 4·9

8
Construction Materials
Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com
Author copy for personal use, not for distribution
pressure of the soil is mobilised and creates more
confinement. Therefore, the stiffness of materials in the
floating stone column alone is not an effective factor in
increasing the bearing capacity, and the bulge of the
column at lower depths plays an important role in the
bearing capacity of the columns.
& The bearing capacity of the stone column constructed
of a type of recycled aggregates has a better
performance than that of the columns constructed of
a combination of several types of recycled and natural
aggregates.
& As the construction of stone columns needs huge amounts
of natural aggregates and limitation on the supply of
aggregates environmental aspects such as transportation-
induced pollution and the management of construction
and demolition wastes through waste reuse and recycling
brings the use of recycled materials in stone columns
into consideration. According to this study’s findings, the
use of a combination of recycled aggregates might lead
to such goals being attained; however, future research
studies are needed to investigate other available and similar
materials.
REFERENCES
Amini R (2016) Physical Modelling of Vibro Stone Column Using
Recycled Aggregates. Doctoral dissertation, University of
Birmingham, UK.
Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Bo MW and Sivakugan N (2012)
Geotechnical characteristics of recycled crushed brick
blends for pavement sub-base applications. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 49(7): 796–811, https://doi.org/10.1139/
t2012-041.
ASTM (2011) D 2487-11: Standard practice for classification of soils
for engineering purposes (unified soil classification system).
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Ayothiraman R and Soumya S (2014) Model tests on the use of tyre
chips as aggregate in stone columns. Proceedings of the Institution
of Civil Engineers – Ground Improvement 168(3): 187–193,
https://doi.org/10.1680/grim.13.00006.
Barksdale RD and Bachus RC (1983) Design and Construction of Stone
Columns. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC,
USA, FHWA/RD-83/026.
Basu D, Misra A and Puppala AJ (2015) Sustainability and geotechnical
engineering: perspectives and review. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal 52(1): 96–113, https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2013-0120.
BIS (2003) IS 15284-1: Design and construction for ground
improvement – guidelines, Part 1: Stone columns. BIS, New Delhi,
India.
Black JA, Sivakumar V and Bell A (2011) The settlement performance
of stone column foundations. Géotechnique 61(11): 909–922,
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.9.P.014.
BRE (2000) Specifying Vibro Stone Columns. CRC Ltd, London, UK,
BR391.
BSI (1990a) BS 812, part 112: Testing aggregates: methods
for determination of aggregate impact value (AIV).
BSI, London, UK.
Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad
BSI (1990b) BS 812, part 110: Testing aggregates: methods for
determination of aggregate crushing value (ACV). BSI,
London, UK.
Chummar AV (1972) Bearing capacity theory from experimental results.
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division,
Proceedings of the ASCE 98(SM2): 1311–1324.
Dash SK and Bora MC (2013) Influence of geosynthetic encasement on
the performance of stone columns floating in soft clay. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 50(7): 754–765, https://doi.org/10.1139/
cgj-2012-0437.
Demir S, Mokarram FR and Ozener P (2016) The sustainable design of
granular columns based on laboratory model tests. Geo-Chicago
2016 (De A, Reddy KR, Yesiller N, Zekkos D and Farid A (eds)).
ASCE, Chicago, IL, USA, GSP 271, pp. 893–903,
https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784480144.089.
Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Haghighi H, Mohammadinia A and
Horpibulsuk S (2014) Flexural beam fatigue strength evaluation
of crushed brick as a supplementary material in cement
stabilized recycled concrete aggregates. Construction and
Building Materials 68: 667–676, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2014.07.007.
Egan D and Slocombe BC (2010) Demonstrating environmental benefits
of ground improvement. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers – Ground Improvement 163(1): 63–69, https://doi.org/
10.1680/grim.2010.163.1.63.
Fakher A and Jones CJFP (1996) A New Unit-Cell to Study the
Deformation Mechanism of Super Soft Clay Overlaid by
Geogrid and Sand. Geosynthetics International 3(3): 349–367,
https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.3.0066.
Han J (2014) Recent research and Development of ground column
technologies. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers –
Ground Improvement 168(4): 246–264, https://doi.org/10.1680/
grim.13.00016 .
Han J and Ye S (1993) Field study of an oil tank on stone column
ground. Proceedings of International Conference on Case Histories
in Geotechnical Engineering (Prakash S (ed.)). Missouri University
of Science and Technology, St. Louis, MO, USA, vol. 43,
pp. 1113–1118.
Hughes JMO, Withers NJ and Greenwood DA (1975) A field trial of the
reinforcing effect of a stone column in soil. Géotechnique 25(1):
31–44, https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1975.25.1.31.
Jefferson I, Gaterell M, Thomas AM and Serridge CJ (2010)
Emissions assessment related to vibro stone columns.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Ground
Improvement 163(1): 71–77, https://doi.org/10.1680/
grim.2010.163.1.71.
Lillis C, Lutenegger AJ and Adams M (2004) Compression and uplift of
rammed aggregate piers in clay. In GeoSupport 2004 (Turner JP,
and Mayne PW (eds)). American Society of Civil Engineers,
Reston, VA, USA, pp. 497–507, https://doi.org/10.1061/
40713(2004)57.
Malarvizhi SN and Ilamparuthi (2007) Comparative study on the
behavior of encased stone column and conventional stone column.
Soils and Foundations 47(5): 873–885, https://doi.org/10.3208/
sandf.47.873.
Mazumder T, Rolaniya AK and Ayothiraman R (2018) Experimental
study on behaviour of encased stone column with tyre chips as
aggregates. Geosynthetics International 25(3): 259–270,
https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.18.00006.
McKelvey D, Sivakumar ÃV, Bell A and Mclaverty G (2002) Shear strength
of recycled construction materials intended for use in vibro ground
improvement. Ground Improvement 6(2): 59–68, https://doi.org/
10.1680/grim.6.2.59.40790.
9
Construction Materials
Offprint provided courtesy of www.icevirtuallibrary.com
Author copy for personal use, not for distribution
McKelvey D, Sivakumar V, Bell A and Graham J (2004) Modelling
vibrated stone columns in soft clay. Proceedings of the Institution
of Civil Engineers – Geotechnical Engineering 157(3): 137–149,
https://doi.org/10.1680/geng.2004.157.3.137.
Meyerhof GG and Sastry VVRN (1978) Bearing capacity of piles
in layered soils. Part 2. Sand overlying clay. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal 15(2): 183–189, https://doi.org/10.1139/t78-018.
Muir Wood D, Hu W and Nash DFT (2000) Group effects in stone
column foundations: model tests. Géotechnique 50(6): 689–698,
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2000.50.6.689.
Pinto MIM (1999) Modelling a geotextile-reinforced, brick-faced soil
retaining wall. Geosynthetics International 6(1): 651–631,
https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.6.0159.
Rahardjo H, Santoso VA, Leong EC et al. (2013) Use of recycled crushed
concrete and Secudrain in capillary barriers for slope stabilization.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal 50(6): 662–673, https://doi.org/
10.1139/cgj-2012-0035.
Rahman MA, Imteaz M, Arulrajah A and Disfani MM (2014) Suitability of
recycled construction and demolition aggregates as alternative pipe
backfilling materials. Journal of Cleaner Production 66: 75–84,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.005.
10
View publication stats
Use of recycled materials in floating
stone columns
Shahverdi and Haddad
Santos ECG, Palmeira EM and Bathurst RJ (2013) Behaviour of a geogrid
reinforced wall built with recycled construction and demolition
waste backfill on a collapsible foundation. Geotextiles and
Geomembranes 39: 9–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.geotexmem.2013.07.002.
Selig ET and McKee KE (1961) Static and dynamic behavior of small
footings. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division,
ASCE 87(6): 29–47.
Serridge CJ (2005) Announcement: award-winning papers in 2004.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Bridge
Engineering 158(4): 211, https://doi.org/10.1680/
bren.2005.158.4.211.
Vieira CS and Pereira PM (2015) Use of recycled construction and
demolition materials in geotechnical applications: a review.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 103: 192–204, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.07.023.
Yeung AT, Mok KY, Tham LG, Lee PKK and Pei G (2006)
Use of inert C&D materials for seawall foundation:
a field-scale pilot test. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling 47(4): 375–393, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.
2005.12.011.
How can you contribute?
To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the
editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial board, it will be published as
discussion in a future issue of the journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions from the
civil engineering profession (and allied disciplines).
Information about how to submit your paper online
is available at www.icevirtuallibrary.com/page/authors,
where you will also find detailed author guidelines.