Smart Geotechnics for Smart Societies – Zhussupbekov, Sarsembayeva & Kaliakin (Eds)

© 2023 The Author(s), ISBN 978-1-003-29912-7

Open Access: www.taylorfrancis.com, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license

A case study of the ground improvement works for the TBM

tunneling in composite stratum

S.H. Cheng
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan

Ricky K.N. Wong, H.Y. Hsu & Isaac T.Y. Wong

SANSHIN Corporation Ltd., Taipei, Taiwan

C.H. Chen & C.J. Chen

Department of Rapid Transit Systems, Taipei City Government, Taipei, Taiwan

ABSTRACT: This paper presents a case study of the ground improvement works on TBM tun­
neling for Taipei MRT in the east district of Taipei City. The TBM tunnel is mainly drilled in the
composite strata which consist of alluvial deposits, colluvium deposits, and rock formation. The
upper half of the improvement zone is a soft soil layer and the lower half of the improvement is
a hard rock layer (Sandstone or Shale). The soft soil layers outside of the tunnel-shaft interface
require jet grouted body to increase their strength and decrease their permeability. Also, in order
to tunnel through the composite stratum, it needs to carry out jet grouting in the soft ground to
increase the strength of the soil layer to homogenize the excavation section. Since the hard rock
cannot be used by jet grouting, permeability grouting is used to decrease its permeability. In this
case, the jet grouting and the permeability grouting were used to overcome the strata with differ­
ent geological conditions to meet the strength (self-supporting) and to reduce the permeability of
the ground. The ground improvement results show that for the jet grout zone, the total core
recovery is greater than 90%, the in-situ permeability tests and the laboratory uniaxial compres­
sion strength meets the specification requirements. For the TAM grouting zone, the permeability
coefficient k carried out by in-situ permeability tests was less than 1×10-5 cm/sec. Before breaking
the cutter face on the diaphragm wall for the TBM to enter from the shaft, the horizontal leakage
tests of the up track and down track at the west side station have been completed. Without sup­
plementary grouting, the permeability coefficient k of all horizontal permeability tests is less than
1×10-5 cm/sec.

1 INTRODUCTION

Various ground improvement methods have been adopted in the construction of the Taipei
Mass Rapid Transit system (Taipei MRT system). The jet grouting and the chemical grouting
technique have been widely used in the tunnel-shaft interface for the TBM launching and
arrival works. This study reports the ground improvement works for the Taipei MRT Xinyi
East Extension Line in the east district of Taipei City. The TBM tunnels pass through the
composite stratum when the TBM arrives at the shaft of the station. The soft soil layers of the
tunnel-shaft interface require jet grouted to increase their strength and decrease their perme­
ability. Also, to tunnel through the composite stratum, it needs to carry out jet grouting in the
soft ground layer to increase the strength of the soil layer to homogenize the excavation
section. Since the hard rock cannot be used by jet grouting, chemical grouting is used to
decrease its permeability. In this study, the commercial Rapidjet jet grouting method and the
TAM grouting with chemical grouting are used to overcome the strata with different geo­
logical conditions to meet the self-supporting and water-proofing required for TBM tunneling.
The grouting results show that the total core recovery in the jet grouting zone is greater than

DOI: 10.1201/9781003299127-86

659
90%, the permeability coefficient k is less than 1×10-5 cm/sec and the uniaxial compression
strength (UCS) meets the specification requirements (28-days UCS of sand and clay layers is
not less than 2.0 MPa and 1.2 MPa). In addition, in-situ permeability tests were carried out in
the TAM grouting zone, and the permeability coefficient k was found to be less than 1×10-5
cm/sec. The performance and the results of the jet grouting and the TAM grouting works are
presented in the following sections.

2 SITE CONDITIONS

The location and layout for the study case of Taipei MRT are shown in Figure 1. It consists
of the R03 station, the cross-over, the R03 tail rail ventilation shaft with the cut and cover
method, and the shield tunnels with shield machines. The shield tunnel in this study adopts
a circular section with an inner diameter of 5.6 m and an outer diameter of 6.1 m. The shield
machine adopts the earth pressure balance critical, in which the total length of the shield
machine is 8.5 m with an outer diameter of 6.24 m as shown in Figure 2. The lengths of the
shield tunnels from the east side of the R03 station to the R03 tail rail ventilation shaft are
about 524 m, and the overburden depth is about 20.8 m to 22.0 m. The shield tunnel is mainly
drilled in the composite strata which consist of alluvial deposits, colluvial deposits, and rock
formations.
The soil condition near the ground surface mainly consists of fill material (SF), alluvial
deposit (CL/CH/ML/SM) with a thickness of 10-20 m and a very soft to weak consistency,
and underneath is soft to medium-hard, moderately weathered to fresh sandstone (SS), shale
(SH). The soil-rock interface is occasionally mixed with colluvial deposits; the main compo­
nents are gravel and rock blocks. The physical properties of soil near the east side/west side of
the R03 station and R03 tail rail ventilation shaft are shown in Table 1. Additionally, the soil
and rock properties along the R03 station to the R03 tail rail ventilation shaft are shown in
Figure 3. It indicates that the qu value of the rock formation is > 1000 kgf/cm2, and the RQD
of the rock formation is between 0 and 100. The groundwater level was about 0 ~ 1.8 m below
the ground surface.

Figure 1. The location and layout for the study case of Taipei MRT.

Figure 2. The TBM shield machine of this study case (Chen et al., 2020).

660
Figure 3. Soil and rock properties along R03 station to R03 tail rail ventilation shaft (Chen et al., 2020).

Table 1. The soil properties at the west side, east side, and tail rail ventilation shaft of R03 station.
at the west side:
Soil Layer Depth (m) Soil Type SPT-N (Avg.) Unit Weight (kN/m3) Water Content (%)

1 1.6 SF - - -
2 16.5 CH-CL 2.2 15.89~17.85 41~52
3 21.4 CL 4.5 18.05~18.34 31~37
4 22.8 SM 53 17.95~18.25 29~32
5 35.0 SS/SH 100 - -
at the east side:
Soil layer Depth (m) Soil type SPT-N (Avg.) Unit weight (kN/m3) Water content (%)
1 1.6 SF - - -
2 8.3 CH 2.5 16.30 61
3 15.0 ML-SM 8.8 18.24~19.72 24~34
4 23.3 CL 6.7 16.38~17.10 42~49
5 33.5 SS 100 - -
at the tail rail ventilation shaft:
Soil layer Depth (m) Soil type SPT-N (Avg.) Unit weight (kN/m3) Water content (%)
1 1.6 SF - - -
2 11.8 CH~CL 5.1 16.48~18.25 28~43
3 20.0 SM-CL-ML 65 19.32~21.29 16~23
4 35.0 SS/SH 100 - -

3 GROUTING WORKS

3.1 Grouting for tunnel launching and arrival

For the grouting works of this study case, the soft soil layers outside of the tunnel-shaft interface
for tunnel launching and arrival require jet grouting to increase soil strength and decrease ground
permeability, but the hard rock layer cannot be performed with jet grouting. Therefore chemical
grouting is used to reduce the permeability. In this case, jet grouting (Rapidjet Method) and chem­
ical grouting (TAM method) were used to overcome the strata with different geological conditions
and meet the strength and reduce the permeability of the ground. The grouting work and improved
zone for the launching and the arrival shield of the presented case as shown in Figure 4 and
Table 2.

3.2 Grouting for soil-rock interface

When the TBM tunnels pass the interface of the alluvial layer and a colluvial layer or rock forma­
tion, it increases the possibility of over-excavation. This is because the stratum on the shield
machine’s cutting blade disk is soft at the top and hard at the bottom, so the TBM becomes liable

661
to offset when drilling and digging. The strength of mixed strata varies significantly in some areas
of this study case. To minimize the impact of drilling on the surrounding area, ground improve­
ment is carried out for these areas. This study introduces the grouting method of the soil-rock
interface located on the east side of the R03 station as shown in Figure 5. The soil layer above the
soil-rock interface is performed by jet grouting (Rapidjet method) to ensure that the shield
machine does not shift up or cause the ground to collapse due to improper digging. Figure 5
shows the position of the soil-rock interface, grouting zone, and adopted grouting method. How­
ever, the TAM grout of the soil-rock interface area is always for building protection.

Figure 4. Grouting plan and profile for launching and arrival shield of the study case (Chen et al.,2020).

Table 2. Grouting method and improved zone for launching and arrival shield of the study case.
Improved range (m)

Center of Grouting
Location tunnel EL (m) method L1 L2 H1 H2 H3 W1 W2 W3 W4

East Tunnel Launc­ 85.6 R-Jet/ TAM Grout 7.8 2.2 4 2 6.5 2 2 2.7 0.5*
hing TAM
Grout
Arrival 84.6 R-Jet/ TAM Grout 8.8 2.2 2.5 2 5.5 2 2 2.7 2.7
TAM
Grout
West Tunnel Launc­ 85.6 R-Jet/ TAM Grout 8.8 2.2 2.5 2 4.4 2 2 2 2
hing TAM
Grout
Arrival 89.9 JSG ** - 10.5 2.5 2 10.8 - - 2 2

Noted: * Close to D-Wall of Entrance C; ** Not included in this report

4 GROUTING METHOD

4.1 Jet grouting

4.1.1 Working procedure

The jet grouting method used in this study is a double-fluid jet grouting system, commercially
named the Rapidjet method. Considering that part of the clay layer has occasionally mixed
with a colluvial deposit, and the subsequent construction of double tube double packer grout­
ing requires drilling of sandstone and shale, the jet grouting adopts a rotatable percussion

662
drilling machine to drill first. The drilling is used directly in the subsequent double tube
double packer grouting. The construction process of Rapidjet is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 5. The soil-rock interface, grouting zone, and adopted grouting method the at east side of R03
station.

Figure 6. Rapidjet working procedure (Rapidjet association, 2019).

4.1.2 Material and grouting parameters

The jet grouting parameters of this method are similar to those proposed by Burke (2004) and
Lunardi (1997). The grout jet was shrouded with compressed air (pa = 0.7–1 MPa) and grout­
ing pressure (pg = 33–37 MPa). The grout flow rate (qg) was increased to 540 liters/min to
enhance its cutting ability and cutting distance while also enhancing the mixing of cement
grout with the soil in situ. In the drilling of jet grout holes, rotary drilling and water jet are
used to pre-drill the holes. The rotation force provided by the drilling machine is then trans­
ferred to the drill bits at the tip of the drill rod. Two nozzles were mounted on the opposite
side of the monitor with a 25 mm difference in elevation. The parameters used in this grouting
are listed in Table 3. Materials required for Rapidjet are as follows: (1) groundwater is
required, and it must not contain oil, acid, alkali, organic matter, or other harmful substances
that affect solidification, durability, and strength; (2) cement binder HSC301 material for jet
grouting.

663
 Table 3. Jet grouting parameters used in the Rapidjet grouting.
Parameter Value

Water cement ratio, W/C 1.4

Jetting pressure of air, pa (MPa) 0.9
Jetting pressure of grout, pg (MPa) 35±10%
Flow rate of grout, qg (liters/min) 180 per nozzle
Nozzle diameter, d0 (mm) 4.24
Number of nozzles on the monitor 2
Rotation speed of the rod, Rs (rad/s) 0.52
Lift up or withdrawal rate of rod, vs (m/s) 1.19×10-3
Lift up step, ΔSt(cm/step) 2.5

4.2 TAM grouting

4.2.1 Working procedure

TAM grouting can be applied to any grouting material in any grouting hole, which is
one of its irreplaceable advantages. Generally speaking, when the grouting zone, location
of grouting holes, and grouting ratio are decided, pressure control or quantity control
can be used for grouting practice. Influenced by non-uniform and anisotropy of soil,
pressure control grouting as well as quantity control grouting, can perform better grout­
ing efficiency. It is especially apparent when the value of grouting pressure itself is not
so influential and relative change in pressure is essential. Relevant construction proced­
ures are shown in Figure 7:
Step1: Boring
The hole was bored with a 125 mm diameter casing using a high-efficiency rotary percussion
boring machine. To prevent disturbance of the surrounding ground, double pipe boring was
used and the spoil was withdrawn through the space between the inner and outer pipes. Mean­
while, to ensure the reliability of ground investigation, we also keep track of drilling slag to
understand the ground condition more clearly.
Step2~Step 4: Sealing compound injection grouting and external pipe placing
After boring the holes, the inner pipe of the double pipe withdrew, and after injecting the seal­
ing compound the TAM tube was driven into the hole. In order not to cause obstruction
when carrying out the drilling work and to withstand the grouting pressures, a TAM tube
made of PVC was used. The axial spacing of injection openings in each TAM tube was main­
tained at 33 cm, and fitted with a packer to seal and prevent the inflow of groundwater/the
flow of grout.
Step5~Step 6: The grouting operation
An internal inner pipe, at the end of which is fitted two stages of packing, was inserted into
the TAM tube, and step grouting was carried out at predetermined depths.

4.2.2 Material and grouting parameters

Two stages of grouting were used in the grouting work: the first-stage grouting used
cement and bentonite grout (CB grout) with an injection volume of 5~8 % soil porosity
for interlayer. Similarly, a solution-type sodium silicate grout (with MK reagent) with
a volume of 30~32 % soil porosity was injected during the second stage. The first-stage
CB grouting was aimed to fill and compact the voids in the ground (mix proportions as
shown in Table 4). The grouting was not stopped until the mentioned design grouting
quantity was reached. Such grout intrusions compress the sandy soil, and make the
improved zone homogenization. In comparison, the injection of sodium silicate grout
into the sandy layer was for low-permeability purposes and increased its overall strength.
TAM Grout injection parameters, grout ratio, and grout volume for the project as
shown in Table 5 to Table 7.

664
Figure 7. TAM grouting procedure.

Table 4. Summary of mix proportions for CB grout and MK grout.

CB grout Mix proportion MK grout Mix proportion

Cement binder 150~250 kg Sodium silicate 250 L

bentonite 40 ~ 80 kg MK reaction 35 ~ 65 L
Water 888~937 L Water 685~715 L
Total 1000 L Total 1000 L

Table 5. TAM grouting parameters.

Grouting method TAM Grout (Double packer method)

Grouting mode 1 shot

Grouting length per step 1 step=0.33 m
Grout flow q =4 ~15 L/min
CB -
Gel Time MK ≈ 60 min
Quantity control Flow rate and pressure
st
1 Grout CB
Grout type 2nd Grout MK

Table 6. TAM grouting ratio.

Grout ratio %
Grouting zone Soil type 1st Grout 2nd Grout Total

Tunnel-shaft interface SS/SH 5 10 15

Water-stop section CL/ML 10 10 20
SM 15 20 35
SS/SH 5 10 15
East side of R03 station (Soil-Rock Interface) CL/ML 10 15 25

Remark: If the filling is completed according to the grouting rate but the pressure is low, the MK material will
be used to inject about 3 to 5% of the inspection and supplement grouting.

5 QUANTITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

5.1 TAM grout pressure recorded

Although the value of grouting pressure observed at each step is not so meaningful, the relative
change itself is essential. It proves it’s helpful to record the 1st and 2nd grouting pressure at the
injection hole in each step (33 cm) by comparing them with each other to evaluate the grouting
effects and detect the insufficiently-improved areas (Hayashi and Matsubayashi, 1996). TAM

665
grout pressure was recorded for 1st grout, 2nd grout, and supplement grout as shown in Table 8.
The average pressures on the clayey, sandy, and sandstone/shale range from 6.4~8.0, 11.8~13.0
and 7.0~13.3 kg/cm2, respectively.

Table 7. TAM Grouting volume.

Grout volume (m3)
Soil volume Grout ration
Location (m3) (%) Nos Design Actual Soil type

West side of R03 station 853.6 20 53 170.7 186.6 CL/ML

1569.9 15 235.5 250.4 SS/SH
East side of R03 station 1086.2 20 51 217.2 224.0 CL/ML
1257.4 15 188.6 191.8 SS
Tail rail ventilation shaft 960.2 35 49 336.2 349.4 SM
(Arrival) 1180.6 15 177.1 182 SS/SH
East side of R03 station 591.0 25 38 147.8 148.2 CL/ML
(Soil-Rock Interface)

Table 8. Results of TAM grout pressure recorded.

Average grout pressure (kgf/cm2)
Soil 2nd Grout Supplement grout
st
Location type 1 Grout (CB) (MK) (MK)

West side of R03 station CL/ML 6.5 7.3 7.7

(Launching) SS/SH 7.0 8.1 7.6
Remark: When the pressure is lower than 6.5 kgf/cm2, apply about
3.0% MK supplementary grouting, and most of the grouting pressure
at this position has increased.
East side of R03 station (Water- CL/ML 8.0 7.5 8.0
Stop Section) SS/SH 9.0 9.7 11.4
Remark: When the pressure is lower than 6.5 kgf/cm2, apply about
3.0% MK supplementary grouting, and most of the grouting pressure
at this position has increased.
Tail rail ventilation shaft SM 12.7 11.8 13.0
(Arrival) SS/SH 13.2 13.3 13.3
Remark: When the pressure is lower than 9.0 kgf/cm2, apply about
3.5% MK supplementary grouting, and most of the grouting pressure
at this position has increased
East side of R03 station CL/ML 6.4 9.1 -
(Soil-Rock Interface) Remarks: The purpose of the improvement of the low-pressure zone
on both sides of the soil-rock interface is to protect the adjacent
buildings, and no supplementary grouting is applied.

5.2 Permeability test of TAM grout zone

According to the construction specification, every 100 grout holes should be tested with at
least 3 holes. The permeability coefficient k ≤1×10-5 cm/sec. Table 9 shows the results of the
permeability of the TAM grout zone. All test results meet the design requirement.

5.3 Core sampling and permeability test of the jet grouted zone
According to the construction specification, every 100 grout holes should be sampled with at least
3 holes. The total core recovery (TCR) of sampling was ≥ 90%, the 28-day uniaxial compressive
strength (UCS) of each sample ≥ 20.0 kgf/cm2 for sandy soil, and ≥ 12.0 kgf/cm2 for clayey(silty)

666
soil, and the permeability coefficient k ≤1×10-5 cm/sec. Table 10 shows the results of coring, UCS,
and permeability of the Jet grout zone. All test results meet the design requirement.

Table 9. Permeability test results of TAM grouted zone.

Location Test No Depth, E.L. (m) Permeability k, (cm/sec)

Tail rail ventilation shaft (Arrival) T-1 87.75~88.75 2.36×10-07

T-2 84.30~85.30 2.66×10-07
T-3 81.00~82.00 1.90×10-06
West side of R03 station (Launching) T-1 88.69~89.75 3.92×10-07
T-2 85.01~86.01 3.50×10-07
T-3 82.00~83.00 2.04×10-07
East side of R03 station (Launching) T-1 89.9~90.9 2.25×10-06
T-2 86.0~87.0 9.78×10-08
T-3 82.0~83.0 1.95×10-07

Table 10. The core sampling and permeability test results of jet grouted zone.
Test TCR Age UCS (kgf/cm2) Top/ Permeability k,
Location No % (Day) Mid./Bot. (cm/sec)

West side of R03 station T-1 100.0 28 26.0/40.0/26.0 6.40 ×10-06

(Launching) T-2 96.0 28 36.0/28.0/46.0 2.58×10-06
T-3 94.0 27 12.0/20.0/28.0 6.75×10-06
East side of R03 Station (Water- T-1 97.9 28 31.8/22.4/45.8 5.20×10-06
Stop Section) T-2 96.1 28 27.5/34.0/39.3 8.15×10-06
T-3 94.6 27 42.0/44.0/33.0 5.65×10-06
Tail rail ventilation shaft (Arrival) T-1 98.9 28 18.2/25.9/34.2 5.79×10-07
T-2 98.5 28 19.6/26.6/35.6 1.89×10-06
T-3 97.0 27 17.4/30.0/48.4 2.37×10-06
East side of R03 station T-4 98.6 28 27.0/32.5/23.3 -
(Soil-Rock Interface) T-5 96.5 26 31.9/16.5/28.8 -
T-6 95.0 27 17.5/29.9/48.3 -

5.4 Horizontal leakage tests in the grouting zone

Before breaking the mirror face on the diaphragm wall for the shield machine to enter or from the
shaft, it is critical to conduct leakage tests for the grouted zone behind the wall. Typically, horizon­
tal boreholes were drilled at the mirror-face location, through the wall into the grouted zone to the
desired length. Then the valve attached to the horizontal borehole is opened to measure the
groundwater inflow rate through the grouted zone into the working shaft. The supplement of the
grout will achieve the purpose of safely breaking the mirror. According to the construction specifi­
cation, with five holes within the mirror frame, and nine holes outside the mirror frame, the depth
is at least 2 m into the grouted zone. The depth of the hole is at least 1 hole must reach the front
edge of the outermost row of the grouted zone or the position 1m before the grouted zone. After
drilling the leaking amount of each test, the hole is measured by the measuring cup with a meter
after the water leakage is stable. The permeable field test uses a spherical flow method to deter­
mine the permeability coefficient. The design permeability coefficient k ≤1×10-5 cm/sec. The hori­
zontal leakage tests of the up track and down track at the west side of the R03 station for
launching as shown in Figure 8. The depth of the center hole was 8.6 m into the grouted zone, and
the depth of the other holes was 2 m. There were 5 holes inside the mirror frame that were equally
distributed in the center diameter of 4.4 m, and the 9 holes outside the mirror frame distributed
the hole positions evenly within the center diameter of 7.2 m. A total of 28 horizontal leakage tests
were carried out in the up and down track grout zone, test results of permeability k range
0.0~9.19×10-7 cm/sec, and the maximum quantity of water was 20 cc/min at the center hole. All
tests met the design requirement and were without supplementary grouting.

667
Figure 8. Horizontal leakage tests at the west side of the R03 station for launching.

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study reports the grouting works for the Taipei MRT Xinyi East Extension Line in the
east district of Taipei City. The TBM tunnels through the composite stratum at the east side
of the R03 station. The upper half of the improvement zone is a soft soil layer and the lower
half of the improvement is a hard rock layer (Sandstone or Shale). The Rapidjet Method and
the TAM grouting were used to overcome the strata with different geological conditions to
meet the self-supporting and water-proofing required for the TBM break-in and break-out.
The following conclusions can be drawn:
1) All the tests carried out in the jet grouted and TAM grouted zone meet the design require­
ment. For the jet grouted zone: the 28-day uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of each
sample was ≥ 20.0 kgf/cm2 for sandy soil, and ≥ 12.0 kgf/cm2 for clayey (silty) soil, and the
permeability coefficient k ≤1×10-5 cm/sec. For TAM grouted zone: the permeability coeffi­
cient k ≤1×10-5 cm/sec. For the horizontal leakage test in the grouting zone at the west side
of the R03 station, the permeability coefficient k was ≤1×10-5 cm/sec.
2) The TBM at the west side of the up-track tunnel of the R03 station was launched
smoothly and without supplementary grouting. Therefore, careful planning of grouting
methods can significantly shorten construction time and reduce construction costs.
3) In addition, the construction of the diaphragm wall for the TBM launching and arrival
works may have an adverse effect on the grouting works (such as the verticality of the
grout holes, the impermeability of grouting, etc.), a row of low-pressure inspection grout
(TAM grout) can be accessional at the interface between the diaphragm wall and the
ground, it can let the grouting works effect more perfect.

REFERENCES

Burke, G.K., 2004. “Jet Grouting Systems: Advantages and Disadvantages.” GeoSupport 2014: Drilled
shafts, Micropiling, Deep mixing, Remedial method, and Specialty foundation systems, Orlando, Flor­
ida, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, pp. 218–234.
BES Engineering Corporation/DAIHO Corporation Taiwan Branch (2018),” Shield tunnel launching and
arrival/soil-rock interface ground improvement works for Xinyi East Extension Line CR285” (In Chinese).
Chen Jian Ren, Zhang Zheng Lin, Yang Gwo Rong, Guo Jin Wei 2020, “Design Consideration and Con­
struction Plan of Shield Tunneling Through Composite Stratum in Edge of Taipei Basin”, Rapid Tran­
sit Systems and Technology”, N0.55, pp. 99–119 (In Chinese).
Hayashi K. and Matsubayashi Y. 1996. “Chemical grouting contributed to the urban development in
Hiroshima city”, Proceedings of Grouting and Deep Mixing, Japan, pp. 299-302.
i-Grout association 2020. 4. Chemical Grouting Guideline (Version 1). Japan: i-Grout association.
Lunardi, P., 1997. “Ground Improvement by Means of Jet-Grouting.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground
Improv., Vol. 1, Issue 2, pp. 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1680/gi.1997.010201
Rapidjet association 2019. Rapidjet Method Jet Grouting Guideline (Version 1). Japan: Rapidjet association.

668