Ground Improvement (2007) 11, No.
3, 117–126
Soil compaction by vibro-replacement: a case study
E. AUSILIO and E. CONTE
University of Calabria, Rende, Italy
During the earthquake of 23 November 1980, the historic
centre of the village of San Michele di Serino in Southern
Italy was almost completely destroyed. The site investiga-
tions carried out after the earthquake revealed the subsoil
to consist fundamentally of compressible silty soils with
interbedded gravelly layers. To improve the poor ground
conditions prior to reconstruction, it was decided to use
the vibro-compaction method with the installation of stone
columns (vibro-replacement technique). In this study, the
degree of soil improvement achieved at the site is assessed
by comparing both the profiles of numerous penetration
tests performed before and after the treatment, and the
respective values of the foundation settlement calculated
using the practical method developed by Van Impe and
De Beer, which allows the reinforcing and soil compaction
effects due to the installation of stone columns to be
accounted for in a simple manner. The obtained results
prove that remarkable soil compaction was achieved by
the treatment, especially in the deep soil layers charac-
terised initially by low penetration resistance. Moreover, it
is shown that, if the soil compaction effect is ignored, the
settlement of the composite system consisting of stone
columns and soil subject to loading could be significantly
overestimated.
Keywords : compaction; ground improvement; settle-
ment
Introduction
The method of achieving in situ ground improvement using
deep vibration (the vibro-compaction technique) was first
developed in Germany about 70 years ago. Since then, the
technique has been extensively used in many other countries
to provide an adequate bearing capacity and settlement
performance of foundations under design loads (Thorburn,
1975; Mitchell and Huber, 1985), or to prevent soil liquefac-
tion during seismic events (Tokimatsu and Yoshimi, 1980;
Boulanger et al., 1998; Mitchell et al., 1998). The degree of
ground improvement resulting from this technique depends
on many factors, such as the arrangement and spacing of the
vibrator locations, vibrator power, energy spent at each
location and depth for densifying soil, and operator experi-
ence, as well as soil type and its properties in the pre-
treatment conditions. In particular, it is known that the
presence of silt and clay may severely inhibit the in situ
densification of the soil. In these circumstances, use is often
(GI 5247) Paper received 30 May 2005; last revised 22 March 2006;
accepted 25 September 2006
www.groundimprovement.com 1751-7621 (Online) 1365-781X (Print) # 2007 Thomas Telford Ltd
117
À la suite du tremblement de terre du 23 novembre 1980,
le centre historique du village de San Michele di Serino,
dans le sud de l’Italie, a été presque complètement détruit.
Par la suite, les études menées sur le terrain ont révélé que
le sous-sol consistait essentiellement de sol limoneux
compressible avec des couches graveleuses intercalées.
Pour améliorer les conditions de terrain peu favorables
avant la reconstruction, il a été décidé d’utiliser la méthode
de vibrocompaction avec l’installation de colonnes de
pierre (technique de vibro-remplacement). Dans cette
étude, le degré d’amélioration du sol atteint sur le site est
évalué en comparant à la fois les profils de nombreux tests
de pénétration réalisés avant et après traitement et les
valeurs respectives de tassement de la fondation calculées
par la méthode pratique développée par Van Impe et De
Beer, qui permet de prendre en compte de manière simple
les effets de renfort et de compaction du sol dus à
l’installation de colonnes de pierre. Les résultats obtenus
montrent que le traitement conduit à une excellente
compaction du sol, en particulier au niveau des couches
profondes caractérisées initialement par une faible résis-
tance à la pénétration. Il est également démontré que, si
l’on ignore l’effet de compaction du sol, le tassement du
système composite constitué de colonnes de pierre et de
sol soumis à la charge pourrait être significativement
surestimé.
made of the vibro-replacement technique, because it pre-
sents many advantages compared with the vibro-compaction
method (Hughes et al., 1975; Van Impe, 1989; Bergado et al.,
1994; Adalier and Elgamal, 2004). Vibro-replacement differs
from the other vibro methods because large-sized columns
of well-compacted, coarse-grained backfill material are con-
structed. Generally speaking, installation of the stone col-
umns increases the overall stiffness and shear strength of the
soil, thus permitting the adoption of greater design loadings.
Moreover, the stone columns, acting as vertical drains, allow
a rapid dissipation of the excess pore water pressures arising
from the construction process or generated by loading. In
addition, this soil improvement measure, causing no signifi-
cant vibrations to the existing adjacent structures in com-
parison with other compaction techniques, is also suitable,
with care, for use in urban areas (Adalier and Elgamal,
2004). Finally, even when the soil is considered to be well
suited to densification, the installation of stone columns
could be more economical than other ground improvement
methods to accelerate productivity and enhance results.
This paper presents a case study on the use of the vibro-
replacement technique as a ground improvement measure.
The site where this treatment was performed is situated in
E. Ausilio and E. Conte
San Michele di Serino village (Southern Italy), which was
subjected to severe damage by the earthquake of 23
November 1980. The site investigations carried out after the
earthquake revealed the subsoil to be predominantly cohe-
sive, with the presence of interbedded gravelly layers. After
emphasising some aspects concerning the degree of soil
improvement achieved at the site under consideration, the
effectiveness of vibro-replacement is assessed by comparing
both the results of numerous penetration tests carried out
before and after the treatment, and the values of the
foundation settlement calculated using the practical method
proposed by Van Impe and De Beer (1983), whereby the
reinforcing and soil compaction effects due to the installa-
tion of the stone columns are also analysed.
Background
In November 1980, southern Italy was shaken by a strong
earthquake that caused extensive damage. San Michele di
Serino village, located about 50 km from Naples (Fig. 1) and
about 35 km from the earthquake epicentre, was almost
completely destroyed. Many masonry buildings collapsed,
and others were so severely damaged that they had to be
demolished. In several zones of the village, typical signs of
soil liquefaction were also observed, such as ground surface
cracking, spouting of water and sand, settlement and uplift-
ing of buildings (Carulli et al., 1981; Conte and Dente, 1987).
In order to improve the poor ground conditions of a wide
zone in the historic centre of the village, and to allow the
new buildings to be constructed with shallow foundations, it
was decided to use the vibro-compaction method with the
installation of stone columns (vibro-replacement technique),
prior to reconstruction. This in situ soil improvement
method was chosen on the basis of technical and economic
considerations, and also taking into account the existing
subsoil conditions, which, as will be pointed out in the next
San Michele di Serino
Naples
Fig. 1. Aerial view of San Michele di Serino village; the site to be treated is indicated by a circle. A map of Italy showing the location of San Michele di
Serino village is also shown
118
section, are characterised fundamentally by the presence of
silty soils. In particular, owing to the high compressibility of
these soils, one of the main requirements for the treatment
was to reduce the settlement potential of the site, under both
static and seismic loadings (Ausilio et al., 2004).
In the vibro-replacement technique a vibrator is lowered
into the soil to the desired depth by vibration and water-
jetting. Thereafter, a gravel backfill is placed into the hole
and compacted by vibration and by repeatedly raising and
lowering the vibrator. During vibration, material is added to
compensate for the decrease in pore space, and to continu-
ously fill the cavity between the vibrating probe and the
surrounding soil, so that vibration can be always fully
transmitted to the soil. Further densification occurs because
of pushing of the filling material into the surrounding soil.
The process of backfilling and compaction continues until
the fill top is at the level of the ground surface. As a result,
very dense gravel columns (stone columns) are formed, and
the surrounding soil is reinforced and compacted.
Several authors (Thorburn, 1975; Scott, 1986; Baez and
Martin, 1992; Slocombe et al., 2000) have described the
densification mechanisms occurring during the installation
of stone columns in saturated sandy soils. Following these
authors, densification is achieved mainly by increasing pore
water pressure together with the vibratory action. In parti-
cular, the pore water pressure increase causes a condition of
liquefaction for the soil surrounding the vibrator, which
allows the soil particles to be rearranged under gravity and
vibration into a denser state. Typical pore water pressure
and vibration time histories measured in a silty sand during
the construction of stone columns were presented by
Slocombe et al. (2000). The above physical processes cannot
occur fully in soils with an appreciable content of silt and
clay (Thorburn, 1975). Consequently, a high degree of
compaction is not in principle expected to be achieved in
these soils by the installation of stone columns.
Figure 1 shows an aerial view of San Michele di Serino

taken before the treatment, where the site to be treated is
indicated by a circle. The stone columns were installed in an
area of about 36 000 m2 with centre-to-centre spacing of
1.5 m, in an equilateral triangular grid pattern. A schematic
plan of the zone to be treated, with an indication of the
building foundation lines prior to construction and the grid
of the vibrator locations, is shown in Fig. 2. The maximum
depth of the treatment was about 9.5 m. The equipment was
a hydraulically powered vibrator of 390 kN centrifugal force
and 175 kW motor operating at 30 Hz. The vibrator tip had a
380 mm diameter and a length of 2.20 m. Gravel for the
stone columns was supplied by the top-feed method.
Subsoil conditions
San Michele di Serino village is located in the alluvial
valley of the Sabato river, on a fundamentally flat area. After
the 1980 earthquake, a site investigation consisting of bore-
holes, penetration tests (SPT and CPT) and laboratory tests
was carried out over the whole urban area. Moreover,
several piezometers were installed to measure the ground-
water levels in the subsoil.
A general geological section at the site where the treat-
ment was carried out is shown in Fig. 3. It was reconstructed
on the basis of the soil profiles derived from the available
boreholes. As can be seen, the subsoil is predominantly
cohesive, and consists of a sequence of soil layers (cover
soils) overlying a thick layer of slightly overconsolidated
silty clay. The maximum depth of the cover soils encoun-
tered in the borings ranged from about 13 m to 18 m. The
cover soils consist of layers of sandy silt or silty sand with
interbedded sandy gravel, the thickness of which was found
to be different from borehole to borehole, varying from a
few centimetres to some metres. They are therefore mark-
edly heterogeneous, in both the vertical and horizontal
directions. The ground improvement technique concerned
these soils directly. The underlying silty clay appears, by
contrast, to be more uniform. At the time of the subsurface
B
D
C
E
F
I
G P
L O
P
Q
M W
N Q
T R
S 1·5
Fig. 2. Schematic plan of zone to be treated by vibro-replacement, with indication of building foundation lines prior to construction, and grid of vibrator
locations
Soil compaction by vibro-replacement: a case study
0
5
Cover soils
Depth: m
10
15
20
0 m 20 40 60 80
Sandy silt or silty sand
with black tuff blocks
Sandy silt
Sandy gravel Silty clay
Fig. 3. Geological section of the site to be treated
exploration, the water table was indicated at a depth ranging
between 2 m and 4 m below the ground surface.
The scatter in the available soil-grading curves is shown
in Fig. 4. As can be seen, the silty soils are in general well
graded, with a good representation of particle size over a
wide range from sand to silt containing a significant clay
fraction (Fig. 4(b)). The granular materials vary from gravel
with sand to sandy gravel with silt, and contain up to 8%
clay (Fig. 4(a)), whereas the finest soils consist of silty clay or
clay with silt, with a granular soil fraction up to about 20%
(Fig. 4(c)). Fig. 5 shows the soil particle size distribution as a
function of depth, along a vertical axis located in the central
zone of the geological section in Fig. 3, together with the
available values of the soil unit weight ª, liquidity index LI,
liquid limit wL and plastic limit wp . Recent studies have
shown that this last parameter should correlate with the
compaction characteristics of soils much better than the
other index properties (Sridharan and Nagaraj, 2005). It is
evident from Fig. 5 that, in general, the fines content is
H
I
H O
Y
U
V W Y m
119
E. Ausilio and E. Conte

significant at every depth. In particular, in the cover soils,

the silt and clay content often exceeds 60%, with a clay
fraction of up to 25%. As already indicated, this was one of
Gravel Sand Silt Clay
100 the reasons why the vibro-replacement technique was used
to achieve ground improvement at the site under considera-
tion. The value of the unit weight ranges from 15 kN/m3
80
near the ground surface to 19 kN/m3 at a depth of about
18 m (Fig. 5). The plastic limit of the silt is about 35%, and
their activity is high (Fig. 6). Moreover, according to the
Percent passing: %

plasticity chart, the fine-grained soils can be classified as

60
inorganic clays of high plasticity, with values of plasticity
index greater than 40% (Fig. 7). Summarising, on the basis of
the above experimental data, a poor compaction of the soil
40
owing to the installation of stone columns should have been
expected at the site under consideration.
Finally, Fig. 8 shows a soil profile with some CPT and SPT
20 results recorded in the cover soils before the treatment.
These experimental data account for the stratigraphic condi-
tion and the mechanical characteristics of these soils. In the
0 silt soils, the tip resistance qc is fairly uniform with depth,
100 1 0·01 0·0001
Diameter: mm and takes a value of about 0.6 MPa. The sharp increases in qc
(a) make the gravelly layers clearly identifiable. These latter
soils are characterised, in fact, by much higher values of tip
resistance, which increases up to about 20 MPa in the CPT
Gravel Sand Silt Clay profile under consideration. The same trend can be observed
100
for the SPT blow counts, NSPT : they provide an average
value of about 6 blows/30 cm in the silty layers, and higher
values in the gravel.
80
Percent passing: %

60
Soil compaction achieved by the
treatment
40 In order to check the degree of ground improvement
achieved at the site under consideration, numerous penetra-
tion tests were performed before and after treatment.
20 Specifically, over 20 dynamic cone penetration tests (DCPT)
were carried out in the area to be treated, at varied locations.
In such tests, a conical tip is driven into the soil by a
0 hammer with a 0.716 kN weight falling from a height of
100 1 0·01 0·0001
Diameter: mm
75 cm, and the number of blows, N, for each 30 cm penetra-
(b) tion is recorded. The conical tip has an apex angle of 608 and
a base diameter of 50.8 mm. This test was chosen because it
is relatively simple, quick and inexpensive to use. Moreover,
Gravel Sand Silt Clay it provides a continuous record of the penetration datum
100
with depth in a similar way to CPT. Unlike this latter test,
however, DCPT can be more easily driven into soil layers
containing a significant coarse fraction. It should be noted,
80
in fact, that several CPTs performed before the treatment
stopped when the gravelly layers present in the subsoil (Fig.
Percent passing: %

3) were encountered. The main disadvantage of DCPT is the

60 lack of standardisation. As regards this point, Fig. 9 com-
pares many DCPT results with the SPT values measured at
the same depths in borings located close to the former tests.
40 As can be seen from this figure, there is a fairly good
agreement between the N-values and the SPT blow counts,
with the exception of the gravelly layers, where these latter
20 experimental results are generally higher than the DCPT
data.
The same type of penetration test was used to assess the
0 post-treatment ground conditions, positioning the equip-
100 1 0·01 0·0001 ment approximately at the centre of the triangles forming
Diameter: mm
the compaction pattern, in the neighbourhood of the tests
(c)
carried out before the treatment. Fig. 10 shows a comparison
Fig. 4. Limiting grain size distribution curves: (a) gravelly soils; (b) silty soils; between several DCPT profiles recorded before and after the
(c) clayey soils treatment. The results prove that, although unexpected, the

120
 Soil compaction by vibro-replacement: a case study

Grain size distribution: % γ: kN/m3 Atterberg limits: % LI

0 50 100 0 10 20 0 50 100 0 0·5 1
0 0 0 0

5 5 5 5
Silt

Cover soils
wP
10 10 10 wL 10
Depth: m

Sand

Gravel 15
15 15 15

20 20 20 20

Clay

25 25 25 25

Fig. 5. Particle size distribution and soil properties with depth

100 near the ground surface. In order to analyse this aspect, the
parameter K is introduced, with
80 Nb
K¼C (1)

9z
Plasticity index: %

60 where Nb indicates the DCPT value recorded at a given

depth before the treatment,
9z is the vertical effective stress
at the same depth expressed in kPa, and C is a constant
40 depending on the characteristics of the penetration test used,
whose function is that of making K dimensionless. Specifi-
Silt (cover soils) cally, the expression for C is
20
Silty clay Mhm
C¼ (2)
Ar
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 where M is the hammer weight (0.716 kN), hm is the fall
Clay fraction: % height of the hammer (0.75 m), A is the base area of the cone
tip (0.002 m2 ), and r is the penetration of the conical tip
Fig. 6. Activity chart
during the test (0.30 m). For the testing device under
consideration the value of C is therefore 895 kPa. In Fig. 11,
the parameter K is related to the ratio of the number of
60 blows recorded at a given depth after the treatment, Na , to
the corresponding blow count measured at the same depth
Plasticity index: %

before the treatment, Nb , considering all the penetration data

40
20
0
0 20
Fig. 7. Plasticity chart
vibro-replacement technique significantly improved the soil
up to a depth of about 10 m below the ground surface. The
greatest increase in penetration resistance occurred in the
deep layers with initially low values of the number of blows,
whereas a slight increase in the N-values can be observed
available. It should be noted that Na /Nb represents a
measure of the degree of soil compaction achieved by the
vibro-replacement technique, and K should account for the
packing of the soil before the treatment. A certain similarity
Silt (cover soils)
can, in fact, be recognised between the expression for K and
some empirical correlations proposed in the literature to
Silty clay evaluate the relative density of granular soils as a function
40 60 80 100
of the SPT blow count and the effective overburden stress
Liquid limit: % (e.g. Gibbs and Holtz, 1957; Peck and Bazaraa, 1969; Saito,
1977; Skempton, 1986).
As can be seen from Fig. 11, the treatment effectiveness at
a given depth depends on the K value or, equivalently, on
the initial N-value and the vertical effective stress at that
depth. Specifically, the soil layers initially characterised by
low values of Nb and/or high values of
9z (low values of K)
are those where a more pronounced soil improvement,
expressed in terms of penetration resistance increase, was

121
E. Ausilio and E. Conte

Description of soil qc: MPa NSPT: blows/30 cm

0 10 20 0 20 40
0 0 0

Sandy silt or silty sand

with black tuff blocks

Sandy gravel
5 5 5
Depth: m

Sandy silt

10 10 10
Sandy gravel

Sandy silt

Sandy gravel
15 15 15

Sandy silt

Fig. 8. Soil profile with SPT and CPT results measured before treatment

60 evidence analytically, we can fit the data presented in Fig. 11

by the equation

Na
log ¼ 2:73  log K (3)
Nb
40
SPT blow counts

which is also plotted in the same figure.

20 Improvement of the settlement

Gravelly layers
0
0 20 40
DCPT blow counts
Fig. 9. Correlation between DCPT results and corresponding SPT data
achieved (Na /Nb . 1). In particular, for values of K , 100,
the post-treatment DCPT results often exceed the corre-
sponding pre-treatment values by a factor of at least 5. By
contrast, for the soil layers with high values of Nb and/or
low values of
9z (high values of K), slight increases in the N-
values were recorded after the treatment (Na /Nb
1). It
should be noted that some values of Na /Nb are even less
than unity (Fig. 11), indicating that in this case the initial soil
properties are made worse by the treatment. This occurs at
high values of K, and should be due to the fact that the
location of the tests performed after the treatment was not
exactly the same as that of the corresponding tests carried
out before the treatment. As a result, because of soil
heterogeneity, some granular soil lenses, initially very dense,
were found at slightly different depths on performing the
pre- and post-treatment tests. However, in general it can be
affirmed that the soil compaction degree was higher, the
lower the value of K. In order to express this experimental
behaviour of the site
In the present study, the effectiveness of the treatment is
also assessed by comparing the settlement performance of
foundations on the unimproved soil with that of the same
60 foundations on the soil improved by the installation of the
stone columns. This is achieved by calculating the settle-
ments on a theoretical basis, but taking into account the soil
data previously discussed.
Many practical methods have been developed to predict
the settlement of foundations on cohesive soils reinforced
with stone columns (e.g. Greenwood, 1970; Hughes et al.,
1975; Aboshi et al., 1979; Balaam and Poulos, 1983; Gough-
nour, 1983; Van Impe and De Beer, 1983; Rao and Ranjan,
1985; Priebe, 1995; Bouassida et al., 2003). Most of the
proposed calculation models refer to the improving effect on
settlement due to the presence of load-carrying columns of
very dense material, in a soil whose mechanical properties
are assumed to be unchanged compared with those in the
pre-treatment conditions. In other words, these methods
account for the reinforcing effect of the stone columns, but
often disregard the combined effect of soil compaction by
vibration during their installation. In many cases, however,
the installation process may produce a considerable densifi-
cation of the soil surrounding the stone columns, which
contributes to a reduction of the foundation settlement. As
emphasised in the previous section, the present case study
constitutes a real example of where a remarkable soil

122
 Soil compaction by vibro-replacement: a case study

N N N
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
0 0 0

Before treatment
2 After treatment 2 2

4 4 4
Depth: m

6 6 6

8 8 8

10 10 10

N N N
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
0 0 0

2 2 2

4 4 4
Depth: m

6 6 6

8 8 8

10 10 10

Fig. 10. Comparison of pre- and post-treatment DCPT profiles

100·0 compaction, although not fully expected, was achieved by

the vibro-replacement technique.
To evaluate the settlement behaviour of the composite
system consisting of stone columns and soil, by considering
10·0
both the improvement components (i.e. reinforcement and
soil compaction), in this paper use is made of the practical
Na method presented by Van Impe and De Beer (1983). These
Nb authors derived some closed-form expressions that are very
easy to use. In addition, using this method, a few parameters
1·0 are required to be known: the external load, q; the centre-to-
centre spacing of the columns, s; their diameter, d, and height,
H; the angle of shearing resistance of the stone material, 9;
and the deformation parameters of the soil (Fig. 12). The
0·1 method is based on the assumption that the stone columns
1 10 100 1000 10 000 are at their limit equilibrium while deforming at constant
K
volume under vertical loading. In order to solve the problem
Fig. 11. Correlation between ratio Na /Nb and parameter K in a simple way, the stone columns are replaced by equiva-

123
E. Ausilio and E. Conte

q for the reinforcing effect of the stone columns on the

settlement calculation. Nevertheless, it can easily be extended
Soil to include the soil compaction effect by using in equation (6)
Stone column
(φ⬘) (E⬘, ν⬘) the soil parameters improved by the treatment.
H Failing values of the soil modulus directly measured using
more appropriate tests than the penetration ones (Jamiol-
kowski et al., 1985), for purposes of analysis, in the present
study it is assumed that E9 is empirically related to the SPT
blow count by (Pasqualini, 1983)
d E9 ¼ 0:316NSPT þ 1:58 (8)
s
where E9 is expressed in MPa. Because of the good
Fig. 12. Scheme for settlement calculation agreement between N and NSPT , as documented in Fig. 9, the
DCPT data may be used in equation (8) instead of the SPT
values to evaluate E9. This allows the soil modulus to be
lent stone walls. Therefore the calculations are performed estimated for both the pre- and post-remediation ground
under plane-strain conditions. Moreover, the soil is modelled conditions, although in an approximate manner. The other
as an isotropic, homogeneous, linearly elastic medium. Under data used in the analysis are: q ¼ 100 kPa, 9 ¼ 40o and 90 ¼
the above assumptions, Van Impe and De Beer (1983) 9 ¼ 1/3. This latter value should be adequate for the state
proposed the use of the expressions shown below. of final settlement in most cases (Priebe, 1995).
The settlement w0 of an unimproved soil layer subject to a Following Van Impe and De Beer (1983), the beneficial
uniform load is given by influence of the stone columns on settlement is described by
" # the settlement reduction factor , defined as the ratio of the
90 2 q
w0 ¼ H(1  90 2 ) 1  (4) settlement for the composite system, consisting of stone
ð1  90 Þ2 E90 columns and soil subject to a given load, to the settlement of
the unimproved soil layer without stone columns under the
where H is the layer thickness, which is assumed to be equal same load. That is,
to the initial height of the stone columns; and 90 and E90 w
indicate, respectively, the Poisson’s ratio and Young’s ¼ (9)
w0
modulus of the soil in the state before treatment.
The settlement w of a composite soil system consisting of Settlements w and w0 were calculated using equations (4) and
stone columns and soil is given by (5) respectively. Specifically, w0 was determined from equa-
2uH tion (4) with E90 deduced from equation (8) using the DCPT
w¼
 (5) profiles measured before the treatment. With regard to w, two
u
sÆ 1 þ 2 analyses were carried out. First, the settlement was calculated
sÆ
using equation (5) under the assumption that the soil proper-
where Æ is a dimensionless parameter that depends on the ties were not affected by the installation of the stone columns.
diameter of the stone columns and their spacing (for the In other words, E9 was estimated again using the DCPT blow
present case study, Æ ¼ 0.2), and u denotes the horizontal counts concerning the pre-treatment conditions. As a result,
displacement undergone by a stone column, which can be the computed settlement, indicated by w1 , accounts only for
obtained by solving the equation the reinforcing effect of the stone columns. Then the settle-

3 ment denoted as w2 was calculated using equation (5) with E9
8Æ u
½ð1  9Þº  9 derived from equation (8), but adopting the DCPT data
1Æ sÆ recorded after the treatment. In this way, both the reinforcing
"

#
2 and soil compaction effects are accounted for. Because the
2Æ 1  2Æ u
þ 4 1  9
ð Þ º  1 þ 9 º þ method refers to a homogeneous soil layer, in all the above
1Æ 1Æ sÆ calculations Young’s modulus of the soil was estimated for
"
 each DCPT profile considered, using in equation (8) the mean
ƺ 1Æ (6) of the N values measured throughout the depth H.
þ 2 ð1  9Þ þ þ 9ðº þ 1Þ
1Æ Æ The analysis results are synthesised in Fig. 13, where the
#
settlement reduction factor  is presented as a function of K,

q u which denotes the average value of K obtained by equation
 ð1 þ 9Þð1  2 9Þ (1) for each DCPT profile recorded before the treatment. In
ÆE9 sÆ
order to point out the improving effects on settlement due to
q the installation of stone columns, both the ratios w1 /w0 and
 ð1 þ 9Þð1  2 9Þ ¼0
ÆE9 w2 /w0 are presented in Fig. 13. As can be seen, w1 /w0
attains a value of 0.62 that is essentially constant with K,
in which 9 and E9 are the Poisson’s ratio and Young’s and hence it is independent of the DCPT profile considered.
modulus of the soil respectively, and º is defined as In other words, in the present case study a settlement

 reduction of 38% should be ascribed to the reinforcing effect
 9
º ¼ tg2 þ (7) of the stone columns, irrespective of the subsoil variability.
4 2 A greater settlement improvement is achieved when the soil
It should be noted that in the original version of the method compaction effect is also accounted for, consistent with what
(Van Impe and De Beer, 1983), the deformation parameters of was emphasised in the previous section. This is expressed
the soil appearing in equation (6) were assumed to be the by the ratio w2 /w0 , the values of which are always lower
same as those of the soil in the pre-treatment conditions (i.e. than those of w1 /w0 . As shown in Fig. 13, the calculated
E9 ¼ E90 and 9 ¼ 90 ). In this way, the method accounts only values of w2 /w0 vary from about 0.20 to 0.60 as a function of

124

1·0
0·8
0·6
0·4
w1/w0
w2/w0
0·2
0
0 200 400 600
K
Fig. 13. Settlement reduction factor  against average value of K for each
DCPT profile considered
K. Specifically, w2 /w0 is about 0.20 for the lowest values of
K, increases as K increases, and approaches 0.62 for the
highest value of K. Therefore the settlement values are
significantly reduced when the soil compaction effect of the
stone columns is accounted for in the calculations, especially
for the soil profiles characterised initially by a very low
value of K, where a high soil improvement was achieved
because of the treatment.
Finally, it should be noted that owing to the presence of
the high permeable granular soil layers in the subsoil (Fig. 3)
and the installation of stone columns, which also act as
vertical drains, the settlement rate should have been very
fast. Unfortunately, no survey was planned to monitor
settlement both during and after the construction of the new
buildings. At present, however, evidence of distress or
detrimental settlements has not been observed to either the
improved ground or the constructed facilities and structures.
Concluding remarks
Based on field observations and theoretical analyses, it can
be concluded that the vibro-replacement technique success-
fully improved the subsoil of a wide area at San Michele di
Serino village, where severe damage occurred during the
earthquake of 23 November 1980. The degree of ground
improvement achieved at the site under consideration has
been assessed by comparing the profiles of numerous
dynamic penetration tests carried out before and after the
treatment. The results of these tests have been related to the
parameter K, which depends on the number of blows
recorded at a given depth before the treatment, and the
effective vertical stress at the same depth. It has been
pointed out that the soil layers initially characterised by low
values of K, although predominantly cohesive, are those
where a remarkable soil compaction, expressed in terms of
penetration resistance increase, was observed. By contrast,
for the soil layers with initially high values of K, a low
degree of soil improvement was achieved by the treatment.
In addition, the practical method proposed by Van Impe
and De Beer (1983) has been employed to analyse the
reinforcing and soil compaction effects due to the installa-
tion of the stone columns on the settlement of the composite
system consisting of stone columns and soil subject to
loading. The calculation results have shown that, if the soil
compaction effect is ignored, the settlement could be
significantly overestimated.
Soil compaction by vibro-replacement: a case study
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to express their gratitude to the Town
Council of San Michele di Serino for having kindly provided
the experimental data used in the present work.
References
Aboshi H., Ichimoto E., Enoki M. and Harada K. (1979) The
‘composer’: a method to improve characteristics of soft clays by
inclusion of large diameter sand columns. Proceedings of the
International Conference on Soil Reinforcement: Reinforced Earth and
Other Techniques, Paris, pp. 211–216.
Adalier K. and Elgamal A. (2004) Mitigation of liquefaction and
800
associated ground deformations by stone columns. Engineering
Geology, 72, No. 3–4, 275–291.
Ausilio E., Conte E. and Dente G. (2004) Improvement of
compressible soils using the vibro-replacement technique. Pro-
ceedings of the International Symposium on Ground Improvement,
ASEP-GI 2004, Paris, pp. 363–370.
Baez J. I. and Martin G. R. (1992) Liquefaction observations during
installation of stone columns using the vibro-replacement tech-
nique. Geotechnical News Magazine, September, 10, No. 3, 41–44.
Balaam N. P. and Poulos H. G. (1983) The behaviour of founda-
tions supported by clay stabilised by stone columns. Proceedings
of the 8th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Helsinki, pp. 199–204.
Bergado D. T., Chai J. C., Alfaro M. C. and Balasubramaniam
A. S. (1994) Improvement Techniques of Soft Ground in Subsiding
and Lowland Environment. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Bouassida M., Guetif P., De Buhan P. and Dormieux L. (2003)
Estimation par une approche variationnelle du tassement d’une
fondation rigide sur sol renforcé par colonnes. Revue Française
de Géotechnique, 102, No. 1, 21–29.
Boulanger R., Idriss I., Stewart D., Hashash Y. and Schmidt B.
(1998) Drainage capacity of stone columns or gravel drains for
mitigating liquefaction. Proceedings of the ASCE Conference on
Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, ASCE
Geotechnical Special Publication No. 75, pp. 678–690.
Carulli G., Migliacci A., Onofri R. and Porfido S. (1981)
Indagini geologiche ed ingegneristiche in prospettiva sismica a
S. Michele di Serino (AV). Rendiconti della Società Geologica
Italiana, 4, No. 2, 161–164.
Conte E. and Dente G. (1987) Case histories of liquefaction during
Southern Italy 1980 earthquake. Proceedings of the 9th European
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Dublin,
pp. 591–594.
Gibbs H. J. and Holtz W. G. (1957) Research on determining the
density of sand by spoon penetration test. Proceedings of the 4th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engi-
neering, London, pp. 35–39.
Goughnour R. R. (1983) Settlement of vertically loaded stone
columns in soft ground. Proceedings of the 8th European Con-
ference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Helsinki, pp.
235–240.
Greenwood D. A. (1970) Mechanical improvement of soils below
ground surface. Proceedings of the Conference on Ground Engineer-
ing, London, pp. 11–22.
Jamiolkowski M., Ladd C. C., Germaine J. T. and Lancellotta R.
(1985) New developments in field and laboratory testing of
soils: Theme lecture. Proceedings of the 11th International Con-
ference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francis-
co, pp. 57–152.
Hughes J. M. O., Withers N. J. and Greenwood D. A. (1975)
A field trial of reinforcing effects of stone columns in soil.
Géotechnique, 25, No. 1, 31–44.
Mitchell J. K. and Huber T. R. (1985) Performance of a stone
column foundation. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
111, No. 2, 205–223.
Mitchell J. K., Cooke H. G. and Schaeffer J. A. (1998) Design
considerations in ground improvement for seismic risk mitiga-
tion. Proceedings of the ASCE Conference on Geotechnical Earthquake
Engineering and Soil Dynamics, ASCE Geotechnical Special
Publication No. 75, pp. 580–613.
Pasqualini E. (1983) Standard penetration test. Conferenze di
125
E. Ausilio and E. Conte
Geotecnica di Torino, XI Ciclo, Parametri di progetto da prove in sito.
Department of Structural Engineering, Technical Univ. of Turin,
Italy.
Peck R. B. and Bazaara A. R. S. (1969) Settlement of spread
footings on sand: Discussion of the paper by D’Appolonia et al.
Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, 95, No.
SM3, 905.
Priebe H. J. (1995) The design of vibro replacement. Ground
Engineering, 28, No. 10, 31–37.
Rao G. and Ranjan G. (1985) Settlement analysis of skirted granular
piles. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 111, No. 12,
1264–1281.
Saito A. (1977) Characteristics of penetration resistance of a
reclaimed sandy deposit and their change through vibratory
compaction. Soils and Foundations, 17, No. 4, 31–43.
Scott R. (1986) Solidification and consolidation of a liquefied sand
column. Soils and Foundations, 26, No. 4, 23–31.
Skempton A. W. (1986) Standard penetration test procedures and
the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density,
particle size, ageing and overconsolidation. Géotechnique, 36, No.
3, 425–447.
Slocombe B. C., Bell A. L. and Baez J. I. (2000) The densification of
126
granular soils using vibro methods. Géotechnique, 50, No. 6,
715–725.
Sridharan A. and Nagaraj H. B. (2005) Plastic limit and compac-
tion characteristics of fine-grained soils. Ground Improvement, 9,
No. 1, 17–22.
Thorburn S. (1975) Building structures supported by stabilized
ground. Géotechnique, 25, No. 1, 83–94.
Tokimatsu K. and Yoshimi Y. (1980) Effects of vertical drains on
the bearing capacity of saturated sand during earthquakes.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering for
Protection from Natural Disasters, Bangkok, pp. 643–655.
Van Impe W. F. and De Beer E. E. (1983) Improvement of settlement
behaviour of soft layers by means of stone columns. Proceedings
of the 8th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Helsinki, pp. 309–312.
Van Impe W. F. (1989) Soil Improvement Techniques and their
Evolution. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Discussion contributions on this paper should reach the
editor by 4 January 2008