54 Ground improvement by deep vibratory methods

Table 3.3 Physical properties of saturated sand (guideline values)

Medium Very
Very loose Loose dense Dense dense
Relative density Dr (%) <15 15–35 35–65 65–85 85–100
NSPT (blows/30 cm) <4 4–10 10–30 30–50 >50
CPT qc(MPa) <5 5–8 8–15 15–20 >20
NDPH (heavy) (blows/10 cm) <5 5–10 10–15 15–20 >20
Unit weight (wet, above GWT) (MN/m3) <14 14–16 16–18 18–20 >20
Constrained modulus Eoed (MPa) 15–30 30–50 50–80 80–100 >100
Friction angle φ (°) <30 30–32.5 32.5–35 35–37.5 >37.5
Shear wave velocity Vs (m/s) <150 220 350 450

permeability—necessary for design. The direct or indirect measurement of

the density therefore plays a decisive role in determining the need or other-
wise for sand compaction and in any quality control measures.

3.3.2 Stability and settlement control

Natural sand deposits and artificially placed sand fill are likely to have
a considerable variation of their key characteristics depending on the
nature or method of placement, geological history and, as already
explained, the distinctive features of the sand grains (mineralogical ori-
gin, size, shape, hardness, and roughness). As we have seen, the potential
increase of the fines content inhibits densification, and Figure 3.13 shows

Clay Silt Sand Gravel

100
90
80
Passing by weight (%)

70
60 D C B A
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.0006 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2.0 6.0 20 60 200
Grain size (mm)

Figure 3.13 Soil grading suitable for vibro compaction. (After Degen, W., Vibroflotation
Ground Improvement [unpublished], 1997b.)
 Compaction  107

Figure 4.21 Grid patterns for vibrocompaction.

Figure 4.22 Preliminary design chart for Vibrocompaction.

a design relative density. Note that the design relative density decreases as the area per probe
increases. Also, note that there is considerable latitude in the results from Figure 4.22. Most
significant projects use a field test section to verify outcomes prior to beginning production
vibrocompaction.
There are multiple measures of ground improvement resulting from vibrocompaction.
Increased density increases shear strength and decreases compressibility allowing buildings
to be supported on shallow foundations that might otherwise have required deep founda-
tions. For areas where seismicity is a concern, densification reduces liquefaction susceptibil-
ity. By reducing liquefaction susceptibility, a number of possible failure modes are eliminated
including loss of bearing capacity, excessive settlement, lateral spreading of slopes, and gen-
eral loss of support for pavements, buildings, sidewalks, and landscaping.
As with most ground improvement methods, post-ground improvement verification of the
effectiveness of vibrocompaction is typically undertaken. Just as with DDC, vibrocompac-
tion resulting in soil densification results in the need to replace the lost void volume with fill
soils. Both top and bottom feed vibrators use granular material to replace the volume lost
during densification to maintain the site grade. By keeping track of fill used, calculations
can be done to show improvement in density or relative density. In addition, both the SPT
and CPT can be used for in situ evaluations of the site. Both of these in situ tests can be
 Vibro-­flotation and dynamic compaction 41

Figure 3.2 Percentage of relative density that may be achieved versus area for each of the treatment
centers

3.2.1.2 Stone columns (vibro-­r eplacement)

As mentioned earlier, soft soils can be treated with the stone column or vibro-­replacement
technique. In this technique, replacing part of the soil with the compacted stones treats the
soil. The stone columns formed are usually about 0.9 m in diameter. The typical depth of soil
treated is about 10 m.
Estimates on the distance between columns and its effect on settlement is normally based
on a semi-­empirical method using bearing capacity theory, taking into account the passive
column wall resistance (Bell, 1975). Nevertheless, this method does not take into account
the possibility of improvement in the subsoil due to compaction or drainage during installa-
tion of the columns.
The stone column method is most successful at forming columns in normally consolidated
soft clays, silt and a thin layer of peat (Huat and Ali, 1992, Huat et al., 1993b). Construction
has to be done to allow dissipation of excess pore water pressure at each stage to allow for
sufficient gain in shear strength of the subsoil. According to Bell (1975), this method enables
stone columns to be formed in soil with undrained shear strength as low as 10 kN/m2.
In Japan, a variant of the sand columns, better known as sand compaction piles, are gener-
ally used. As its name implies, sand backfill rather than gravel is used.
In cases where the upper zones of the in situ soil do not have adequate strength to provide
lateral support to the sand or stone columns, synthetic fabrics (geotextile) wrap has been
suggested to remedy the problem (Al-­Refeai, 1992).
Another version of the column technique is what is known as the vibrated concrete col-
umn. In this technique the concrete columns are created in situ. A vibrator penetrates the
weak subsoil until it reaches the proposed bearing stratum. Concrete is then pumped as the
vibrator is withdrawn. By revibrating the concrete at the base and top, bulbous ends are