Advertisement

An experimental test study on ring footing resting on clay bed reinforced by stone column

  • Shivani VermaEmail author
  • Vikas Kumar
  • Akash Priyadarshee
Technical Paper
  • 42 Downloads

Abstract

Stone columns are used as a ground improvement technique, and they not only enhance the bearing capacity and reduce the settlement, but also serve as a primary function of reinforcement and drainage. Wrapping the stone columns with geosynthetic materials makes ordinary stone column (OSC) stronger and stiffer by enhancing its performance. Ring footings are more often provided for structures such as storage tanks and bridge piers. Stone column is generally used with square, rectangular and circular footings. The idea of using ring footing with encased stone column is very popular nowadays. By using geosynthetic-encased stone column (GESC) with combination of ring footing, more increase in bearing capacity and reduction in settlement are achieved as compared to OSC. Based on the experimental results, pressure–settlement response of the stone column-reinforced clay was studied. This paper also presents the subgrade modulus aspect of geosynthetic-encased stone column-reinforced clay bed The aim of this paper is to study the effect of different parameters such as the number of columns, length of column, diameter of column and the effect of encasement provided on OSC and GESC on bearing capacity and on subgrade modulus. The variation of bearing capacity ratio and settlement are also reported for different parameters. The experimental data were further used for regression analysis to fit the equation for bearing capacity of the improved soft clay bed. Thus, it was concluded that with the increase in the number of columns, length and diameter of column, bearing capacity and subgrade modulus of reinforced clay have increased.

Keywords

Stone column Ground improvement Ring footing Settlement Bearing capacity Subgrade modulus 

Notes

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank my supervised Prof. Vikas Kumar, Civil Department, MMMUT, Gorakhpur, for his direction and consistent support throughout the course of my research work. I genuinely acknowledge and esteem his regarded direction and support from the earliest starting point to the end of my research paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Bardet JP et al (1995) The great Hanshin earthquake disaster. In: Preliminary Investigation Report. Department of Civil Engineering University of Southern California, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee JS, Pande GN (1998) Analysis of stone-column reinforced foundations. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 22(12):1001–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ambily AP, Gandhi SR (2004) Experimental and theoretical evaluation of stone column in soft clay. In: ICGGE-2004, vol 25, pp 201–206Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Impe WF (1989) Soil Improvement Techniques and Their Evolution. Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Murugesan S, Rajagopal K (2006) Geosynthetic-encased stone columns: numerical evaluation. Geotext Geomembr 24:349–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lo SR, Zhang R, Mak J (2010) Geosynthetic-encased stone column in soft clay: a numerical study. Geotext Geomembr 28:292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gniel J, Bouazza A (2009) Improvement of soft soils using geogrid encased stone columns. Geotext Geomembr 27(3):167–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2008.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murugesan S, Rajagopal K (2010) Studies on the behavior of single and group of geosynthetic encased stone columns. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 136(1):129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghazavi M, Afshar JN (2013) Bearing capacity of geosynthetic encased stone columns. Geotext Geomembr 38:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jamshidi Chenari R, Karimpour Fard M, Jamshidi Chenari M et al (2017) Physical and numerical modeling of stone column behavior in loose sand. Int J Civ Eng 3:1–14Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gniel J, Bouazza A (2010) Construction of geogrid encased stone columns: a new proposal based on laboratory testing. Geotext Geomembr 28:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fisher K (1957) Zur Berechnung der setzung Von Fundamenten in der form einer Kreisformigen Ringflache. Der Bauingenieur 32(5):172–174 (in German) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kumar J, Ghosh P (2005) Bearing capacity factor Nγ for ring footings using the method of characteristics. Can Geotech J 42(5):1474–1484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Benmebarek S, Remadna MS, Benmebarek N, Belounar L (2012) Numerical evaluation of the bearing capacity factor of ring footings. Comput Geotech 44:132–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Saha MC (1978) Ultimate bearing capacity of ring footings on sand. M. Eng. Thesis. University of Roorkee, RoorkeeGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saran S, Bhandari NM, Al-Smadi MMA (2003) Analysis of eccentrically–obliquely loaded ring footings on sand. Ind Geotech J 33(4):422–446Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sharma V, Kumar A (2017) Strength and bearing capacity of ring footings resting on fibre-reinforced sand. Int J Geosynth Ground Eng 3:9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-017-0086-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moayed RZ, Rashidian V, Izadi E (2006) Evaluation on bearing capacity of ring foundations on two layered soil. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 61:1108–1112Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dash SK, Reddy PD, Raghukanth STG (2007) Subgrade modulus of geocell-reinforced sand foundations. Proc Inst Civ Eng Ground Improv 160(GI1):1–9Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bora MC, Dash SK (2014) Regression model for floating stone column improved soft clay. In: Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference IGC-2014 December 18–20, KakinadaGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yadav JS, Tiwari SK (2016) Behaviour of cement stabilized treated coir fibre-reinforced clay-pond ash mixtures. J Build Eng 8:131–140.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2016.10.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yadav JS, Tiwari SK (2017) Effect of waste rubber fibres on the geotechnical properties of clay stabilized with cement. Appl Clay Sci 149:97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yadav JS, Tiwari SK (2017) Evaluation of the strength characteristics of cement stabilized clay–crumb rubber mixtures for its sustainable use in geotechnical applications. Environ Dev Sustain.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-9972-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yadav JS, Tiwari SK (2017) A study on the potential utilization of crumb rubber in cement treated soft clay. J Build Eng 9:177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yadav JS, Tiwari S, Shekhwat P (2018) Strength behaviour of clayey soil mixed with pond ash, cement and randomly distributed fibres. Transp Infrastruct Geotech.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-018-0056-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    ASTM Standard D 6913, 2004 (e2) (2004) Standard test methods for particle-size distribution (gradation) of soils using sieve analysis, vol 04.09. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    ASTM D 4221-99, 1999 (2005) Standard test method for dispersive characteristics of clay soil by double hydrometer, vol 04.08. ASTM International, west ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ASTM Standard D 0854, 2006 (2006) Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer, vol 04.09. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    ASTM D 4318, 2005 (2005). Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soil, vol 04.08. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    ASTM D 2487, 2006 (2006) Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), vol 04.08. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    ASTM D4595 (2011) Standard test method for tensile properties of geotextiles by the wide-width strip method. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kumar V, Kumar A (2018) An experimental study to analyse the behavior of piled-raft foundation model under the application of vertical load. Innov Infrastruct Solut 3:35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-018-0141-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Debnath P, Dey AK (2017) Bearing capacity of geogrid reinforced sand over encased stone columns in soft clay. Geotext Geomembr.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2017.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    IS: 15284 (Part1-2003) Design and construction for ground improvement—guidelines. Part 1: Stone column ICS 93.020Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shivani Verma
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vikas Kumar
    • 2
  • Akash Priyadarshee
    • 3
  1. 1.Seismic Design and Earthquake Engineering, Civil DepartmentMadan Mohan Malaviya University of TechnologyGorakhpurIndia
  2. 2.Civil DepartmentMadan Mohan Malaviya University of TechnologyGorakhpurIndia
  3. 3.CEDMITMuzaffarpurIndia

Personalised recommendations