An Experimental Study of Compaction Grouting on Its Densification and Confining Effects
- 238 Downloads
Compaction grouting (CPG) involves the injection of high viscosity mortar-type grout under relatively high pressure that displaces and compacts the soil in-place. Many case studies around the world prove the effectiveness of CPG to treat liquefiable soils. In these studies, mostly CPG has been developed and used on the basis of practical experiences, its densification and confining effects are not well understood until now. The objective of the present study is to bring out densification and confining effects of CPG. This paper presents a laboratory experimental study carried out to model a CPG treated ground. The study includes the experiments performed to decide appropriate consistency of grout material and appropriate relative contribution of factors such as overburden pressure, grout volume, injection speed and injection pressure that ensures efficient grouting. The effects of CPG are quantified in terms of lateral earth pressures and lateral displacements that are further defined in terms of coefficient of lateral earth pressure, K, and densification factor in the soil around grout column. This leads to a better understanding of its densification and confining effects. Although in practice, majority of the works with CPG have been related to its densification effect and lesser attention has been given to its confinement effect, in present experimental study, its confinement effect were prominent. Also at the farthest locations usually where field tests are carried out, its densification effect could not be found experimentally but its confinement effect was clear.
KeywordsCompaction grouting Density Earth pressure Ground improvement
The authors acknowledge the support of Kyushu University, Japan for conducting this experimental study.
- Akiyama T, Ohsawa K, Watanabe M (1996) Compaction grouting for buildings suffering uneven settlement. In: Yonekura R, Terashi M, Shibazaki M (eds) Grouting and deep mixing, vol 1. Balkema AA, Rotterdam, pp 243–248Google Scholar
- Crockford RM, Bell AL (1996) Compaction grouting in UK—a review. In: Yonekura R, Terashi M, Shibazaki M (eds) Grouting and deep mixing, vol 1. AA Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 279–284Google Scholar
- Haramy KY, Henwood JT, Szynakiewicz T (2009) Assessing the effectiveness of compaction grouting using seismic methods. In: Contemporary topics in ground modification, problem soils, and geo-support, pp 241–248Google Scholar
- Lei JS, Yang XZ, Xia LN, Wang XH (2009) Finite element simulation on compaction grouting with bored pipe in soft soil [J]. J Railw Sci Eng 3:007Google Scholar
- Orense RP, Morita Y, Ide M (2000) Compaction grouting of liquefiable soil under an existing structure—a case study. In: Proceedings of Geo Eng. 2000. International conference on geotechnical and geological engineering, Melbourne, Australia, paper No. GIGS-0329, p 6 (in CD ROM)Google Scholar
- Scherer SD, Gay RL (2000) Compaction grouting: three midwest case histories. Advances in grouting and ground modification, Geotech. Special Pupl. No. 104, Krizek RJ, Sharp K eds. ASCE, Reston, Virginia, pp 245–269Google Scholar
- Warner J, Brown DR (1974) Planning and performing compaction grouting. J Soil Mech Found ASCE 100(6):653–666Google Scholar
- Zisman ED, Clarey DJ (2013) Problems associated with the use of compaction grout for sinkhole remediation in west-central florida cardno ATC, 5602 Thompson Center Ct., Ste. 405, Tampa, Florida 33634 USA. email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.orgGoogle Scholar