Experimental and numerical modelling of group of geosynthetic-encased stone columns
- PDF / 8,120,671 Bytes
- 17 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 1 Downloads / 180 Views
TECHNICAL PAPER
Experimental and numerical modelling of group of geosynthetic‑encased stone columns Ankit Thakur1 · Saurabh Rawat1 · Ashok Kumar Gupta1 Received: 20 May 2020 / Accepted: 23 September 2020 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract The advantage of utilizing stone columns in very low bearing capacity of soil has been demonstrated as an effective strategy to improve the load bearing characteristics of soils. For stone columns, the load bearing capacity primarily relies upon the circumferential confinement given by the local delicate soils. In this research article, several tests were performed on group of 3 and 4 stone columns having diameter of 40 mm and length of stone columns of 300 mm. Stone columns were tested for both unreinforced and geotextile reinforced stone columns, i.e. encased stone columns and horizontally reinforced stone columns. Reinforced stone columns have been considered to explore the load settlement behaviour and failure mechanism. The principle target of this exploration is to compare the adequacy of encased stoned columns and horizontally reinforced stone columns. Results show that horizontal reinforced stone columns provide better ground improvement in comparison with encased stone columns. Utilizing of geotextile helps reduce failure due to the lateral bulging. Finite element modelling (FEM) has also been performed with Plaxis 2D and 3D software. The FEM results show that the load bearing capacity of reinforced stone columns is better than unreinforced stone columns both depicting failure due to bulging. The validation of experimental and FEM results are found in good agreement within permissible range of variation. Keywords Stone columns · Unreinforced · Encased · Horizontally reinforced · Geotextiles · Plaxis 3D List of symbols ϕ Angle of internal friction Ar Area replacement ratio EA Axial stiffness of geotextile γunsat. Bulk unit weight COV Coefficient of variance c Cohesion A Cross-sectional area of element D Crushed aggregates/gravels size dmodel Diameter of model stone column dprototype Diameter of prototype stone column FEM Finite element method Rinter Interface reduction ratio E Modulus of elasticity of element * Ankit Thakur [email protected] Saurabh Rawat [email protected] Ashok Kumar Gupta [email protected] 1
Department of Civil Engineering, Jaypee University of Information Technology, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India
SP Poorly graded sand γsat Saturated unit weight d Stone column diameter l Stone column length Np Tensile yield strength 3D Three-dimensional 2D Two-dimensional GW Well-graded gravel B Width of hypothetical footing
Introduction Many improvement methods have been used in order to reduce considerably soft soils problems such as preloading, geosynthetic reinforcement, stone column method and sand drains. The methods improve the insufficient soil bearing capacity (granular or cohesive materials), excessive settlement (total or differential) or liquefaction potential. The stone column is an efficient me
Data Loading...
