Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

ISSN 2095-2430

ISSN 2095-2449(Online)

CN 10-1023/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-968

2018 Impact Factor: 1.272

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2016, Vol. 10 Issue (4) : 481-487    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-016-0355-9
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Model test of stone columns as liquefaction countermeasure in sandy soils
Mengfei QU1(),Qiang XIE1,Xinwen CAO2,Wen ZHAO1,Jianjun HE1,Jiang JIN1
1. Faculty of Geosciences and Environmental Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031,China
2. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China
 Download: PDF(679 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

The shaking table model test was conducted to investigate earthquake resistant behavior of stone columns under the intensity of an earthquake resistance of buildings is VIII. The test results show that when acceleration is less than 0.20 g, composite foundation is not liquefied, settlement is also small and pile dislocation is not observed; when acceleration is 0.3g, ground outside embankment’s slope toe is liquefied and ground within stone column composite foundation is not. It is suggesting that reinforcement scale of stone column foundation should be widened properly. The designed stone column composite foundation meets the requirements for seismic resistance.
Keywords stone column composite foundation      seismic liquefaction      shaking table test     
Corresponding Author(s): Mengfei QU   
Online First Date: 04 November 2016    Issue Date: 29 November 2016
 Cite this article:   
Mengfei QU,Qiang XIE,Xinwen CAO, et al. Model test of stone columns as liquefaction countermeasure in sandy soils[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2016, 10(4): 481-487.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-016-0355-9
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2016/V10/I4/481
Fig.1  Composite stone column layout
Fig.2  Model box
physical quantity similarity coefficient physical quantity similarity coefficient
geometry L CL = 1/10 input acceleration A CA = 1.0
mass density r Cr = 1 input shaking duration T CT = 10-1/2
dynamic elastic module E CE = 1/10 dynamic response stress s Cs = 1/10
dynamic Poisson's ratio m Cm = 1 dynamic response angular displacement q Cq = 1.0
frequency w Cw = 101/2 dynamic response linear displacement S CS = 1/10
damping coefficient R CR = 10-5/2 dynamic response strain e Ce = 1.0
subgrade deadweight P CP = 10-3 dynamic response speed v Cv = 1
effective overlying stress sv Csv’ = 1/10 dynamic response acceleration a Ca = 1.0
gravitational acceleration g Cg = 1.0 excess pore pressure u Cu = 1/10
Tab.1  Similarity coefficients of the shaking table model test
gravel size (mm) >0.075 0.075–0.01 0.01–0.002 <0.002
content (%) 34.4 24.9 37.1 3.6
Tab.2  Grain composition of silt soil
gravel size (mm) >0.5 0.5–0.25 0.25–0.075 <0.075
content (%) 2.8 13.9 52.5 30.8
Tab.3  Grain composition of silty sand
gravel size (mm) >2 2–0.5 0.5–0.25 0.25–0.075 <0.075
content (%) 12.4 41.0 33.1 11.2 2.3
Tab.4  Grain composition of coarse sand
Fig.3  Model and arrangement of transducers (unit: mm)
Fig.4  Failure phenomenon of subgrade
Fig.5  The relation between pore water pressure and loading acceleration. (a) Horizontal direction; (b) vertical direction
0.25 g 0.3 g 0.25 g 0.3 g
WP1 0.09 1.00 WP9 0.15 1.70
WP2 0.12 0.52 WP10 0.48 1.60
WP3 0.07 0.29 WP11 0.07 0.27
WP4 0.07 0.35 WP12 0.05 0.19
WP5 0.08 1.78 WP13 0.34 0.52
WP6 0.18 1.20 WP14 - -
WP7 0.06 0.34 WP15 0.02 0.10
WP8 0.03 0.25 WP16 0.01 0.19
Tab.5  The max pore pressure ratio at different loading acceleration
Fig.6  The vertical distribution of ground settlement
Fig.7  The accumulated settlement distribution of ground surface
Fig.8  The accumulated horizontal deformation distribution of ground surface
1 Yang G Q. Construction technique for treating vibrating liquefied foundation of high-speed railway line by dry vibrating crushed stone pile. Journal of railway engineering society, 2004, (2): 31–34
2 Englehardt K, Golding H C. Field testing to evaluate stone column performance in a seismic area. Geotechnique, 1975, 25(1): 61–69
3 Sasaki Y, Taniguchi E. Shaking table tests on gravel drains to prevent liquefaction of sand deposits. Soil and Foundation, 1982, 22(3): 1–14
4 Baez J I, Martin G R. Permeability and shear wave velocity of vibro-replacement stone columns. Soil Improvement for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation. ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication, 1995, 49: 66–81
5 Boulanger R W, Idriss I M, Stewart D P, Hashash Y, Schmidt B. Draigage capacity of stone columns or gravel drains for mitigating liquefaction. ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication, 1998, 1:678–690
6 Adalier K, Elgamal A, Meneses J, Baez J I. Stone columns as liquefaction countermeasure in non-plastic silty soils. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2003, 23(7): 571–584
7 Huang C X, Zhang H Y, Sui Z L, Jin J J. Shaking table test on liquefaction properties of saturated sand ground. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2006, 28(12): 2098–2103
8 Jiang G L, Liu X F, Zhang J W, Zhao R Y. Shaking table test of composite foundation reinforcement of saturated silty soil ground for high speed railway. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2006, 41(2): 190–196
9 Bhattacharya S, Hyodo M, Goda K, Tazoh T, Taylor C A. Liquefaction of soil in the Tokyo Bay area from the 2011 Tohoku (Japan) earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2011, 31(11): 1618–1628
10 Li J Y. Application of foundation treatment with vibro-replacement stone piles to Yinping hydropower station. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2013, 32(S): 2968–2976
11 Asgari A, Oliaei M, Bagheri M. Numerical simulation of improvement of a liquefiable soil layer using stone column and pile-pinning techniques. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2013, 51: 77–96
12 Zhan Y X, Jiang G L, Yao H L. Dynamic characteristics of saturated silty soil ground treated by stone column composite foundation. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2014, 3: 1–7
13 Forcellini D, Tarantino A M. Assessment of stone columns as a mitigation technique of liquefaction-induced effects during Italian earthquakes (May 2012). The Scientific World Journal, 2014, 2014(1): 1–8
14 Liang T, Cong S Y, Ling X Z, Lu J C, Elgamal A. Numerical study on ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation using stone columns encased with geosynthetics. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 2015, 43(2): 190–195
15 Finn W D L, Fujita N. Piles in liquefiable soils: seismic analysis and design issues. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2002, 22(9-12): 731–742
16 Zhuang X, Augarde C, Mathisen K. Fracture modelling using meshless methods and level sets in 3D: framework and modelling. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 92(11): 969–998
17 Zheng W B, Zhuang X Y, Dwayne D. Tannant, Cai Y C, Samuel Nunoo. A continuous/discontinuous deformation analysis (CDDA) method based on deformable blocks for fracture modeling. Frontiers of Structural & Civil Engineering, 2013, 7(4)
18 Budarapu P R, Javvaji B, Sutrakar V K, Roy Mahapatra D, Zi G, Rabczuk T. Crack propagation in graphene. Journal of Applied Physics, 2015, 118(6): 064307
19 Sudhir Sastry Y B, Budarapu P R, Madhavi N, Krishna Y. Buckling analysis of thin wall stiffened composite panels. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96B: 459–471
20 Budarapu P R, Narayana T S S, Rammohan B, Rabczuk T. Directionality of sound radiation from rectangular panels. Applied Acoustics, 2015, 89: 128–140
21 Yang S W, Budarapu P R, Mahapatra D R, Bordas S P A, Zi G, Rabczuk T. A meshless adaptive multiscale method for fracture. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96(B): 382–395
22 Sudhir Sastry Y B, Budarapu P R, Krishna Y, Devaraj S. Studies on ballistic impact of the composite panels. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 72: 2–12
23 Budarapu P R, Sudhir Sastry Y B, Javvaji B, Mahapatra D R. Vibration analysis of multi-walled carbon nanotubes embedded in elastic medium. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2014, 8(2): 151–159
24 Budarapu P R, Gracie R, Yang S W, Zhaung X, Rabczuk T. Efficient coarse graining in multiscale modeling of fracture. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 126–143
25 Budarapu P R, Gracie R, Bordas S P A, Rabczuk T. An adaptive multiscale method for quasi-static crack growth. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(6): 1129–1148
[1] Yan XU, Shijie ZENG, Xinzhi DUAN, Dongbing JI. Seismic experimental study on a concrete pylon from a typical medium span cable-stayed bridge[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2018, 12(3): 401-411.
[2] Jianzhuang XIAO, Tao DING. Research on recycled concrete and its utilization in building structures in China[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(3): 215-226.
[3] Yundong SHI, Tracy C BECKER, Masahiro KURATA, Masayoshi NAKASHIMA. H∞ control in the frequency domain for a semi-active floor isolation system[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(3): 264-275.
[4] Yiyi CHEN, Dazhao ZHANG, Weichen XUE, Wensheng LU. Seismic performance of prestressed concrete stand structure supporting retractable steel roof[J]. Front Arch Civil Eng Chin, 2009, 3(2): 117-124.
[5] LI Peizhen, REN Hongmei, LU Xilin, SONG Heping, CHEN Yueqing. Shaking table testing of hard layered soil-pile-structure interaction system[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(3): 346-352.
[6] YANG Linde, ZHENG Yonglai, ZHANG Dongliang, JI Qianqian, YANG Chao. Design of a shaking table test box for a subway station structure in soft soil[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(2): 194-197.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed