Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE.

For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Assessment of Ground Improvement with Improved Columns by Surface Wave Testing Chih-Ping Lin1, M. ASCE, Chun-Hung Lin2, Yung-Zheng Dai3, and Chih-Jung Chien4
1 2

Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, TAIWAN Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil Engineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, TAIWAN 3 Former graduate student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, TAIWAN 4 Geotechnical Engineer, Li-Jia Engineering Co., Ltd, Taipei, Taiwan.

ABSTRACT Soft ground is often improved to increase strength and stiffness by methods such as jet grouting and stone column which result in heterogeneous ground with improved columns. Experimental methods (Standard Penetration Test, sampling and laboratory testing, etc.) used to assess such ground improvement are subjected to several limitations such as small sampling volume, time-consuming, and cost ineffectiveness. Its difficult to assess the average property of the improved ground and the actual replacement ratio of ground improvement. The use of seismic surface wave method (i.e. multi-station analysis of surface wave, MASW) for such a purpose seems to be a good candidate. But the surface wave method is essentially a 1-D method assuming horizontally-layered medium. What MASW measures in the highly heterogeneous improved ground remains to be investigated. This study evaluated the feasibility of MASW in the heterogeneous ground with improved columns and investigated the homogenization of shear wave velocity measured by MASW. The lateral sampling space of the surface wave testing was also investigated by field testings of different survey line locations relative to the improved columns. The engineering information that can be extracted from the improvement rate of shear wave velocity obtained by surface wave testing is discussed. INTRODUCTION Soft ground is often improved to increase the shear strength and bearing capacity by methods such as jet grouting and stone column which may result in heterogeneous ground with improved columns. Experimental methods (Standard Penetration Test, Sampling, Laboratory testing, etc.) used to assess such ground improvement are subjected to several limitations such as small sampling volume, time-consuming, and cost ineffectiveness. Its difficult to assess the average property of the improved

483
Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

484
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

484A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

ground and the actual replacement ratio of ground improvement. Cross-hole seismic velocity has been used for grout quality assurance. Seismic wave velocity can be used to quantify soil improvement by measuring wave velocities before and after grouting. Several case histories describing the successful use of crosshole seismic method in confirming quality and extent of grouting operations have been reported (Stokoe et al. 2004). The use of surface wave methods for such a purpose should be even more efficient because of its non-destructive nature. But it is rarely reported except for dynamic compaction, blast densification, and ground treatment (Kim and Kim 1997, Kim et al. 1999, Donohue and Long 2008). Surface wave methods assume that the propagation medium is horizontally layered. What surface wave methods measure in highly heterogeneous improved ground remains to be investigated. Furthermore, surface waves propagate in horizontal direction while structural loadings are typically vertical. Engineering significance of the effective shear wave velocity of the improved ground should be discussed. This paper presents a case study on application of surface wave method (i.e. multi-station analysis of surface wave method, MASW) in quality assessment of jet grouting. The homogenization of shear wave velocity measured by MASW in the heterogeneous ground with improved columns is discussed. The lateral sampling space of the surface wave testing was also investigated by field testings of different survey line locations relative to the improved columns. Preliminary numerical simulation of the field study was also conducted. BACKGROUND OF MASW METHOD As shown in Figure 1, three steps are involved in a surface wave test: (1) field testing for recording surface waves, (2) determination of the experimental dispersion curve from the field data, and (3) inversion of shear wave velocity VS profile from the experimental dispersion curve.
frequency content
VS

geophone
0

VS1
T ime (s)

0.05

VS2
z

0.1

VS3 Dispersion curve V

0.15

0.2 0

10

20

Field testing Dispersion analysis

Inversion f

FIG. 1. Procedure of surface wave testing.

Surface wave testing in geotechnical engineering have been for a long time associated to the two-station setup used in the spectral analysis of surface wave (SASW) method (Nazarian and Stokoe 1984). To improve inherent difficulties in evaluating and distinguishing signal from noise with only a pair of receivers by this

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

485

method, new techniques incorporating multi-station receivers and 2-D wavefield transformation, named as the multi-station analysis of surface Wave (MASW), were developed (McMechan and Yedlin, 1981; Gabriels et al. 1987; Park et al. 1998; Xia et al. 2007). This method simplifies the testing procedure and the data analysis is better automated. The sampling periods in the time and space domain are t and x; and the numbers of samples in the time and space domain are M and N, respectively. This allows a single survey of a broad depth range and high levels of redundancy with a single field configuration, as shown in Fig. 1. The analysis of the multi-station signals may begin with Fourier transform as
U ( f , xn ) = u (t m , xn ) exp( j 2ft m )
m =0 M 1

(1)

where u is the ground motion (typically velocity) recorded by the receivers with space interval x and time interval t, U is the DFT of u, j = 1 , tm = mt, and xn = nx. The subscripts n and m in Eq. (1) are integer indices to represent respectively discrete points in the space and time domain. The dispersion relation can be found by 2-D wavefield transformation. The most straight-forward algorithm is the 2-D Fourier transform, which is often referred to as the f-k transform (Gabriels et al., 1987). For each frequency component of interest in Eq. (1), the wavefield U is a harmonic function of space. By taking another Fourier transform with respect to the space (i.e. spectral analysis in the space domain),
( f , k ) = U ( f , xn ) exp( j 2kxn )
n=0 N 1

(2)

where 2-D spectrum Y(f, k) represents the wavefield in the frequency-wavenumber domain, the wavenumbers (spatial frequency, inverse of wavelength) of propagating modes for each frequency can be identified at amplitude peaks of the spectrum Y(k). The phase velocity is then determined by the definition v=2f/k. Alternatively, the f-v spectrum can be derived from Eq. (2) by simply changing the variable k = 2f/v as N 1 2f ( f , v) = U ( f , x ) exp (3) xn j n v n =0 ( f , v) represents the wavefield in the frequency-velocity where 2-D spectrum domain. The peaks of the amplitude of the frequency-velocity domain spectrum constitute the experimental dispersion curve. Spectra in other domains can be derived from Eq. (2) by simply changing the variable k=2fp for the frequencyslowness domain and k= 2/ for the frequencywavelength domain. Other 2-D transform algorithms are also available, such as, p-f transform (McMechan and Yedlin, 1981), the phase shift (Park et al. 1998), and the frequency decomposition and slant stacking (Xia et al. 2007). But they are essentially or physically equivalent to Eq. (2) and Eq. (3). The inversion of the experimental dispersion curve is based on the solution of the forward problem of Rayleigh wave propagation in a layered system. The layers are considered homogenous linear elastic; hence each of them is fully characterized by its thickness, density, and two elastic constants. To reduce the number of unknowns in the inversion process, less sensitive variables are estimated and fixed on the basis of typical values for soils and boring logs (soil density = 1.8 g/cm3, Poissons ratio =

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

486
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

486A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

0.31). The inversion process starts from a preliminary estimate of the shear wave velocity profile. Initial models for inversion were determined using the simple inversion formula, in which the shear wave velocity is taken as a percentage (close to 110%) of the phase velocity and assigned to a depth of 1/3 to 1/2 of the wavelength (Stokoe et al. 1994). The profile is then adjusted to reduce the difference between the experimental and the corresponding numerical dispersion curves. This fitting process can be performed manually by trial and error (i.e. iteratively by changing the shear wave velocities from top to deeper layers), or using an automated procedure based on a non-linear search algorithm (Rosset et al. 1991; Xia et al. 1999; Herrmann 2002). The inversion analyses in this study were performed using SurfSeis software, considering only the dispersion curves associated with the fundamental mode. Higher modes may be dominant at higher frequencies. The model compatibility between the experimental and the corresponding numerical dispersion curves should be considered. Participating modes can be identified if the geophone array is sufficiently long (Lin and Chang 2004). Only the part associated with the fundamental mode was utilized for inversion. However, because of the short array used in geotechnical testing, it may not be possible to identify separate modes. Hence, cautions must be taken in deciding the effective frequency range of the fundamental mode if higher modes contribute significantly in the 2-D spectrum. TESTING SITE AND EXPERIMENTAL CONFIGURATION A pilot testing was conducted at a test site next to the Luodong Sports Park in Luodong township, Taiwan (Fig. 2). The test site is close to the Loudong River and is mainly composed of silty sand within top 20 m. A power transformer substation is to be constructed at this site. Previous site investigation revealed possible liquefaction during large earthquakes based on SPT results and suggested ground improvement by jet grouting. The design diameter of the get grout is 1.2 m and the center to center spacing is 2.8 m. The design area replacement ratio of ground improvement is 14.43%. Two sets of MASW survey lines were deployed, each set with one through the center of the grout and the other through the un-grouted area, as shown in Fig. 3. The near offset, geophone spacing, and geophone spread length are 2 m, 2m, and 46 m, respectively. Surface wave tests were conducted prior to and after the ground improvement. MASW signals were acquired with 4.5 Hz vertical geophones and 62.5 s sampling interval. A sledgehammer impacting on a steel plate was used as the seismic source. Two sets of crosshole seismic tests were also performed for comparison. The crosshole tests were arranged such that the sources were in C2 and C6. Each set of tests consisted of one test through the grout and the other through the un-grouted area. The objective of this study was to investigate the homogenization and lateral sampling space of surface wave testing in heterogeneous improved ground with improved columns.

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

487

FIG. 2. Testing site in Luodong, Taiwan.

FIG. 3. Plan view of the jet grouting and testing configuration RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Figure 4 shows an example of MASW seismic record for L1 through grouted columns. Even though the improved ground is highly heterogeneous with grouted columns, the time-domain record after grouting seems to be normal compared to the record before grouting. From the apparent slope of the surface wave in the timedomain record, it is apparent that there is an increase in surface wave velocity after grouting. Figure 5 further shows the results (dispersion curves and inverted shear wave velocity) of the MASW tests and the improvement rate of shear wave velocity. In Fig. 5a and 5b, there are basically two groups of curves, one before grouting and the other after grouting. There are no significant difference between the line through grout columns and that through the un-grouted area. The experimental dispersion curves in Fig. 5a shows that the minimum wavelength is about 5 m, almost twice of

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

488
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

the spacing of the grout columns. In such a case, the overall average shear wave velocity of the improved ground is effectively measured by the MASW. The measured improvement rate of shear wave velocity lies between 15~17%, close to the design replacement ratio of ground improvement 14.43%, suggesting MASW is a good tool for quantifying the replacement ratio of ground improvement at least in the case where the wavelength is significantly greater than the spacing of the grouted columns. On the contrast, the results of crosshole tests are not satisfactory due to high noise to signal ratio, especially after grouting (see for example Fig. 6) where there are scatterings from grouted columns. The MASW, on the other hand, is more immune to noise and is very efficient. But it should be noted that MASW required a lateral extent similar to the desired depth of interest.

488A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

(a) (b) FIG. 4. MASW seismic record for L1: (a) Before grouting (b) After grouting.

PRELIMINARY NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION Surface wave methods assume that the propagation medium is horizontally layered. What MASW measures in highly heterogeneous improved ground remains to be investigated. Although the improvement rate of shear wave velocity was found to be close to the design improvement ratio in the jet grouting case study, the actual replacement ratio of ground improvement was not known. The engineering information that can be extracted from the improvement rate of shear wave velocity obtained by surface wave testing should be verified. This section introduces some preliminary efforts put into this issue based on numerical simulations of surface wave testing using a 2D, fourth-order, staggered-grid, velocity-stress finite difference method (Levander 1988). Details on finite difference simulations of surface wave are referred to Lin and Lin (2007).

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

489

(a) (b) (c) FIG. 5. MASW tests on the ground improvement site, (a) the experimental dispersion curves, (b) the inverted S-wave velocity profiles, and (c) the improvement rate of S-wave velocity.

(a) (b) FIG. 6. Results of cross-hole test C2-C3: (a) Before grouting (b) After grouting.

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

490
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

490A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

The ground condition of the ground improvement was numerically modeled, as shown in Fig. 7a. The simulated seismogram and dispersion relation, shown in Fig. 7b and 7c, resembles that of field measurements except that the shear wave velocity at shallow depth in the field is higher, possibly because the grouting actually propagated up to the ground surface. Figure 8 shows the inverted shear wave velocity profile and the corresponding improvement rate. The simulated improvement rate of shear wave velocity for depth greater than 5 m is 16%, very close to what was observed in the field study. This result seems to support the idea that the rate of shear wave velocity increase measured by surface wave testing is a good indication of replacement ratio of ground improvement. When the stiffness of the grout column is much higher than the background soil, it is the volumetric ratio of the improved columns that controls the effective shear wave velocity measured, independent of how stiff the grout columns are. The improvement rate of shear wave velocity may depend on the spacing of the grout columns relative to the wavelength. Further parametric studies are on-going to validate the engineering information that can be extracted from the improvement rate of shear wave velocity obtained by surface wave testing.

Grid size 0.2m 0.2m

0
20

0.1
30 F re q u e n c y (H z )

T im e (s e c )

0.2

40 50 60

0.3

0.4

0.5

10

20

30 40 Offset (m)

50

60

70 100

150 200 Phase Velocity (m/s)

250

FIG. 7. Numerical simulation of surface wave testing in the jet grouting case, (a) the model configuration, (b) the seismogram, and (c) the f-v amplitude spectrum. CONCLUSIONS The surface wave method is essentially a 1-D method assuming horizontallylayered medium. What MASW measures in highly heterogeneous improved ground

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

491

remains to be investigated. This study evaluated the feasibility of MASW in the heterogeneous ground with improved columns and investigated the homogenization of shear wave velocity measured by MASW and the associated lateral sampling space. The results of a field study show that there is no significant difference between the survey line through grout columns and that through the un-grouted area in the case where the minimum wavelength is significantly greater than the spacing of the grout columns. In such a case, the overall shear wave velocity of the improved ground is effectively measured by the MASW regardless of the location of the survey line. The measured improvement rate of shear wave velocity lies between 15~17%, close to the design replacement ratio of ground improvement 14.43%. When the stiffness of the grout column is much higher than the background soil, the effective shear wave velocity measured seems to reflect the volumetric ratio of the improved columns, independent of how stiff the grout columns are. Hence, the MASW appears to be a good tool for quantifying the replacement ratio of ground improvement. Some parametric studies are on-going to validate the engineering information that can be extracted from the improvement rate of shear wave velocity obtained by surface wave testing.
0 0

-1

-1

-2

-2

Depth, m

-3

Depth, m

-3

-4

Improved ground

-4

-5

-5

-6

-6

Original ground
-7 160 180 200 220 -7 0 5 10 15 20

Velocity, m/s (a)

Improving rate, % (b)

FIG. 8. (a) Inverted shear wave velocity profile and (b) the corresponding improvement rate of shear wave velocity. REFERENCES Donohue, S. and Long, M. (2008), Ground improvement assessment of glacial till using shear wave velocity, Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, A. B. Hung & P.W. Mayne, Eds., Taylor&Francis Group, London, 825-830.

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

492
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 08/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

492A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40 Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Gabriels, P., Snieder, R., and Nolet, G. (1987). In situ measurements of shear-wave velocity in sediments with higher mode Rayleigh waves. Geophys. Prospect., 35, 187-196. Herrmann, R. B. (2002), Computer programs in seismology, Ver. 3.20, Saint Louis University, Missouri. Kim, S. and Kim, D. (1997), SASW method for the evaluation of ground densification by dynamic compaction, Ground Improvement Geosystems: Densification and Reinforcement, M.C.R. Davies, & F. Schlosser, Eds., Thomas Telford, London, 141-147. Kim, D. and Park, H. (1999). Evaluation of ground densification using spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW) and resonant column (RC) tests, Canadian Geotechnical Journal , 36, 291-299. Levander A. R. (1988), Fourth-order finite-difference P-SV seismograms, Geophysics, 53, 1425-1436. Lin C-P. and Chang. T-S. (2004). Multi-station analysis of surface wave dispersion Soil dynamics and earthquake engineering, 24, 877-886. Lin, C.-P. and Lin, C.-H.(2007), Effect of lateral heterogeneity on surface wave testing: numerical simulations and a countermeasure, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 27, 541-552. McMechan, G. A. and Yedlin, M. J. (1981), Analysis of dispersive waves by wavefield transformation. Geophysics, 46, 869-874. Nazarian S., and Stokoe K.H., II. (1984). Nondestructive testing of pavements using surface waves. Transportation Research Record, 993, 67-79. Park, C. B., Miller, R. D., and Xia, J. (1998). Imaging dispersion curves of surface waves on multi-channel record. 68th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, 1377-1380. Rosset, J. M., Chang, D. W., Stokoe II, K. H. (1991), Comparison of 2-D and 3-D models for analysis of surface wave tests, Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Karlsruhe, Germany, 111-126. Stokoe II, K.H., Wright, G. W., Bay, J. A., and Roesset, J. M. (1994), Characterization of geotechnical sites by SASW method, Geophysical characterization of sites, R. D. Woods, Ed. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 15-25. Stokoe II, K. H., John, S. H., Woods, R. D. (2004), Some contributions of in situ geophysical measurements to solving geotechnical engineering problems. Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization, Porto, Portugal, 1, 97-132. Xia, J., Miller, R. D., and Park, C. B. (1999), Estimation of near-surface shear-wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh waves, Geophysics, 64, 691-700. Xia, J., Xu, Y., and Miller, R.D. (2007). Generating image of dispersive energy by frequency decomposition and slant stacking Pure and Applied Geophysics, 164, 941-956.

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012