Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
tan
tan
The parameters with the subscript input refer to properties entered in the material set
and those with the subscript reduced refer to the reduced values used in the analysis.
At the start of analysis, Msf is set to 1.0 so that all material strengths are at unre-
duced values. The parameters are then successively reduced until failure occurs. At
this point, the factor-of-safety is given by:
failure at Msf of value
failure at strength
strength available
FOS = =
Displacements are also generated in this process. The total displacements do not have
a physical meaning, but the incremental displacements of the final step (i.e., at failure)
may give an indication of the failure mechanism.
68
69
6.3.5 Analysis results
Factor-of-safety analyses were carried out for the cases of untreated soil and jet
grouted soil. For the untreated soil, three cases with excavation depths of 5 m, 8 m,
and 11 m were analyzed. Assuming that open excavations with 45 slopes could be
made, factors-of-safety were calculated for each of the scenarios. Computer results
indicate that for all of these cases, the factor-of-safety is below unity. In other words,
failure will occur if excavation were to proceed in the untreated soil.
For the jet grouted soil, three cases of 5 m, 8 m, and 11 m were again considered, this
time with grouted column elements supporting the sides and base. The factor-of-
safety is calculated after the excavation reaches the final excavation level and the
groundwater level is lowered. Computer results indicate that for all of these cases, the
factor-of-safety is above the required value of 1.25.
The finite element analyses results for the six cases are included in Appendix D.
6.4 Implementation
A series of 1.41.6 m diameter columns placed in a 1.4 m c/c square grid were
grouted using a dual-fluid system, following the layout plans in Appendix C. The
columns forming the base raft are typically 2 m long. The columns lining the slopes
have variable lengths, ranging from 2 m to 8 m. The jet grouting machines were
girder-mounted (see Figures 17 and 18 for grouting equipment used); i.e., they rested
upon two girders laid in parallel which act as tracks. The operating parameters used to
form the jet grout columns are given in Table 15.
Table 15. Operating parameters used in jet grouting, Negeri Sembilan site.
Operating parameter Range/Value
Number of nozzles -
Nozzle diameter 2.84.0 mm
Grout injection pressure 200 bars
Grout flow rate 0.050.06 m
3
/min
Air flow rate 23 m
3
/min
Rod withdrawal rate 1214 min/m
Rod rotation rate 510 rpm
Water-cement ratio -
Cement content 600 kg/m
3
grout
Figure 17. Girder-mounted jet grouting rig.
70
Figure 18. Silo and mixing equipment.
6.4.1 Monitoring instrumentation
A monitoring program was established to track soil behavior before, during, and after
grouting works, so that warning signs which might indicate failure in the soil or
nearby buildings might be observed. Instrumentation was required to detect any
ground movements, settlements, water table changes, etc. caused by the construction
activities so that areas near the site (i.e., the Shell oil refinery and the residential areas)
are minimally affected.
Instrumentation which was installed include:
1. Inclinometers These determine the magnitude, direction, and rate of lateral
slope displacements. These offer an early warning should there be a potential
slope instability problem during excavation or later construction activities.
2. Water standpipes These monitor the levels and changes of the existing
groundwater table. These are positioned strategically across the site to provide
an overall picture of the groundwater table profile.
71
3. Settlement markers These are rods or nails attached to a firm ground sur-
face. Their elevation levels are determined by surveying techniques using a
fixed benchmark. Rates and magnitudes of any settlement movement can then
be obtained by taking regular readings.
6.5 Project review
Overall, the project was executed fairly smoothly and no major problems were en-
countered. Works started in April 2002 and were completed by August over a period
of four months. This was not APG Geo-systems first jet grouting job of this nature,
and its experience suggests that jet grouting can be reliably used for the construction
of retaining walls in the Malaysian environment. Indeed, the senior design engineer
Mr. Lim has expressed confidence in the method when applied to this type of work
and has indicated that the company will further promote jet grouting in retaining wall
construction and other geotechnical projects.
Figure 19. Site after excavation.
72
73
7 CASE STUDY: PROPOSED COMMERCIAL
BUILDING AT JALAN PAHANG, KUALA
LUMPUR, MALAYSIA
7.1 Introduction
In late 1996, APG Geosystems Sdn. Bhd. won an earthworks and foundation contract
for a proposed office and shopping complex development on Lot 436, Section 85,
J alan Pahang in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The site was located in an urban area and
had several buildings bordering the site, including a school. The tight space con-
straints and other considerations had led to APGs proposal of jet grouting plus mi-
cropiles (cast in-situ piles typically of low diameters below 350 mm) being selected
over other bids. The entire contract value was around RM15.5 million, of which jet
grouting works took up around RM4 million.
74
7.2 Site conditions
The soil at the site consists of a roughly 7 m deep layer of medium to stiff clayey silt
near the surface. Below this is a roughly 11 m deep layer of soil varying from loose
sand to slime/very soft clay. Further on down lies a bedrock layer of karstic limestone,
which is commonly found in the Kuala Lumpur area. The soil parameters for each
stratum are presented in Table 16.
Table 16. Design parameters for various soil strata.
Layer
Depth
(m)
Thick-
ness
(m)
Unit wt.
(kN/m
3
)
Friction
angle
Cohesion
c
u
(kN/m
2
)
SPT N-
value
(blows/
300mm)
Youngs
modulus
E
(kN/m
2
)
1 0.07.0 7.0 18 - 25 510 6250
2 7.018.0 11.0 18 2830 0 410 3000
3 18.0 on - 22 42 - - 200000
The subsurface limestone was problematic because it was susceptible to cavity forma-
tion (due to dissolution), discontinuities (joints and fractures), and weathering prob-
lems. From soil investigation reports, it was found that the eastern part of the site was
sounder, while the western part appeared to be underlain by pinnacle limestone with a
few cavities and signs of weathering. Detailed investigation employing seismic tech-
niques were initially proposed. However, the local firm with expertise in seismic sur-
veying was not available during the time due to prior engagements. To avoid unnec-
essary delays to the project, the geological input was assembled from available data
from the soil investigations and detailed examination of the SPT samples and drill
cores.
The zone of slime and soft clay was the legacy of prior mining activities in the area.
There were concerns as this soft layer was located at the pilecap level. Heaving or
lateral soil movements may occur and displace the micropiles during construction.
The site was located in a congested urban area with neighboring buildings bordering
on its edges. In particular, there was a school on the northern side and an administra-
tive building owned by the Automotive Corporation Malaysia (ACM) on the southern
side. A plan of the site and various cross-sectional views of the jet grouting works are
included in Appendix E. Photos of the site after grouting works were completed are
shown in Figures 20 and 21.
Figure 20. View of entire site, Jalan Pahang project.
75
Figure 21. View of jet grouted slope covered with plastic sheeting.
7.3 Justification for jet grouting
J et grouting along the sides and bottom of the excavation was proposed to prevent
upheaval and other undesired soil movements. This would create a firm base upon
which the micropiling machines may be seated subsequently.
Although sheet piles are commonly used as retaining structures, the congested nature
of the site had to be taken into consideration. When combined with deep excavation,
sheet piles require anchors to be installed in order to prevent lateral movements. As
these anchors may extend into neighboring properties, various problems can crop up.
Permission must be obtained from the owners of the affected properties, and extra
measures may need to be taken to minimize any adverse effects. If the anchors extend
under existing buildings, installation may not be feasible at all.
As an alternative, APG proposed that jet grouting along the sides and base of the ex-
cavation be carried out. Company engineers noted that the soil conditions at this site
76
77
were similar to a Kallang River widening project in Singapore, where the soft marine
clay of the river basin there mirrors the soft zone of soil here. The concept was essen-
tially to jet grout an inverted arch structure to resist the upheaval forces in the soft soil.
This solution avoids the aforementioned boundary constraint problems associated
with sheet piling. The grouted soil is also expected to provide a better base for mi-
cropile installation since lateral forces are reduced.
7.4 Jet grouting design
The design of the jet grout columns followed essentially the same process as de-
scribed in Section 6.3 (pp.6669). Finite element analyses were carried out using
various column configurations until displacements and stresses were deemed accept-
able or possessing a sufficiently high factor-of-safety against failure. Detailed analy-
ses results are included in Appendix F.
A series of 1.21.6 m diameter columns placed in a 1.4 m c/c square grid were
grouted using a dual-fluid system. Columns range from 2.6 m to 10 m in length. The
operating parameters used to form the jet grout columns are given in Table 17. Ap-
proximately 9000 linear meters of columns were grouted in total for the project.
Table 17. Operating parameters used in jet grouting, Jalan Pahang site.
Operating parameter Range/Value
Nozzle diameter 2.84.0 mm
Grout injection pressure 200 bars
Grout flow rate 0.050.06 m
3
/min
Air flow rate 23 m
3
/min
Rod withdrawal rate 1214 min/m
Rod rotation rate 510 rpm
Water-cement ratio 0.5
Cement content 600 kg/m
3
grout
7.5 Encountered problems
There were two major problems which cropped up after the project had been executed.
One, the formation of sinkholes in the nearby elementary school (see Figure 22), was
attributed to micropiling activities and will not be discussed further here. The other
involved the ejection of excess grout on the property of the adjacent Automotive Cor-
poration Malaysia (ACM) complex (see Figure 23) during the jet grouting works.
Figure 22. Elementary school located adjacent to Jalan Pahang site.
78
Figure 23. ACM complex (structure with striped roof) adjacent to the Jalan Pahang site.
The grout spillage issue illustrates one of the potential problems of jet grouting in
limestone ground. It was suspected that the limestone formation within the local area
was either extremely porous or contained fissures or cavities. As part of the jet grout-
ing activity was located adjacent to the boundary line between the site and the ACM
property, the pressurized grout had flowed through these subterranean channels which
conducted the grout into the adjacent area. Unfortunately, part of the ACM building
and its parking lot was located along the affected boundary as well. The excess grout
penetrated through the subsoil to cause minor damage along a zone of roughly 5 m
along the edge. A partial list of affected items is shown below:
1. Grout had overflowed into the toilet and storeroom area, causing minor crack-
ing and inconvenience.
2. A nearby water well had been filled with grout, disrupting the water supply to
ACMs toilet system.
79
80
3. An air compressor of the air-conditioning unit suffered damage from over-
heating after grout had seeped into the discharge pipe.
4. Heaving occurred around several offices and the vehicle showroom area. The
chain-link fence delineating the boundary was also damaged due to heave. In
many cases the heave had caused cracking or distortions in the walls, floors,
and other fixtures (door frames, window frames, etc.).
5. The parking zone could not be used as the grout would break up the surface
and stain parked vehicles.
These problems had resulted in prompt complaints and claims against APG, adding a
remedial dimension to the project. Meetings were arranged and access clearance to
the ACM complex had to be secured. Temporary measures to minimize further dam-
age had to be taken, including:
1. Pre-drilling jet grouting points to minimize heave and spillage.
2. Assigning two general workers to clean up and remove spilled grout on the
ACM complex.
3. Propping the fencing and walls along the edge to avoid further tilting.
4. Provision of temporary toilets.
5. Supplying ACMs toilet system with water from APGs site, as well as pro-
viding potable water to ACM.
81
By the time the grouting works were completed, a lot of the damage had been done
already. Not all of the proposed temporary measures were carried out as there were
difficulties in coordination and securing access from ACM. The removal of hardened
grout was particularly problematic as ACM did not want dump trucks entering the
compound due to the narrow access area. After many negotiations, final remedial ac-
tions were agreed to, including:
1. Reinstallation of a water well.
2. Repair of the piping system.
3. Removal of hardened grout to restore the ground profile to its original state.
4. Repair of structural cracks and restoration of door and window frames.
7.6 Project review
The jet grouting works were executed over a period of 13 weeks spanning from April
1997 to J une 1997. The jet grouted blanket worked as expected and there were no ma-
jor problems aside from the spillage issue. The only other major technical problem
encountered was the formation of sinkholes during the micropiling stage.
82
8 CONCLUSIONS
8.1 State of jet grouting
From being a relatively new technique in the nineties, the jet grouting method has
matured to a sufficient degree that contractors are comfortable with prescribing it rou-
tinely under certain circumstances. The evolution has come with the passage of time
and the accumulation of experience. Projects using jet grouting in various types of
soils and for various purposes have been performed, and their records form a knowl-
edge base upon which future studies and works can draw and build upon. From the
many case histories examined, jet grouting has received good reviews of being able to
perform well under extremely demanding geotechnical conditions. As knowledge
spreads and more contractors experiment with the technique, it is expected that jet
grouting will be elevated to the status of a primary design solution offered by many.
83
8.2 Ending notes
A review of the jet grouting method has been completed. Background theory covering
jet grouting operation, the different types of jet grouting, the design of jet grouting
works, etc. has been presented. Select case histories presenting jet grouting used in
different settings have also been described, with two case studies of jet grouting in the
Malaysian environment examined in detail. As good jet grouting design involves an
intricate web of practical and theoretical considerations, actual figures from studies
and case histories have been presented where possible.
The effectiveness of jet grouting is very dependent on the selection of correct operat-
ing parameters, making it a method in which practical experience is crucial. It is ex-
pected more interest will be generated as increasing numbers of geotechnical contrac-
tors see the value of investing in the technique. J et grouting is still in a growth stage,
and the future should only see more development as construction community become
more familiar and comfortable with the technique.
84
9 REFERENCES
1. Andromalos, K.B. and Gazaway, H.N. (1989) J et grouting to construct a
soilcrete wall using a twin stem system (online pdf). ASCE Geotechnical and
Construction Divisions Special Conf., J une 2529, 1989. Available:
<http://www.geocon.net/pdf/paper13.pdf>[Accessed: J uly 16, 2005]
2. Bruce, D.A. (2002) Anchors, micropiles, rock grouting and deep mixing: a
decade of progress in the United States (online pdf) Available:
<http://www.geosystemsbruce.com/v20/biblio/z167_2002_anchorsGroutingD
MM_decade.pdf>[Accessed: August 15, 2005]
3. Carruthers, D. et al. (1994) Background to the design of quay wall stabilisa-
tion works at Kingston Bridge, Glasgow. Grouting in the Ground: Proc. of
the Conf. organized by the Institute of Civil Engineers, London, November
2526, 1992, Paper 25. Thomas Telford, London, pp.417432.
85
4. Coutts, D. et al. (1994) Specification, planning & construction of quay wall
stabilisation works at Kingston Bridge, Glasgow. Grouting in the Ground:
Proc. of the Conf. organized by the Institute of Civil Engineers, London, No-
vember 2526, 1992, Paper 26. Thomas Telford, London, pp.433453.
5. Covil, C.S. and Skinner, A.E. (1994) J et groutinga review of some of the
operating parameters that form the basis of the jet grouting process. Grouting
in the Ground: Proc. of the Conf. organized by the Institute of Civil Engineers,
London, November 2526, 1992, Paper 36. Thomas Telford, London, pp.605
627.
6. Day, S.R. et al. (1997) Stabilization of cadmium-impacted soils using jet-
grouting techniques (online pdf). ASCE Specialty Conf., Minneapolis, Octo-
ber 48, 1997. Available: <http://www.geocon.net/pdf/paper33.pdf> [Ac-
cessed: J uly 16, 2005]
7. Guatteri, G. et al. (1994) Application of jet grouting to tunnel portals and top
headings in N.A.T.M. tunneling: Brazilian experience. Grouting in the
Ground: Proc. of the Conf. organized by the Institute of Civil Engineers, Lon-
don, November 2526, 1992, Paper 27. Thomas Telford, London, p.465.
8. Guilloux, A. (2000) Facing a major geological hazard for a highway tunnel
in the French Alps. Proc. of the Int. Symp. on Geotechnical Aspects of Un-
derground Construction in Soft Ground, Tokyo, J uly 1921, 1999. Balkema,
Rotterdam, pp.8792.
9. Ho, C.E. et al. (2002) Characteristics of bored piles installed through jet
grout layer. J ournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, November
2002. ASCE, pp.160168.
86
10. Ing, H.W. and Teoh, Y.P. (2002) Effects of jet grouting on adjacent ground
and structures. J ournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
February 2005. ASCE, pp.178186.
11. J apan J et Grout Association (n.d.) J et grout: technique materials. Technical
manual.
12. Karol, R.H. (2003) Chemical grouting and soil stabilization. 3
rd
ed., Marcel
Dekker, New York, chapter 8.
13. Liao, H.J . et al. (1994) Grouting for retaining wall movement control of a
deep excavation in soft clay. Grouting in the Ground: Proc. of the Conf. or-
ganized by the Institute of Civil Engineers, London, November 2526, 1992,
Paper 24. Thomas Telford, London, pp.403416.
14. Littlejohn, G.S. (1982) Design of cement based grouts. Proc. of the Conf. on
Grouting in Geotechnical Engineering, New Orleans, Feb 1012. ASCE,
pp.3547.
15. Mosiici, P. (1994) J et grouting quality control. Grouting in the Ground:
Proc. of the Conf. organized by the Institute of Civil Engineers, London, No-
vember 2526, 1992, Paper 14. Thomas Telford, London, pp.227235.
16. Newman, R.L. et al. (1994) J et grouting to enable basement construction in
difficult ground conditions. Grouting in the Ground: Proc. of the Conf. or-
ganized by the Institute of Civil Engineers, London, November 2526, 1992,
Paper 23. Thomas Telford, London, pp.385402.
17. Olgun, C.G. (2003) Performance of improved ground and reinforced soil
structures during earthquakes case studies and numerical analyses (online
thesis). PhD thesis, Chapter 4. Available: <http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/
available/etd-01162004-154238/>[Accessed: September 3, 2005]
87
18. PQ Corporation (2005) Soluble silicates in geotechnical grouting applica-
tions (online pdf). PQ Corporation Industrial Chemicals Division. Available:
<http://www.pqcorp.com/literature/bulletin_52-53.pdf> [Accessed: J une 18,
2005]
19. Schaefer, V. et al. (eds.). (1997) Ground improvement, ground reinforcement,
ground treatment: developments 19871997. ASCE, pp.113125.
20. Shibazaki, M. and Ohta, S. (1982). A unique underpinning of soil solidifica-
tion utilizing super-high pressure liquid jet. Proc. of the Conf. on Grouting in
Geotechnical Engineering, New Orleans, Feb 1012. ASCE, pp.680693.
21. Shroff, A.V. and Shah, D.L. (1999). Grouting technology in tunneling and
dam construction. 2
nd
ed., A.A.Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.547574.
22. Terzaghi K. et al. (1996). Soil mechanics in engineering practice. 3
rd
ed.,
J ohn Wiley & Sons, New York, pp.2829, 324.
23. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1984). Grouting technology (online pdf).
Publication No. EM 1110-2-3506. Available: <http://www.usace.army.mil/
inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/cecw.htm>[Accessed: May 2, 2005]
24. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1995). Chemical grouting (online pdf). Pub-
lication No. EM 1110-1-3500 Available: <http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/
usace-docs/eng-manuals/cecw.htm>[Accessed: May 2, 2005]
25. U.S. Department of Energy (1998). Innovative grouting and retrieval (online
pdf). Available: <http://apps.em.doe.gov/OST/pubs/itsrs/itsr63.pdf> [Ac-
cessed: May 12, 2005]
26. Xanthakos, P.P. et al. (1994). Ground control and improvement. J ohn Wiley
& Sons, New York, pp.580683.
88
APPENDIX A
89
University of Southern Queensland
Faculty of Engineering and Surveying
ENG 4111/4112 Research Project
PROJECT SPECIFICATION
FOR: Richard Fun Yiu CHOI
TOPIC: Review of the J et Grouting Method
SUPERVISOR: Dr. J im Shiau
PROJ ECT AIM: To investigate the current state of the jet grouting ground im-
provement technique.
PROGRAM: Final Issue, October 2005
1. Collect background information relating to the historical development of jet
grouting.
2. Review the current state of jet grouting design and practice.
3. Describe the design of a jet grouting program.
4. Analyze and present the experience of researchers and contractors.
As time permits:
5. Locate local specialists in jet grouting if possible to tap into local experience
with the technique.
6. Review current research in jet grouting and identify directions of future re-
search.
AGREED:
_________________ (Student) _________________ (Supervisor)
(Dated) ____ / ____ / ____
90
APPENDIX B
91
92
93
APPENDIX C
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
APPENDIX D
101
Factor of safety analysis results for untreated soil
Excavation depth not exceeding 11.0 m
102
103
104
Factor of safety analysis results for untreated soil
Excavation depth not exceeding 8.0 m
105
106
107
Factor of safety analysis results for untreated soil
Excavation depth not exceeding 5.0 m
108
109
110
Soil deformations/stresses and FOS analysis results for jet grouted soil
Excavation depth not exceeding 11.0 m
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
Soil deformations/stresses and FOS analysis results for jet grouted soil
Excavation depth not exceeding 8.0 m
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Soil deformations/stresses and FOS analysis results for jet grouted soil
Excavation depth not exceeding 5.0 m
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
APPENDIX E
135
136
137
138
139
APPENDIX F
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149