Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference

December 13-15, 2012, Delhi

BEHAVIOUR OF SOFT SOIL REINFORCED WITH ENCASED STONE COLUMNS

S. Dutta, Research Scholar, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, sushovan@iitb.ac.in

J. N. Mandal, Professor, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, cejnm@civil.iitb.ac.in

ABSTRACT: In the present study, axisymmetric numerical analysis has been performed using finite element software
PLAXIS 2D on end bearing stone columns without and with geogrid encasements. Axial stiffness and length of encasement is
varied in order to analyze their effects on the behaviour of reinforced soft clay foundation. Results indicate improved load
carrying capacity with increase in the length of encasement. It is also observed that increase in the stiffness of the encasement
enhances the behaviour of the encased stone column.

INTRODUCTION
Encased stone column is an excellent soft ground FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
improvement technique as it helps the soil to achieve The dimensions of the test tank considered are 850 mm
sufficient bearing capacity in consequence with increased rate diameter and 500 mm height. End bearing stone column of
of drainage so that constructions can be executed over it in 100 mm diameter and 500 mm height with surrounding clay
short time duration. The problem with ordinary stone column is loaded with a 200 mm diameter rigid plate so as to obtain
(OSC) is that it fails by bulging due to insufficient lateral uniform settlement. The plate diameter is chosen such so as
confinement from the surrounding soft soil. Encasing the to simulate the single stone column with its surrounding
stone columns with suitable geosynthetics material influence zone. The tank is modeled large enough to avoid
accomplishes the necessity of lateral confinement and the boundary effect. 15-node triangular elements are used to
prevents bulging of stones. Various investigators performed model the deformations and stresses in the soil. In the
finite element analysis as well as laboratory investigations to analysis, un-drained (B) Mohr-Coulomb model is used for
hunt for the efficacy of encased stone columns. The soft clay and drained Mohr-Coulomb model is used for stone
reinforcing effect of a stone column in soil was investigated column. The geogrid elements are modeled as elastic
to derive the ultimate load carrying capacity of ordinary stone material. Short term plastic analysis is used as calculation
column [1]. The ultimate load carrying capacity of encased procedure. The axisymmetric model for encased stone
stone column was derived [2] and later modified [3] keeping column with generated very fine mesh is shown in Fig. 1.
in view that stone columns failed by bulging before the stress
in the geosynthetic material had reached its failure point.
Parametric study on encapsulated stone column using the
finite element program GEOFEM was carried out extensively
[4] as well as model tests were conducted on single and group
of stone columns without and with different geosynthetic
encasements to investigate the effect of encasements on stone
columns of different diameters [5,6]. More robust
encasements made of uni-axial and bi-axial geogrid of higher
strength were also used for model studies [7]. Finite element
software Abaqus (2006) was extensively used by many
authors to model the encased granular columns with different
approaches [8]. The optimum length of encasement was
found as a function of the stress applied [9]. Analytical study
on non-encased and encased stone columns was carried out
by some authors considering the column as an elasto-plastic
material, soil as an elastic material and geosynthetic Fig. 1 Finite element model of encased stone column with
encasement as a linear-elastic material as well as very good generated fine mesh
agreement with elasto-plastic finite element analyses was
achieved [10]. MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Linear elastic geogrid of stiffness 200 kN/m, 300 kN/m, 1000
In the present study, finite element analysis has been carried kN/m and 2000 kN/m of length varying as 2D, 4D and full
out using PLAXIS 2D [11] on end bearing encased stone length are used to model the encasement where ‘D’ is the
columns by varying the length and stiffness of the diameter of stone column. The partial encasements are
encasement to find out the efficacy of encased stone column
installed in very soft clay.

420
S. Dutta & J. N. Mandal
provided from the top of the stone column. Properties of 2000 kN/m the maximum radial deformation gets reduced to
stone and clay are presented in Table 1. 2 mm and 1.4 mm respectively. As the stiffness of the
encasement increases, more hoop tension force gets
Table 1 Properties of clay and stone developed in the stiffer encasement at the same applied load
Parameters Properties resulting more confining pressure to the stone column. The
Clay Stone lateral deformation also becomes more uniform throughout
Elastic modulus, E’ (kPa) 4000 50000 the length of the column. The maximum hoop tension force
Poisson’s ratio, ν’ 0.4 0.3 obtained from the analysis for encasement stiffness of 200
Cohesion, cu (kPa) 10 0 kN/m, 300 kN/m, 1000 kN/m and 2000 kN/m are 18.13
Angle of internal friction, φ 0 45° kN/m, 23.81 kN/m, 44.49 kN/m and 56.21 kN/m
respectively. Figure 3 shows the radial deformation of
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS encased stone columns (ESC) with encasement stiffness of
The analysis has been carried out keeping in view the radial (a) 1000 kN/m and (b) 2000 kN/m.
deformation of stone column without and with encasement,
relative shear stress distribution, pressure - settlement
response as well as effect of length and stiffness of
encasements on the ordinary stone column.

Radial Deformation
A huge radial displacement of about 13 mm has been
observed in case of ordinary stone column (OSC) from the
analysis whereas providing a full length encasement of
stiffness 300 kN/m the maximum radial displacement gets
reduced to 4 mm. The encasement provides sufficient lateral
confining pressure to prevent the lateral bulging of stones.
Figure 2 shows the radial deformation of (a) ordinary stone
column and (b) fully encased stone column having 300 kN/m
encasement stiffness. It can be observed that ordinary stone
column fails due to radial deformation mainly within 2D (D =
diameter of the stone column) length of the column whereas
for encased stone column (ESC), the load is transferred to the
whole length of the column producing almost uniform and
lesser lateral deformation. Fig. 3 Radial deformation of encased stone column with
stiffness (a) 1000 kN/m and (b) 2000 kN/m

Relative Shear Stress Distribution

Relative shear stress is defined as the ratio of mobilized shear
stress to the maximum shear stress. Figure 4 shows the
relative shear stress distribution of (a) ordinary stone column
as well as (b) encased stone column with encasement
stiffness of 2000 kN/m installed in soft clay.

Fig. 2 Radial deformation (a) ordinary stone column (b)

encased stone column (300 kN/m)
Fig. 4 Relative shear stress distribution (a) ordinary stone
column (b) encased stone column (2000 kN/m)
It is also observed that stiffness of encasement plays an
The mobilized shear stress zone is more for encased column
important role. For full length encasement of 1000 kN/m and
when compared with ordinary stone column for the

421
 Behaviour of extremely soft soil reinforced with stone column without and with encasement
prescribed settlement. As a consequence load carrying
capacity of encased stone column is more.
Pressure - Settlement Response
Influence of stiffness of encasement
The load carrying capacity of the encased stone column
increases as the casing stiffness is increased. The pressure -
settlement response of the encased stone column for different
encasement stiffness values compared to only clay and
ordinary stone column is shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 Pressure - settlement response of stone column without
and with encasement of different stiffness values
Influence of length of encasement
The length of encasement has also been varied in the analysis
and it has been observed that full length encasement is
required to achieve the maximum bearing capacity. The
pressure - settlement response of encased stone column with
different lengths of encasement (2000 kN/m) compared to
ordinary stone column (OSC) is shown in Fig. 6.
Fig. 6 Pressure - settlement response of encased stone
column with different encasement lengths
It can be observed that as the length of encasement increases,
the load carrying capacity gets increased. For encasement
length of 2D (D = diameter of the column), after certain
422
development, the column behaves like ordinary stone column
as it fails by bulging occurred beneath the end of the
encasement and the load cannot get distributed to the whole
length of the column. For encasement length of 4D, same
scenario occurs although the load gets distributed to a larger
depth providing better performance. As the partial
encasement is stiffer than the surrounding clay, it will punch
through the soil with increasing pressure long before the
generation of maximum hoop tension in the encasement. The
maximum hoop tension developed in the partial encasement
of 2D and 4D length are 7.462 kN/m and 44.64 kN/m
respectively while the maximum hoop tension is 56.21 kN/m
in the full length encasement for the same prescribed
displacement.
Influence of stiffness on length of encasements
It has been found from the analysis that for encasement of
‘2D’ length, the role of stiffness is negligible. For higher
length of encasements as the encasement stiffness increases,
the load carrying capacity of stone column gets increased.
For the generation of maximum hoop tension in the
encasements, a hard support at the end of the encasement is
required. Otherwise it will punch through the soil much
before the generation of maximum hoop strain. Figure 7
shows the effect of encasement stiffness (300 kN/m and 2000
kN/m) on its various lengths.
Fig. 7 Influence of encasement stiffness on its various lengths
When the encasement length is 4D, the encasement with
stiffness 2000 kN/m produces better results although
maximum benefit is obtained for full length of encasements.
With increasing stiffness more hoop tension will be
developed in the encasements before failure though it may be
lesser than the maximum hoop tension. The encasements with
stiffness of 300 kN/m and 2000 kN/m for partial 4D length
generates maximum hoop tension as 22.90 kN/m and 44.64
kN/m respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
S. Dutta & J. N. Mandal
The following major conclusions can be made from the stone columns, Journal of Geotechnical and
present study. Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 129-138.
1. The stone column without encasement (Ordinary stone 6. Mandal J.N. and Kamble S.M. (1998), Geosynthetics
columns) is unable to improve the bearing capacity of encased stone column, Proce. of the Geosynthetics - 99
clay sufficiently due to lesser lateral confinement from Conference, April 28-30, Boston, USA,Vol.1, 101-113.
the surrounding soft clay. However, encasing the stone 7. Gniel, J. and Bouazza, A. (2009), Improvement of soft
column with suitable full length encasement can increase soils using geogrid encased stone columns, Geotextiles
the bearing capacity of clay many times than that of the and Geomembranes, 27, 167-175.
ordinary stone column. Encasement provides extra 8. Yoo, C. and Kim, S.B. (2009), Numerical modelling of
confining pressure to the stone columns and prevents the geosynthetic-encased stone column reinforced ground,
lateral bulging of stones. Geosynthetics International, 16(3), 116-126.
2. Encasement of higher stiffness provides more confining 9. Khabbazian, M., Kaliakin, V.N. and Meehan, C.L.
pressure to the stone column due to the generation of (2010), Numerical study of the effect of geosynthetic
higher hoop tension force in it. As a consequence, using encasement on the behaviour of granular columns,
encasement of higher stiffness the radial deformation can Geosynthetics International, 17 (3), 132-143.
be reduced significantly as well as the bearing capacity 10. Pulko, B., Majes, B. and Logar, J. (2011), Geosynthetic-
gets improved enormously. encased stone columns: analytical calculation model,
3. When the stone column is encased, the applied load is Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 29, 20-39.
distributed to the whole length of the column whereas 11. Brinkgreve, R.B.J., Swolfs, W.M. and Engin, E. (2011),
the ordinary stone column fails due to the lateral bulging Plaxis 2D 2011 Reference Manual, 111p.
of the stones within 2D length of the column from the
top.
4. The mobilized shear stress zone is more in encased
column when compared with ordinary stone column for
the prescribed settlement.
5. For an encasement with certain stiffness, the load
carrying capacity gets improved with the increase in
length of the encasement. However, for any encasement
length the encased stone column produces better results
than the ordinary stone column.
6. The effect of encasement stiffness is negligible when the
encasement length is very short. However, as the length
of encasement is increased, the stiffer encasement
produces better results and it is more pronounced for full
length of encasements. As the stiffness of the
encasement is increased, higher hoop tension force gets
developed in the encasement before failure though it may
be lesser than the maximum hoop tension. For end
bearing stone columns, the maximum hoop tension force
can be developed in the full length encasement.

REFERENCES
1. Hughes J.M.O. and Withers N.J. (1974), Reinforcing of
soft cohesive soils with stone columns, Ground
Engineering, 1 (3), 42–49.
2. Briaud, J.L. (1991), The pressuremeter: some special
applications, Proce. of the Geotechnical Engineering
Congress, Boulder, CO, ASCE, Geotechnical Special
Publication, 27, 26–37.
3. Ayadat, T and Hanna, A.M. (2005), Encapsulated stone
columns as a soil improvement technique for collapsible
soil, Ground Improvement, 9 (4), 137–147.
4. Murugesan, S. and Rajagopal, K. (2006), Geosynthetic-
encased stone columns: numerical evaluation,
Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 24, 349-358.
5. Murugesan, S. and Rajgopal, K. (2010), Studies on the
behaviour of single and group of geosynthetic encased

423