Investigating the dynamic response of deep mixing columns and gravel columns in liquefiable layer with different thickness

Document Type : Research Article


1 Department of Civil Engineering, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Urmia University


Liquefaction is one of the most devastating Geotechnical phenomena that severely damage vital structures and lifelines. An accurate understanding of the dynamic response of the site prone to liquefaction and improved with different modern methods and comparing it with the unimproved site improves the ability of engineers to choose the appropriate improvement method. Before construction, it is necessary to solve the geotechnical problem. Among the methods of land improvement to deal with liquefaction, gravel columns and deep mixing columns can be mentioned. In this study, the results of 1g shaking table tests by a flexible box on the foundation located on the liquefiable ground surface and reinforced with the aforementioned techniques have been investigated. The dynamic responses of the reinforced ground in different thicknesses of the liquefiable layer and the different frequencies of the input movement have been investigated based on stress-strain behavior, secant shear modulus of the soil and excess pore water pressure versus shear strain. The results of the tests show that the thickness of the liquefiable layer has a considerable effect on the dynamic responses of the soil, including the shear behavior and the shear modulus of the soil. By increasing the thickness of the liquefiable layer, the values of the secant shear modulus and shear strain of the improved mass decrease and increase respectively. Also, the dynamic performance of deep mixing columns in thicker layers is more suitable compared to gravel columns, and at lower thicknesses, the dynamic behavior of gravel columns approaches that of deep mixing columns.


Main Subjects

[1] D. Zhang, A. Wang, and X. Ding, Seismic response of pile groups improved with deep cement mixing columns in liquefiable sand: shaking table tests, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 59(6) pp. (2022)  994-1006.
[2] M. Kitazume, M. Terashi, The deep mixing method, CRC press, 2013.
[3] A. Porbaha, K. Zen, M. Kobayashi, Deep mixing technology for liquefaction mitigation, Journal of infrastructure systems, 5(1) (1999) 21-34.
[4] M. Shahraki, R. Rafiee-Dehkharghani, K. Behnia, Three-dimensional Finite Element modeling of stone column-improved soft saturated ground, Civil Engineering Infrastructures Journal, 51(2) (2018) 389-403.
[5] R.V. Siddharthan, A. Porbaha, Seismic response evaluation of sites improved by deep mixing, Part 2: Verification, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground Improvement, 161(3) (2008) 163-169.
[6] R.V. Siddharthan, A. Porbaha, Seismic response evaluation of sites improved by deep mixing, Part I: Proposed approach, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground Improvement, 161(3) (2008) 153-162.
[7] P. Mohanty, D. Xu, S. Biswal, S. Bhattacharya, A shake table investigation of dynamic behavior of pile supported bridges in liquefiable soil deposits, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 20(1) (2021) 1-24.
[8] M. Ghazavi, J.N. Afshar, Bearing capacity of geosynthetic encased stone columns, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 38 (2013) 26-36.
[9] M. Esmaeili, M. Gharouni-Nik, H. Khajehei, Evaluation of deep soil mixing efficiency in stabilizing loose sandy soils using laboratory tests, Geotechnical Testing Journal, 37(5) (2014) 817-827.
[10] R.A. Green, C.G. Olgun, K.J. Wissmann, Shear stress redistribution as a mechanism to mitigate the risk of liquefaction, in:  Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics IV, 2008, pp. 1-10.
[11] A. Asgari, M. Oliaei, M. Bagheri, Numerical simulation of improvement of a liquefiable soil layer using stone column and pile-pinning techniques, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 51 (2013) 77-96.
[12] Gh. Asadzadeh, H. Bahadori, Evaluation of the performance of gravel columns in reducing risks caused by liquefaction, International Institude of earthquake engineering and seismology, 12(1-2) (2009) (in persian).
[13] S. Prasad, I. Towhata, G. Chandradhara, P. Nanjundaswamy, Shaking table tests in earthquake geotechnical engineering, Current science,  (2004) 1398-1404.
[14] F.O. Yang, G. Fan, K. Wang, C. Yang, W. Lyu, J. Zhang, A large-scale shaking table model test for acceleration and deformation response of geosynthetic encased stone column composite ground, Geotextiles and Geomembranes,  (2021).
[15] A.A. Araei, I. Towhata, Impact and cyclic shaking on loose sand properties in laminar box using gap sensors, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 66 (2014) 401-414.
[16] C.-J. Lee, Y.-C. Wei, Y.-C. Kuo, Boundary effects of a laminar container in centrifuge shaking table tests, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 34(1) (2012) 37-51.
[17] A. Turan, S.D. Hinchberger, H. El Naggar, Design and commissioning of a laminar soil container for use on small shaking tables, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 29(2) (2009) 404-414.
[18] H. Bahadori, A. GHALANDARZADEH, I. Towhata, Effect of non plastic silt on the anisotropic behavior of sand, Soils and foundations, 48(4) (2008) 531-545.
[19] K. Farahmand, A. Lashkari, A. Ghalandarzadeh, Firoozkuh sand: introduction of a benchmark for geomechanical studies, Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering, 40(2) (2016) 133-148.
[20] H.B. Seed, J.R. Booker, Stabilization of potentially liquefiable sand deposits using gravel drains, Journal of the geotechnical engineering division, 103(7) (1977) 757-768.
[21] S. Iai, Similitude for shaking table tests on soil-structure-fluid model in 1g gravitational field, Soils and Foundations, 29(1) (1989) 105-118.
[22] D. Rayamajhi, T.V. Nguyen, S.A. Ashford, R.W. Boulanger, J. Lu, A. Elgamal, L. Shao, Numerical study of shear stress distribution for discrete columns in liquefiable soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 140(3) (2014) 04013034.
[23] H. DehqanKhalili, A. Ghalandarzadeh, M. Moradi, R. Karimzadeh, Effect of distribution patterns of DSM columns on the efficiency of liquefaction mitigation, Scientia Iranica, 27(5) (2020) 2198-2208.
[24] A. Bahmanpour, I. Towhata, M. Sakr, M. Mahmoud, Y. Yamamoto, S. Yamada, The effect of underground columns on the mitigation of liquefaction in shaking table model experiments, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 116 (2019) 15-30.
[25] M. Kitazume, JGS TC Report: Japanese design procedures and recent activities of DMM, in:  Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground Improvement Geosystems, 1996, pp. 925-937.
[26] M. Kitazume, H. Yamazaki, T. Tsuchida, Recent soil admixture stabilization techniques for port and harbor constructions in Japan—deep mixing method, premix method, light-weight method, in:  Proc Int Seminar on Geotechnics in Kochi, ISGK, 2000, pp. 23-40.
[27] M. Bouassida, A. Porbaha, Ultimate bearing capacity of soft clays reinforced by a group of columns: Application to a deep mixing technique, Soils and Foundations, 44(3) (2004) 91-101.
[28] M.Y. Fattah, M.A. Al-Neami, A.S. Al-Suhaily, Estimation of bearing capacity of floating group of stone columns, Engineering science and technology, an international journal, 20(3) (2017) 1166-1172.
[29] M.H. Rayhani, M.H. El Naggar, Seismic response of sands in centrifuge tests, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 45(4) (2008) 470-483.
[30] D. Bertalot, A. Brennan, F. Villalobos, Influence of bearing pressure on liquefaction-induced settlement of shallow foundations, Géotechnique, 63(5) (2013) 391. 
[31] H. Bahadori, A.Khalili, Effect of loading waveform and frequency on dynamic properties of dry sands using shaking table tests, Journal of Engineering Geology, 14 (2) 223-252 (2020) (in persian).