Int. Workshop on Geotechnics of Soft Soils-Theory and Practice. Vermeer, Schweiger, Karstunen & Cudny (eds.

)  2003 VGE

Field Measurements and Numerical Analysis of the Stress

Distribution below Stone Column Supported Embankments
and their Stability

Fabian Kirsch
Dipl.-Ing., Institute for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, TU Braunschweig

Wolfgang Sondermann
Dr.-Ing., Keller Grundbau GmbH, Offenbach

ABSTRACT:

Since decades vibro stone columns are used to improve the bearing capacity and the settlement
behaviour of soft soils. The design is based on empirical or semi-analytical formulae, most of
which using the unit cell approach. Such design procedures, e.g. the Priebe method, proved their
reliability in many cases. Stone columns are also used to improve the ground below embankments
constructed for infrastructural measures. In such cases the columns act predominantly in order to
enhance the slope stability. To give a realistic picture of the actual situation the design of the stone
column pattern needs to take into account the stress distribution between columns and soil. All
approaches not considering the stress concentration in the columns gain results which are over-
conservative and thus lead to uneconomical solutions.
In the paper the results of numerical analyses considering the spatial nature of the problem are
presented. The results are compared with those of analytical approaches. In addition to the
numerical analysis the results of long term monitoring of the stresses at a case history are
presented. The knowledge of the stress distribution offers the possibility of a realistic approach for
the calculation of the slope stability of embankments on improved ground.

1 VIBRO REPLACEMENT METHOD

Stone columns can be used to improve soft layers under dams and embankments in order to
reduce the settlements, accelerate the consolidation process and increase the stability.
They are installed using either the vibro replacement or the vibro displacement process. Figure 1
depicts the different construction stages. More detailed descriptions of the equipment and the
procedure itself can be found in Moseley & Priebe (1993) or Kirsch & Sondermann (2003).

Stone Filling of Pene- Displa- Comple-

supply material lock tration cement tion

Figure 1. Dry bottom feed vibro displacement method

 Infrastructural measures are the most common field of application for stone column supported
embankments (e.g. Sondermann (1996), Sondermann & Jebe (1996), Raju & Hoffmann (1996)).
Usually the columns are placed in a regular pattern improving the weak layers below the
embankment with vertical zones of improved soil.

2 CURRENT DESIGN PROCEDURES

2.1 Settlement Reduction

In order to assess the settlement reduction factor numerous analytical and semi-analytical
approaches exist. One of the most common design procedures is the method developed by
Priebe (1995). An example of his design is given below, where an embankment of 15 m height is
being constructed for the dam close to a bridge abutment at a highway crossing in Kuala Lumpur.
Figure 2 shows the geometry.
15,00
20 kN/m 2

2,00

5,00
10,00 10,00
2,00

15,00
5,00
1
3,00

25,00
10,00
5,00

± 0,0 1

5,00 5,00 4,00

2
14,00

2,00
Stopfsäulen: Abstand 1,7 m Stopfsäulen: Abstand 2,1m
Stone columns Ø1.1m @1.7m
Ø 1,10 m
Stone columns Ø1.1m @2.1m
Ø 1,10 m

Figure 2. Cross section of a stone column supported embankment

Adopting the Priebe method to this type of structure calls for several idealisations in order to
calculate the stresses at the base of the embankment. In this case a total settlement of 192 cm was
calculated for the centre of the dam.

2.2 Slope Stability

The calculation of the slope stability is usually performed using analytical procedures like the
Bishop method. In order to use these analytical procedures some sort of homogenisation of shear
parameters has to be adopted. Generally it is proposed to use a weighted average for the shear
parameters of the unimproved soil and the stone column material. It seems however to be over-
conservative to calculate an average on the basis of the area ratio of columns and soil AS/A since
the columns concentrate the vertical stresses and therefore create a higher resistance against slope
failure. Priebe suggests a weighting of the angle of inner friction and the cohesion by the stress
distribution, which is a result of his analysis. Weighting the cohesion by the stress distribution has
no physical justification but accounts for conservatism.
In figure 3 the results of stability analyses using different mean friction values are shown.
Column 3 shows the result of an approach in which the shear parameters are weighted as an
average of area ratio and Priebe's method. The subsoil was divided into 14 different soil
compounds to compute the indicated factors of safety. One should emphasize, that the stress
concentration factor calculated by the Priebe method cannot simply be taken at the dam base, but
needs to be calculated for each and every layer. This stands because the stress distribution between
column and soil is by no means constant along the column depth.
 1 2 3 4 5 6

4,00 26,00 35,00

10,00 Slope stability using analytical procedures
1
57 kN/m 2
20 kN/m2 1 2 3
5,00 5,00 4,00

2 7a 8a 9a
Average type Area-Ratio Priebe Average of 1 and 2

14,00
3 7b 8b 9b

4 7c 8c 9c η 1,12 1,77 1,42

5

2,00
1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 3. Factors of safety by analytical procedures

There is quite a scatter in the results and since none of the methods has thorough physical
justification further investigation was deemed necessary.

3 STRESS DISTRIBUTION
3.1 Measurement
In order to gain more information about the stress distribution between column material and
surrounding soil pressure cells can be installed. When applied at the dam base usually the measured
stress distribution values n=σCol/σSoil vary between 2 and 3. The stress concentration is depending
on various parameters such as the loading type (soft or rigid), the surcharge, the material
parameters of column and soil and the geometrical dimensions.
Figure 4 shows the result of a measurement at another embankment site in Kuala Lumpur,
which shows approximately the same conditions as the example above. The columns were installed
using a square pattern at 2,2 m. The result of approx. n=2,6 compares well with the results of an
in situ trial field reported by Gruber (1994). There values of n=2,8 were measured for the same
column pattern and a surcharge of 120 kN/m².

3,0

2,5
Stress distribution n [-]

2,0

1,5
PC2
2,2

1,0 PC1

2,2
0,5

0,0
0,00 100,00 200,00 300,00 400,00
Surcharge [kN/m2]

Figure 4. Measurement of stress concentration below an embankment

3.2 Numerical Simulation

In order to calculate the stress distribution and to give an assessment on the slope stability
within the same model a numerical analysis of the spatial problem is advantageous. The following
section shows the approach, in which the finite element analysis can be used to design
embankments such as the example above.
According to the column and embankment geometry calculations can make use of several
planes of symmetry. Modelling of the ground was done by employing the Drucker-Prager yield
criterion using a non associated flow rule. Division of the continuum was done using isoparametric
brick elements with square interpolation functions and three degrees of freedom at each node.
Obviously it is important to perform a 3-D analysis in order to model the stress distribution
correctly.
 The chosen constitutive law is of a linear-elastic ideal-plastic type, but cannot take care for
hardening. To overcome these restrictions a cap model was proposed by Vittinghoff, Plaßmann &
Schmitt (1997). In this model a multi-surface Drucker-Prager criterion with isotropic strain
hardening is combined with a hydrostatic cap, which accounts for volumetric hardening (figure 5).
Unfortunately however the cap parameters could not be determined for the example presented here.
Therefore some care must be taken when interpreting the results of the numerical simulations.

σ 1'

elastic
hardening
σ 3' softening

residual strength

σ 2'
peak strength

Figure 5. Constitutive model

Figure 6 shows the results of a simplified FEM analysis in which the typical stress distribution
between columns and soil can be seen. The calculated stress concentration results in n=3,1.

spatial FEM model

y
x

plan view with lines of symmetry

A B C
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
50 kN/m 2
0
7,00
stress concentration n=3,1
3,00

18,00 12,00
-50
Vertikalspannung [kN/m 2]

D D
-100
6,00

-150
15,00
12,00

-200
3,00

0,70
3,00 -250
3,00

column no. 0 1 2 3 4
30,00
-300
-350
0 1 2 3 4
A B C -400
cross section vertical stresses at the dam base

Figure 6. Numerical analysis of the stress distribution below a simplified embankment

4 SLOPE STABILITY

4.1 Numerical Simulation

The calculation of safety factors in finite element analyses is not a straight forward procedure.
From the practical viewpoint a method, in which the strength parameters of the soil are reduced
stepwise until failure, can give a reasonable assessment of the stability problem (e.g.
Cai & Ugai (1999), Naylor (1999)). The calculation of a factor of safety is done by the use of the
Fellenius rule:
actual shear strenght
η=
necessary shear strengh
 The strength parameters tan ϕ' and c' are reduced in parallel till system failure occurs. Failure
can be observed by monitoring the displacement of several key points. When the shear reduction-
displacement graph shows a horizontal asymptote failure is about to begin (figure 7).
One of the shortcomings of this ϕ-c-reduction method is, that the influence of ϕ and c remains
constant during the analysis. Thus possible changes in the failure mechanisms during the analysis
are not included. The results however reveal valuable information about the stability and the failure
mechanisms of embankments on stone column improved ground.
Figure 7 shows the results of the analysis for the embankment introduced in chapter 2. The
finite element analysis yields a settlement of 240 cm at the centre of the dam. The following
stepwise reduction of the shear parameters revealed a factor of safety of 1,36.

cross section of the spatial model

100

95
1
90 η FEM = = 1,36
% of phi-c

0, 735
85

80

75

70
0,00

0,10

0,20

0,30

0,40

0,50

Vertical displacement of the embankment toe [m] Countours of horizontal displacement

and deformed model
Figure 7. Numerical model and results

Focus should be given to the fact, that there is obviously a second failure mechanism below the
berm at the embankment toe. This was not included in the analytical analysis and is probably one
reason why the safety factor in the numerical simulation is smaller than in the analytical
procedures.

4.2 Comparison of results

The comparison of both, the calculated settlements and the established factors of safety are
summarised in table 1. The match of the settlement results between the Priebe method and the
finite element analysis appears satisfactory.
Table 1. Comparison of results
Analytical procedures FEM
Settelment of
embankment base - 192 240
centre [cm]
Homogenisation 2. Priebe (stress Average of 1.
1. Area-Ratio none
method ration) and 2.

safety factor η 1,12 1,77 1,42 1,36

 The results of the stability analyses indicate however, that the analytical method using the area
ratio homogenisation approach for the shear parameters may be somewhat over-conservative. Also
the Priebe method leads to factors of safety, which are greater than those obtained by the numerical
model adopting the ϕ-c-reduction method.
However no general trend can be conducted from this observation since in this specific case the
numerical analysis revealed a potential second failure mechanism below the berm at the
embankment toe, which rests partially on improved and unimproved ground. Comparative studies
with reduced berm lengths revealed that the factors of safety according to the Priebe method
remain higher than those obtained from the spatial numerical analyses, which compare favourably
with the safety factors obtained by an analysis with the mean of the shear strength calculated by the
area ratio and the stress ratio homogenisation method.
It is instructive to compare the results with a 2-D numerical analysis conducted by Indraratna,
Balasubramaniam & Sivaneswaran (1997). They calculated a normalised deformation β2 being the
ratio of the maximum settlement to the corresponding filling height of β2=0.097 for a test
embankment on Malaysian soft clay. The study presented here provides a normalised deformation
of β2=0.149.

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The deformations and the stability of embankments on stone column improved ground can be
analysed using either analytical or numerical methods. Whilst the analytical models contain
simplifications which are not completely justified, the finite element analysis of stability problems
also need approximations like the ϕ-c-reduction method. The complex load bearing mechanisms
call for a three dimensional analysis, which until now is not suitable for day to day design
purposes.
Numerical analyses can account for the correct reproduction of the stress distribution between
stone columns and surrounding soil. Useful conclusions on approximate factors of safety and
failure mechanisms can be drawn from the results of these numerical simulations.
The comparison of the results from both numerical and analytical computations leads to a
practical approach when analysing the slope stability with homogenised shear parameters using the
average of area ratio and stress ratio according to Priebe's method. Then analytical methods like
Bishop's can be adopted to calculate factors of safety.

REFERENCES
Cai, F. & Ugai, K. 1999. 3D FE-analysis of the stability of slope reinforced with piles. In Pande,
Pietruszczak, Schweiger (eds.) NUMOG VII. Rotterdam: Balkema. 541-546.
Gruber, F.J. 1994. Verhalten einer Rüttelstopfverdichtung unter einem Straßendamm. Diss. TU Graz.
Indraratna, B., Balasubramaniam, A.S. & Sivaneswaran, N. 1997. Analysis of settlement and lateral defor-
mation of soft clay foundation beneath two embankments. I. J. Num. Anal. M. Geom. 21. 599-618
Kirsch, K. & Sondermann, W. 2003. Ground improvement. In U. Smoltczyk (ed.), Geotechnical Engineering
Handbook. Vol. 2: 1-56. Berlin: Ernst & Sohn.
Moseley, M.P. & Priebe, H.J. 1993. Vibro techniques. In M.P. Moseley (ed.), Ground Improvement: 1-19.
Glasgow: Blackie.
Naylor, D.J.. 1999. On the use of the F.E.M. for assessing the stability of cuts and fills. In Pande,
Pietruszczak, Schweiger (eds.) NUMOG VII. Rotterdam: Balkema. 553-560.
Priebe, H.J. 1995. Die Bemessung von Rüttelstopfverdichtungen. Bautechnik 72. Heft 3. 183-191.
Raju, V.R. & Hoffmann, G. 1996. Treatment of tin mine tailings in Kuala Lumpur using vibro replacement.
In Proc. 12th SEAGC.
Sondermann, W. 1996. Rüttelstopfverdichtung zur Baugrundverbesserung für die feste Fahrbahn im
Schnellbahnbau. 3. Darmstädter Geotechnik Kolloq. TU Darmstadt. Heft 35. 147-164.
Sondermann, W. & Jebe, W. 1996. Methoden zur Baugrundverbesserung für den Neu- und Ausbau von
Bahnstrecken auf Hochgeschwindigkeitslinien. Vorträge der Baugrundtagung 1996 in Berlin. 259-280.
Vittinghoff, T., Plaßmann, B. & Schmitt, J. 1997. Programmentwicklungen im ANSYS-Open-System für
Anwendungen in der Geotechnik. 15th CADFEM Users' Meeting. Fulda. Part 1-30. 1-17.