PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS OF

STONE COLUMNS

- END SEM PROJECT PRESENTATION

BITS- PILANI

ABHIJEET ROY
2014A2PS592H
 BASIC PRINCIPLE OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT

Ground improvement is the modification

of the ground properties in order to
achieve the required ground conditions
for the particular use of the ground.
Densification of the ground , E.g.: Compaction
Accelerate the consolidation, E.g.: Vertical drains
Usage of geo synthetics, E.g.: Geotextiles
Usage of admixtures, E.g.: Cement stabilization
Preloading
Mechanical Stabilization
ALTERNATIVES FOR INADEQUATE GROUND?

Abandon the site and locate the

structure elsewhere
Design deep foundations to carry the
weight of the structure to competent
stratum
Redesign the structure according to
the ground conditions
Improve the properties of the
ground prior to construction
STONE COLUMN
TECHNOLOGY
STONE COLUMN TECHNOLOGY
It is also known as Vibro replacement
or Vibro displacement
Compacted aggregates form as a
vertical columns to improve the soil
conditions.
Resulting in considerable increase in
vertical load capacity and improves
draining to dissipate pore water
pressure.
STONE COLUMN : ADVANTAGES
Technically and potentially economical
alternative for deep compaction.
Alternative for dynamic compaction,
deep blasting etc.,
It increases the bearing capacity,
reduces the settlements, liquefaction
potential.
PROBABLISTIC ANALYSIS OF COLUMNS:

PURPOSE:

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF THE BEARING CAPACITY OF FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL IMPROVED BY STONE COLUMNS BY CALCULATING THE FACTOR OF SAFETY
 INPUT PARAMETERS

1)- Saturated soil density (sat)

2)- Cohesion(C),
3)-Internal angle of friction for soil(c) ,
4)-Internal angle of friction for stone column(s)
 STATISTICS OF INPUT PARAMETERS

Variables Mean COV (%) Distribution

sat (kN/m3) 20 3-7 Gaussian

C (kN/m2) 25 10-50 Log-Normal

c () 15 3-20 Gaussian

s () 38 5-20 Log-Normal

 STATISTICAL INPUTS AND MEAN VALUES

Yavg C avg c avg s avg

MEAN() 20 25 15 38

COV 7 10 10 10

St.Dev() 2.8571 2.5 1.5 3.8

+1.96 25.6 30 17.94 45.45

-1.96 14.4 20.1 12.06 30.55

 FACTORIAL DESIGN IN 2- LEVEL FACTORS

each of the k (we have 4!!! ) factors of has only 2

levels (From permutations and combinations), we can
we have 2 ways of selecting a particular independent
variable ).
TOTAL 2k = 24 = 16 set of data !!!

 ALL POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS OF INPUT PARAMETERS

sat C c s

25.6 30 17.94 45.45

25.6 30 12.06 30.55

25.6 20.1 17.94 45.45

25.6 20.1 12.06 30.55

14.4 20.1 12.06 45.45

14.4 20.1 17.94 30.55

14.4 30 17.94 45.45

14.4 30 12.06 30.55

25.6 30 17.94 30.55

25.6 30 12.06 45.45

25.6 20.1 17.94 30.55

25.6 20.1 12.06 45.45

14.4 20.1 12.06 30.55

 LITERATURE REVIEW

-NAME OF YEAR THEME OF THE

RESEARCHER THESIS
2012)
Mohammed Y. Fattah Stone columns
and Quitaba G. increase the bearing
Majeed 2007) capacity in soft soils
Behavior of Stone
.P Ambily and Columns on the
ShaileshR . Gandhi basis of FEM
analysis and
1998 Experimental
observations
J.S Lee and G.N
Pande model for analysis of
elastic and
elastoplastic
2003 behavior of stone
columns reinforced
foundations.
YahiaE.A 1986
.Mohamedzein and developing a 2-D
Osama M.A. Daoud axis-symmetric
 LITERATURE REVIEW
NAME OF YEAR THEME OF THE
-RESEARCHER THESIS
2013
Yardim CemreHarzem settlement of stone
columns by Finite
Element Modelling
through various
BahadorReihani and 2014 case histories
MasoudDehghani
modeling of Ground
Improvement with
2007 stone columns using
Ahmed A. Al Hity PLAXIS

analyzing behavior
of stone columns
using finite element
method to provide
the basis and for the
design of
2008) foundations on weak
Ayadat, A. Hanna and soils which are
M. Etezad reinforced with
 METHODOLGY

SOFTWARES USED:
PLAXIS-FOR FINDING FACTOR OF SATETY
MS EXCEL- FOR MULTIPLE REGRESSION
 SOIL MODE:
PROPERTY VALUE

Youngs Modulus (E) 85000KN/m3

Cohesion(C) 25KN/m2

Angle of friction() 15 degrees

Saturated Density(Ysat) 20KN/m3

Kinematic Viscosity(v) 0.4m2/sec

 STRUCTURE MODE
MESHING MODE:
STAGED CONSTRUCTION:
DEFORMED MESH:
FACTOR OF SAFETY:
 All values of Factor of Safety for
possible diameters:
C c s 0.42(Dia) 0.45(Dia) 0.47(Dia) 0.66(Dia) 1.05(Dia) 1.68(Dia)
30 17.94 45.45 1.181 1.092 1.21 1.159 1.194 1.278

30 12.06 30.55 0.8878 0.9003 0.845 0.9048 0.9609 1.285

20.1 17.94 45.45 1.027 0.9669 0.9626 1.051 1.036 1.104

20.1 12.06 30.55 0.9899 0.8512 0.8497 0.8758 0.8643 0.9031

20.1 12.06 45.45 0.9658 0.9336 0.931 0.9584 0.9625 1.016

20.1 17.94 30.55 0.9815 0.8223 0.938 0.9595 0.8665 0.937

30 17.94 45.45 1.2 1.13 1.14 1.158 1.171 1.265

30 12.06 30.55 0.9706 0.8539 0.8585 0.944 0.9393 1.066

30 17.94 30.55 0.9775 0.9475 0.9354 0.988 0.9563 1.011

30 12.06 45.45 1.09 1.052 1.075 1.109 1.106 1.1078

20.1 17.94 30.55 0.9537 0.8675 0.8379 0.957 0.8668 0.9423

20.1 12.06 45.45 0.9664 0.8897 0.9455 0.9415 0.9642 0.9678

20.1 12.06 30.55 0.9776 0.8403 0.8457 0.9889 0.9853 0.9897

20.1 17.94 45.45 1.019 0.9931 0.9836 1.041 0.9974 1.023

30 17.94 30.55 0.9797 0.9499 0.9715 0.9805 0.9789 0.9856

30 12.06 45.45 1.067 1.0325 1.108 1.108 1.045 1.089

BEARING CAPACITY CHANGES :
Ysat C c s 0.42 0.45 0.47 0.66 1.05 1.68
25.6 30 17.94 45.45
25.6 30 12.06 30.55 250 450 670
25.6 20.1 17.94 45.45
25.6 20.1 12.06 30.55
14.4 20.1 12.06 45.45 200 200 400 525 590
14.4 20.1 17.94 30.55
250
14.4 30 17.94 45.45
14.4 30 12.06 30.55 400 525 670
25.6 30 17.94 30.55
25.6 30 12.06 45.45
25.6 20.1 17.94 30.55 450 600

25.6 20.1 12.06 45.45

14.4 20.1 12.06 30.55
14.4 20.1 17.94 45.45
14.4 30 17.94 30.55 250 280 400 525 670
14.4 30 12.06 45.45
 MULTIPLE REGRESSION

THE TRENDS OF INDIVIDUAL PARAMETERS

NON LINEAR VARIATION OF YSAT WITH FACTOR
OF SAFETY FOR 0.42 DIA
NON LINEAR VARIATION OF C WITH FACTOR OF
SAFETY FOR 0.42DIA
LINEAR VARIATION OF C WITH FACTOR OF
SAFETY FOR 0.42DIA
: NON LINEAR VARIATION OF S WITH FACTOR
OF SAFETY FOR 0.42DIA
DERIVED NON LINEAR EXPRESSIONS

e-0.002Ysat
0.25ln(C)
0.012(c)
0.0072(s
0.0072e
MULTIPLE NON LINEAR REGRESSION RESULTS
FOR 0.45 DIA

Regression Statistics

Multiple R 0.953116

R Square 0.908431

Adjusted R Square 0.875133

Standard Error 0.033157

Observations 16
DERIVED EQUATION!!!!!

F.S(0.45)= -1.148-0.06679e-0.002Ysat + 0.57ln(C) +0.00837(c)

0.0072(s)
+0.936e
 ALL DERIVED EQUATIONS

F.S(0.42)= -1.007 + 0.51e-0.002Ysat + 0.3397ln(C) +0.00859(c)+0.7068e0.0072(s)

F.S(0.45)= -1.148-0.06679e-0.002Ysat + 0.57ln(C) +0.00837(c)+0.936e0.0072(s)

F.S(0.47)= -2.1785+ 0.669e-0.002Ysat + 0.61ln(C) +0.0114(c)+1.12e0.0072(s)

F.S(0.66)=-1.6487+ 0.8839e-0.002Ysat + 0.4155ln(C) +0.0098(c)+0.8215e0.0072(s)

F.S(1.05)= -1.1098-0.0151e-0.002Ysat + 0.58ln(C) +0.00588(c)+0.937e0.0072(s)

F.S(1.68)= 0.2367-1.3224e-0.002Ysat + 0.8656ln(C) +0.00258(c)+0.647e0.0072(s)

 GENERAL EQUATION EXPRESSION!!!!!

F.S(Dia)= K+Ae^(-0.002Ysat) + Bln(C) +C(c)+De^(0.0072(s))

Where, K,A,B,C and D are constants

FINDING THE CONSTANTS !!!!!
K A B C D DIAs

-1.007 0.51 0.3397 0.00859 0.7068 0.42

-1.148 -0.06679 0.57 0.00837 0.936 0.45

-2.1785 0.669 0.61 0.0114 1.12 0.47

-1.6487 0.8839 0.4155 0.0098 0.8521 0.66

-1.1098 -0.0151 0.58 0.00588 0.937 1.05

0.2367 -1.3224 0.8656 0.00258 0.647 1.68

 MOST GENERAL EQUATION EXPRESSION!!!!!

F.S(Dia)= K+Ae^(-0.002Ysat) + Bln(Coh.) +C(c)

+De^(0.0072(s))

K= -5.3759(Dia)3 + 18.321(Dia)2 - 17.361(Dia) + 3.1818

A= 5.876(Dia)3 - 19.836*(Dia)2 + 18.632*(Dia) - 4.502
B= 0.3705e0.4764*(Dia)
C= -0.0057*(Dia) + 0.0123
D= -0.3818*(Dia)2 + 0.6098(Dia) + 0.7014
 CONCLUSIONS!!!

1- The values of factor of safeties calculated from plaxis and from the
regression equation seem to be in close vicinity to each other
 CONCLUSIONS!!!
2)Constant D is maximum for most of the diameters which is in
relevance to the single regeression which was conducted before. Therefore,
we can say that Factor of Safety values have a maximum dependence on s.
DIA K A B C D

0.4 -1.1753 0.153104 0.448278 0.01002 0.884232

0.41 -1.22696 0.207668 0.450419 0.009963 0.887237

0.42 -1.27629 0.259711 0.45257 0.009906 0.890166

0.43 -1.3233 0.309267 0.454731 0.009849 0.893019

0.44 -1.36804 0.356372 0.456902 0.009792 0.895796

0.45 -1.41053 0.401061 0.459084 0.009735 0.898496

0.46 -1.45081 0.443369 0.461276 0.009678 0.901119

0.47 -1.4889 0.483332 0.463479 0.009621 0.903666

0.48 -1.52485 0.520984 0.465692 0.009564 0.906137

0.49 -1.55869 0.556362 0.467916 0.009507 0.908532

0.5 -1.59044 0.5895 0.470151 0.00945 0.91085

0.55 -1.71906 0.72283 0.481484 0.009165 0.921296

0.6 -1.80043 0.805456 0.493091 0.00888 0.929832

0.65 -1.83858 0.841787 0.504977 0.008595 0.93646

0.7 -1.83754 0.836228 0.51715 0.00831 0.941178

0.75 -1.80135 0.793188 0.529617 0.008025 0.943988

0.8 -1.73402 0.717072 0.542384 0.00774 0.944888

0.85 -1.6396 0.612289 0.555458 0.007455 0.94388

0.9 -1.52212 0.483244 0.568848 0.00717 0.940962

0.95 -1.38561 0.334346 0.582561 0.006885 0.936136

1.2 -0.55872 -0.55371 0.656245 0.00546 0.883368

1.4 0.03409 -1.17202 0.721847 0.00432 0.806792

1.5 0.218888 -1.3535 0.757068 0.00375 0.75705

1.7 0.203993 -1.28485 0.83275 0.00261 0.634658

 CONCLUSIONS!!!
3)- Most of the R- squared values for
multiple regression for most of the
diameters are above 85% showing that
the curve has a good fit and the best fit
line is near the regression points
 REFERENCES!!!
Mohammed Y. Fattah and Quitaba G. Majeed (2012), Finite Element Analysis of Geogrid Encased Stone Columns - Springer,
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30: 713. doi:10.1007/s10706-011-9488-8

A.P Ambily and ShaileshR . Gandhi (2007) Discussion of Behavior of Stone Columns Based on Experimental and FEM Analysis, J.
Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000153, 1355-1356.

J.S Lee and G.N Pande (1998) , Analysis of stone-column reinforced foundations,
International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, Volume 22, Issue 12
December 1998,Pages 10011020

YahiaE.A .Mohamedzein and Osama M.A. Daoud (2003), finite element analysis for analyzing stone column reinforced
soft clays
H.F Schweiger and G.N Pande (1986),Numerical analysis of stone column supported foundation, Computers and Geotechnics
2(6):347372January 1986
YardimCemreHarzem (2013),Study of settlement of stone columns by finite element modelling through case studies ,Yardm, Cemre
Harzem M.Sc., Department of Civil Engineering Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Mehmet Ufuk Ergun January 2013, 106 pages
BahadorReihani and MasoudDehghani (2014)."Effect of Changing of Dilation Angle and the Cohesion of Clayey Soil on Stone Column",
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), V16(6),283-287 Oct 2014. ISSN:2231-5381. www.ijettjournal.org.
published by seventh sense research group

Ahmed A. Al Hity (2007), Analysis of stone column in soft soil by finite element methods analysis, Iraqi Journal of Civil
Engineering ,ISSN: 74281992Year: 2007Issue: 7Pages: 27-41
Al-Anbar University
Ayadat, A. Hanna and M. Etezad (2008),Failure process of stone columns in collapsible soils, IJE TRANSACTIONS B: Applications Vol. 21,
No. 2 (August2008) 135-142
A .J Choobbasti, Ali Zahmatkesh and Reza Noorzad(2011),Performance of Stone Columns in Soft Clay: Numerical Evaluation,
Geotechnical and Geological Engineering29(5):675-684September 2011

 THANK YOU!