American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Case Reports

Simulation of Stone Column Ground Improvement

(Comparison between Axisymmetric and Plane Strain)
Maryam Gaber, Anuar Kasa, Norinah Abdul-Rahman and Jamal Alsharef

Department Civil and Structural Engineering,

Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment,
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

Article history Abstract: Most of the numerical studies on stone columns are based on the
Received: 20-12-2017 unit cell concept. However, the impact of interactions between adjacent
Revised: 27-12-2017 columns and between the columns and the surrounding soil has not been
Accepted: 15-01-2018 investigated thoroughly. In this study, the finite element software,
Corresponding Author:
PLAXIS-2D-V8.2, was used to simulate a stone column as a unit cell and
Maryam Gaber as a plane strain model in order to specify the difference between the
Department Civil and Structural performances of each model. The key factors that were investigated
Engineering, Universiti included the diameter and c/c spacing of the stone columns, friction angle
Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 of the stone column material and undrained cohesion of the soft soil. The
Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia emphasis of this parametric study was on the settlement improvement
Email: mm_gaber@yahoo.com factor and excess pore water pressure, since these are critical to the design
of stone columns. The main findings of this study were that in the plane
strain model, the settlement improvement factor ranged between 2.2 and
3.2, which means that the settlement was improved more than twice.
Meanwhile, in the unit cell concept, the settlement improvement factor did
not exceed 1.53. The results of the settlement improvement were compared
with the theoretical solutions that are commonly used for studies into the
behaviour of stone columns. The unit cell model showed a lower peak
value of excess pore water pressure than the plane strain model.

Keywords: Stone Column, Unit Cell, Plane Strain, Settlements

Improvement Factor, Excess Pore Water Pressure, Numerical Analysis

Introduction 2014). They provided detailed results on the behaviour

of a single column and a group of columns by varying
Ground improvement techniques have been used in parameters like the area replacement ratio, shear strength
many difficult foundation sites throughout the world of the soft clay, columns stiffness, etc.
to increase the bearing capacity, reduce the A complex modelling of the soil reinforcement
settlement, improve the slope stability and also to
system is needed to simulate and analyse stone column
resist liquefaction. Stone columns improve soft soils
due to: (i) The inclusion of a firmer column material ground improvement. According to Dheerendra Babu et al.
such as crushed stones in the soft soil; (ii) the (2013), there are five main numerical approaches to the
densification of the surrounding soft soil during the modelling of stone columns: (i) The axisymmetric
installation of stone columns (Choobbasti et al., model, which is a “unit cell” comprised of only one
2011); and (iii) the creation of a vertical drainage path column and the surrounding soil (Balaam and Booker,
by the stone columns (Guetif et al., 2007). 1981); (ii) the plane strain model, where the cylindrical
Several researchers developed related studies based columns are modelled as stone trenches, which are
on theories, experiments and field observations to used extensively under long loads, such as
evaluate the behaviour of stone columns (Greenwood, embankments (Van Impe and De Beer, 1983); (iii) the
1970; Priebe, 1976; Ambily and Gandhi, 2007; axial symmetry technique, where stone rings are
Malarvizhi and Ilamparuthi, 2007; Andreou et al., 2008; modelled instead of cylindrical columns in order to
Lo et al., 2010; Al-Kaisi and Ali, 2013; Al-Saoudi et al., simulate the columns under circular loads such as tanks

© 2018 Maryam Gaber, Anuar Kasa, Norinah Abdul-Rahman and Jamal Alsharef. This open access article is distributed
under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 3.0 license.
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

(Elshazly et al., 2008); (iv) the homogenization thickness of each stage are summarized in Table 1. In order
technique, which can be used to model the improved to consider the long- term performance, the modelling was
homogeneous soil with stone columns using the extended to 1000 days after the end of construction.
composite soil parameters (Jellali et al., 2005;
Abdelkrim and Buhan, 2007); and (v) the full 3D model, Generation Modelling and Material Properties
which is the most complex approach to the stone column The construction and consolidation of the
system (Weber et al., 2008). embankment on soft soil was simulated by two different
Compared to an experimental investigation, the constitutive models, the unit cell and plane strain model,
numerical analysis of stone columns is more flexible, as using PLAXIS 2D, where the 2D and 3D models gave
well as efficient in terms of cost and time. The results that were similar to each other, especially on the
understanding of this system has been greatly improved settlement performance and the failure mechanism
due to numerical studies. However, most of the numerical (Ng and Tan, 2015). The 2D-axisymmetric model with
studies adopted the unit cell modelling method, while only 290 (15-node) triangular elements was built with an
a few adopted other approaches such as the plane strain equivalent diameter, (de = 1.13S). Meanwhile, in the
and 3D models. In practice, the plane strain model has plane strain analysis, the representative model consisted
been used to simulate embankment projects on soft soil of 1189 (15-node) triangular elements. Due to the
with a high groundwater level. The current study focused symmetry of both models, only half of the cross-section
on the impact of the selected model on the behaviour of was simulated to save computing time. The phreatic
stone columns by a direct comparison between the unit level was set at 1 m below the top surface. Figure 1
cell and plane strain approaches. shows the cross sections of the two models that were
The unit cell concept is commonly used to design and used in the analysis with a finite element mesh and
evaluate the performance of stone columns (Baumann and boundary conditions. The lateral boundaries of the
Bauer, 1974; Ng and Tan, 2014; Abhijit and Das, 2000). models were closed (impervious), while the drainage
The unit cell model involves a single stone column with boundaries were assumed to be at the ground surface and
an equivalent circular zone of influence. The equivalent at the bottom of model (the excess pore pressure at the
diameters of the stone columns for triangular, square and nodes along the boundaries was set to zero).
hexagonal patterns are 1.05, 1.13 and 1.29 S, After the generation of the initial stress and pore
respectively, where S is the c/c spacing of the columns water pressure, the stone column was modelled by
(Balaam and Booker, 1981). replacing the soft soil element. The Mohr-Coulomb
In the current paper, 2D finite element analysis was failure criterion was adopted for all the material
utilized to simulate a single as well as a group of end- elements. The properties of the soft clay, stone column
bearing stone columns embedded in soft clay soil below and sand for the modelling were taken from the case
an embankment. In addition, the study focused on some studies of Adnan (2014). A drained behaviour was
factors that impacted both the Settlement Improvement assumed for the stone column and the fill material,
Factor (SIF) and excess pore water pressure in the unit whilst the soft clay was assumed to be undrained. The
cell and plane strain models. Moreover, the study tried to input parameters of the Mohr-Coulomb model involved
fill the gap of knowledge about the difference between the stiffness modulus (E), drained cohesion (c), internal
using the unit cell and plane strain approaches in friction angle (φ), dilation angle (ψ), Poisson’s ratio (υ)
numerical models and checked the accuracy of each and unit weight (γ). All these parameters and the
through the results that were obtained. interface strength between the stone column and soft
clay (Rinter) are tabulated in Table 2.
Geometry and Ground Conditions
A consolidation analysis was selected to investigate
The selected problem in this study involved stone the soft soil reinforced with ordinary stone columns.
columns that supported a large embankment with 2:1 This type of analysis should be used to consider the
side slopes. A synopsis of this project that was relevant dissipation of excess pore water pressure. Each
to the current study is described as follows: For the modelling was divided into three major steps: (1)
purpose of ground improvement, columns, with a Initializing the stress field and hydrostatic pore water
diameter of 1 m, were installed in a square grid with a pressure distribution (after the construction of the last
c/c spacing of 2 m between the columns. The 8 m long layer, the calculations were taken until the excess pore
columns were fully penetrating and rested on a firm pressure had dissipated to a residual value of 1 kPa to
stratum to support a 10.5 m high embankment. The determine the final consolidation settlement); (2)
embankment was constructed in stages to allow partial building the embankment in stages; and (3) applying and
dissipation of excess pore water pressure during maintaining the traffic load. The traffic load was
construction. The construction of the embankment was simulated by applying a uniformly distributed load (20
modelled in two stages, where the duration and fill kPa) to the top of the embankment.

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

Parametric Study Table 1: Construction sequences of embankment (Adnan,

2014)
A parametric study was conducted to evaluate the Stage Fill height (m) Time consumed (day)
behaviour of the stone columns by comparing between First 0-1 4.0
two different simulation and to investigate the influence 3.0 7.0
of several key factors. A series of parametric analyses 0.0 42.0
were performed, where each parameter was varied at a Second 3.5 3.5
time while the other parameters were kept constant, as 3.0 3.5
listed in Table 3. 0.0 1000.0

Table 2: Soil data sets parameters used for validation of PLAXIS

Mohr-Coulomb Blanket layer Fill material Firm clay Soft clay Stone column
Type Drained Drained Undrained Undrained Drained
γunsat [kN/m³] 19 17 16 15 12
γsat [kN/m³] 22 18 17 16 22
kx [m/day] 1 1 7.36*10−5 7.36*10−5 1
ky [m/day] 1 1 3.68*10−5 3.68*10−5 0.5
Eref [kN/m²] 20*103 20*103 15*103 2*103 20*103
v [-] 0.333 0.333 0.4 0.4 0.333
cref [kN/m²] 0.1 0.1 23 28 0.1
ϕ [°] 35 30 28 1 38
ψ [°] 0 0 0 0 8
Rinter. [-] - - - 1 1

Table 3: Range of parameters

Parameter Unit Value range
c/c spacing ratio (S/d) [-] 2, 2.6, 3 and 3.4
Diameter ratio (d/S) [-] 0.4, 0.45, 0.5, 0.55 and 0.6
Internal friction angle (φ) [°] 30, 38, 40 and 45
Undrianed cohesion (c) [kPa] 15, 20, 28, 30 and 35

Fig. 1: Site cross section with geometric characteristics and mesh of embankment project modeled using axisymmetric and plane
strain conditions

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

Results and Discussion column diameter was followed by a gradual increase

in the SIF. Generally, using stone columns to
Settlement Improvement Factor reinforce the soil will lead to a reduction in the
The deformation behaviour is one of the factors that settlement and an achievement of about 1.52 and 3.28
are taken into account when designing stone columns to times the settlement improvement when the unit cell
support roadways, railways, etc. Most investigators and plane strain are used, respectively. Both the
focus on the settlement at the base of the embankment models that were used showed the same behaviour
since the maximum long-term settlement occurs at this with the same rate of improvement, where an increase
elevation (Huang and Han, 2010). Moreover, the of 37.1 and 36% in the SIF resulted from the plane
settlement performance is expressed as the settlement strain and unit cell models, respectively when the d/S
improvement factor SIF, which is defined as: was increased from 0.4 to 0.6.
As can be seen in Fig. 2c, the results of the SIF
investigation illustrated that better quality stone column
Su
SIF = (1) material yielded a higher SIF for the embankment
St
system. The increasing effect was more significant in
the plane strain model than in the unit cell model.
Where: According to the analysis of the unit cell concept,
Su (untreated) = The settlement without stone column almost constant SIF values were obtained for φ ≥ 38°,
treatment i.e., for stone columns where φ = 38° and 45°, the SIF
St (treated) = Corresponds to the settlement with improved by 2.4% only. The result of the current study
stone column treatment was in agreement with Ng (2017), who stated that the
friction angle of the column material has a moderate
The SIF in this study was measured at the end of the influence on the settlement ratio.
second stage of construction in order to consider the The settlement improvement factor decreased slightly
long-term conditions (during serviceability) at the as the undrained cohesion of soft soil increased, as
reference point (A) (Fig. 1). The change in the SIF was shown in Fig. 2d. The SIF reached a constant value as
given in terms of the changes to all the parameters the undrained cohesion of soil increased to more than 28
mentioned in Table 3. kPa, where there was no significant difference in the SIF
The c/c spacing between adjacent columns is one of behaviour between both approaches. For the soil with an
the important design parameters in this system, where it undrained cohesion that was equal to or more than 28
is directly related to the area replacement ratio of the kPa, the SIF was almost constant, with an average value
columns (e.g., larger spacing of columns lead to a of 1.09 and 2.833 in the unit cell and plane strain
smaller area replacement ratio). Figure 2a indicates that models, respectively. From this numerical study, it was
in both the models that were used there was a gradual observed that the use of stone columns for soil with a
decrease in the SIF as the spacing ratio (S/d) increased. low undrained cohesion had a greater effect on the
The SIF decreased by 25.9 and 22% when the spacing settlement. Moreover, the undrained cohesion of the soft
ratios were increased from 2 to 3.4 in the plane strain clay became less significant as the cohesion was higher
and unit cell models, respectively. The maximum than 28 kPa and this result was in agreement with the
values of the factor were 2.832 and 1.302 according to study by Abusharar and Han (2011), when they
plane strain and unit cell models, respectively. These investigated the 2D deep-seated slope stability of
results were expected since the unit cell model does not embankments over stone columns. They concluded that
consider the interactions between adjacent columns and the undrained cohesion of the soft clay became less
between the column and the surrounding soil, which significant as the cohesion was higher than 25 kPa.
enhance the system resistance and reduce deformation. Differential Settlement
According to the unit cell results, the settlement of the
reinforced ground did not improve much compared to The differential settlement between the column and
the unimproved ground when the c/c spacing was the surrounding soil for this system was clearer in the
greater than three times its diameter. Bergado et al. plane strain than in the unit cell model, as indicated in
(1990) concluded the same observation in their study Fig. 3 and 4. At a selected section [A-A], the plane strain
when the c/c spacing was greater than four times the analysis showed a variable settlement that was between
diameter of the column. the minimum and maximum value of 144.9 to 186.27
Figure 2b shows the results of the investigation mm along the embankment base. Besides, the unit cell
into the effect of the column diameter ratio (d/S) on model showed a less variable settlement at the same
the SIF obtained from the use of both approaches. The section, where the settlement varied between 196.5 and
results indicated that the higher value of the stone 203.5 mm for the same test case.

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 2: Factors influencing SIF: (a) c/c spacing ratio (S/d); (b) stone column diameter ratio (d/S); (c) friction angle of stone column
material; (d) undrained cohesion of soft clay
0.260
0.240
0.220
0.200
0.180
0.160
0.140
0.120
0.100
0.080
0.060
0.040
0.020
-0.000
-0.020

Fig. 3: Total displacement distribution with differential settlement calculated at GL (plane strain model)

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

Fig. 4: Total displacement distribution with differential settlement calculated at GL (unit cell model)

Validation of the Results pore water pressure; and (ii) high column stiffness, which
leads to reduced vertical stress on the soil body, thereby
The Priebe method has been used widely for stone reducing the generation of excess pore water pressure.
column ground improvement projects. Priebe (1976) and In this study, the two approaches that were used to
Balaam and Booker (1981) came up with the simulate the stone column behaviour resulted in different
computation for the settlement of a stone column. As can excess pore pressure values at the reference point (C)
be seen in Fig. 2a and 2b, the analytical methods (located 2 m below the water table level (Fig. 1)) for all
indicated similar behaviour with the FEM results. the tested models as this factor requires more attention
However, the plane strain calculation tends to during the design stage. Generally, at the beginning of
overestimate the SIF comparing with the Priebe and each stage of construction, the dissipation of the excess
Ballam methods meanwhile, the derived SIF based on pore water pressure increased suddenly due to an
the unit cell model were much close to theoretical used increase in the embankment loading and each sudden
methods. This result is expected since both of Priebe and increase was followed by a gradual decrease.
Ballam methods were derived based on unit cell concept. Figure 5a shows the simulated excess pore water
Unfortunately, both Priebe and Ballam did not consider pressure with time when S/d = 2. The excess water
all the parameters in this part of the study such as the pressure had peak values of approximately 24.3 and 3.87
undrained cohesion of soft clay. In order to judge the kPa due to the embankment construction and then
results of the numerical analysis, a comparison was dissipated at different rates to nearly zero after 90 days
made with the results of some case histories, as for the plane strain and unit cell models, respectively.
summarized in Table 4. This fast dissipation resulted from the drainage and
stress transfer from the soil to the columns, as noted by
Excess Pore Water Pressure Han and Ye (2001) when they studied the consolidation
Stone columns can significantly accelerate the rate of of the soft soil treated with stone columns.
consolidation of soft clays due to the following two Figure 5b indicates the difference between the
mechanisms: (i) High column permeability, which causes results of the excess pore pressure when a stone
radial drainage resulting in faster dissipation of excess column with a diameter of 0.6 S was used. There was

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

a clear difference in the peak value of the excess d/S = 0.6 at approximately 66 and 110 days based on
pressure and dissipation time. Moreover, the residual the unit cell and plane strain models, respectively
excess pore water pressure was less than 1 kPa when from the start of construction.

Table 4: Case histories and comparison of SIF

Reference: Material treated d(avg)./S Havg.(m) SIF
Castelli et al. (1983) Clay 0.524 18.00 3.400
Cooper and Rose (1999) Clay 0.401 4.35 2.550
Greenwood (1970) Clay, peat 0.522 6.00 1.630
Venmans (1998) Clay 0.433 5.20 1.540
Raju (1997) Clay 0.500 15.00 2.500
Current study (plane strain) Soft clay 0.400 8.00 2.396
0.500 2.832
Current study (unit cell) Soft clay 0.400 8.00 1.117
0.500 1.302

Fig. 5: Compression between unit cell and plane strain models factors influencing excess pore water pressure-time curves: (a)
c/c spacing ratio (S/d); (b) stone column diameter ratio (d/S); (c) friction angle of stone column material; (d) undrained
cohesion of soft clay

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

When the column had a friction angle of 38°, the Ir. Dr. Anuar Kasa: Is the supervisor and
results of the excess pore water pressure with time were coordinator of the research. He participated in the
plotted as in Fig. 5c in order to make a comparison conceptualisation, coordination and designing of the
between the two models that were used in this study. As research,contributed to the the analysis and
usual, the graph of the excess pore pressure indicated interpretation of results.
that the plane strain model resulted in higher pressure Dr. Norinah Abdul-Rahman: Is the co-supervisor
than the unit cell model. The difference between the of the research. She participated in the conceptualisation
excess pore water pressure of the soft soil at 15 kPa and designing of the research,contributed to the analysis
became less significant in the undrained cohesion state and interpretation of results.
and was about 5 kPa after 60 days (Fig. 5d). The peak Mr. Jamal Alsharef: He participated in the
values of the excess pore pressure for the plane strain modelling and simulation, analysis and interpretaion of
model were higher than those of the unit cell model in the results, drafting of the manuscript.
relation to the measured points and the impact of the
columns and the soil interaction. Ethics
The current article is original and contains
Conclusion unpublished material. The corresponding author confirms
The current paper presented a comparison between that all of the other authors have read and approved this
two different approaches to the simulation of stone manuscript and there are no ethical issues involved.
columns and investigated their performance by means of
a numerical analysis. The Settlement Improvement References
Factor (SIF) and excess pore water pressure were Abdelkrim, M. and P.D. Buhan, 2007. An elastoplastic
investigated. The following conclusions were made: homogenization procedure for predicting the
settlement of a foundation on a soil reinforced by
• In all the series of models used in this study, when
columns. Eur. J. Mechan. A/Solids, 26: 736-757.
the stone column system was modelled on the unit
DOI: 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2006.12.004
cell concept the SIF was found to be smaller than
when the plane strain model was used. This result Abhijit, S. and S.C. Das, 2000. Interaction analysis of
was expected due to the effect of the interference stone column groups in foundations. Proceedings of
and friction of the column with the surrounding soil the Indian Geotechnical Conference, (IGC’ 00),
in the plane strain system Bombay, India, pp: 279-284.
• Among the different models, the stone column with a Abusharar, S.W. and J. Han, 2011. Two-dimensional
bigger diameter ratio, lower spacing ratio and higher deep-seated slope stability analysis of embankments
friction angle indicated better behaviour against the over stone column-improved soft clay. Eng. Geol.,
settlement and dissipation of water pressure 120: 103-110. DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.04.002
• Since the excess pore water pressure was greatly Adnan, Q., 2014. Behavior of stone column embedded in
affected by the model of analysis, the designer has soft clays under embankment by using finite
to be careful when analysing and designing projects element and artificial intelligent methods. PhD
with higher ground water levels Thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
• Finally, the authors of this paper advise the Al-Kaisi, A.A.R. and H.H. Ali, 2013. Mathematical
researchers and the designers to select the correct estimation for the bearing capacity of sand column
way to simulate the problem inserted in soft clay soil. Eng. Technol. J., 31: 816-827.
Al-Saoudi, N.K.S., M.M.M. Al-Kaissi and N.A.A.
Acknowledgment Rajab, 2014. Treatment of soft soil by sand
columns. Eng. Technol. J., 32: 2106-2118.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial
Ambily, A.P. and S.R. Gandhi, 2007. Behavior of stone
support provided by Reinforced Fire-Proof Concrete
Tunnel Lining - Universiti Kabangsaan Malaysia UKM columns based on experimental and FEM analysis.
under research grant DIP-2014-019 in this work. ASCE, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 133: 405-415.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:4(405)
Andreou, P., W. Frikha, J. Canou, V. Papadopoulos
Author’s Contributions
and J.C. Dupla, 2008. Experimental study on sand
Maryam Gaber: Collection of data, modelling and and gravel columns in clay. Proc. ICE-Ground
simulation, analysis and interpretaion of the results, Improvement, 161: 189-198.
drafting and reviewing of the manuscript. DOI: 10.1680/grim.2008.161.4.189

■■
Maryam Gaber et al. / American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2018, ■■ (■): ■■■.■■■
DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2018.■■■.■■■

Balaam, N.P. and I.R. Booker, 1981. Analysis of rigid Jellali, B., M. Bouassida and P.D. Buhan, 2005. A
rafts supported by granular piles. Int. J. Numerical homogenization method for estimating the bearing
Analytical Meth. Geomechan., 5: 379-403. capacity of soils reinforced by columns. Int. J.
DOI: 10.1002/nag.1610050405 Numerical Analytical Meth. Geomech., 29: 989-1004.
Baumann, V. and G.E.A. Bauer, 1974. The performance DOI: 10.1002/nag.441
of foundations on various soils stabilized by the Lo, S.R., R. Zhang and J. Mak, 2010. Geosynthetic-
vibro-compaction method. Can. Geotech. J., 11: encased stone columns in soft clay: A numerical
509-530. DOI: 10.1139/t74-056 study. Geotextiles Geomembranes, 28: 292-302.
Bergado, D.T., N. Singh, S.H. Sim, B. Panichayatum and DOI: 10.1016/j.geotexmem.2009.09.015
C.L. Sampaco et al., 1990. Improvement of soft Malarvizhi, S.N. and Ilamparuthi, 2007. Comparative
Bangkok clay using vertical geotextile band drains study on the behavior of encased stone column and
compared with granular piles. Geotext. Geomembr., conventional stone column. J. Soils Foundat., 47:
9: 203-231. DOI: 10.1016/0266-1144(90)90054-G 873-885. DOI: 10.3208/sandf.47.873
Castelli, R.J., S.K. Sarkar and G.A. Munkfakh, 1983.
Ng, K.S. and S.A. Tan, 2014. Design and analyses of
Ground treatment in the design and construction of a
floating stone columns. J. Soils Foundat., 54: 478-487.
wharf structure. Proceedings of the International
DOI: 10.1016/j.sandf.2014.04.013
Conference on Advances in Piling and Ground
Treatment for Foundations, (GTF’ 83), Institution of Ng, K.S. and S.A. Tan, 2015. Simplified homogenization
Civil Engineers, London, pp: 275-281. method in stone column designs. J. Soils Foundat.,
Choobbasti, A.J., A. Zamatkesh and R. Noorzad, 2011. 55: 154-165. DOI: 10.1016/j.sandf.2014.12.012
Performance of stone columns in soft clay: Ng, K.S., 2017. Settlement ratio of floating stone
Numerical evaluation. J. Geotech. Geol. Eng., 29: columns for small and large loaded areas. J.
675-684. DOI: 10.1007/s10706-011-9409-x GeoEng., 12: 89-96. DOI: 10.6310/jog.2017.12(2).5
Cooper, M.R. and A.N. Rose, 1999. Stone column Priebe, H., 1976. Evaluation of the settlement reduction
support for an embankment on deep alluvial soils. of a foundation improved by Vibro Replacement.
Proc. Instit. Civil Eng. Geotech. Eng., 137: 15-25. Die Bautechnik, 53: 160-162.
DOI: 10.1680/gt.1999.370103 Raju, V.R., 1997. The Behaviour of Very Soft Soils
Dheerendra Babu, M.R., S. Nayak and R. Shivashankar, Improved by Vibro-Replacement. In Ground
2013. A critical review of construction, analysis and Improvement Geosystems: Densification and
behaviour of stone columns. J. Geotech. Geol. Eng., Reinforcement, Davies, M.C.R. and F. Schlosser
31: 1-22. DOI: 10.1007/s10706-012-9555-9 (Eds.), Thomas Telford, London,
Elshazly, H.A., D.A. Hafez and M.E. Mossaad, 2008. ISBN-10: 0727726056, pp: 253-259.
Reliability of conventional settlement evaluation for Van Impe, W.Y. and E. De Beer, 1983. Improvement of
circular foundations on stone columns. J. Geotech. settlement behavior of softy layers by means of
Geol. Eng., 26: 323-334. stone columns. Proceedings of the 8th International
DOI: 10.1007/s10706-007-9169-9 Conference on SMFE, (SMFE’ 83), Helsinki,
Greenwood, D.A., 1970. Mechanical improvement of pp: 309-312.
soils below ground surfaces. Proceedings of the Venmans, A.A.J., 1998. Design, construction and
Ground Engineering Conference, (GEC’ 70), lifetime behaviour on a highway widening on stone
Institution of Civil Engineers, London, pp: 11-22. column improved ground. Proceedings of the
Guetif, Z., M. Bouassida and J.M. Debats, 2007. International Symposium on Problematic Soils,
Improved soft clay characteristics due to stone (SPS’ 98), Tohoku, pp: 105-108.
column installation. J. Comput. Geotech., 34: Weber, T.M., S.M. Springman, M. Gab, V. Racansky
104-111. DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2006.09.008 and H.F. Schweiger, 2008. Numerical Modelling of
Han, J. and S.L. Ye, 2001. Simplified method for Stone Columns in Soft Clay Under an Embankment.
consolidation rate of stone column reinforced In: Geotechnics of Soft Soils-Focus on Ground
foundations. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 127: Improvement, Karstunen, M. and M. Leoni (Eds.),
597-603. Taylor and Francis, London, pp: 305-311.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2001)127:7(597)
Huang, J. and J. Han, 2010. Two-dimensional parametric
study of geosynthetic-reinforced column-supported
embankments by coupled hydraulic and mechanical
modeling. J. Comput. Geotech., 37: 638-648.
DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2010.04.002

■■