fundamental study of static and dynamic compaction...
Post on 20-Mar-2018
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
FUNDAMENTAL STUDY OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC COMPACTION GROUTING IN COMPLETELY
DECOMPOSED GRANITE SOIL IN HONG KONG
WANG SHANYONG
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG
DECEMBER 2006
-
CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG
Fundamental Study of Static and Dynamic
Compaction Grouting in Completely Decomposed Granite Soil in Hong Kong
Submitted to
Department of Building and Construction
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
By
Wang Shanyong
December 2006
-
Abstract The research described in this thesis focuses on the fundamental behavior of static and
dynamic compact grouting in the soil of completely decomposed granite (CDG). Using
the modified triaxial apparatus and newly-invented pulse wave creator, laboratory tests
were performed to identify the critical controllable factors of static and dynamic compact
grouting for optimizing the compaction effectiveness. Numerical study was carried out to
improve the understanding of the static and dynamic compact grouting on the soil
densified and the associated consolidation process of soil.
Firstly, In order to study the behavior of soil when grouting is carried out in experimental
tests, various types of standard tests, which include moisture content test, bulk density
test, Protor tests, soil classification test, permeability test, and oedometer test are carried
out to obtain the basic soil properties of the soil specimens. Moreover, the triaxial tests on
the fundamental behaviour of the soil with different fine content in the saturated state
under drained shearing are carried out, which particular attention is paid to the influence
of different initial dry density with different effective confining pressure changing from
50 to 250kPa.
Secondly, a set apparatus of triaxial tests was modified to study the static and dynamic
compact grouting in soil. The most distinguished character of this laboratory apparatus is
that it can simulate the triaxial condition of static and dynamic compact grouting in the
field. In the tests, the effective confining pressure, the lateral pressure coefficiency (K),
excess pore water pressure, back pressure, void ratio change, vertical and lateral
deformation of specimen can be measured. In addition, the dynamic compact grouting
pressure, dynamic compact grouting frequency, and dynamic compact grouting period
can also be controlled.
Thirdly, the compact grouting efficiency ( )/( minmax eee ) due to compact grouting
was defined. The effect of injection rate, confining pressure and on the grouting
iii
-
efficiency in static compact grouting tests was studied. Meanwhile, the ground surface
response due to static compact grouting was also investigated. Moreover, the study which
focused on the effect of dynamic compact frequency, dynamic compact duration,
effective confining pressure, K, initial dry density on the grout efficiency and mean shear
strength enhancement of Hong Kong CDG was carried out. Moreover, the effect of fine
content for eleven kinds of soils on the dynamic compact results was studied.
Finally, finite element analysis was adopted for the simulation of the static and dynamic
grouting in Hong Kong CDG. Specially, a Cam-Clay-Model-for-Cyclic-Loading was
introduced in ABAQUS through its user subroutine UMAT to study the soil response due
to vibro-compaction. The numerical results demonstrated the experimental results that the
grouting efficiency of dynamic compact grouting method is typically 3-5 times higher
than that using static compaction grouting.
iv
-
CONTENTS
Declaration
Abstract
Acknowledgements
Table of contents
List of tables
List of figures
CHAPTER 1 ...................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Objective and Scope of the Study ............................................................................ 3
1.3 Outline of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 4
1.4 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 5
CHAPTER 2 ...................................................................................................................... 9 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................ 9
2.1 Overview.................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 Soil Improvement by Vibration ............................................................................. 10
2.2.1 Vibro-compaction........................................................................................... 10
2.2.2.1 Definition .................................................................................................... 10
2.2.1.2 Principle.................................................................................................. 10
2.2.1.3 Applications............................................................................................ 11
vii
-
2.2.1.4 Limitations.............................................................................................. 12
2.2.2 Vibro-replacement.......................................................................................... 12
2.2.2.1 Definition................................................................................................ 12
2.2.2.2 Principle.................................................................................................. 12
2.2.2.3 Applications............................................................................................ 13
2.2.2.4 Limitations.............................................................................................. 13
2.2.3 Dynamic compaction...................................................................................... 13
2.2.3.1Definition................................................................................................. 13
2.2.3.2 Principle.................................................................................................. 13
2.2.3.3 Applications............................................................................................ 14
2.2.3.4 Limitations.............................................................................................. 14
2.2.4 Rapid Impact Compaction.............................................................................. 15
2.2.4.1 Definition .................................................................................................... 15
2.2.4.2 Principle.................................................................................................. 15
2.2.4.3 Applications and limitations................................................................... 15
2.3 Compaction Grouting............................................................................................. 15
2.3.1 Definition ....................................................................................................... 15
2.3.2 Principle ......................................................................................................... 16
2.3.3 Descriptions and applications......................................................................... 17
2.3.4 Limitations ..................................................................................................... 18
2.3.5. Comparison between compaction grouting method and conventional grouting methods ......................................................................................... 19
2.3.6 New Developments in Compact Grouting ..................................................... 19
2.4 Summary ................................................................................................................ 19
CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................................................... 29 MATERIAL BEHAVIORS............................................................................................ 29
viii
-
3.1 Overview................................................................................................................ 29
3.2 Physical Properties of the CDG in Hong Kong ..................................................... 29
3.3 Triaxial Tests of the CDG in Hong Kong .............................................................. 30
3.3.1 Test Program .................................................................................................. 30
3.3.2 Experimental Results and Analysis................................................................ 32
3.4 Effect of Fine Content on Drained Behavior of Soil.............................................. 33
3.4.1 Experimental Study ........................................................................................ 34
3.4.2 Results and Discussion................................................................................... 34
CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................................................... 51 EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEM AND PROCEDURES FOR COMPACT GROUT INJECTION TESTS ....................................................................................................... 51
4.1 Overview................................................................................................................ 51
4.2 Testing Programme ................................................................................................ 52
4.3 Testing Apparatus .................................................................................................. 53
4.3.1 Modified Triaxial Injection System ............................................................... 53
4.3.1.1 Modified Triaxial Cell ............................................................................ 53
4.3.1.2 Instruments of the modified triaxial cell ................................................ 54
4.3.1.3 Data logging and control system ............................................................ 54
4.3.2 Pressure Pulse Device .................................................................................... 55
4. 3.3 Grouting Equipment ...................................................................................... 56
4.3.3.1 Pressure/Volume Controller and the Operations.................................... 56
4. 3.3.2 Injection Needle and Preparation .......................................................... 57
4.4 Soil Being Tested ................................................................................................... 57
4.4.1 Constant Loads for K Conditions-Anisotropic Consolidation Tests.............. 58
4.4.1.1 Description of the Test ........................................................................... 58
4.4.1.2 Dead weight loading............................................................................... 58
ix
-
4.5 Experimental Procedure ......................................................................................... 60
4.5.1 De-airing Porous Stones, Filter Papers and Injection Needle ........................ 60
4. 5.2 Sample Preparation ....................................................................................... 60
4.5.3 Saturation ....................................................................................................... 62
4.5.4 Consolidation of Soil Specimen..................................................................... 62
4.5.5 Injection Stage................................................................................................ 63
4.5.5.1 Static Compaction Grouting ................................................................... 63
4.5.5.2 Dynamic Compact Grouting................................................................... 64
4.6 Post Testing............................................................................................................ 64
CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................................... 77 STATIC COMPACTION GROUTING RESULTS AND DISCUSSION................. 77
5.1 Overview................................................................................................................ 77
5.2 A Definition for Assessing Sandy Soil Compaction Efficiency ............................ 77
5.3 Test Programme ..................................................................................................... 80
5.4 Experimental Results and Analysis........................................................................ 81
5.4.1 Effect of K on the Static Compaction grouting Efficiency ............................ 81
5.4.2 Vertical and Horizontal Deformation............................................................. 83
5.4.3 The Effect of Effective Confining Pressure and Initial Void Ratio on the Static Compaction Grouting Efficiency.......................................................... 84
5.4.4 The Influence of Injection Rate on Compaction Grouting............................. 85
CHAPTER 6 .................................................................................................................... 96 DYNAMIC COMPACTION GROUTING RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............ 96
6.1 Overview................................................................................................................ 96
6.2 General Comparison for Static and Dynamic Compaction Grouting Results........ 96
6.3 Effect of Dynamic Compact Frequency on the Compaction Efficiency................ 98
6.4 Effect of Dynamic Compaction Grouting Period on the Compaction Efficiency 100
x
-
6.5 Effect of Effective Confining Pressure on the Grouting Efficiency .................... 101
6.6 Effect of Lateral Pressure Coefficient K on the Compaction Efficiency............. 101
6.7 Effect of Initial Dry Density on the Compaction Efficiency ............................... 102
6.8 Radial Boundary Effect of Dynamic Compact Grouting Frequency on the Compaction Efficiency ....................................................................................... 103
6.9 Effect of Fine Content of Soil on the Compaction Efficiency ............................. 104
CHAPTER 7 .................................................................................................................. 132 NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF LABORATORY TESTS .................................. 132
7.1 Overview.............................................................................................................. 132
7.2 Finite Element Simulations .................................................................................. 132
7.2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 132
7.2.2 Finite Element Meshes ................................................................................. 133
7.2.3 Boundary Conditions.................................................................................... 133
7.2.4 Loading Conditions ...................................................................................... 134
7.2.5 Soil Model for Static Compaction Grouting Tests....................................... 134
7.2.5.1 Description of Modified cam-clay model............................................. 134
7.2.5.2 Numerical Simulation Using Modified Cam-Clay Model ................... 136
7.2.6 Step of Analysis ........................................................................................... 137
7.3 Interpretation of the FEA Results for Static Compaction Injection Tests ........... 138
7.3.1 Densification of Hong Kong CDG Due to Static Compaction Grouting..... 138
7.3.2 Increase of Soil Strength and Compaction Efficiency with Time................ 139
7.3.3 Pore Pressure Distribution............................................................................ 139
7.3.4 Permeability Distribution ............................................................................. 140
7.3.5 Displacement around the Grouting Hole...................................................... 140
7.3.6 Stress Paths................................................................................................... 140
7.3.7 Effect of K on the Compaction Efficiency................................................... 142
xi
-
7.3.8 Effect of Effective Confining Pressure on the Compaction Efficiency ....... 143
7.3.9 Effect of Initial Void Ratio on the Compaction Efficiency.......................... 144
7.3.10 Effect of Grouting Times on the Compaction Efficiency .......................... 145
7.4 Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Compaction Grouting Tests......................... 146
7.4.1 A Modified Cam-Clay model for Cyclic Loading ....................................... 146
7.4.2 Numerical Results of Dynamic Compaction Grouting ................................ 147
7.4.3 Densification of Hong Kong CDG Due to Dynamic Compaction Grouting 147
7.4.4 Increase Grouting Efficiency Due to Dynamic Compaction Grouting ........ 148
7.4.5 Pore Pressure Distribution Due to Dynamic Compaction Grouting ........... 149
7.4.6 Displacement around the Grouting Hole Due to Compaction Grouting...... 149
7.4.7 Stress Paths and Liquefaction of Sandy Soil Due to Compaction Grouting 150
7.4.8 Effect of Dynamic Amplitude on the Compaction Efficiency ..................... 151
CHAPTER 8 .................................................................................................................. 196 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................ 196
8.1 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 196
8.2 Suggestions for Further Work.............................................................................. 198
8.2.1 Physical Modelling....................................................................................... 198
8.2.2 Numerical Modelling and Field Data........................................................... 198
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 200
xii
-
LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Grouting theory literature review (Rawlings et al. 2000)................................. 21
Table 3.1 Physical properties of Hong Kong CDG .......................................................... 36
Table 3.2 Strength of Hong Kong CDG ........................................................................... 36
Table 3.3 Critical parameter of Hong Kong CDG............................................................ 37
Table 3.4 Soil properties for experimental test ................................................................. 37
Table 5.1 Effect of K on static compaction efficiency ..................................................... 87
Table 5.2 Effect of confining pressure on static compaction efficiency........................... 87
Table 5.3 Effect of injection rate on static compact efficiency ........................................ 87
Table 6.1 Effect of dynamic frequency on the Compaction Efficiency for the samples
with diameter of100mm.......................................................................................... 107
Table 6.2 Effect of dynamic compact period on the Compaction Efficiency................. 107
Table 6.3 Effect of effective confining pressure on the Compaction Efficiency............ 108
Table 6.4 Effect of K on the Compaction Efficiency ..................................................... 108
Table 6.5 Effect of Initial Dry Density on the Compaction Efficiency .......................... 108
Table 6.6 Effect of dynamic frequency on the Compaction Efficiency for the samples
with diameter of 75mm........................................................................................... 109
Table 6.7 Effect of fine content of soil on the Compaction Efficiency .......................... 109
Table 7.1 Soil properties and initial conditions for static compaction grouting............. 153
Table 7.2 Soil properties and initial conditions for different K...................................... 153
Table 7.3 Soil Properties and initial conditions for different effective confining pressure
................................................................................................................................. 153
Table 7.4 Soil properties and initial conditions for dynamic compaction grouting........ 154
xiii
-
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 1.1 Schematic static compact grouting and dynamic pulse grouting .......................... 7
Fig. 1.2 Flow chart of research plan and methodology....................................................... 8
Fig. 2.1 Effect of vibro compaction on soil density
(http://www.haywardbaker.com/services/vibro_compaction.htm)........................... 24
Fig. 2.2 Vibro compaction process (http://www.keller-asia.com/vibro_compaction.htm)
................................................................................................................................... 24
Fig. 2.3 Idealized responses to vibration (after Green wood and Kirsch, 1984) .............. 24
Fig. 2.4 Effect of increasing fines content on effectiveness of vibratory compaction (after
Saito, 1977) ............................................................................................................... 25
Fig. 2.5 Principle of vibro-replacement (http://www.keller-
asia.com/vibro_replacement.htm)............................................................................. 25
Fig. 2.6 A schematic showing the vibro replacement process (http://www.keller-
asia.com/vibro_replacement.htm)............................................................................. 26
Fig. 2.7 Idealized stress and displacement at a point below dynamic compaction (after
Greenwood and Kirsch, 1984) .................................................................................. 26
Fig. 2.8 Rapid impact compactor of granular fill (after Charles and Watts 2002) ........... 27
Fig. 2.9 Principle of compaction grouting (after Warner, 1982) ...................................... 27
Fig. 2.10 Schematic illustrating compaction grouting process (http://www.keller-
asia.com/compaction_grouting.htm)......................................................................... 28
Fig. 2.11 Grouting principles and methods....................................................................... 28
Fig. 3.1 Grain size distribution curves for Hong Kong CDG ........................................... 38
Fig. 3.2 Standard Proctor test results ................................................................................ 38
Fig. 3.3a Deviatoric stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.3Mg/cm ) .. 39 3
Fig. 3.3b Volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.3Mg/cm ). 39 3
Fig. 3.3c Deviatoric stress versus mean effective normal stress for the sample (dry
density 1.3Mg/cm )................................................................................................... 40 3
Fig. 3.3d Critical state ( plot) (initial dry density=1.3g/cm3; fine content=6%) .............. 40
xiv
-
Fig. 3.4a Deviatoric stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.4Mg/cm ) .. 41 3
Fig. 3.4b Volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.4Mg/cm ). 41 3
Fig. 3.4c Deviatoric stress versus mean effective normal stress for the sample (dry
density 1.4Mg/cm )................................................................................................... 42 3
Fig. 3.4d Critical state ( plot) (initial dry density=1.4g/cm3; fine content=6%) .............. 42
Fig. 3.5a Deviatoric stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.5Mg/cm ) .. 43 3
Fig. 3.5b Volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.5Mg/cm ). 43 3
Fig. 3.5c Deviatoric stress versus mean effective normal stress for the sample (dry
density 1.5Mg/cm )................................................................................................... 44 3
Fig. 3.5d Critical state ( plot) (initial dry density=1.5g/cm ; fine content=6%)............... 44 3
Fig. 3.6a Deviatoric stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.6Mg/cm ) .. 45 3
Fig. 3.6b volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.6Mg/cm ).. 45 3
Fig. 3.6c Deviatoric stress versus mean effective normal stress for the sample (dry
density 1.6Mg/cm3) .................................................................................................. 46
Fig. 3.6d Critical state plot (initial dry density=1.6g/cm ; fine content=6%) .................. 46 3
Fig. 3.7a Deviatoric stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.7Mg/cm ) .. 47 3
Fig. 3.7b volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.7Mg/cm ).. 47 3
Fig. 3.7c Deviatoric stress versus mean effective normal stress for the sample (dry
density 1.7Mg/cm )................................................................................................... 48 3
Fig. 3.7d Critical state ( plot) (initial dry density=1.7g/cm ; fine content=6%)............... 48 3
Fig. 3.8 Grain size distribution curves for different fine content...................................... 49
Fig. 3.9a Deviatoric stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.3Mg/cm ) .. 49 3
Fig. 3.9b Volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.3Mg/cm ). 50 3
Fig. 3.9c Effective principal stress versus axial strain for the sample (dry density
1.3Mg/cm ) ............................................................................................................... 50 3
Fig. 4.1 (a) Schematic layout of static and dynamic compaction grouting experimental. 65
Fig. 4.1 (b) Part of the laboratory set up ........................................................................... 66
Fig. 4.2 (a) The Schematic base of the modified tri-axial cell.......................................... 67
Fig. 4.2 (b) The base of the modified tri-axial cell ........................................................... 67
Fig. 4.3 The modified triaxial cell base and the expanded needle.................................... 68
Fig. 4.4 The modified triaxial cell and the loading frame ................................................ 68
xv
-
Fig. 4.5 The data acquisition system and the personal computer ..................................... 69
Fig. 4.6 The transducer controller system......................................................................... 69
Fig. 4.7 (a) The schematic diagram of the Pressure Pulse Device.................................... 70
Fig. 4.7 (b) The schematic of the pressure pulse device (Richart, 1970) ......................... 70
Fig. 4.8 The GDS controller and the dynamic compact device ........................................ 71
Fig. 4.9 The working system of GDS standard controller ................................................ 71
Fig. 4.10 The injection needle design ............................................................................... 72
Fig. 4.11 Anisotropic consolidation tests in triaxial cell under dead weight loading,
illustrating forces acting on the specimen (Head, K.H. 1998).................................. 72
Fig. 4.12 The modified Porous stone for injection ........................................................... 73
Fig. 4.13 The vacuum chamber for de-air the needles...................................................... 73
Fig. 4.15 The O-rings and O-ring placing tool ................................................................. 74
Fig. 4.16 The Carbon dioxide supplier and the air compressor ........................................ 75
Fig. 4.17 Dynamic compact amplitude versus frequency for 100mm diameter specimen76
Fig. 5.1 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)
(100mm).................................................................................................................... 88
0
Fig. 5.2 Compaction efficiency versus K (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for
every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm).............. 88
Fig. 5.3 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)
(100mm).................................................................................................................... 89
Fig. 5.4 Normalized injection pressure versus time for different K (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 89
Fig. 5.5 Excess pore water pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)
(100mm).................................................................................................................... 90
Fig. 5.6 Sketch of soil sample showing vertical and horizontal deformation................... 90
xvi
-
Fig. 5.7 Vertical displacement of sample versus time for different K values (injection
time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation
time is 30 minutes) (100mm).................................................................................... 91
Fig. 5.8 Lateral displacement of sample versus time for different K (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 91
Fig. 5.9 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different effective confining pressure
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm) ............................................................. 92
0
Fig. 5.10 Compaction efficiency versus effective confining pressure (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 92
Fig. 5.11 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus effective confining pressure
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm) ............................................................. 93
Fig. 5.12 Injection pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)
(100mm).................................................................................................................... 93
Fig. 5.13 Excess pore water pressure versus time for different K (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 94
Fig. 5.14 Injection pressure versus time for different injection rate (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 94
Fig. 5.15 Pore water pressure versus time for different injection rates (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 95
Fig. 5.16 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different injection rates (injection
time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation
time is 30 minutes) (100mm).................................................................................... 95
0
xvii
-
Fig. 6.1 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for compact grouting and dynamic
compaction grouting (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8
ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm)
................................................................................................................................. 111
0
Fig. 6.2 Injection pressure versus time for compact grouting and dynamic compaction
grouting (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic
time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) .............. 111
Fig. 6.3 Pore water pressure versus time for compact grouting and dynamic compact grouting.(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) 112
Fig. 6.4 Shear strength change during vibration and resulting static soil density (after
Greenwood, D.A. 1991).......................................................................................... 112
Fig. 6.5 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time (injection time is 0.3mins, injection
volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation
time is 30 minutes)(100mm)................................................................................... 113
0
Fig. 6.6 Mean Compaction efficiency versus frequency (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 113
Fig. 6.7 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus frequency (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 114
Fig. 6.8 The relative density versus frequency (injection time is 0.3mins, injection
volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation
time is 30 minutes)(100mm)................................................................................... 114
Fig. 6.9 Injection pressure versus time for different dynamic compaction frequency
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1
minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................. 115
Fig. 6.10 Pore water pressure versus time for different dynamic compaction frequency
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1
minute, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm)............................... 115
xviii
-
Fig. 6.11 Peak pore water pressure and normalized versus frequency (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minute, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 116
Fig. 6.12 Normalized void ratio e/e0 versus dynamic compaction period (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes)(100mm).................................................................................................... 116
Fig. 6.13 Compaction efficiency versus dynamic compaction period (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes)(100mm).................................................................................................... 117
Fig. 6.14 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus dynamic compaction period
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 117
Fig. 6.15 Injection pressure versus time for different dynamic compaction period
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 118
Fig. 6.16 Pore water pressure versus time for different dynamic compaction period
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 118
Fig. 6.17 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different confining pressure
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1
minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................. 119
0
Fig. 6.18 Compaction efficiency versus confining pressure (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 119
Fig. 6.19 Effective confining pressure versus confining pressure (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 120
Fig. 6.20 Injection pressure versus time for different effective confining pressure
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 120
xix
-
Fig. 6.21 Pore water pressure versus time for different effective confining pressure
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................................................ 121
Fig. 6.22 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm) ........................................................... 121
0
Fig. 6.23 Grouting efficiency versus K (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for
every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (100mm)................................................................................................... 122
Fig. 6.24 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm) ........................................................... 122
Fig. 6.25 Injection pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm) ........................................................... 123
Fig. 6.26 Pore water pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (100mm) ........................................................... 123
Fig. 6.27 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different dry density (injection time
is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 124
0
Fig. 6.28 Compaction efficiency versus time for different dry density (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 124
Fig. 6.29 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus time for different dry density
(injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1
minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm). ............................ 125
Fig. 6.30 Injection pressure versus time for different dry density (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 125
xx
-
Fig. 6.31 Pore water pressure versus time for different dry density (injection time is
0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the
whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm).................................................. 126
Fig. 6.32 Theoretical designs of multiple injection tests for compact grouting (after
Au.2001) ................................................................................................................. 126
Fig. 6.33 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time (injection time is 0.3mins, injection
volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation
time is 30 minutes)(75mm)..................................................................................... 127
0
Fig. 6.34 Grouting efficiency versus dynamic frequency (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(75mm) .............................................................. 127
Fig. 6.35 Grouting efficiency versus dynamic frequency (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes)(75mm) .............................................................. 128
Fig. 6.36 Normalized void ratio/initial void ratio (e/e ) versus time for different fine
content of soil (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml,
dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes) (75mm) 128
0
Fig. 6.37 Grouting efficiency versus fine content of soil (injection time is 0.3mins,
injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole
consolidation time is 30 minutes) (75mm) ............................................................. 129
Fig. 6.38 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus fine content of soil (injection
time is 0.3mins, injection volume for every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes,
the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes) (75mm)............................................. 129
Fig. 6.39 Injection pressure versus time (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for
every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (75mm)..................................................................................................... 130
Fig. 6.40 Pore water pressure versus time (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for
every time is 8 ml, dynamic time is 1 minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30
minutes) (75mm)..................................................................................................... 130
Fig. 6.41 Ideal particle size distributions ........................................................................ 131
xxi
-
Fig. 7.1 Finite element axial-symmetric mesh and boundary conditions for R50 compact
injection tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ......................................................................... 155
Fig. 7.2 Pressure-Volume response versus time during injection (Injection rate=30ml/min)
................................................................................................................................. 156
Fig. 7.3 some aspects of the modified Cam-clay model for triaxial conditions (Roscoe,
K.H. and Burland, J.B. 1968).................................................................................. 156
Fig. 7.4 Numerical simulated void ratio distribution for R50 static compact injection tests
using ABAQUS 6.3 ................................................................................................ 157
Fig. 7.5 Numerical and experimental results of versus time for radial distance from grout
hole (100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3) .................................................... 157
Fig. 7.6 Numerical results of Compaction Efficiency for radial distance from grout hole
(100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3) ............................................................ 158
Fig. 7.7 Numerical results of mean shear strength enhancement ratio for radial distance
from grout hole (100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3) .................................. 158
Fig. 7.8 Numerical simulated excess pore water pressure distribution for R50 single
injection tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ......................................................................... 159
Fig. 7.9 Numerical results of pore water pressure versus time for radial distance from
grout hole (100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3)........................................... 159
Fig. 7.10 Numerical simulated permeability distribution for R50 static compact injection
tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ........................................................................................ 160
Fig. 7.11 Numerical results of permeability versus time along radial direction (ABAQUS
6.3) .......................................................................................................................... 160
Fig. 7.12 Numerical simulated displacement distribution for R50 static compact injection
tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ........................................................................................ 161
Fig. 7.13 Numerical results of the displacement for radial distance from grout hole
(100mm diameter sample). (ABAQUS 6.3) ........................................................... 161
Fig. 7.14 Numerical simulated maximum principal stress distribution for R50 static
compaction grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ...................................................... 162
Fig. 7.15 Numerical results of maximum principal stress versus time for radial distance
from grout hole (100mm diameter sample). (ABAQUS 6.3) ................................. 162
xxii
-
Fig. 7.16 Numerical simulated minimum principal stress distribution for R50 compaction
grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3.......................................................................... 163
Fig. 7.17 Numerical results of maximum principal stress versus time for radial distance
from grout hole (100mm diameter sample). (ABAQUS 6.3) ................................. 163
Fig. 7.18 Numerical results of stress path of point 1 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 164
Fig. 7.19 Numerical results of stress path of point 2 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 164
Fig. 7.20 Numerical results of stress path of point 3 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 165
Fig. 7.21 Numerical results of stress path of point 4 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 165
Fig. 7.22 Numerical results of stress path of point 5 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 166
Fig. 7.23 Numerical results of stress path of point 6 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 166
Fig. 7.24 Numerical results of e versus of point 4 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 167
Fig. 7.25 Numerical results of e versus of point 5 for the static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 167
Fig. 7.26 Numerical results of versus time for different lateral pressure coefficient K
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 168
Fig. 7.27 Numerical results of grouting efficiency versus lateral pressure coefficient K
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 168
Fig. 7.28 Numerical results of mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus lateral
pressure coefficient K (ABAQUS 6.3) ................................................................... 169
Fig. 7.29 Numerical results of pore water pressure versus time for different lateral
pressure coefficient K (ABAQUS 6.3) ................................................................... 169
Fig. 7.30 Numerical results of lateral deformation versus time for lateral pressure
coefficient K=1.4 (ABAQUS 6.3) .......................................................................... 170
xxiii
-
Fig. 7.31 Numerical results of vertical deformation versus time for lateral pressure
coefficient K=1.4 (ABAQUS 6.3) .......................................................................... 170
Fig. 7.32 Numerical results of versus time for different effective confining pressure at
Point-4 (ABAQUS 6.3)........................................................................................... 171
Fig. 7.33 Numerical results of grouting efficiency versus effective confining pressure
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 171
Fig. 7.34 Numerical results of mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus effective
confining pressure (ABAQUS 6.3)......................................................................... 172
Fig. 7.35 Numerical results of pore water pressure versus time for different effective
confining pressure (ABAQUS 6.3)......................................................................... 172
Fig. 7.36Numerical results of the displacement of the point near the cavity versus time for
different effective confining pressure (ABAQUS 6.3) ........................................... 173
Fig. 7.37 Void ratio change versus time for the different initial void ratio for static
compaction grouting (ABAQUS 6.3) ..................................................................... 173
Fig. 7.38 Relative density versus initial void ratio for static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 174
Fig. 7.39 grouting efficiency versus initial void ratio for static compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 174
Fig. 7.40 mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus initial void ratio for static
compaction grouting (ABAQUS 6.3) ..................................................................... 175
Fig. 7.41 Numerical results of normalized versus time for the points at the radial distance
from the grouting hole for eight injections (ABAQUS 6.3) ................................... 175
Fig. 7.42 Numerical results of excess pore water pressure versus time for the points at the
radial distance from the grouting hole for eight injections (ABAQUS 6.3)........... 176
Fig. 7.43 Numerical results of grouting efficiency versus injection times for the point-6
for eight injections (ABAQUS 6.3) ........................................................................ 176
Fig. 7.44 Numerical results of mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus injection
times for the point-6 for eight injections (ABAQUS 6.3) ...................................... 177
Fig. 7.45 the yield surface and the loading surface in space (Carter, J. P, Booker, J. R.,
and C. P. Wroth, 1982) ........................................................................................... 177
xxiv
-
Fig. 7.46 Repeated consolidation and swelling of modified Cam-clay at constant stress
ratio(Carter, J. P, Booker, J. R., and C. P. Wroth, 1982)........................................ 178
Fig. 7.47 Repeated consolidation and swelling of cyclic Cam-clay at constant stress ratio
(Carter, J. P, Booker, J. R., and C. P. Wroth, 1982) ............................................... 179
Fig. 7.48 Numerical simulated void ratio distribution for R50 dynamic compaction
grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3.......................................................................... 180
Fig. 7.49 Numerical and experimental results of dynamic compact versus time for the
different points from the grout hole (100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3)... 180
Fig. 7.50 Numerical results of dynamic Compaction Efficiency for radial distance from
grout hole (100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3)........................................... 181
Fig. 7.51 Numerical results of dynamic mean shear strength enhancement ratio for radial
distance from grout hole (100mm diameter sample) (ABAQUS 6.3) .................... 181
Fig. 7.52 Numerical simulated excess pore water pressure distribution for R50 dynamic
compaction grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ...................................................... 182
Fig. 7.53 Numerical results of the pore water pressure in dynamic compaction grouting
tests versus time for the different points from the grout hole (100mm diameter
sample). (ABAQUS 6.3)......................................................................................... 182
Fig. 7.54 Numerical simulated displacement distribution for R50 dynamic compaction
grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3.......................................................................... 183
Fig. 7.55 Numerical results of dynamic compaction displacement versus time for the
different points along the grout hole (100mm diameter sample). (ABAQUS 6.3). 183
Fig. 7.56 Numerical simulated maximum principal stress distribution for R50 dynamic
compaction grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ...................................................... 184
Fig. 7.57 Numerical results of dynamic compaction maximum principal stress versus
time for the different points from the grout hole (100mm diameter sample).
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 184
Fig. 7.58 Numerical simulated minimum principal stress distribution for R50 dynamic
compaction grouting tests using ABAQUS 6.3 ...................................................... 185
Fig. 7.59 Numerical results of dynamic compaction minimum principal stress versus time
for the different points from the grout hole (100mm diameter sample). (ABAQUS
6.3) .......................................................................................................................... 185
xxv
-
Fig. 7.60 Numerical results of stress path of point-1 for the dynamic compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 186
Fig. 7.61 Numerical results of stress path of point-2 for the dynamic compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 186
Fig. 7.62 Numerical results of stress path of point-3 for the dynamic compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 187
Fig. 7.63 Numerical results of stress path of point-4 for the dynamic compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 187
Fig. 7.64 Numerical results of stress path of point-5 for the dynamic compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 188
Fig. 7.65 Numerical results of stress path of point-6 for the dynamic compaction grouting
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 188
Fig. 7.66 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-1
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 189
Fig. 7.67 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-2
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 189
Fig. 7.68 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-3
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 190
Fig. 7.69 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-4
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 190
Fig. 7.70 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-5
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 191
Fig. 7.71 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-6
(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 191
Fig. 7.72 Input injection pressure with the frequency 1 Hz, Amplitude 20kPa, and
dynamic period 60 seconds..................................................................................... 192
Fig. 7.73 Input injection pressure with the frequency 1 Hz, Amplitude 30kPa, and
dynamic period 60 seconds..................................................................................... 192
Fig. 7.74 Input injection pressure with the frequency 1 Hz, Amplitude 40kPa, and
dynamic period 60 seconds..................................................................................... 193
xxvi
-
Fig.7.75 Input injection pressure with the frequency 1 Hz, Amplitude 50kPa, and
dynamic period 60 seconds..................................................................................... 193
Fig. 7.76 Numerical results of versus time for dynamic compaction with different
vibrating amplitude (ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................... 194
Fig. 7.77 Numerical results of grouting efficiency versus dynamic amplitude (ABAQUS
6.3) .......................................................................................................................... 194
Fig. 7.78 Numerical results of mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus dynamic
amplitude (ABAQUS 6.3) ...................................................................................... 195
Fig. 7.79 Numerical results of pore water pressure versus time for different dynamic
compact amplitude. ................................................................................................. 195
xxvii
cover-1.pdfFUNDAMENTAL STUDY OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC COMPACTION GROUTING IN COMPLETELY DECOMPOSED GRANITE SOIL IN HONG KONG
cover-2.pdfCITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG Fundamental Study of Static and Dynamic Compaction Grouting in Completely Decomposed Granite Soil in Hong Kong
declatation.pdf DECLATARION
Abstract.pdfAbstract
Acceptance of Dissertation of WSY.pdfAcknowledgements.pdfACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Total Talble of content-submitted.pdfCONTENTS
top related