fundamental study of static and dynamic compaction...

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




density 1.4Mg/cm )................................................................................................... 42 3

Fig. 3.4d Critical state ( plot) (initial dry density=1.4g/cm3; fine content=6%) .............. 42




density 1.5Mg/cm )................................................................................................... 44 3

Fig. 3.5d Critical state ( plot) (initial dry density=1.5g/cm ; fine content=6%)............... 44 3


Fig. 3.6b volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.6Mg/cm ).. 45 3


density 1.6Mg/cm3) .................................................................................................. 46

Fig. 3.6d Critical state plot (initial dry density=1.6g/cm ; fine content=6%) .................. 46 3


Fig. 3.7b volumetric strain versus axial strain for the sample (dry density 1.7Mg/cm ).. 47 3


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. 3.9c 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,


(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,


(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


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


minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 92

Fig. 5.11 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus effective confining pressure



Fig. 5.12 Injection pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,


(100mm).................................................................................................................... 93

Fig. 5.13 Excess pore water pressure versus time for different K (injection time is


minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 94

Fig. 5.14 Injection pressure versus time for different injection rate (injection time is


minutes) (100mm)..................................................................................................... 94

Fig. 5.15 Pore water pressure versus time for different injection rates (injection time is


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


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


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


Fig. 6.12 Normalized void ratio e/e0 versus dynamic compaction period (injection time is


minutes)(100mm).................................................................................................... 116

Fig. 6.13 Compaction efficiency versus dynamic compaction period (injection time is


minutes)(100mm).................................................................................................... 117

Fig. 6.14 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus dynamic compaction period



Fig. 6.15 Injection pressure versus time for different dynamic compaction period



Fig. 6.16 Pore water pressure versus time for different dynamic compaction period



Fig. 6.17 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different confining pressure


minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm) ............................. 119

0

Fig. 6.18 Compaction efficiency versus confining pressure (injection time is 0.3mins,



Fig. 6.19 Effective confining pressure versus confining pressure (injection time is



Fig. 6.20 Injection pressure versus time for different effective confining pressure



xix

Fig. 6.21 Pore water pressure versus time for different effective confining pressure



Fig. 6.22 Normalized void ratio e/e versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,


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,



Fig. 6.25 Injection pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,



Fig. 6.26 Pore water pressure versus time for different K (injection time is 0.3mins,



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


0

Fig. 6.28 Compaction efficiency versus time for different dry density (injection time is



Fig. 6.29 Mean shear strength enhancement ratio versus time for different dry density


minutes, the whole consolidation time is 30 minutes)(100mm). ............................ 125

Fig. 6.30 Injection pressure versus time for different dry density (injection time is



xx

Fig. 6.31 Pore water pressure versus time for different dry density (injection time is



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


time is 30 minutes)(75mm)..................................................................................... 127

0

Fig. 6.34 Grouting efficiency versus dynamic frequency (injection time is 0.3mins,


consolidation time is 30 minutes)(75mm) .............................................................. 127

Fig. 6.35 Grouting efficiency versus dynamic frequency (injection time is 0.3mins,


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,



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


minutes) (75mm)..................................................................................................... 130

Fig. 6.40 Pore water pressure versus time (injection time is 0.3mins, injection volume for


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


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 164


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 165


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 165


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 166


(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


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


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


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


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


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


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 186


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 187


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 187


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 188


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 188

Fig. 7.66 Numerical results of dynamic compaction grouting for e versus of point-1

(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 189


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 189


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 190


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 190


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 191


(ABAQUS 6.3) ....................................................................................................... 191

Fig. 7.72 Input injection pressure with the frequency 1 Hz, Amplitude 20kPa, and

dynamic period 60 seconds..................................................................................... 192





xxvi

Fig.7.75 Input injection pressure with the frequency 1 Hz, Amplitude 50kPa, and


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

fundamental study of static and dynamic compaction...

Documents