The Use of Stone Columns to Reduce the Settlement of Swelling Soil Using Numerical Modeling

Document Type : Original Article


Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Estahban Branch, Estahban, Iran.



The existing soils in the nature that is used for construction cannot necessarily bear the loadings on the structure. For example, in granular soils, the natural soil may be very loose and show a lot of elastic settlement. Sometimes, there are soft layers, saturated clay and swelling soils at the lower depths, which may cause significant settlement in the structure in terms of foundation load and clay layer thickness. To avoid such settlements, it is necessary to use certain techniques to improve the soil condition. One of the methods that have recently been widely used to reduce the settlement of soft soils and swelling soils is stone columns or single piles. In this research, first of all, the parameters in need for the analysis will be gained by using the experimental data, and then, the static and dynamic behavior of the confined stone columns is examined with geotextile and without geotextile by a group and single manner as in two-dimensional form using Plaxis numerical method of the finite element and the impact of the following parameters will be investigated in both static and dynamic modes: Column length, column diameter, single and group behavior of columns, and soil cohesion effect on the behavior of the confined stone column in geotextile and reduction of soil settlement during use of stone columns. The results of this research indicate correct understanding of the use of geotextile (Woven Geotextile with a specific elastic normal strength) to prevent the camber and the settlement of the column and increase of the strength and bearing capacity of the column.


Main Subjects

1. Madhav M, Iyengar N, Vitkar R, Nandia A, editors. Increased bearing capacity and reduced settlements due to inclusions in soil. Proceedings of International Conference on Soil Reinforcement, Reinforced and other Techniques; 1979.
2. Greenwood D, editor Mechanical improvement of soils below ground surface. Inst Civil Engineers Proc, London/UK/; 1900.
3. Hughes J, Withers N. Reinforcing of soft cohesive soils with stone columns. Ground engineering. 1974;7(3).
4. Priebe H. Abschätzung des Setzungsverhaltens eines durch Stopfverdichtung verbesserten Baugrundes. Die Bautechnik. 1976;53(5):160-2.
5. Vekli M, Aytekin M, Ikizler SB, Çalik Ü. Experimental and numerical investigation of slope stabilization by stone columns. Natural hazards.2012;64(1):797-820.
6. Balaam N, Booker JR. Analysis of rigid rafts supported by granular piles.International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics. 1981;5(4):379-403.
7. Donner H. Balaam pseudopropheta: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; 1977.
8. Katti R, Katti A, Naik S. Monograph to analysis of stone columns with and without geosynthetic encasement. CBIP Publication, New Delhi. 1993.
9. Deb K. A mathematical model to study the soil arching effect in stone column-supported embankment resting on soft foundation soil. Applied Mathematical Modelling. 2010;34(12):3871-83.
10. Murugesan S, Rajagopal K. Studies on the behavior of single and group of geosynthetic encased stone columns. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2009;136(1):129-39.
11. Deb K, Samadhiya NK, Namdeo JB. Laboratory model studies on unreinforced and geogrid-reinforced sand bed over stone column-improved soft clay. Geotextiles and Geomembranes. 2011;29(2):190-6.
12. Ghazavi M, Afshar JN. Bearing capacity of geosynthetic encased stone columns. Geotextiles and Geomembranes. 2013;38:26-36.
13. Castro J, Sagaseta C. Consolidation and deformation around stone columns: Numerical evaluation of analytical solutions. Computers and Geotechnics. 2011;38(3):354-62.
14. Gniel J, Bouazza A. Construction of geogrid encased stone columns: A new proposal based on laboratory testing. Geotextiles and Geomembranes. 2010;28(1):108-18.
15. Muir Wood D, Hu W, Nash D. Group effects in stone column foundations: model tests. Geotechnique. 2000;50(6):689-98.
16. McKenna J, Eyre W, Wolstenholme D. Performance of an embankment supported by stone columns in soft ground. Geotechnique. 1975;25(1):51-9.
17. Malarvizhi S. Comparative study on the behavior of encased stone column and conventional stone column. Soils and Foundations. 2007;47(5):873-85.
18. Wu C-S, Hong Y-S. Laboratory tests on geosynthetic-encapsulated sand columns. Geotextiles and Geomembranes. 2009;27(2):107-20.
19. Jahandari S, Saberian M, Zivari F, Li J, Ghasemi M, Vali R. Experimental study of the effects of curing time on geotechnical properties of stabilized clay with lime and geogrid. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering. 2017:1-12.
20. Murugesan S, Rajagopal K. Geosynthetic-encased stone columns: numerical evaluation. Geotextiles and Geomembranes. 2006;24(6):349-58.
Volume 1, Issue 2
September 2017
Pages 45-60
  • Receive Date: 15 June 2017
  • Revise Date: 09 July 2017
  • Accept Date: 10 October 2017
  • First Publish Date: 10 October 2017