Effect of Column Configuration on the Performance of Encased Stone Columns with Basal Geogrid Installed in Lithomargic Clay

  • Sitaram Nayak
  • M. P. Vibhoosha
  • Anjana BhasiEmail author
Original Paper


Lithomargic clay is extensively found along the Konkan belt in peninsular India and serves as a foundation for most of the structures. The reduction in strength under saturated conditions makes this soil problematic causing a lot of engineering problems such as uneven settlements, erosion, slope failures, and foundation problems. This paper presents the effect of column configuration (i.e. equivalent number of columns with reduced diameter for the same surface area) on the performance of lithomargic clay reinforced with geogrid encased stone columns and basal geogrid layer. The investigations were performed both experimentally through small-scale models and through finite element analyses. The results were compared with the performance of lithomargic clay reinforced with ordinary and encased stone columns. A single geogrid encased stone column with a basal geogrid layer improved the load-carrying capacity of lithomargic clay by 180% while the percentage of increment in the case of a group of three geogrid encased stone column with basal geogrid layer having the same surface area was 210%. It was also observed that the geogrid encasement of stone columns reduced the maximum column bulging by 38%, whereas geogrid encased stone columns along with basal geogrid layer reduced the bulging by 82% compared to ordinary stone columns.


Lithomargic clay Stone column Geogrid Column configuration Soil improvement Bulging 



The authors wish to acknowledge Science Engineering Research Board (SERB), India for the financial support for this research work through the Grant ECR/2017/000445.


  1. 1.
    Momade Z, Gawu SKY (2009) Geochemical and mineralogical characteristics of lithomargic clay types from awaso bauxite deposit, Ghana: implications for possible industrial utilization. J Sci Tech 29(2):96–106Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ramesh HN, Nanda HS (2007) Strength behaviour of shedi soil treated with fly ashes. 13th ARC, Kolkata, pp 893–896Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shankar AU, Suresha SN (2006) Strength behaviour of geogrid reinforced shedi soil subgrade and aggregate system. Road Mater Pavement Des 7(3):313–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ramesh HN, Nanda HS, Manoj K (2011) Effect of soaking on the strength behaviour of shedi soil treated with NFA. In: Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference, December 15–17Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nayak S, Sarvade PG (2012) Effect of cement and quarry dust on shear strength and hydraulic characteristics of lithomargic clay. J Geotech Geol Eng 30(2):419–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andrews AS, Gawu KY, Momade Z, Momade FWY (2014) Genesis, properties and industrial applications of bauxitic lithomargic clay. Chap. 17 in Clays and Clay Minerals: Geological Origin, Mechanical Properties and Industrial Applications pp 417–434Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shivashankar R, Dheerendra Babu MR, Nayak S, Rajathkumar V (2011) Experimental studies on behaviour of stone columns in layered soil. J Geotech Geol Eng 29(5):749–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rezaei MM, Lajevardi SH, Saba H, Ghalandarzadeh A, Zeighami E (2019) Laboratory study on single stone columns reinforced with steel bars and discs. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 5:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hamidi M, Lajevardi SH (2018) Experimental study on the load-carrying capacity of single stone columns. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 4:26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shehata HF, Sorour TM, Fayed AL (2018) Effect of stone column installation on soft clay behaviour. Int J Geotech Eng. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murugesan S, Rajagopal K (2006) Geosynthetic-encased stone columns: numerical evaluation. Geotext Geomembr 24(6):349–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gniel J, Bouazza A (2009) Improvement of soft soils using geogrid encased stone columns. Geotext Geomembr 27(3):167–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yoo C (2010) Performance of geosynthetic-encased stone columns in embankment construction: numerical investigation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng (ASCE) 136(8):1148–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khabbazian M, Kaliakin VN, Meehan CL (2010) Numerical study of the effect of geosynthetic encasement on the behaviour of granular columns. Geosynth Int 17(3):132–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Keykhosropur L, Soroush Imam R (2012) 3D numerical analyses of geosynthetic encased stone columns. Geotext Geomembr 35:61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Muzammil SP, Varghese RM, Joseph J (2018) Numerical simulation of the response of geosynthetic encased stone columns under oil storage tank. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 4:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hong YS, Wu CS, Yu YS (2016) Model tests on geotextile-encased granular columns under 1-g and undrained conditions. Geotext Geomembr 44(1):13–27MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Castro J (2017) Groups of encased stone columns: influence of column length and arrangement. Geotext Geomembr 45(2):68–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arulrajah A, Abdullah A, Bouzza A (2009) Ground improvement technique for railway embankments. Ground Impr 162(1):3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lo SR, Zhang R, Mak J (2010) Geosynthetic-encased stone columns in soft clay: a numerical study. Geotext Geomembr 28(3):292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deb K, Samadhiya NK, Namdeo JB (2011) Laboratory model studies on unreinforced and geogrid-reinforced sand bed over stone column-improved soft clay. Geotext Geomembr 29:190–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Debnath P, Dey AK (2017) Bearing capacity of geogrid reinforced sand over encased stone columns in soft clay. Geotext Geomembr 45(6):653–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    IS: 15284-2003 Indian standard code of practice for design and construction for ground improvement guidelines. Part 1: Stone columns, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shahu JT, Hayashi S, Madhav MR (2000) Analysis of soft ground reinforced by non-homogeneous granular pile-mat system. Lowland Tech Int 2(2):71–82Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raithel M, Kempfert HG, Kirchner A (2002) Geotextile-encased columns (GEC) for foundation of a dike on very soft soils. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on geosynthetics, Nice, France, pp 1025–1028Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ambily AP, Gandhi SR (2007) Behaviour of stone columns based on experimental and FEM analysis. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng (ASCE) 133(4):405–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Malarvizhi SN, Ilamparuthi K (2008) Behaviour of geogrid encased stone column and stone column stabilized soft clay bed. Physical model geotechnics, pp 1489–1494Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yoo C, Kim SB (2009) Numerical modeling of geosynthetic-encased stone column-reinforced ground. Geosynth Int 16(3):116–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    SP 36 (Part 1)—1987 of the Indian Standard (IS)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    ASTM D4595 (2011) Standard test method for tensile properties of geotextiles by the wide-width strip method. In American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McKelvey D, Sivakumar V, Bell A, Graham J (2004) Modeling vibrated stone columns in soft clay. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers—geotechnical engineering 157(3), pp 137–149Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mohanty P, Samanta M (2015) Experimental and numerical studies on response of the stone column in layered soil. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 1(3)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    ABAQUS (Computer software). SIMULIA, Providence, RIGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Biot MA (1941) General theory of three-dimensional consolidation. J Appl Phys 12(2):155–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bowles JE (1988) Foundation analysis and design. Foundation analysis and design, 5th edn. Mc Graw Hill International Editions, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Elshazly H, Elkasabgy M, Elleboudy A (2008) Effect of inter-column spacing on soil stresses due to vibro-installed stone columns: interesting findings. J Geotech Geol Eng 26(2):225–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Castro J, Karstunen M (2010) Numerical simulations of stone column installation. Can Geotech J 47(10):1127–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Priebe HJ (1995) The design of vibro replacement. Ground Eng 28(10):31–37Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhao MH, Zhang L, Zou XJ, Zhao H (2009) Research progress in two direction composite foundation formed by geocell reinforced mattress and gravel piles. Chin J Highway Transp 22(1):1–10Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhang Zhao M, Shi C, Zhao H (2010) Bearing capacity of geocell reinforcement in embankment engineering. Geotext Geomembr 28:475–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Maheshwari P (2014) Infinite beams on stone column reinforced tensionless earth beds under moving loads. Int J Geotech Eng 8(1):21–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ng KS, Tan SA (2015) Stress transfer mechanism in 2D and 3D Unit cell models for stone column improved ground. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 1:1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Murugesan S, Rajagopal K (2007) Model tests on geosynthetic-encased stone columns. Geosynth Int 14(6):346–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ghazavi M, Afshar JN (2013) Bearing capacity of geosynthetic encased stone columns. Geotext Geomembr 38:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Greenwood DA (1970) Mechanical improvement of soils belowground surfaces. In: Proceedings of conference on ground engineering, Institute of Civil Engineers, London, pp 11–22Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Institute of Technology Karnataka (NITK)SurathkalIndia
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Institute of Technology Calicut (NITC)CalicutIndia

Personalised recommendations