Field Study on the Waterstop of the Rodin Jet Pile Method in a Water-Rich Sandy Gravel Stratum
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. RJP Construction Method
2.1. Process Principle
2.2. Process Characteristics
- Large pile depth and large pile diameter
- 2.
- Low mud discharge and low displacement
- 3.
- Shortening the construction period
- 4.
- Flexible equipment
2.3. Construction Equipment
- Drilling rig
- 2.
- Rotary spray machine and high-pressure pump
- 3.
- Porous drill pipe and front-end nozzle device
2.4. Factors Affecting the Pile Diameter
3. Full-Scale Field Test
3.1. Test Site
3.2. Test Plan
3.2.1. Test Pile Layout
3.2.2. Construction Parameters
3.2.3. Monitoring Plan
- There were three monitoring holes for the horizontal displacement of the deep soil. Since the depth of the jet grouting pile ranged from 8 to 40 m below the ground, considering the difficulty of forming the hole and the unconstructed jet grouting pile from 0 to 8 m below the ground, the monitoring hole was designed to be fixed at the upper end and free at the lower end, and the depth of the embedded body was 8 m. Each measuring hole had a depth of 18 m, and the order was A, B and C. Measuring hole A was 3 m from the center of JP3, measuring hole B was 1.5 m from the center of JP1, and measuring hole C was 2 m from the center of JP2. The plane layout is shown in Figure 4.
- A measuring hole was arranged in the layered settlement point of the soil, which was shared with the horizontal displacement hole C of the deep soil. A total of 17 measurement points were arranged, and the measurement point spacing was 1 m. The plane layout is shown in Figure 4.
- The pore water pressure was measured in two measuring holes (namely, P1 and P2). The center distance between measuring hole P1 and JP1 and JP2 was 2 m, and the measurement points were arranged at 10 m and 24 m below the ground. Measuring hole P2 was 1.5 m from the centers of JP1and JP3, and the measurement points were arranged at 21 m or 32 m below the ground. The plane layout is shown in Figure 4. A vibrating wire pore pressure gauge was adopted to measure the pore pressure in this study. The pore pressure gauge was buried in the stratum in advance.
3.2.4. Core Sampling
4. Construction Process
- The construction of the formation deformation monitoring hole started on 21 November 2015 and finished on 25 November 2015. The depth of the formation deformation monitoring hole was 18 m. The depths of the pore water pressure monitoring holes were 24 m and 32 m.
- The test pile construction sequence was JP1, JP2 and JP3. The construction of JP1 began on November 27, 2015 and was completed on 30 November 2015. JP2 and JP3 were constructed similarly. The construction of JP2 and JP3 began on 1 December 2015 and was completed on 7 December 2015 (construction process photos are shown in Figure 6).
5. Test Results and Analysis
5.1. Excavation Disclosure
5.2. Monitoring Data Analysis
5.2.1. Horizontal Displacement of the Deep Soil
- The three monitoring points exhibited the same trend: The maximum horizontal displacement of the deep soil occurred from –12 to –13 m (the fine sand and silty clay interface), and the cumulative maximum change value was 16.7 mm (see Figure 9a). The reason may have been that the shear strength of the interface was low and easily destroyed under the action of the ultra-high-pressure shear, resulting in a large change in the horizontal displacement of the formation.
- The change values of the free ends of the three monitoring holes were small, and the horizontal displacement of the monitoring holes remained almost unchanged as the monitoring holes entered the gravel stratum. The reason may have been that the gravel stratum had large porosity, and under the action of the ultra-high pressure, the slurry and water replaced the fine particles in the pores of the gravel, and the coarse particles in the gravel were not disturbed; hence, the horizontal displacement perturbation was very small.
- Measurement point A could not be monitored due to the equipment occupancy during construction of JP2. From the monitoring curve analysis of measurement points B and C, the cumulative change trend of each measurement point under the construction of JP1, JP2 and JP3 was consistent, but the cumulative growth change value was very small. For example, the horizontal displacement of measurement point B reached 8.9 mm at a position of –13 m during construction of JP1, but the cumulative change values were 9.8 mm and 10.8 mm during the construction of JP2 and JP3, respectively, and the variation was very small (see Figure 9b); the behavior at measurement point C was similar (see Figure 9c). The reason was that JP1 was located between measurement point B and JP2 and JP3. After solidification of JP1, measurement point B was isolated. Therefore, the construction of JP2 and JP3 had little effect on the horizontal displacement of measurement point B. During the construction of JP2, the cumulative value of the horizontal displacement of measurement point C increased greatly, but during the construction of JP3, the cumulative increase in the horizontal displacement was very small. The reason was that JP2 was closest to measurement point C and was located between measurement point C and JP3. Therefore, the construction process of JP2 would have the largest influence on the horizontal displacement of measurement point C, and the solidification of JP2 occurred; measurement point C was isolated. The construction of JP3 had little effect on the horizontal displacement of measurement point C.
5.2.2. Layered Settlement of Soil
5.2.3. Pore Water Pressure Analysis
- In the construction process of JP1, JP2 and JP3, the relative pore pressure at positions of –10 m and –24 m in the measuring hole P1 was within 1 kPa, and the variation was very small (see Figure 11). It showed that the ultra-high-pressure jet grouting did not form excess pore pressure, and the stratum outside the designed pile diameter range was nearly undisturbed during ultra-high-pressure grouting.
- During the construction of JP1, JP2, and JP3, the relative pore pressure at a position of -21 m in the measuring hole P2 was small and was the same as that in the measuring hole P1. However, during construction of JP1, the pore water pressure at a position of –32 m changed by 2 to 6 kPa (see Figure 12). It showed that ultra-high-pressure jet grouting caused excess pore water pressure when construction was below the groundwater level.
- According to the change in pore water pressure, there was a large effect on pore water pressure in the range of 1.5 m from the center of the pile. However, when the distance was 2.0 m from the center of the pile, there was little effect of ultra-high-pressure jet grouting.
5.3. Pile Strength and Permeability
6. Discussion
6.1. Factors Affecting the Diameter of the Jet Grouting Pile
6.1.1. Environmental Temperature
6.1.2. Equipment Failure
6.1.3. Mechanical Operation
6.2. Impact of Jet Grouting on the Surrounding Environment
6.2.1. Effect of Jet Grouting on the Surrounding Stratum
6.2.2. Effect of the Jet Grouting on Groundwater
7. Conclusions
- RJP ultra-high-pressure jet grouting technology can form a solid with a diameter of approximately 1.5 m in a water-rich sandy gravel stratum. Its compressive strength reaches more than 10 MPa, and the permeability coefficient of the solids reaches 10-8 cm/s, which meets the requirements of foundation excavation. These parameters are reliable for RJP ultra-high-pressure jet grouting construction in the water-rich sandy gravel stratum.
- The diameter of the jet grouting pile is affected by the compactness of the stratum, the slurry pressure, the lifting speed of the drill pipe, and the environmental temperature. Therefore, it is necessary to be familiar with the characteristics of the stratum and environmental temperature before construction. Then, based on these factors, the mechanical parameters can be set up.
- The lifting speed of the drill pipe and the slurry pressure should be gradual at the stratum interface, and the construction parameters should not be changed suddenly. In addition, jet grouting has a positive effect on the horizontal displacement resistance of the stratum. Therefore, when jet grouting is carried out over a wide range, construction should be carried out from the outside to the inside to reduce disturbance to the surrounding stratum caused by the ultra-high-pressure jet grouting.
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Shen, S.L.; Wang, Z.F.; Cheng, W.C. Estimation of lateral displacement induced by jet grouting in clayey soils. Geotechnique 2017, 67, 621–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.F.; Shen, S.L.; Ho, C.E.; Xu, Y.S. Jet grouting for mitigation of installation disturbance. Proc. Instn Civ. Eng. Geotech. Eng. 2014, 167, 526–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Croce, P.; Flora, A. Analysis of single-fluid jet grouting. Geotechnique 2000, 50, 739–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, E.H. Fluid-soil interaction model for jet grouting. In Proceedings of the Geo-Denver, Denver, CO, USA, 18–21 February 2007; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Modoni, G.; Croce, P.; Mongiovi, L. Theoretical modelling of jet grouting. Geotechnique 2006, 56, 335–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flora, A.; Modoni, G.; Lirer, S.; Croce, P. The diameter of single, double and triple fluid jet grouting columns: prediction method and field trial results. Geotechnique 2013, 63, 934–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, X.H.; Kawata, M.; Nakanishi, Y.; Li, J.J. Application of jet grouting pile method in Japan. Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 2010, 32, 410–413. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, F. Two advanced jet grout methods. Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 2010, 32, 406–409. [Google Scholar]
- Shen, S.L.; Wang, Z.F.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Kim, Y.H. Jet grouting with a newly developed technology: The Twin-Jet method. Eng. Geol. 2012, 152, 87–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, S.L.; Wang, Z.F.; Chu, E.H. Current State of the Art in Jet Grouting for Stabilizing Soft Soil. In Proceedings of the Geo-Shanghai, Shanghai, China, 26–28 May 2014; pp. 107–116. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.F.; Shen, S.L.; Ho, C.E.; Kim, Y.H. Investigation of field-installation effects of horizontal twin-jet grouting in Shanghai soft soil deposits. Can. Geotech. J. 2013, 50, 288–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Njock, P.G.A.; Shen, J.S.; Modoni, G.; Arulrajah, A. Recent Advances in Horizontal Jet Grouting (HJG): An Overview. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2018, 43, 1543–1560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nakanishi, W.; Nakanishi, Y.; Zhu, Q.L. High pressure jet grouting method-RJP (Rodin Jet Pile) and field practice in Beijing. Chin. Saf. Sci. J. 1997, 7, 35–42. [Google Scholar]
- Shen, S.L.; Luo, C.Y.; Xiao, X.C.; Wang, J.L. Improvement Efficacy of RJP Method in Shanghai Soft Deposit. In Proceedings of the U.S.-China Workshop on Ground Improvement Technologies 2009, Orlando, FL, USA, 14 March 2009; pp. 170–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, H.L.; Zhou, H.; Kong, G.Q.; Qin, H.Y.; Zha, Y.H. High pressure jet-grouting column installation effect in soft soil: Theoretical model and field application. Comput. Geotech. 2017, 88, 74–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Y.S.; Kao, C.C.; Chou, J.; Chain, K.F.; Wang, D.R.; Lin, C.T. Jet grouting with the superjet-midi method. Ground Improv. 2006, 10, 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karahan, G.N.; Sivrikaya, O. Designing singular jet grouting column for sandy soils. Environ. Earth. Sci. 2018, 77, 6280–6299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cundall, P.A. A discontinuous future for numerical modeling in Geomechanics. Proc. Inst. Civil Eng. Geotech. Eng. 2001, 149, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chai, J.C.; Carter, J.P.; Miura, N.; Zhu, H.H. Improved Prediction of Lateral Deformations due to Installation of Soil-Cement Columns. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2009, 12, 1836–1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bellato, D.; Schorr, J.; Spagnoli, G. Mathematical Analysis of Shadow Effect in Jet Grouting. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2018, 12, 04018088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ochmański, M.; Modoni, G.; Bzówka, J. Prediction of the diameter of jet grouting columns with artificial neural networks. Soils Found. 2015, 55, 425–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Modoni, G.; Bzowka, J. Analysis of Foundations Reinforced with Jet Grouting. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2012, 138, 1442–1454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Pan, Y.T.; Sun, M.M.; Hu, J.; Yao, K. Lateral compression response of overlapping jet-grout columns with geometric imperfections in radius and position. Can. Geotech. J. 2018, 55, 1282–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toraldo, C.; Modoni, G.; Ochmanski, M.; Croce, P. The characteristic strength of jet-grouted material. Geotechnique 2018, 68, 262–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, S.L.; Wang, Z.F.; Yang, J.; Chu, E.H. Generalized approach for prediction of jet grout column diameter. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2013, 139, 2060–2069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, L.D.; Hu, B.; Shao, H.C. The experimental study on the properties of the cement grout in different temperature. J. Henan Polytech. Univ. Nat. Sci. 2016, 35, 274–280. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, J.C.; Ou, Z.W.; Zhong, F.P.; Yu, X.Q. Experimental Study on the Effects of Initial Temperature on Performances of Cement Slurry. Chin. J. Constr. Technol. 2014, 43, 175–177. [Google Scholar]
Stratum | Various Indicator Parameters | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Clay | Soil cohesion c (kPa) | c < 10 | 10 ≤ c < 30 | 30 ≤ c < 50 | |
Effective diameter (m) | 2.4 | 2.2 | 2.0 | ||
Sandy | Standard penetration N (N63.5) | N < 15 | 15 ≤ N < 30 | 30 ≤ N < 50 | 50 ≤ N < 70 |
Effective diameter (m) | 2.6 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 2.0 | |
Gravel | Not enough data can be referred |
Stratum | Formation Parameters | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Depth | Natural Density | Water Content | Pore Ratio | Compression Modulus | Cohesion | Internal Friction Angle | Standard Penetration | Permeability Coefficient | |
(m) | ρ (g/cm3) | w (%) | e | Es (kPa) | c (kPa) | φ (°) | N63.5 | K (m/d) | |
Fill | 0~4.5 | 1.65 | / | / | / | 0 | 8 | / | / |
Silty clay | 4.5~8 | 1.95 | 24.20 | 0.72 | 5.86 | 23.25 | 8.64 | 18 | 0.02 |
Fine sand | 8~13.5 | 1.98 | / | 0.65 | 28 | 0 | 30 | 27 | 6.0 |
Silty clay | 13.5~15.5 | 1.91 | 27.83 | 0.82 | 9.84 | 21.67 | 11.92 | 25 | 0.02 |
Fine sand | 15.5~17.5 | 2.00 | / | 0.60 | 35 | 0 | 30 | 37 | 6.0 |
Gravel | 17.5~ | 2.05 | / | 0.45 | 50 | 0 | 45 | 124 | 200.0 |
Stratum | Depth (m) | Slurry Ratio | Air | Water | Slurry | Lifting Speed | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Water-Cement Ratio | Bentonite | Expansion Agent | Pressure (MPa) | Flow (L/min) | Pressure (MPa) | Flow (L/min) | Pressure (MPa) | (cm/min) | ||
Fine sand | 8~13.5 | 1:1 | 15% | 6% | 0.7~0.9 | 60~80 | 34~36 | 80~100 | 36~40 | 4.3 |
Silty clay | 13.5~15.5 | 1:1 | 15% | 6% | 0.7~0.9 | 60~80 | 34~36 | 80~100 | 40~45 | 4.3 |
Fine sand | 15.5~17.5 | 1:1 | 15% | 6% | 0.7~0.9 | 60~80 | 34~36 | 80~100 | 40~45 | 4.3 |
Gravel | 17.5~40 | 1:1.2 | 20% | 6% | 0.7~0.9 | 60~80 | 34~36 | 80~100 | 45~48 | 3.3 |
Stratum | Permeability Coefficient (cm/s) | Average Permeability Coefficient (cm/s) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Center of JP1 | Center of JP2 | Center of JP3 | JP1 and JP2 Occlusal | JP1 and JP3 Occlusal | JP2 and JP3 Occlusal | ||
Fine sand layer | 4.7 × 10−8 | 2.1 × 10−8 | 1.7 × 10−8 | 1.9 × 10−8 | 3.4 × 10−8 | 7.2 × 10−8 | 3.5 × 10−8 |
Silty clay layer | 1.5 × 10−8 | 4.4 × 10−8 | 5.2 × 10−8 | 5.3 × 10−8 | 1.8 × 10−8 | 1.6 × 10−8 | 3.3 × 10−8 |
Gravel layer | 4.1 × 10−8 | 3.3 × 10−8 | 2.3 × 10−8 | 3.6 × 10−8 | 1.8 × 10−8 | 2.8 × 10−8 | 3.0 × 10−8 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Guan, C.; Yang, Y. Field Study on the Waterstop of the Rodin Jet Pile Method in a Water-Rich Sandy Gravel Stratum. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9081709
Guan C, Yang Y. Field Study on the Waterstop of the Rodin Jet Pile Method in a Water-Rich Sandy Gravel Stratum. Applied Sciences. 2019; 9(8):1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9081709
Chicago/Turabian StyleGuan, Chengli, and Yuyou Yang. 2019. "Field Study on the Waterstop of the Rodin Jet Pile Method in a Water-Rich Sandy Gravel Stratum" Applied Sciences 9, no. 8: 1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9081709
APA StyleGuan, C., & Yang, Y. (2019). Field Study on the Waterstop of the Rodin Jet Pile Method in a Water-Rich Sandy Gravel Stratum. Applied Sciences, 9(8), 1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9081709