Dynamic Replacement: The Influence of Pounder Diameter and Ground Conditions on Shape and Diameter of the Columns

Kwiecień, Sławomir; Kowalska, Magdalena

doi:10.2478/acee-2023-0005

Figures & Tables

Process of dynamic replacement: a) construction of the working platform, b) drop of pounder and crater creation, c) crater backfill, d-e) drop of pounder and crater backfill, f) complete DR column [15]

Shapes of columns at site No. 1.: C1 (left), C2 (right)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 1, columns C1 and C2

Shapes of columns at site No. 2.: C3 (top), C4 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 2, columns C3 and C4

Shapes of columns at site No. 3.: C5 (top), C6 (middle), C7 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 3, columns C5, C6 and C7

Shapes of columns at site No. 4: C8 (top), C9 (middle), C10 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 4, columns C8, C9 and C10

Shapes of columns at site No. 5: C11 (top), C12 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 5, columns C11 and C12

Shapes of columns at site No. 6: C13 (top), C14 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 6, columns C13 and C14

Shapes of columns at site No. 7: C15 (top), C16 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 7, columns C15 and C16

Shapes of columns at site No. 8: C17 (top), C18 (bottom)

Dependence between the ratio of the column and pounder diameters (Dc/Dp) and the relative depth (H/Hc) – Site No. 8, columns C17 and C18

Propagation of the aggregate during driving a floating DR column [15]

Relation between the consistency of the weakest soil and the relative maximal diameters of the columns

Relation between the Hs/Hp ratios and the mean relative diameters of columns Dcm/Dp

Relation between the maximum grain size of the aggregate used as the replacement material and the mean relative diameters of the columns Dcm/Dp

Geographic location and ground conditions at the sites

Site No.	Location (Poland)	Ground conditions
1.	S7 motorway,km 711+050	Organic clayey mud, I_C = 0.56 - 0.60 (0 – 1.70 m – C1; 0 – 2.00 m – C2) Gravel, I_D = 50% (down to 4.00 m)
2.	A1 highway,km 516+715	Working platform (0 – 0.60 m) Organic Mud, I_c = 0.56 – 0.60 (0.60 - 1.50 m) Silty Clay + Or, I_c = 0.62 (1.50 – 2.00 m – C3; 1.50 – 2.10 m – C4) Sandy Silt + Or, I_c = 0.42 (2.00 – 2.50 m – C3; 2.10 – 2.60 m – C4) Fine Sand, I_D = 65% (down to 5.00 m)
3.	A1 highway,km 512+520	Working platform (0 – 0.50 m) Made ground (0.50 – 1.20 m) Sandy Silt, I_C = 0.58 (1.20 – 2.80 m – C5; 1.20 - 3.00 m – C6; 1.20 - 3.30 m – C7) Coarse Sand, I_D = 65% (down to 5.00 m).
4.	A4 highway,km 467+260	Working platform (0 - 0.50 m) Silty Clay, I_C = 0.50 (0.50 – 1.00 m – C10) Sandy Silt, I_c = 0.50 (0.50 – 3.20 m – C8; 0.50 – 3.10 m – C9; 1.00 – 3.50 m – C10) Medium Sand, I_D = 55 – 70%, (down to 5.0 m)
5.	A4 highway,km 461+050	Working platform (0 - 0.50 m) Silty Clay + Or, I_C = 0.65 – 0.76 (0.50 – 2.30 m – C11; 0.50 – 2.10 m – C12) Sandy Silt, I_C = 0.52 – 0.56 (2.30 – 3.20 m – C11; 2.10 – 3.20 m – C12) Medium Sand, I_D = 70 – 90% (down to 5.00 m)
6.	A4 highway,km 462+600	Working platform (0 – 0.50 m) Silty Clay + Or, I_C = 0.50 (0.50 – 1.00 m) Peat (1.00 – 1.20 m) Organic Mud, I_C = 0.44 (1.20 – 3.40 m) Gravely Sand, I_D = 50% (down to 5.00 m)
7.	A4 highway,km 464+720	Working platform (0 - 0.20 m Silty Clay + Or, I_C = 0.76 (0.20 – 1.40 m) Organic Mud, I_C = 0.37 (1.40 – 3.40 m – C15; 1.40 – 3.50 m – C16) Medium Sand, I_D = 80% (down to 5.00 m)
8.	A4 highway,km 461 + 150	Working platform (0 – 0.50 m) Clay, Silty Clay, I_C = 0.70 – 0.72 (0.50 – 2.40 m – C17; 0.50 – 2.50 m – C18) Medium Sand, I_D = 0.30 (2.40 – 3.2 m – C17) or Silty Clay, IC = 0.6 (2.5 – 3.2 m – C18) Silty Clay, I_C = 0.60 (3.20 – 3.80 m – C17 & C18) Medium Sand, I_D = 55% (down to 6.00 m)

Literature review

Author(s)	Ground conditions	D_c/D_p [-]	M_p/H_d [Mg] / [m]	Shapes of columns
Kumar [4]	0–0.6 m: fill0.6–1.5 m: medium stiff sandy silt1.5–3.0 m: medium stiff silty clay3.0–12.5 m: loose fine and medium sand	1.0 – 1.25	19 / 21	-
Varaksin and Hamidi [19]	0–1.5 m: disturbed clayfrom 1.5 m: very stiff clay	1.41	38.5 / 5	-
Lo et al. [25]	0–5.8 m: peaty clayfrom 5.8 m: old alluvium	-	15 / 15	Inverted truncated cone
Chua et al. [5]	0–2 m: loose sand (fill)2–3 m: soft clay3–10 m: medium dense to dense sand	-	24–26/10–20	Inverted truncated cone
Sękowski et al. [27]	0–1.5 m: working platform (semi-dense medium sand)1.5–3.2 m: soft organic mud3.2–5.0 m: semi-dense medium sand	1.7–2.4	11 / 10	Inverted truncated cone
Gunaratne et al. [26]	0–1.2 m: working platform1.2–3.0 m: organic soilfrom 3.0 m: silty sand	2.46	4 / 12	Cylindrical
Kwiecień and Sękowski [23]	various ground conditions (11 columns)	1.5–2.7	10.5–12.0 / 15–25	Cylindrical, Inverted truncated cone
Kwiecień [22], Kwiecień and Sękowski [24]	various ground conditions (34 columns)	1.23–4.1	9–12 / 15–25	Inverted truncated cone, Barrel-shaped
Kwiecień [15]	various ground conditions (65 columns)	-	9–24 /15–25	End bearing columns: cylindrical, truncated cone, barrel, asymmetrical barrelFloating columns: cylindrical, barrel, inverted truncated cone

List of investigated columns, their diameters, lengths and technological information

Site No.	Column	Diameters of the column (D_cmin – D_cmax)	Length of the column H_c	Shape, diameter (D_p), height (H_p) and mass (M_p) of the pounder	Number x height of the pounder drops/type, grading (d) and volume (V) of the aggregate
1.	C1C2	2.00–2.242.00–2.28	2.00 m2.00 m	Barrel-shaped,D_p = 1.05 m, H_p = 2.00 m,Mp = 11.50 Mg	1 x 5 m, 10 x 15 m, 1 x 5 mcrushed sandstoned = 0 – 400 mm, V = 8.0 m³
2.	C3C4	1.60–2.501.70–2.50	2.50 m2.60 m	Barrel-shaped,D_p = 1.00 m, H_p = 1.80 m,Mp = 9 Mg	1 x 5 m, 17 x 15 m, 1 x 5 m,blast furnace slagd = 10 – 120 mm, V = 9.5 m³
3.	C5C6C7	1.70–2.471.80–2.391.80–2.40	2.90 m3.10 m3.40 m		1 x 5m, 22 x 15 m, 1 x 5 mblast furnace slagd = 10 – 120 mm, V = 11,5–13.0 m³
4.	C8C9C10	1.40–2.391.90–2.271.50–2.26	3.20 m3.10 m3.50 m		1 x 5 m, 22 x 15 m, 1 x 5 mblast furnace slagd = 0 – 350 mm, V = 12.0 m³
5.	C11C12	1.80–2.781.50–2.58	3.20 m3.20 m		1 x 5 m, 22 x 15 m, 1 x 5 mblast furnace slagd = 0 – 350 mm, V = 15.0 m³
6.	C13C14	1.73 - 2.802.00 - 2.69	3.40 m3.40 m		1 x 5 m, 23 x 15 m, 1 x 5 mblast furnace slagd = 0 – 350 mm, V = 18.0 m³
7.	C15C16	2.30 - 2.602.20 - 2.60	3.40 m3.50 m		1 x 5 m, 22 x 15 m, 1 x 5 m,blast furnace slagd = 0 – 350 mm, V = 17.0 m³
8.	C17C18	1.50 - 2.741.50 - 2.68	3.80 m3.80 m		1 x 5 m, 22 x 15 m, 1 x 5 mblast furnace slagd = 0 – 350 mm, V = 18.0 m³

Details on the shapes of the columns, ratio of the thickness of the improved layer and the height of the pounder, the maximum and mean consistency indexes of the soil layers along at the column length and relations to the diameters of the column and of the pounder

Site No.	Column	Diameter variation / Shape	H_s/H_p [-]	I_c(min) [-]	I_c(m) [-]	D_cmax/D_p [-]	D_cmin/D_p [-]	D_cm/D_p [-]	D_cmax/D_cmin [-]
1.	C1	constant / cylindrical	0.85	0.56	0.56	2.13	1.90	2.04	1.12
	C2	constant / cylindrical	1.00	0.60	0.60	2.17	1.90	2.07	1.14
2.	C3	increases with depth / truncated cone	1.39	0.42	0.54	2.50	1.60	2.08	1.56
	C4	increases with depth / truncated cone	1.44	0.42	0.56	2.50	1.70	2.19	1.47
3.	C5	the largest diameter at the bottom / asymmetrical barrel	1.56	0.58	0.58	2.47	1.70	2.20	1.45
	C6		1.67	0.58	0.58	2.39	1.80	2.15	1.33
	C7		1.83	0.58	0.58	2.40	1.80	2.17	1.33
4.	C8	the largest diameter at the mid-length / barrel-shaped	1.77	0.50	0.50	2.39	1.40	2.09	1.71
	C9		1.72	0.50	0.50	2.27	1.90	2.10	1.19
	C10		1.94	0.50	0.50	2.26	1.50	1.99	1.51
5.	C11	the largest diameter at the bottom / asymmetrical barrel	1.78	0.56	0.62	2.78	1.80	2.36	1.54
	C12	the largest diameter at the bottom / asymmetrical barrel	1.78	0.52	0.66	2.58	1.50	2.27	1.72
6.	C13	the largest diameter at barrelthe mid-length /	1.89	0.44	0.45	2.80	1.73	2.45	1.62
	C14	the largest diameter at barrelthe mid-length /	1.89	0.44	0.45	2.69	2.00	2.45	1.35
7.	C15	the largest diameter at the mid-length /	1.89	0.37	0.52	2.60	2.30	2.44	1.13
	C16	the largest diameter at the mid-length /	1.94	0.37	0.51	2.60	2.20	2.38	1.18
8.	C17	the largest diameter at the bottom / asymmetrical barrel	2.11	0.40	0.68	2.74	1.50	2.30	1.83
	C18	the largest diameter at the bottom / asymmetrical barrel	2.11	0.30	0.54	2.68	1.50	2.37	1.79

Dynamic Replacement: The Influence of Pounder Diameter and Ground Conditions on Shape and Diameter of the Columns

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

Figure 11.

Figure 12.

Figure 13.

Figure 14.

Figure 15.

Figure 16.

Figure 17.

Figure 18.

Figure 19.

Figure 20.

Figure 21.

Geographic location and ground conditions at the sites

Literature review

List of investigated columns, their diameters, lengths and technological information

Details on the shapes of the columns, ratio of the thickness of the improved layer and the height of the pounder, the maximum and mean consistency indexes of the soil layers along at the column length and relations to the diameters of the column and of the pounder

Paradigm

My account