State of the art in quality assessment of deep mixing technology

The most commonly cited barrier to the use of deep mixing (DM) technology is practitioners′ lack of confidence in their ability to assess the quality of the finished DM product. Accordingly, the objective of this paper is to examine the issues related to quality assessment of the treated ground. The focus is to understand: (a) how to predict the in-situ properties, and (b) what in-situ techniques are available for quality assessment. First the difficulties in estimating the in-situ properties are discussed. Then methods are presented to predict the in-situ strength and stiffness based on probabilistic concepts, homogenisation, and synthetic judgement approaches. The in-situ techniques for quality assessment of treated ground are based on penetration methods, geophysical methods, insitu loading methods, and a non-destructive method based on a low-strain sonic integrity test. Finally, the effects of ageing and chemical attacks on the durability and longterm performance of treated ground are presented, toget...

[1]  Satoru Shibuya,et al.  State of the art in deep mixing technology. Part III:geomaterial characterization , 2000 .

[2]  H Harder,et al.  DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVE CPT-PARAMETERS. PENETRATION TESTING IN THE UK. PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOTECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE ORGANIZED BY THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS AND HELD IN BIRMINGHAM ON 6-8 JULY 1988 , 1989 .

[3]  Kiyoshi Omine,et al.  ESTIMATION OF IN-SITU STRENGTH OF CEMENT-TREATED SOILS BASED ON A TWO-PHASE MIXTURE MODEL , 1998 .

[4]  S. Ward.  Geotechnical and environmental geophysics , 1990 .

[5]  A. Porbaha,et al.  State of the art in construction aspects of deep mixing technology , 2001 .

[6]  A. Porbaha,et al.  State of the art in deep mixing technology: part I. Basic concepts and overview , 1998 .

[7]  Alain Pecker,et al.  Static and Dynamic Properties of Sand-Cement , 1979 .

[8]  Peter K. Robertson,et al.  Cone-penetration testing in geotechnical practice , 1997 .

[9]  Don W. Steeples,et al.  Identifying Intra-Alluvial and Bedrock Structures Shallower than 30 Meters Using Seismic Reflection Techniques , 1990 .

[10]  N Takada,et al.  Mikasa's Direct Shear Apparatus, Test Procedures and Results , 1993 .

[11]  Takeshi Kodaka,et al.  Modelling the non-linear deformation properties of stiff geomaterials , 1997 .

[12]  M. Kobayashi,et al.  State of the art in deep mixing technology: part II. Applications , 1998 .

[13]  R. W. Peterson,et al.  INTERPRETATION OF MODULI FROM SELF-BORING PRESSUREMETER TESTS IN SAND , 1989 .

[14]  P. Kearey,et al.  An introduction to geophysical exploration , 1984 .

[15]  Kohji Tokimatsu,et al.  EFFECTS OF SAMPLE DISTURBANCE ON DYNAMIC PROPERTIES OF SAND , 1986 .

[16]  A. Porbaha,et al.  Static response of fly ash columnar improved ground , 2001 .

[17]  Ing Hieng Wong,et al.  USE OF DEEP CEMENT MIXING TO REDUCE SETTLEMENTS AT BRIDGE APPROACHES , 1999 .

[18]  Y. Iagolnitzer,et al.  COLMIX: the process and its applications , 1994 .

[19]  D. M. McCann,et al.  Modern geophysics in engineering geology: an overview , 1997, Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications.

[20]  M. Hardman,et al.  Quality Control of Dry Lime Cement Columns by the Pressuremeter Test , 2001 .

[21]  Ali Porbaha,et al.  Deep Mixing Technology for Liquefaction Mitigation , 1999 .

[22]  A. Porbaha,et al.  State of the art in deep mixing technology. Part IV:design considerations , 2000 .

[23]  Yusuke Honjo,et al.  A PROBABILISTIC APPROACH TO EVALUATE SHEAR STRENGTH OF HETEROGENEOUS STABILIZED GROUND BY DEEP MIXING METHOD , 1982 .

[24]  A. Porbaha,et al.  Ground improvement engineering–the state of the US practice: part 1. Methods , 1998 .

[25]  Vincenzo Silvestri,et al.  Influence of Apex Angle on Cone Penetration Factors in Clay , 1995 .