MTGS 2002

SOIL MIXING OVERVIEW CURRENT PRACTICE AND NEEDS

Abir Al-Tabbaa Cambridge University

CONTENT
History Worldwide and in UK Applications and Advantages Projects Worldwide and in UK Publications Events Case Studies: Boston Fort Point Channel Project West Drayton (Commercial Project) West Drayton (R&D Project) Student Projects Conclusions

HISTORY
Origin in ground improvement using mix-in-place piling technique, dating back to 50s In USA, Japan & Sweden projects date back to 70s Soil mixing made a comeback in last few years Two types: dry mixing and wet mixing Involves use of augers

EXAMPLES OF AUGERS

SOIL MIXING IN THE UK

Wet mixing used in late 80s and early 90s for

ground improvement In mid 90s wet mixing used for ground remediation Recently dry mixing used for ground improvement

SOIL MIXING AUGERS IN UK

EXAMPLES OF SOIL-MIXED COLUMNS

APPLICATIONS Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental

Groundwater control Excavation support Soil and foundation stabilisation Liquefaction mitigation Vibration reduction Fixation of contaminants (stabilisation/solidification) Passive and reactive in-ground barriers Repair of defective soil-bentonite cut-off walls

ADVANTAGES OF SOIL MIXING

Uses established technologies Reduces off-site disposal problems Relatively fast Reduces surface exposure Cost effective (30-50/m3) Low noise and vibration level Enables rapid redevelopment of sites Additional ground improvement of contaminated soils

MAJOR PROJECTS WORLDWIDE

Sypress Freeway, California Boston Central Artery Tunnel Project: Bird Island Flats, nr Logan Airport Boston Central Artery Tunnel Project: Fort Point Channel site Restoration of Yodo River Embankment following Kobe Earthquake, Japan Trans-Tokyo Bay Highway, Japan Kansai Airport, Japan West Coast train line at Ledsgrd, Sweden

UK SOIL MIXING PROJECTS 1990-2002

Cementation Piling: Brooklands, Weybridge, Surrey Gorleston pumping station, Great Yarmouth Elland pumping station, Halifax Sewer shafts, Rochdale, Yorkshire Bachy: ICI site, Ardeer, Scotland

May Gurney/Birmingham University/Envirotreat Ltd: DoE R&D, West Drayton, Middlesex Cementation Piling: Ash embankment stabilisation May Gurney: West Drayton, Middlesex Bath Road, nr Heathrow Airport

 Bachy Soletanche: Pumpherston, nr Edinburgh May Gurney: Technopolis Millennium Library, Norwich Long Eaton, Nottingham Gas Hill, Norwich Marchington Prison trial, Staffordshire EU EuroSoilStab project embankment, Dartford CTRL Contract 440, Sandling Queen Elizabeth Dock, Hull

Keller: Hercules/Stent: Keller:

RECENT/FORTHCOMING PUBLICATIONS
State of the Art in Deep Mixing Technology, paper series in J. Ground Improvement, Porbaha et al, 1998-2002. Keynote Lecture by Broms on Design of lime, lime/cement and cement columns, Int. Conf Deep Mixing Methods for Soil Stabilisation, Stockholm, 1999. Deep Mixing Method Manual: Principles, design and Construction, Coastal Development Institute of Technology, Japan, 2001. EU EuroSoilStab Project: Design Guide for Soft Soil Stabilisation. Covers Geotechnical Investigation, Materials, Execution, Testing, Supervision, Monitoring, Records and Special Requirements.

CEN/TC288 WG10: Standard on Execution of Deep Mixing.

 STARNET (EPSRC Stabilisation/solidification Treatment And Remediation NETwork): State-of-Practice Reports In situ Auger Mixing Treatment of a Contaminated Site, West Drayton R&D project, paper series in ICE J. Geotechnical Engineering, 1998-2002 State of Practice Report on Soil Mixing in the UK 1991-2001, Report produced for ISSMGE TC17 submitted to J. Ground Improvement

Guidance Document, being produced by Greenwich University CASSST project (Codes and Standards for Stabilisation/Solidification Technologies)

EVENTS
Jan 99: Oct 99: July 01: BGS/ICE evening meeting on Environmental and Engineering Applications of Deep Soil Mixing Int. Conf., Dry Mixing Methods for Deep Soil Stabilisation, Stockholm Int. Workshop on Deep Mixing Technology for Infrastructure Development: Current Practice and Research Needs, Oakland, California Int. Soil Mixing Workshop, Tokyo, Coastal Development Institute of Technology/ CEN TC288/WG10 Int. Conf. on Geotechnical Grouting and Deep Mixing, New Orleans, ISSMGE TC17.

Oct 02:

Feb 03:

CASE STUDIES
Boston Central Artery Tunnel Project FORT POINT CHANNEL (1997)
Largest soil mixing project in USA In 1994 projected $500m cost increase and 2 yr delays This required redesign of this section of severe site restrictions and with very soft marine soils Original design of cut-and-cover excavation support for the approach sections replaced by soil modification Deep soil mixing was favoured over grouting, freezing, stone columns, wick drains & slurry walls Bid (Seiko now Raito) was 25% cheaper than nearest bid Imported Japanese rigs used to soil mix to 36m

WEST DRAYTON (1997)

Paints factory: inorganic, organics and Heavy metals Previous treatment with soil vapour extraction failed Landfilling rejected: high costs & environmental nuisance On-site soil washing was rejected due high costs Bioremediation was rejected on technical grounds Cement-based stabilisation/solidification soil mixing with modified clays considered most cost-effective 4500 columns installed to depth of 4m First soil mixing project for organic contamination Three soil mixing treatment methodologies employed

WEST DRAYTON R&D PROJECT (1994-date)

MoD Research Agency, old chemical works site Heavy metals, inorganics and organics up to 9000mg/kg Variable made ground overlying natural sand & gravel Seven grout mixes: cement, pfa, lime and bentonite 23 overlapping columns, 600mm diameter, 2.3m deep, treating 14m3 of soil Cores obtained at 2 months and 4.5 years after treatment

water 4-10% lime 0-0.5% pfa 8-16% cement 1-6% soil 75-88%
bentonite 0-0.5%

A 2.4 m

2.4 m

TESTING
Strength Permeability Durability (Freeze-thaw and wet-dry) Leachability (TCLP and NRA and flow-through) Leachate pH SEM/EDX XRD One objective: time-related performance

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

6000 Unconfined compressive strength (kPa) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0

Mix Mix Mix Mix Mix Mix Mix

A B C D E F G

Time (years)

PERMEABILITY

10

Mix A Mix B Mix C

m/s)

Mix D Mix E Mix F Mix G

Permeability (x10

-9

0.1 0 1 2 3
Time (Years)

TCLP LEACHATE pH
12 11 10 9
pH

8 7 6 5 0 1 2 3 time (years) 4 5 6

mix D mix C mix E mix B

TCLP LEACHABILITY
Concentrations in TCLP leachates (mg/l): 2 months Copper Zinc Lead 0.13 - 0.31 0.005 - 0.23 0.02 - 0.05 5 years 0.59 - 0.64 0.52 - 1.14 0.05 - 2.48

STUDENT ACTIVITIES

CONCLUSIONS
Soil mixing is becoming popular in UK for both ground remediation and improvement

Wide range of conventional and novel applications Interest from many contractors in soil mix technology Publications and standards now available offering guidance on the design and execution of soil mixing However, more validation is still needed Interest from students in soil mixing research work

FINAL REMARK
Conclusion at BGS meeting on Soil Mixing in 1999: Deep soil mixing is a potentially useful ground improvement tool but suffers from a lack of integrated guidance on its use

3.5 years later. Many initiatives have taken place to encourage more widespread use of soil mixing.