×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
Instructions for papers
For Authors Aim & Scope Contact
Original scientific article

IMPROVED STRESS STATE CALCULATION FOR GEOSYNTHETIC-ENCASED COLUMNS USING GRANULAR MEDIA MECHANICS

By
Kadhim A. Al-Abbas Orcid logo ,
Kadhim A. Al-Abbas
Contact Kadhim A. Al-Abbas

Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Thi-Qar, Dhi Qar Governorate Iraq

Ali A. Al-Robay Orcid logo ,
Ali A. Al-Robay

Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Al-Qadisiyah University, Qadisiyyah Province Iraq

Sura A. Saadoon Orcid logo
Sura A. Saadoon

Assistant Professor, Department of Roads and Transport Engineering, College of Engineering, Al-Qadisiyah University, Qadisiyyah Province Iraq

Abstract

The paper is aimed at enhancing the computational method of Geosynthetic-Encased Columns (GECs) that enhance the engineering structures' foundations on weak soils. This method has proven to be effective in many projects, and the current technique fails to consider the distribution of stresses in the soil-filler, especially in loose soils. This study aimed at improving the analytical methodology by incorporating the mechanics of granular media (MGM) in an attempt to increase the precision of the stress state calculations in Geosynthetic-Encased Columns. The methodology used incorporated the theories of the mechanics of the granular media with the previously used method of computation to calculate the stress distribution both vertically and horizontally in the soil-filler. The traditional method, as well as the improved method, was comparatively analyzed with the emphasis on the determination of horizontal stresses. Major findings showed that the two techniques were highly convergent, with the better technique giving marginally larger, more conservative values of horizontal stresses. Statistical analysis revealed that there was an average differentiation of 0.0015 kN/m² in the values of vertical stress between the two methods, and the p-value was 0.02, which showed that there has been significant improvement in the new method. The incorporation of MGM in the calculations gave a closer description of the behavior of soil at the level of interaction of particles, and the design process has been made more reliable. To sum up, the introduction of the concept of granular media in the computational method of Geosynthetic-Encased Columns presents great advantages to the analysis of stress states and offers more valid and precise outcomes of the foundation system design on the weak soils. This improvement of the methodology increases the range of application of the method, especially in projects that contain loose and heterogeneous soils.

References

1.
Akosah S, Chen J, Bao N. Reinforcement of problematic soils using geotextile encased stone/sand columns. Arabian Journal of Geosciences. 2022 Aug;15(16):1371.
2.
Zhang L, Peng B, Zhou S, Cui P, Liu Y. Numerical study on stability of geosynthetic-encased stone                column-supported embankments based on equivalent method. Computers and Geotechnics. 2024 May 1;169:106179.
3.
Detert O, Rodriguez C, Ojaruega V. Geosynthetic-encased columns (GEC): A proven case study over 30 years. InE3S Web of Conferences 2024 (Vol. 569, p. 10002). EDP Sciences.
4.
Kumar N, Kumar R. Performance of geosynthetic-encased stone columns in sandy soils subjected to vertical cyclic loads. International Journal of Geomechanics. 2025 Jan 1;25(1):04024323.
5.
Peng B, Feng R, Wu L, Wei K, Wang P. Settlement calculation method for peat soil foundations. International Journal of Geomechanics. 2023 Jul 1;23(7):04023094.

Citation

This is an open access article distributed under the  Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (CC BY-NC) License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.