Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7650-9

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Designing singular jet grouting column for sandy soils

Gulsah Nur Karahan1 · Osman Sivrikaya1 

Received: 19 February 2018 / Accepted: 18 June 2018

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
In this study, the bearing capacity and settlement values of jet grouting columns with the same diameter in very loose and
loose sandy soils were estimated by theoretical approaches and numerical analysis depending on the change in the length
of the jet grout columns and soil relative densities, and those values were compared with each other. The changes in bear-
ing capacity and settlement values obtained from soil parameters, jet grouting column length and method differences were
examined. In the designing of the jet grouting column, these factors should be determined carefully and correctly. The bear-
ing capacity of the jet grouting column is calculated by the theoretical approach considering as a pile. The settlement values
of the jet grouting column were calculated by semi-empirical, empirical and theoretical methods. In numerical analyses,
single jet grouting column was modelled with Mohr Coulomb and Hardening Soil models in axial symmetry model and the
bearing capacity and settlement values of singular jet grouting column were determined.

Keywords  Jet grouting column · Bearing capacity · Settlement · Theoric approach · Numeric analysis

Introduction With the development of technology, new soil improve-

The fields for engineering constructions have been restricted
due to the rapid urbanization. Therefore, new constructions
have been shifted from the old areas to the fields with prob-
lematic soil such as creek bads, swamp areas, excavation
casting areas and filler grounds. Alluvion soils are formed by
the accumulation of soils such as clay, silt, sand and gravel
transported by rivers and streams. Loess is an aeolian sedi-
ment formed by the accumulation of wind-blown silt typi-
cally in the balance equal parts sand and silt that are loosely
cemented by calcium carbonate. Very loose and loose sandy
soils are problematic soils which have the characteristics
of loess or alluvion soils including a small amount of fine
grained soils. Loads coming from superstructures are trans-
ferred to the ground by the foundations. If the soil does not
have the desired bearing capacity, if it cannot tolerate the
settlements and if it contains liquefaction potential, then soil
improvements are applied for those kinds of soils. Thus,
the soil conditions can be made suitable for the engineering
structure to be built on it.
* Osman Sivrikaya
osivrikaya@ohu.edu.tr; osivrikaya@gmail.com
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Nigde Omer Halisdemir
University, 51240 Nigde, Turkey
ment methods have begun to be developed. One of them is
the jet grouting method. The jet grouting process consists
of the disaggregation of the soil or weak rock and its mix-
ing with, and partial replacement by, a cementing agent. Jet
grouting method is based on the high-velocity injection of
one or more fluids (grout, air, water) into the subsoil (EN
12716 2001; Croce et al. 2014). Jet grouting method pre-
sents a faster, more reliable, lasting and economical solution
than any other remediation methods in virtually any type of
weak soil and combinations of soils such as sand, gravel and
clay. The most important difference of it from other classi-
cal grouting systems is being able to know the various soil
parameters such as the amount of material required and the
bearing capacity, deformation modulus and permeability of
the ground improved before application and to know the cost
of the application (Xanthakos et al. 1994).
The studies on jet grouting method in the literature can
be classified as four topics.
The studies on soil improvement by jet grouting, qual-
ity control tests and case studies: Soil was improved by
jet grouting method as a suitable solution against settle-
ment, liquefaction and bearing capacity problems. Suitable
compositions of the parameters required to form jet grout-
ing columns were investigated. These parameters are the
cement dosage, the grout, water and air pressure, the rotation

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 448   Page 2 of 11
velocity, the lifting velocity and the diameter of nozzles.
Control tests were carried out after the desired properties
were achieved both during application and after application.
Column diameters were measured, unconfined compressive
strength was determined by taking core and bearing capacity
was determined by carrying out loading test (Lunardi 1997;
Durgunoğlu et al. 1998, 2002, 2004; Toğrol 1998; Keskin
and Cimen 2002; Daemon et al. 2011; Çetin and Şeflek
2012; Wang et al. 2013; Nguyen et al. 2014; Tonyalı et al.
2015; Kara and Senlik 2015; Akın et al. 2015; Ochmanski
et al. 2011; Hashiro et al. 2016; Erkan and Tan 2016; Mako-
vetskiy 2016; Pan et al. 2017; Sokolov et al. 2017; Cheng
et al. 2017).
The studies on unconfined compressive strength, set-
tlement and bearing capacity of jet grouting columns: The
changes of uniaxial compressive strengths (σ JGK) of jet
grouting columns applied in different soil types were inves-
tigated in accordance with the water/cement ratio, modulus
of elasticity (EJGK), the parameters used in this method (lift-
ing velocity, nozzle diameter) and the soil condition before
improvement was conducted. The effect of soil properties on
the settlement and bearing capacity of jet grouting columns
was examined (Baumann 1984; Trevi 1994; Omine et al.
1998; Bell et al. 2003; Bzowka 2012; Akan et al. 2015).
The studies on the behaviour of jet grouting retaining
structures: It has been stated that the retaining structures
constructed by jet grouting method are an alternative solu-
tion to the more conventional type retaining structures such
as diaphragm wall and sheet pile. Jet grout columns were
also used amongst the attached buildings for preventing soil
movements during the excavation of basement floor, and the
displacement due to the jet grouting method was also ana-
lyzed (Wong and Wu 1997; Wong and Poh 2000; Racansky
et al. 2008; Slizyte and Medzvieckas 2013).
The studies on numerical analysis of jet grout application:
Numerical analyses of jet grouting application were made
by numerical modelling and the numerical analysis values
obtained from the studies were compared with the experi-
mental findings and empirical solution results. To facilitate
the projecting phase of the jet grouting columns, a computer
program of Excel was prepared. It is aimed to facilitate the
project with the use of Excel program and to control the
prepared projects (Bzowka 2004; Madoni et al. 2010; Alkaya
and Yeşil 2011; Juzwa and Bzowka 2016).
Due to the fact that the jet grouting method and tech-
nology are in development stage, the theories used in engi-
neering design have not been finalized yet. Therefore, the
projects have been designed based on the jet grout applica-
tions which are made in similar conditions and the analyses
made during the application. In the design of the jet grouting
column, the parameters and design methods should be cho-
sen correctly. This study is a parametric study and includes
obtaining the bearing capacity and settlement values of jet
13
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448
grouting columns in very loose and loose sandy soils with
different relative density by theoretical, empirical and semi-
empirical and numerical approaches, and also includes the
comparison of the results obtained from different methods.
Bearing capacity
It is a common approach to determine the bearing capacity
of a jet grouting column by the theoretical method used in
designing piles. The piles that transfer the load to a solid
layer by end bearing resistance are called end bearing piles
(Fig. 1a). If a significant portion of the load is transported
by friction, such piles are called friction piles (Fig. 1b). Jet
grout columns, which have very high interaction with the
ground, can carry a large part of the loads applied to them
due to their rigidity under vertical loads (Garassino 1997).
The total bearing capacity of a jet grouting column gener-
ally consists of two components. These are the end bearing
(Qb) and the friction of surface (Qs) components. Dividing
the ultimate bearing capacity by the safety factor, allow-
able bearing capacity (Qall) value is obtained (Coduto 2001;
Tomlinson and Woodward 2015).
( 2)
D
(1)
�
Qb = qb × Ap = (k1 cNc + 𝜎vo Nq + k2 𝛾N𝛾 B) 𝜋
4
�
(2)
( )
Qs = fs × As = Ks 𝜎vo tan 𝛿 (𝜋DL)
Qb + Qs
Qall = (3)
Fs
where qb is the unit point bearing (kN/m2), Ap is the cross-
sectional area of jet grout column ­(m2), fs is the unit skin
friction resistance (kN/m2), As is the surface area of the pile
in contact with the soil (­ m2), B is the base width (m), D is
the diameter of jet grouting column (B = D for jet grouting
column) (m), Nc, Nq, Nγ are bearing capacity factors, k1 and
k2 is the shape factors, c is the cohesion (kN/m2), γ is the unit
weight of the soil (kN/m3), L is jet grouting column length
and used instead of depth Df (m), σ′v is the effective geo-
logical stress at the selected depth (kN/m2), Ks is the coef-
ficient of mean horizontal soil pressure which is effective on
jet grouting column, δ is the friction angle between the jet
grouting column material and the soil, Qall is the allowable
jet grout column capacity (kPa), Fs is the safety factor.
Settlement
Garassino (1997) stated as shown in the study by Erdil
(2008) that the cases that can occur in settlement analysis
of jet grouting column are given in Fig. 1. The load is trans-
ferred to the jet grouting columns by a rigid foundation as
shown in Fig. 1a, and if the ends of the jet grouting columns
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448 Page 3 of 11  448
Fig. 1  Settlements that can
occur at the soils improved by
jet grout columns (Garassino
1997)
are embedded in a carrier layer, the entire load is transferred
to the carrier layer by the jet grouting columns. In this case
settlements are limited by the elastic deformation of the jet
grouting columns. If the load is transferred to the jet grout
columns by a rigid foundation and the ends of the jet grout
columns are not embedded in a carrier layer (Fig. 1b), the
columns act as floating piles and a large part of the load
is carried by the jet grouting columns, and a small part of
the load is carried by the soil. In this case, the settlements
are higher than the elastic settlement of the jet grouting
columns. If the load is transferred to the jet grouting col-
umns uniformly by a flexible surface and the ends of the
jet grouting columns are not embedded in the carrier layer
(Fig. 1c), most of the load is transferred to the jet grouting
columns and a suitable portion is carried by the soil. Set-
tlements are not uniform. If a layer of granular material is
present between the load and the foundation system, the load
is generally carried by the columns (Fig. 1d), and a suitable
portion of it is carried by the soil. The presence of granular
material allows the reactions of the columns to behave more
uniformly, but the soil stresses are mostly transferred to the
columns when the depth increases.
Only approximate solutions are used in determining the
settlements of the jet grouting columns in practice due to
the difficulties. Settlement of the jet grouting column can
be calculated using empirical, semi-empirical and theoreti-
cal methods as a pile in the literature. In the semi-empirical
method, elastic settlement under a vertical load (Q) for jet
grouting column, as it is in pile, consists of three compo-
nents. These are elastic settlement of jet grouting column
end (Sp), jet grouting column (Ss) and the settlement due
to the load carried across the jet grouting column shaft
(Sps). The details of these calculations are available in Vesic
(1977).
St = Ss + Sp + Sps (4)
The empirical method proposed for elastic settlement is
given in the Eq. (5) developed by Vesic (1977) for a single
jet grouting column under load.
D LQv
St = + (5)
100 Ap Ep
where St is the total settlement of the jet grout column, Qv
is the load applied to jet grout column, L is the length of the
jet grouting column, D is diameter of jet grouting column,
Ap is the cross sectional area of jet grouting column base and
Ep is the elasticity of jet grouting column.
13
 448   Page 4 of 11 Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448

Table 1  Soil parameters selected for the study Table 3  Elasticity modulus and unconfined compressive strength of
jet grouting columns in terms of soil type (Durgunoğlu 2004)
Soil parameters Dr (%) References
Type of soil σJGC (MPa) EJGC/σJGC
Very loose Loose
10 14 20 34 Clay 2–5 150
Silt 3–7 200
γd (kN/m3) 13 13.5 14 15 Carter and Bentley (1991) Sand 7–14 600
γsat (kN/m3) 17 17.5 18 19 Gravel 12–18 900
ϕ (°) 26 28 30 32
Peck et al. (1974)
Carter and Bentley (1991)
E (MPa) 10 15 24 28 Das (2008)
µ 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 Das (2008) Table 4  Unconfined compressive strength and elasticity modules of
jet grout column
Dr (%) σJGC (MPa) EJGC (MPa)
Another method that can be used to calculate jet column
10 7 12,514
settlement is the theoretical method based on the Hooke rule.
14 7.5 12,954
According to this method, all of the loads are carried by
20 8 13,379
the jet grouting column. End of the column is embedded
34 9 14,190
to a carrier layer and the settlement is considered for only
column. This can be calculated by Eq. (6).

𝜎 Qv The bearing capacity and settlement calculations were

Δhe = L 𝜎= (6) made for jet grouting columns with a diameter of 60 cm and
2
EJGC 𝜋 D4
a length of 9, 12, 15 and 20 m. The manufacturing param-
where Δhe is vertical displacement of the jet grouting col- eters of the jet grouting column are given in Table 2.
umn, in another word settlement; σ is the stress value on the The unconfined compressive strength values of jet grout-
jet grouting column under load, EJGC is the elasticity modu- ing columns in very loose and loose sand with relative den-
lus of the jet grouting column, L is the length of column, Qv sities of 10, 14, 20, 34% were determined by making use of
is the vertical load on the single jet grouting column, D is the values in Table 3. Elasticity modules (EJGC) were calcu-
diameter of jet grouting column. lated by Eq. (7) (Ozsoy and Durgunoğlu 2003) and given
in Table 4.

(7)
√
EJGC = 4730 𝜎JGC
Material and method Method

Material
The parameters defining very loose sand (Dr = 10, 14%)
and loose sand (Dr = 20, 34%) were selected considering
different relative density (Dr) values in sandy soils. These
parameters are internal friction angle (ϕ), elasticity modulus
(E), poisson ratio (µ), dry and water saturated unit weights
(γd, γsat) and they are given in Table 1 (Peck et al. 1974;
Carter and Bentley 1991; Das 2008).
The soil profile consisting of uniform sandy soil in this study
is shown in Fig. 2. The soil consists of very loose sand with
internal friction angle of 26° and 28° and loose sand with
internal friction angle of 30° and 32°. The underground
water level is at 1 m depth from the surface.
The bearing capacity of jet grouting columns was cal-
culated by theoretical approach as a pile calculations and
numerical modelling. The settlement calculation of the jet
grouting columns was made by semi-empirical, empirical,

Table 2  Manufacturing
parameters of jet grout column Jet grouting method JET-1 Cement amount for 1 m column length 126 kg
selected in the study Diameter of jet grouting 60 cm Grout volume for 1 m column length 169 lt
column
Cement dosage 450 kg/m3 Specific weight of enjection mixture 1.49 kg/lt
Water/cement ratio 1 Out velocity of enjection mixture 230 m/sn
Enjection pressure 450 Bar Amount of enjection mixture 2.39 lt/sn
Nozzle number 2 Time for production of 1 m column length 1.95 dk
Diameter of nozzle 2.5 mm

13
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448 Page 5 of 11  448

geotextile reinforced and non-reinforced filler construction,

Fig. 2  The soil profile and jet grouting columns
theoretical methods and numerical modelling. Numerical
modelling was performed with using the Plaxis 2D pro-
gram. Plaxis is a software programme based on finite ele-
ment method that is widely used in geotechnical engineer-
ing applications to analyze soil behaviour with soil models
(Brinkgreve and Broere 2006). It is used in geotechnical
application areas such as deep excavation and support sys-
tems, shallow and deep foundation, retaining structures,
soil improvement, dams and tunnel design (Lim et al. 2010;
Likitlersuang et al. 2013; Ismail and Shahin 2011; Salimath
and Pender 2015; Sanjei and Silva 2015; Kasim et al. 2013;
Cristovao et al. 2014; Athani et al. 2015; Houari et al. 2011).
For numerical analyses in this study, Mohr Coulomb and
Hardening Soil models were used. The Mohr Coulomb
model, is a simple and well known linear elastic perfectly
plastic model, which can be used as a first approximation of
soil behaviour. The linear elastic part of the Mohr Coulomb
model is based on Hooke’s law of isotropic elasticity. In con-
trast to an elastic perfectly-plastic model, the yield surface of
a hardening plasticity model is not fixed in principal stress
space, but it can expand due to plastic straining. Distinction
can be made between two main types of hardening, namely
shear hardening and compression hardening (Brinkgreve
and Broere 2006). The soil parameter values used in these
models are given in Tables 5 and 6. The Jet grouting col-
umns were defined as soil in models and parameter values
are given in Tables 7 and 8.
Single jet grouting columns in very loose and loose sands
(ϕ = 26°, ϕ = 28°, ϕ = 30°, ϕ = 32°) with 60 cm in diam-
eter were modelled for the lengths of L = 9 m, L = 12 m,
L = 15 m, L = 20 axially symmetrically. Internal friction

Table 5  Mohr Coulomb (MC) Soil model MC MC MC MC Unit

model parameters
Behavior type of soil Drained Drained Drained Drained

Internal friction angle (ϕ) 26 28 30 32 °

Dry unit volume weight (γd) 13 13.5 14 15 kN/m3
Water saturated unit weight (γsat) 17 17.5 18 19 kN/m3
Horizontal permeability (kx) 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 m/day
Vertical permeability (ky) 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 m/day
Elasticity Module (Eref) 10 15 24 28 MPa
Poisson Ratio (µ) 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 –
Cohesion (cref) 1 1 1 1 kN/m2
Dilatance Angle (Ψ) 0 0 0 2 °

Table 6  Hardening Soil (HS) Soil model HS HS HS HS Unit

model parameters
Behavior type of soil Drained Drained Drained Drained

Internal friction angle (ϕ) 26 28 30 32 °

Dryunit weight (γd) 13 13.5 14 15 kN/m3
Water saturated unit weight (γsat) 17 17.5 18 19 kN/m3
Horizontal permeability (kx) 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 m/day
Vertical permeability (ky) 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 m/day
Elasticity module (E50) 10 15 24 28 MPa
Elasticity module (Eur) 30 45 72 84 MPa
Poisson ratio (µ) 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 –
Cohesion (cref) 1 1 1 1 kN/m2
Dilatance Angle (Ψ) 0 0 0 2 °

13
 448   Page 6 of 11 Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448

Table 7  Jet grouting column Soil Model MC MC MC MC Unit

parameters for Mohr Coulomb
(MC) model Behavior type of soil Non-porous Non-porous Non-porous Non-porous

İnternal friction angle (ϕ) 26 28 30 32 °

Dry unit weight (γd) 21 21.5 22 22.5 kN/m3
Water saturated unit weight (γsat) 21 21.5 22 22.5 kN/m3
Horizontal permeability (kx) 0 0 0 0 m/day
Vertical permeability (ky) 0 0 0 0 m/day
Elasticity module (Eref) 12,514 12,954 13,379 14,190 MPa
Poisson Ratio (µ) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 –
Cohesion (cref) 2800 3000 3200 3600 kN/m2
Dilatance angle (Ψ) 0 0 0 0 °

Table 8  Jet grouting column Soil Model HS HS HS HS Unit

parameters for Hardening Soil
(HS) model Behavior type of soil Non-porous Non-porous Non-porous Non-porous

İnternal friction angle (ϕ) 26 28 30 32 °

Dry unit weight (γd) 21 21.5 22 22.5 kN/m3
Water saturated unit weight (γsat) 21 21.5 22 22.5 kN/m3
Horizontal permeability (kx) 0 0 0 0 m/day
Vertical permeability (ky) 0 0 0 0 m/day
Elasticity module (E50) 12,514 12,954 13,379 14,190 MPa
Elasticity module (Eur) 37,542 38,862 40,137 42,570 MPa
Poisson ratio (µ) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 –
Cohesion (cref) 2800 3000 3200 3600 kN/m2
Dilatance angle (Ψ) 0 0 0 0 °

angles of ϕ = 26°, ϕ = 28° and ϕ = 30°, ϕ = 32° corre-
spond very loose and loose sand, respectively. The loads
on the jet grouting column that was defined as a soil were
applied as distributed load. Before the modelling, axial sym-
metry model and dimension measurements were determined
in the general settings. Jet grouting columns were modelled
as soil. Therefore, two different soil types were created. One
of the soils represents the soil and the other represents the
jet grouting column. The analyses were made in accord-
ance with Mohr–Coulomb and Hardening Soil models. In
the model, the interface element value was defined as 1.
After the values of soil properties and jet grouting column
were assigned, two dimensional network systems were estab-
lished. The underground water level was fixed as 1 m. The
pore water pressure was updated after the groundwater level
was plotted. The effective stresses of the soil models were
calculated after the pore water pressure was obtained. The
account phases were created for analysis of models. In the
calculation phase, the production of the jet grouting column
and the activation of the loads were carried out in accord-
ance with the actual conditions.
The jet grouting column was loaded with a load that could
make column collapse while the bearing capacity values
were calculated. After analysing with this load, the load that
made column collapse was found at the reached values in the
program. Then the load–displacement curve was drawn from
the outputs. The bearing capacity values were divided by the
safety factor of Fs = 2.5 to determine the allowable bearing
capacity (Qall) (Fig. 3).
Bearing capacity analysis
The bearing capacity values for the jet grouting columns of
60 cm diameter with 9, 12, 15 and 20 m lengths in very loose
and loose sandy soils were calculated by Eqs. (1) and (2) and
the results are shown in Fig. 4.
As clearly seen, while the lowest bearing capacity value
of the jet grouting column is obtained at very loose sandy
soil with the internal friction angle of 26°, the highest bear-
ing capacity value is obtained at loose sandy soil with inter-
nal friction angle of 32° (Fig. 4). As the length of the jet
grouting columns increases, their bearing capacity values
in both very loose sand and loose sand are also increased
as expected.
In addition, their bearing capacity values are determined
using Hardening Soil and Mohr Coulomb models based on
numerical method, and are compared with those by obtained
by theoretical approach (Fig.  5). It is seen that the jet

13
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448 Page 7 of 11  448

Fig. 3  a Modeling of soil with jet grouting column and b failure curve

3300 The allowable bearing capacity of a single jet grout

3000 φ=26 ° 2884 column of 9 m long in a very loose sand with an internal
2700 φ=28 ° 2430
friction angle of 26° was applied as a load for settlement
2400 calculation of a jet grouting column of 9 m long in a very
φ=30 ° 2114
2100 loose sand and loose sand, and thus the settlement values
1808 1819
Qall (kN)

1800
φ=32 ° were calculated with Eq. (4) for the semi-empirical method,
1496
1500 1274 1296
Eq. (5) for the empirical method and Eq. (6) for the theoreti-
1200 1045 1106 cal method. Using the same calculation method and formu-
900
900
827 763 las, the settlement values of jet grouting columns of 12, 15
670
573 and 20 m lengths were calculated for sandy soils of ϕ = 28°,
600 480
ϕ = 30° and ϕ = 32°. In addition, the settlement values were
300
determined using the Hardening Soil and Mohr Coulomb
0
0.6/9 0.6/12 0.6/15 0.6/20 models and compared with each other (Fig. 6).
D/L In the comparison of the jet grout column settlement
values obtained from the semi-empirical, empirical and
Fig. 4  Comparison of bearing capacity values of jet grouting column theoretical methods, it is seen that the jet grouting column
settlement value calculated by the semi-empirical method
is the largest and the value calculated by theoretical method
grouting column bearing capacity values calculated by the is the smallest (Fig. 6). It is considered that the reason why
theoretical approach are smaller than the jet grout column the settlement values obtained by semi-empirical method is
bearing capacity values obtained by numerical modelling the highest is to be a detailed method involving elastic settle-
(Fig. 5). Among the numerical models; the jet grout col- ment components which is the settlement of the jet grouting
umn bearing capacity values obtained by the Mohr Coulomb column, the jet grouting column end and settlement due to
model were found to be higher than those obtained by the the load carried across the jet grouting column shaft. The
Hardening Soil model. As the internal friction angle and jet reason why the settlement values obtained by the theoretical
grout column length increases, the allowable bearing capac- method are the smallest can be attributed to the settlement
ity of the jet grouting column increases as expected. occurring only in the jet grout column itself in this method.
Among the numerical models, the settlement value of the
jet grouting column obtained by Mohr Coulomb was found
Settlement analysis to be greater than that obtained by the Hardening Soil model.
However, the difference between these values is very small.
The elastic settlements occur in both the jet grouting column Its reason is thought to be the change in the stiffness param-
and sandy soils. The settlement of the jet grouting column eters of the jet grouting column dependent on the increase
was calculated by numerical method, semi-empirical, empir- in stress at the soil in Hardening Soil model, and that it is
ical and theoretical methods. possible to define each elasticity modulus for loading (E50)

13
 448   Page 8 of 11 Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448

4500 6000
Theoric 9m 3734 Theoric 12 m 4934
HS 5000
HS 4180
MC MC
3000 4000
2534
Qall (kN)

Qall (kN)
2194 2774
2041 3000 2576 2571
1455 1557 2182
1284 1351 1680
1500 2000 1431 1274
827 1045
573 670 763 900
480 1000

0 0
26 28 30 32 26 28 30 32
φ (˚) φ (˚)

6000 6000
Theoric Theoric 20 m
15 m 4953 4965
5000 HS 5000 HS
MC 4203 MC 4219
3785 3789 3676
4000 3361 3532 4000 3399 3405

Qall (kN)
Qall (kN)

3068 2817
2780 2884
3000 3000 2619
2430
2078 2114
1808 1819
2000 1496 2000
1296
1106
1000 1000

0 0
26 28 30 32 26 28 30 32
φ (˚) φ (˚)

Fig. 5  Comparison of bearing capacities obtained by theoretical approach, Mohr Coulomb and Hardening Soil models for the jet grouting col-
umn of 9, 12, 15 and 20 m long

and unloading (Eur) unlike the Mohr Coulomb method. The
settlement values of jet grouting columns obtained from
numerical models were found to be smaller than those calcu-
lated by semi-empirical, empirical and theoretical methods.
As expected, the settlement values decreases as the internal
friction angle increases.
Results
In the study, the allowable bearing capacities of single jet
grout columns with constant diameter and different lengths
in very loose and loose sandy soils were calculated by the
methods as pile calculations and numerical analysis meth-
ods. In addition, maximum settlement values were calculated
by theoretical, empirical and semi-empirical approaches and
numerical analysis methods. As a result of this study, the
following results were reached.
• The allowable bearing capacity of a single jet grouting
column found by both pile calculations and numeri-
cal analysis methods increases as the internal friction
angle increases. At the same time, as the length of the
jet grouting column with the same diameter increases,
the bearing capacity of the jet grouting columns also
increases.
• The allowable bearing capacity values of a single jet
grouting column estimated from the numerical analy-
sis model were found to be generally greater than those
calculated by the theoretical approach. In the numerical
analysis method, the allowable bearing capacity obtained
by selecting Mohr Coulomb soil model is bigger than that
obtained by selecting Hardening Soil model regardless of
notwithstanding the relative density of soil and column
length.
• The maximum settlement values of a single jet grout-
ing column calculated by semi-empirical, empirical and
theoretical methods and numerical analysis methods
decrease as the internal friction angle increases. It was
also found that while the settlement value calculated by
the semi-empirical method is the highest, the other one
calculated by the theoretical method is the lowest.
• In the numerical analysis method, the maximum settle-
ment values of the single jet grouting column obtained by

13
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448 Page 9 of 11  448

45 45

9m Semi-empirical 38.56 Semi-empirical

37.22 12 m
Empirical Empirical
Theoric 30.65 Theoric
29.13
30 30

Settlement (mm)
MC MC
Settlement (mm)

23.32
21.79 HS HS
17.9
16.8

15 15
8.59 8.5 8.42 8.28
7.22 7.18 7.14 7.08

2.12 2.90 2.5 2.28

1.22 1.98 1.181.491.45 1.14
0.99 0.93 1.08 0.83 2.59 2.87 2.07 1.99 2.421.42
1.37 1.251.11
0.87
0 0
26 28 30 32 26 28 30 32
φ (˚) φ (˚)

45 60
40.4
15 m Semi-empirical 20 m Semi-empirical
Empirical 46.16 Empirical
32.59 Theoric Theoric
45
MC 38.01 MC
30
25.24 HS Settlement (mm) HS
30.25
Settlement (mm)

19.8 30
24.59

15 16.29 15.94 15.62 15.07

10.69 10.53 10.39 10.14
15
10.29 9.94 9.62 9.07
4.69
4.53 4.39 4.14 5.52
3.99 2.86 5.36 4.09
3.76 1.99 1.74 4.06 2.97 2.89 2.63
2.85 2.38
1.94 1.60
0 0
26 28 30 32 26 28 30 32
φ (˚) φ (˚)

Fig. 6  Comparison of settlements obtained by Mohr Coulomb and Hardening Soil models, theoretical, empirical and semi-empirical approaches
for the jet grout column of 9, 12, 15 and 20 m long

the Mohr Coulomb (MC) model were found to be larger Akın M, Akın M, Ciftci A, Bayram BB (2015) The effect of jet
than that obtained by the Hardening Soil (HS) model. grouting on the cyclic stress ratio (CSR) for the mitigation of
liquefaction. Ejoir 1:10–20
• The maximum settlement values of the jet grouting col- Alkaya D, Yesil B (2011) Design of high-modulus columns (jet
umn obtained in the numerical model were found to be grouting) by using tabulation program. In: Academic Informat-
generally smaller in comparison with those obtained by ics ‘11—XIII. Academic informatics conference, Inonu Univer-
semi-empirical, empirical and theoretical methods and sity, 2–4 February, pp 749–755 (in Turkish)
ASTM D 1143-81 (2013) Standard test methods for deep founda-
the results by the theoretical approach were found to be tion under static axial compressive load. American National
close to those found by numerical methods. Standards Institute, USA
Athani SS, Solanki CH, Dodagoudar GR (2015) Seepage and
stability analyses of earth dam using finite element method.
Aquat Procedia 4:876–883. https​: //doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro​
.2015.02.110
Baumann V (1984) Das soilcrete-verfahren in der baupraxis. Vor-
trage der Baugrundtagung, Duesseldorf, pp 49–83
Bell KR, Clemente JLM, Gularte FB, Lopez RA (2003) Superjet
References grouting reduces foundation settlement for La Rosita power
plant in Mexicalli, Mexico. In: Third international conference
on grouting and ground treatment, New Orleans, United State,
Akan R, Keskin SN, Uzundurukan S (2015) Multiple regression model 10–12 February, pp 354–364
for the prediction of unconfined compressive strength of jet grout Brinkgreve RBJ, Broere W (2006) Plaxis 2D version 8. Delft Uni-
columns. Procedia Earth Planet Sci 15:299–303. https​://doi. versity, Netherlands
org/10.1016/j.proep​s.2015.08.072

13
 448   Page 10 of 11
Bzowka J (2004) Computational model for jet grouting pile-soil
interaction. Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica 26:47–89
Bzowka J (2012) Analysis of bearing capacity and settlement of jet
grouting columns. Arch Civ Eng Environ 2:41–54
Carter M, Bentley SP (1991) Correlations of soil properties. Pentech,
London
Cetin H, Seflek N (2012) Improvement of Ceyhunkent mass housing
area by jet grouting method. Cukurova Univ Sci Eng J 27(2):27–
37 (in Turkish)
Cheng SH, Liao HJ, Yamazaki J, Wong RKN (2017) Evaluation of jet
grout column diameters by acoustic monitoring. Can Geotech J
54(2):1781–1789. https​://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2017-0025
Coduto DP (2001) Foundation design principles and practices. Pren-
tice Hall, New Jersey
Cristovao A, Nogueira A, Hutchinson R, Brito D, Tomasio R, Pinto
A (2014) Jet grouting columns operating as reaction platform
for building uplift and soil induced liquefaction mitigation. In:
17. Brazilian Mechanical Congress of Soils and Geotechnical
Engineering, Brazil, 9–13 September
Croce P, Flora A, Modoni G (2014) Jet grouting technology, design
and control. CRC, New York
Daemon RC, Marques MES, Moreira JR (2011) Evaluating the per-
formance of jet grouting for reinforcement of port structure. In:
5th Pan-American conference on teaching and learning of geo-
technical engineering, Toronto, Ontorio, Canada, 2–6 October
Das BM (2008) Advanced soil mechanics. Taylor & Francis, New
York
Durgunoglu HT, Kulac HF, Oruc K, Oge CE, Eker FS (1998) An
application on soil improvement by jet grout method. In: Sev-
enth National Congress of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul, 438–449
(in Turkish)
Durgunoglu HT, Kulac HF, Oruc K, Yildiz R, Altugu T, Emrem CA
(2002) A case analysis of soil improvement by jet grouting method
against liquefaction. In: Ninth national congress of soil mechanics
and foundation engineering, Anadolu University, Eskisehir, pp
1–12 (in Turkish)
Durgunoğlu HT (2004) Use of high modulus columns in the foundation
engineering. Turkey Eng News 431:39–52 (in Turkish)
Durgunoğlu HT, Kocak B, Kulac F, Velioglu N (2004) Use of jet
grouting columns in soil improvement and quality control meth-
ods-a case study. In: Ninth national congress of soil mechanics
and foundation engineering, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, 16–17 October, pp 1–10 (in Turkish)
EN 12716 (2001) Execution special geotechnical works-Jet grouting.
European Standards
Erdil B (2008) Jet grout column design bearing capacity calculation.
Dissertation, İstanbul Technical University (in Turkish)
Erkan İH, Tan Ö (2016) The effect of pulling and rotation speed on
the jet grout columns. World Acad Sci Eng Technol Int J Civil
Environ Struct Constr Arch Eng 10(12):1690–1694
Garassino AL (1997) Design procedures for jet grouting. In: Seminar
on jet grouting, Singapore, 7 April, pp 15–48
Hashiro R, Nakayama D, Kwong J (2016) Use of jet grouting in chal-
lenging infrastructure renewal situations in Hawaii. In: Proceed-
ings of the 7th civil engineering conference in the Asian region,
Waikiki, Hawaii, USA, 30 August-2 September, pp 1–11
Houari N, Allal MA, Bekr NA (2011) Numerical simulation of the
mechanical response of the tunnels in the saturated soils by Plaxis.
Jordan J Civ Eng 5(1):9–31
Ismail MA, Shahin MA (2011) Finite element modelling of innova-
tive shallow foundation system for reactive soils. Int J Geomate
1:78–82
Juzwa A, Bzowka J (2016) Numerical simulations of settlement of jet
grouting columns. Trans VŠB Tech Univ Ostrava Civ Eng Ser
16(1):1–6. https​://doi.org/10.1515/tvsb-2016-0001
13
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448
Kara HB, Senlik HC (2015) A case study of soil improvement with
jet grouting method. In: 6th Geotechnical Symposium, Cukurova
University, Adana, 26–27 November (in Turkish)
Kasim F, Martob A, Othman BA, Bakar I, Othmane MF (2013) Simu-
lation of safe height embankment on soft ground using Plaxis.
APCBEE Procedia 5:152–156. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcbe​
e.2013.05.027
Keskin SN, Cimen Ö (2002) An application on the use of jet-grouting
method in soil improvement. In: Ninth National congress of soil
mechanics and foundation engineering, Anadolu University,
Eskisehir, 21–22 October, pp 641–648 (in Turkish)
Likitlersuang S, Surarak C, Wanatowski D, Oh E, Balasubramaniam A
(2013) Finite element analysis of a deep excavation: a case study
from the Bangkok MRT. Soils Found 53(5):756–773. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/j.sandf​.2013.08.013
Lim A, Ou CY, Hsieh PG (2010) Evaluation of clay constitutive models
for analysis of deep excavation under undrained conditions. J Geo
Eng 5(1):9–20
Lunardi P (1997) Ground improvement by means of jet-grouting.
ISSMFE Thomas Telford 1:65–86
Madoni G, Bzowka J, Pieczyrak J (2010) Experimental investigation
and numerical modelling on the axial loading of jet grouting col-
umns. Arch Civ Eng Environ 3:69–78
Makovetskiy OA (2016) Application of jet grouting for installation of
substructures of estates. Procedia Eng 150:2228–2231. https:​ //doi.
org/10.1016/j.proen​g.2016.07.269
Nguyen HT, Tho T, Ly TH (2014) A field trial study on jet grouting
to improve the subsoil in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. J Technol
69(3):23–29
Ochmanski M, Modoni G, Bzowka J (2011) Prediction of the diam-
eter of jet grouting columns with artificial neural networks.
Soils Found 55(2):425–436. https​: //doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf​
.2015.02.016
Omine K, Ochiai H, Yoshida N (1998) Estimation of in-situ strength of
cement-treated soils based on a two-phase mixture model. Soils
Found 38(4):17–29
Ozsoy B, Durgunoglu HT (2003) Reduction of liquefaction effects with
high shear modulus soil-cement mix columns. In: 5th National
earthquake engineering conference, İstanbul, pp 15–23 (in
Turkish)
Pan Y, Liu Y, Hu J, Sun M, Wang W (2017) Probabilistic investiga-
tions on the water tightness of jet grouted ground considering
geometric imperfections in diameter and position. Can Geotech
J 54(10):1447–1459
Peck RB, Hanson WE, Thornburn TH (1974) Foundation engineering.
Wiley, New York
Racansky V, Schweiger HF, Thurner R (2008) FE-Analysis of the
behaviour of buttressed jet grouted retaining walls. In: Proc. 12th
Int. Conf. computer methods and advances in geomechanics,
India, pp 3984–3992
Salimath RS, Pender MJ (2015) Moment-rotation behaviour of shal-
low foundations with fixed vertical load using Plaxis 3D. In: 6th
International conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering,
Christchurch, New Zealand, 1–4 November
Sanjei C, Silva LIN (2015) Numerical analysis of the backfilling
sequence effect on gravity retaining wall behaviour. In: 6th Inter-
national conference on structural engineering and construction
management, Kandy, Sri Lanka, 11–13 December
Slizyte D, Medzvieckas J (2013) Evaluation of gravity retaining walls
from jet grouting piles installed in sands. Procedia Eng 57:1070–
1077. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.proen​g.2013.04.135
Sokolov VA, Strakhov DA, Sinyakov LN, Gaarmanov GV (2017)
Effectiveness of jet grouting method for soil base strengthening.
Constr Unique Build Struct 5(56):53–56
Togrol E (1998) Quality inspection in the construction of jet grout
columns. In: Seventh national congress of soil mechanics and
Environmental Earth Sciences (2018) 77:448 Page 11 of 11  448
foundation engineering, Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul, pp
393–402 (in Turkish)
Tomlinson M, Woodward J (2015) Pile design and construction prac-
tice. CRC, London
Tonyali İ, Horoz C, Cağlar S (2015) Evaluation of parameter changes
after soil improvement by jet grouting method. In: 6th Geotechni-
cal symposium, Cukurova University, Adana, 26–27 November
(in Turkish)
Trevi K (1994) Columnar treatment. Illustrative Report, Cesena
Vesic AS (1977) Design of pile foundations. Transportation Research
Board, National Research Council, Washington
Wang ZF, Shen SL, Ho CE, Kim YH (2013) Jet grouting practice: an
overview. Geotech Eng J SEAGS AGSSEA 44(4):88–96
Wong JG, Poh TY (2000) Effects of jet grouting on adjacent ground
and structures. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 44:247–256
Wong LW, Ju D, Wu PJ (1997) Control of ground movements caused of
jet grouting. In: International conference on ground improvement
techniques, Macau, Taiwan, 6–8 May, pp 541–549
Xanthakos PP, Abramson LW, Bruce DA (1994) Ground control and
improvement. Wiley, New York
13