Strength and Modulus of Marine Clay-Cement Mixes

Fook-Hou Lee1; Yeong Lee2; Soon-Hoe Chew3; and Kwet-Yew Yong4

Abstract: This paper examines the strength and modulus of marine clay-cement mixes with high cement content. Although similar
studies have been reported, many of these studies were conducted using soil-cement and water-cement ratios which are more applicable
to deep cement mixing than jet grouting. The objective of this study is to investigate how the strength and modulus of cement-treated
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Singapore marine clay vary with cement and water contents at a range of cement contents, which is more representative of that used in
jet grouting. To facilitate parametric studies that are relevant to jet grouting operations, a working range of the constituents was proposed
for Singapore marine clay based on the liquid and bleeding limits of the soil-cement mixes. Comparison with data from some previous jet
grouting studies and projects indicates that the liquid and bleeding limits can encompass most, if not all, of the parameter range normally
used in jet grouting operations. The results of unconfined compression tests on cement-treated marine clay showed that water-cement ratio
alone cannot adequately account for the variation in measured strength; the influence of the soil-cement ratio must also be included. For
a given water-cement ratio, the strength of the cement-treated soil appears to increase with the soil-cement ratio. Based on these results,
empirical relations for the strength and modulus of marine-clay-cement mix are proposed. The experiments also show that slurry clay,
rather than dried-pulverized clay, should be used in such tests as the two soil states can lead to significantly different strength and modulus
of the cement-treated soil.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:2(178)
CE Database subject headings: Clays; Soil cement; Mixtures; Material properties; Strength.

Introduction is sheathed within an air jet to increase its effective distance. In

the triple-fluid system, a water jet, sheathed within an air jet, is
The use of cement for increasing the strength and stiffness of soft used as a cutting medium, while a separate grout jet is used to
soil is well established (e.g., Yahiro and Yoshida 1973; U.S. introduce the stabilizing agent.
Patent 3,800,544; Kawasaki et al. 1981; Kauschinger et al. 1992a; Fig. 1 shows the water-cement and soil-cement ratios used in a
Liao et al. 1992; Gallavresi 1992). There are two approaches to number of deep mixing and jet-grouting studies and projects in-
introducing cement into the soil matrix. The first is deep mixing, volving soft, fine-grained soils. The water-cement ratio is defined
in which cement slurry or powder is introduced and mixed into as the ratio of the mass of water, w, in the resulting jet grout mix
the soil matrix by a rotating mixing tool (e.g., Babasaki et al. to the mass of cement solids 共c兲. The soil-cement ratio is defined
1991; Bruce et al. 1998). The second is jet grouting, which in- as the ratio of the mass of soil solids, s, in the jet grout mix to the
volves breaking up the soil matrix by a high velocity grout or mass of cement solids, c. Also included are some data from the
water jet with concurrent introduction of cement grout (e.g., Gal- Singapore River Contract 3 project, wherein overlapping jet grout
lavresi 1992; Kauschinger et al. 1992a; Chia and Tan 1993; Yong piles were installed in a marine clay stratum using triple-fluid jet
et al. 1996; Sugawara et al. 1996). In both approaches, the result- grouting. The natural water content of the marine clay lies be-
ing material is a mixture of cement grout and soil. Three methods tween 80 and 90% and the grouting parameters used are summa-
of jet grouting are in common use, namely the single-, double-, rized in Table 1. Jet grout effluent egressing from the borehole
and triple-fluid jet grouting systems. In the single-fluid jet grout- was collected during the grouting process and then tested for its
ing system, the grout jet is used as the cutting medium and stabi- water-cement and soil-cement ratios, the latter following ASTM
lizing agent. In the double-fluid jet grouting system, the grout jet method D806-89 (ASTM 1995a). The results from two collec-
tions are summarized in Table 2 and also included into Fig. 1.
1 The overall composition of the jet grouted soil can be back-
Associate Professor, Centre for Soft Ground Engineering, Dept. of
Civil Engineering, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore. estimated by using the data in Table 2 in a mass balance calcula-
2
Engineer, Geocon Piling and Engineering Pte. Ltd., Singapore. tion and assuming that none of the air remains in the cut volume.
3
Assistant Professor, Centre for Soft Ground Engineering, Dept. of As in situ water content fluctuates between 80 and 90% over the
Civil Engineering, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore. site, mass balance computations were conducted for these two
4
Professor, Centre for Soft Ground Engineering, Dept. of Civil water contents. As shown in Fig. 1, deep mixing is characterized
Engineering, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore. by higher soil-cement and water-cement ratios than jet grouting. It
Note. Discussion open until July 1, 2005. Separate discussions must should be noted that although deep mixing is conducted at much
be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by one lower water contents than jet grouting, the water-cement ratio for
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor.
deep mixing is often higher because of the much smaller amount
The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible
publication on April 26, 1999; approved on February 16, 2004. This of cement used.
paper is part of the Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental The strength of cemented clay has been extensively investi-
Engineering, Vol. 131, No. 2, February 1, 2005. ©ASCE, ISSN 1090- gated (e.g., Gallavresi 1992; Kauschinger et al. 1992b; Asano et
0241/2005/2-178–186/$25.00. al. 1996; Nagaraj et al. 1996; Matsuo et al. 1996; Uddin et al.

178 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Soil-cement and water-cement ratios for some previous

studies on deep mixing and jet grouting
Fig. 2. Unconfined compressive strength of cement treated clay from
different sources. Numbers represent soil-cement ratios.
1997). However, as Fig. 1 shows, many of the studies were con-
ducted using soil-cement and water-cement ratios which are more
representative of deep mixing than jet grouting. Fig. 2 shows the
variation of unconfined compressive strength with the water- well as dried-pulverized Singapore marine clay samples. As can
cement ratio for some of these studies (Gallavresi 1992; Kausch- be seen, significant reduction in the Atterberg limits of the clay
inger et al. 1992b; Asano et al. 1996; Nagaraj et al. 1996; Matsuo occurred upon drying. This suggests that the activity of the clay
et al. 1996; Uddin et al. 1997). Nagaraj et al.’s results (1996) in had been lowered in the process of drying and subsequent crush-
Fig. 2 suggest that there are two separate trends of variation in ing.
shear strength for soil-cement ratios of 5 and 10, respectively. Studies have also been carried out on the modulus of soil-
This suggests that, other than water-cement ratio, the soil-cement cement mix. Asano et al. (1996) and Saitoh et al. (1996) mea-
ratio may also affect the strength of soil-cement mix. For these sured the secant Young’s modulus E50 at a deviator stress level of
reasons, data obtained with water-cement and soil-cement ratios 50% of unconfined compressive strength qu. Both studies seem to
in the deep mixing range may not necessarily apply to the jet suggest that E50 / qu lies between 100 and 700. As noted earlier,
grouting range. however, these two studies relate to water-cement and soil-cement
Gallavresi (1992) proposed that, for a given type of cement ratios which are more relevant to deep mixing than jet grouting.
mixed with a given type of cohesive soil, the unconfined com- On the other hand, Kauschinger et al.’s (1992b) results on jet-
pressive strength qu may be correlated to water-cement ratio by grouted soil implied E / qu ratios of between 30 and 120. Although
the relationship it is not uncertain if Kauschinger et al. (1992b) referred to E50, the
above comparison does appear to imply that soil improved by
q0 deep mixing may have a higher E / qu ratio than jet-grouted soil.
qu = 共1兲
共w/c兲n This paper examines the strength and modulus of uniformly
mixed, cement-treated Singapore marine clay. An important dif-
in which q0 and n are experimentally fitted values. However, Na- ference between the present and previous studies is the use of
garaj et al.’s (1996) results in Fig. 2 appear to suggest that soil- soil-cement and water-cement ratios which are more representa-
cement ratio also has an effect on the strength of the treated soil, tive of those used in jet grouting. Operating parameters for jet
which is not reflected in Eq. (1). Furthermore, Kauschinger et grouting in Singapore marine clay often fall within a narrow band
al.’s (1992b) tests were conducted on dried, pulverized clay, of values, irrespective of the required strength and modulus of the
which may not represent the in situ state of the clay in jet grouting jet-grouted soil. For instance, the lift speed for double-fluid jet
conditions. It has been known, for instance, that certain tropical grouting in Singapore marine clay is typically 16 to 18 min/ m,
soils are affected by air-drying and should be used in their natural and the water-cement ratio of the grout is about 0.9 (e.g., Chia
state (BSI 1975). Table 3 shows the Atterberg limits of in situ as and Tan 1993; Yong et al. 1996; Sugawara et al. 1996). Thus, an
idealized “working range” is first established, which can encom-
Table 1. Grouting Parameters of Singapore River Contract 3 pass the range of parameters currently used in jet grouting and is
sufficiently large to allow meaningful parametric studies to be
Grouting parameters Values conducted. Based on the established “working range,” unconfined
Diameter of jet grout pile (m) 1.6 compression tests are conducted on cement-clay mixes. By so
Water pressure (kPa) 40,000 doing, the effects of soil-cement and water-cement ratios on the
Air pressure (kPa) 700 unconfined compressive strength and Young’s modulus of
Grout pressure (kPa) 10,000 cement-treated marine clay can then be determined, which allows
Water flow rate 共1 / min兲 70 empirical relationships for these parameters to be postulated. An
Grout flow rate 共1 / min兲 130
explanation for the observed variation in strength and stiffness is
then proposed based on recent findings from micro-structural
Withdrawal rate 共min/ m兲 8
studies of cement-treated marine clay.
Rate of rotation (RPM) 6
The cement used in this study is ordinary Portland cement.
Mix water/cement ratio 0.86
Two forms of marine clay were tested in this study, viz. slurry

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005 / 179

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

 Table 2. Constitution of Effluent Slurry and Improved Soil in the Singapore River Contract 3 Project
Composition of slurry 1st collection 2nd collection
Mean cement content c / 共s + c兲 0.058 0.105
Mean water content w / 共s + c兲 1.2 1.4
Mean soil/cement ratio s / c 16.24 8.52
Mean water/cement ratio w / c 20.69 13.33

Back-estimated overall composition of jet grout pile

Assumed water content of in situ soil (%) 80 90 80 90

Cement content c / 共s + c兲 0.52 0.57 0.47 0.51
Water content w / 共s + c兲 0.93 1.05 0.84 0.95
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Soil-cement ratio s / c 0.91 0.75 1.14 0.97

Water-cement ratio w / c 1.78 1.84 1.8 1.87

clay and dried-pulverized clay. Slurry clay was prepared by mix- the upper marine clay is often distinguished by its higher liquid
ing the required amount of water with Singapore marine clay in limit and plasticity index. The clay used in this study comes from
its natural state. Dried-pulverized clay was prepared by oven- the upper marine clay layer. Table 4 summarizes the typical range
drying the clay at 105°C and then crushing it into a fine powder, of engineering properties of the upper and lower marine clay
before reconstituting it with water. The reason for using dried- layers. The upper marine clay is often classified as an inorganic
pulverized clay was to obtain a direct comparison with Kausch- clay of high plasticity, with the weight of organic matter in the
inger et al.’s (1992b) results. marine clay usually ranging from 5 to 8% of the mass of solids.

Properties of Singapore Marine Clay Ranges of Jet Grouting Parameters

Details of the Singapore marine clay have been presented by Tan
The operating parameters of a jet grouting operation are often
(1983) and Yong et al. (1990), amongst others, and are only sum-
determined on the basis of past experience with similar soil con-
marized briefly herein. The Singapore marine clay is the main
ditions or by means of field trials (e.g., Burke et al. 1989; Gal-
constituent of the Kallang Formation, which covers much of the
coastal plains and immediate offshore areas in Singapore. This lavresi 1992; Yogarajah and Ganeshan 1997). As such, the entire
formation consists mainly of recent deposits of marine, alluvial, groutable range of soil-cement and water-cement ratios is often
littoral and estuarine origins. This formation covers about one not explored in routine jet grouting operations. It is also plausible
quarter of Singapore Island (Pitts 1992). The thickness of the that the groutable range of parameters may depend upon a num-
marine clay stratum is usually between 10 and 15 m, but, in some ber of factors such as the viscosity and unit weight of the grout,
instances, it can be thicker than 40 m. As this marine clay covers viscosity of the grout-soil mix, in situ water content of the soft
many of the deeply incised river valleys, it can be found far soil and the desired strength of the improved soil. Nonetheless,
inland, near to the center of Singapore Island. some typical ranges of operating parameters can be glimpsed
In areas where the marine clay deposit is thick, it is usually from published data. As Gallavresi’s (1992) data and the Sin-
present in two layers, typically referred to as the upper and lower gapore River Contract 3 data in Fig. 1 show, the soil-cement ratio
marine clay. These two layers are separated by a stiffer interme- is narrowly banded with the water-cement ratio in jet grouting
diate layer, which is widely considered to be the desiccated crust operations. This narrow banding of the range makes it difficult to
of the lower marine clay. Pitts (1992) suggested that the lower conduct a comprehensive parametric series of tests. For this rea-
marine clay was deposited some time between 12,000 to 18,000 son, idealized ranges of jet grouting parameters are established to
years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene period. Between 10,000 facilitate the parametric studies that follow. These idealized
and 12,000 years ago, the sea level dropped as a result of the ranges of parameters are meant to encompass rather than strictly
Little Ice Age and it was hypothesized that this caused the top represent the ranges which have been used in the field.
part of the lower marine clay to be exposed, desiccated and For the grout and the cut soil to mix and thereby fill up the cut
weathered. The upper marine clay is a holocene deposit that was volume and for air voids to escape to the ground surface, the
deposited after the last Ice Age and is usually thought to be water content has to be sufficiently high to ensure that the grout-
younger than 10,000 years. Between the two marine clay layers, soil mixture has a sufficiently low viscosity. One possible param-
eter for quantifying the viscosity of the grout-soil mixture is its
liquid limit (LL). Phillips (1995) noted that preparation of labo-
Table 3. Atterberg Limits of In Situ and Dried-Pulverized Singapore ratory soil models from remoulded soil often entails mixing the
Marine Clay soil with water up to a water content of twice the liquid limit, for
the same reason. On this basis, one may surmise that the water
Soil Condition Plastic limit (%) Liquid limit (%)
content of the grout-soil mixture may not be less than ␣LL where
In situ clay 31 90 ␣ is a factor which may be determined empirically.
Dried-pulverized clay 24 63 On the other hand, excessive water in the grout-soil mix may
Note: Dried-pulverized marine clay samples which were resoaked for lead to “bleeding” (e.g., Tan et al. 1997), or segregation of cement
durations up to 7 days show no increase in their Atterberg limits. and soil solids from the water. In this study, this “bleeding” phe-

180 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

 Table 4. Typical Properties of Singapore Marine Clay
Tan (1983) Yong et al. (1990)
Geotechnical properties Upper member Lower member Upper member Lower member
Unit weight 共kN/ m3兲 14–16 15–17.5 15–16 15–17.5
Water content (%) 60–110 47–70 60–90 50–70
Atterberg limits Liquid limit (%) 75–115 63–80 80–120 60–90
Plasticity index (%) 50–77 39–55 50–80 40–55
Undrained shear strength su 共kPa兲 Undrained unconsolidated triaxial test 5–20 8–50 … …
Field vane 8–40 35–50 … …
su / p⬘0 0.18–0.41 0.25–0.41 0.18–0.30 0.25–0.30
Sensitivity 1.5–6 3–5 1.5–6 3–5
Compression index (Cc) 0.7–1.3 0.45–0.95 0.6–1.2 0.4–1.0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

In situ void ratio 1.72–2.5 1.4–1.85 1.7–2.5 1.4–1.85

Coefficient of permeability k 共⫻10−9 m / s兲 0.01–0.2 … 0.1–1 1
Coefficient of lateral Earth pressure at rest 共Ko兲 0.52–0.72 0.52–0.72 0.58–0.70 0.58–0.70
Note: p0⬘ denotes effective overburden stress.

nomenon was investigated by measuring the increase in settle- Fig. 4 shows the bleeding and liquid limits of slurry soil-
ment of the solid-water interface of various soil-cement mixes, cement mixes for various cement contents, the latter being de-
which were left to stand in 1000 ml measuring cylinders after fined as mass of cement expressed as a fraction of the total mass
mixing. The results indicate that much of the settlement of the of solids. The trend of change in the liquid limit is consistent with
solid-water interface occurred within the first 2 h. Moreover, as that reported by Uddin et al. (1997) on Bangkok clay. Also shown
the water content increases, the cumulative settlement after 2 h in Fig. 4 are data from the Singapore River Contract 3 Project as
also increases at an increasing rate. As Fig. 3 shows, in the case of well as the range of data from Gallavresi (1992) on a soil having
Singapore marine clay and ordinary Portland cement, the rate of an in situ water content of 67%. Data relating to this soil are
increase in cumulative settlement with water content rises signifi- selected as its in situ water content is closest to that of Singapore
cantly when the cumulative settlement exceeds about 1% of the marine clay. As can be seen, the data points for the bleeding and
original height of the mixture. In view of this, the water content at liquid limits form a boundary enclosing the data points from the
which the settlement reaches 1% of the original height of the Singapore River Contract 3 as well as much of the data range
slurry is termed the “bleeding limit” (BL). Since settlement of investigated by Gallavresi (1992). As mentioned earlier, in the
solid-water interface will effectively lead to a shortening of the jet back-estimation, the assumption was made that none of the air
grout pile (JGP), one may surmise that excessive bleeding is remains in the cut volume. The effect of this assumption can be
likely to be unacceptable. On this basis, one may define an upper assessed by assuming that a small amount of air remains in the
limit to the workable range of water content as ␤BL, in which ␤ volume. This has the effect of increasing the effluent outflow,
is a factor that may be determined empirically. It should be noted which will, in turn, increase the cement content of the jet-grouted
that the use of a settlement of 1% of the column height is actually soil. The water content will also be decreased, but proportionally
arbitrary; it still needs to be checked against data from previous by a much smaller amount. This will tend to bring the water and
jet grouting operations or studies; this is the purpose of the factor cement contents of the jet grout piles deeper into the workable
␤. range. Thus, the possible presence of air within the jet-grouted

Fig. 3. Increase in cumulative settlement of soil-cement mix with Fig. 4. Working ranges of dried-pulverized and slurry clay cement
water content mixes.

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005 / 181

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

 soil does not alter the finding that the relative composition of the
JGP falls within the workable range. This suggests that the bleed-
ing and liquid limits do encompass much of the presented data for
jet grouting operations on Singapore marine clay or similar soils.
Although this does not preclude the possibility that there may be
other limits, it does suggest that the use of the bleeding and liquid
limits to define the range of mix ratios for jet grouting leads to
quite realistic working ranges for laboratory testing.
In Fig. 4, the results of the limit tests for dried-pulverized
clay-cement mixes are also presented. As can be seen, the liquid
and bleeding limits of dried-pulverized clay-cement mixes are
significantly lower than those of slurry clay-cement mixes, and its
“working range,” that is the region between the liquid limit and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the bleeding limit, is much narrower than that of slurry clay-

cement mixes. Moreover, much of the range of parameters inves-
tigated by Gallavresi (1992) and the Singapore River Contract 3 Fig. 5. 28-Day strength of cement treated clay prepared from dried-
data lie outside of the limits for the dried-pulverized clay-cement pulverized Singapore marine clay compared with results of
mixes. This supports the earlier assertion that slurry clay behaves Kaushinger et al. (1992a)
differently from dried-pulverized clay and strength tests on clay-
cement mixes should be conducted on slurry clay if they are to
reflect field conditions accurately. Unconfined Compressive Strength
Fig. 5 shows the 28-day strength against water-cement ratio for
cement-treated dried-pulverized Singapore marine clay. As can be
Parametric Studies on the Strength and Modulus seen, the 28-day result agrees well with that of Kauschinger et al.
of Clay-Cement Mix (1992b), whose tests were conducted on dried-pulverized Boston
blue clay. The best fit using Eq. (1) was obtained with
There are three basic constituents in a clay-cement mix, viz. n = 1.87 and qo = 4 , 730 kN/ m2. This also agrees well with
water, cement and clay. One parameter which is known to affect Kauschinger et al.’s (1992b) suggested values of n = 1.87 and qo
the strength of the clay-cement mix in jet grouting is water- = 5 , 626 kN/ m2. The Boston blue clay studied by Kauschinger et
cement ratio, as indicated by Eq. (1). However, as mentioned al. (1992b) comprises sediments which had been transported by
earlier, Nagaraj et al.’s (1996) results, presented in Fig. 3, suggest streams from melting glaciers of the Pleistocene Age and depos-
that the strength of the clay-cement mix may also be affected by ited in the marine waters of the Boston Basin. It is a medium-
soil-cement ratio. In this section, the effects of the soil-cement plasticity clay with plastic limit of about 20% and liquid limit
and water-cement ratios on the strength and modulus of the clay- between 40 and 50%. Its compression index lies largely between
cement are discussed. 0.3 and 0.5 (Lambe and Whitman 1973). Comparison with the
The samples for strength tests were prepared in a similar way properties of Singapore marine clay in Table 4 shows the latter to
as those in the limit tests. All the samples have water and cement be much more active and compressible. The fact that both clays
contents lying between the bleeding and liquid limits. The follow the same pattern of strength increase when treated by ce-
samples were prepared by mixing cement slurry with natural clay ment suggests that the results obtained in this study are not unique
to Singapore marine clay.
or dried, pulverized clay, as appropriate. Each batch of samples
Gallavresi (1992) also suggested that n may range from 1.5 to
was mixed in a mechanical mixer for at least 30 min to ensure
3 but that, for inorganic soil, it may be assumed to be 2. Using
uniformity in the mix. It is likely that the uniformity of the mix
this assumed n value of 2, Gallavresi (1992) further showed that
will not reflect actual jet grouting conditions in the field, where
qo typically lies between 5,000 to 10, 000 kN/ m2 for fine-grained
significant nonuniformity is known to exist. This, however, does
cohesive soil. The fitted value of n = 1.87 for the Singapore ma-
not detract from the objective of this study, which is to examine rine clay and Kauschinger et al.’s (1992b) data on Boston blue
the strength and modulus of soil-cement mix under idealized, clay is therefore not only within the range given by Gallavresi
rather than actual, field conditions. The samples were then poured (1992) but is also reasonably close to his nominally assumed
into 75 mm diameter sampling tubes, which were sealed by plas- value of n = 2. The fitted value of qo for Singapore marine clay
tic sheets, lined with silicone sealant. They were then left to set lies just outside of Gallavresi’s range but, as will be shown later,
for one day before they were extruded into a triaxial sampling this can be at least partially explained by the fact that this set of
tube with a diameter of 38 mm and height of 76 mm. The small data comes from dried-pulverized clay. Kauschinger et al.’s
size of the samples was justified by the small grain sizes of the (1992b) fitted qo lies near the lower end of Gallavresi’s range.
solid constituents, viz. cement and clay, and is in accordance with Given the variety of fine-grained cohesive soils covered by Gal-
the requirements of unconfined compressive test method lavresi’s (1992), Kauschinger et al.’s (1992b) and the current
D2166-91 in ASTM (1995b). study, the consistency in the observed pattern of strength increase
These samples were then cured in water for 7 or 28 days. indicates that the findings of these studies are not just applicable
Water curing was used as it is considered to be representative of to the soils covered by these studies individually, but are likely to
the actual conditions of jet grouting operations in Singapore Ma- have a wider generality for fine-grained cohesive soils.
rine Clay, which usually lies below the groundwater table, where As shown in Fig. 5, the scatter of the data points about the
sufficient water is present to support the hydration of the cement fitted curve is quite considerable, especially at low water-cement
in the improved soil. ratio. This is unlikely to be due to experimental scatter in the

182 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 6. 28-Day strength of cement treated clay prepared from dried- Fig. 8. 28-Day strength of cement treated clay prepared from slurry
pulverized clay clay

As shown in Fig. 8, the effect of soil-cement ratio values is

water-cement ratio as this parameter was closely controlled in the
similarly evident on the strength of samples prepared from slurry
sample preparation process. Fig. 6 shows the data plotted sepa-
clay. Fitting attempts showed that the trends indicated by the ex-
rately according to soil-cement ratios. As can be seen, for a given
perimental data can be adequately described by an empirical re-
water-cement ratio, the unconfined compressive strength of the
lation of the form
cement-treated soil increases with soil-cement ratio.
Fig. 7 compares the results of the 28-day unconfined compres- em共s/c兲
sive strength of cement-treated clay samples prepared from dried- qu = q0 共2兲
共w/c兲n
pulverized clay and those from slurry clay. For slurry clay, the
best fit to Eq. (1) was obtained with n = 2.16 and qo in which q0 , m and n are experimentally fitted values. For the
= 6 , 550 kN/ m2. Thus, the fitted value of qo for slurry clay- cement-treated slurry clay samples, m = 0.62, n = 3 and q0
cement mix lies within Gallavresi’s range of values. For a given = 4 , 000 kN/ m2 for 7-day strength and 6 , 000 kN/ m2 for 28-day
water-cement ratio, samples prepared from slurry clay generally strength.
have higher strength than those prepared from dried-pulverized Figs. 6 and 8 show that for a given water-cement ratio, the
clay, the difference being particularly significant at low water- unconfined compressive strength increased with soil-cement ratio.
cement ratios. Since the soft soil in the field is unlikely to have This effect is proportionally more marked at high soil-cement
undergone a drying-pulverization-wetting cycle during the jet ratio, especially for the slurry clay-cement mix. On the other
grout process, the use of slurry clay is likely to be more repre- hand, at low soil-cement ratio, the trend, while still present, be-
sentative of in situ conditions than dried-pulverized clay. comes less significant. The effect of the soil-cement ratio can be
explained using the general framework set out by Chew et al.
(2002) on the interaction between cement and marine clay. Using
scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis, Chew et al. (2002)

Fig. 7. Comparison of 28-day strength of cement-treated clay

prepared from dried-pulverized clay and slurry clay Fig. 9. Typical stress-strain curve of cement treated clay

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005 / 183

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

 tract 3 falls at or below the turning point. This suggests that the
effluent would not set or would have negligible strength, as was
indeed observed in the field.

Modulus in Unconfined Compression Tests

A typical stress-strain curve from the unconfined compression

tests is shown in Fig. 9. Internal strain measurement using, for
instance, Halls effect transducer (Clayton et al. 1989), was not
employed in this study. Hence, the measured Young’s modulus
may be different from the small-strain Young’s modulus. The se-
cant modulus at a stress level equal to 50% of the unconfined
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 10. Relationship between Eo and 28-day strength of cement compression strength, E50, was also obtained from the stress-
treated clay prepared from dried-pulverized clay strain curves of the tests. However, the measurements showed
that there was very little difference between E and E50, this being
due to the fact that the linear portion of the stress-strain curve
showed that the release of Ca2+ ions arising from the hydration often extends beyond 50% of the unconfined compression
reaction of the cement leads to a flocculated microstructure of the strength. As such, the measured value of E may be taken to be
soil-cement mix, with increased edge-to-face contacts between approximately equivalent to the E50.
adjacent illite sheets. For a given water-cement ratio, a lower Figs. 10 and 11 show the 28-day modulus of dried-pulverized
soil-cement ratio means a higher voids ratio in the mix. This will and slurry clay mixes in relation to the unconfined compressive
allow the flocculation process to produce a more porous structure, strength. As can be seen, although there is some scatter around the
which would account for the lower strength of the cured soil- line of best fit, the effect of soil-cement ratio is less evident. This
cement mix. This is likely to be more pronounced at higher water- is probably because the effects of water-cement ratio and soil-
cement ratio, wherein highly flocculated microstructure may re- cement ratio have already been largely accounted for in qu. As
sult if the amount of soil solids is reduced. On the other hand, at shown in Table 5, the E / qu ratio from dried-pulverized clay-
low water-cement ratio, flocculation is likely to be limited by the cement mixes was lower than the corresponding value from slurry
lower voids ratio, anyway. Thus, the amount of soil solids is of clay-cement mixes. The 28-day E / qu ratio of slurry clay mix was
lesser importance. In other words, water-cement ratio alone is also somewhat lower than reported values in deep cement mixing
insufficient to account for all the salient factors affecting the studies, which ranged from 150 to 500 (Asano et al. 1996; Futaki
strength of clay-cement mix. Instead, the relative proportion of all et al. 1996). This indicates that the elastic modulus of the jet-
three constituents cement, clay particles and water, is likely to grouted soil cannot be predicted using E / qu ratios obtained from
affect the interaction between clay and cement, and thereby the tests which were conducted at water contents in the deep cement
resulting strength after curing. mixing range.
Attempts to prepare samples at lower cement contents than the
“turning points” in Fig. 4 were unsuccessful as the clay-cement
mix failed to set. This implies that a minimum amount of cement Conclusions
is required before the improvement becomes apparent. Similar
observations were also reported by Asano et al. (1996) and Uddin Several findings have emerged out of the foregoing discussion.
et al. (1997). Comparison of the values presented in Table 2 and First, the composition of the improved soil is shown to be differ-
the liquid and bleeding limits in Fig. 4 shows that the cement ent in jet grouting and deep cement mixing, with the former usu-
content of the jet grout effluent from the Singapore River Con- ally having higher cement content than the latter. Because of this
difference, laboratory tests results related to deep mixing may not
apply to jet grouting. Second, the liquid and bleeding limits were
proposed as measures for establishing a working range, within
which the effect of jet grouting composition on strength and

Table 5. Summary of E0 / qu Ratios

Condition of samples Average E0 / qu
Dried-pulverized Singapore marine 92
clay, 7-day curing
Dried-pulverized Singapore marine 84
clay, 28-day curing
Slurry Singapore marine clay, 100
7-day curing
Slurry Singapore marine clay, 140
28-day curing
Pulverized Boston Blue Clay, 60
Fig. 11. Relationship between Eo and 28-day strength of cement 28-day curing (after
treated clay prepared from slurry clay Kauschinger et al., 1992b)

184 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

 modulus can be studied. Comparison of the liquid and bleeding 98, Boston, 1–26.
limits with data from some previous jet grouting operations on BSI. (1975). BS1924 (1975). Part 2: Methods of tests for cement-
soils with high in situ water content show that the two proposed stabilized and lime-stabilized material, British Standards Institution,
limits encompass most of the compositions reported. This enables London.
the two proposed limits to be used to define a working range Burke, G. K., Johnsen, L. F., and Heller, R. A. (1989). “Jet grouting for
within which parametric studies that are relevant to actual jet underpinning and excavation support.” Proc., Foundation Engineer-
grouting operations can be conducted. Third, results of uncon- ing, ASCE, New York, 291-300.
fined compression tests on clay-cement mixes within the pro- Chew, S. H., Kamruzzaman, A. H. M., and Lee, F. H. (2004). Physico-
posed working range show that water-cement ratio alone cannot chemical and engineering behavior of cement-treated clays. J. Geo-
tech. Geoenviron. Eng., 130(7), 696–706.
account for the variation in the strength; the influence of the soil-
Chia, B. H., and Tan, T. S. (1993).“The use of jet grouting in the con-
cement ratio must also be included. For a given water-cement
struction of drains in soft soils.” Innovation in infrastructure develop-
ratio, the strength of the cement-treated soil appears to increase
ment: Proc., 11th Conf. of ASEAN Fed. of Eng. Organisations, 20–26.
with the soil-cement ratio. This may be attributed to the fact that,
Clayton, C. R. I., Khatrust, S. A., Bica, A. V. D. and Siddique, A. (1989)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

for a given water-cement ratio, a higher soil-cement ratio would .“The Use of Hall Effect Semiconductor in Geotechnical Instrumen-
result in a smaller void ratio in the soil-cement mix. This will, in tation.” Geotech. Test. J., 12(1), 69–76.
turn, lead to less flocculation of the treated soil, which contributes Futaki, M., Nakano, K., and Hagino, Y. (1996). “Design Strength of
to a higher strength. Based on these results, empirical relations for Soil-Cement Columns as Foundation Ground for Structures.” Grout-
the strength and modulus of marine-clay-cement mix were pro- ing and deep mixing: Proc. IS Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground
posed. The experiments also showed that slurry clay, rather than Improvement Geosystems, 481–484.
dried-pulverized clay, should be used in such tests as the two soil Gallavresi, F. (1992). “Grouting improvement of foundation soils.” Proc.,
states can give significantly different strength and modulus of the Grouting, soil improvement and geosynthetics, ASCE, New York, vol.
soil-cement mix. Although the tests were only conducted on Sin- 1, 1–38.
gapore marine clay, comparison with results reported for Bangkok Kaushinger, J. L., Perry, E. B., and Hankour, R. (1992a). “Jet grouting:
clay shows that the trend of variation in the liquid and plastic state of the practice.” Proc., Grouting, soil improvement and geosyn-
limits of the two materials is similar, when treated with cement. thetics: ASCE, New York, vol. 1, 169–181.
Similarly, the variation in the unconfined compressive strength for Kaushinger, J. L., Hankour, R., and Perry, E. B. (1992b). “Methods to
the marine clay tested in this study shows close agreement with estimate composition of jet grout bodies.” Proc., Grouting, soil im-
that reported for Boston blue clay as well as other fine-grained provement and geosynthetics, ASCE, New York, vol. 1, 194–205.
cohesive soils. This indicates that the findings in this study are not Kawasaki, T., Niina, A., Saitoh, S., Suzuki, Y., and Honjo, Y. (1981).
unique to Singapore marine clay, but are also likely to be appli- “Deep mixing method using cement hardening agent.” Proc., of the
cable to other clays, at least in trend. 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Stockholm, Sweden, vol. 3,
721–724.
Lambe, T. W., and Whitman, R. V. (1973). Soil mechanics. Wiley Eastern
Edition, New Delhi, India.
Acknowledgments Liao, H. J., Kao, T. C., Chen, M. S., and Wu, Z. C. (1992). “Grouting for
retaining wall movement control of deep excavation in soft clay.”
This study is jointly sponsored by the National University of Sin- Grouting in the ground: Proc., Conf. Organised by the Inst. of Civil
gapore, National Science & Technology Board and L & M Geo- Eng., London, 403–416.
Matsuo, T., Nisibayashi, K., and Hosoya, Y. (1996). “Studies on Soil
technic Pte. Ltd., Singapore. Their support is gratefully acknowl-
Improvement Adjusted at Low Compressive Strength in Deep Mixing
edged.
Method.” Grouting and deep mixing: Proc. IS Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int.
Conf. on Ground Improvement Geosystems, 521–526.
Nagaraj, T. S., Miura, N., Yaligar, P. P., and Yamadera, A. (1996). “Pre-
dicting strength development by cement admixture based on water
References
content.” Grouting and deep mixing: Proc. IS Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int.
Conf. on Ground Improvement Geosystems, 431–436.
Asano, J., Ban, K., Azuma, K., and Takahashi, K. (1996). “Deep mixing
Phillips, R. (1995). “Centrifuge modelling: practical considerations.”
method of soil stabilization using coal ash.” Grouting and deep mix-
Geotechnical Centrifuge Technology. R. N. Taylor, ed., Blackie Aca-
ing: Proc. IS Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground Improvement Geo-
demic, London, 34–60.
systems, 393–398.
Pitts, J. (1992). “Landforms and Geomorphic Evolution of the Islands
ASTM. (1995a). “ASTM D806-89 Test method for cement content of
During the Quaternary.” in: Physical Adjustment in a Changing Land-
soil-cement mixtures.” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4:
scape: The Singapore Story, A. Gupta and J. Pitts, eds., Singapore
Construction, vol. 04.08: soil and rock (1): D420-D4914, ASTM,
Philadelphia, 77–79. University Press, Singapore, 83–143.
ASTM. (1995b). “ASTM 2166-91 Standard Test Method for Unconfined Saitoh, S., Suzuki, Y., Nishioka, S., and Okumura, R. (1996). “Required
Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soil.” Annual Book of ASTM Stan- strength of improved ground.” Grouting and deep mixing: Proc. IS
dards, Section 4: Construction, vol. 04.08: soil and rock (1): D420- Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground Improvement Geosystems, 375–
D4914, ASTM, Philadelphia, 162–166. 380.
Babasaki, R., Suzuki, K., Saitoh, S., Suzuki, Y., and Tokitoh, K. (1991). Sugawara, S., Shigenawa, S., Gotoh, H., and Hosoi, T. (1996). “Large-
“Construction and testing of deep foundation improvement using the scale jet grouting for prestrutting in soft clay.” Grouting and deep
deep cement mixing method.” Deep Foundation Improvements: De- mixing: Proc. IS Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground Improvement
sign, Construction and Testing, ASTM STP 1089, M. I. Esrig and R. C. Geosystems, 353–356.
Bachus, eds. ASTM, Philadelphia, 224–233. Tan, S. L. (1983). “Geotechnical Properties and Laboratory Testing of
Bruce, D. A., Bruce, M. E. C., and DiMillio, A. F. (1998). “Deep mixing Soft Soils in Singapore.” Proc., 1st International Seminar on Con-
method: a global perspective.” Geotechnical Special Publication no. struction Problems in Soft Soils, Nanyang Technological Institute,
81. Soil Improvement for Big Digs, Proc. Sessions of Geo-Congress Singapore, 1–47.

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005 / 185

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186

 Tan, T. S., Loh, C. K., Yong, K. Y., and Wee, T. H. (1997). “Modelling of tional Conference on Ground Improvement Technique, Macau, 673–
bleeding of cement paste and mortar.” Adv. Cem. Res., 9(34), 75–91. 682.
Uddin, K., Balasubramaniam, A. S., and Bergado, D. T. (1997). “Engi- Yong, D. M., Hayashi, K., and Chia, B. H. (1996). “Jet grouting for the
neering behaviour of cement-treated Bangkok clay.” Geotech. Eng., construction of a RC canal in soft marine clay.” Grouting and deep
28(1), 89–119. mixing: Proc. IS Tokyo ’96, 2nd Int. Conf. on Ground Improvement
Yahiro, T., and Yoshida, H. (1973). “Induction grouting method utilizing Geosystems, 375–380.
high speed water jet.” Proc., 8th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Yong, K. Y., Karunaratne, G. P., and Lee, S. L. (1990). “Recent develop-
402–404. ments in soft clay engineering in Singapore.” Proc., Kansai Int. Geo-
Yogarajah, I., and Ganeshan, V. (1997). “Application of Jet Grouting⬍⬎ tech. Forum ’90: Comparative Geotechnical Engineering. Osaka,
Techniques for Temporary Support Systems.” Proc. of the Interna- Japan, 1–8.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Hong Kong on 07/08/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

186 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2005, 131(2): 178-186