Proceedings of The Twelfth (2002) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

Kitakyushu, Japan, May 26 31, 2002

Copyright 2002 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers
ISBN 1-880653-58-3 (Set); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set)

Case Study on Ground Improvement

by High Pressure Jet Grouting
Hong, Won-Pyo, Kim, Dong- Wook, Lee, Mm-Ku, Yea, Geu-Guwen
Department of Civil and Environmental

Engineering, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea

KEY WOIRDS : high pressure jet grouting, boiling, coefficient of

permeability,
cutoff of ground water, ground improvement,
cohesionless; soil

structures may take place, because soil particles behind the temporary
retaining walls flow away with the void water.
The high pressure jet grouting method is generally applied so as to
eliminate the settlement problem or obtain the cutoff effects of the
ground water behind the retaining wall for excavation.
This method
has been widely used for installing circular soil-cement mixture
columns behind the temporary retaining wall or for constructing a
cutoff wall under a dam (Miyasaka et al 1986; R. H. Borden; R. D.
Holtz and I. Juran).
Especially, the high pressure jet grouting method can restrict the
excessive horizontal displacement of a temporary retaining wall,
because the earth pressure acting on the retaining wall can be reduced
during excavation.
Before excavation, improving the ground helps
prevent excessive deformation of ground by restraining the heaving
or boiling at excavation bottom surface.
On the other hand, this method is also widely adopted for foundation
reinforcement
such as underpinning
works, protection of old
buildings and reinforcing the bearing capacity of soft ground
(Ichihashi et al. 1985).
The purpose of this study is to investigate the cutoff effect of a
grouted ground wall installed by the high pressure jet grouting
method behind a temporary retaining wall. The investigation is
performed on three temporary retaining wall construction sites with
high ground water level in silty sand and sandy gravel layers.
Particularly, comparing the cutoff effect of ground water in ground
grouted by high pressure jet with that in case of applying low
pressure jet, the high efficiency of the high pressure jet grouting is
observed.

INTRODTJCTION

GROUTING

Occasionally, subway construction in Korea is carried out in an

alluvial soil layer with high ground water level and high permeability.
When an excavation work is applied to these poor soils, boiling
would be induced at the excavation bottom surface due to the
difference in ground water levels between the excavation region and
the ground behind temporary retaining walls (Hong et al, 1992).
When a boiling occurs to these poor soils, ground surface settlement
at excavation sites and cracking in the vicinity of neighboring

I. Field description
Three sites chosen for this study were intended to be reinforced by
grouting for the purpose of obtaining the efftcient cutoff of ground
water behind temporary retaining walls. Various grouting methods
were applied in the sites. In Site-l, soil was mixed in ground by
cement with relatively low pressure jet of 5 to 10 kgf/cm* to make
soil cement columns in subground.
The soil cement columns are
overlapped in a row so as to form a wall in subground.

ABSTRACT
If excavation works in front of a temporary retaining wall is
performed in loose sand with high ground water level, a boiling
problem would be induced at the site. Due to excessive ground
settlement mduced by the boiling at excavation bottom, severe
damage may take place to structures in the vicinity of an excavation
site. Recently, in order to cutoff ground water behind a temporary
retaining wall during excavation, the high pressure jet grouting has
been widely used in Korea.
The purpose of this study is to investigate, first, the engineering
properties of the ground improved by the high pressure jet grouting
method, then, to confirm in field the effects of cutoff of ground water
behind temporary retaining walls during excavation.
A series of laboratory and field tests is performed to investigate the
effect of ground improvement; unconfined compression tests are
performed on the specimens sampled from grouted ground and
permeability tests are performed in bore holes drilled in the grouted
ground.
Test results indicate that the cutoff characteristics of the grouted
ground is affected by the water content of the original ground, the jet
nozzle pressure, the type of jetting method and the ground water level.
This study also shows that the high pressure jet grouting has a
sufficient e&iency to cutoff ground water at excavation works.

610

SITES

Table 1. The grouting method and the adapted pressure

Sites

Site-l

Grouting methods

Soil cement wall

Adapted pressures
(k&cm)

Site-2

Site-3
High pressure jet grouting

200

5-10

Diameter of grouted columns (cm)

450

120

method was adopted to obtain the cutoff effect of the ground water
behind the temporary retaining wall. After the grouting, excavation
could be completed without boiling problems.
Consequently, the
effective cutoff could be obtained in these sites.

This grouting method is called by the soil cement wall grouting

method.
Besides, in Site-2 and Site-3, soil cement columns were
constructed by injection of cement with high pressure jet in
subground. The high pressure jet could be supplied through center
tube rod to inject cement with air and water to soil. The center tube
rod applied in Site-2 was the double tube rod type, while the triple
tube rod type was applied in Site-3. This grouting method is called
by the high pressure jet grouting method. The jet nozzle pressure
through the triple tube rod was 450 k&cm* in Site-3. In Site-2
constructed by double tube rod type, the jet nozzle pressure was 200
kgfYcmz as shown in Table 1.
In Site-l, excavation was performed without any grouting at first.
The excavation could not be continued below the ground water level
because of :severe boiling problems during excavation.
Therefore,
the soil celment wall grouting method was adopted behind the
retaining w,all as a countermeasure.
However, the boiling was
continued.
Consequently, the method failed to obtain the cutoff
effect of ground water. Photo 1 shows the circular shaped fountain
holes caused1by boiling at Site-l.

Figure 1. Site location

Photo 1.

2. Ground profile
Figure 2 shows soil profiles in the three sites with the results of
standard penetration tests.
Soil profiles show a little difference
among the three sites, but the general pattern of soil profiles shows
that the vertical soil distribution is fill, alluvial soil, weathered zone
and bedrock from ground surface in turn.
The topsoil consists of a fill layer composed of a mix of silt, clay,
sand and a small amount of gravel mainly. This layer was formed in
the course of earth works to construct a road and a new city.
Relative density of the fill layer is identified to be loose state.
An alluvial soil layer deposited for a long-term period exists below
the fill layer and is composed of deposit materials removed by
overflow from upstream floods. And the alluvial soil is divided into
silty clay, silty sand, sand and sandy gravel. Relative density of the
upper alluvial soil is identified as a state of medium dense descending
to a dense state. Especially, the silty sand and sandy gravel at these
sites make the aquifer, because the sites belong to the Han-river
system region.
Therefore, the soils in this region has a high
permeability.
Weathered zone is separated into two layers as the upper weathered
soil and the lower weathered rock. The weathered soil is in a
completely weathered state from the bedrock, remaining as a residual
soil of silt and sandy silt.

Boiling in Site-l

The other sites were also located at ground excavation sites for
subway construction in alluvial soils, in which Site-2 was located at
the 7-23 sector in the Seoul subway line 7 and Site-3 was located at
the 6-2 sector in the Seoul subway line 6.
Excavation in these sites would make the adjacent apartment
buildings unstable, because of the draw down of ground water level
and the co.nsiderable horizontal displacement of the temporary
retaining wall1due to excavation.
The high pressure jet grouting

611

Figure 2. Ground profiles

TEST RESULTS

Weathered rock is produced by only changing its mechanical

property from bedrock, remaining the texture of in-situ bedrock
containing a part of discrete rock fracture.
Relative density shows
the range from dense to very dense state.
Soft rock in the bedrock consists of the gneiss classified from KyungGi metamoqphic rock in Pre-Cambrian.
Sample cores am used to
detect the rock fracture shapes that remarkably develops both cracks
and joints.
The ground water level was founded to be at a considerable height;
Site-l has at G.L-l.O--4.Om,
in Site-2 at G.L-3.0--3.5m
and in
Site-3 at G.L-4.9m - -6.7m, respectively.

IN FIELD

Grouting was adapted to cutoff the ground water in the three sites.
When grouting is performed, it is necessary to confirm the cutoff
effect in the grouted ground.
Lugeon value (1933) measured by a packer test is obtained by a
pump-in test, in which the volume of water taken in a section of bore
hole is measured during certain time intervals.
Packer tests were
performed in boreholes drilled in the grouted ground in-situ to certify
how much cutoff effect could be obtained.
Lugeon Values are
measured at the weathered rock in the case of Site-Z as 4.7 - 17
Lugeon before grouting and 4.2 Lugeon after grouting.

Table 2. The coefficient of permeability for each soil layer

612

*if-8

I6

24

32

!O

Figure 4. Comparison of strength for submerged and dried cores

The coefficient of permeability for grouted ground could be estimated
on the basis of the results of the packer tests. Then, the coefficient
of permeability between original ground and grouted ground was
compared.
Table 2. presents the coefficient of permeability, which is obtained by
the packer tests in the three sites. The results summarized in Table
2 indicate that the coefficient of permeability is nearly the same for
each soil layers in each sites.
Table 2. shows that the cutoff effect of ground water is dependent on
the grouting method which is applied in the sites.
The Site-l was performed by soil cement wall grouting method.
According i:o permeability test, the coefficient of permeability was
It was
nearly not changed from the original value before grouting.
due to nozzle jet pressure adapted by 5 - 10 kgf/cm*, which is
relatively lower jet pressure than any other Site-2 (200 kgfYcm* ),
Site3( 450 kgfYcm* ) consequently, the grouting method with low
pressure jet was not effective to cutoff ground water.
Besides, the coefficient of permeability in Site-2 and Site-3, where
the high pressure jet grouting was applied, were lowered considerably.
Therefore, the cutoff effect of ground water in these sites would be
very effective.
The coefficient of permeability in the sites where the high pressure jet
is applied shows the range of 1O5 to 106cm/sec, while the
permeability is nearly not lowered from the original value in the site
where the low pressure jet is applied.
On the othar hand, comparing the permeability of the grouted ground
in the two sites where the high jet grouting is applied, a little
difference on permeability is found. That is, the lower jet pressure
produces thle higher permeability, which means the lower cutoff
effect of ground water.
A large soil-cement mixture column can be formed in ground due to
The diameter of the grouted ground
the high pressure jet grouting.
columns in Site-3 was 12Ocm as shown in Table I. The size of
columns was measured at the depth 2.0m from the ground surface in
field.
GROUTING

Water
Figure 3. Relationship
and water content

content

w&l

between unconfmed

compressive

strength

the water content were measured in advance. The water content of the
cores sampled in Site-l shows the range of 10% to 30%.
Figure 3 shows the relationship between unconfined compressive
strength and water content of the cores. This figure shows that the
unconfined compressive strength has a tendency to decline inversely
proportional to the increase of water content.
That is, the higher
strength could be obtained from the cores, which have the less water
content.
This result indicates that the properties of the grouted ground is
affected by the water content, which is related to the ground water
level in field.
The grouted ground is made of the soil-cement
mixture, which is different from concrete or cement mortar. That is,
the grouted ground made of the soil-cement mixture contains soil
particles.
Therefore, the grouted ground is easy to be affected by
the ground water level.
The strength of the grouted ground will be varied along with the
To
variation of ground water level during rainy and dry seasons.
investigate the effect of variation of ground water level on the
strength of the grouted ground, two kinds of cores were prepared for
unconfined compression tests and indirect tension tests. One is the

EFFECT

1. The strength of grouted ground

The strength of ground will be increased by ground improvement due
To investigate the strength of the grouted columns in
to grouting.
subground, some cores were sampled from the grouted columns.
Unconfined compression tests were performed on the cores, of which

613

cores submerged in water for 48 hours, the other is the cores dried in
the oven for 24 hours.
These two lcinds of cores represent the saturated condition and the
Figure 4 shows the comparison of the strength
dried condition.
Figure 4(a) shows the
obtained from the two kinds of cores.
comparison of unconfined compressive strength of the saturated cores
with that of the dried cores, while Figure 4(b) shows the comparison
of the tensile strength.
As shown in Figure 4, the unconfined compressive strength of the
grouted ground for submerged condition is 20% on the average (45%
at the max:imum) less than that for dry condition, while tensile
strength as well as unconfined compressive strength is 20% on the
average (60% at the maximum) less than that for dry condition.
Consequentlly, the strength of grouted ground will be considerably
affected by existence of ground water. Therefore, on application of
high pressure jet grouting, the elevation or existence of ground water
level should be observed accurately to maximize the effect of ground
improvement.
2. The permeability of grouted ground
The ground water level in each sites was located at G.L. -1 .O- -4.Om,
G.L. -3.0--3.5m
and G.L. -4.9--6.7m,
respectively.
As mentioned in the previous section, boiling was induced during
excavation in Site-l and also there were a high possibility of boiling
problems inI the other two sites. The silty sand and sandy gravel
found at the sites make this region an aquifer, because the sites
belong to the Han-river system region.
Special cutoff treatments of
ground water would be necessary for excavation in these sites due to
high permealbility in alluvial soils.
Accordingly, a grouted ground wall was made in subground by
overlapping the grouted columns constructed by high pressure jet
grouting in a row for achieving a watertight barrier. Packer tests
were performed in the bore holes drilled in grouted ground to
investigate the permeability of the grouted ground.
Table 2 shows the coefficient of permeability along with the each soil
layer in both the original ground and the grouted ground. Figure 5,
which is given on the basis of table 2, illustrates the variation of
permeability after grouting along with depth.
The coefficient of permeability in the original soils have a range from
2.01 x IO5 to 4.91 x lOA cm/set which is good for permeability, in
case of grouted ground, Site-l, Site-2 has a tendency with decreasing
the permeability from 1.19 x 1Oto 7.34 x lo6 cm/set.

Figure 5. Comparison of permeability

that in grouted ground

in original ground with

In other words, high pressure jet grouting is sufficient to obtain the

cut off effect in soils. But that of weathered rock were 2.25~ lo4
- 6.17~ lo5 cm/set, then the grouted ground was 5.48~ IO
cm/set, which means the lower cutoff effect in the Site-2.
The characteristic of subsoil in three sites was composed of silty sand,
sandy gravel and sand in detail, it represents the similar permeability
in Figure 5, since it was deposit soil with the nearly same relative
density.
As shown in Figure 5(a), the coefficient of permeability in
the soil cement wall at No.1 site is almost same as the coefficient of
permeability in the original ground before grouting.
It shows that
the permeability was not lowered by the grouting method
Therefore, because the cutoff effect of ground water could not be
achieved in Site-l by the soil cement wall grouting method, boiling
problems were continued during excavation even after grouting.
Besides, in Site-2 and Site-3, in which the high pressure jet grouting
was performed, the coefficient of permeability in the grouted ground
was lowered considerably after grouting as shown in Figures 5(b) and

614

laboratory tests on cores sampled from the grouted ground.

The following conclusions could be obtained;
1) The strength of the grouted ground is affected considerably by the
water content of original grotmd, which is related to existence of
ground water level.
2) The high pressure jet grouting method is more effective than the
low pressure grouting method to cutoff ground water behind
temporary retaining wall.
3) Gn application of high pressure jet grouting, the tripIe tube rod
type is more effective to cutoff groundwater than the double one.

S(c). Therefore, the cutoff effect of ground water during excavation

could be achieved sufficiently by the high pressure jet grouting in
these sites.
The coefficient of permeability of grouted ground shows the range of
10Jcm/sec in application of the double tube rod type grouting method,
while that of permeability of the range of lO%m/sec show in
application of the triple tube rod type grouting method.
Bell (1993) presented that the coefficient of permeability for sand and
sandy gravel injected by cement has a range from 14 to 10-cm/set.
Consequently, As shown in Figure 6, the coefficient of permeability
are compared double with triple tube rod in the grouted ground.
In the case of Site-2, that shows the range of 1.1 lx IOe5to 7.13~ 10
cm/set and 2.67x 10M6
to 7.34x 10m6cm/set in the site-3.
On the basis of above results, the coefficient of permeability measured
in these sites is extremely similar to the permeability presented by
Bell.
Therefore, cutoff of ground water would be effective during
excavation in ground injected by cement with high pressure.
Figure 6 shlows the comparison of the coefficient of permeability,
which is measured in the ground injected by cement with both double
and Triple tube rod type high pressure jets.

REFERENCES
Bell, A. L., (1993) Jet Grouting, Ground Improvement, Edited by
Moseley, M. P., CRC Press, Inc. pp.149 - 174.
Hong. W. P., Lim. S. B. and Kim. H. T. (1992). Report on Safety
Check for Excavation Works of Jahng-Hang Station in Ilsan
City, Korean Society of Civil Engineers.
Hong. W. P., Yun. J. M. and You. S. K. (1996). A Case Study of
Soil Improvement Constructed by High Pressure Jet Grouting
Method ( I ), Journal of Korean Geotechnical Society, Vol 12,
No.3.pp.48-51.
Houlsby, A. C. Engineering in Rocks Masses, Edited by Bell, F. :
with specialist contributions, Cha 17, pp.335.
Yoshiomi Ichihashi, Mitsuhiro Shibazaki, Hiroaki Kubo, Masahiro Iji
and Akira Mori (1985), Jet Grouting in Airport Construction,
Grouting, Improvement Soil and Geosynthetics Edited by R. H.
Borden, R. D. Holtz and I. Juran, ASCE, Vol. 1, pp. 182 - 193.
Gohichi Miyasaka, Yutaka Sasaki, Toshiaki Nagata, Mitsuhiro
Shibazaki, Masahiro Iji and Masami Yoda (1986). Jet Grouting
for a Self-Standing Wall, Grouting, Improvement Soil and
Geosynthetics Edited by R. H. Borden, R. D. Holtz and I. Juran,
ASCE, Vol. 1, pp.144 - 155.

4
We

-6
8
-2
H
p

10

14
16
18
20
lEXr6 3E-06

lE-05

3E-05

O.ooo1 0.0003

Coefficient of PermeabiIity(an/s)
Figure 6. Comparison of permeability in grounds grouted with
high pressure jets by different rod types
The coefficient of permeability for the ground grouted by the triple
tube rod type has a lesser value of lO%n/sec than that of the doubie
tube rod type. Therefore, the triple tube rode type is more effective
to cutoff ground water than the double tube one.
CONCLUSIONS
Ground improvement and cutoff treatment of ground water have been
performed to excavate cohesiontess soil with high ground water level
and high permeability.
Soil cement columns are made in the
There are
cohesionless soil injected by cement with some pressure.
two kinds of grouting methods;
One is the grouting method, in
which the soil is mixed in ground by cement with relatively low
pressure jet. The other is the grouting method in which the cement
is injected in ground with high pressure jet.
The effect of grouting on ground improvement and cutoff of ground
water is investigated by field tests on the grouted ground and

615