Poromechanics V © ASCE 2013 1358

Differential settlements - case studies of settlement correction by specialist

foundation methods
E. Falk† and C. Kummerer*
†
Keller Holding GmbH, e.falk@kellerholding.com
*
Keller Grundbau GmbH, c.kummerer@kellergrundbau.at
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY on 07/08/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1) Problem Statement
The construction of infrastructure projects in urban area is typically associated with tunnelling induced
settlements. These settlements are caused by the stress relief and the overcut (ring space between
cutting diameter and final lining diameter) of the Tunnel Boring Machine during the excavation and
frequently exceed the tolerable settlements of the above located structures. The main parameters
influencing the development of total and differential settlements are:

• Soil conditions
• Effective stress level
• Overburden – distance between foundation level and tunnel crown
• Tunnel diameter
• Volume loss of TBM

The typical situation is depicted in Fig. 1.

Figure 1: Problem statement

For designing protective measures both geotechnical (i.e. reliable settlement predictions) and
structural analyses (allowable deformation of the structure) have to be performed in order to establish
the appropriate conditions for a tunnel excavation without damage of the existing structures. These
analyses yield in the classification of the expected damage category. Where the expected damage is
not appropriate, countermeasures have to be implemented. Fig. 2 shows the steps of the risk
assessment.

Poromechanics V
 Poromechanics V © ASCE 2013 1359
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY on 07/08/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure2: Risk assessment procedure

2) Compensation Grouting - geotechnical approach to settlement remediation

Several geotechnical measures can be applied to reduce excavation induced settlements to tolerable
values, most of them are passive measures which do not allow for an active correction during tunnel
excavation. Therefore compensation grouting gained importance as it an active, observational method
of protecting buildings. The principles were taken from the petroleum industry (‘fracture grouting’)
and successfully applied in civil engineering from the 1980s. The main phases of a compensation
grouting project are (Fig. 3.):

• Site installation with drilling and pumping units

• Installation of real-time monitoring system
• Installation of grouting pipes underneath the structures to be protected
• Pre-treatment grouting with controlled and limited pre-heave of the structures
• Corrective grouting concurrent with the passage of the TBM

Figure 3: Basic configuration for compensation grouting works

Poromechanics V
 Poromechanics V © ASCE 2013 1360

The pre-treatment phase is of particular importance as the efficiency of the concurrent grouting has to
be achieved. In this phase existing voids have to be penetrated and afterwards the soil has to be
‘fractured’ resulting in improved soil conditions (i.e. resistance and stiffness) and a change of the
stress paths.

3) Compensation grouting mechanism and material requirements

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY on 07/08/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The first phase of a compensation grouting project is the definition of the geometry of the grouting
pipes. Usually the grouting array is installed at half the distance between the tunnel crown and the
foundation level. In plan view the grouting pipes have to cover an area exceeding the settlement
trough (Falk 1998).

Figure 4: Simplified model for stresses and deformation during the lifting process

According to the grout intensity Ix (see Fig. 4) distinct areas can be distinguished. In the centre of the
grouted zone the highest grout intensities I1 (highest intensity) and I2 occur yielding in the maximum
grouting efficiencies. The composite material soil/frac has a 5 to 10 times increased stiffness
compared to the original soil.
Grout intensity area I3 defines the lateral ‘abutment’ of the treatment zone contrasting the lateral stress
generated by any injection in the centre. Due to the large surface and the high skin friction along the
irregularly shaped fracs considerable horizontal support is provided (Fig. 5).

Figure 5: Typical frac distribution in a unit soil volume

Fig. 6 shows local stress states (overburden pressure, external loads and K0-conditions). These local
stress conditions determine the response of each grouting step. From the measurements of many
projects it can be concluded that the heave efficiency at the foundation level/ground surface varies

Poromechanics V
 Poromechanics V © ASCE 2013 1361

from 5-25% of the total grouted volume. Table 1 provides typical ranges of horizontal and vertical
deformations (heave) according to the grouting phase. Grout volumes for void penetration are not
considered in this Table.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY on 07/08/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 6: The influence of the stress distribution and resulting heave at surface

Table 1: Vertical / horizontal displacement volumes during grouting operation

Phase Horizontal Vertical

Pre-treatment 100% 0%
Multi stage injection 95-100% 0-5%
before actual heave
Heaving phase 75-95% 5-25%

4) In situ applications
A comprehensive overview of Compensation grouting works is described by Falk and Kummerer
(2012). Actually, the Cross Rail construction in London and the Metro B1 works in Rome are the most
important infrastructure projects in Europe involving Compensation grouting. On the Cross Rail
project grouting is realized mainly in the heavily over-consolidated London clay with mainly
horizontal fractures and high grouting efficiencies.
On the Metro B1 projects in Rome normally consolidated cohesive and granular soils were
encountered. In total, approx. 6,000m² of ground surface were covered in the urban area of Rome to
protect 15 buildings. Especially these gravelly soils turned out to be critical as a large quantity of grout
was necessary to permeate the soil before the fracturing process could take place. Comprehensive full-
scale tests were performed to assess all necessary parameters for compensation grouting. Fig. 7 shows
the cross section of the field trial for NC cohesive soil and a typical frac recovered with a large
diameter drilling (Fig. 8).

Poromechanics V
 Poromechanics V © ASCE 2013 1362
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY on 07/08/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 7: Field trail for ‘shallow' foundations and NC soils

Figure 8: Sample of fractured NC soil

In the compensation area ‘Ionio station’ the effects of compensation grouting were shown as a
building was protected by means of grouting only partially. In Fig. 9 the vertical displacement is
represented for 3 monitoring points (liquid levels TL 08 and 11) and the precise levelling point N 24.

Figure 9: Plan view of ‘Building 164’, ‘Ionio station’ area

It was proved that the settlements were reduced significantly below the allowable value of 15mm with
compensation grouting (TL 08). In the untreated area a total settlement of approx. 20mm occurred. To
reduce the differential settlements in the transition zone between untreated and grouted area,
monitoring point TL11 was compensated only partially.

Poromechanics V
 Poromechanics V © ASCE 2013 1363
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY on 07/08/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 10: Comparison of vertical displacements for compensated and untreated points

References
[1] E. Falk. 1998. Soil improvement by injection of solid material with hydraulic energy (in German).
Ph. D. Thesis, Institute for Ground Engineering and Soil Mechanics, Technical University Vienna.
[2] Falk E. and Kummerer C. 2012. Ground improvement – Chapter 7: Soilfracture Grouting. Ground
Improvement 3rd edition, eds. K.Kirsch and A.Bell, CRC Spoon, Francis&Taylor.

Poromechanics V