J.B. Sellmeijer
Geodelft, The Netherlands
ABSTRACT: Since several years horizontal jetgrout layers, consisting of short overlapping columns are used to
ensure the vertical stability of building pits and trenches. At the Tramtunnel project in The Hague a considerable
part of the building pits had such jetgrout arch. This layer appeared to be not fully watertight. In recent years
there have been several, nearly catastrophically events with these jetgrout screens. This was one of the reasons
for Delft University of Technology and GeoDelft to start a research work on the design criteria and the reliability
of a jetgrout layer as a groundwater barrier. The safety approach that was introduced is that a covering sand layer
of a certain thickness is necessary. This paper reviews the required thickness of a covering sand layer. First a
theoretical consideration was made to analyze the stability of a sand prop in a hole. In addition experiments were
carried out to determine the governing parameters. Finally the field observations of the Tramtunnel project in
The Hague are compared with the results of the theoretical and experimental research.
235
236
3 EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH
237
238
In this equation the seepage pressure (in the covering Design calculations can in principle be performed
layer) is neglected. The experiments confirmed this using equation (2). Failure occurs when the effective
assumption. Bieberstein (1999) and Sellmeijer (1999) stress at the bottom of the hole equals nil: (σz = 0 at
did use an approximation for the excess pore pressure z = L) giving equation (3) and the required effective
in the covering layer. stress at the upper side of the hole (σz at z = 0), which
In Figure 5 both equations 4 and 5 are depicted for determines the required thickness of the covering sand
an increasing hole diameter, different gradients and layer.All parameters are known in this equation, except
thickness’ of the covering layer. Other parameters are for the factor K tg δ, which was determined in the
fixed and the design values are giving in the figure. experiments.
Figure 5 (Tol et al. 2001b) presents the required thick- The available effective stress from the covering layer
ness of a covering sand layer. The overall safety factor can be determined using equation (4). The unknown
η = 2 is applied to the height of the covering layer. For factor kr was also determined in the experiments.
the parameters design values are used: Kd tg δ = 0.32, It should be noted that the presented design method
γsat = 18.2, and i as shown in Figure 5. The thickness is valid for homogeneous soil in the hole and the cover-
of the grout layer is equal to Ld = 1.25 and the friction ing layer. Heterogeneous soil can have a negative influ-
ence on the stability. Especially a thin clay layer in the
upper part of the hole requires a thicker covering layer.
239
240
ABSTRACT: Since several years jetgrout layers, consisting of short overlapping columns are used to ensure
the stability of building pits and trenches. At the Tramtunnel project in The Hague a considerable part of the
building pits had such jetgrout arch. In recent years there have been several, nearly catastrophically events with
these jetgrout screens due to the inflow of groundwater and sand into the building trench. This paper presents a
method to assess the amount of water and sand flowing through a hole in a jetgroutlayer, the possible influenced
zone in the surrounding and the available time for countermeasures.
241
242
243
in which:
vwal = wall velocity in m/s
n0 = porosity sand layer
i = hydraulic gradient (negative in the case of out-
flowing pore water)
= relative density sand grains in water (= 1.65)
n = porosity increase from actual to loose condition
kl = permeability of loosely packed sand in m/s
α = breach slope angle (maximum 90◦ )
ϕ = natural angle of repose of the sand (about 37◦ )
In the case no groundwater flow is present i = 0 and
the maximum retrogression velocity develops for a
vertical “wall” (with α = 90◦ ). No more breach retro-
gression occurs for a slope gentler than the natural
equilibrium slope. Figure 6. Flow rate development in time.
Due to a negative hydraulic gradient the equilib-
rium slope (at which vwal = 0) will decrease. For full
fluidization circumstances equilibrium slope reduces construction shaft are reached (after about 1 hour).
to zero. In the case of a positive gradient (f.i. shear Further increase will, from that moment, take place
dilatancy) the equilibrium slope increases. Retrogres- only in linear direction along the tunnel axis.
sive small breaches will be active until an equilibrium
situation is established (see Figs. 6 and 8).
4 CALCULATION RESULTS
Initiated by the removal of at least the fine frac-
tions of the sand particles from the soil beneath the
In Figure 7 is indicated the computed flow rate devel-
well channel, a small initiating sand surface disturb-
opment in the case of the Tram Tunnel shaft, following
ance develops, which will axially and retrogressively
4 different scenario’s, based on an available pressure
propagate along the grout arch (Figs. 4 and 5). Breach-
difference of 9.2 m (Fig. 1) and a permeability of
ing is enhanced by gravity and the present hydraulic
5 m/day. Four different scenario’s are given:
gradient, but is NOT principally powered by an eroding
flow velocity, as is the case with f.i. piping in dykes. 1 groundwater flow development with constant
This process therefore will initiate already at very low hydraulic gradient, achieving finally a value of
flow velocity, far beyond the Shields threshold for sand 57 m3 /hour;
particle traction (as is the case with “piping”). The flow 2 groundwater flow development with decreasing
rate in the vertical channel should only be sufficient pressure difference due to applied air compression,
to allow the particles to move along and overcome fall after 1 hour a maximum value of 48 m3 /hour is
velocity. achieved, successively decreasing until after 4 hours
So the radius of the ground water receiving area sufficient air pressure is achieved;
Rg , initially equal to the channel well radius, grad- 3 groundwater flow development with decreasing
ually increases, until finally the side walls of the pressure difference due to applied air compression
244
245
246