English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The wet and dry types of deep mixing methods have been developed and widely been applied for on-land and marine constructions. The quality assurance (QA) of the methods has been usually carried out by unconfined compression test on field stabilized soil sampled by core boring in Japan. In some countries, stabilized soil excavated by the wet grab sampling is subjected to unconfined compression test. There are several merits and demerits in each method, but few studies compare the strength of these two specimens to discuss its applicability to practical construction. In this study, the wet grab sampling was carried out at two road embankment construction sites where the wet and dry types of deep mixing method were applied. The cement stabilized soil was excavated by a wet grab sampler soon after the DM column construction. The test result is compared with the previous studies to discuss the applicability of the web grab sampling method.

Field tests on wet grab sampling for quality assurance of deep mixing method