## 3 Numerical Model
The constitutive model of ground soil, disturbance soil, and cement-soil reinforcement area adopts the Mohr-Coulomb criterion. The Mohr-Coulomb model has the advantages of having fewer input parameters and being easy to obtain in laboratory testing, and it  
Figure 5: Schematic diagram of the numerical model: (**a**) Model profile view; (**b**) Schematic diagram of soil reinforcement. Figure 6: Diagram of finite element numerical model. has been widely used in deep foundation analysis [20; 21]. The input parameters of the ground soil in this paper are determined from geological reports and laboratory testing results. As discussed by [PERSON] et al. [22], the elasticity modulus of ground soil (\(E\)) is a crucial parameter in the analyses of bearing capacity and deformation. This parameter is correlated from CPT results using a local empirical model [23]. Since the disturbance ring is mainly affected by the sinking of the caisson and the infiltration of friction-reducing mud, its material parameters are less affected by the corresponding soil layer. To simplify the calculation and analysis, the soil in the disturbance ring is assumed to be uniformly distributed along the depth direction. It should be noted that the bearing capacity of the caisson foundation is very sensitive to the soil parameters. In general, the bearing capacity of the caisson foundation decreases with the weakening of the soil mechanical parameters. Due to space limitations, this paper does not analyze the specific influence of soil parameter uncertainty on the bearing performance of the caisson foundation, and relevant discussion can be referred to [PERSON] [24] and [PERSON] et al. [22]. Table 1 shows the parameters for soil or structures adopted in the numerical model. Table 2 shows the analysis cases of the numerical simulations in this paper. The numerical analysis cases include two main parts: the influence of the thickness of the disturbance ring, and the influence analysis of the cement-soil reinforcement range. As shown in Figure 5b, the fan-shaped reinforcement area includes the reinforcement thickness t and the reinforcement angle \(\theta\). A total of 12 groups of working conditions are analyzed in this paper. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Material** & **Thickness** & **Cohesion** & **Friction Angle \(\varphi\)** & **Unit Weight \(\gamma\)** & **Elastic Modulus \(E\)** \\  & **(m)** & \(c\) **(kPa)** & **(\({}^{\circ}\))** & **(kN/m\({}^{3}\))** & **(MPa)** \\ \hline Silty clay & 2.2 & 15.5 & 13.6 & 18.0 & 15.8 \\ Muddy silty clay & 4.0 & 14.9 & 13.8 & 17.7 & 14.2 \\ Sandy silt 1 & 7.6 & 6.8 & 31.1 & 19.2 & 37.2 \\ Sandy silt 2 & 7.6 & 6.2 & 32.6 & 19.2 & 39.9 \\ Silty sand & 7.7 & 6 & 29.4 & 19.3 & 38.6 \\ Fine sand 1 & 14.0 & 3.7 & 34.1 & 20.3 & 40.7 \\ Fine sand 2 & 14.1 & 6.3 & 32.7 & 19 & 41.8 \\ Medium fine sand & 25.0 & 3 & 35.3 & 19.8 & 44.7 \\ Disturbed soil & - & 15.0 & 5.0 & 18.0 & 5.0 \\ Cement mixed soil & - & 500 & 30.0 & 20.0 & 100.0 \\ Concrete & - & - & - & 25 & \(40\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Material parameters in the numerical model. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Thickness of** & **Thickness of Reinforcement** & **Angle of Fan-Shaped** \\
**Disturbance Ring** & **t (m)** & **Reinforcement** \\ \(\delta\) **(m)** & & **\(\theta\) (\({}^{\circ}\))** \\ \hline
0 & & & \\
0.5 & & & \\
1 & - & - \\
5 & & 2 & \\  & & 4 & \\  & & 6 & \\
2 & & 8 & \\  & & & 60 \\
4 & & 120 \\  & & 180 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Numerical simulation analysis conditions.