Abdrabbo2005 PDF

GSP 140 Slopes and Retaining Structures under Seismic and Static Conditions
Behavior of Strip Footings Resting on Sand Reinforced with Tire-Chips

F. M. Abdrabbo1, H. M. Abouseeda2, K. E. Gaaver3, and M. A. El-Marassi4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 11/27/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Professor, Head of Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering,

Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt, P.O Box 21544, email:
f.m.abdrabbo@excite.com.
2
Lecturer, Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University, Alexandria, Egypt, P.O Box 21544, email: hseeda@yahoo.com.
3
Lecturer, Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University, Alexandria, Egypt, P.O Box 21544, email: khaledg2000@hotmail.com.
4
M.Sc. student, Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering,
Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt, P.O Box 21544, e-mail:
mohamedmarassi@yahoo.com.
Abstract
Utilizing waste materials as an alternative to using virgin construction materials,
made from nonrenewable resources, in civil engineering applications is currently one
of the most important environmental issues. The unique properties of tire chips such
as strength, high frictional resistance and flexibility can be exploited in a beneficial
manner in geotechnical applications. This research aims to investigate the benefits of
using tire chips as lightweight inclusion to improve the bearing capacity and control
the settlement of sandy soil. Forty loading laboratory tests were carried out on a
strip-footing model of 50 mm width supported by sand-tire chips mixture. The study
was carried out on sand with relative densities of 50%, 75%, and 90%. The thickness
of sand layer containing the inclusions underneath the footing was taken equal to 1,
2, 3, and 5 times the strip footing width. The mixture overlies pure sand layer. The
mixture was formed at the same relative density as the underlying sand. The
percentage of tire chips to sand was taken as 5%, 10%, and 15% by weight. The
study revealed that at the same loading level the settlement of strip footing on sandtire chips mixture was about 30% less than in the case of pure sand. The initial
modulus of elasticity increased to a value varied from 2 to 9 times its value in the
case of pure sand at the same relative density. Most importantly, the ultimate bearing
capacity of sandy soil noticeably increased up to 7 times its value in the case of pure
sand. The conclusions of this paper support the use of tire-chips as an
environmentally acceptable lightweight inclusion in soil improvement applications.
Introduction
Several billions of tires are disposed of in huge stockpiles across many countries
every year. Part of these scrap tires wind up in landfills, and the rest is left in lots and
illegal tire dumps. These dumps are a serious fire hazard and an unpleasant sight.
Developing new ways to reuse or recycle waste tires is desired. Some of the current
Copyright ASCE 2005
Slopes and Retaining Structures

Slopes and Retaining Structures Under Seismic and Static Conditions
uses for recycled tires and shredded tires include tire-derived fuel generation,
breakwaters, highway crash barriers, reefs, and crumb rubber asphalt pavement (Lee
et al., 1999). One possible application consists of using shredded tires, mixed with
soil, as fills and backfills. Moreover, the shredded tires may be used as subgrade
reinforcement for road construction over soft soils, as aggregate in leach beds for
septic systems, as an additive to asphalt, and as a substitute for leachate collection
stones in landfills (Hall 1991; Ahmed and Lovell 1993; Park et al. 1993; Foose et al.
1996; Consoli et al. 2002). Before using tire chips in engineering applications, it is
important to consider any possible environmental implications, such as potential
ground-water contamination (Bosscher et al. 1997 and Marel et al. 2004). However,
guidelines for the use of tire shreds in geotechnical applications are covered in
ASTM D6270.
Bosscher et al. (1993) conducted a detailed field study and reported that an
embankment constructed with sand reinforced by tire shreds has performed
satisfactory even after being subjected to extensive heavy truck traffic. Edil &
Bosscher (1994) and Humphrey & Manion (1992) have shown that soil-tire shreds
mixture is a compressible material under vertical pressure. However, most of the
compression that occurs is plastic, thus preloading can be used to eliminate plastic
compression. Bosscher et al. (1997), Ahmed and Lovell (1993), and Humphrey and
Manion (1992) reported that soil-tire shreds mixture could be compacted using
common compaction procedures. They concluded that unit weight of soil-tire shreds
mixture is primarily controlled by the amount of soil in the mixture whereas
compaction effort and molding water content appear to have little influence. They
reported also that vibratory compaction is ineffective for compacting soil-tire shreds
mixtures. Deformability parameters of tire shreds and soil-shreds mixtures such as
Youngs modulus, constrained modulus, and Poissons ratio were reported by
Bosscher et al. (1997). Kurian et al. (1997) reported that the settlement of sandrubber mixture is found to be much less than that of pure sand. Heimdahl and
Drescher (1999) indicated that the effect of tire shreds anisotropy on road structure
settlements is moderate, and the traditional isotropic elastic analysis overestimates
the actual settlements.
Model Description
The general layout of the testing equipment used in the current study is illustrated in
figure (1). The model footing is made out of a steel plate, 20 mm in thickness, 50
mm in width and 490 mm in length. It has a smooth bottom face and a hole at the
center of the top face for mounting a proving ring. The footing was machined to the
designed dimensions within an accuracy of 1.0 mm. Two dial gauges were attached
to the footing to measure the settlement and any unexpected tilt. The accuracy of the
dials is 0.01 mm and with a maximum travel of 50 mm. A proving ring with capacity
of 50 kN and accuracy of 10 N is used to measure the applied loads. The soil bin has
inside dimensions of 520 mm by 520 mm and 500 mm in height. Load is applied
with a constant rate of strain of 1.0 mm/min using a motor with a gearbox to adjust
the movement. The model footing was centrally placed on the surface of the
Copyright ASCE 2005

Reinforced concrete ceiling

U.P.N 140
0.14
U.P.N 140
U.P.N 140
0.75
U.P.N 80
U.P.N 80
2 U.P.N 100
0.10
0.50
3.00 m
Motor
4 Steel
rods
Gear
box
2 U.P.N 80
Proving
ring
0.25
0.10
Lateral support
L 50x50x5
Steel tank
(520x520x500)mm
0.40
0.62
Steel plate
(550x550x12)mm
9 L 50x50x5
0.14
Rigid floor
U.P.N 140
U.P.N 140
3.00 m
Figure 1. Testing equipment

compacted sand with inclusions. The load and displacement were recorded at small
displacement increments up to failure using the proving ring and the two dial gauges.
The average displacement from dial gauge readings is calculated. The total number
of loading tests performed in the study is 40. It is important to note that, the depth of
the used soil bin and the distance between the edge of strip footing and the wall of
the soil bin are greater than four times the footing width. Hence the boundary effects
on the test results were considered insignificant. According to Boussinesqs stress
distribution theory, the stress below a footing dissipates to effectively zero at a depth
of about 3B below the footing.
Material Properties
Table (1) shows the properties of the siliceous sand used in the sand-tire chips
mixture. The table indicates that well graded sand with medium to fine grains is
used. Sand was formed in the soil bin at selected relative densities of 50%, 75% and
90%. The amount of sand required to form a layer of specified thickness was
Copyright ASCE 2005

Table (1) Properties of sand

Parameter
Effective size D10% (mm)
Uniformity coefficient, Cu
Coefficient of curvature, Cc
Specific gravity of solids, Gs
Maximum dry unit weight (kN/m3), ASTM D4253
Minimum dry unit weight (kN/m3), ASTM D4254
Optimum water content (%)
Value
0.12
4.58
0.80
2.64
18.80
15.70
10 %
computed to an accuracy of 5 grams. The sand is placed in the soil bin and
compacted to achieve the required thickness within an accuracy of 1mmto attain
the target relative density. The relative density was checked by a group of small
wooden boxes of 60 x 60 x 25 mm placed at different location and different levels in
the soil bin. The grain size distribution of tire-chips is illustrated in figure (2) along
with the used sand. A mixture of sand and tire-chips is formed at the same relative
density of the underlying sand. The percentage of tire-chips to sand was taken as 5%,
10% and 15% by weight. Direct shear box, and standard Proctor tests were
conducted on mixtures of different ratios of tire chips. Table (2) illustrates the
summary of the obtained results.
Table (2) shows that the inclusion of tire chips provides an increase in material
strength. The composite behavior is governed by the tire chips content and the
mechanical and geometrical properties of the chips. The obtained results confirm
Edil and Bosscher (1994), which they concluded that the shear strength of sand-tire
chips mixture is higher than of pure sand. They attributed this phenomenon to the
100
Sand
80
Rubber chip
60
%ge Finer by
weight
40
20
0
100
10
1
Diameter, mm
0.1
0.01
Figure 2. Grain size distribution
Copyright ASCE 2005

Table (2) Properties of sand-tire chips mixture

Parameter
(degrees), at Dr = 50%
c (kPa), at Dr = 50%
Maximum dry unit weight (kN/m3), ASTM D4253
Optimum water content (%)
Natural water content (%)
0.0%
40.51
3.13
42.42
2.68
44.41
3.90
18.80
10.0%
1.1%
5.0% 10.0%
40.30 40.88
10.23 12.53
42.19 43.10
8.77
10.23
43.10 43.98
4.14
5.46
17.80 17.05
9.5% 9.5%
1.1% 1.1%
15.0%
43.10
13.40
46.07
10.48
46.47
6.34
16.90
9.5%
1.1%
positioning of tire shreds across potential shear plans. On the other hand, direct shear
tests on pure shredded tires were conducted by Humphrey et al. (1993). They
reported an effective friction angle ranging from 19o to 25o and an effective cohesion
ranging from 4.30 to 11.50 kPa. Bosscher et al. (1997) reported that the unit weight
of pure tire-chips fills typically ranges from 3.00 to 5.50 kN/m3, according to chips
size and compaction. The inclusion of tire shreds in the mixture decreases its unit
weight.
Testing Program
A testing program is developed to evaluate the effect of various parameters
governing the behavior of the sand-tire chips mixture. Such factors are: The
percentage of tire chips to sand by weight, the depth of the improved layer
underneath the footing and the relative density of the mixture. Tire chips to sand ratio
by weight (M, %) is varied, starting from pure sand (M=0%) to (M=15%). The
values of M=0, 5, 10, 15% are considered. Figure (3) shows a typical loaddisplacement behavior of the strip footing on a mixture of tire-chips and sand with
relative density of 75%, and depth of the improved layer of 5 times the footing width.
The load (P) is normalized as, P/(A.KB. 2.B) where; (A) is the area of the footing,
(KB) is the shape factor taken equals 1.0 for strip footing, ( 2) is the unit weight of
the mixture and (B) is the width of the footing. Displacement is normalized as S/B;
where (S) is the average settlement value. The ultimate load of the footing is defined
as the maximum or peak load achieved during the test. Depth of the improved layer
underneath the strip footing is the second parameter considered in the study. This
depth is varied from 1 to 5 times the footing width. In this study, footing width has
remained constant and the depth of the improved layer is varied to achieve the
aforementioned ratios. Relative density of the sandtire chips mixture is also
considered in the analysis. All tests were conducted at pre-determined relative
densities of 50%, 75% and 90% for the mixture. It is worth mentioning that
achieving a relative density of 90% for the mixture was very difficult and required
high energy of compaction compared to the other values of relative densities used in
the tests. Figure (4) presents typical load-displacement relationships for a strip
Copyright ASCE 2005

100
200
300
400
500
P/(A.KB. 2.B)
700
800
600
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
S/B 0.20
M=0.0%
M=5.0%
M=10.0%
M=15.0%
0.25
0.30
0.35
Figure 3. Normalized load-displacement relationship, Dr = 75% and d = 5B

P/(A.KB. 2.B)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0.00
0.03
0.06
0.09
S/B 0.12
0.15
Dr=50%
Dr=75%
Dr=90%
0.18
Figure 4. Normalized load-displacement relationship, M =5% and d = 2B

footing resting on a sand-tire chips mixture with M=5% and the depth of the upper
layer containing the inclusions is 2 times the width of the footing for different
relative densities.
The goal of this program is to evaluate the performance of the sand-tire chips
mixture in two aspects: ultimate bearing capacity improvement expressed as bearing
capacity ratio (BCR) and footing settlement reduction. The bearing capacity ratio of
a surface strip footing is used to judge the ultimate bearing capacity improvement.
The bearing capacity ratio is defined as the ratio between the ultimate baring capacity
of a strip footing resting on a specified thickness of sand with inclusions overlying
pure sand and the ultimate bearing capacity of the same footing resting on pure sand.
On the other hand, initial modulus of elasticity, derived from the load-displacement
relationships, is used to illustrate the effects of various parameters on the settlement
behavior of strip footing resting on sand-tire chips mixture. The reason for choosing
Copyright ASCE 2005

the initial modulus of elasticity to take this role is the fact that this modulus controls
the settlement of the footing in the range of working loads (approximately the first
third of the load range). In this paper the value of the initial modulus of elasticity will
be called (Eeqr) for the sand-tire chips mixture. For pure sand, the value of the initial
modulus of elasticity will be noted (Eeq). The relation of (Eeqr/Eeq) will be used
frequently in presenting the results pertaining to the analysis of settlement reduction.
Discussion of Results
Test results are grouped in three consecutive sets of figures representing the three
main parameters addressed in the study. Each set of plots is used to illustrate the
effect of one of those parameters on the behavior of strip footing. Results will be
compared to the reference case with the strip footing resting on pure sand.
a- Effect of the inclusion ratio (M %) on BCR:
The first parameter studied is the ratio of inclusions (M%). Inclusion is the
distinguishing factor in this study and is represented by its weight ratio to sand. A
realistic range of (M%) is selected, from 0 15%, to illustrate the practical potential
of adding the inclusions to pure sand and its effect on the BCR.
Figure (5) shows the value of BCR versus the inclusion ratio, M%, for a mixture with
relative density of 50%. Figures (6) and (7) show the same relation for Dr=75% and
90% consecutively. The general trend prevailing in these figures is that increasing
M% increases the BCR at any relative density. This can be attributed to the increase
of shear strength of mixture. Also, the figures confirm that the bearing capacity ratio
increases as the thickness of reinforced sand layer increased. The only exception is
when the depth of the improved layer equals to the width of footing and this only
happens at low values of M% (M=5%). In this case, the reduction of BCR is minute
(0.92 to 0.96), and can be attributed to the test setup. For very low values of M% and
improved layers with small depth, the strengthening effect on soil matrix as well as
the layer intersection with failure planes of footing is smallest.
It should be emphasized that, the sand-tire chips mixture has the same relative
density as the pure sand below; nevertheless the shear strength is greater than that of
the underlying pure sand. So at a greater thickness of reinforced sand layer (d/B > 3),
M 10%, in case of Dr=50% for the mixture, the mode of failure is expected to be
changed from general shear failure to a punching failure. In the case of
medium/dense and dense mixture, still the mode of failure is general shear failure.
Thus as the thickness of sand-tire chips mixture layer increases, the thickness of
improved sand layer confining the plane of failure increases and an increase in
bearing capacity is anticipated. These results confirm Shewbridge and Sitar (1989) in
which they indicated that shear zones underneath the footing tend to be wider in
reinforced soil composites than in soil alone, and the width of shear zones increases
with increasing stiffness of the composite due to increased reinforcement inclusion,
stiffness, or soil bond strength.
From a practical point of view, the bearing capacity of footings on loose sand can be
Copyright ASCE 2005

7.00
6.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
5.00
BCR
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0
8
M%
10
12
14
16
14
16
14
16
Figure 5. BCR versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 50%

7.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
6.00
5.00
BCR 4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0
8M%
10
12

7.00
6.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
5.00
BCR
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0
8
M%
10
12
Copyright ASCE 2005

improved by adding a layer of sand-tire chips mixture with a thickness does not less
than 2B underneath the footing. The mix ratio should be greater than 10%. In the
case of medium/dense and dense sand, the thickness of improved layer should be
larger than 3B. Table (3) presents the range of BCR as a function of M%.
Table (3) Range of BCR to tire chips mixture (Dr=50% to 90%, d/B=1 to 5)
5.0%
10.0%
M%
15.0%
0.92
1.20
BCR min
1.54
1.85
3.00
BCR max
6.80
b- Effect of the relative density of mixture (Dr %) on BCR:
Shear strength of sand and its unit weight are governed by its state of compactness;
the more compacted its structure, the higher its angle of friction and dry unit weight.
Immediate settlement of sand layers is also affected by the compactness of sand.
Equivalent deformation modulus of sand increases as its relative density increases.
Since the tire shreds used in the study have the same unit weight and strength
characteristics for all tests, it is logical to expect that its strengthening effect will be
more evident in weaker sand with low values of relative density. This can be
attributed to the bigger difference in shear strength values of reinforced and
unreinforced sand compared to the case of medium and dense sand. Figure (8)
illustrates the effect of Dr% of the mixture on the values of BCR for different values
of (d) at M=5%. Figures (9) and (10) illustrate the same relation for M=10% and
15% respectively. It is clear that the maximum BCR is achieved at the smallest value
of Dr%. As the relative density increases, the difference of shear strength of sand-tire
shreds mixture and pure sand decreases and it is anticipated that the value of BCR
drops. Table (4) presents the maximum values of BCR as a function of the relative
density of the mixture.
Table (4) Maximum values of BCR versus Dr% (d/B=1 to 5, M=5% to 15%)
50%
75%
Dr%
90%
6.8
4.3
BCR max
3.4
c- Effect of the depth of improved layer (d) on BCR:
Terzaghi's concept of shear failure under footings and its planes of failure is a key
factor in understanding the effect of the depth of inclusion layer on the BCR. Since
the layer with inclusions has higher shear strength, the more it intersects with the
planes of failure under the footing, the more improvement in the BCR is expected.
However, the extension of the planes of failure is not constant but rather depends on
the shear strength of the underlying soil. Having inclusions with pure sand increases
the angle of internal friction of the mixture ( ), and possesses an apparent cohesion
and hence extend the depth and extent of the planes of failure. Table (5) presents the
improvement of BCR due to increasing the thickness of the layer with inclusions, for
different relative densities. The ratio between BCR for an improved layer of
thickness = 5B and the BCR for an improved layer of thickness = 2B is used to
Copyright ASCE 2005

7.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
6.00
5.00
4.00
BCR
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
45
50
55
60
65
70
Dr%
75
80
85
90
95
Figure 8. BCR versus relative density at M = 5%

7.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
6.00
5.00
4.00
BCR
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
45
50
55
60
65
70
Dr%
75
80
85
90
95

7.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
6.00
5.00
BCR
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
45
50
55
60
65
70
Dr%
75
80
85
90
95
Copyright ASCE 2005

Table (5) Improvement of BCR versus tire chips mixture (d/B=1 to 5)

5.0%
10.0%
Parameter
1.00
1.26
(BCR d=5B/ BCR d=2B), at Dr = 50%
0.93
1.53
1.27
1.26
15.0%
2.29
1.37
1.05
evaluate the response of footing-soil system. For Dr = 50%, the improvement of

BCR as a result of thickness increase (BCR d=5B/ BCR d=2B) equals 1.0 for M=5%,
indicating no significant improvement. The lack of improvement can be attributed to
the lack of shear strength increase of the mixture due to the low values of M% and
Dr%. Also, at this level of M%, the shear strength increase did not result in
extending the planes of failure beyond d=2B.
As M% increases, the ratio (BCR d=5B/ BCR d=2B) increases; for M=10% the ratio is
1.26 and for M=15%, the ratio is 2.29, indicating the importance of increasing the
thickness of the improved layer as the ratio of inclusions (M %) increases to achieve
the best values of BCR in loose conditions. For Dr=75%, thickness increase has less
effect on the BCR. For M=5% the (BCR d=5B/ BCR d=2B) ratio is 0.93, indicating no
improvement due to the increase of improved layer thickness. For higher values of
(M %), the improvement still exists but lesser than what it is for loose condition. For
Dr=90%, the (BCR d=5B/ BCR d=2B) ratio is almost constant for all values of (M %),
indicating no improvement of BCR when increasing the thickness of layer with
inclusions in case of dense condition.
In the case of medium/dense and dense sand, general shear failure in soil beneath the
footing is expected. The depth of shear planes is confined to a depth of about 2B, so
any increase in the improved soil thickness does not affect the bearing capacity of the
footing. In the case of loose sand, punching failure in the improved sand layer is
expected with general shear failure in sand below. So an increase of improved sand
thickness resulted in an increase in bearing capacity. Moreover, for dense sand the
internal angle of friction is already high due to compaction and the effect of adding
inclusions to it is less significant than adding it to loose sand.
d- Modulus of deformation:
The displacement (S) of a strip footing resting on the surface of elastic half-space can
be computed from the theory of elasticity as, (Bowles, 1996);
q.B( 1 2 )
I
(1)
E
Where, S = the settlement of the footing (m), q = intensity of contact pressure in
units of E (kN/m2), B = width of the strip footing in units of S (m), = Poisson's
ratio of soil, I = influence factor depends upon many factors, and E = modulus of
elasticity (kN/m2).
Thus, the above equation can be rewritten as;
q
E
1
=
* = Eeq
(2)
S B( 1 2 ) I
S=
Copyright ASCE 2005

The values of (Eeqr) for sand-tire chips mixture and (Eeq) for pure sand were
calculated from the linear portion of load-displacement relationships of loading tests
on the strip footing. Figures (11) through (13) illustrate the variation of (Eeqr/Eeq)
ratio against inclusion ratio (M%) at different values of (d/B) and different relative
densities. The figures demonstrate that the values of (Eeqr/Eeq) increases as (d/B)
increased and as the ratio (M%) increased. The effect of (M%) on (Eeqr/Eeq) is more
pronounced when (M%) becomes greater than 10% in the case of loose sand, and at
any value of (M%) in the case of medium/dense and dense sand. As the thickness of
sand-tire chips mixture increases, the equivalent deformation modulus increases and
consequently (Eeqr/Eeq) increases. The ratio of (Eeqr/Eeq) reflects the ratio of
stresses at footing-soil interface that produce the same displacement in the case of
sand-tire chips mixture and pure sand. In the case of loose and medium/dense sand,
the more inclusions are added to the soil the less deformation is expected, thus bigger
value of (Eeqr) and consequently bigger value of (Eeqr/Eeq) is anticipated. In dense
sand-tire chips mixture, Dr = 90%, the effective depth of the soil that affects the
displacement of the footing is clearly 3B, while in loose and medium/dense sand it is
bigger than 5B.
For the case of loose sand-tire chips mixture, Dr = 50%, the maximum attained value
of (Eeqr/Eeq) is 5.70. The same values are 9.80 and 11.40 for mixture with Dr = 75%
and 90% respectively. All these values occur at M = 15% and d/B =5. Apart from all
other factors, it is visible that the increase in Dr% enhances the effect of adding
inclusions to pure sand on the stiffness of the mixture when compared to pure sand,
hence the increase of (Eeqr/Eeq) as Dr% increase. One reason for this observation
can be the added elasticity from the tire chips to the soil matrix. Loose sand will start
to arrange its matrix and densify from the beginning of loading, exhibiting plastic
deformation early in the loading process, while dense sand will start to compress
rather than densify. The added elasticity introduced by th tire chips will allow the soil
matrix to deform elasticity rather than go through the matrix rearrangement process,
delaying the start of the plastic behavior.
Conclusions
1. Adding tire chips as an inclusion to sand does not appreciably increase
the angle of internal friction but adds an apparent cohesion to the
mixture.
2. Tire chips are an effective material for sand improvement. The most
beneficial application can be obtained for loose sand, Dr=50%. A sandtire chips mixture layer of chips content greater than 10% and thickness
larger than 2B beneath strip footing is recommended.
3. The bearing capacity of strip footing on sand can be improved
appreciably by constructing a layer of sand-tire chips mixture with a
chip content greater than 10% and thickness d/B > 2.0 in loose sand and
d/B = 2.0 in medium/dense and dense sand.
4. The effect of tire-chips on the displacement of strip footing resting on a
layer of tire chips-sand mixture is more pronounced in the case of dense
sand than in loose and medium/dense sand.
Copyright ASCE 2005

12.00
10.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
8.00
Eeqr/Eeq 6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0
8 M % 10
12
14
16
Figure 11. Eeqr/Eeq versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 50%
12.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
10.00
8.00
Eeqr/Eeq 6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0
10
M%
12
14
16

12.00
10.00
8.00
Eeqr/Eeq 6.00
d=B
d=2B
d=3B
d=5B
4.00
2.00
0.00
10 M %
15
20
Copyright ASCE 2005

References
Ahmed, I., and Lovell, C. (1993) "Use of rubber tires in highway construction
Utilization of Waste Material in Civil Engrgr. Constr., ASCE, New York, N.
Y., pp 166-181.
Bosscher, P. J., Edil, T. B., and Kuraoka, S. (1997) "Design of high way
embankments using tire chips" Journal of geotechnical and
geoenvironmental engineering, ASCE, Vol. 123, No. 4, pp 295-304.
Bosscher, P. J., Edil, T. B., and Eldin, N. (1993) "Construction and performance of
shredded waste tire test embankment" Transp. Res. Rec., No. 1345, Transp.
Res. Board, Washington, D. C., pp 44-52.
Bowles, J. E. (1996) Foundation analysis and design, Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc. New York, N. Y.
Consoli, N. C., Montardo, J. P., Prietto, P. D., and Pasa, G. S. (2002) "Engineering
behavior of a sand reinforced with plastic waste" Journal of geotechnical and
Edil, T., and Bosscher, P. (1994) "Engineering properties of waste tire chips and soil
mixtures" Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp 453-464.
Foose, G. J., Benson, C. H., and Bosscher, P. J. (1996) "Sand reinforced with
shredded waste tires" Journal of geotechnical engineering, ASCE, Vol. 122,
No. 9, pp 760-767.
Hall, T. (1991) Reuse of shredded tire material for leachate collection systems
proc. 14 th Annu. Madison Waste Conf., Dept. of Engrg., Univ. of Wisconsin,
Madison, Wis., pp. 367-376.
Heimdahl, T. C., and Drescher, A. (1999) "Elastic anisotropy of tire shreds" Journal
of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, ASCE, Vol. 125, No. 5,
pp 383-389.
Humphrey, D., and Manion, W. (1992) "Properties of tire chips for lightweight fill"
Grouting, Soil improvement, and Geosynthetics, ASCE, New York, N. Y.,
Vol. 2, pp 1344-1355.
Kurian, N. P., Beena, K. S., and Kumar, R. K. (1997) "Settlement of reinforced sand
in foundations" Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 123, No. 9, pp 818-827.
Lee, J. H., Salgado, R., Bernal, A., and Lovell, C. W. (1999) "Shredded tires and
rubber sand as lightweight backfill" Journal of geotechnical and
Marei, N. A., Hassona, F. A., Hassan, M. A., and Hashem, M. D. (2004)
"Reinforcement of sandy soil using shredded waste tires" International
conference on structural & geotechnical engineering technology, IC-SGECT
'04, Mansoura University, Egypt, pp 1015-1033.
Park, J., Kim, J., and Edil, T. (1993) "Sorption capacity of shredded waste tires
Green 93, An Int. Symp. On Geotech. Related to Envir., A. A. Balkem
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp 341-348.
Shewbridge, S. E., and Sitar, N. (1989) "Deformation characteristics of reinforced
sand in direct shear" Journal of geotechnical engineering, ASCE, Vol. 115,
No. 8, pp 1134-1147.
Copyright ASCE 2005


Abdrabbo2005 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abdrabbo2005 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GSP 140 Slopes and Retaining Structures under Seismic and Static Conditions

Behavior of Strip Footings Resting on Sand Reinforced with Tire-Chips

Professor, Head of Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering,

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Reinforced concrete ceiling

Figure 1. Testing equipment

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Table (1) Properties of sand

Figure 2. Grain size distribution

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Table (2) Properties of sand-tire chips mixture

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Figure 3. Normalized load-displacement relationship, Dr = 75% and d = 5B

Figure 4. Normalized load-displacement relationship, M =5% and d = 2B

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Figure 5. BCR versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 50%

Figure 6. BCR versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 75%

Figure 7. BCR versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 90%

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Figure 8. BCR versus relative density at M = 5%

Figure 9. BCR versus relative density at M = 10%

Figure 10. BCR versus relative density at M = 15%

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Table (5) Improvement of BCR versus tire chips mixture (d/B=1 to 5)

evaluate the response of footing-soil system. For Dr = 50%, the improvement of

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Figure 11. Eeqr/Eeq versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 50%

Figure 12. Eeqr/Eeq versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 75%

Figure 13. Eeqr/Eeq versus inclusion ratio at Dr = 90%

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

Copyright ASCE 2005

Slopes and Retaining Structures

You might also like