Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geotextiles and Geomembranes

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geotexmem

Technical note

Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene

terephthalate (PET)
E. Botero a, *, A. Ossa a, 1, G. Sherwell a, 2, E. Ovando-Shelley a, 3
a
noma de M

Instituto de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Auto
n, M

exico, CP. 04510 Coyoaca exico D.F., Mexico

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In some cases, the production of solid waste is experiencing an uncontrolled and continuous increase,
Received 9 September 2014 especially wastes from plastic products. Therefore, this study proposes an alternative reuse method for
Received in revised form certain types of plastic waste (bottles and containers used for liquid storage that are processed using
9 April 2015
discrete fibers) in geotechnical construction projects. To this end, discrete polyethylene terephthalate
Accepted 12 April 2015
Available online xxx
(PET) fibers were randomly mixed with fine soil to modify their mechanical properties.
The principal objective of this research was to study the mechanical behavior of a silty soil that was
reinforced with aleatorily distributed PET fibers. To meet this objective, UU triaxial laboratory tests were
Keywords:
Geosynthetics
performed on soil specimens with fiber contents of 0.0e1.0% of the soil dry weight. The test results
Reinforced soils indicated that the reinforced specimens presented an increment of shear strength that was associated
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) fibers with the increasing quantities of the PET fiber. Furthermore, the laboratory tests indicated that the
Cracking behavior reinforced soil had a greater deformation capacity, which can be a positive characteristic in some cases
because the deformation capacity can reduce the risk of crack formation in certain soil layers for specific
geotechnical problems.
Finally, this reinforced soil presents interesting mechanical properties and could be used in structures
that require a high deformation capacity, such as landfills, sewage treatment deposits and dams (among
other uses), to prevent failures due to cracking and to prevent the possible leakage of contaminants or
water. However, these issues are beyond the scope of this paper.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Historically, soils have required improvement for housing,

For the sustainable development of humanity, conceptualization
and implementation of new techniques and concepts are required
to enable the reuse and recycling of large quantities of certain waste
materials that are commonly and massively discarded. Currently, in
many countries, in the best-case scenario, the final destination of
solid wastes is a solid waste landfill. Consequently, research has
been conducted that proposes the possible use of discrete recycled
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) fibers for soil reinforcement at a
large scale.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ52 55 56233600x8462; fax: þ52 55 56160784.
E-mail addresses: eboteroj@iingen.unam.mx (E. Botero), aossal@iingen.unam.
mx (A. Ossa), billy_sb@hotmail.com (G. Sherwell), eovandos@iingen.unam.mx
(E. Ovando-Shelley).
1
Tel.: þ52 55 56233600x8524; fax: þ52 55 56160784.
2
Tel.: þ52 55 56233600x8462; fax: þ52 55 56160784.
3
Tel.: þ52 55 56233600x3649; fax: þ52 55 56160784.
infrastructure, communications, etc. In addition, due to continued
population growth, optimal geotechnical sites (good soil properties,
accessibility, low natural risk potential, magnitude of induced
works, etc.) are increasingly scarce. Consequently, the modification
of soil mechanical properties with invasive methods (e.g., sand
drainages, piles, partial compensation techniques, etc.) or rein-
forcement techniques (e.g., geotextiles, geogrids, fibers, etc.) is
becoming increasingly common. Specifically, alternative fibers
were implemented several years ago and are occasionally used
today. This method consists of mixing the soil with certain fibers,
such as straw, plant roots, and other natural fibers, to provide more
ductility and prevent of the formation of cracks in masonry mate-
rials. Currently, these types of reinforced masonry structures are
being built in rural areas, and the durability and ductility of the
buildings constructed with these materials is well known. How-
ever, proper maintenance and certain construction rules must be
followed to ensure the quality of the construction.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
0266-1144/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
2 E. Botero et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7
At a large scale, the soilefibers (natural or synthetic) mixture
provides benefits that are of interest for practical engineering. In
the last 50 years, several studies regarding the behavior of soil
reinforced with different types of fibers have occurred, especially
regarding soils with low shear resistance capacity. Currently, rein-
forcing soils with fibers can be principally realized by using pre-
viously oriented continuous inclusions (geotextiles, geogrids, etc.)
or by using aleatorily oriented discrete inclusions. The first method
includes the introduction of several continuous inclusion layers of
geosynthetic materials, which increase the soil shear tensile
strength. However, it is important to consider the shear strength
decreases at the soil-inclusion interface due to the low resistance
generated between them. In addition, when using this method, the
fiber orientation, number of layers, and interlayer distances are
decisive parameters that affect the stability, strength, deformability
and durability of the soil structure. In the second case, the soils are
reinforced with fibers in an aleatory orientation and distributed
into the soil mass using a suitable mixing process. In this case, the
formation of weak planes should be absent or reduced, which could
increase the long-term stability of the geostructures under several
services or load conditions.
In last years several techniques, materials and numerical anal-
ysis tools have been developed along with rheological sophisticated
geotechnical engineering models to improve the mechanical
properties of soils with a low strength capacity. To present new
possibilities for improving the mechanical proprieties of soils with
a low strength capacity, a new technique is developed in this paper.
This technique is based on a simple process with low operation
costs that uses easily procured raw materials and has important
environmental impacts because it reduces the generation of PET
waste and allows for its reuse in permanent geotechnical
structures.
A large portion of the waste that is collected to be sent to
landfills, can be reused. In some cases, additional processes and
energy consumption are required. However, in other circum-
stances, the waste could be reused directly without transformation
(Sherwell, 2014; Botero et al., 2014; Mun ~ oz, 2012). PET, originally in
the form of bottles, containers or any packaging that is used in
markets with additional industrial processes, can be transformed in
random fibers.
In contrast, due to cultural changes in consumption habits, the
world population growth and the demand and consumption of
industrialized products made of plastic compounds has resulted in
a continuous increase in the generation of non-degradable waste
materials of the same proportions. Thus, it is important to find new
uses, to develop the technology necessary for new process for this
waste, and to take advantage of these processes to reduce the
environmental impacts of engineering works, especially those
generated by large-scale construction.
1.1. Evolution of the inclusion of aleatory fibers in soils for
reinforcement
One of the first studies conducted to determine the behaviors of
soils that were reinforced with aleatory fibers was conducted by
Andersland and Khattak (1979). These authors used dry pulp fibers
to reinforce a kaolinite-saturated soil. These fibers had a diameter
of 0.02 mm and a length of 1.6 mm and were added to the soilefiber
mixture at 16 and 40% of the kaolinite dry weight. Overall, these
authors concluded that the addition of fiber to the specimen
resulted in greater compressive strength, failure strain and rigidity.
Gray and Ohashi (1983) performed direct shear tests on sands
that were reinforced with different fibers (natural, synthetic and
metal). The diameters of the fibers that were used in this study
varied from 1 to 2 mm with lengths of 2e25 cm. Most of the tests
Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
were performed by using fiber concentrations of 0.25 and 0.5% with
respect to the dry sand. The results showed an increase in the shear
resistance that was directly proportional to the fiber concentration
and initially increased for the fibers that were oriented at 60 to the
shear surface. Gray and Al-Refai (1986) performed triaxial tests on a
dry sand specimen that was reinforced with oriented and contin-
uous laminar fibers to compare their stressestrain responses with a
specimen of sand that was reinforced with discrete and randomly
distributed fibers. These authors showed an increase in the shear
resistance during axial deformation at the failure points for both
configurations. In most cases, a limited reduction in the residual
shear resistance was associated with its increased reinforcement.
Maher (1988) and Maher and Gray (1990) performed triaxial
compression tests to determine the stressestrain behavior of sands
that were reinforced with randomly distributed discrete fibers. In
this case, a significant increase in the ultimate strength and rigidity
of the sand was observed, which was a function of the gran-
ulometry distribution of the sand and the fiber properties (aspect
ratio Large (L)/diameter (d), weight and elasticity modulus). Wang
(1999) used carpet waste as a reinforcing fiber in soils and concrete.
In this case, the carpet was suitable for soil improvement. However,
only the nylon and polypropylene carpets were suitable for con-
crete. Finally, it was demonstrated that the reinforced soils had
greater triaxial strengths and ductilities.
Consoli and Prietto (1998) and Consoli et al. (2003, 2009)
studied loadedeformation and stressestrain behaviors by using
two steel plates to apply loads to compacted sandy soils that were
unreinforced and reinforced with polypropylene fibers that were
randomly and equally distributed. The results of these studies
showed a significant change in the stressestrain behavior for the
large deformations. The resistance continuously increased inde-
pendently of the applied pressure confinement and did not reach
an asymptotic upper limit, even with an axial deformation of 25%.
Later Consoli et al. (2012) quantified the influence of the amount of
lime, the porosity and the porosity/lime ratio in the tensile (qt) and
compressive (qu) strength of polypropylene-fiber-reinforced silty-
lime-mixtures. The obtained results show that tensile and
compression strengths exhibit a linear and power relationships
with lime content and porosity respectively. Finally, the authors
found that qt/qu relationship is unique for the fiber-reinforced silty-
lime mixtures studied, being independent of the porosity/lime
ratio.
Ferna
ndez Calvo (2006) and Ferna
ndez Calvo et al. (2007)
studied two types of cohesive soil (expansive clay and silty clay)
that were reinforced with synthetic fiber. In the laboratory tests, a
significant increase in the mechanical properties of the soil
occurred following the addition of the synthetic fibers. Namely, the
expansive clay had a greater behavior than the silty clay, which
reflected the influence of the fiber longitude. In addition, the longer
fibers increased the soil resistance.
Al-Akhras et al. (2008) investigated the effects of two types of
synthetic fibers (nylon and palmyra) on the behavior of expansive
clayey soils. Both fibers had different aspect ratios large/diameter,
L/d, (25, 50, 75 and 100). The specimens with different fiber
quantities (1, 2, 4 and 5% with respect to the dry soil used in each
test) were mixed with three types of expansive soils with different
mechanical properties. In this case, the potential soil expansion
decreased with both types of fibers. In addition, in the mixed soils
with the same quantities of fibers, the specimens with palmyra
fiber presented a greater capacity to reduce the expansion pressure
relative to the nylon-reinforced specimens. Similarly, the lower
aspect ratio (L/d) of the fibers influenced the soil behavior by
reducing the expansion pressures for both types of fibers.
The study performed by Mirzababaei et al. (2009a,b) considered
the influences of fibers on the behavior of a reinforced soil under an
 E. Botero et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7
undrained condition. Four different PET scraps were used (with a
length of 76 mm and a diameter of 38 mm) at quantities of 1, 5 and
10% of dry soil mass with a low plastic index. In this case, UU triaxial
compression tests were performed. Overall, at a fiber specimen
concentration of 1%, the deviatoric stress peak increased by 10%
relative to the unreinforced soil. Nevertheless, for the 5 and 10%
fiber concentrations, the deviatoric stress peaks decreased by 17.6
and 25.4%, respectively, relative to the unreinforced soil. Thus,
adverse effects occurred regarding the strengths of certain fiber
quantities. Finally, all of the tests showed a perfect plastic behavior.
Park (2009) investigated the effect of fiber reinforcement and
distribution on unconfined compressive strength of fiber-
reinforced cemented sand and found that where fibers were
evenly distributed throughout the five layers, was twice as strong
as a non-fiber-reinforced specimen. Using the same amount of fi-
bers to reinforce two different specimens, a specimen with five fi-
ber inclusion layers was 1.5 times stronger than a specimen with
one.
Ahmad et al. (2010) evaluate the response of randomly distrib-
uted oil-palmempty-fruit- bunch fiber on the triaxial compression
strength of reinforced silty sand. The results indicate that the shear
strength parameters of the soilefiber mixture can be improved
significantly.
Diambra et al. (2010) carried out conventional triaxial
compression and extension tests on sand specimens reinforced
with short polypropylene fibers. Test results indicated that the
contribution of fibers to the strength was significant in compres-
sion while limited in extension confirming that it depends pri-
marily on their orientation with respect to tensile strains. On the
other hand, a modeling approach was proposed for coupling the
effects of fibers with the stressestrain behavior of unreinforced soil,
which provide good agreement with experimental data.

and Le (2012) proposed the use of clay reinforcement with
Ple
polypropylene fibers to mitigate the formation of cracks due to
differential settlement in landfills. Compression and tension tests
were performed for reinforced and unreinforced clays. The results
showed an important increase in stiffness in the compression tests.
In contrast, the specimens became more ductile in the tension tests,
which mitigated the soil cracking potential.
Pradhan et al. (2012) used aleatorily oriented polypropylene
fibers as inclusions to study their effects on the strength charac-
teristics of a cohesive soil. Polypropylene fibers had three aspect
ratios (L/d ¼ 75, 100 and 125) at concentrations of 0e1% of the soil
dry weight. These tests revealed that the residual and peak shear
strengths increased with the reinforced specimens. The quantities
of the necessary fibers that were required to obtain the maximum
strengths where within 0.4e0.8% of the dry soil weight with an
aspect ratio of 100 (L/d).
Ibraim et al. (2012) proposed a new fabrication procedure for
fiber reinforced soil-samples using vibration of moist sandefiber
mixture. Laboratory test results indicate that mechanical responses
of reinforced samples prepared with the two fabrication methods
(conventional and new) are qualitatively similar when tested under
triaxial conditions.
Fatahi et al. (2013) carried out bender element tests on 126
cylindrical samples of cement-treated kaolinite and bentonite clays
with various cement and fiber (polypropylene and recycled carpet)
contents to discern the relationships between fiber and cement
content and the small-strain mechanical properties, including the
shear wave velocity and maximum small-strain shear modulus of
the treated soils.
Cristelo et al. (2015) carried out ultrasonic wave and uniaxial
compression tests to measure P-wave velocity and compression
strength in cement-stabilised sandy-clay reinforced with poly-
propylene fiber. Test results indicated that stiffness and
Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
3
compression strength of the sandy soil, increase with cement and
fiber contents. Additionally, P-wave velocity increases with cement
content and curing time. However, variations in fiber content do
not affect significantly this velocity.
Finally, Correira et al. (2015) studied the effect of binder and
polypropylene fiber quantity on the mechanical behavior of soft
soil; results reveal that the increment of binder quantity improves
the stiffness, the compressive and the tensile strength of the soil;
however, the presence of fibers may reduce this beneficial effect.
2. Experimental work
2.1. Material properties
In this research, two materials were used, a silty soil (MH ac-
cording to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)) and
reinforcement PET fibers, obtained from a recycling process in
which PET bottles after crushing and chopping into flakes, are
extruded, filtered and passed through a spinneret to produce the
fiber (Warrel and Reuter, 2014). The soil was obtained from two
samples that were extracted in 2012 from the old Texcoco Lake
zone, which is located in the northeastern region of Mexico City.
The soil samples were obtained at depths of 4 and 6 m. In addition,
the soil samples were remolded and passed through a No. 60 sieve
before mixing to obtain a homogenized soil with the following
properties.
 Particle size: 250 mm
 Atterberg limits: Liquid limit (LL): 89.7%, Plastic limit (PL):
55.2%, Plastic index (PI): 34.5%
 Specific gravity of the soil (Gs): 2.53
 Optimum dry density (Gd): 12.2 kN/m3
 Optimum water content derived from the adapted compaction
tests (w): 37.3%
The Polyethylene terephthalate fibers were used as reinforcing
elements and were provided by a local recycling enterprise that
industrializes the production of fiber with recycled PET bottles. The
characteristics of the resulting fibers are shown in Table 1 with an
aspect ratio of 3333.3 (L/d).
2.2. Construction of the laboratory test specimens
The conventional principle for reinforcing fine soils with
discrete fibers is based on the hypothesis that no potential weak
planes will develop (failure planes) (due to the aleatorily distrib-
uted fibers in the soil specimen) and the absorption energies for the
soilefibers become mixed during the application of external loads.
To achieve this external load, the improvement of the reinforced
soils by the discrete aleatory fibers partially depends on the
appropriate mixing process.
The soilefiber mixing process differs for each type of fine soil,
depending on its physical properties and on the amounts of added
fibers. A specific mixing protocol is currently not available for lab-
oratory or field tests. Thus, diverse mixing procedures were used in
this study because they were the most efficient for the soil type that
was used. In these procedures, the PET fibers were weighted (0.0,
0.1, 0.3, 0.6 or 1.0% of the soil dry weight) and scattered inside a tray.
Once the silt was passed through a No. 60 sieve, it was dried in the
oven, and cooled inside a desiccator (to avoid cavitation). Next,
130 g of this material were spread over the PET fibers. To obtain the
optimum water content (37%) 178.1 ml of water were added to the
soilefiber mixture. The mixing process was conducted manually
until the material was homogenous while trying to prevent water
losses due to evaporation and avoid fiber entanglement.
4 E. Botero et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7
Table 1
PET fiber characteristics.
Fiber type Color Length
15  50 SIL Ivory 50 mm
Fig. 1. Fiber stamen.
The soilefiber mixture was divided in 10 17.3-g portions. Each
portion was placed in a capsule and covered with a damp cloth.
Nine capsules (soil lifts) were required for the remolded specimen.
The remaining capsule was only used as a replacement. The spec-
imens were made by compacting nine soil lifts using 25 blows of a
206.7-g hammer falling for 26 cm (a compaction energy of 13.68 kg
cm/cm3). Once the specimen was formed, it was wrapped with
plastic and stored in a humidity chamber to avoid water loss and
achieving a greater homogeneity within the specimen.
A fiber stamen in its virgin state after reprocessing PET bottles is
shown in Fig. 1. The fiber stamen was separated into independent
fibers and mixed with the soil (Fig. 2). In this case, the fibers are
aleatorily distributed into the soil and the fibers remain quasi-
elongated in the soil.
2.3. Triaxial tests
UU triaxial compression tests were conducted on remolded
reinforced specimens to study their behavior under different
confining pressures that were equivalent to depths of 2.5, 5.0 and
7.5 m in an embankment. The added PET fiber quantities (Xw)
corresponded to Xw ¼ 0.0, 0.1, 0.3, 0.6 and 1.0% of the wet soil
weight. The confining pressure (sc) values were used to reproduce
Fig. 2. Soilefiber mix.
Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
Diameter Melting point Chemical resistance
15 mm 255  C Excellent in alkaline conditions
the vertical effective stresses (sv) at each depth and are shown in
Table 2. The height/diameter relationship (h/d) of the specimens
with a diameter of 3.53 cm and a height of 9.03 cm was approxi-
mately h/d z 2.56. Overall, 30 reinforced and unreinforced mixed
soil samples were formed. All of the specimens were manufactured
with a compaction energy (Ee) that was equal to Ee ¼ 13.68 kg cm/
cm3 and with an optimum water content (w) of 37%.
3. Laboratory test results
3.1. Stressestrain curves
To examine the behavior of the reinforced and unreinforced
specimens, the stressestrain curves were plotted from the triaxial
test results. In general, Figs. 3e5 indicate that the stressestrain
responses vary with the fiber content and the confining pressure.
In Figs. 3e5, it is possible to observe important differences in the
behaviors of the unreinforced and reinforced soil specimens. The
unreinforced specimens present an approximate linear stresse-
strain response and a higher soil resistance relative to the rein-
forced specimens over a deformation range of 0.0e10%. In the strain
range of 10e15%, the unreinforced soil presents a plastic behavior
but does not increase the soil resistance until failure is reached. In
contrast, the reinforced specimens exhibit an increasing stresse-
strain behavior for all of the tested strain ranges. This behavior
becomes more pronounced as the fiber content increases. However,
the specimens manufactured with fiber contents of 0.60 and 1.00%
exhibit greater resistance increments with strain values near to
10%.
It is important to consider that the reinforced specimens with
added discrete fiber (0.1, 0.3, 0.6 and 1.0%) did not reach a state of
failure (Fig. 6), in contrast with the unreinforced specimen. This
situation can be attributed to the tensile resistance of the fiber,
which contributed to the greater shear resistance of the soil and
allowed for a greater soil deformation capacity without propaga-
tion or the formation of cracking. In addition, the final strain of the
specimens in each test reached the maximum displacement ca-
pacity of the triaxial test machine. However, the laboratory test
machine used in this research was similar to those previously used
for this type of soil tests (unreinforced soils).
Table 3 presents the tangent modulus E values of the stresse-
strain curves that were calculated at low strain levels and could
represent the elastic modulus values of the materials. This
parameter was calculated for each fiber content and confining
pressure condition. The magnitudes of the resultant modulus were
higher for the unreinforced soil conditions and increased with the
confining stress in all cases.
Fig. 7 shows the tangent modulus evolution (%) against the fiber
content at strain levels of 10%. From this figure, it can observe that
Table 2
Confinning pressure values.
Depth (m) sv (kPa) sc (kPa)
0.0 0.00 0.00
2.5 61.85 61.85
5.0 123.70 123.70
7.5 185.56 185.56
 E. Botero et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7 5

Fig. 3. Stressestrain curves for sc ¼ 61.85 kPa.

Fig. 6. Reinforced soil specimen after testing.

4. Concluding remarks

The reuse of certain inorganic solid wastes in civil works is

Fig. 4. Stressestrain curves for sc ¼ 123.70 kPa.
the tangent modulus for the unreinforced soil (0.0% fiber) is
significantly greater than the values obtained from reinforced
specimens. For the reinforced soil, the increase in the tangent
modulus with the fiber content was not significant and remained
nearly equal between the confining pressures.
Figs. 8 and 9 present the Mohr circles at 10% of the strain for the
UU triaxial test that was conducted on the unreinforced and fiber-
reinforced soil specimens. In these figures, it is possible to observe
the influences of the fiber on the apparent internal friction angle
and cohesion fa and ca respectively. When the fiber content in-
creases, apparent the internal friction angle decreases and the
apparent cohesion tends to increase. The first point can be attrib-
uted to the reduced number of contact points between the soil
particles due to the presence of the fiber. The second point can be
attributed to the interlocking of the soil particles and fibers.
currently gaining popularity for mutually improving the environ-
mental sector by reducing residual wastes and developing new
geotechnical materials with better mechanical behaviors.
The volume/weight ratio of the PET is higher than most of the
solid wastes in landfills, which results in an increased filling rate
and generates the need for building more landfills. Consequently,
the currently lacking availability of space for landfills is an issue.
In the field construction, the implementation of the culture for
reusing materials is important for avoiding the important envi-
ronmental impacts that are generated.
The use of discrete randomly oriented PET fibers as a reinforcing
material affected the mechanical behavior of the silty soil. Based on
the experimental tests results and data analysis, the following re-
sults were obtained.
 During all of the triaxial compression tests, a fragile failure was
noted on the unreinforced soil specimens. The reinforced
Table 3
Elasticity moduli at low strain levels.

Fiber content sc (kPa) E (kPa)

0% 61.85 1864.45
123.70 2131.78
185.56 2975.80

0.10% 61.85 970.45

123.70 1383.63
185.56 1659.80

0.30% 61.85 938.22

123.70 1387.59
185.56 1596.02

0.6% 61.85 1026.64

123.70 1259.63
185.56 1732.77

1.00% 61.85 1103.59

123.70 1373.47
185.56 1830.63
Fig. 5. Stressestrain curves for sc ¼ 185.56 kPa.

Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
6 E. Botero et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7
Fig. 7. Variations of the elasticity moduli for 10% of the strain.
Fig. 8. Mohr circles for the unreinforced soil at a unitary deformation of 10%.
Fig. 9. Mohr circles for the reinforced soil at a unitary deformation of 10%.
Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003
specimens presented a ductile behavior, which was character-
ized by barreling deformation and did not fail
 The presence of fibers influenced the apparent internal friction
angle and the apparent cohesion in the reinforced soil. Greater
fiber contents resulted in a lower friction angle and greater
apparent cohesion. Changes in the friction angle could be
attributed to a reduction in the number of contact points be-
tween the soil particles due to the presence of fibers and the
greater apparent cohesion of the soil particles and fibers.
 The reinforced specimens showed an increase in the apparent
cohesion parameter rather than the unreinforced specimens.
PET fiber reinforced specimens presented a ductile behavior that
varied with the fiber content. This behavior favors the improve-
ment of the soil cracking resistance.
The reinforcement of the silty and clayey soils with discrete PET
fibers in an aleatory orientation can be implemented in situations
that involve low loading applications to the soil due to its low shear
strength resistance or when the soil would be susceptible to dif-
ferential settlements. Examples of this situation include the con-
struction of embankments, landfills (as liners) and earth-filled
dams (as a fine-soil blanket or core) where impermeable fine soil
layers are needed to avoid the leakage of leachates in the subsoil
and water seepage and to improve the cracking behavior. However,
hydraulic and dynamic properties of the fiber-reinforced soil is an
issue that should be study in detail, to define a clearer scenario for
the application of this kind of reinforcement.
Additional studies must be developed to use polyethylene
terephthalate as a reinforcing material for earthy structures that are
formed of fine soils with characteristics that are different from the
characteristics used in this research. Particularly, the lengths and
 E. Botero et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes xxx (2015) 1e7 7

the diameters of the fibers and the permeability of reinforced soils Consoli, N.C., Vendruscolo, M.A., Fonini, A., Dalla Rosa, F., 2009. Fiber reinforcement
effects on sand considering a wide cementation range. Geotext. Geomembr. 27,
should be addressed. Undoubtedly, the formed specimens will have
196e203.
different mechanical behaviors than those presented in this Consoli, N.C., Bellaver Corte, M., Festugato, L., 2012. Key parameter for tensile and
research and each specimen will have a different application for compressive strength of fibre-reinforced soilelime mixtures. Geosynth. Int. 19
engineering issues. (5), 409e414.
Correira, A.A.S., Oliverira, P.J.V., Custodio, D.G., 2015. Effect of polypropylene fibres
on the compressive and tensile strength of a soft soil, artificially stabilised with
Acknowledgments binders. Geotext. Geomembr. 43, 97e106.
Cristelo, N., Cunha, V., Dias, M., Topa Gomes, A., Miranda, T., Araújo, N., 2015. In-
fluence of discrete fibre reinforcement on the uniaxial compression response
The authors would like to acknowledge DGAPA of the Uni- and seismic wave velocity of a cement-stabilised sandy-clay. Geotext. Geo-
versidad Nacional Auto
noma de Me
xico for financial support membr. 43 (1), 1e13. Elsevier Publishers.
through project PAPIIT TB10021. In addition, we are grateful to the Diambra, A., Ibraime, E., Muir Wood, D., Ruessell, A.R., 2010. Fibre reinforced sands:
experiments and modelling. Geotext. Geomembr. 28, 238e250.
Tecnología del Reciclaje S.A de CV, for providing the fibers that were Ferna
ndez Calvo, C., 2006. Estudio experimental de refuerzo de suelos con fibras
used in this study. sinte
ticas. Geogaceta 40, 303e306.
Ferna
ndez Calvo, C., Martínez Santamaría, J.M., Thode Mayoral, J.M., 2007. Refuerzo
de Suelos con Fibras Sinte
ticas. Asociacio

n Te

cnica de Carreteras, Comite
de
Notations Geotecnia Vial.
Fatahi, B., Fatahi, B., Le, T.M., Khabbaz, H., 2013. Small-strain properties of soft clay
Gs density of solids treated with fibre and cement. Geosynth. Int. 20 (4), 286e300.
Gray, D.H., Ohashi, H., 1983. Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in sand. J. Geotech.
Gd optimum dry density, kN/m3
Eng. 109 (3), 335e353.
w optimum water content, % Gray, D.H., Al-Refai, T.O., 1986. Behavior of fabric versus fiber-reinforced sand.
L/d aspect ratio J. Geotech. Eng. 112 (8), 804e820.
Ee compaction energy, kg cm/cm3 Ibraim, E., Diambra, A., Russell, A.R., Muir Wood, D., 2012. Assessment of labo-
ratory sample preparation for fibre reinforced sands. Geotext. Geomembr. 34,
Xw fiber quantity, % 69e79.
h height, cm Maher, M.H., 1988. Static and Dynamic Response of Sands Reinforced with Discrete,
d diameter, cm Randomly Distributed Fibers. Thesis submitted to the University of Michigan, at
Ann Arbor, Mich., in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
sc confining pressure, kPa Doctor of Philosophy.
E tangent modulus, kPa Maher, M.H., Gray, D.H., 1990. Static response of sand reinforced with randomly
sv effective vertical stress, kPa distributed fibers. J. Geotech. Eng. 116 (11).
Mirzababaei, M., Miraftab, M., McMahon, P., Mohamed, M., 2009a. Undrained
Ca apparent cohesion, kPa behaviour of clay reinforced with surplus carpet fibres. In: Second International
fa apparent internal friction angle, 
Symposium on Fiber Recycling, Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A..
Mirzababaei, M., Miraftab, M., Mohamed, M., 2009b. Undrained Behaviour of Clay
Reinforced with Surplus Carpet Fibres. Carpet Recycling UK, University of Bol-
Abbreviations ton and Bradford University.
PET polyethylene terephthalate Mun ~ oz, L., 2012. Estudio del uso del polietileno tereftalato (PET) como material de
restitucio
n en suelos de baja capacidad de carga (Tesis de licenciatura). Uni-
versidad Nacional Auto
noma de Me
xico.
References
Park, S.S., 2009. Effect of fiber reinforcement and distribution on unconfined
compressive strength of fiber-reinforced cemented sand. Geotext. Geomembr.
Ahmad, F., Bateni, F., Azmi, M., 2010. Performance evaluation of silty sand reinforced 27, 162e166.
with fibres. Geotext. Geomembr. 28, 93e99.
, O., Le, T.N.H., 2012. Effect of polypropylene fiber-reinforcement on the strength
Ple
Al-Akhras, N.M., Attom, M.F., Al-Akhras, K.M., Malkawi, A.I.H., 2008. Influence of of silty clay. Geotext. Geomembr. 32, 111e116. Elsevier Publishers.
fibers on swelling properties of clayey soil. Geosynth. Int. 15 (4), 304e309. Pradhan, P.K., Kar, R.K., Naik, A., 2012. Effect of random inclusion of polypropylene
Andersland, O.B., Khattak, A.S., 1979. Shear strength of kaolinite/fiber soil mixtures. fibers on strength characteristics of cohesive soil. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 30 (1),
In: Proceedings, International Conference on Soil Reinforcement, Paris, France, 15e25.
vol. I, pp. 11e16. Sherwell, G.F., 2014. Estudio del Uso del Polietileno Tereftalato como Material de
Botero, E., Mun ~ oz, L., Ossa, A., Romo, M.P., 2014. Uso del Polietileno Tereftalato (PET) Refuerzo de Estructuras Te
rreas Conformadas por Suelo Fino (Tesis de licen-
como material de aligeramiento y restitucio
n en aplicaciones geote
cnicas. Rev. ciatura). Universidad Nacional Auto
noma de Me
xico.
Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia. ISSN: 0120-6230 70, 207e219. Marzo 2014. Wang, Y., 1999. Utilization of recycled carpet waste fibers for reinforcement of
Consoli, N., Prietto, D.M., 1998. Influence of fiber and cement addition in sandy soils. concrete and soil. J. Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng. 38 (3), 533e546.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 124 (12), 1211e1214. Warrel, E., Reuter, M., 2014. Handbook of Recycling: State-of-the-art for Practi-
Consoli, N.C., Casagrande, M.D.T., Prietto, P.D.M., Thome, A., 2003. Plate load test on tioners, Analysts, and Scientists, first ed., p. 600
fiber-reinforced soil. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 129, 951e955.

Please cite this article in press as: Botero, E., et al., Stressestrain behavior of a silty soil reinforced with polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
Geotextiles and Geomembranes (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2015.04.003