International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.

1, 2012

Influence of Geofabrics on California Bearing Ratio of Expansive Clayey Subgrades

Prof. A.V.Narasimha Rao1 and D.Neeraja2
1 2

Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, S.V.U.College of Engineering,Tirupati Assistant Professor(Sr) , Department of Civil Engineering, VIT University,Vellore (neerajadamarapati@gmail.com)

Abstract
Increasing demand for and decreasing availability of suitable base and subbase materials for modern highway construction has lead to a search for economic method of converting locally available troublesome soils to be utilized in construction by adopting various techniques like soil stabilization, adoption of reinforcement, use of geofabrics etc. In this paper, emphasis is given to investigate the feasibility of using abundantly available indigenous resources, coir and jute in road construction. In addition to the above mentioned natural fabrics, geogrid, a synthetic material is also considered. CBR method is employed for the design of flexible pavements in most of the design offices even though it is empirical in nature, since the method is simple and convenient to apply and the CBR value of the subgrade indirectly gives the strength of subgrade soil. Hence, the experimental study mainly deals with CBR values to determine the optimum location of reinforcement. In the present study, to determine the optimum depth, soil is tested for CBR with geofabrics like coir, jute and geogrid at different locations such as the top, H/6, 2H/6, 3H/6, 4H/6, 5H/6 from the top, H being the total thickness of the soil specimen. The results are analyzed effectively by introducing two non-dimensional factors namely, Effective Depth Ratio (EDR) and Strength Benefit Ratio (SBR). From the test results, it was observed that the optimum depth for placing the geofabrics( coir, jute and geogrid) were found at H/6, which gave a CBR value of 13.6% , 11.9% and 9.12% respectively, which is more than that of unreinforced soil. Based on the favorable results obtained, it can be concluded that expansive soil can be successfully stabilized using geofabrics.

Keywords: California Bearing Ratio, Effective Depth Ratio, Geofabrics, Expansive clay and Strength Benefit Ratio 1. Introduction
Design and construction of roads on expansive soils is a difficult task because of its low load carrying capacity, high compressibility, high swelling and shrinkage. With the reduction of available land resources, more and more construction of civil engineering structures is carried out over weak or soft soil, which leads to the establishment and development of various ground improvement techniques. The properties of these soils can be improved by stabilization with admixtures and geofabrics. But, in stabilization using admixtures technique, it is necessary to select proper stabilizer and it is very difficult to stabilize huge quantity of soil in the field. With the advent of synthetic fibres, soil reinforcement is found to be dynamic in improving load bearing capacity of soft soils. The geofabric reinforcement system prevents the failure of the pavement due to penetration of road crust into subgrade soil or intrusion of soft subgrade soils into base course and inadequate drainage of subbase and base course by acting as separator as well as drainer within the pavement apart from reinforcing function. The geofabrics include synthetic fibres like geogrid and natural fibres like jute and coir. In practice, the geofabrics are laid over weak sub grade soils and the aggregate is placed directly on it. But in this system sharp angular aggregates puncture through the fabric during the imposition of traffic loads. Moreover, the stressed soil tries to push the fabric into voids in between the aggregates. So, to avoid above discrepancies and to achieve positive contribution of geofabric, Shroff(1989) has suggested the placement of geofabric at optimum depth below the surface of weak

Special Issue

Page 67 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216

International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.1, 2012

subgrade. In the present study, to determine the optimum depth, soil is tested for CBR with geofabrics coir, jute and geogrid at different locations such as top, H/6, 2H/6, 3 H/6, 4 H/6, 5 H/6 from top, H being the total thickness of the specimen.

2. Materials and Methods

Soil
The soil used in this study was obtained from Gajulamandyam near Tirupati. Disturbed but representative soil samples were collected from trial pits at a depth of about 2.0 m from ground level. The soil collected from the site was pulverized with wooden mallet to break lumps and then air-dried. Subsequently it was sieved through 2.36 mm IS sieve and then dried in an oven at 105oC for 24 hours .The soil falls under the CH category i.e., clay of high compressibility as per I.S Classification System (IS 1498-1970). The soil passing through I.S 425 sieve has very high Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index. Based on Differential Free Swell Index, Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index, the soil comes under the category of high degree of expansiveness. The properties of soil are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Properties of Soil CHARACTERISTICS Specific gravity Particle Size distribution a) Gravel (%) b) Sand (%) c) Silt+Clay (%) VALUE 2.69 Nil 12 88

Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%) Plasticity index (%) Differential Free Swell Index (%) Classification of soil Maximum dry unit weight (kN/m3) Optimum moisture content (%) Unconfined Compressive Strength (kN/ m2) Unsoaked CBR (%)

98 13 85 150 CH 17.99

14 145 6.84

Special Issue

Page 68 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216

International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.1, 2012

Coir
The coir fabric is obtained from door mats which are uniformly woven. Coir fabrics of 15 cm diameter circular pieces were used for the present study.

Jute
Jute is prepared from jute bags like sugar bags, rice bags etc, of 1.5 mm thick. 15cm diameter circular pieces are cut from the jute bag. A jute geofabric of 3mm thick is prepared by joining two pieces of jute bag.

Geogrid
Geogrid used in this study is a product of Netlon. This is immune to corrosive, chemical and biological attack in soils. Geogrid of 15 cm diameter circular pieces were used for the present study. 3. Tests conducted on Unreinforced Soil The compaction tests on unreinforced soil were conducted in accordance with I.S.2720:1980.UCC tests were conducted in accordance with I.S.2720:1991. CBR tests were conducted in accordance with I.S.2720:1987. 4. Tests conducted on Reinforced Soil The main emphasis in the present study is the influence of geofabrics on CBR values of expansive clays, since the thickness of pavement depends on CBR value. Hence CBR tests are conducted for determining optimum depth. The tests have been conducted for determining optimum depth (location effect). The locations chosen for this purpose were top, H/6, 2H/6, 3H/6, 4H/6 and 5H/6 respectively, H being the total thickness of the soil specimen. The CBR tests have been carried out as per I.S.2720-1987 with some modifications. In standard CBR tests, the soil is compacted in three layers at 55 blows per each layer for light compaction. The above procedure has been modified by compacting in six layers at 28 blows per layer, keeping the compactive effort as the same. 5. Results and Discussion The load-penetration curves for the soil reinforced with coir, jute and geogrid at different locations such as top, H/6, 2H/6, 3H/6, 4H/6, 5H/6 from the top, H being total thickness of the specimen are shown in Figures 1,2 and 3 respectively. The load-penetration curve for the unreinforced soil is also plotted in each of these figures. The results are analyzed effectively by introducing two non-dimensional factors namely, Effective Depth Ratio (EDR) and Strength Benefit Ratio (SBR). The Strength Benefit Ratio (SBR) is defined as the per cent increase in CBR value of soil due to the presence of reinforcement when compared to the CBR value of unreinforced soil.

SBR =

CBR Reinforced CBR Unreinforced CBR Unreinforced

X 100

The Effective Depth Ratio (EDR) is defined as the ratio of depth of reinforcing layer from the top to total height of soil specimen. EDR =

Depth of reinforcin g layer from the top Total height of soil specimen

The CBR values of the soil are tabulated in Table 2 for different locations of geofabrics. An analysis of test results presented in the table indicates that the effect of geofabric reinforcement with soil is to increase the value of CBR. It is interesting to note that the optimum value of CBR is obtained at an Effective Depth ratio (EDR) of 1/6 for all the fabrics considered in the present study. Beyond EDR of 1/6 the CBR values in all the cases are found to decrease, but remains always higher than the unreinforced soil. Hence, it can be concluded that the optimum depth of geofabric is at EDR of 1/6, which is nearly equal to half the diameter of the plunger. This implies that the optimum depth in the field is about half the maximum width of dual tyre assembly of a vehicle that is expected to ply on the

Special Issue

Page 69 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216

International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.1, 2012

pavement. The increase in CBR value at EDR of 1/6 may be due to the effect of increase in anchorage at H/6 rather at other locations. At H/6 the geofabric is sandwiched with the soil resulting in full lateral restrainment and better membrane reinforcement. Beyond H/6, even though the value is more than CBR value of unreinforced soil, it is less than H/6. The SBR values of the soil at optimum depth of H/6 from the top for the coir, jute and geogrid are 98.83%, 73.98% and 33 .33% respectively (Figure 4). The SBR values calculated from the CBR values obtained on testing at different EDR values are presented in Table 3. It is inferred that coir is more effective than jute due to the fact that the coir has more tensile strength and friction than jute. It is also observed from the above values that geogrid results in less CBR value when compared to natural fabrics like coir and jute. Actually, this is not correct since geogrid has more tensile strength than natural fabrics. But, to develop full tensile stress within the geogrid, it should interlock with the aggregates. Otherwise, it will slip due to its smooth nature resulting in low CBR value.

Figure 1 Load Vs penetration curves of soil reinforced with coir at different locations

Figure 2 Load Vs penetration curves of soil reinforced with jute at different locations

Special Issue

Page 70 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216

International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.1, 2012

Figure 3 Load Vs penetration curves of soil reinforced with geogrid at different locations

Figure 4 SBR (%) values for geofabrics with respect to effective depth ratio (EDR)

Special Issue

Page 71 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216

International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.1, 2012

Table 2 CBR Values (%) for changing location of reinforcing layer

Type geofabric

of

CBR without fabric 6.84 6.84 6.84

GEOFABRIC AT TOP 9.12 8.7 8.8 H/6 13.6 11.9 9.12 2H/6 10 9.12 7.8 3H/6 8.2 7.3 7.3 4H/6 8.2 7 7.3 5H/6 7.3 7 7

COIR JUTE GEOGRID

Table 3 SBR Values (%) for different EDR Values Type of geofabric EDR values for Geofabric at 0 0.167 0.33 0.5 0.667 0.833

Coir Jute Geogrid

33.33 27.19 28.65

98.83 73.98 33.33

46.2 33.33 14.035

19.88 6.72 6.72

19.88 2.34 6.72

6.72 2.34 2.34

6. References
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. IS 1498-1970, Classification and Identification of Soils for General Engineering Purposes. IS 2720 (Part VII)-1980, Method of Test for Soils, Determination of Water Content-Dry Density relation using Light Compaction. IS 2720 (Part X)-1991, Method of Test for Soils, Determination of Unconfined Compressive Strength. IS 2720 (Part XVI)-1987, Method of Test for Soils, Laboratory Determination of CBR. Shroff A.V and. Singh G.N. (1989), Load-Deformation characteristics of fabric reinforced on weak soil subgrades, International workshop on geotextiles, pp 144-147.

Special Issue

Page 72 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216

International Journal of Advances in Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No.1, 2012

Authors Profile

Dr. A.V.Narasimha Rao received his Ph.D degree from IIT Madras in 1979. He published more than 105 papers in international and national journals and conferences and 3 text books in Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering mechanics. He has more than 32 years of teaching experience. He is the recipient of Engineer of the year 2007 by Institution of Engineers and Government of Andhra Pradesh.

D.Neeraja received her M.Tech from S.V.University, Tirupati. She published 28 papers in international and national journals and conferences. She has more than 10 years of teaching experience.

Special Issue

Page 73 of 99

ISSN 2229 5216