First International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology

Strength Characteristics of Soil Fly Ash Mixtures Reinforced with

Randomly Oriented Polypropylene Fibers
Pradip D. Jadhao, Research Scholar
K.K.Wagh Institute of Engineering Education & Research, Nashik (Maharashtra), India
Dr. P.B.Nagarnaik, Professor and Head
G.H Raisoni College of Engineering, Nagpur-(Maharashtra), India
ABSTRACT
Fly ash is a waste produced from thermal power stations, which contributes to
environmental pollution. A number of studies have been conducted to investigate the
influence of randomly oriented fibers on the strength behavior of coarse grained and fine
grained soils. The effect of fiber inclusion on the strength characteristics of soil fly ash
mixtures has not been reported so as much detail as in the case of the soils.
In present study, polypropylene fibers were mixed with various proportions of soil fly
ash mixtures to investigate the relative strength gain in the terms of unconfined
compression strength (UCS). Samples of soil fly ash mixtures were tested in unconfined
compression with 0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 per cent polypropylene fibers.
The results presented show that the UCS increases with the increase in the per cent of
fibers for all the proportions of soil fly ash mixtures under consideration. Samples of soil
and soil fly ash showed significant higher increase in UCS and residual strength compared
to the samples of the fly ash. Results are, also, presented to show that the addition of
polypropylene fibers increase the residual strength of soil fly ash mixture significantly
more than the increase in the UCS.

Key Words - Fly Ash, Polypropylene fibers, UCS, Residual Strength

INTRODUCTION provision of a needed construction

Coal burning electric utilities
annually produce million tons of fly ash
as a waste byproduct worldwide and the
environmentally acceptable disposal of
this material has become an increasing
concern. Due to continuous and high
volume of material it requires, the
construction industry is often looked upon
as a potential consumer of fly ash.
The established techniques of soil
stabilization by adding cement, lime or
fly ash and reinforcement in form of
discrete fibers cause significant
modification and improvement in strength
characteristics of soils. Fibers are added
and mixed randomly with soil or fly ash.
One of the primary advantages of
randomly distributed fibers is the absence
of potential planes of weakness that can
be developed parallel to oriented
reinforcement. (Maher, 1990)
One of the most promising approaches in
this area is use of fly ash as a replacement
to the conventional earth material and
fiber as reinforcement will solve two
problems with one effort i.e. elimination
of solid waste problem on one hand and
material on other.Also, this will help in
achieving sustainable development of
natural resources.
A review of the literature revealed that
various laboratory investigations have
been conducted independently either on
fly ash / lime stabilization of soil or fiber
reinforced soil by many investigators like
Mitchell and Katti (1981),Maher et al
(1993), Consoli et al (2001),Ingles and
Metcalf (1972), Brown (1996),Gray and
Ohashi (1983) ,Gray and Al-Refeai
(1986), Gray and Maher (1989), Al-
Refeai (1991), Michaowski and Zhao
(1996), Michaowski and Cermak (2003),
Ranjan et al (1996),Consoli et al (2002).
Kumar S. and Tabor E. (2003) studied the
strength behavior of silty clay with nylon
fiber for varying degree of compaction.
The study on soil fly ash mixture
reinforced with polyester fibers was
conducted in India by Kaniraj S.R. and
Havanagi V.G. (2001).
All these investigations were limited in
their scope. The authors have not come
across any study about effect of
polypropylene fibers (with respect to

978-0-7695-3267-7/08 $25.00 © 2008 IEEE 1044

DOI 10.1109/ICETET.2008.208
content) on soil fly ash mixtures. In
present study, an attempt is made to
investigate the strength behavior of soil
fly ash mixtures reinforced with
polypropylene fibers in different amounts.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
Materials Used
Locally available soil used in the soil fly
ash mixtures was silt. The grain size
distribution curve indicated that soil was
primarily fine grained with approximately
85% silt size, 11.00% fine sand and 4.00
% clay size particles. The specific gravity
of soil solids was 2.66.
Fresh fly ash samples were collected from
Nashik Thermal Power Station, Eklahare,
Nashik (Maharahtra), India. The chemical
composition and physical properties of fly
ash are shown in Table 1.The fly ash is
classified as class F fly ash as per ASTM
C 618 (ASTM 1993).
The polypropylene fibers RP12 were
used. Polypropylene fibers are
hydrophobic, non corrosive and resistant
to alkalis, chemicals and chlorides. The
characteristics of polypropylene fibers
used are shown in Table 2.
Sample Proportions
An experimental work was carried out on
soil fly ash mixtures considering
following proportions-
i) Soil Fly Ash
a) Plain soil sample without fly ash.
b) 50% soil sample with 50 % fly ash.
c) Plain fly ash sample without soil..
ii) Polypropylene fibers (RP12) were
added in above combinations of soil fly
ash in varying percentage of 0.5 %, 1.0 %
and 1.5 % by dry weight of soil fly ash
mixture respectively.
Method of Soil Fly Ash Mixture
Proportions
The general expression for the total dry
weight W of a soil fly ash fiber mixture is
[1] W = Ws + Wf + Wps
Where Ws, Wf and Wps are weights of
soil, fly ash and polypropylene fiber
respectively. The proportions of soil, fly
ash and fiber in soil fly ash mixture are
defined as the ratio of their respective dry
weight to the combined dry weight of soil
fly ash. Thus, above equation can be
written as
[2] W = (Ps+Pf+Nps) (Ws+Wf)
1045
Where Ps= proportion of soil= Ws/
(Ws+Wf); Pf= proportion of fly ash
=Wf/(Ws+Wf) and Nps=Polypropylene
fiber content =Wps/(Ws+Wf).
The sum of Ps and Pf is unity. The
different values adopted in the present
study for Ps are 0.00, 0.50 and 1.00; Pf
are 1, 0.50 and 0.00 and Nps are 0.05, 0.1
and 0.15.
Sample Preparation and Testing
The samples were prepared by dry
blending of soil and fly ash, with required
amount of water obtained from standard
proctor test.In preparation of fiber
reinforced samples; the fibers were added
to moist mixture of soil fly ash. The
samples were mixed manually with
proper care to get homogeneous mix. Test
Specimens of size 38 mm x 76 mm were
prepared using mould by compacting
samples in the three layers at maximum
dry unit weight and optimum moisture
content determined by conducting a
Standard Proctor Test.
Strength characteristics of soil fly ash
mixtures, with or without fibers, were
measured in the terms of unconfined
compression strength. A series of UCS
tests was carried out on selected soil fly
ash mixtures with and without
polypropylene fibers to determine the
stress strain behavior. The tests were
performed as per Indian Standard
specifications(BIS1980/87 and BIS1973).
TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Observations from standard proctor tests
and unconfined compression tests had
been analyzed to study the effect of fly
ash and polypropylene fibers on
compaction characteristics and stress
strain behavior of soil.
Compaction Characteristics
Figure 1 shows the light (standard)
compaction curves of the soil fly ash
mixtures.
The addition of fly ash to the soil caused
significant reduction in the maximum dry
density and increase in the optimum
moisture content.
In soil, due to fiber addition, MDD
decreases and OMC increases. Whereas
in the other soil fly ash mixture, MDD
increases due to fibers. The OMC in fly
ash mixtures with fibers decreases with
 increases in the fibers content. The values
of maximum dry density (MDD) and
optimum moisture content (OMC) of
different soil fly ash mixtures with
various fiber content are summarized in
Table 3.The variation in MDD and OMC
of different soil fly ash mixtures with
fiber content are shown in Figure 2 and
Figure 3.
Unconfined Compression Tests-
Minimum of three specimens were
prepared for each combination of
variables and the specimens were
prepared as explained before in the
method of specimen preparation.
Specimens were tested at a deformation
rate of 1.20 mm/min and loading of
specimens continued till residual
characteristics were established .Figure 4
shows the stress strain response of soil
fly ash mixtures without polypropylene
fibers. These tests were performed to
establish base UCS of the mixtures so
that change in UCS due to addition of
polypropylene fibers could be estimated.
It is clear from figure that in
unreinforced state, fly ash exhibits higher
UCS and residual strength than soil and
soil fly ash specimens. Also, the stiffness
of fly ash specimen is slightly higher than
soil and soil fly ash specimens.
Figure 5 shows stress strain response of
soil fly ash specimen with 1.0 %
polypropylene fibers. It is clear from
figure that in fiber-reinforced specimens
does not show distinct reduction in axial
stress. UCS in such situations is generally
defined by permissible amount of
deformation. Usually UCS is taken at a
corresponding strain of 15 or 20 %. Thus,
in the present analysis, the UCS has been
defined as the stress corresponding to the
peak stress condition or at 15 % axial
strain, whichever is earlier.
By comparing UCS of soil fly ash
specimens, it is seen that, in unreinforced
condition, fly ash has a higher UCS than
soil and soil fly ash specimens. However,
the inclusion of fibers improves the UCS
of soil and soil fly ash specimens so much
that their UCS even super passes that of
fiber-reinforced fly ash.
Figure 6 shows how the UCS and residual
strengths increased with the increase in
the amount of fibers for particular
1046
proportion of soil fly ash specimens. It is
also seen from figure that for fiber
content more than 0.5 %, the specimens
become more ductile and UCS is defined
at an axial strain of 15 %.
Table 4 shows the summary of UCS and
residual strength measured, and ratios of
UCS and residual strengths with fibers to
UCS and residual strengths without
fibers, for all soil fly ash specimens
respectively.
Figure 7 and 8 show significant increase
in UCS and residual strengths.
Comparison of figures 7 and 8 indicates
that addition of polypropylene fibers
increased the residual strength of soil fly
ash specimens more than the increase in
UCS. Figures also clearly indicate that the
relative increase in both UCS and residual
strengths is significantly more for soil and
50% soil + 50 % fly ash specimens
compared to the fly ash specimens.
Conclusions:
From the investigations carried out, the
following conclusions are made
1)The results of light (Standard Proctor)
compaction tests of various soil fly ash
mixtures indicate that addition of fly ash
to soil decreases MDD with increase in
OMC. The inclusion of fibers in soil fly
ash mixture and fly ash shows increase in
MDD and decrease in OMC. However in
plain soil, MDD decreases with increase
in OMC.
2) The UCS and residual strength of soil
fly ash specimens increase significantly
due to addition of polypropylene fibers.
The increase in UCS and residual strength
are proportional to fiber content.
3) The effect of addition of polypropylene
fibers is comparatively more on residual
strength of soil fly ash specimens than the
UCS.
4)Normalized UCS and residual strengths
are comparatively more in soil and soil
fly ash specimens than fly ash specimens.
For the specimens with fiber content of
1.5 % , UCS increase was nearly 13 times
or 8 times the UCS of with 0% fibers, in
soil and soil fly ash specimens
respectively, compared to approximately
3 times in UCS of fly ash.
5) The addition of polypropylene fibers
imparts the ductility to soil fly ash
specimens. The ductile behavior increases Ingles, O.G., and Metcalf, J.B. (1972)
with increase in fiber content Soil stabilization principles and practice,
Acknowledgement: Butterworth, Sydney, Australia.
The authors are thankful to Mr.Ganesh Kumar, S. and Tabor, E. (2003) Strength
Swar of Rebuild Technologies, Mumbai characteristics of silty clay reinforced
for providing polypropylene fibers. with randomly oriented nylon fibers.
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical
References:- Engineering (EJGE).
Al- Refeai, T.O 1991. Behavior of Kaniraj, S.R and Havanagi, V.G.
granular soil reinforced with discrete 2001.Behavior of cement stabilized fiber
randomly oriented inclusions. Geotextile reinforced fly ash soil mixtures. Journal
and Geomembranes, 10 .pp319-333. of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Brown, R.W. 1996 Practical foundation Engineering, 127(7), July 2001, pp.574-
engineering handbook. Mc-Graw Hill, 584.
New York. Michalowski, R.L and Cermak, J. 2003.
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) .1980. Triaxial Compression of sand reinforced
Methods of test for soils: Determination with fibers. Journal of Geotechnical and
of water content –dry density relation Geoenvironmental Engineering, 129(2)
using light compaction, Compendium of Feb.2003, pp125-136.
Indian Standard on Soil engineering, Michalowski, R.L. and Zhao, A. 1996.
IS2720, Part 7, New Delhi. Failure of fiber reinforced granular soils.
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) 1973. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
Methods of test for soils: Determination ASCE 122 (3), pp226-234.
of unconfined compressive strength. Mitchell, J.K...and Katti, R.K.(1981) Soil
Compendium of Indian Standard on Soil improvement .state-of-the-art report.
engineering, IS2720, Part 10, New Delhi. Proc., 10th Int.Conf. on soil mechanics
Consoli, N.C., Prietto, P.D.M. and Pasa, and foundation engineering., International
G.S. 2002. Engineering behavior of a Society of Soil Mechanics and
sand reinforced with plastic waste. Foundations Engineering , London, pp
Journal of Geotechnical and 261-317.
Geoenvironmental Engg., ASCE 128(6), Ranjan, G. Vasan, R.M. and Charan, H.D.
June2002, pp 462-472. 1996.Probalistic Analysis of Randomly
Consoli, N.C., Prietto,P.D.M., Distributed Fiber Reinforced Soil. Journal
Carraro,J.A.H. and Heinech (2001) of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 122
Behavior of compacted soil-fly ash- (6), pp 419-426.
carbide lime mixtures.Journal of Appendix I –
Geotechnical and Geoenviromental List of Notations –The following
Engineering Volume 127, No.9, symbols are used in this paper-
September,2001 pp774-782. MDD = Maximum Dry Density.
Gray, D.H. and Maher, M.H. 1989. OMC = Optimum Moisture Content.
Admixture stabilization of sand with Ws = Weight of Soil.
discrete randomly distributed fibers. Wf = Weight of Fly Ash.
Proceedings of XII International Wps = Weight of polypropylene Fibers.
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Ps = Proportion of Soil.
Foundation Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Pf = Proportion of Fly Ash.
Brazil. Volume 2, pp1363-1366. Nps = Polypropylene Fiber content.
Gray, D.H. and Al-Refeai, T. 1986.
Behavior of fabric versus fiber reinforced
sand. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, 112(8), pp 804-826.
Gray, D.H. and Ohashi, H.
1983.Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in
sand. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, 109(3), March1983, pp -
335-353.

1047
 16.00 120

15.50 100 % Soil 0 % Polypropylene Fibers

100
15.00
100 % Fly Ash

A xial Stress (K N /m 2 )
14.50
D ry D e n s it y ( K N /m 2 )

80
14.00 50 %Soil +50% Fly Ash 50 % Soil + 50% Fly Ash
13.50 60

13.00
40 100% Soil
12.50
100 % Fly Ash
12.00 20
11.50

11.00 0
17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 0 1 2 3 4 5
Axial Strain (%)
Water Content (%)
Figure 4. Stress strain response of soil fly
Figure 1. Light (Standard Proctor) ash mixtures without polypropylene fiber
Compaction Curves of Soil Fly Ash
Mixtures (0 % fibers) 700

17.00 17.00 1 % Polypropylene Fibers

600 100 % Soil
16.50 16.50
100 % Soil 500
A xial Strss( K N /m 2 )

16.00 16.00

15.50 15.50 50 % Fly Ash + 50 % Soil

D ry D e n s it y ( K N /m 2 )

400
15.00 15.00
50% Soil + 50% FlyAsh 300
14.50 14.50
14.00 14.00 200
100 % Fly Ash
13.50 100% Fly Ash 13.50
100
13.00 13.00

12.50 12.50 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
12.00 12.00
Axial Strain (%)
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
Fiber Content(%)(12mm)
Figure 5. Stress strain response of soil fly
ash mixtures with 1 % polypropylene
Figure 2. Variation of Maximum Dry
fiber
Density with Fiber Content
800
35 35
50% Fly Ash + 50% Soil 1.5 % Fibers
700
O p t im u m M o is t u re C o n t e n t ( % )

32 32 600
100% Fly Ash
Axial Stress (K N/m 2 )

500 1.0 % Fibers

29 50% Soil + 50% FlyAsh 29

400

300
26 26 0.5 % Fibers

100 % Soil 200

23 23 100
0 % Fibers
0
20 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Axial Strain ( % )
Fiber Content(%)(12 mm) Figure 6. Stress strain response of 50 %
Figure 3. Variation of Optimum
fly ash + 50 % soil mixtures with varying
Moisture Content with Fiber Content
fiber content.

1048
 20 20
18
18 100 % Soil
16

R esid u al Stren g th ( n o fib er )

R esid u al Stren g th (w ith fib er)
16
14 14
U C S ( n o f ib e r )
U C S ( w it h f ib er)

12 100 % Soil 12
10 10 50 % Fly Ash+ 50% Soil
8
8
6 50 % Fly Ash+ 50% Soil
6
4
4
100 % Fly Ash 100 % Fly Ash
2
2
0
0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
FiberContent (% by weight )
FiberContent (% by w eight )
Figure7. Increase in the UCS with fiber
content. Figure 8. Increase in the residual strength
with fiber content.

Table 1. Chemical composition Table 3. Compaction characteristics of soil fly ash

and physical properties of fly ash mixtures without and with fibers
Composition /Property Value No. Mix Proportion Fiber Content M. D.D. O. M.C.
Silicon dioxide, SiO2 55.30 Soil : Fly Ash (%) (KN/m3) (%)
Aluminum oxide, Al2O3 25.70
1 0.00 15.70 24.69
Ferric oxide, Fe2O3 05.30 2 100 % : 0 % 0.50 15.50 25.40
Calcium oxide, CaO 05.60 3 1.00 15.40 25.80
Titanium oxide, TiO2 01.30 4 1.50 15.00 26.10
Potassium oxide, K2O 00.60 5 0.00 13.86 30.21
Sodium oxide, Na2O 00.40 6 50 % : 50 % 0.50 14.30 27.63
7 1.00 14.30 28.63
Magnesium oxide, MgO 02.10 8 1.50 14.70 26.30
Specific Gravity 2.16 9 0.00 12.56 33.99
Loss on Ignition (%) 01.90 10 0 % : 100 % 0.50 12.90 31.25
Moisture (%) 00.30 11 1.00 13.20 29.30
12 1.50 13.50 27.30

Table 2. Characteristics of
Table 4. Summary of the UCS and residual strengths of
polypropylene fibers *
samples
Property Value No Mix Fiber UCS UCS (with Residual Residual
Length (mm) 12 Soil: Fly Ash Content (KN/m2) fiber)/ Strength Strength (with
Aspect Ratio 300 (%) UCS (No (KN/m2) fiber)/ (no fiber)
Density (g/cc) 0.91 fiber)
Tensile Strength ( MPa) 450 1 100 % : 0 % 0.00 65.86 1.00 44.97 1.00
Elongation at break (%) 15-25 2 0.50 243.25 3.69 213.06 4.74
Melting Point (o C) 165 3 1.00 655.57 9.95 660.92 14.70
Heat Resistance (oC) <130 4 1.50 827.16 12.56 834.84 18.56
* Provided by supplier –Rebuild
5 0.00 90.69 1.00 75.16 1.00
Technologies, Mumbai. 6 50 % : 50% 0.50 268.20 2.96 255.71 3.40
7 1.00 472.98 5.22 473.95 6.30
8 1.50 690.77 7.62 687.01 9.14

9 0.00 115.25 1.00 99.39 1.00

10 0 % : 100% 0.50 131.10 1.14 130.10 1.30
11 1.00 241.98 2.10 247.84 2.49
12 1.50 310.18 2.69 313.07 3.15

1049