polymers

Article
An Experimental Study on the Shear Behaviors of
Polymer-Sand Composite Materials after Immersion
Jin Liu 1, * ID , Yuxia Bai 1 , Ding Li 1 , Qiongya Wang 1 , Wei Qian 1 , Ying Wang 1 ,
Debi Prasanna Kanungo 2 and Jihong Wei 1
1 School of Earth Sciences and Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China; byxhhu@163.com (Y.B.);
geofaris617@foxmail.com (D.L.); hhu_wqy@163.com (Q.W.); wei.geoserve@gmail.com (W.Q.);
hhuwy1@163.com (Y.W.); weijhhhu@163.com (J.W.)
2 Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)-Central Building Research Institute (CBRI),
Roorkee 247667, India; debi.kanungo@gmail.com
* Correspondence: jinliu920@163.com or mydream@hhu.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-139-1397-6590




Received: 26 July 2018; Accepted: 14 August 2018; Published: 18 August 2018


Abstract: Sand mixed with geotextile/fiber/cement/lime or non-traditional chemical additives to

form composite materials is recognized as an effective method for improving the sand properties.
In this work, the variation in properties of composite materials after immersion is reported which
has rarely appeared in the literature. The focus of this study is to evaluate the shear behaviors of
polymer-sand composite material after immersion with direct shear tests. Several factors which
may influence the shear behaviors after immersion are analyzed. The results demonstrate that this
composite material still has good shear behaviors after immersion when compared to the purely sand
material. The shear behaviors are improved with an increment in the curing time, polymer content
and sand dry density while there is a decrease in the shear behaviors with increasing immersion
time. The interaction between sand particles and the polymer are analyzed with Scanning Electron
Microscope (SEM). The polymer membranes are formed by polymer enwrapping and connected sand
particles to build an elastic and viscous structure in the sand that increases the interlocking forces
between sand particles and decreases the void ratio of this material. The membranes are softened in
water resulting in a decrease in the shear strength. Moreover, other factors affect the shear behaviors
by improving the completeness and stability of this structure.

Keywords: polymers; sand; composite materials; shear behavior; immersion

1. Introduction
As a natural material, sand is widely used in subgrade constructions, foundation work, and slope
engineering as a buffer/backfill material with the advantages of being widely distributed, easy to
draw and low-cost materials. However, the inherent characteristics of sandy soil with a loose structure,
poor adhesion, and less clay content easily results in various geologic disasters, e.g., the slope surface
easily tends to form gullies with water erosion and results in soil and water losses; saturated sand
is prone to liquefy under dynamic loading, thus resulting in foundation failures. Erosion and bank
collapses induced by the action of ship waves and river erosion usually occur in river banks.
Therefore, sand reinforcement is a hot topic in geotechnical engineering, and sand mixed with
other reinforced materials to form a kind of composite materials is internationally recognized as
an effective method for improving the sand’s properties [1,2]. In earlier times, people mixed sand with
geomembrane/geotextile or cement/lime/fly ash to improve the physical and engineering behaviors
of the soil to achieve a specific level of performance [3–7]. With in-depth research, fibers attracted the
interested attention of scholars and researchers with several strengths [8–11], e.g., it is easily mixed

Polymers 2018, 10, 924; doi:10.3390/polym10080924 www.mdpi.com/journal/polymers

Polymers 2018, 10, 924 2 of 16

randomly and evenly with soil, it avoids forming some potential weak planes with great strength,
and it has gained plenty of important achievements [12–15]. The influence of fiber types including
synthetic fiber, plant fiber, fiber sizes (length, diameter), and fiber contents (i.e., the weight ratio of
fibers to soil) on the resistance of liquefaction, strength behaviors, and mechanical mechanism are
researched in depth. On the other hand, the brittle behaviors of cement/lime treated soil, which is
prone to cracking and may influence the stability of structures, play negative effects on the local
environment [16–20]. Therefore, non-traditional chemical additives including liquid polymer, resins,
acids, silicates, and ions are also used as a cost-effective and flexible option [21–24]. Liu et al. [25]
illustrated that the presence of the organic polymers could effectively enhance the strength behaviors of
the treated sand. Rezaeimalek et al. [26] discussed the influence of the curing method and mix design
on the performance of stabilized sand with Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate. Ajalloeian et al. [27]
investigated the variation in the improvement of sandy soil mixed with polyvinyl acetate in different
dry densities. In addition, rheology is an important parameter to composite materials [28,29].
All the mentioned research achievements illustrate that these methods can usefully improve the
sand behaviors. There are many studies on increasing strength, reducing permeability, improving the
resistance to liquefaction, and weathering action [30–34]. However, very limited studies are carried
out to evaluate the behaviors of composite materials after immersion. Moreover, the variation in
properties of composite materials after immersion is crucial for roadways, embankments, levees, and
water channel constructions [26].
In this study, sand is mixed with a polymer to form a composite material and the shear behaviors
of the polymer-sand composite material after immersion are studied by methods of laboratory direct
shear tests. Based on the tests results and comparison of the SEM photomicrographs before and after
immersion, the interaction mechanism of the composite materials is analyzed in-depth. The research
results and associated discussions provide the interaction mechanism of the composite materials for
researchers and practicing engineers.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sand and Polymer Stabilizer

The sand used in this study is collected from Nanjing, eastern China. The physical behavior of
the sand is obtained by a series of laboratory tests and the results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. The basic behaviors of the used sand.

Weight Size Distribution Range of Sand Particle (mm)

Percentage 2–1 1–0.5 0.5–0.25 0.25–0.1 0.1–0.075
Content (%)
0.2 1 17.1 48.9 31.7 2.1
Specific Uniformity Gradation
Physical Dry Density ρ (g/cm3 ) Void Ratio e
Gravity Gs Coefficient Cu Coefficient Cc
Parameters
ρmax = 1.69 ρmin = 1.36 emax = 0.97 emin = 0.59 2.65 2.27 1.13
1 The weight of sand particles, which ranged from 1 to 2 mm accounts for 0.2% of the total sand. Others are similar to it.

A polymer stabilizer, a light-yellow liquid, was used in this study. It contains plenty of
macromolecular long chains, including abundant functional groups (–NCO) and hydrophilic
groups. The polymer stabilizer is mainly prepared by the reaction of poly-oxypropylene diol
(PPG, Jining Hongming Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Jining, China), poly-oxyethylene glycol
(PEG, Shanghai Ika Biotechnology Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China), and an excessive dose of Toluene
diisocyanate (TDI, Nantong Runfeng Petrochemical Co. Ltd., Nantong, China) [25,34]. The structural
formula of the polymer is given as Formula (1), and the properties are shown in Table 2.

O = C = N [R1 − NH − CO − O − R2 − O − CO − NH]n R1 − N = C = O (1)

The polymer stabilizer is mainly prepared by the reaction of poly-oxypropylene diol (PPG, Jining
Hongming Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Jining, China), poly-oxyethylene glycol (PEG, Shanghai Ika
Biotechnology Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China), and an excessive dose of Toluene diisocyanate (TDI,
Nantong Runfeng Petrochemical Co. Ltd., Nantong, China) [25,34]. The structural formula of the
polymer
Polymers is given
2018, 10, 924 as Formula (1), and the properties are shown in Table 2. 3 of 16

O = C = N [ R − NH − CO − O − R − O − CO − NH ] R − N = C = O (1)

where R11 == , R22 ==PEG

PEG and/or
and/orPPG.
PPG.
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 15
Table 2. The properties of the polymer stabilizer.
Table 2. The properties of the polymer stabilizer.
PH Specific Gravity Gs Viscosity (mPa·s) Solid Content (%) Coagulation Time (s)
PH Specific Gravity Gs Viscosity (mPa·s) Solid Content (%) Coagulation Time (s)
7 1.15 650–800 88 60–1600
7 1.15 650–800 88 60–1600

2.2. Polymer-Sand
2.2. Polymer-Sand Composite
Composite Material
Material Preparation
Preparation
The sand
The sandisismixed
mixedwithwith thethe polymer
polymer at different
at different weight
weight ratiosratios
of theof the polymer
polymer to the
to the soil (i.e.,soil
Wr
(i.e., W r = (W p /W s ) × 100% = 0%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%, Test Number T
= (Wp/Ws) × 100% = 0, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%, Test Number T13–T17). The water content is maintained at 13 –T 17 ). The water content
is maintained
10% at 10% duecharacteristics.
due to the sand-water to the sand-water characteristics.
The following The following
process obtains process obtains
the polymer-sand composite the
polymer-sand
material. composite
Firstly, material.
the prepared polymer Firstly, the prepared
and distilled waterpolymer
were added andtogether
distilledtowater were added
the container and
stirred to get an evenly viscous solution. Then this solution was put into the prepared sandwas
together to the container and stirred to get an evenly viscous solution. Then this solution put
(Figure
into(i.e.,
the prepared sand 3
1a) ρ = 1.4, 1.5, 1.6(Figure 1a) (i.e.,
g/cm3, Test ρ = 1.4,
Number T18–T 1.5, 1.6 g/cm , Test Number T18 –T20
20) and mixed to obtain uniform
) and mixed
polymer-sand
to obtain uniform polymer-sand mixture (Figure 1b). Secondly,
mixture (Figure 1b). Secondly, the prepared mixture was placed into the cylinder molds the prepared mixture was with
placed a
into the cylinder molds with a diameter of 61.8 mm and a height of
diameter of 61.8 mm and a height of 20 mm. The static pressure was applied to the cylinder molds 20 mm. The static pressure
was
by a applied
jack for to the cylinder
several minutes. molds
Afterby a jack
that, the for several
specific minutes.(Figure
specimens After that, the specific
1c) were air curedspecimens
at room
(Figure 1c) were air cured at room temperature (20 ± 2 ◦ C) for different times (i.e., T = 1, 6, 24, 48, 72 h,
temperature (20 ± 2 °C) for different times (i.e., Tc = 1, 6, 24, 48, 72 h, Test Number T1–T5). Finally, the c
Test Number
cured specimen T1 –T 5 ). Finally,
was placed the
intocured specimen was
the transparent placed into
container filledthewith
transparent
water. Itcontainer filled with
was immersed for
water. It was immersed for different times (i.e., T = 1, 6, 24, 48, 72, 168, 216
different times (i.e., Ti = 1, 6, 24, 48, 72, 168, 216 h, Test Number T6–T12). Thus, the polymer-sand
i h, Test Number T 6 –T 12 ).
Thus, the polymer-sand specimens
specimens are obtained for further testing. are obtained for further testing.

Figure 1. (a) The prepared sand; (b) prepared polymer-sand composite material; (c) prepared
Figure 1. (a) The prepared sand; (b) prepared polymer-sand composite material; (c) prepared specimen.
specimen.

2.3. Direct Shear Test

2.3. Direct Shear Test
The shear properties of the polymer-sand composite material after immersion are studied by
The shear properties of the polymer-sand composite material after immersion are studied by the
the direct shear tests. They are carried out with ZJ typed strain control direct shear apparatus [25].
direct shear tests. They are carried out with ZJ typed strain control direct shear apparatus [25]. The
The shear stress-displacement curve is pictured separately under a normal stress (σ) of 100, 200, 300,
shear stress-displacement curve is pictured separately under a normal stress (σ) of 100, 200, 300, 400
400 kPa at a shear rate of 2.4 mm/min. The shear strength (τ) is defined as the peak value or the value
kPa at a shear rate of 2.4 mm/min. The shear strength (τ) is defined as the peak value or the value of
of shear stress corresponding to a 4 mm displacement of shear curves. The shear strength parameters
shear stress corresponding to a 4 mm displacement of shear curves. The shear strength parameters
including cohesion (c) and internal friction angle (ϕ) are calculated by Coulomb’s law of shear strength,
including cohesion (c) and internal friction angle (φ) are calculated by Coulomb’s law of shear
as shown in Formula (2):
strength, as shown in Formula (2):
τn = σn × tan ϕ + c (2)
𝜏 = 𝜎 × tan𝜑 + 𝑐 (2)
where τ n (kPa) is the shear strength; σn (kPa) is the normal stress; ϕ (◦ ) is the internal friction angle;
where τn (kPa)
and c (kPa) is the
is the shear strength;
cohesion. Cohesionσn (kPa) is the
(c) and thenormal stress;
internal φ (°)angle
friction is the(ϕ)
internal
reflectfriction angle;
the strength
and c (kPa) is the cohesion. Cohesion (c) and the internal friction angle (φ)
characteristics of the material itself and only change with the variety of the material. reflect the strength
characteristics of the material itself and only change with the variety of the material.

3. Results

3.1. The SEM Studies and Analysis

The variation in the microstructure of the polymer-sand composite material was studied by
scanning electron microscopy (SEM, SU3500, Hitachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan) at an acceleration
voltage of 5 kV and a beam current of 100 μA. The SEM specimen was prepared in the following
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 4 of 16

3. Results

3.1. The SEM Studies and Analysis

The variation in the microstructure of the polymer-sand composite material was studied by
scanning electron microscopy (SEM, SU3500, Hitachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan) at an acceleration
voltage of 5 kV and a beam current of 100 µA. The SEM specimen was prepared in the following
manner. Firstly, the polymer-sand composite material specimen (2 mm × 2 mm × 1 mm,
length × width × height) was dried in an oven at around 90 ◦ C for 8 h. Secondly, the dried specimen
was fixed on the object stage by double-sided adhesive tape and then a conductive silver paste was
used to connect the sample surface and the object stage. After the conductive silver paste dried,
the specimen surface was sputtered with gold at a voltage of 700 V for a minute by the ion sputter
Polymers
(E-1010,2018, 10, x FOR
Hitachi, PEER REVIEW
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan). 4 of 15
A photomicrograph from Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) of polymer-sand composite
width
material× height) was dried in
before immersion anpresented
was oven at around 90 °C
in Figure 2a.for
As8seen,
h. Secondly, the dried
the polymer specimen
membrane formedwasby
fixed
the
on the object stage by double-sided adhesive tape and then a conductive silver
reaction with the polymer and water, as shown in Formulas (3) and (4), builds physicochemical bonds paste was used to
connect the sample surface and the object stage. After the conductive silver paste
between macromolecular long chains and sand particles. The –NCO groups of the polymer readily dried, the specimen
surface
reacted was
withsputtered with gold
the –OH groups at a voltage
of water as shownof 700 V for a minute
in Formula (2); thenbythe
theresulted
ion sputter (E-1010,
product Hitachi,
continued to
Chiyoda-ku,
react with theTokyo,
polymer Japan).
to form macromolecular chains as shown in Formula (3). Thereby, it built bonds
A photomicrograph
between the macromolecular fromlongScanning
chains Electron
and sandMicroscopy (SEM) ofthe
particles. Moreover, polymer-sand
membrane iscomposite
insoluble
material
in water. before immersion was presented in Figure 2a. As seen, the polymer membrane formed by
the reaction with the polymer and water, as shown in Formulas (3) and (4), builds physicochemical
bondsObetween
= C = N −macromolecular
R − N = C = O + 2H long chains and sand particles. The –NCO groups of the polymer
2 O → HO − CO − NH − R − NH − CO − OH → H2 N − R − NH2 + 2CO2 . (3)
readily reacted with the –OH groups of water as shown in Formula (2); then the resulted product
continued to react with the polymer to form macromolecular chains as shown in Formula (3). Thereby,
1)H2 N − Rthe
(n + between
it built bonds − NH 2 + nO = C = N − long
macromolecular R − Nchains → Hsand
= C = Oand − NH − COMoreover,
2 N [Rparticles. − NH]2n R −the
NHmembrane
2 (4)
is insoluble in water.

Figure 2. The SEM photomicrograph of the polymer-sand composite material for different periods:
Figure 2. The SEM photomicrograph of the polymer-sand composite material for different periods:
(a) Before immersion; (b) After immersion.
(a) Before immersion; (b) After immersion.

O =With
C = Nthese
− R − Nbonds,
= C = Othe
+ 2H O → HO − CO enwrap
membranes − NH − R − NH −
and CO − OH sand
connect → H Nparticles
− R − NH with
+ 2CO each
. other(3)
to form
an elastic and viscous structure in the polymer-sand mixture. The formed structure would (4)
n + 1 H N − R − NH + nO = C = N − R − N = C = O → H N [R − NH − CO − NH ] R − NH
increase
the bonding and interlinking forces, and decrease the void ratio of the polymer-sand mixture.
With these
Therefore, bonds, the membranes
the characteristics enwrap and
of the polymer-sand connectmaterial
composite sand particles withimproved.
have been each otherThe
to form
SEM
an
image of the polymer-sand mixture immersed in water for 9 days is presented in Figure 2b. It canthe
elastic and viscous structure in the polymer-sand mixture. The formed structure would increase be
bonding
observedandthatinterlinking
the polymerforces, and decrease
membrane thea void
still holds ratio and
complete of the polymer-sand
stable structure inmixture. Therefore,
the polymer-sand
the characteristics
mixture. While theofspecimens
the polymer-sand composite
are immersed material
in water, have been improved.
the membranes Theswelled
softened and SEM image of the
(Figure 3),
polymer-sand mixture immersed in water for 9 days
resulting in a decrease of the strength characteristic. is presented in Figure 2b. It can be observed that
the polymer membrane still holds a complete and stable structure in the polymer-sand mixture. While
the specimens are immersed in water, the membranes softened and swelled (Figure 3), resulting in a
decrease of the strength characteristic.
bonding and interlinking forces, and decrease the void ratio of the polymer-sand mixture. Therefore,
the characteristics of the polymer-sand composite material have been improved. The SEM image of the
polymer-sand mixture immersed in water for 9 days is presented in Figure 2b. It can be observed that
the polymer membrane still holds a complete and stable structure in the polymer-sand mixture. While
the specimens
Polymers are immersed in water, the membranes softened and swelled (Figure 3), resulting5 of
2018, 10, 924 in16a
decrease of the strength characteristic.

Figure 3.
Figure 3. The
Theschematic
schematicdiagram
diagramofofthethe
polymer-sand composite
polymer-sand material
composite for for
material different periods:
different (a)
periods:
Before immersion; (b) After immersion.
(a) Before immersion; (b) After immersion.

3.2. Direct Shear Test Results

The trials of the laboratory direct shear tests were conducted on the polymer-sand composite
material after immersion. Several factors that will influence the shear behaviors are investigated in
detail, including the curing time (Tc ), polymer content (W r ), sand dry density (ρ), and immersion
time (Ti ). The direct shear tests results are summarized in Table 3. Figure 4a presents the shape of the
specimens with different polymer contents (i.e., W r = 0%, 1%, 3%, 5%) after immersion in water for
48 h. As shown, the specimen with 0% polymer disintegrates totally while those specimens mixed
with the polymer remain intact without any disintegration or destruction behaviors. Such behavior is
induced by the appearance of the polymer membranes, which improves the adhesion between the
sand particles. It is noted that the zero value approach of the adhesion of sand was considered as
a reference because it is difficult to carry out a direct shear test on the disintegrated specimen. It can
be known from Figure 4b that the specimens’ body largely remains intact after carrying out direct
shear tests. There is just a small amount of shear displacement in the middle section of the specimens.
The detail analyses with variation in the shear properties of the polymer-sand composite material after
immersion are given in the following section.

Table 3. The direct shear test results of the specimens after immersion.

Polymer Dry Curing Immersion Shear Strength

Test Shear Strength (kPa)
Parameters
Number Content Density Time Time
(%) (g/cm3 ) (hour) (hour) σ = 100 kPa σ = 200 kPa σ = 300 kPa σ = 400 kPa c (kPa) ϕ (◦ )
T1 2 1.4 1 48 63.69 115.38 142.30 204.80 18.98 24.23
T2 2 1.4 6 48 69.23 119.23 158.30 219.48 19.10 26.10
T3 2 1.4 24 48 79.24 128.84 166.34 225.95 30.67 25.64
T4 2 1.4 48 48 81.73 130.76 169.22 228.39 32.91 25.64
T5 2 1.4 72 48 99.53 146.15 177.56 249.70 47.76 25.64
T6 2 1.4 48 1 99.03 155.38 211.53 246.14 53.65 26.10
T7 2 1.4 48 6 92.73 138.46 206.72 242.04 40.93 27.02
T8 2 1.4 48 24 85.57 135.30 173.07 229.62 38.42 25.17
T9 2 1.4 48 48 81.73 130.76 169.22 228.39 32.91 25.64
T10 2 1.4 48 72 84.23 121.15 162.54 227.52 31.04 25.17
T11 2 1.4 48 168 78.46 119.23 167.83 219.61 28.27 25.27
T12 2 1.4 48 216 76.61 112.69 162.51 212.94 26.48 24.70
T13 1 1.4 48 48 73.07 104.23 159.06 214.37 18.00 25.64
T14 2 1.4 48 48 81.73 130.76 169.22 228.39 32.91 25.64
T15 3 1.4 48 48 99.99 151.02 196.62 241.20 54.91 25.17
T16 4 1.4 48 48 107.69 169.22 218.11 248.95 67.83 25.17
T17 5 1.4 48 48 122.69 183.65 220.54 269.14 79.94 24.70
T18 2 1.4 48 48 81.73 130.76 169.22 228.39 32.91 25.64
T19 2 1.5 48 48 97.61 134.22 201.17 251.99 38.74 27.92
T20 2 1.6 48 48 110.76 156.72 212.35 283.88 47.18 28.37
 induced by the appearance of the polymer membranes, which improves the adhesion between the
sand particles. It is noted that the zero value approach of the adhesion of sand was considered as a
reference because it is difficult to carry out a direct shear test on the disintegrated specimen. It can be
known from Figure 4b that the specimens’ body largely remains intact after carrying out direct shear
tests. There is just a small amount of shear displacement in the middle section of the specimens. The
Polymers
detail 10, 924 with variation in the shear properties of the polymer-sand composite material after6 of 16
2018,analyses
immersion are given in the following section.

Figure 4. The shape of the polymer-sand composite material for different periods: (a) After immersion
Figure 4. The shape of the polymer-sand composite material for different periods: (a) After immersion
for 48 h; (b) After carrying out the direct shear test.
for 48 h; (b) After carrying out the direct shear test.
Table 3. The direct shear test results of the specimens after immersion.
3.2.1. The Effect of Curing Time on Shear Behaviors Shear Strength
Shear Strength (kPa)
Test Polymer Dry Density Curing Immersion Parameters
Figure
Number 5aContent
shows (%) the (g/cm
typical
3) shear
Time curves
(hour) of theσ =specimens
Time (hour) 100 σ = 200 with
σ = 300different
σ = 400 normal
c (kPa)
stresses.
φ (°)
kPa kPa kPa
3 dry kPa
The mixture
T1
specimens
2
were 1.4
prepared 1
with 2% polymer
48
at
63.69
1.4 g/cm
115.38 142.30
density,
204.80
48 h
18.98
of air curing,
24.23
and 48 hTof 2 immersion 2 in water.
1.4 As expected,6 the shear
48 stress
69.23 increases
119.23 monotonically
158.30 219.48 with
19.10 the increase
26.10
T3 2 1.4 24 48 79.24 128.84 166.34 225.95 30.67 25.64
of the shear
T4 displacement
2 before
1.4 the shear
48 strength 48 is reached.
81.73 After
130.76 that, the shear
169.22 228.39 stress
32.91maintains
25.64 at
a stable value
T5 with 2 increasing 1.4 displacement.
72 Additionally,
48 99.53 the 146.15
shear stress
177.56 of249.70
the mixture
47.76 specimen
25.64
T6 2 1.4 48 1 99.03 155.38 211.53 246.14 53.65 26.10
with a large
T7 normal2 stress has1.4a bigger value 48 than the
6 ones92.73
with small
138.46 normal
206.72 stress.
242.04 The representative
40.93 27.02
Polymers 2018,
T8
10, x FOR
2
PEER REVIEW
1.4 48 24 85.57 135.30 173.07 229.62 38.42 25.17
6 of 15
shear curves
T9
of the 2
mixture specimen
1.4
with
48
a normal48
stress of
81.73
300 kPa
130.76
cured
169.22
for different
228.39
times
32.91
is shown
25.64
in FigureT10times
different 5b, and is it
2 is observed
shown in 1.4
Figure from5b,the
48 figure that,
72
and it is observed prior
84.23to reaching
121.15
from 119.23
the figure the that,
162.54 shear strength,
227.52
prior 31.04 the 25.17slopes
to reaching the
T11 2 1.4 48 168 78.46 167.83 219.61 28.27 25.27
of the curves were not significantly affected by the curing time.
shear strength, the slopes of the curves were not significantly affected by the curing time.
T 12 2 1.4 48 216 76.61 112.69
Additionally,
162.51
with
212.94
the
26.48
increasing
24.70
displacement,
T13
Additionally, the1curing
with time
1.4 plays an 48 active effect
48
the on the
73.07 shear stress
104.23 behavior.
159.06 214.37 Figure
18.00 625.64
displays
T14 2 the increasing
1.4 displacement,
48 48 curing
81.73 time plays
130.76 an
169.22 active
228.39effect
32.91on the
25.64 shear
the relationship
stress behavior.
T15 between
Figure
3 shear
6 displays
1.4 stress,
the 48test time,
relationship and curing
48 between time.
99.99 shear As shown
151.02stress, obviously
test 241.20
196.62 time, and in the
25.17figure,
54.91curing time.
T16 4 1.4 48 48 107.69 169.22 218.11 248.95 67.83 25.17
the shear
As shown stress increases rapidly with an increment in the test time, and increases slowly to maintain
T17 obviously 5 in the figure,
1.4 the shear
48 stress48increases rapidly
122.69 183.65with an increment
220.54 269.14 in the 24.70
79.94 test time,
a stable
and Tvalue
increases
18 while2
slowly the
to shear
1.4 strength
maintain a 48 is reached.
stable value 48 Figure
while 81.73 6 also
the 130.76shows
shear 169.22that228.39
strength is the curing
reached. 32.91 time
Figure25.64 plays
6 also
T19 2 1.5 48 48 97.61 134.22 201.17 251.99 38.74 27.92
an active
shows that role on the
T20 the curing 2
shear
time stress
plays
1.6
when the role
an active
48
shear strength
on48 the shear is stress
110.76
reached.when212.35
156.72 the shear 283.88strength
47.18 is28.37
reached.

3.2.1. The Effect of Curing Time on Shear Behaviors

Figure 5a shows the typical shear curves of the specimens with different normal stresses. The
mixture specimens were prepared with 2% polymer at 1.4 g/cm3 dry density, 48 h of air curing, and
48 h of immersion in water. As expected, the shear stress increases monotonically with the increase
of the shear displacement before the shear strength is reached. After that, the shear stress maintains
at a stable value with increasing displacement. Additionally, the shear stress of the mixture specimen
with a large normal stress has a bigger value than the ones with small normal stress. The
representative shear curves of the mixture specimen with a normal stress of 300 kPa cured for

Figure
Figure 5.
5. The
The typical
typical shear
shear curves:(a)
curves:(a) With
With different
different normal
normal stress
stress σ;
σ; (b)
(b)With
With different
different curing
curing times
times TTcc. .

The shear strengths of the specimens cured for different times are summarized in Table 3 and
Figure 7a displays the relationship between shear strength and normal stress. As shown in Figure 7a,
the shear strength of the specimen with a large normal stress is higher than that with a small normal
stress and increases slightly with an increase in the curing time. For the specimen cured for 48 h,
the shear strength increased from 81.73 to 228.39 kPa, while the normal stress increased from 100 to
400 kPa (Table 3). Additionally, for the mixture specimen with a normal stress of 300 kPa, cured for
an hour, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h, the shear strength is 142.30, 158.30, 166.34, 169.22, 177.56 kPa, respectively
(Table 3). Based on these shear strength, Coulomb’s law of shear strength was used to compute the
cohesion and internal friction angle of the composite material (Figure 7a). The calculated cohesion
and internal friction angle are presented in Table 3 and Figure 7b. As expected, the cohesion shows
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 7 of 16

an increasing trend with increments in the curing time. The cohesion values of the specimens cured for
6, 24, 48, and 72 h are 19.10, 30.67, 32.91, and 47.76 kPa, respectively. The cohesion is increased by 0.12,
11.69, 13.93, and 27.78 kPa compared to that of 18.98 kPa with one hour of curing time. Figure 6b also
shows that the internal friction angle varies gently with the increase in the curing time and fluctuates
at a value ◦
Figureof5.25
The. typical shear curves:(a) With different normal stress σ; (b) With different curing times Tc.

Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 15

for 6, 24, 48, and 72 h are 19.10, 30.67, 32.91, and 47.76 kPa, respectively. The cohesion is increased by
0.12, 11.69, 13.93, and 27.78 kPa compared to that of 18.98 kPa with one hour of curing time. Figure
6b also shows that the internal friction angle varies gently with the increase in the curing time and
Figure 6. The relationships between shear stress, test time, and Tc.
of 25°.6. The relationships between shear stress, test time, and Tc .
fluctuates at a value Figure
The shear strengths of the specimens cured for different times are summarized in Table 3 and
Figure 7a displays the relationship between shear strength and normal stress. As shown in Figure 7a,
the shear strength of the specimen with a large normal stress is higher than that with a small normal
stress and increases slightly with an increase in the curing time. For the specimen cured for 48 h, the
shear strength increased from 81.73 to 228.39 kPa, while the normal stress increased from 100 to 400
kPa (Table 3). Additionally, for the mixture specimen with a normal stress of 300 kPa, cured for an
hour, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h, the shear strength is 142.30, 158.30, 166.34, 169.22, 177.56 kPa, respectively
(Table 3). Based on these shear strength, Coulomb’s law of shear strength was used to compute the
cohesion and internal friction angle of the composite material (Figure 7a). The calculated cohesion
and internal friction angle are presented in Table 3 and Figure 7b. As expected, the cohesion shows
an increasing trend with increments in the curing time. The cohesion values of the specimens cured

Figure 7.
Figure 7. (a) The relationship
(a) The relationship between
between shear
shear strength
strength ττ and
and normal
normal stress σ; (b)
stress σ; The relationship
(b) The relationship
between the
between the shear
shear strength
strength parameters
parameters (c
(c and
and ϕ)
φ) and
and curing time TTcc..
curing time

3.2.2. The
3.2.2. The Effect of Immersion
Effect of Immersion Time Time on
on Shear
Shear Behaviors
Behaviors
The polymer
The polymer membrane
membrane formedformed by
by the
the polymer
polymer stabilizer
stabilizer would
would bebe softened
softened while
while immersed
immersed in in
water, which may change the behaviors of the composite material. The effect of the
water, which may change the behaviors of the composite material. The effect of the immersion time on immersion time
on the
the shear
shear properties
properties is studied
is studied byby carrying
carrying out
out directshear
direct sheartests.
tests.Figure
Figure8a 8ashows
showsthethe typical
typical shear
shear
curves of
curves of the
the specimen
specimen compacted
compactedwith withaa2%2%polymer
polymeratataadry
drydensity
densityofof1.4
1.4g/cm
g/cm3 cured
3 for 48
cured for 48 h
h and
and
immersed in water for 72 h. It can be observed that the shear stress of all the mixture specimens
immersed in water for 72 h. It can be observed that the shear stress of all the mixture specimens follow follow
aa relatively
relatively gentle
gentle gradient
gradient with
with increasing
increasing displacement,
displacement, and
and then
then remain
remain stable
stable with
with an
an increment
increment
in the displacement. Figure 8a also displays that the normal stress plays an active
in the displacement. Figure 8a also displays that the normal stress plays an active effect on the effect on the shear
shear
behavior of the mixture specimen. Figure 8b presents the shear curves of the specimens testedonona
behavior of the mixture specimen. Figure 8b presents the shear curves of the specimens tested
normal stress of 300 kPa. It can be seen that the shear behavior of the specimen is reduced with an
increase in the immersion time. The variation in the shear stress of the specimens tested with a normal
stress of 300 kPa with the test time and immersion time is shown in Figure 9. As shown, the shear
stress presents a clear variation trend with increasing test time, increasing at first to the peak value
and then keeping stable around this value. It also can be seen from Figure 9 that the shear stress
water, which may change the behaviors of the composite material. The effect of the immersion time
on the shear properties is studied by carrying out direct shear tests. Figure 8a shows the typical shear
curves of the specimen compacted with a 2% polymer at a dry density of 1.4 g/cm3 cured for 48 h and
immersed in water for 72 h. It can be observed that the shear stress of all the mixture specimens follow
a relatively gentle gradient with increasing displacement, and then remain stable with an increment
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 8 of 16
in the displacement. Figure 8a also displays that the normal stress plays an active effect on the shear
behavior of the mixture specimen. Figure 8b presents the shear curves of the specimens tested on a
normal
a normal stress of of
stress 300 kPa.
300 kPa.It can be be
It can seen that
seen thethe
that shear behavior
shear behaviorof the specimen
of the specimenis reduced
is reduced with an
with
increase
an increasein the
in immersion time.time.
the immersion The variation in the shear
The variation in thestress
shearofstress
the specimens tested with
of the specimens a normal
tested with
stress of 300
a normal kPaofwith
stress 300 the
kPatestwithtime
theand
test immersion time is shown
time and immersion time in Figure 9.
is shown in As shown,
Figure 9. As theshown,
shear
stress presents
the shear stress apresents
clear variation trend with
a clear variation increasing
trend test time,
with increasing increasing
test at first to
time, increasing the peak
at first to thevalue
peak
and then keeping stable around this value. It also can be seen from Figure 9 that the shear stress
value and then keeping stable around this value. It also can be seen from Figure 9 that the shear stress
decreases
decreases with an increment in the immersion time when the test time is over two minutes.

Figure 8. The
Figure 8. The presentative
presentativeshear
shearstress-displacement
stress-displacement curves:
curves: (a)(a) With
With different
different normal
normal stressstress
σ; (b)σ;With
(b)
With different immersion time
different immersion time Ti . T i.
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

Figure 9.
Figure 9. The
The relationships between shear
relationships between shear stress,
stress, test
test time,
time, and
and T
Tii..

The shear strengths of the mixture specimens immersed in water for different times are given in
The shear strengths of the mixture specimens immersed in water for different times are given in
Table 3 and Figure 10a. They all obviously show that the shear stress increases with an increase in
Table 3 and Figure 10a. They all obviously show that the shear stress increases with an increase in the
the normal stress, and decreases with an increase in the immersion time. While the normal stress
normal stress, and decreases with an increase in the immersion time. While the normal stress increases
increases from 100 to 400 kPa with an increment of 100 kPa, the shear strength keeps stable at about
from 100 to 400 kPa with an increment of 100 kPa, the shear strength keeps stable at about 80, 120, 160,
80, 120, 160, and 220 kPa, respectively. For the specimen immersed in water for different times (i.e.,
and 220 kPa, respectively. For the specimen immersed in water for different times (i.e., Ti = one hour, 6,
Ti = one hour, 6, 24, 48, 72, 168 and 216 h) and tested with a normal stress σ = 400 kPa, the shear
24, 48, 72, 168 and 216 h) and tested with a normal stress σ = 400 kPa, the shear strength is 246.14, 242.04,
strength is 246.14, 242.04, 229.62, 228.39, 227.52, 219.61, and 212.94 kPa, respectively. The calculated
229.62, 228.39, 227.52, 219.61, and 212.94 kPa, respectively. The calculated shear strength parameters of
shear strength parameters of the specimens are shown in Table 3 and Figure 10b. As shown, the
the specimens are shown in Table 3 and Figure 10b. As shown, the cohesion changes with a decreasing
cohesion changes with a decreasing trend with the increasing immersion time, and the cohesion
trend with the increasing immersion time, and the cohesion keeps stable at a value of about 30 kPa
keeps stable at a value of about 30 kPa while the specimen is immersed in water for more than 9 days.
It also can be observed from Figure 10b that the friction angle varies gently with the change in
immersion time, and is maintained steady at 25° when the immersion time exceeds 24 h.
the normal stress, and decreases with an increase in the immersion time. While the normal stress
increases from 100 to 400 kPa with an increment of 100 kPa, the shear strength keeps stable at about
80, 120, 160, and 220 kPa, respectively. For the specimen immersed in water for different times (i.e.,
Ti = one hour, 6, 24, 48, 72, 168 and 216 h) and tested with a normal stress σ = 400 kPa, the shear
strength is 246.14, 242.04, 229.62, 228.39, 227.52, 219.61, and 212.94 kPa, respectively. The calculated
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 9 of 16
shear strength parameters of the specimens are shown in Table 3 and Figure 10b. As shown, the
cohesion changes with a decreasing trend with the increasing immersion time, and the cohesion
keeps the
while stable at a value
specimen of about 30
is immersed in kPa while
water the specimen
for more is immersed
than 9 days. inbe
It also can water for more
observed fromthan 9 days.
Figure 10b
It also
that thecan be observed
friction fromgently
angle varies Figure 10bthe
with that the friction
change angle varies
in immersion gently
time, and with the change
is maintained steady inat
◦
immersion time, and is maintained
25 when the immersion time exceeds 24 h. steady at 25° when the immersion time exceeds 24 h.

Figure
Figure 10.
10. (a)
(a) The
The variation
variation of
of the
the shear
shear strength
strength ττ and
and normal
normal stress
stress σ;
σ; (b)
(b) The
The variation
variation of
of the
the shear
shear
strength parameters (c and φ) and immersion time
strength parameters (c and ϕ) and immersion time T . Ti.
i

3.2.3. The Effect of Polymer Content on Shear Behaviors

3.2.3. The Effect of Polymer Content on Shear Behaviors
The polymer content may play a vital role in the stability of the polymer membrane and it
The polymer content may play a vital role in the stability of the polymer membrane and it
significantly influences the strength of the polymer-sand composite material. Thereby, the polymer
significantly influences the strength of the polymer-sand composite material. Thereby, the polymer
content in the prepared specimen varies from 1% to 5% with an increment of 1%. The typical shear
content in the prepared specimen varies from 1% to 5% with an increment of 1%. The typical
stress-displacement curves of the mixture specimen with various normal stresses are given in Figure
shear stress-displacement curves of the mixture specimen with various normal stresses are given
11a. It can be seen that the shear stress of the mixture with a normal stress of 100 and 200 kPa increases
in Figure 11a. It can be seen that the shear stress of the mixture with a normal stress of 100 and 200 kPa
increases first to its peak shear strength, and then decreases gently, suggesting that the shear failure
occurs at the center of the edge of the specimen. Finally, the shear stress maintains a stable value
with increasing shear. Figure 11a also shows that the shear stress of the material tested with a larger
than normal stress value increases first to the shear strength value and then remains stable at that
value. Figure 11b displays the shear curves of the mixture specimens prepared with different polymer
contents tested on a normal stress of 300 kPa. It is observed that polymer content has a vital effect
on the shear behavior of the specimen, especially when the shear stress reaches the shear strength.
Figure 12 is the relationships between the shear stress, test time, and polymer content. As seen in
Figure 12, with the test time increasing, the shear stress shows a similar trend as those of Figures 6
and 9. When the test time is over about two minutes, the shear stress keeps stable with the increasing
test time, but increases with the increase in the polymer content.
The shear strength obtained from the shear curves is summarized in Table 3 and Figure 13a
presents the relationship between the shear strength and normal stress. As seen, the shear strength
shows an increasing linear trend with an increase in the normal stress, and it increases with the increase
in the polymer content. For the mixture specimen compacted with a 3% polymer tested at a normal
stress increasing from 100 to 400 kPa, the shear strength varies from 99.99 to 241.20 kPa. The results
of the shear strength parameters are given in Figure 13b. As expected, the cohesion of the mixture
increases greatly with the polymer content varying from 1% to 5%. However, the internal friction
angle changes lightly with the varying polymer contents. While the polymer content of the mixture
increases from 1% to 5% with an increment of 1%, the cohesion of mixture is 18.00, 32.91, 54.91, 67.83,
and 79.94 kPa, respectively and internal friction angle is 25.64◦ , 25.64◦ , 25.17◦ , 25.17◦ and 24.70◦ ,
respectively, being stable around 25◦ .
contents
contents tested
tested onon aa normal
normal stress
stress ofof 300
300 kPa.
kPa. ItIt is
is observed
observed that
that polymer
polymer content
content has
has aa vital
vital effect
effect on
on
the
the shear behavior of the specimen, especially when the shear stress reaches the shear strength. Figure
shear behavior of the specimen, especially when the shear stress reaches the shear strength. Figure
12
12 is
is the
the relationships
relationships between
between thethe shear
shear stress,
stress, test
test time,
time, and
and polymer
polymer content.
content. As
As seen
seen in in Figure
Figure 12,
12,
with
with the test time increasing, the shear stress shows a similar trend as those of Figures 6 and 9.
the test time increasing, the shear stress shows a similar trend as those of Figures 6 and 9. When
When
the
the test time
test2018,
Polymers time10,is over
over about
is 924 about two
two minutes,
minutes, the
the shear
shear stress
stress keeps
keeps stable
stable with
with the
the increasing
increasing test
test time,
time, but
but
10 of 16
increases with the increase in the polymer
increases with the increase in the polymer content. content.

Figure 11.
11. The
Figure 11. The typical
typical shear
shear curves:
curves: (a)
(a) With
(a) With different
different normal
normal stress
stress σ;
σ; (b)
(b) With different polymer
With different polymer
content W r
content W r. .

Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15

mixture increases greatly with the polymer content varying from 1% to 5%. However, the internal
friction angle changes lightly with the varying polymer contents. While the polymer content of the
mixture increases from 1% to 5% with an increment of 1%, the cohesion of mixture is 18.00, 32.91,
54.91, 67.83, and 79.94 kPa, respectively and internal friction angle is 25.64°, 25.64°, 25.17°, 25.17° and
Figure 12.
Figure 12. The relationships between
12. stable
The relationships between shear
between shear stress,
shear stress, test
stress, test time,
test time, and
time, and W
Wrrr..
and W
24.70°, respectively, being around 25°.
The
The shear
shear strength
strength obtained
obtained from
from the
the shear
shear curves
curves is
is summarized
summarized in in Table
Table 33 and
and Figure
Figure 13a
13a
presents
presents the relationship between the shear strength and normal stress. As seen, the shear strength
the relationship between the shear strength and normal stress. As seen, the shear strength
shows
shows anan increasing
increasing linear
linear trend
trend with
with an
an increase
increase in
in the
the normal
normal stress,
stress, and
and it
it increases
increases with
with the
the
increase
increase in the polymer content. For the mixture specimen compacted with a 3% polymer tested at
in the polymer content. For the mixture specimen compacted with a 3% polymer tested at aa
normal
normal stress
stress increasing
increasing from
from 100
100 to
to 400
400 kPa,
kPa, the
the shear
shear strength
strength varies
varies from
from 99.99
99.99 to
to 241.20
241.20 kPa.
kPa. The
The
results
results of the shear strength parameters are given in Figure 13b. As expected, the cohesion of the
of the shear strength parameters are given in Figure 13b. As expected, the cohesion of the

Figure
Figure 13.The
13. (a) (a) linear
The linear relationship
relationship betweenbetween
the shearthe shear
stress stress
τ and normalτ and
stressnormal stress
σ; (b) The σ; (b) The
relationship
relationship between the shear strength parameters (c and φ) and the
between the shear strength parameters (c and ϕ) and the polymer content W r . polymer content W r.

3.2.4. Effect of Sand Dry Density on Shear Behaviors

For the polymer-sand composite material, limited studies have been carried out to investigate
the influence of dry density on the mechanical property. This aspect was studied by performing direct
shear tests on the composite material with different dry densities. The representative shear curves of
the mixture specimens prepared with a 2% polymer at 1.4 g/cm3, cured for 48 h, and immersed in
 Figure 13. (a) The linear relationship between the shear stress τ and normal stress σ; (b) The
relationship between the shear strength parameters (c and φ) and the polymer content Wr.
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 11 of 16

3.2.4. Effect of Sand Dry Density on Shear Behaviors

3.2.4. Effect of Sand Dry Density on Shear Behaviors
For the polymer-sand composite material, limited studies have been carried out to investigate
the influence of dry densitycomposite
For the polymer-sand on the mechanical
material,property. This aspect
limited studies was studied
have been carried byoutperforming
to investigate direct
the
shear testsof
influence ondry
thedensity
composite material
on the with different
mechanical property. dry densities.
This aspect The wasrepresentative shear curves
studied by performing of
direct
the mixture
shear tests on specimens prepared
the composite withwith
material a 2%different
polymer dry at densities.
1.4 g/cm ,The
3 cured for 48 h, and
representative immersed
shear curves inof
water for 48specimens
the mixture h, are tested with different
prepared with a 2% normal
polymer stresses
at 1.4 g/cm 3 , cured
and shown infor
Figure
48 h, 14a. As seen, with
and immersed any
in water
normal
for 48 h,stress, the shear
are tested with stress of all
different the specimens
normal stresses andincreases
shownfirst to the shear
in Figure 14a. Asstrength
seen, withvalue, anyand then
normal
keeps
stress, stable
the sheararound
stressthe peak
of all thevalue.
specimensIt also can be first
increases observed
to the that
shearthe shear value,
strength stress andis significantly
then keeps
influenced
stable around by the
normal
peakstress.
value.Figure
It also14b
canpresents
be observedthe shear
that thecurves
shearofstress
the specimens at different
is significantly dry
influenced
densities
by normal tested on Figure
stress. a normal 14bstress of 300
presents thekPa. As curves
shear shown,of the
thedry density did
specimens not significantly
at different affect
dry densities
the overall
tested on a shape
normalofstress
the shear
of 300curves
kPa. As of the specimens
shown, the dryand is in did
density agreement with the affect
not significantly result thepresented
overall
in Figure
shape of the14a. However,
shear curves of thethedry density and
specimens increases the shearwith
is in agreement strength of the
the result specimen.
presented Figure14a.
in Figure 15
displays
However,the thevariation
dry densityin the shear stress
increases of specimens
the shear strength of tested with a normal
the specimen. Figurestress of 300 kPa
15 displays the and with
variation
the testshear
in the time stress
and dry density. Astested
of specimens expected,
with athe shear stress
normal stress of of 300
the kPa
specimens
and with in dense
the testconditions
time and
increases
dry density. rapidly to the peak
As expected, value stress
the shear and thenof thedecreases
specimens to in
a relatively stable value.
dense conditions increasesHowever,
rapidlytheto
specimens
the peak value in a loose condition
and then maintain
decreases stability when
to a relatively stablethe peakHowever,
value. strength isthereached.
specimens Figure in a15loose
also
shows
conditionthatmaintain
the shearstability
stress increases
when the with
peakanstrength
increment in the dryFigure
is reached. density15when the test
also shows time
that theisshear
over
about two minutes.
stress increases with an increment in the dry density when the test time is over about two minutes.

Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 15

Figure TheThe
14. 14.
Figure presentative
presentativeshear stress-displacement
shear stress-displacement curves:
curves: (a) With
(a) With different
different normalnormal
stress σ; stress
(b) σ;
(b) With
Withdifferent
different dry densityρ.ρ.
dry density

Figure 15. The relationship between shear stress, test time, and ρ.
Figure 15. The relationship between shear stress, test time, and ρ.

The variation in the shear strength with different dry densities for the specimens tested with
different normal stresses can be observed in Figure 16a. The shear strength increases linearly with an
increase in the dry density regardless of the normal stress. For instance, for specimens tested with a
normal stress of 300 kPa, the shear strength is 169.22 kPa at a dry density of 1.4 g/cm3 and it increases
to 212.35 kPa at a dry density of 1.6 g/cm3, respectively (Table 3). Another feature observed in Figure
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 12 of 16

Figure 15. The relationship between shear stress, test time, and ρ.
The variation in the shear strength with different dry densities for the specimens tested with
different The
normal stresses
variation canshear
in the be observed
strength with in Figure
different16a.
dryThe shear for
densities strength increases
the specimens linearly
tested with with
an increase in the dry density regardless of the normal stress. For instance, for specimensantested
different normal stresses can be observed in Figure 16a. The shear strength increases linearly with
with increase
a normal in stress
the dryofdensity regardless
300 kPa, the shear of the normalisstress.
strength 169.22ForkPa
instance, for density
at a dry specimensof tested
1.4 g/cmwith3 aand it
normal
increases to stress
212.35ofkPa
300 at
kPa, the shear
a dry density strength
of 1.6isg/cm
169.223 ,kPa at a dry density
respectively (Tableof3).
1.4Another
g/cm andfeature
3 it increases
observed
to 212.35 kPa at a dry density of 1.6 g/cm3, respectively (Table 3). Another feature observed in Figure
in Figure 16a is that the dry density affects the linear relationship between the shear strength and
16a is that the dry density affects the linear relationship between the shear strength and normal stress.
normal stress. The results of the shear strength parameters are presented in Figure 16b. As expected,
The results of the shear strength parameters are presented in Figure 16b. As expected, the shear
the shear strength
strength parameters
parameters increaseincrease
with an with an increment
increment in dryFor
in dry density. density. For the specimens
the specimens prepared atprepared
dry
at dry densities of 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6 g/cm 3 , the cohesion values are 32.91, 38.74, and 47.18 kPa the and
densities of 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6 g/cm , the cohesion values are 32.91, 38.74, and 47.18 kPa the and internal
3

internal friction angles are 25.64 ◦ ◦ 28.37◦ , respectively.

friction angles are 25.64°, 27.92°,, 27.92
28.37°,,respectively.

Figure 16. (a) The linear relationship between the shear strength τ and normal stress σ; (b) The
Figure 16. (a) The linear relationship between the shear strength τ and normal stress σ; (b) The relationship
relationship between the shear strength parameters (c and φ) and the dry density ρ.
between the shear strength parameters (c and ϕ) and the dry density ρ.
4. Discussion
4. Discussion
It is generally true that the action of the friction and cohesion determines the mechanical
properties of the
It is generally soilthat
true [35].the
Theaction
specimens
of thebecome
frictiondenser when bearing
and cohesion differentthe
determines normal stresses,properties
mechanical thus
of theresulting
soil [35].in The
a great improvement
specimens becomein the frictional
denser when interaction forces, andnormal
bearing different this is the reasonthus
stresses, whyresulting
the
in a great improvement in the frictional interaction forces, and this is the reason why theashear
shear behaviors strengthen with increments in the normal stress. When the specimen bears
behaviors strengthen with increments in the normal stress. When the specimen bears a horizontal force,
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 15
with increasing test time, the sand particles are rotated, displaced, and rearranged, and the polymer
membrane andforce,
horizontal frictional interactiontest
with increasing forces
time,between
the sand sand particles
particles causedisplaced,
are rotated, them to resist the movement
and rearranged,
of theand the polymer membrane and frictional interaction forces between sand particles cause them atoloose
sand particles (Figure 17). Sand is a kind of problematic soil with poor cohesion,
structure,
resist and less clay content,
the movement theparticles
of the sand adhesion depends
(Figure on the
17). Sand is amembrane strength soil
kind of problematic andwith
the condition
poor
of thecohesion,
membrane a loose structure, and
enwrapping sandlessparticles
clay content,
(i.e.,the
theadhesion dependsand
completeness on the membrane
stability of thestrength
elastic and
andstructure
viscous the condition of thewith
formed membrane enwrapping
the polymer sand particles
membrane (i.e., theOn
in the sand). completeness and stability
the other hand, of
the frictional
the elastic and viscous structure formed with the polymer membrane in the sand).
interaction forces are influenced by the surface roughness of the soil particles. The membranes absorbed On the other hand,
the frictional interaction forces are influenced by the surface roughness of the soil particles. The
on the surface of the soil particles soften and swell, reducing the surface roughness. Additionally,
membranes absorbed on the surface of the soil particles soften and swell, reducing the surface
the lubrication action induced by water leads to a slight decrease in the frictional interaction forces
roughness. Additionally, the lubrication action induced by water leads to a slight decrease in the
between the soil
frictional particles.
interaction forces between the soil particles.

Figure 17. The schematic diagram of the specimen during the shear processing.
Figure 17. The schematic diagram of the specimen during the shear processing.
As mentioned earlier, while the prepared polymer solution is mixed with sand, the polymer
membranes formed with the reaction of the polymer and water on the surface of the sand particles
or sand voids change the frictional interaction forces between the sand particles by forming a three-
dimensional bridge between the macromolecular long chains and the detached sand particles. Once
these are formed in the polymer-sand composite material, they increase the inter-particle cohesive
forces of the mixture, although it depends on Tc, Ti, Wp, and ρ.
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 13 of 16

As mentioned earlier, while the prepared polymer solution is mixed with sand, the polymer
membranes formed with the reaction of the polymer and water on the surface of the sand particles
or sand voids change the frictional interaction forces between the sand particles by forming
a three-dimensional bridge between the macromolecular long chains and the detached sand particles.
Once these are formed in the polymer-sand composite material, they increase the inter-particle cohesive
forces of the mixture, although it depends on Tc , Ti , W p , and ρ.
The polymer and water need enough time to react to form polymer membranes, and increasing
the reaction time strengthens the material strength behaviors by enhancing the connection forces
between the sand particles [31,34]. On the other hand, with an increment in the curing time of the
specimen, a greater strength, more elasticity, and a softer membrane structure in the mixture can be
achieved due to the fact that the liquid fractions of the specimens evaporate [19]. The test results
demonstrate that the specimen still has the load-bearing capacity although it is immersed in water for
48 h and the curing time plays an active role on the shear behaviors of the specimens after immersion.
As shown before, the shear properties of the mixture after immersion in water showed a decreasing
trend with the increasing immersion time and the dominant change in the mechanism of the strength
properties is based on the action of the water. The specimen soaked with water for a long time makes
an increment in the water content of the specimens, resulting in a decrease of the load-bearing capacity
of the specimen [36,37]. On the other hand, the polymer membranes are insoluble, softened in the water
with infiltration, and have negative effects on the shear performance of the specimen. Additionally,
with increasing immersion time, while the water content varies and the membrane softens to reach
a saturation state, the shear strength characteristics remain stable.
Considering that the polymer membranes enwrap and connect the detached sand particles,
the strength of the polymer-sand composite material depends on the stability of the three-dimensional
structure formed by the membranes in the sand particles. The specimens prepared at a higher polymer
content have a more stable three-dimensional bridge with a large adhesion surface contact through
the soil particles and stronger membranes and, therefore, they improve the strength performances of
the specimens.
The dry density dependant on the sand density condition influences the completeness and
stability of the three-dimensional structure that affects the strength properties of the specimens. For the
specimen with a dense structure, the sand particles are tightly touched and arranged, resulting in the
incompletely wrapping of the sand particles by the membranes because of a small adhesion surface
contact and the mostly fill up sand voids. With a decrease in the dry density, the membranes easily
enwrap the sand particles but build a relatively weakened connection between the macromolecular
long chains and the sand particles because of the loose structure of the specimens. Additionally,
dry density plays a significant positive role in the interaction of the particles [27]. Thus, the shear
behaviors of the specimens improve with an increment in the dry density.

5. Conclusions
This study carried out trials of direct shear tests on a polymer-sand composite material after
immersion to determine the influence of curing time Tc , immersion time Ti , polymer content W r ,
and dry density ρ on the shear behavior. Additionally, the interaction between the polymer and sand is
analyzed by these test results and the SEM study. The results obtained in this study can be summarized
as follows:

(1) The polymer-sand composite material still has good shear behaviors after immersion when
compared to the only sand material. An increment in the curing time, polymer content, and dry
density displays improvements in the shear properties, including the shear curves, shear strength,
and shear strength parameters. The variation of the curing time and polymer content leads to
a great change in the cohesion, while weakly affecting the friction angle, which fluctuating at
around 25◦ . Both cohesion and the friction angle increase with an increment in the dry density,
which varies from 32.91 to 47.18 kPa and 25.64◦ to 28.37◦ while the dry density increases from
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 14 of 16

1.4 to 1.6 g/cm3 . However, the increase in the immersion time reduces the shear behaviors
of this composite material after immersion. Similar to the curing time and polymer content,
the immersion time significantly influences the cohesion and lightly affects the friction angle.
(2) The shear behaviors of the polymer-sand composite material mainly depend on the integrity
and stability of the elastic and viscous structure formed by the polymer membrane. When the
specimen is immersed in water, the water content of the specimens increases. In the meantime,
the membranes are softened, and therefore, the shear strength decreases with an increment in the
immersion time. However, the curing time and polymer content both play positive effects on the
integrity and stability of the three-dimensional bridge by increasing the membrane strength and
adhesion contact of the sand particles. Unlike the curing time and polymer content, the sand dry
density affects the membranes’ integrity through the tightness of the soil particle arrangement
and determines the frictional action of soils. Thus, the shear strength of this material improves
with an increase in the dry density.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.L.; Data curation, J.L. and J.W.; Formal analysis, Y.B., D.L., Q.W. and
Y.W.; Methodology, Y.B., D.L., Q.W. and Y.W.; Project administration, D.K. and J.W.; Software, D.L., W.Q. and Y.W.;
Visualization, J.L., Y.B. and Q.W.; Writing—original draft, Y.B. and D.L.; Writing—review & editing, W.Q. and D.K.
Funding: This research was financially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
41472241), Water Conservancy Science and Technology Project of Jiangsu Province, China (Grant No. 2017010)
and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 2016B05914).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of
this paper.

References
1. Latifi, N.; Marto, A.; Eisazadeh, A. Structural characteristics of laterite soil treated by sh-85 and tx-85
(non-traditional) stabilizers. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 2013, 18, 1707–1718.
2. Sand, F. Behavior of fabric- versus fiber-reinforced sand. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 1986, 112, 804–820.
3. Cepuritis, R.; Mørtsell, E. Possibilities of improving crushed sand performance in fresh concrete by washing:
A case study. Mater. Struct. 2016, 49, 5131–5146. [CrossRef]
4. Hsieh, C.; Hsieh, M.W. Load plate rigidity and scale effects on the frictional behavior of sand/geomembrane
interfaces. Geotext. Geomembr. 2003, 21, 25–47. [CrossRef]
5. Izgin, M.; Wasti, Y. Geomembrane–sand interface frictional properties as determined by inclined board and
shear box tests. Geotext. Geomembr. 1998, 16, 207–219. [CrossRef]
6. Keramatikerman, M.; Chegenizadeh, A.; Nikraz, H. Experimental study on effect of fly ash on liquefaction
resistance of sand. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2017, 93, 1–6. [CrossRef]
7. Wu, P.H.; Houben, L.J.M.; Scarpas, A.; Egyed, C.E.G.; De, L.R.R. Stiffness modulus and fatigue properties of
cement stabilized sand with use of a synthetic modified-zeolite additive. In Proceedings of the Transportation
Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, 11–15 January 2015.
8. Neeraja, V.S.; Manjari, K.G.; Babu, G.L.S. Numerical analysis of effect of orientation of fibers on stress-strain
response of fiber reinforced soil. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 2014, 8, 328–334. [CrossRef]
9. Zhu, H.H.; Zhang, C.C.; Tang, C.S.; Shi, B.; Wang, B.J. Modeling the pullout behavior of short fiber in
reinforced soil. Geotext. Geomembr. 2014, 42, 329–338. [CrossRef]
10. Wang, Y.; Guo, P.; Shan, S.; Yuan, H.; Yuan, B. Study on strength influence mechanism of fiber-reinforced
expansive soil using jute. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2016, 34, 1079–1088.
11. Ye, B.; Cheng, Z.R.; Liu, C.; Zhang, Y.D.; Lu, P. Liquefaction resistance of sand reinforced with randomly
distributed polypropylene fibres. Geosynth. Int. 2017, 24, 625–636. [CrossRef]
12. Maity, J.; Chattopadhyay, B.C.; Mukherjee, S.P. Behaviour of different types of sand randomly mixing with
various natural fibers. J. Inst. Eng. 2012, 93, 97–104. [CrossRef]
13. Anagnostopoulos, C.A.; Papaliangas, T.T.; Konstantinidis, D.; Patronis, C. Shear strength of sands reinforced
with polypropylene fibers. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2013, 31, 401–423. [CrossRef]
14. Tang, C.S.; Li, J.; Wang, D.Y.; Shi, B. Investigation on the interfacial mechanical behavior of wave-shaped
fiber reinforced soil by pullout test. Geotext. Geomembr. 2016, 44, 872–883. [CrossRef]
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 15 of 16

15. Tang, C.S.; Wang, D.Y.; Cui, Y.J.; Shi, B.; Li, J. Tensile strength of fiber reinforced soil. J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
2016, 28, 04016031-1–04016031-13. [CrossRef]
16. Little, D.N. Comparison of in-situ resilient moduli of aggregate base courses with and without low
percentages of lime stabilization. ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 1992, 15. [CrossRef]
17. Sebesta, S. Use of microcracking to reduce shrinkage cracking in cement-treated bases. Trans. Res. Rec. J.
Trans. Res. Board 2005, 1936, 3–11. [CrossRef]
18. Li, X. Shrinkage Cracking of Soils and Cementitiously-Stabilized Soils: Mechanisms and Modeling.
Ph.D. Thesis, Washington State University, Pillman, DC, USA, 2014.
19. Chang, I.; Im, J.; Prasidhi, A.K.; Cho, G.C. Effects of xanthan gum biopolymer on soil strengthening.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 74, 65–72. [CrossRef]
20. Latifi, N.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Meehan, C.L.; Majid, M.Z.A.; Tahir, M.M.; Mohamad, E.T. Improvement
of problematic soils with biopolymer—An environmentally friendly soil stabilizer. J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
2016, 29, 04016204. [CrossRef]
21. Tingle, J.S.; Newman, J.K.; Larson, S.L.; Weiss, C.A.; Rushing, J.F. Stabilization mechanisms of nontraditional
additives. Trans. Res. Rec. J. Trans. Res. Board 2007, 1989, 59–67. [CrossRef]
22. Sukmak, P.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Shen, S.L. Strength development in clay–fly ash geopolymer. Constr. Build. Mater.
2013, 40, 566–574. [CrossRef]
23. Suksiripattanapong, C.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Chanprasert, P.; Sukmak, P.; Arulrajah, A. Compressive
strength development in fly ash geopolymer masonry units manufactured from water treatment sludge.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 82, 20–30. [CrossRef]
24. Latifi, N.; Meehan, C.L.; Majid, M.Z.A.; Horpibulsuk, S. Strengthening montmorillonitic and kaolinitic clays
using a calcium-based non-traditional additive: A micro-level study. Appl. Clay Sci. 2016, 132–133, 182–193.
[CrossRef]
25. Liu, J.; Bai, Y.; Song, Z.; Lu, Y.; Qian, W.; Kanungo, D.P. Evaluation of strength properties of sand modified
with organic polymers. Polymers 2018, 10, 287. [CrossRef]
26. Rezaeimalek, S.; Huang, J.; Bin-Shafique, S. Evaluation of curing method and mix design of a moisture
activated polymer for sand stabilization. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 146, 210–220. [CrossRef]
27. Ajalloeian, R.; Matinmanesh, H.; Abtahi, S.M.; Rowshanzamir, M. Effect of polyvinyl acetate grout injection
on geotechnical properties of fine sand. Geomech. Geoeng. 2013, 8, 86–96. [CrossRef]
28. Tzounis, L.; Debnath, S.; Rooj, S.; Fischer, D.; Mäder, E.; Das, A.; Stamm, M.; Heinrich, G. High performance
natural rubber composites with a hierarchical reinforcement structure of carbon nanotube modified natural
fibers. Mater. Des. 2014, 58, 1–11. [CrossRef]
29. Tzounis, L.; Pegel, S.; Zafeiropoulos, N.E.; Avgeropoulos, A.; Paipetis, A.S.; Stamm, M. Shear alignment
of a poly(styrene-butadiene-styrene) triblock copolymer/mwcnt nanocomposite. Polymer 2017, 131, 1–9.
[CrossRef]
30. Zandieh, A.R.; Yasrobi, S.S. Retracted article: Study of factors affecting the compressive strength of sandy
soil stabilized with polymer. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2010, 28, 139–145. [CrossRef]
31. Liu, J.; Feng, Q.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, D.; Wei, J.; Kanungo, D.P. Experimental study on unconfined compressive
strength of organic polymer reinforced sand. Int. J. Polym. Sci. 2018, 2018, 3503415. [CrossRef]
32. Ueng, T.S.; Wang, Z.F.; Chu, M.C.; Ge, L. Laboratory tests for permeability of sand during liquefaction.
Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2017, 100, 249–256. [CrossRef]
33. Liu, J.; Qi, X.; Zhang, D.; Feng, Q.; Wang, Y.; Kanungo, D.P. Study on the permeability characteristics of
polyurethane soil stabilizer reinforced sand. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017, 2017, 5240186. [CrossRef]
34. Liu, J.; Chen, Z.; Song, Z.; Bai, Y.; Qian, W.; Wei, J.; Kanungo, D.P. Tensile behavior of polyurethane organic
polymer and polypropylene fiber-reinforced sand. Polymers 2018, 10, 499. [CrossRef]
35. Hataf, N.; Ghadir, P.; Ranjbar, N. Investigation of soil stabilization using chitosan biopolymer. J. Clean. Prod.
2018, 170, 1493–1500. [CrossRef]
Polymers 2018, 10, 924 16 of 16

36. Chang, I.; Im, M.J.; Cho, G.C. Geotechnical engineering behaviors of gellan gum biopolymer treated sa.
Can. Geotech. J. 2016, 53, 1658–1670. [CrossRef]
37. Chang, I.; Prasidhi, A.K.; Im, J.; Cho, G.C. Soil strengthening using thermo-gelation biopolymers.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 77, 430–438. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).