Environmental Geotechnics, Kamon (ed,)© 1996 Balkema, Roterdam. ISBN 905410648 7 Effect of plastic wastes in improving cement-treated soils K.Omine, H.Ochiai, N.Yasufuku & T-Kato Faculty of Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan ABSTRACT: Recently, there has been an increasing amount of plastic wastes and it has become necessary to ‘ake use of them. As one of the methods for reuse of plastic wastes in geotechnical engineering, mixing these plastic wastes within the shallow part of soft ground is expected to make soft ground stable and improve its trafficebility. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the shape of plastic pieces and cement content on the strength-deformation properties of cement-ireated soils. ‘The improvement, brought about by mixing with plastic pieces, is demonstrated by the results of unconfined compression test on the treated soils cont ing. plastic pieces. ‘The plastic pieces were obtained by cutting plastic sheets. The same results are also confirmed for the treated soils mixed with PET-bottle pieces which are ordinary plastic wastes. 1 INTRODUCTION ‘The production of plastics in Japan has increased gradually and so has the amount of the plastic wastes. The plastic wastes are often classified as a trash unsuitable for buming, because of problems such as a damage to the chimney due to extreme heat and the formation of hydrogen potassium gas. Mozeover, considering the difficulty in obtaining. reclaimed land for the waste disposal, developing a technique for reusing plastic wastes is one of the important problems in environmental and ‘geotechnical engineering. There have been some studies on reusing plastic. wastes, from a geotechnical engineering point of view." T. Hirata and Y. Maeno (1992) have investigated the mechanical properties of mixtures with trash ash and hard or soft plastic wastes and hhave discussed their effects on the compaction degree, compressibility and shear strength of the mixtures. T.B. Edil and P.1. Bosscher (1994) have researched the engineering properties of tie chips and soil mixtures for reusing shredded scrap tires as a construction material for light-weight fill material. ‘These methods for the reuse of plastic wastes would not only provide a means of disposing them but would also help to solve difficult economical and technical problems. ‘As a new method for reusing plastic wastes, mixing PET-botile pieces within the shallow part of soft ground is expected to make soft ground stable and improve its traficability (T. Kato et al., 1995). In order to investigate the mechanical properties of cement-treated soils mixed with plastics, unconfined compression tests are conducted. The plastic pieces were obtained by cutting plastic sheets. The effects of slendemess of plastic pieces and cement content fon the strength-deformation properties of treated soils are discussed based on the test results Furthermore, the improvement effects are also confirmed forthe treated soils mixed with PET-bottle pieces. 2 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST ON CEMENT-TREATED SOILS WITH PLASTIC PIECES 2.1 Specimens and Testing Method ‘Three kinds of plastic pieces with different lengths Land widths B are used as mixing materials, which are obtained by cutting plastic sheets of 0.0dem thickness, As shown in Table 2, the aren (LX B) of these plastic pieces is uniform (=1em?). The ratio of length and width L/B of plastic pieces is one of the parameters which represents the shape of the plastic piece and is herein referred as slenderness value. First, Kaolin clay (w,=50.6%, I,=19.6, ,=2.70g/cm’) in a slurry of water content of 100% is mixed adequately with portland cement in water- ‘cement ratio of 1. The mixture samples are made by ixing with plastic pieces. There are four types of ‘mixtureswith different plastic contents by volume, 875Table 1 Size of plastic pieces and slendemess value UB L(cm) B(em) 1 1 1 16 4 0.25 64 8 0.125 Table 2 Results of the unconfined compression test Cement Piao gy Content B Content (g/m) G5)" Gra) (36) ————T 25 3920353, 50 16 50612 0.685 7S 623 0.836 o we 107s 25 1029 0.796 100 165) 1s:5 O74 Ts 1216 0.900 0. 1G8 0.608 25 IBS 0776 150, 1 S06 o.689 7S 15k 0.866 01805 053 25 2090 0.607 150 16 50 za 0769 TS 2032 _o.s8s 0. 1676 08am 25 186 O.6a2 150 6450232 O68 1S 2697 Lon D. saRe O78 25 S108 0733 300° 16 50 es 0.783 75 4k O68 + 0, 2.5, 5.0 and 7.5%. "The specimen size is 10cm 10emx 20cm. These specimens arc wrapped in moisture proof bags and are cured for 7 days in a humid room at the temperature of 20:+3°C. The undrained compression tests of the treated soils were conducted under the axial strain rate of 1%6/min, 2.2 Test Results The results of unconfined compression test of cement-treated soils mixed with plastic picces are shown in Table 2. As seen in this table, the unconfined compressive strength of the treated soils ' influenced by the plastic content and the slenderness of plastic piece, while the axial strain at failure isin the range of 0.5 to 1.0%. 876 The typical stress-strain relationship of the treated soil with plastic pieces is shown in Fig.1. As seen in Fig.1 (a) and (0), the plastic pieces of the slendemess value 1/B=16 contribute significantly 0 the increase in peak strength and residual strength of the treated soils at cement content of 100kg/m*, ‘whereas the values at cement content of 300kg/m decreases with increase in plastic content. Thus, the stress-strain behavior of the treated soil with plastic ieces depends on not only the content of plastic pieces but also the cement content. Figure 2 shows that the relationship between deformation modulus Ey, and unconfined compressive strength gy of the treated soils with different plastic content, where Ey, indicates secant moduli at a point of qy/2 in the stress-strain curve. As shown in the figure, Exy is almost proportional 1o qu and is independent of the cement and plastic contents.On the other hand, the strain energy of the treated soil under a residual state can be used to represent the degree of resistance, ‘Therefore, The influences of the slenderness 150 Plane Gonient 75% {2516 0% L/“B=16 — | Cement Content 100g, 7m) 100 atkra) Lo 20 30 ‘Axial Sirain (98) 40 (@) Cement content 100(kg/m?) con Plastic Contem 010 L/B=16 Cement Content (30g “m} 400 500 a (kPa) 200 0 2030 ‘Axial Stain (94) (b) Cement content 300(kg/m) Fig.1 Typical stress-strain relationship of cement- treated soils with plastic pieces 4050© came 300 04 m2) Be Game 0 (kgm? © cane 150 Gem!) eB 2007 x Conon 80 a8 LB amin: 100 (Mp?) LB 160 aman 50 Chg) - 120 > MPa Plastic Content 3 s — o 0s Cement Content (150kg_ m") 0 I 132 a4 a, (kPa) LB Fig.2 Relationship between deformation modulus and unconfined compressive strength of ccement-treated soils with plastic pieces value of plastic piece and the cement content are discussed by focusing on the unconfined compressive strength and the strain energy of the treated soil in the study. 2.3 Influence of Slendemess of Plastic Pieces on Improved Properties Strength of composite materials mixed with fibers is represented as the function of fiber properties and fiber-matrix interaction properties (C.L. Victor, 1993). Itis, therefore, considered that the shape of plastic pieces is a very important factor in evaluating mechanical properties of the mixtures. From this point of view, the influences of the slendemess of plastic pieces on the strength-deformation properties of the treated soils are discussed. Figure 3 shows the influence of the slendemess value L/B on the unconfined compressive strength ratio qy/4yo Of the treated soils with cement content of 150kgim’,” where gy and quo represent the unconfined compressive strengths of the treated soils with and without plastics respectively. The value of duo Fepresents a degree of improvement by mixing with plastic pieces. As seen in this figure, more slender plastic pieces contribute to the increase of the unconfined compressive strength of the treated soils and the increase is_more pronounced as. plastic. content increases. These facts indicate that the slender the plastic pieces and the more its content, the better the treated soil is in preventing the developmentof cracks. On the other hand, the strain energy required to deform the treated soil up to axial strain of 5% is defined as follows. Fig.3 Influence of the slenderness value L/B on the unconfined compressive strength ratio q,/dy of the treated soils Plastic Content 1 I Content (1sDkg_m? 1 16 32, LB Fig.4 Relationship between the energy ratio W/W, and the slenderness of the plastic pieces 48 64 ode, where 0, is an axial stress and de, is an incremental axial strain. The energy W of the treated soils is one of the parameters for evaluating improvements in properties and represents a degree of resistance for deformation of the treated soils under a residual state The axial strain of 5% is decided by considering that the almost treated soils are in a residual state at the axiel strain of 5%, Figure 4 shows the relationship between W/Wo and the slendemess value, of the treated soils with cement content of 150kg/m’, where Wo indicates the strain energy of the treated soil erwithout plastic pieces. The value of W/Wo represents ‘a degree of improvement by mixing with plastics and is positive when W/Wp is more than 1. As shown in this figure, the values of W/W is independent of the slenderness value L/B and is almost constant (about 1.4) even for different plastic contents. Therefore, it can be said that large strain energy is needed to deform the treated soils when plastic content is more than 2.5% at least. 2.4 Influence of Cement Content on Improved Properties In the previous section, it is mentioned that the strength of the treated soils with cement content of 150kg/m’ is influenced by the slenderness value LB of plastic pieces, while the strain energy needed to deform the treated soils to residual state is independent of the slenderness value. In this section, the influence of cement content on the strengil deformation properties of the treated soils mixed wi plastic pieces are discussed. The relationship between the unconfined compressive strength ratio qy/dyo of the treated soils ‘and cement content in the case of the slenderness value L/B=16 is shown in Fig.5. The obvious peak ff the strength ratio is indicated and the cement content corresponding to this value is about 100kg/m® for the treated soils with any plastic content. Iti also found thatthe peak value of the strength ratio increases as plastic content increases. On the other hand, quldyp of the treated soils cement content of 50 to 15Okg/m is larger than 1, whereas qyldyo at cement content of 300kg/n ‘becomes less than 1.At a cement content of 300kg/m*, soil grains are closely bound together and since the friction between plastic pieces and the grains is less than that between grains, sli Occur atthe plastic pieces-grain surface. This, Plastic Content (L/B=16) 1s r obo pes ban RR 05 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Cement Content (kg/m*) Fig.5 Relationship between qy/ay, of the treated soils and cement content, 3.0 2.0 ww, 1.0 250 Cement Content kg/m") 50 100 150 200 300 350 6 Relationship between the energy ratio W/W, of the treated soils and cement content explains the reduction in strength at high cement contents. This fact means that the improvement by mixing with plastics is not expected at all when relatively soft plastic pieces are included in the cement-treated soil with high strength. Figure 6 shows the relationship between the energy ratio W/W, of the treated soils and cement content in the case of the slendemess value L/B=16. As seen in this figure, the value of W/Wo becomes @ maximum at cement content of 100kg/m’ and decreases gradually, when cement content is more than 100kg/m’. This tendency is similar to the relationship between qu/ayo and cement content. Thus, it is concluded that the maximum improvement is obtained at about 100kg/m® for both strength and strain energy. Although this result is obtained for the treated soils in the case of the slendemess value L/B=16, it is considered that similar property willbe obtained for the treated soils with plastic pieces with other slenderness values. 3. IMPROVEMENT ON TREATED SOILS WITH PET-BOTTLE PIECES 3.1 Comparison between PET-bottle Pieces and PlasticPieces In order to see whether similar improvement effects to the treated soils with plastic pieces are obiained for PET-bottle, which is an ordinary plastic waste, a series of unconfined compression tests of the treated soils mixed with PET-bottle pieces was ‘conducted, Improvements on treated soils with PET- bottle pieces are discussed based on the test results. Figure 7 shows the stress-strain relationship for the treated soils with PET-botle pieces at ocment ‘content of 100kg/m’, where the used PET-bottle pieces were of a mean thickness of 0.08cm and a e78slenderness value L/B=16 (L=4em, B=0.25em). The stress-strain curve of the treated soils with PET- bottle pieces is similar to that with plastic pieces in the same conditions and a big improvement for the deformation property by mixing with PET-bottle piccesis indicated. Figure 8 shows the comparison of the strength ratio Guldyo for the treated soils with PET-bottle pieces and those with plastic pieces. As shown in this figure, qy/dyo of the treated soils increases as, plastic content increases and this tendency of the treated soils with PET-bottle pieces is almost equivalent to that with plastic pieces at the same plastic content. The relationship between the enrgy ratio W/W ofthe treated soils and plastic content is. shown in 1s "(L/B=16) content PET-bottle | 10 20 =«30 4.0 ‘Axial Strain (96) 5.0 Fig.7 Stress-strain relationship of treated soils with PET-bottle pieces TH Plastic Pieces 15 | @ PET-bottle Pieces of \,10 o L/ BAIS -__fement Content] (100Kg/“m*) os 0 25 50 75 Plastic Content (%) Fig.8 Comparison of the strength ratio qy/4ye for the treated soils with PET-bottle pieces and plastic pieces Plastic Pieces PET-bottle Pieces 175: smeat Content 16 (.00%5.m®) 25 5.0 Plastic Content (%) 15 Fig.9 Comparison of the energy ratio W/W, for the treated soils with PET-bottle pieces and plastic pieces Fig.9. The value of W/Wo increases gradually and becomes constant at plastic content of about 5%. The increase of the energy for the treated soils with PET- bottle pieces is almost equivalent to that of plas piecesat the same plastic content. Thus, it is concluded that the improvement on properties of the treated soils with PET-bottle pieces is nearly equal to that with plastic pieces. 3.2 Unconfined Compression Test of Treated Soils with LargeSize PET-botle Pieces ‘The improvement of properties of the treated soils mixed with small PET-bottle pieces is mentioned in the previous section, However, in considering the practical use of PET-bottle, it is necessary to investigate the effect in the case of large size PET- bottle pieces. From the point of view, the unconfined compression test of the relatively large size specimen is performed. The specimen size is 25emx 25em x ‘S0cm and PET-boitle pieces are L=24em and Be1.Sem (U/B=16). The method of specimen preparation is the same as the one described in the section 2.1. ‘The stress-strain relationship of the treated soils with large size PET-bottle pieces is shown in Fig. 10. As scen in the figure, the treated soil with large size of PET-bottle pieces has significant increase in unconfined compressive strength comparing with the treated soil without PET-bottle pieces. The improvement on strength is almost the same as treated soil with small size of PET-bottle pieces. Although the strength of the treated soil with PET- bottle pieces decreases remarkably after indicating a peak value, the residual strength is larger than that of the treated soil without PET-bottle pieces. 879a nt Content 00K 7m") _| 10 203.0 Axial Stain (96) Fig.10 Stress-strain relationship of treated soils with large size PET-bottle pieces 405.0 ‘Thus, the same improvement effects are confirmed for the treated soil with large size PET-bottle pieces. ‘CONCLUSIONS In this study, the following conclusions are obiained from the unconfined compression test results on cement-treated soils mixed with plastic pieces. 1) The stress-strain property of the treated soil with plastic pieces depends on not only the content of plastic pieces but also the cement content. 2) More slender plastic pieces contribute to the increase of the unconfined compressive strength of the treated soils and the increase is more pronounced as plastic content increases. 3) Large strain energy is needed to deform the treated soils when plastic content is more than 2.5% at least. 4) The maximum improvement is obtained at cement content of 100kg/m’ for both strength and strain energy. 5) The improvement by mixing with plastics is not ‘expected at all when relatively soft plastic pieces ‘are included in the cement-treated soil with high strength. 6) The improvement on properties of the treated soils with PET-bottle pieces whi ‘wastes is nearly equal to that with plastic pieces. 7) The same improvement effects are confirmed for the treated soil with large size PET-bottle pieces. 880 REFERENCES, Bail, T. B. and Bosscher, P. J. (1994) Engineering properties of Tite Chips and soil mixtures, Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJODI, Vol.17, No.4, pp.453-464. rata , T. and Maeno , Y. (1992) : Mechanical properties of municipal waste and their improvement, TSUCHI-TO-KISO _JSSMFE Ser.No.413, Vol.40, No.6, pp.29-34 (in Japanese). Kato, T., Ochiai, H., Yasufuku, N., Omine, K. and Ohno, S. (1995) : Effects of improvement of cement-treated soils mixed with plastic pieces, Technology Reports of Kyushu University, ‘Vol.68, No.6 (in Japanese). Victor, C.Li, (1993) : From — micromechanics 10 structural engineering-The design of cementitious composites for civil engineering applications, Structural Eng./Earthquake Eng. Vol.10, No.2, pp.37s-48s.