608/658 Insitu Stabilisation Question 1

Assignment 1

Question 1

The use of in-situ stabilisation is helping lessen a number of environmental issues. The environmental benefits of using these techniques in comparison to using other rehabilitation techniques are quite substantial. The list of key environment factors makes in-situ stabilisation a better option than other construction methods are as follows: 1. Recycling of existing material: The in-situ stabilisation make use of existing pavement material helping preserve the natural resources. Recycling also reduces the need for landfill which often saves large areas of land from clearing and contamination. 2. Construction Time: In-situ stabilisation often drastically reduces the construction time and lane closures. In soft and moist clayey sub grade, in-situ stabilisation by use of lime can drastically reduces the excess moisture without the need for drying out the sub grade. Construction time directly affect the road users and fuel consumption by vehicles waiting in traffic. 3. Greenhouse Gases: Minimal usage of construction equipment helps reduces the production of greenhouse gases. The raw material transportation and energy used will be greatly minimised. Vehicle emissions are also reduced as less material haulage occurs. Sometimes it becomes necessary to clear vegetation to build an access to get to the quarry site. Using insitu stabilisation helps reduce our carbon footprints. 4. Use of Industrial By-products: Industrial by-products like slag and fly ash were traditionally been considered as waste materials however, these days it’s an important constituent of the blended cement used for pavement stabilisation. Rather than dumping these produces in the landfill it can recycled for good of environment and human beings.

References: AustStab (2011) Pavement Recycling and Stabilisation Guide, AustStab, North Sydney, NSW. Austroads (2006) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4(D): Stabilised Materials Austroads Project No: TP1089, Sydney NSW

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 1 of 1

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation Question 2

Assignment 1

Question 2

The major problem associated with the construction of pavement layer with two stabilised layer is failure of bonding between two layers. The consequences are that the fatigue life of smooth interface between the two layers is approximately 100 times less than the fatigue life of rough interface or bonded layers. This usually happens when significant delay between the placement of lower and upper layers occur. The shrinkage cracking on the surface of the upper layer may terminate at the interface of the two layers. Which in turn may allow the water to enter from surface to the interface & consequently laterally along the interface. This may caused rapid and further more de-bonding. Once the layers act as separate layers, the fatigue life of the pavement diminishes quiet rapidly. In general, the bond strength between the cemented layers was observed to decrease with an increased time delay in placement of the second layer (Cameron & Mathias 2001). Minimising the time delay between placements of second layer to the same day or as soon as possible can have very good results. Some road agencies have tried using chemical bonding agent between the stabilised pavement layers, but the more studies have to be done before we have the definitive answers. Techniques that can be used to attempt to bond cementitiously-bound pavement layers include the use of cement slurry or bituminous seal Interlayer (Kadar et.al. 1986). In the mean time, the preferred construction method for two stabilised layer is to remove the top existing pavement material to allow stabilisation of lower layer with the stabilising binder. This is then followed by replacing the top material and stabilising this layer together with the uppermost 50mm of the lower layer in the final phase. This may ensure the bonding between the two stabilised layers.

References: Mathias C.L, Cameron D.A (2001) Bonding of Cement treated pavement Layers, 20th ARRB Conference Melbourne Australia, ISBN 0-86910-799-2 AustStab (2011) Pavement Recycling and Stabilisation Guide, AustStab, North Sydney, NSW Austroads (2006) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4(D): Stabilised Materials Austroads Projects No: TP1089, Sydney NSW

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 1 of 1

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation Question 3

Assignment 1

Question 3

a. When lime is added to the clayey soil, the lime reacts with poozzolanic material in clay like silica and alumina to form calcium aluminates and calcium silicates. The silicate compounds in treated soil decreases plasticity, increases cohesion and strength. b. For the lime stabilisation to be effective, the plastic index of the soil should be equal to or greater than 10%. High plastic soil indicates the presence of pozzolanic material in soil such as alumina and silica. The presence of pozzolanic material in high alkaline environment promotes formation of silicate and aluminates. c. Lime, particularly quicklime, is an alkaline material that is reactive in the presence of moisture (National Lime Association, January 2004). Workers handling lime must be trained and wear proper protective equipment. Soil applications can create exposure to airborne lime dust, which should be avoided. The list of safety precautions required during stabilisation are as follows: Eye Protection - Lime can cause severe eye irritation or burning, including permanent damage. Eye protection (chemical goggles, safety glasses and/or face shield) should be worn where there is a risk of lime exposure. If lime comes in contact with the eyes, they should first be flushed with large amounts of water. Seek medical attention immediately after administering first aid. Skin Protections - Lime can cause irritation and burns to unprotected skin, especially in the presence of moisture. Prolonged contact with unprotected skin should be avoided. Protective gloves and clothing that fully covers arms and legs are recommended. Particular care should be exercised with quicklime because its reaction with moisture generates heat capable of causing thermal burns. If skin contact occurs, brush off dry lime and then wash exposed skin with large amounts of water. If skin burns occur, administer first aid and seek medical attention, if necessary. Respiratory Protections - Lime dust is irritating if inhaled. In most cases, nuisance dust masks provide adequate protection. In high exposure situations, further respiratory protection may be appropriate, depending on the concentration and length of exposure (MSDS should be consult for applicable exposure limits). For inhalation, remove exposed person to fresh air. Seek medical attention immediately after administering first aid. d. Cementitious Binders like Slag/Lime (85/15) allows the contractors to have longer setting time. This gives more time to achieve compaction and possibility to reduce shrinkage cracks. In such cases this binder is useful. This blend has also been tested thoroughly and accepted throughout Australia.

e. Fly Ash and Slag are the pozzolans i.e. it contains siliceous or alumina siliceous material. These materials themself cannot form an expected cementitious material. These pozzolans Sudarshan Maharjan ID: 839025 Page 1 of 3

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 3

need calcium hydroxide released from the hydration lime to form silicates and aluminates. Lime act as an activator for slag and fly ash. That is why in Triple blends it is essential to have lime. For the Triple blend, a minimum of 10% hydrated lime is required to activate slag and usually one part of lime for every 2 part of Fly Ash is necessary. If these proportions are maintained, various Triple blends could be made and used. f. Blended Cement (Hydraulic Cement) is a cement which contents one or both of Greater than 5% of Fly Ash or Ground Granulated iron blast furnace slag, or both. Up to 10% silica fumes. The list of Blended Cement type used in our region (Central West NSW) are as follows: SSC40 (60% Slag / 40% Cement) SSC50 (50% Slag / 50% Cement) RoadPozz (75% Cement / 25% Fly Ash) RoadPozz 50 (50% Cement / 50% Fly Ash) 622 Cement Triple Blend (60% Cement / 20% Slag / 20% Fly Ash) g. Both bitumen emulsion and foamed bitumen use bitumen as a major component however, the way they interact with the pavement material differs. Where the traffic has to be opened immediately foam bitumen are better suited as foam bitumen treated material can be placed, compacted and opened to traffic immediately. Foamed bitumen can be used to stabilise the marginal quality pavement material with relatively high plasticity. Bitumen emulsion can only be used in the comparatively better material. Foam bitumen encapsulates only the fine particle and creating a bitumen rich mortar that binds the matrix together. In the other hand bitumen emulsion separate and breaks leaving bitumen. Then the bitumen provides a thick coat of binder to the aggregate in the pavement without excessive bitumen drain off. In urban area the supply and delivery cost generally does not varies much between bitumen emulsion and foamed bitumen. However, in rural area foamed bitumen has edge over bitumen emulsion as contractor does not have to carry extra water to rural place. h. In bitumen emulsion the bitumen is in the state of dispersed droplets in a continous water phase. The surface active agent (an emulsifier) is used in bitumen emulsion to prevent rejoining of bitumen droplets. The bitumen in suspension of water helps it become easy to mix with the pavement material. Bitumen emulsion is designed to break or remove from water leaving solid bitumen at or near the time of primary compaction. This frees bitumen than coat the pavement materials that needs to be stabilised. Sudarshan Maharjan ID: 839025 Page 2 of 3

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 3

It would be necessary to incorporate secondary binder into the bitumen emulsion if the traffic is to open shortly after the stabilisation (in this case 3 hrs). The supplementary binder like cement makes the stabilised pavement to improve the early strength rapidly without significantly reducing the fatigue life of pavement. The study shows that up to 2% of General Purpose cement is considered to be suitable (Wirtgen, 1998). i. Soluble synthetic polymers are in granulated or liquid form. During in-situ stabilisation it is mixed with water to form the polymer chain which forms acrylimide or urethane copolymer. These polymers then encapsulate soil particles with the thin film of polymer. When the polymer dries it bonds with the pavement material reducing permeability and minimising the water absorption into the clayey soil. It is usual practice to keep stabilised pavement layer damp to help cure for 4 to 7 days. However, over watering the layer will create a slurry on the surface of the stabilised layer and it can cause delamination of the upper zone of stabilised layer.

j.

References: National Lime Association (January 2004), Lime-treated Soil Construction Manual, Lime Stabilisation and Lime Modification, Bulletin 326 AustStab (2011) Pavement Recycling and Stabilisation Guide, AustStab, North Sydney, NSW. Austroads (2006) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4(D): Stabilised Materials Austroads Project No: TP1089, Sydney NSW

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 3 of 3

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation Question 4 We have, No. of heavy vehicles = 200

Assignment 1

Question 4

For calculating the Design Traffic (NDT) we have equation as follows: NDT = 365 x AADT X DF x % HV/100 X LDF x CGF X NHVAG Where, AADT DF % HV LDF CGF NHVAG Design Traffic DESA DESA = 200 = 0.5 = 100% =1 = 29.8 (assuming annual growth rate of 4%, 20 years design life) (Austroads 2008, Table 7.4) = 2.8 (for rural road, Austroads 2008 Table 7.5) = 3.05 X 106 = 2.75 X 106 = 3.0 X 106 ESAs ESAs ESAs (rounded)

Laboratory Test indicates that the pavement material throughout the studied section is similar with around 40% passing 425 micron and PI in between 7 to 9 %. The existing pavement is 180 mm thick and the subgrade CBR ranges from 2% to 5%. On the basis of the laboratory test results for pavement material, the following stabilising binders have been chosen in top to bottom rank: 1. RoadPozz (Cement 75% / Fly Ash 25%) (http://www.boral.com.au/ProductCatalogue/product.aspx?product=2345 2. Stabilment (Slag 85% / Lime 15%) (http://www.boral.com.au/ProductCatalogue/product.aspx?product=2269) 3. Cement Triple Blend 622 (Cement 60% / Slag 20% / Fly Ash 20%) (From BCSC – Stabilisation Product Range) The most preferred binder would be RoadPozz as it contains both Cement which is suitable for granular material and FlyAsh for finer material. In this case, there are 40% passing 425 micron sieve which justify the need of Fly Ash in stabilising binder. RoadPozz is a proven binder as it has been used successfully used in NSW Central West for local council roads. Fly Ash is the byproduct of Power Generation Company. Using Fly Ash as a component of binder helps reduce the environmental impact as the waste material like Fly Ash can be used. In rural areas in NSW, Fly Ash based binder is more readily available. Stabilment is another option for the stabilisation; however slag cost more than cement in this region. GGBFS Slag is produced by steel industries and due to the lack of steel producing industries in this region and even in Australia the Slag has to be imported from other countries. This makes it costlier than other binders like RoadPozz. Long Haulage to the rural Area is not viable. Sudarshan Maharjan ID: 839025 Page 1 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 4

RoadPozz (Cement 75% / Fly Ash 25%) has been used for the design of this pavement. Using CIRCLY 5TM as the design tool pavement has been designed as follows.

Option 1
Depth (mm) Descriptions 2 coat bitumen seal 000mm – 150mm 150mm – 350mm 350mm – 650mm Subgrade 150mm thick unbound granular base (specified by RTA 3051) 200mm thick modified existing pavement including additional 20mm of base material (modulus = 500MPa anisotropic) (use RoadPozz) 300mm thick 4% hydrated lime stabilised Subgrade (minimum CBR = 10%) In-situ Subgrade (CBR = 2%)

Construction Methodology 1. As the road cannot be closed during the rehabilitation, the construction shall be done in single lane at a time. This method needs longer time to finish the job. 2. Excavate and stockpile the existing 180mm of pavement material for reuse. 3. The CBR value of the subgrade is quiet low which indicate the soil must me CLAYEY in nature. For clayey soil lime based binders are suitable (AustStab 2011 Table 3.2). Stabilise 300mm of in-situ CBR with approximately 4% of hydrated lime and compacted to required density ratio and moisture ratio. Let the stabilised pavement cure for 4 to 7 days. Required hydrated lime percentage shall be determined in lab using Lime Demand Test on the subgrade material. 4. Place 200mm thick existing pavement material that has been stockpile. Place extra unbound granular base material as the exiting pavement material wouldn’t be sufficient to make 200mm of stabilised subbase. 5. Modify 200mm of subbase layer with RoadPozz and perform the required compaction. The percentage of binder shall be determined by stabilisation trials in the laboratory. The testing includes Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) trials and Stabilised California Bearing Ratio (CBR) trials using different % by mass of the binders. 6. The UCS of the sample tested in lab should be less than 1 MPa (for modified pavement) 7. Lay and compact 150mm of base layer (specified by RTA 3051) 8. Carry out sealing with 2 coat bitumen seal (Which is the economical and better option for traffic <107 ESAs, Austroads 2009). The 150mm of unbound granular base has been laid to stop the possible crack from stabilised layer to transfer on to the top of the pavement.

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 2 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 4

Foamed bitumen stabilisation of pavement including certain design depth of subgrade and existing pavement could be another option which takes much lesser time than the option devised above. This method also allows the traffic on the pavement immediately after the construction. However, the subgrade seems to be clayey and upon mixing with the pavement material will increase the PI of the soil matrix greater than 10. In this case, it is necessary to pre-treat the soil with lime to reduce the PI. And because the subgrade CBR is low it will be difficult to compact the stabilised layer to required density ratio. Deep lift stabilisation could have been another option however, presence of weak subgrade would have made it difficult for the compaction of the pavement layer and in many instant it is impossible to compact the pavement to the right compaction ratio which will lead to even thicker pavement.
CIRCLY Analysis CIRCLY Version 5.0s (30 May 2011) Job Title: Assignment-1-Q4 Damage Factor Calculation Assumed number of damage pulses per movement: One pulse per axle (i.e. use NROWS) Traffic Spectrum Details: ID: 2004-1 Title: Austroads 2004 - Example 1 - Unbound Granular Pavement Load No. 1 Load ID ESA75-Full Movements 3.00E+06

Details of Load Groups: Load No. 1 Load ID ESA75-Full Load Category SA750-Full Gear No. 1 1 1 1 Load Type Vertical Force X -165.0 165.0 1635.0 1965.0 Radius 92.1 Y 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pressure/ Ref. stress 0.75 Scaling Factor 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 1.00E+00 Exponent 0.00

Load Locations: Location Load No. ID 1 ESA75-Full 2 ESA75-Full 3 ESA75-Full 4 ESA75-Full

Theta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Layout of result points on horizontal plane: Xmin: 0 Xmax: 165 Xdel: 165 Y: 0 Details of Layered System: ID: Aust2004-1 Title: Austroads 2004 - Example 1 - Unbound Granular Pavement Layer No. 1 2 3 4 Lower i/face rough rough rough rough Material ID Gran_300 Cem500A StasubCB10 Sub_CBR2 Isotropy Aniso. Aniso. Aniso. Aniso. Component EZZ Modulus (or Ev) 3.00E+02 5.00E+02 1.00E+02 2.00E+01 Perform. Constant 0.009300 P.Ratio (or vvh) 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.45 Perform. Exponent 7.000 F 2.20E+02 3.70E+02 7.40E+01 1.38E+01 Traffic Multiplier 1.600 Eh 1.50E+02 2.50E+02 5.00E+01 1.00E+01 vh 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.45

Performance Relationships: Layer Location Performance No. ID 4 top Sub_2004

Reliability Factors: Not Used. Details of Layers to be sublayered: Layer no. 1: Austroads (2004) sublayering

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 3 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation
Layer no. Results: Layer No. 1 2 3 4 Thickness 150.00 200.00 300.00 0.00 Material ID Gran_300 Cem500A StasubCB10 Sub_CBR2 Load ID 3:

Assignment 1

Question 4

Austroads (2004) sublayering

ESA75-Full

Critical Strain n/a n/a n/a 1.03E-03

CDF n/a n/a n/a 9.60E-01

Note: I used Macquarie Geotechnical Pty Ltd facilities to prepare this assignment. All the RTA Standard and Specification and CIRCLY software were provided by Macquarie Geotechnical Pty Ltd, Bathurst NSW 2795.

References: AustStab (2011) Pavement Recycling and Stabilisation Guide, AustStab, North Sydney, NSW Austroads (2006) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4(D): Stabilised Materials Austroads Projects No: TP1089, Sydney NSW

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 4 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation Question 5

Assignment 1

Question 5

The pavement materials need to be tested for the index properties to determine the suitability of the three possible binders. The laboratory test programs to assess the suitability of the binder are as follows:

Determine the Particle Size Distribution (PSD) of the pavement material

Determine Plasticity Index (PI)

Determine the suitable binder types

RoadPozz

Stabilment

Cement TBlend 622

Perform UCS Test (Pair) at 2%, 4% & 6% binder

Perform UCS Test (Pair) at 2%, 4% & 6% binder

Perform UCS Test (Pair) at 2%, 4% & 6% binder

Select Suitable Binder and Percentage binders (two possible proportions of binders like 2% & 4%)

Perform Compaction Test on material with 2% binders and Perform CBR Test

Perform Compaction Test on material with 4% binders and Perform CBR Test

Select the suitable % binder

Flow Chart for selecting suitable binder and it proportion in the material to be stabilised Sudarshan Maharjan ID: 839025 Page 1 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 5

The testing can be done either using Australian Standard or RTA standard; however, RTA is more rigorous and detailed. This is the reason why I chose RTA method of Testing. The list of test methods that have to be used to determine the suitable binders are as follows: 1. RTA T106 & T107 – Coarse & Fine Particle Distribution of road construction material. Particle size distribution test helps determine the % fine particles and % coarse particles in the materials (pavement material in this case). 2. RTA T108 & T109 – Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit & Plasticity Index of the soil. This testing determines the plasticity of the soil. The plasticity is used to determine the suitable binders that will work for the given material. If the plasticity is low cement based binder is suitable whereas for high plastic soil lime based binder is suitable. The Acceptance value for Plasticity Index test for pavement material is < 10%. Note: both of above tests won’t be needed as the testing results are already available in the question. 3. RTA T111 – Dry Density/Moisture Relationship of road construction material This test determines the optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of the road construction material. 4. RTA T117 – California Bearing Ratio of remoulded specimens of road construction material This test determines the CBR value of remoulded sample of road construction material without binder so that it can be compared with the Stabilised CBR value to identify where the binder has done the job or not. 5. RTA T116 – Unconfined Compressive Strength test of remoulded road construction materials. Accelerated Curing at 65 °C for 7 days. This test method is used to determine the suitable proportion of binder in the construction material to give the desired compressive strength. For this assignment, I have chosen modified layer i.e. UCS shall be less than 1 MPa. The Acceptance value for UCS test for remoulded pavement material with the appropriate binder is <1 MPa. 6. RTA T130 – Dry Density/Moisture Relationship of Road Construction Materials (Blended in the laboratory with cementitious binders) This test determines the optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of the road construction material with binder mixed in. 7. RTA T132 – Determination of California Bearing Ratio of road materials modified or stabilised with proportions of cement, lime or other cementitious materials.

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 2 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 5

This test determines the CBR value of remoulded sample of road construction material with binder. It determines the whether the addition of binder has produced the required CBR in the material. The Acceptance value for Stabilised CBR test for remoulded pavement material with the appropriate binder is ≥ 50% CBR. The designated stabilised layer in Assignment Question 4 is the subbase layer. The quantities of pavement material required from each Test pit are as follows:
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Qty / Test 8kg 6kg 8kg 6kg 3kg number of test 1 1 1 1 2 Sets of binders (2%, 4% and 6%) 3 3 3 -

Description of test

Total Amount

Remarks

RTA T111 - MDD & OMC RTA T117 - CBR Test RTA T130 - MDD & OMC RTA T132 - CBR Test RTA T116 - UCS Test (pair) RTA T108 & T109 Atterberg's Limit RTA T106 & T107 - PSD

8kg 6kg 24kg 18kg 18kg -

quantity passing 19mm sieve quantity passing 19mm sieve quantity passing 19mm sieve quantity passing 19mm sieve quantity passing 19mm sieve Already Provided Already Provided

Total Sample required from each test pit = 74 kg. Samples were taken from 20 test pits, however due to the similarities in the material based on PSD test and plasticity Index result we shall do the laboratory testing on only 10 Test Pit samples evenly spread along the road. The total cost for laboratory program is calculated as follows
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Description of test RTA T144 – Lime Saturation Point Test RTA T111 - MDD & OMC RTA T117 - CBR Test RTA T111 - MDD & OMC RTA T117 - CBR Test RTA T130 - MDD & OMC (Stabilised) RTA T132 - CBR Test (Stabilised) RTA T116 - UCS Test (pair) RTA T108 & T109 - Atterberg's Limit no. of test per sample 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 (@ lime saturation) 1 (@ lime saturation) 3 3 3 Sets of binders (2%, 4% and 6%) Total no. of Sample 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Unit Rates 120 100 150 $100 $150 $150 $200 $150 Total Amount $1200 $1000 $1500 $1000 $1500 $4500 $6000 $9000 binder cost inclusive in the unit rates binder cost inclusive in the unit rates binder cost inclusive in the unit rates Already Provided Already Provided Remarks For subgrade material For subgrade material For subgrade material

10 RTA T106 & T107 - PSD Note: unit rates are provided by Macquarie Geotechnical Pty Ltd. (Exclusive of Tax)

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 3 of 4

608/658 Insitu Stabilisation

Assignment 1

Question 5

The total laboratory cost = $ 25,700.00 (does not include site investigation cost) The total construction cost provided = $ 525,000.00 Therefore, the proportion of total cost spends on the testing = 4.9 %. References: RTA T106 – October 2011 “Coarse Particle Size Distribution of road construction material (by dry sieving) RTA T107 – October 2011 “Fine Particle size distribution of road construction material”. RTA T108 – April 2007 “Liquid Limit of road materials” RTA T109 – November 2007 “Plastic Limit & Plasticity Index of road construction material”. RTA T111 – May 2011 “Dry Density/moisture relationship of road construction materials”. RTA T116 – May 2011 “Unconfined compressive strength of remoulded road construction materials”. RTA T117 – October 2011 “California bearing ratio of remoulded specimens of road construction material”. RTA T130 – January 2010 “Dry density/moisture relationship of road construction materials (blended in the laboratory with cementitious binders) RTA T132 – February 2001 “Determination of the California bearing ratio of road materials modified or stabilised with proportions of cement, lime or other cementitious materials RTA T144 – February 2001 “Determination of the lime saturation point of roadmarking materials by the pH method”. AustStab (2011) Pavement Recycling and Stabilisation Guide, AustStab, North Sydney, NSW Austroads (2006) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4(D): Stabilised Materials Austroads Projects No: TP1089, Sydney NSW

Sudarshan Maharjan

ID: 839025

Page 4 of 4

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.