STABILIZATION OF SOIL USING WASTE FIBRE

MATERIALS

PRESENTED BY : CH MAHITEJA
(18N61A0107)

1
 CONTENTS
 Introduction.
 Objectives.
 Scope Of Study.
 Outline.
 Methodology.
 Result& Discussions.
 Inferences From Direct Shear Test.
 Inferences From Unconfined Compression Test.
 Conclusion.
 References
 INTRODUCTION

 For any land-based structure, foundation is incredibly necessary and has to

be
strong to support the entire structure.

 So as for the foundation to be strong, the soil around it plays a crucial role.

 So, as to work with soils, we need to have correct data regarding their properties
and factors that have an effect on their behavior.

The process of soil stabilization helps to attain the specific properties in

soil required for the construction work.

Here, in this project, soil stabilization has been done with the help of
randomly distributed polypropylene fibers obtained from waste materials.
 OBJECTIVE OF PRESENT STUDY

1. To evaluate the index properties of two different soil samples.

2. To increase the strength characteristic of soil by using polypropylene fiber .
3. To make comparison of strength properties between two different location soil
sample with fiber and without fiber.
4. To increase the load bearing capacity of soil by adding polypropylene fiber in
various percentages.
5. To identify the optimum % of polypropylene fiber by conducting
various strength test to various % of fiber.
 SCOPE OF STUDY

The scope of present work includes addition of polypropylene fiber to the soil
samples to enhance the engineering properties.
The main aim of this work is to investigate the improvement of soil parameters by
adding polypropylene fiber material. A series of of laboratory test are conducted to
improve soil properties.
 OUTLINE

An attempt has been made to study the characteristics of soil stabilization using
different methods. For generalization of the experiment, first polypropylene
fiber
material and different soil samples of different locations are collected.

The analysis of every material is done to its best of its convenience and the results
are carried out.
 METHODOLOGY

Soil samples at different locations are collected and tested for their geotechnical
properties and strength characteristics. The various tests conducted to obtain
geotechnical properties.
a.Specific gravity
b.Determination of maximum dry density (MDD) and the corresponding optimum
moisture content (OMC) of the soil by proctor compaction test
c.Preparation of soil samples
d.Determination of shear strength by(i)direct shear test (DST) and(ii)unconfined
compression test (UCS).
 MATERIALS USED

• SOIL:
o Soil can be defined as the organic and inorganic materials on the surface of
the earth that provide the medium for plant growth. Soil develops slowly over
time and is composed of many different materials.
o Soil sample collected from sree Chaitanya college of engineering.
 POLYPROPYLENE FIBERS

 Polypropylene fiber, also known as polypropene or PP, is a synthetic fiber, transformed from 85%
propylene, and used in a variety of applications.
 Polypropylene is a by-product of petroleum.
 Polypropylene is manufactured from propylene gas in presence of a catalyst such as titanium
chloride.
 Polypropylene fiber displays good heat insulating properties and is highly resistant to acids,
alkalies, and organic solvents.
 Because of its low specific gravity, polypropylene yields the greatest volume of fibre for a given
weight.
Growth in demand of PP is very high, and it is mainly due to its distinct technical features:
i)light weight ii)strong iii)hydrophobic iv)flexible, has low thermal conductivity etc.
 RESULTS &DISCUSSIONS
 soil from specified location is collected and tests are conducted by adding certain percentages of polypropylene fibers and
corresponding graphs are plotted based on test results.
Two samples are;
 Soil sample-1:Silt&
 Soil sample-2:Clay.
Specific Gravity:
SAMPLE-1 SAMPLE-2
sample number 1 2 3 sample number 1 2 3
mass of empty bottle (M1) in gms. 128.41 118.67 122.16 mass of empty bottle (M1) in gms. 112.45 114.93 115.27
mass of bottle+ dry soil (M2) in gms. 162.45 164.93 165.27
mass of bottle+ dry soil (M2) in 178.41 168.67 172.16
gms.
mass of bottle + dry soil mass of bottle + dry soil + water
401.86 396.29 399.03 (M3) in gms. 390.088 395.38 398.16
+ water (M3) in gms.
mass of bottle + water (M4) in 369.67 365.378 367.355 mass of bottle + water (M4) in gms. 359.448 364.07 367.87
gms.
specific gravity 2.81 2.62 2.73 specific gravity 2.58 2.68 2.54
Avg. specific gravity 2.72 Avg. specific gravity 2.60
 Standard Proctor Compaction Test

Sample-1 Sample-2
Test No. 1 2 3 4 5 Test No. 1 2 3 4 5
Weight of empty mould(Wm) gms 2059 2059 2059 2059 2059 Weight of empty mould(Wm) gms 2062 2062 2062 2062 2062
Internal diameter of mould (d) cm 10 10 10 10 10 Internal diameter of mould (d) cm 10 10 10 10 10
Height of mould (h) cm 13 13 13 13 13 Height of mould (h) cm 13 13 13 13 13
Volume of mould (V)=( π/4) d2h cc 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Volume of mould (V)=( π/4) d2h cc 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Weight of Base plate (Wb) gms 2071 2071 2071 2071 2071
Weight of Base plate (Wb) gms 2065 2065 2065 2065 2065
Weight of empty mould + base plate (W') gms 4133 4133 4133 4133 4133
Weight of empty mould + base plate (W') 4124 4124 4124 4124 4124
gms
Weight of mould + compacted soil + Base 6089 6179 6271 6086 6080 Weight of mould + compacted soil + Base
plate(W1) gms 6174 6261 6427 6347 6348
plate (W1) gms
Weight of Compacted Soil (W1-W') gms 1965 2055 2147 2108 2102 Weight of Compacted Soil (W1-W') gms 2041 2128 2294 2214 2215
Container no. 20.15 21.15 19.47 21.49 21.12 Container no. 19.47 21.15 21.12 20.15 21.49
Weight of Container (X1) gms 20.19 21.14 19.48 21.55 21.14 Weight of Container (X1) gms 19.49 21.6 21.14 20.19 21.55
Weight of Container + Wet Soil (X2) gms 84.81 124.16 89.93 154 113 Weight of Container + Wet Soil (X2) gms 90.21 122.57 113.12 125.00 119.28
Weight of Container + dry soil (X3) gms 79.59 114.24 82.05 138.13 100.5 Weight of Container + dry soil (X3) gms 82.51 110.04 99.74 108.94 102.32
Weight of dry soil (X3-X1) gms 63.02 88.87 78.6 88.75 80.77
Weight of dry soil (X3-X1) gms 59.4 93.1 62.57 116.58 79.36
Weight of water (X2-X3) gms 7.7 12.53 13.38 16.06 16.96
Weight of water (X2-X3) gms 5.22 9.92 7.88 15.87 12.5
Water content W%= X2-X3/X3-X1 12.18 14.4 17.02 18.1 21
Water content W%= X2-X3/X3-1 8.79 10.65 12.59 13.61 15.75
Dry density ϒd= ϒt/(1 + (W/100)) gm/cc 1.79 1.86 1.96 1.875 1.83
Dry density ϒd= Vt/1 + (W/100) gm/cc 1.81 1.86 1.91 1.85 1.82

12
 Graphs for standard proctor compaction test

Sample-1 Sample-2
2.15

2.1
ZERO VOID COMPACTION LINE
2.05

1.95

1.9

1.85

1.8
7 12 17
Moisture content (%)

From the figure on the left side, it is evident

that, Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) =
17.02%
Maximum Dry Density (MDD) = 1.96 g/cc
 Preparation of soil
sample
Following steps are carried out while mixing the fiber to the soil:
i.All the soil samples are compacted at their respective maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture
content (OMC), corresponding to the standard proctor compaction tests.
ii. Content of fiber in the soils is herein decided by the following equation:

Where, ρf= ratio of fiber

content. Wf = weight of the
fiber.
W = weight of the air-dried soil.
iii.The different values adopted in the present study for the percentage of fiber reinforcement are 0, 0.05,
0.15, and 0.25%.
iv.The adopted content of fibers was first mixed into the air-dried soil in small increments by hand, making sure
that all the fibers were mixed thoroughly, so that a fairly homogenous mixture is obtained, and then the
required water was added.
 Direct Shear Test

SOIL SAMPLE-1

SL.NO % OF REINFORCEMENT Cohesion (C) Angle of internal friction

(φ)

1 Unreinforced soil(0%) 0.325 kg/cm2 47.72◦

2 0.05%

3 0.15% 0.3747 kg/cm2 48.254◦

4 0.25% 0.3887 kg/cm2 48.483◦

 SOIL SAMPLE-2

S.NO % OF Cohesion (C) Angle of internal friction

REINFORCEMENT (φ)

1 Unreinforced soil(0%) 0.3513 kg/cm2 27.82◦

2 0.05% 0.4732 kg/cm2 29.02◦

3 0.15% 0.504 kg/cm2 29.95◦

4 0.25% 0.5375 kg/cm2 32◦

 Unconfined Compression Strength Test

SOIL SAMPLE-1

SL.NO % OF REINFORCEMENT UCS(Unconfined compression

strength value)

1 Unreinforced soil(0%) 0.0562Mpa

2 0.05% 0.0631Mpa

3 0.15% 0.0637Mpa

4 0.25% 0.0643Mpa
 SOIL SAMPLE-2

UCS
(Unconfined compression
SL.NO % OF REINFORCEMENT
strength value)

1 Unreinforced(0%) 0.0692Mpa

2 0.05% 0.0938Mpa

3 0.15% 0.0965Mpa

4 0.25% 0.1037Mpa
 INFERENCES FROM DIRECT SHEAR TEST

Soil sample- 1
• Cohesion value increases from 0.325 kg/cm2 to 0.3887 kg/cm2, a net 19.6%
• The increment graph shows a gradual decline in slope
• The angle of internal friction increases from 47.72 to 48.483 degrees, a net
1.59%
• The increment in shear strength of soil due to reinforcement is marginal.

Soil sample- 2
• Cohesion value increases from 0.3513 kg/cm2 to 0.5375 kg/cm2, a net 53.0%.
• The increment graph for cohesion shows a gradual decline in slope.
• The angle of internal friction increases from 27.82 to 32 degrees, a net 15.02%
• The increment graph for φ shows a variation in slope- alternate rise and fall.
• The increment in shear strength of soil due to reinforcement is substantial.
 Inferences From Unconfined Compression Test

 Soil sample- 1

 UCS value increases from 0.0562MPa to 0.0643MPa, a net 14.4%.

 The slope of increment graph is continuously decreasing with an
initially steep slope.

 Soil sample- 2

 UCS value increases from 0.0692 MPa to 0.1037 MPa, a net 49.8%.
 The slope of the increment graph varies with alternate rise and fall.
 CONCLUSION
• DIRECT SHEAR TEST:
Soil Sample-1:
 With increase of percentage fiber reinforcement the increase of soil strength due to adhesive property of soil and fibers and
the increase of angle of internal friction is not substantial for silty type of soils the randomly distributed polypropylene fibers
is not recommended.
Soil sample-2:
 With the increase of percentage fiber reinforcement the increase of adhesion and angle of internal friction(φ) is effective and high
increase in the value of the(c) and (φ). Thus, the use of polypropylene fiber as reinforcement for soils like soil sample- 2 is
recommended.
• UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST (UCS):
Soil sample-1:
 With increase of percentage fiber reinforcement the increase in unconfined compressive strength is not Incremental&
substantial and applying it for soils similar to soil sample-1 is not effective.
 This also supports the previous conclusion that use of polypropylene fibers for reinforcing soils like soil sample- 2 is
recommended.
 Overall it can be concluded that fiber reinforced soil can be considered to be good ground improvement technique
specially in engineering projects on weak soils where it can act as a substitute to deep/raft foundations, reducing the
cost as wellas energy.
 REFERENCE

1. S. A. Naeini and S. M. Sadjadi ,(2008) ,” Effect of Waste Polymer Materials on

Shear Strength of Unsaturated Clays”, EJGE Journal, Vol 13, Bund k,(1-12)
2. Yetimoglu, T., Inanir, M., Inanir, O.E., 2005. A study on bearing capacity of
randomly distributed fiber-reinforced sand fills overlying soft clay. Geotextiles
and Geomembranes 23 (2), 174–183.
3. Chaosheng Tang, Bin Shi, Wei Gao, Fengjun Chen, Yi Cai, 2006. Strength and
mechanical behavior of short polypropylene fiber reinforced and cement
stabilized clayey soil. Geotextiles and Geomembranes 25 (2007) 194–202.
4. Consoli, N. C., Prietto, P. D. M. and Ulbrich, L. A. (1999). ‘‘The behavior of a
fibre_x0002_reinforced cemented soil.’’ Ground Improvement, London, 3(1), 21–
30.
THANK YOU