EFFECT OF REINFORCEMENT ON

COMPACTION AND CBR OF CLAY SOIL

Session: (2016-2020)

PROJECT ADVISOR
DR. HASSAN MUJTABA SHAHZAD

SUBMITTED BY

MUHAMMAD DANISH 2016-CIV-98

MUHAMMAD TAYYAB 2016-CIV-86
NAVEED KHAWAJA 2016-CIV-101
MUHAMMAD JAMAL 17R/2016-CIV-102

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
LAHORE, PAKISTAN
EFFECT OF REINFORCEMENT ON COMPACTION AND CBR
OF CLAY SOIL

Session: (2016-2020)

GROUP MEMBERS

MUHAMMAD DANISH 2016-CIV-98

MUHAMMAD TAYYAB 2016-CIV-86
NAVEED KHAWAJA 2016-CIV-101
MUHAMMAD JAMAL 17R/2016-CIV-102

INTERNAL EXAMINER
EXTERNAL EXAMINER

Final year project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of B.Sc. Civil Engineering

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
LAHORE, PAKISTAN
 To Allah Almighty,

Who has been our eternal rock and source of refuge, and for
His words in 61: 13" Nasrun min Allahi, wa fat'hun qareeb"
that kept us all through the journey of completing this work.
We also dedicate

this work to our families for being great pillars of support

 DECLARATION

It is hereby declared that this research, entitled “Effect of reinforcement on compaction

and CBR of clay soil” is an original and authentic work of the authors. It is further
guaranteed that current work is not submitted for the acquisition of any degree or
qualification at any other institute besides University of Engineering & Technology,
Lahore for the partial fulfillment of B.Sc. Civil Engineering degree requirement. It is
assured that this thesis does not contain any formerly published data except where the
reference is quoted.

MUHAMMAD DANISH 2016-CIV-98

MUHAMMAD TAYYAB 2016-CIV-86
NAVEED KHAWAJA 2016-CIV-101
MUHAMMAD JAMAL 17R/2016-CIV-102

Project Advisor
DR. HASSAN MUJTABA
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

All the praises and gratitude to Allah Almighty for blessing us with health and
knowledge to accomplish this work. We would like to appreciate the Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Lahore for giving us
the opportunity to instigate this research in the first place and for the financial and
infrastructural support.

First of all, we are obliged to our respected advisor Dr. Hassan Mujtaba, who
provided us with the opportunity to study and perform research at University of
Engineering and Technology (UET) Lahore. He introduced us to the new ideas in the
field of geotechnical engineering and gave us ample freedom to explore interests and
pursue what we thought was interesting. We learnt a lot through the group
discussions, where we could hone our communication skills while we developed the
ability to question without hesitation. Without his guidance, insights and leadership, it
would have been impossible for us to grow both as a researcher and a person that we
are today. He has been great source of inspiration for us and a great advisor, above all.

We are obliged to the lab staff of Soil Mechanics Laboratory. We got major support
from their side. We are obliged to our parents for being a continuous source of
inspiration and support.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................10
1. GENERAL................................................................................................................11
1.1. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES.......................................................................................12
1.2. SCOPE OF RESEARCH..........................................................................................12
1.3. THESIS OVERVIEW..............................................................................................13
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................14
2.1 What is CLAY?.................................................................................................... 15
2.2 Expansive nature of clay....................................................................................15
2.3 Clay Mineralogy................................................................................................. 15
2.3.1 Kaolinite group...............................................................................................15
2.3.2 Montmorillonite group...................................................................................16
2.3.3 ILLITE group....................................................................................................17
2.4 Occurrence of expansive soil.............................................................................18
2.5 Properties of expansive soil...............................................................................18
2.6 Problems associated with expansive soil...........................................................19
2.7 Techniques used in the Stabilization of expansive soil.......................................20
2.7.1 Pre-wetting.....................................................................................................21
2.7.2 Moisture control and Compaction.................................................................21
2.7.3 Soil replacement.............................................................................................21
2.7.4 Chemical stabilization.....................................................................................21
2.7.4.1 Lime stabilization........................................................................................22
2.7.4.2 Cement stabilization...................................................................................22
2.7.4.3 Organic compounds stabilization................................................................23
2.7.5 Stabilization using fibre reinforcement..........................................................23
2.8 Jute Fiber........................................................................................................... 25
2.9 Advantages of Jute Geotextile...........................................................................26
2.11 Review of Recent Research Work...................................................................29
Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHEDOLOGY.............................................................................30
3.1 Sample Collection.............................................................................................. 31
3.2 Laboratory Testing.............................................................................................31

1
 3.2.1 Natural Moisture Content..............................................................................31
3.2.2 Sieve Analysis................................................................................................. 32
3.2.3 Fineness Modulus...........................................................................................33
3.2.4 Hydrometer Analysis......................................................................................33
3.2.5 Atterberg Limits Test......................................................................................34
3.2.5.1 Liquid Limit Test..........................................................................................34
3.2.5.2 Plastic Limit Test.........................................................................................35
3.2.6 Specifies Gravity Test.....................................................................................36
3.2.7 Modified Compaction Test.............................................................................37
3.2.8 California Bearing Ratio..................................................................................38
Chapter 4 RESULTS & DISSCUSSION................................................................................41
4.1 Natural Moisture Content:.................................................................................42
4.2 Index Properties (ASTM D4318):........................................................................42
4.2.1 Liquid Limit................................................................................................. 42
4.2.2 Plastic Limit......................................................................................................43
4.2.3 Plasticity Index............................................................................................44
4.3 Particle Size Distribution:...................................................................................44
4.3.1. Sieve Analysis................................................................................................. 44
4.3.2 Hydrometer Analysis......................................................................................45
4.4 Modified Compaction Test:................................................................................45
4.4.1 Without Fiber Content...................................................................................45
4.4.2 With 0.2% Fiber Contents...............................................................................47
4.4.3 With 04% Fiber Content.................................................................................48
4.4.4 With 0.6% Fiber Content................................................................................49
4.4.5 With 0.8% Fiber Content................................................................................50
4.5 California Bearing Ratio:....................................................................................51
4.5.1 Without Fiber Content...................................................................................51
4.5.2 With 0.2% Fiber Content................................................................................52
4.5.3 With 0.4% Fiber Content................................................................................54
4.5.4 With 0.6% Fiber Content................................................................................55
4.5.5 With 0.8% Fiber Content................................................................................56

2
 4.6 Final Result.........................................................................................................58
Chapter 5 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION.............................................................60
5.1 Conclusions:.......................................................................................................61
5.2 Recommendations.............................................................................................61

3
LIST OF FIGURES:

Figure 1.1. Natural Jute Fibers............................................................................................9

Figure 2.1. Kaolinite Mineral Structure............................................................................14
Figure 2.2. Montmorillonite Mineral Structure................................................................15
Figure 2.3. ILLITE Group................................................................................................ 15
Figure 2.4. : Soil Map of Pakistan....................................................................................16
Figure 2.5. Cracks due to clayey Soil...............................................................................18
Figure 2.6. Load & Moment Effect on Slab.....................................................................18
Figure 2.7. Effect of length, diameter and fiber content on CBR......................................22
Figure 2.8. Effect of coir fiber on the CBR......................................................................22
Figure 2.9. Effect of fiber content & Time Period on UCS & CBR.................................23
Figure 3.1Sieves............................................................................................................... 26
Figure 3.2. Hydrometer Apparatus...................................................................................27
Figure 3.3:Atterberg Apparatus........................................................................................29
Figure 3.4. Atterberg Apparatus.......................................................................................29
Figure 3.5. Liquid Limit Test..............................................................................................29
Figure 3.6. Soil Threads for Plastic Limit Test.................................................................30
Figure 3.7. Specific Gravity Test......................................................................................31
Figure 3.8. Modified Compaction Apparatus...................................................................32
Figure 3.9. Sketch of CBR Testing Machine....................................................................34
Figure 4.1. Liquid limit from graph..................................................................................37
Figure 4.2. Sieve analysis.................................................................................................38
Figure 4.3. Distribution curve of clayey soil....................................................................39
Figure 4.4. Moisture Content for Compaction Curve (without fibers)..............................39
Figure 4.5. Dry Density for Compaction Curve (without fibers)......................................40
Figure 4.6. Zero Void Curve (without fibers)...................................................................40
Figure 4.7. Zero Void Curve (with 0.2% fibers)...............................................................41
Figure 4.8. Zero Void Curve (with 0.4% fibers)...............................................................42
Figure 4.9. Zero Void Curve (with 0.6% fibers)...............................................................43
Figure 4.10. Zero Void Curve ( with 0.8% fibers)............................................................44
Figure 4.11. Penetration Curve (without fibers)...............................................................45
Figure 4.12. Load penetration curve (with 0.2% fibers)...................................................47
Figure 4.13. Load penetration (with 0.4% fibers).............................................................48
Figure 4.14. Load penetration (with 0.6% fibers).............................................................49
Figure 4.15. Load penetration curve (with 0.8% fibers)...................................................51
Figure 4.16. Effect of jute fiber on OMC ~ MDD ~ CBR.....................................................52

4
 ABSTRACT

Infrastructure projects like highways, bridges, dams and high rise buildings involve a
large soil mass. In some areas, replacement of weak soil is not easily possible as soil has
to be transported from a long distance. Quite often, large areas are covered with
problematic soil, which is not suitable for large scale construction projects. Extensive
research has been carried out to find solution of such problems by a variety of ground
improvement techniques. The present investigation has been focused on the methods to
improve the subgrade characteristic of Nandi-pur soil. The samples were subjected to
Consistency limit tests, compaction test and California bearing ratio value tests. The tests
have clearly shown the increase California bearing ratio of Clay on the addition of jute
fibers.

5
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

6
1. GENERAL

Civil engineering structures like building, bridge, highway, tunnel, dam, tower, etc. are
founded below or on the surface of the earth. For their stability, suitable foundation soil is
required and the foundation needs to be on stable soil. A building foundation rests on soil
and transfers the load of the building to the soil below. The soil acts as a resisting force. If
the soil under a building is not stable, the foundation of the building could crack, sink, or
worse–the building could fall Soils are unconsolidated materials that are result of
weathering and erosion process of rocks. When water content of some soils change, it
makes problems to civil activities. Some soils undergo slow volume changes when
change water content that occur independently of loading and are attributable to swelling
or shrinkage. These soils also represent a problem when they are encountered in road
construction, and shrinkage settlement of embankments composed of such clays can lead
to cracking and breakup of the roads they support. When construction projects are carried
out at problematic soils it is not always feasible to replace huge soil mass with stable soil.
So, the soil needs to be stabilized. There is substantial savings in stabilizing existing sub-
grade instead of replacing existing sub-grade with suitable materials. In soil stabilization
soil properties are improved by different techniques so that a stable structure can be
constructed on stable soil.
Volumetric variation of problematic expansive soils, due to altering of their moisture
content facilitate movement in upward direction which is uncertain situation and difficult
to anticipate contributing to swelling, cracking and the deformation of the structure which
have been observed for such problematic expansive nature soils (Mowafay et al., 1990).
Expansive soils are present at various locations in Pakistan including Nandipur near
Gujranwala, Dera Ghazi Khan, Sialkot, Bannu, Khairpur, Dera Ismail Khan and also in
some parts of Murree and Azad Kashmir and in some parts across the entire World.
Due to non-availability of good soils at some places it becomes unavoidable to build
structures on the problematic expansive soils. Therefore the stabilization of such
problematic soils prior to construction is very necessary. Stabilization of a clayey soil is
necessary to improve its volume stability by reducing Swell Pressure & Swell Potential &
enhancing Unconfined Compressive Strength and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of the
soil. In order to stabilize the problematic soil the top layer of the soil to a significant
depth may be replaced by the good quality soil but in some areas the good quality soil are
available at large distances which contributes to uneconomical if such soil is to be
transported. Therefore in order to make the construction on such soils cheaper and
economical, cost-effective and durable, the unconventional method to improve the
expansive soil using different waste materials like Jute fiber, Coir fiber, Bamboo strips,
Human hairs, Rice-Husk, Bagasse ash, Glass powder and Fly ash etc. is adopted. The use
of some of these waste materials is highly economic and environmental friendly.
Prior planning, designing and construction of any civil engineering projects, Geotechnical
Investigation practice for roads and multistory buildings on expansive soils is important

7
and it is also essential that the occurrence of expansive soils in the field should be
checked physically by adopting following procedure of identification:
 The polygonal shape cracks in soil often indication of expansive soil.
 It adopts popcorn like appearance upon drying, it appears like somebody has made
little bulges of popcorn shaped dirt on the soil surface.
 Such soil often behaves like clay, becoming very sticky when wet and hard and
brittle when dry.
 Cracking and settlement in road pavements.
 Series of deep & wide shrinkage cracks during dry periods.
 Distresses to the adjacent structures due to expansiveness of soil.
Many researchers including H. P. Singh and M. Bagra (2013), R.R Singh and Er. Shelly
Mittal (2014), Ismaiel et al. (2006), Wasim et al. (2018) and Rohit et al. (2015) have done
work in the stabilization of expansive soil using different additives like Jute fiber, Coir
fiber, chemical stabilization using lime and cement paste, fly ash and jute fiber coated
with bituminous materials.

1.1. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this research was to evaluate the Effect of Jute reinforcement on
compaction and CBR value of clayey soil has been studied in this project. Use of natural
fiber in civil engineering for improving soil properties is advantageous because they are
cheap, locally available, biodegradable and eco-friendly. The natural fiber reinforcement
causes significant improvement in tensile strength, shear strength, and other engineering
properties of the soil
Soils are stabilized for improvement of their durability and strength to render them
more suitable for construction (Khalid et al., 2012)

1.2. SCOPE OF RESEARCH

The research study consists on various laboratory tests. At start basic soil classification
tests have been performed which includes Sieve Analysis and Hydrometer Analysis,
Atterberg’s Limits, Modified Proctor and California Bearing Ratio Test. In the second
phase of this research, almost all above mentioned tests were performed on Jute Fiber
reinforced soil samples and all of their basic soil properties have been determined. The
various percentages of Jute Fiber ranging from 0 to 0.8% were added to the original soil
sample. The improvements in terms of compaction and California Bearing Ratio (CBR
value) of the soil samples with the altering Jute fiber percentages from 0 to 0.8% were
observed. The jute fiber used in this research had a length of 50 mm and the diameter of
0.5 mm.

8
1.3. THESIS OVERVIEW

Mainly this research thesis consists of chapter’s named as Introduction and Background,
Literature Review, Research Methodology, Results & Discussions and finally
Conclusions & Recommendations.
Chapter 1 refer to problem statement and the necessity of the research has been furnished.
After that, the objectives and scope of the research have been elaborated.
Chapter 2 refer to comprehensive literature review that has been provided to recognize
the soil improvement by using Jute fiber reinforcement.
Chapter 3 refer to the research methodology that has been espoused, to carry out the
proposed study/research work. All tests & experiments which were executed in this
research have been provided briefly, with their desired standard methods and procedures
have been provided, according to the ASTM Standards.
Chapter 4 gives the output and results / effects of the research work that has been
performed. Moreover, all the laboratory test results have been provided in comprehensive
way.
Chapter 5 provides the conclusion based on the results and discussions in the previous
chapters and some valuable propositions and finally, future recommendations have been
provided.

9
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

10
2.1 What is CLAY?

Clay is a naturally occurring fine-grained silicate mineral with the particle size of less
than 0.002 mm. These minerals typically form over a long periods as a result of the
gradual chemical weathering of rocks. Clayey soils have a unique behaviour in terms of
building a structure on them. Clayey soils have numerous problems due to its low
strength, high compressibility and high level of volumetric changes. These soils are often
of expansive nature.

2.2 Expansive nature of clay

Expansive soils contain minerals such as clays that are capable of absorbing water. When
they absorb water, they increase in volume. The more water they absorb, the more their
volume increases. Expansive soils will also shrink when they dry out and as a result of it
the volume is decreased.
Swelling clays are the clays that exhibit latter type of swelling, where the clay minerals
with largely inflating lattice are present. One of the fundamental characteristics of clayey
soil is that they display little cohesion and strength when wet, but they become hard when
devoid of water. However, all of them do not swell due to wetting action. Decrease in
ultimate bearing capacity at saturation, and large differential settlement due to this occurs.
Thus, clayey soils exhibit foundation problems.

2.3 Clay Mineralogy

Clay mineralogy, the scientific discipline concerned with all aspects of clay minerals,
including their properties, composition, classification, crystal structure, and occurrence
and distribution in nature. The methods of study include X-ray diffraction, infrared
spectroscopic analysis, chemical analyses of bulk and monomineralic samples,
determinations of cationic exchange capacities, electron-optical studies, thermal studies
by differential thermal analysis, and thermo-gravimetric methods. The singular character
of these hydrous silicate minerals and the nature of the problems surrounding them justify
the status of clay mineralogy as a discipline distinct from mineralogy. A common body of
knowledge is involved, however, particularly with regard to studies of internal structure.
On the basis of their crystalline arrangement, clay minerals can be categorized into three
general groups, namely:
 Kaolinite group
 Montmorillonite group
 ILLITE Group

2.3.1 Kaolinite group

11
Kaolinite is a clay mineral, part of the group of industrial minerals with the chemical
composition Al₂Si₂O₅(OH)₄. The basic structural unit of kaolinite consists of one
tetrahedral (Si–O) sheet and one octahedral (Al–O) layer. China clay or Kaolin is the
name given to rocks that are rich in this mineral. A thickness of 7Å is exhibited by the
stacked layers of kaolinite; as a result of this, kaolin group of minerals are seen to be the
most stable, which is also because of the fact that water cannot enter between the sheets
to inflate that unit cell.

Figure 2.1. Kaolinite Mineral Structure

2.3.2 Montmorillonite group

Montmorillonite (MMT) is the most common and the best studied clay, which has been
used in polymer nanocomposites for almost three decades. It belongs to the smectite
family of clays and it has 2:1 layer structure, which means that the structure unit of MMT
consists of two tetrahedral silica layers separated by an octahedral alumina layer.
Mx(Al4−xMgx)Si8O20(OH)4, where M is a monovalent cation, X is the degree of
isomorphs substitution ranging from 0.5 to 1.3. Montmorillonite is a phyllosilicate
mineral with nano layered structure. Its layered structure consists of stacked layers, and
each layer is composed of two O--Si—O tetrahedral sheets sandwiching one O--Al(Mg)--
O octahedral sheet. Due to the isomorphs substitution, the layer is positively charged and
then cations are existed in the interlayered space of MMT. Neighbouring layers are held
together primarily by van der Waals force and electrostatic force to form the primary
particles of MMT. The particles then aggregate to form secondary micrometre-scale to
millimetre-scale particles. As shown in the figure given below. During weak bond
between the crystal forms, water can penetrate, breaking the structures to 10Å structural
unit.

12
 Figure 2.2. Montmorillonite Mineral Structure

2.3.3 ILLITE group

It is a mica-type clay mineral widely distributed in marine shale’s and related sediments.
It contains more water and less potassium than true micas, but it has a mica like sheet
structure and is poorly crystallized. ILLITE is a group of closely related non-expanding
clay minerals. Its structure is a 2:1 sandwich of silica tetrahedron (T) – alumina
octahedron (O) – silica tetrahedron (T) layers. It’s chemical formula is (K,H3O)
(Al,Mg,Fe)2(Si,Al)4O10[(OH)2,(H2O)]. The spacing between the elementary silica-
gibbsite-silica sheets depend largely upon the availability of water to occupy the space.
Owing to this reason, Montmorillonite is believed to have an expanding lattice. However,
in presence of excess water, ILLITE can split up into individual layers of 10Å thick,

Figure 2.3. ILLITE Group

13
2.4 Occurrence of expansive soil

Expansive soils generally occur in semi-arid regions where evaporation and

evatranspiration exceeds the precipitation. Expansive soils covers large area of the land
worldwide. The countries in which expansive soils are reported include Argentina,
Australia, Canada, India, Israel, Iran, Mexico, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, USA and
many other under developing countries.

The map here shows the generalized geographic distribution of soils that are known to
have expandable clay minerals.

Figure 2.4. : Soil Map of Pakistan

The map is meant to show general trends in the geographic distribution of expansive
soils. It is not meant to be used as a property evaluation tool. It is useful for learning areas
where expansive soils underlie a significant portion of the land and where expansive soils
might be a localized problem. In Pakistan the soil in the region of Azad Kashmir, Murree,
Nandipur, Sialkot, Gujranwala, D.I. Khan, D.G. Khan and Narowal is of expansive
nature.

2.5 Properties of expansive soil

Some of the observed properties of expansive soils are listed as below:

 Majority of expansive soils are clayey soils containing sand, silt, gravel and clay
fractions. Gravel fraction is normally missing in expansive soil.
 Colour of these soils varies from black to grey to brown to red.
 Liquid limit of expansive soils varies from 45% to 700%
 Plastic limit ranges from 30% to 50%.
14
  Shrinkage limit varies from 8% to 28%
 Specific gravity ranges from 2.67 to 2.82
 Clay content of these soil may be as low as 35% to as high as 100%. Silt and sand
content may vary proportionately.
 Heaves are observed in the field may varies from few centimetre to as high as 50
cm.
 Swell pressure of expansive soil according to various researches varies from 50
kPa to as high as 2400 KPa.
 Gravel sand and silt fractions normally don’t contribute in swelling or swelling
pressure instead they may show settlement. However clay fraction can cause
swelling pressure 2 to 3 times of the whole soil.

2.6 Cause of Swelling:

Soils are composed of a variety of materials, most of which do not expand in the
presence of moisture. However, a number of clay minerals are expansive. These include:
smectite, bentonite, montmorillonite, beidellite, vermiculite, attapulgite, nontronite,
and chlorite. There are also some sulfate salts that will expand with changes in
temperature. When a soil contains a large amount of expansive minerals, it has the
potential of significant expansion. When the soil contains very little expansive minerals,
it has little expansive potential.
When expansive soils are present, they will generally not cause a problem if their water
content remains constant. The situation where greatest damage occurs is when there
are significant and repeated moisture content changes.

2.7 Factors Affecting Swelling:

Following are the factors generally responsible for the swelling nature of the soil:
 Clay Mineral Type
 Moisture Content
 Density
 Surcharge Load

2.7.1 Effect of Clay Mineral Type:

Clay minerals of different types typically exhibit different swelling potentials because of
variations in the electrical field associated with each mineral. The swelling capacity of an
entire soil mass depends on the amount and type of clay minerals in the soil, and specific
surface area of the clay particles minerals are described for engineering purposes as:
Kaolinite Group: Generally non-expansive.

15
Mica-like Group: Includes Hines and vermiculites, which can be expansive, but generally
do not pose significant problems.
Montmorillonite Group: These are highly expansive and are the most troublesome clay
minerals.
Lambe Whitman (1969) reported that swelling ability varies with the type of clay mineral
and decreases in the order as montmorillonite, illite, and kaolinite and also depends
considerably on exchangeable ions.
The crystalline structure of clays forms thin platy-shaped particles that carry a net
negative charge on the flat surface of particles. This charged surface attracts the cations
that are in the pore water and even tends to orient water molecules into a somewhat
structured arrangement. A basic understanding of clay particles and the aqueous
solution that surrounds the particles helps in interpreting the engineering behaviour of
clays. The nature of clay particles can be illustrated by describing the three most
common subgroups of the clay minerals: kaolinites, illites, and montmorillonites.

2.7.2 Effect of Moisture Content:

In the field, expansive clay soils can be easily recognized in the dry season by the deep
cracks, in roughly polygonal patterns, in the ground surface. The zone of seasonal
moisture content fluctuation can extend from three to forty feet deep. This creates
cyclic shrink/swell behaviour in the upper portion of the soil column, and cracks can
extend to much greater depths than imagined by most engineers.
The relation between the swelling pressure and initial moisture content was not
monotonic. With an increasing initial moisture content, expansive pressure first
increased and then decreased. These results could be explained by the change in the
microstructure as the water content increased; this relationship could be described by a
Gaussian function. The coefficient of correlation was 0.99 for the dry density of 0.16
kN/m3, suggesting a good fit between expansive stress and moisture content using the
Gaussian distribution. The relationship of expansive stress and dry density could be
fitted well by a power function.

16
 Effect of Moisture content on swelling pressure

2.7.3 Effect of Density:

Initial dry density also has an appreciable effect on swelling pressure. For a soil
compacted to different dry densities at a particular moisture content, the swelling
pressure at saturation increases appreciably with increase in dry density. A fill which has
been compacted to a great degree or is an over consolidated natural deposit, will have
the tendency to swell more, given access to water. Swelling is more in compacted soils
which are compacted on the dry side of optimum moisture content than those
compacted on the wet side of optimum.
Expansive stress clearly rose with dry density based on figure shown below. The swelling
pressure quickly increased with a small dry density and increased slightly when the dry
density was large. For example, the swelling pressure changed from 46.28 kPa to 120.10
kPa with an increase in small dry density at a water content of 12.85%. However, the
swelling pressure increased from 120.10 kPa to 293.54 kPa with an increase in large dry
density. It was concluded that the dry density effect was considerable when the dry
density was greater than 0.15 kN/m3, which is useful reference for geotechnical
engineering applications.

17
 3 Effect of Dry density on swelling pressure

2.7.4 Effect of Surcharge Load:

If the load that is placed on the swelling soil is more, the swelling of the soil is inhibited.
When the imposed loads are light, the swelling is more pronounced. If a surcharge is
placed on the area surrounding the test area, it would reduce the swelling of the test
soil. The pressure is found to increase with increase in height of soil sample.
consequences of soil swelling: volumetric changes may cause both unfavourable and
favourable effects on human unfavourable effects are the destruction of buildings, roads
and pipelines in wed soils, and the leaching of fertilizers and chemicals below the root
zone Ur' desiccation cracks (by pass flow). In these soils horizontal flux of water. On the
other hand, swelling clays can be used to seal landfills, hazardous wastes.

18
2.8 Problems associated with expansive soil

The presence of problematic clayey soil is a Natural Hazard. The expansive soils must be
improved in order to perform construction works otherwise they can cause failure in the
structure. Generation of problems for all kinds of construction over expansive soils is
common, leading us to believe that such types of soil are not suitable for these purposes.
However, given the placement of these kinds of soil over the country, it leaves engineers
no other choice but to develop different structures on the soil, well aware of the risk.
These structures chiefly are a part of irrigation projects. Buildings, and other kinds of
structures constructed over these soils are subjected to differential deflections. These
deflections cause distressing, and in turn leads to damage of the structure.
Moreover, the reduction in moisture content due to the evaporation of water in soil causes
shrinkage, and heaving of soil occurs when there is a disproportionate increase in
moisture content. The level of ground water table also has a significant impact on the
moisture content of these soils, which in return affect the shrinkage-swelling cycles. In
seasons which are dry in nature, the surface of clayey soil shrinks, however, little
evaporation is there on the clayey soil on which the building stands. This causes
differential settlement at plinth level, posing danger to the structure.

19
 Figure 2.5. Cracks due to clayey Soil

The most obvious way in which expansive soils can damage foundations is by uplift as
they swell with moisture increases. Swelling soils lift up and crack lightly-loaded,
continuous strip footings, and frequently cause distress in floor slabs.
Because of the different building loads on different portions of a structure's foundation,
the resultant uplift will vary in different areas. As shown in figure given below, the
exterior corners of a uniformly-loaded rectangular slab foundation will only exert about
one-fourth of the normal pressure on a swelling soil of that exerted at the central portion
of the slab. As a result, the corners tend to be lifted up relative to the central portion. This
phenomenon can be exacerbated by moisture differentials within soils at the edge of the
slab. Such differential movement of the foundation can also cause distress to the framing
of a structure.

Figure 2.6. Load & Moment Effect on Slab

2.9 Techniques used in the Stabilization of expansive soil

20
Different treatment procedures have been developed by researchers in order to reduce or
completely eliminate the swelling potential of expansive soil. The problematic soil is
removed and replaced by a good quality material or treated using mechanical or chemical
stabilization. Following are the techniques adopted in stabilization of expansive soil.
 Pre-wetting.
 Moisture control.
 Chemical stabilization.
 Compaction control.
 Soil Replacement.
 Fibre Reinforcement.

Following techniques are explained

2.9.4 Pre-wetting

Aim of pre-wetting, as the name suggests, is to make the troublesome soil to allow the
placement of the structure. One of the techniques of pre-wetting is to the whole area into
water, but this method has been successful in many less is important to mention that the
wetting of the foundation soil may take years, unless there are a great amount of cracks in
the clay. Wetting can be achieved by installation of vertical wells, before flood comes.
This can help in reducing the amount of heave that may occur in a few months after the
flood. Usually after pre-wetting the clay is then mixed with lime (4%) to reduce the
Plasticity further. The advantage of using lime is that it not only reduces the plasticity tad
swelling characteristics of the clay but also it makes the soil firmer, that assists in
working on the soil, that was pre-wetted and became somewhat loose. Sometimes a small
layer of gravels is used on top of the pre-wetted clay, to provided platform for working on
the pre-wetted soil.

2.9.5 Moisture control and Compaction

Compaction and moisture control refer basically to the determination of the optimum
density of the soil and apply the compaction with 4-5% higher than the optimum in
the field. It is a very difficult operation. Moisture content is the most important factor in
the calculations but the process of re-compacting swelling clays at moisture contents
slightly above their natural moisture content and at a low density should be the
preferred approach. The main advantage of the technique is that it increases the
strength of the soil, reduces swelling potential without adverse effects. With modern
construction techniques, it is possible to scarify, pulverize, and recompact the natural soil
effectively without substantially increasing the construction cost
.

2.9.6 Soil replacement

21
Soil replacement is considered to be an easy solution for resolving the issue of
problematic foundation soils. The procedure consists in replacing the expansive soil with
non-swelling soils, this being the first requirement, followed by details concerning type of
material, depth of replacement and extent of replacement. For man-made fill the extent of
the layer should be limited. The depth of replacement is determined based on the swelling
characteristics of the soil determined by laboratory testing, uplift pressure and the actual
heave in the field. The cost of soil replacing is comparatively smaller to other techniques,
like chemically treatments.

2.9.7 Chemical stabilization

The use of different chemicals for the stabilization of expansive soils is being adopted
since many years. Different chemicals like cement, lime, fly ash, rice husk and man, other
materials are used for stabilization of expansive soils. Some of the different chemical
stabilization techniques are discussed below:

2.9.7.1 Lime stabilization

Lime stabilization has been used successfully on many projects to minimize swelling and
improve soil plasticity and workability. Lime improves the strength of clay by three
mechanisms: hydration of quicklime, flocculation, and cementation. The theoretical
chemistry behind lime stabilization of clayey soils is complex.
The first and second mechanisms occur almost immediately upon introducing the lime in
the soil, while the third is a prolonged effect. One of the most important factors that
define the soil/lime reactivity is the pH. Therefore a soil pH greater than 7 indicates
usually a good reactivity to lime treatment. Organic carbon reduces lime-soil reactions.
Also, poorly drained soils tend to have a better reaction to lime treatment than well-
drained soils. Calcareous soils have good reactivity. Depending of the depth of the
problematic soil and the type of geotechnical application, two types of chemical
stabilization can be defined: surface and deep stabilization.
The National Lime Association in the USA gives a general context about lime treatment
procedure. Lime in the form of quicklime (calcium oxide – CaO), hydrated lime
(calcium hydroxide – Ca[OH]2), or lime slurry can be used to treat soils. Quicklime is
manufactured by chemically transforming calcium carbonate (limestone – CaCO3) into
calcium oxide. Hydrated lime is created when quicklime chemically reacts with water.

It is hydrated lime that reacts with clay particles and permanently transforms them into a
strong cementitious matrix.
Nelson and Miller (1992) recommend a percentage of 3 to 8% of the weight of the soil
mass of hydrated lime to be added to the top several centimetres of the soil. Ismaiel
22
(2006) recommends a percentage between 3-5%, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) percentages of 2, 4 and 6%. Thus, we
conclude that the percentage of lime depends on the properties of the treated soil, the final
destination of the site and therefore the desired change in geotechnical parameters of the
treated soil compound.

2.9.7.2 Cement stabilization

Cement stabilization is not as effective as lime stabilization in case of swelling clays. We

mix the clay properly with the cement. A cementations compound is made that causes
hardening of the clay and prevent swelling of the clay. It is very important of adequate
amount of cement is mixed in the clay. Cement actually reduces liquid limit plasticity and
potential volume change; also it increases the shear strength of the clay. The mixing of
cement is similar to that of lime mixing. Also, here the cost effectiveness ratio is of
considerable importance.

2.9.7.3 Organic compounds stabilization

The real action of the organic compounds is the water proofing action. This can be done
by retarding the water adsorption or by stiffening the soil by the use of resins. Organic
compounds such as 4-Tert-Butylppeateechol are used sometimes, but they have similar
problem of application as with cement or lime.

2.9.8 Stabilization using fibre reinforcement

Fibre reinforcement is predominately used to improve the strength of the clayey soil.
Various researchers have published their work on the stabilization of soil using fibre
reinforcement. This technique of soil improvement is very fruitful as the strength of soil
is increased significantly as well as it is economical too. Most of the fibres used in the
stabilization of the soil are waste materials with not such significant use thus are
economical. Most commonly used fibres in the research work for soil stabilization are
listed below:
 Jute fibre.
 Human hair fibre.
 Bamboo strip.
 Flax fibre.
 Coconut fibre.
The effect of these fibres on the compaction and CBR (California bearing ratio) of clayey
soils is explained by various researchers in their published work. Some of which is
described below:-
The effect of jute fibre on the clayey soil of Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh, India was
studied by H. P. Singh, M. Bagra (2013) and they concluded that CBR value of the soil
increases with the inclusion of Jute fibre. When the Jute fibre content is increases, the
23
CBR value of soil is further increases and this increase is substantial at fibre content of 1
%. They also studied the effect of length and diameter of jute fibre and concluded that the
CBR value of soil increases with the increase in length and diameter of fibre. The
maximum increase in CBR value was found to be more than 200 % over that of plain soil
at fibre content of 1 % for fibre having diameter 2 mm and length 90 mm

Figure 2.7. Effect of length, diameter and fiber content on CBR

The effect of Coir fibre on the clayey soil of Chandigarh was studied by R.R Singh and
Er. Shelly Mittal (2014) and they concluded that Coir fibre is a waste material which
could be utilized in a sub base for flexible and rigid pavements. The OMC of soil-coir
mix increases with increasing the percentage of coir fibre. CBR and UCS values of soil-
coir fibre mix increases with increasing percentage of fibre. Maximum improvement in
UCS and CBR values are observed when 1% of coir is mixed with the soil.

24
 Figure 2.8. Effect of coir fiber on the CBR

The effect of Jute fibre coated with bitumen on the expansive clayey soil of Norowal,
Pakistan was studied by Wasim in 2018 and he concluded that addition of 0.75% Jute
fibre, UCS increased up to 90%, 140% & 275% for normal jute fibre, woven jute fibre &
bitumen coated fibre respectively. Similarly addition of 0.75% Jute fibre percentage
increase in CBR is 61%, 56% & 129% for normal jute fibre, woven jute fibre & bitumen
coated fibre respectively.

25
 Figure 2.9. Effect of fiber content & Time Period on UCS & CBR

2.10 Jute Fiber

Jute is one of the cheapest natural fibers. Jute is extracted from the bark of the white jute
plant. Jute is an annual crop taking about 120 days (April/May-July/August) to grow. The
current annual worldwide production of jute fiber is about 3.2 million tons and used for
various applications. A huge amount of these jute fibers is wasted and is gone to landfill
every year, either in the form of slivers resulted from manufacturing of jute cloth or in the
form of used cloths after the end-of-life of the jute bags. Jute is long, soft and shiny, with
a length of 1 to 4 m and a diameter of from 17 to 20 microns. Jute fibers are composed
primarily of the plant materials cellulose (major component of plant fiber) and lignin
(major components of wood fiber). The fibers can be extracted by either biological or
chemical retting processes. After the retting process, stripping begins. In the stripping
process, non-fibrous matter is scraped off, leaving the fibers to be pulled out from within
the stem

Cotton takes the title of most-produced plant-based fiber, but jute is a close second. While
jute isn’t very popular in the Western world, it is one of the primary textile fibers of India
and neighboring countries. Jute plants grow to be over 10 feet high, and the fibers derived
from these plants are harvested in a single long string. Therefore, jute fibers are among the
longest natural textile fibers in the world.

Jute grows in similar conditions to rice, and this plant is best suited to warm areas that
have annual monsoon seasons. This crop cannot grow in hard water, and ambient humidity
level of approximately 80% are necessary for jute production. While jute absorbs water
readily, it also dries quickly, and it is highly resistant to abrasion and stains. The earth
reinforcement is an ancient technique and is demonstrated abundantly by the nature in the
26
action of tree roots. This concept is used for the improvement of certain desired properties
of soil like bearing capacity, shear strength, and permeability characteristics etc. This
work investigates the use of jute fiber as soil reinforcement material.

2.11 Advantages of Jute Geotextile

1. Jute fiber is 100% bio-degradable and recyclable and thus environmentally

friendly.
2. It is the cheapest vegetable fiber procured from the bast or skin of the plant’s
stem.
3. Available in the market and the overall productivity of Jute Fiber is good.
4. Superior drivability, Jute Geotextile Can Perfectly Shape Itself to Ground
Contours.
5. High Moisture / Water Absorbing Capacity. Jute Geotextile Can Absorb Moisture
Water Up to About 5 Times Its Dry Weight.
6. Greater Moisture Retention Capacity.
7. Tensile strength is high.
8. 100% Biodegradable; so, it is environment friendly.

2.12 History and Its Classification

Jute is known as the ‘Golden Fiber’ due to its golden-brown color and its importance. In
terms of usage, production and global consumption, jute is second only to cotton. It is the
fiber used to make hessian sacks and garden twine. Jute is environmentally friendly as
well as being one of the most affordable fibers; jute plants are easy to grow, have a high
yield per acre and, unlike cotton, have little need for pesticides and fertilizers. Jute is a
fiber, like flax and hemp, and the stems are processed in a similar way. Jute fibers can be
obtained in threaded form and they can be depicted below.

 Biology of Jute
 Jute Fiber
 Uses of Jute Fiber
 Cultivation of Jute
 Harvesting Jute
 Jute Fiber Extraction
 History of Jute Fiber
 Why Jute is an Environmentally Friendly Fiber

A) Biology of Jute

Jute is an annual crop grown mainly in India and Bangladesh in the fertile Ganges Delta.
It is classified in the lime tree family (Tiliaceae) by Kew Royal Botanic Gardens but jute
has sometimes been placed in Malvaceae with cotton or more recently in
Sparrmanniaceae.

27
B) Jute Fiber Jute fibers are very long (1 to 4 meters), silky, lustrous and golden
brown in color. In contrast to most textile fibers which consist mainly of cellulose, jute
fibers are part cellulose, part lignin. Cellulose is a major component of plant fibers while
lignin is a major component of wood fiber. Jute is therefore partly a textile fiber and
partly wood. Jute fiber has strength, low cost, durability and versatility.
C) Uses of Jute Fiber

Jute is used where low cost is more important

than durability, for example in coffee sacks and
cotton bale covers. You are probably familiar
with jute as twine used to tie garden plants, and
as hessian fabric (or burlap in the US). Jute is
used in shopping bags, carpets and rugs, backing
for linoleum floor covering, chair coverings and
Figure 1.10. Natural Jute Fibers
environmentally friendly coffins.

Jute is also useful as a geotextile fabric laid over soil to stabilize it against landslides and
to control erosion or weeds. The fabric helps to keep the moisture in and holds the soil in
place, whilst the open weave structure of the fabric allows space for plants to grow. As
the plants get established, the jute fabric starts to biodegrade. This fabric is also used to
wrap plant root balls, as it allows water and air to reach the roots. Experimental use of
jute fiber in commercial papermaking has proved moderately successful and may
eventually supplement pine and spruce as papermaking fibers.

D) Cultivation of Jute

This is a fiber crop that you will not be able to grow in European back gardens as jute
needs tropical rainfall, warm weather and high humidity. Unlike cotton, it has little need
for pesticides or fertilizers. Jute is planted close together so that the plants grow tall and
straight.

E) Harvesting Jute

Jute is ready to harvest in four to six months, after the flowers are shed. The plant stems
are then about 2.5 to 3.5 meters tall and as thick as a finger. Jute fields may be under
water at the time of harvest and the workers often need to wade in the water to cut the
stems at ground level or to uproot the plants. The stems are then tied into bundles.

F) Jute Fiber Extraction

On average, jute yields four times more fiber per acre than flax. The fibers lie beneath the
bark around the woody core or ‘hurd’. To extract the fiber, the jute bundles are submersed
in water and left for a few days until the fibers come loose and are ready for stripping

G) History of Jute Fiber

28
Jute has been used in India on family farms for centuries. It was twisted it into cordage
and made into twine and ropes to be used on the farm. The jute hurd, left after the fiber
was extracted, was used as firewood. Now jute is almost entirely grown by commercial
growers.

Jute started to be exported in the 1880s when a system for spinning and weaving was
developed in Dundee (Scotland), where there is now a jute museum. Jute products were
then sold widely and soon replaced their equivalents in hemp and flax. By the 1970 many
jute products were replaced by synthetic fibers and by the late 1990s, bulk packaging in
global transport and storage reduced the need for jute sacks. Jute production declined
from between 3 and 3.7 million tons a year to between 2.6 and 2.8 million tons. Despite
this decline, jute is still a very important plant fiber.

H) Why Jute is an Environmentally Friendly Fiber

Jute has a low carbon footprint, it is biodegradable, feeds the soil and all parts of the plant
can be used.

a. Good for the air.

b. Good for the soil.

a. Good for the air

Jute plants help to clean the air; during growth they assimilate three times more CO2 than
the average tree, converting the CO2 into oxygen. Polypropylene (the material used in
plastic bags) does the opposite, producing huge amounts of CO2 during its manufacture.

b. Good for the soil

As well as having little need for fertilizers and pesticides, jute plants enrich the soil. As these
plants grow fast, they are often used in crop rotation. The leaves and roots left after harvest
enrich the soil with micronutrients, maintaining soil fertility. The flooded fields also support
fish populations. When used as a geotextile, it puts nutrients back in the soil when it
decomposes.

2.13 Review of Recent Research Work

The current study as the name indicates, deals with improvement of engineering
properties of expansive soils by using Jute fiber. In this very study, Nandipur soil has
been selected. The effect of additive content i.e. Jute Fiber is noted on the Compaction
and California Bearing Ratio of this locally available expansive soil have been studied.

29
Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHEDOLOGY

30
Research Methodology is the specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select,
process, and analyze information about a topic. It includes the sequence of steps carried
out during the research.

3.1 Sample Collection

For the sample collection we made a visit to a small village known as Ballaywala in
Nandipur, Gujranwala Punjab. This place is known for deposits of highly clayey soil. The
sample was collected at a depth of 1.5 to 2 meters.

3.2 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing includes all the tests which were performed for the testing during the
research. All the tests were performed according to the ASTM standards. Here is the list
of all the tests performed in the lab.

 Natural Moisture Content

 Sieve Analysis
 Fineness Modulus
 Hydrometer Analysis
 Atterberg Limits Test
 Specific Gravity Test
 Modified Compaction Test
 California Bearing Ratio Test

3.2.1 Natural Moisture Content

Procedure:

The standard code for this test is ASTM D2216-10. Following procedure is adopted to
carry out this test.

1. Clean the container dry it and weigh it (W1).

2. Take a specimen of the sample in the container and weigh (W2).
3. Keep the container in the oven. Dry the specimen to constant weight maintaining
the temperature between 1050 C to 1100 C for a period varying with the type of
soil but usually 16 to 24 hours.
4. Record the final constant weight (W3) of the container with dried soil sample.
Peat and other organic soils are to be dried at lower temperature (say 600)
possibly for a longer period.

31
 Certain soils contain gypsum which on heating loses its water of crystallization. If it is
suspected that gypsum is present in the soil sample used for moisture content
determination it shall be dried at not more than 800 C and possibly for a longer time.

W = [ (W2 - W3) / (W3 - W1) ] x 100

3.2.2 Sieve Analysis

Procedure:

To carry out the sieve analysis ASTM D422-63 procedure is followed which is described
below step by step.
1. Obtain 100 gram of soil sample, which has already been dried and pulverized or
washed by placing it on, sieve no 200.
2. Arrange the sieves with the increasing order of sieve number.
3. Sieves are arranged as #4, #10, #40, #100, #200 and pan.
4. Put the soil to be sieved on the first sieve and either place it in mechanical sieve
shaker or shake it manually.
5. Remove the sieves from mechanical sieve shaker and weigh the proportioned amount
of soil retained on each sieve.
6. Compute the percent passing and percent retained for each sieve and show the results
in tabular form as well as in the form of gradation curve
7. Normally the results of grain size analysis are reported in the form of grain size
distribution curve.

Figure 3.11Sieves

32
3.2.3 Fineness Modulus

Procedure:

1. Take the sieves and arrange them in descending order with the largest sieve on
top. If mechanical shaker is using, then put the ordered sieves in position and pour
the sample in the top sieve and then close it with sieve plate.
2. Then switch on the machine and shaking of sieves should be done at least 5
minutes.
3. If shaking is done by the hands then pour the sample in the top sieve and close it
then hold the top two sieves and shake it inwards and outwards, vertically and
horizontally.
4. After some time shake the 3rd and 4th sieves and finally last sieves.
5. After sieving, record the sample weights retained on each sieve. Then find the
cumulative weight retained.
6. Finally determine the cumulative percentage retained on each sieve. Add the all
cumulative percentage values and divide with 100 then we will get the value of
fineness modulus.

3.2.4 Hydrometer Analysis

Procedure:

1. Take the sieves and arrange them in descending order with the largest sieve on
top. If mechanical shaker is using, then put the ordered sieves in position and pour
the sample in the top sieve and then close it with sieve plate.
2. Then switch on the machine and shaking of sieves should be done at least 5
minutes.
3. If shaking is done by the hands then pour the sample in the top sieve and close it
then hold the top two sieves and shake it inwards and outwards, vertically and
horizontally.
4. After some time shake the 3rd and 4th sieves and finally last sieves.
5. After sieving, record the sample weights retained on each sieve. Then find the
cumulative weight retained.

33
 6. Finally determine the cumulative percentage retained on each sieve. Add the all
cumulative percentage values and divide with 100 then we will get the value of
fineness modulus.

Figure 3.12. Hydrometer Apparatus

3.2.5 Atterberg Limits Test

There are two types of limits included in Atterberg Limits i.e. Liquid Limit and Plastic
Limit.

3.2.5.1 Liquid Limit Test

Procedures:

1. Take roughly 3/4 of the soil and place it into the porcelain dish. Assume that the
soil was previously passed through a No. 40 sieve, air-dried, and then pulverized.
Thoroughly mix the soil with a small amount of distilled water until it appears as a
smooth uniform paste. Cover the dish with cellophane to prevent moisture from
escaping.
2. Weigh four of the empty moisture cans with their lids, and record the respective
weights and can numbers on the data sheet.
3. Adjust the liquid limit apparatus by checking the height of drop of the cup. The
point on the cup that comes in contact with the base should rise to a height of 10
mm. The block on the end of the grooving tool is 10 mm high and should be used
as a gage. Practice using the cup and determine the correct rate to rotate the crank
so that the cup drops approximately two times per second.
4. Place a portion of the previously mixed soil into the cup of the liquid limit apparatus
at the point where the cup rests on the base. Squeeze the soil down to eliminate air
pockets and spread it into the cup to a depth of about 10 mm at its deepest point.
The soil pat should form an approximately horizontal surface.

34
 5. Use the grooving tool carefully cut a clean straight groove down the center of the
cup. The tool should remain perpendicular to the surface of the cup as groove is
being made. Use extreme care to prevent sliding the soil relative to the surface of
the cup.
6. Make sure that the base of the apparatus below the cup and the underside of the cup is
clean of soil. Turn the crank of the apparatus at a rate of approximately two drops per
second and count the number of drops, N, it takes to make the two halves of the soil
pat come into contact at the bottom of the groove along a distance of 13 mm (1/2 in.)
if the number of drops exceeds 50, then go directly to step eight and do not record the
number of drops, otherwise, record the number of drops on the data sheet.
7. Take the sample using the spatula, from edge to edge of the soil pat. The sample
should include the soil on both sides of where the groove came into contact. Place the
soil into a moisture can cover it. Immediately weigh the moisture can, containing the
soil, record its mass, remove the lid, and place the can into the oven. Leave the
moisture can in oven for at least 16 hours. Place the soil remaining in the cup into the
porcelain dish and dry the cup on the apparatus and the grooving tool.
8. Remix the entire soil specimen in the porcelain dish. Add a small amount of
distilled water to increase the water content so that the number of drops required
closing the groove decrease.
9. Repeat steps six, seven, and eight for at least two additional trials producing.
Successively lower numbers of drops to close the groove. One of the trials shall be
for a closure requiring 25 to 35 drops, one for closure between 20 and 30 drops,
and one trial for a closure requiring 15 to 25 drops. Determine the water content
from each trial by using the same method used in the first laboratory. Remember
to use the same balance for all weighing.

Figure
Figure
3.3:Atterberg
3.13. Atterberg
Apparatus
Apparatus
Figure 3.14. Liquid Limit Test

3.2.5.2
Plastic Limit Test

Procedure:

1. Weigh the remaining empty moisture cans with their lids, and record the weights.
2. Take the remaining 1/4 of the original soil sample and add distilled water until the
soil is at a consistency where it can be rolled without sticking to the hands.

35
3. Form the soil into an ellipsoidal mass. Roll the mass between the palm or the fingers and
the glass plate. Use sufficient pressure to roll the mass into a thread of uniform diameter
by using about 90 strokes per minute. (A stroke is one complete motion of the hand
forward and back to the starting position. The thread shall be deformed so that its
diameter reaches 3.2 mm (1/8 in.), taking no more than two minutes.
4. When the diameter of the thread reaches the correct diameter, break the thread into
several pieces. Knead and reform the pieces into ellipsoidal masses and re-roll them.
Continue this alternate rolling, gathering together, kneading and re-rolling until the
thread crumbles under the pressure required for rolling and can no longer be rolled in
to a 3.2 mm diameter thread.
5. Gather the portions of the crumbled thread together and place the soil into moisture,
then cover it. If the can does not contain at least 6 grams of soil add soil to the can
from the next trial. Immediately weigh the moisture cane containing the soil, record
its mass, and place the can into the oven. Leave the moisture can in the oven for at
least l6 hours.
6. Repeat the test to determine the water content from various trials by using the same
method.

Figure 3.15. Soil Threads for Plastic Limit Test

3.2.6 Specifies Gravity Test

Procedures:

1. Determine and record the weight of the empty can dry pycnometer WP.
2. Fill the pycnometer by one third of a dry soil sample (passed through the sieve
No.10).
36
3. Determine and record the weight of the pycnometer containing the dry soil, WPS.
4. Add distilled water to fill about half to three-fourth of the pycnometer. Soak the
sample for 10 minutes.
5. Apply the partial vacuum to contents for 10 minutes, to remove the entrapped air.
6. Stop the vacuum and carefully remove the vacuum line from pycnometer. Fill the
pycnometer with distilled (water to the mark), clean the exterior surface of the
pycnometer with a clean, dry cloth. Determine the weight of the pycnometer and
contents, WB.
7. Empty the pycnometer and clean it. Then fill it with distilled water only (to the mark).
Clean the exterior surface of the pycnometer with a clean, dry cloth. Determine the
weight of the pycnometer and distilled water, WA. Empty the pycnometer and clean it.

Figure 3.16. Specific Gravity Test

3.2.7 Modified Compaction Test

Procedure:

1. Compact the soil in five layers, each layer being given 25 blows from the hammer
weighing 10 lbs. dropping from a height of 18 inches. The blows should be
uniformly distributed over the surface of each layer.
2. Pulverize the soil sieve it through the # 4 sieve.
3. Determine the weight of the soil sample as well as the weight of the compaction
mold with its base (Without the collar) by using the balance and record the weights.
4. Compute the amount of initial water to add by the following method: Assume
water content for the first test to be 5 percent.
5. Measure out the water, add it to the soil, and then mix it thoroughly into the soil
using the trowel until the soil gets a uniform color.
6. Assemble the compaction mold to the base, place some soil in the mold and
compact the soil in the number of equal layers specified by the type of

37
 compaction method employed. The number of drops of the rammer per layer is
also dependent upon the type of mold used.
7. The drops should be applied at a uniform rate not exceeding around 1.5 seconds
per drop and the rammer should be provided with uniform coverage of the
specimen surface. Try to avoid rebound of the rammer from the top of the guide
sleeve.
8. Soil should completely fill the cylinder and the last compacted layer must slightly
extend slightly above the collar joint. If the soil is below the collar joint at the
completion of the drops, the test point must be repeated. (Note: For the last layer,
carefully, aid add more soil after about 10 drops if it appears that the soil will be
compacted bet the collar joint.
9. Carefully remove the collar and trim off the compacted soil so that it is
completely even with the top of the mold using the trowel. Replace small bits of
soil that may fall out during the trimming process.
10. Weigh the compacted soil while it's in the mold and to the base, and record the
mass. Determine the wet mass of the soil by subtracting the weight of the mold
and base.
11. Remove the soil from the mold using a mechanical extruder and take soil
moisture content samples from the top and bottom of the specimen. Fill the
moisture cans with soil and determine the water content.
12. Place the soil specimen in the large tray and break up the soil until it appears visually
as if it will pass through the # 4 sieve, add 2 percent more water based on the original
sample mass, and re-mix' in step 4.
13. Repeat steps 5 through 9 until, based on wet mass, we got a peak value followed by
two slightly lesser compacted soil masses.

Figure 3.17. Modified Compaction Apparatus

3.2.8 California Bearing Ratio

38
Procedure:

1. Prepare the specimen at Proctor maximum dry density or any other density at
which C.B.R is required.
2. Maintain the specimen at optimum moisture content or the field moisture as
required. The material used should pass 20 mm sieve but it should be retained on
4.75 mm sieve.
3. Prepare the specimen either by dynamic compaction or by static compaction. Take
about 4.5 to 5.5 kg of soil and mix thoroughly with the required water.
4. Fix the extension collar and the base plate to the mold. Insert the spacer disc over
the base. Place the filter paper on the top of the spacer disc.
5. Compact the mix soil in the mold using either light compaction or heavy
compaction. For light compaction, compact the soil in 3 equal layers, each layer
being given 55 blows by the 2.6 kg rammer. For heavy compaction compact the
soil in 5 layers, 56 blows to each layer by the 4.89 kg rammer. Remove the collar
and trim off soil. Turn the mold upside down and remove the base plate and the
displacer disc. Weigh the mold with compacted soil and determine the bulk
density and dry density. Put filter paper on the top of the compacted soil (collar
side) and clamp the perforated base plate on to it. Calculate the weight of the wet
soil at the required water content to give the desired density when occupying the
standard specimen volume in the mould from the expression.

W =desired dry density * (1+w) V

Where W = Weight of the wet soil

w = desired water content

V = volume of the specimen in the mold = 2250 cm3 (as per the mold available in
laboratory)

6. Take the weight W (calculated as above) of the mix soil and place it in the mold.
Place a filter paper and the displacer disc on the top of soil. Keep the mold
assembly in static loading frame and compact by pressing the displacer disc till
the level of disc reaches the top of the mold. Keep the load for some time and then
release the load. Remove the displacer disc. The test may be conducted for both
soaked as well as un-soaked conditions. If the sample is to be soaked, in both
cases of compaction, put a filter paper on the top of the soil and place the
adjustable stem and perforated plate on the top of filter paper. Put annular weights
to produce a surcharge equal to weight of base material and pavement expected in
actual construction. Each 2.5 kg weight is equivalent to 7 cm construction. A
minimum of two weights should be put. Immerse the mold assembly and weights
in a tank of water and soak it for 96 hours. Remove the mold from tank.

39
Note the consolidation of the specimen. Place the mold assembly with the surcharge
weights on the penetration test machine. Seat the penetration piston at the center of the
specimen with the smallest possible load, but in no case in excess of 4 kg so that full
contact of the piston on the sample is established. Set the stress and strain dial gauge to
read zero. Apply the load on the piston so that the penetration rate is about 1.25 mm/min.
Record the load readings at penetrations of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 7.5, 10 and
12.5 mm. Note the maximum load and corresponding penetration if it occurs for a
penetration less than 12.5 mm. Detach the mold from the loading equipment. Take about
20 to 50 g of soil from the top 3 cm layer and determine the moisture content.

Figure 3.18. Sketch of CBR Testing Machine

40
Chapter 4 RESULTS & DISSCUSSION

41
This chapter contains all the results of the experiments performed as a part of the
research. Mainly graphs are discussed; their behavior and their importance are explained
within the context of this study. All the experiments are discussed here, with their results
pointing to the main conclusions of the research.

4.1 Natural Moisture Content:

Sample No. 1 2 3
Can No. 275 231 224
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 4.43 4.5 4.28
Weight of Empty can + Weight of
49.26 45.9 44.4
soil (W2) gm
Weight of can + Weight of dry soil (W3) gm 44.87 41.57 40.38
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 4.39 4.33 4.02
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 40.44 37.07 36.1
w=(Ww/Ws) x
Moisture Content 100 % 10.8556 11.6806 11.1357
Average W % 11.2240
Table 4.1. Moisture Content from Oven dry Method

4.2 Index Properties (ASTM D4318):

Index properties of soil are as follow: -

4.2.1 Liquid Limit

Sample No. 1 2 3
Can No. 23 38 27
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 13.98 13.47 15.05
Weight of Empty can + Weight of
(W2) gm 22.66 25.45 24.6
wet soil
Weight of can + Weight of dry soil (W3) gm 19.56 21.23 21.14
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 3.1 4.22 3.46
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 5.58 7.76 6.09
No. of Blows 23 28 32
Moisture Content w=(Ww/Ws) x % 55.555 54.381 56.814

42
 100 6 4 4
Average w % 55.584
Table 4.2. Liquid Limit determination

Figure 4.19. Liquid limit from graph

4.2.2 Plastic Limit

Sample No. 1 2 3
Can No. 40 73 27
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 17.3 15.34 15.05
Weight of Empty can + Weight of wet
(W2) gm 22.35 19.4 28.65
soil
Weight of can + Weight of dry soil (W3) gm 21.3 18.55 25.7
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 1.05 0.85 2.95
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 4 3.21 10.65
w=(Ww/Ws) x
%
Moisture Content 100 26.25 26.4798 27.6995
Average w % 26.810

Table 4.3. Plastic limit

43
4.2.3 Plasticity Index

P.I = L.L – P.L = 55.5 – 26.8 = 28.7 %

4.3 Particle Size Distribution:

4.3.1. Sieve Analysis

Total Weight = 100 g

Sieve Analysis
%Age Comm.
Sieve Weight Percent
Sieve Weight %Age wt.
Size Retained Passing
No. Retained Retained
mm g g g %
#4 4.75 0 0 0 100
#10 2 0 0 0 100
#40 0.42 1.1 1.1 1.1 98.9
#100 0.149 1.11 1.11 2.21 97.79
#200 0.075 0.49 0.49 2.7 97.3
Total Weight 2.7 3.31

44
 Figure 4.20. Sieve analysis

4.3.2 Hydrometer Analysis

Figure 4.21. Distribution curve of clayey soil

4.4 Modified Compaction Test:

4.4.1 Without Fiber Content

Sample No. 1 2 3 4
Can No. 3 90 36 54
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 14.97 14.04 14.48 14.07

45
Weight of Empty can + Weight
(W2) gm 23.15 33.61 44.16 26.59
of soil
Weight of can + Weight of dry
(W3) gm 22.6 31.72 40.64 24.69
soil
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 0.55 1.89 3.52 1.9
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 7.63 17.68 26.16 10.62
w=(Ww/ 7.2083 13.455 17.890
Moisture Content % 10.69
Ws)x100 9 7 8
Figure 4.22. Moisture Content for Compaction Curve (without fibers)

Sample No. 1 2 3 4
Assumed Water Content % 8 12 16 20
Weight of Soil + Mold gm 4275 4420 4546 4502
Weight of Soil gm 1749 1894 2020 1976
Dry Density kN/m3 19.3989 20.3463 21.1709 19.9307
Figure 4.23. Dry Density for Compaction Curve (without fibers)

Figure 4.24. Zero Void Curve (without fibers)

46
4.4.2 With 0.2% Fiber Contents

Sample No. 1 2 3 4
Can No. P-6 P-1 H-1 P-8
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 9.84 10.09 11.78 9.84
Weight of Empty can +
(W2) gm 40.48 31.05 35.76 39.79
Weight of soil
Weight of can + Weight of
(W3) gm 37.9 28.51 32.25 34.37
dry soil
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 2.58 2.54 3.51 5.42
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 28.06 18.42 20.47 24.53
w=(Ww/Ws) 9.1945830 13.789 17.147 22.095
Moisture Content %
x100 36 36 04 39
Table 4.4. Moisture Content for void Curve (0.2% fiber)

Sample No. 1 2 3 4
Assumed Water Content % 8 12 16 20
Weight of Soil + Mold gm 3934 4050 4117 4094
Weight of Soil gm 1803 1919 1986 1963
Dry Density kN/m3 16.59639727 16.95089 17.0399 16.15996
Table 4.5. Dry Density for void Curve (0.2% fiber)

Figure 4.25. Zero Void Curve (with 0.2% fibers)

47
4.4.3 With 04% Fiber Content

Sample No. 1 2 3 4
Can No. P-10 P-6 P-1 H-1
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 9.9 9.63 10 11.9
Weight of Empty can +
(W2) gm 27.323 29.65 35 36.88
Weight of soil
Weight of can + Weight of dry
(W3) gm 25 26.4 30.6 32.11
soil
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 2.323 3.25 4.4 4.77
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 15.1 16.77 20.6 20.21
w=(Ww/ 15.3841 19.3798 21.359 23.602
Moisture Content %
Ws)x100 1 4 2 2
Table 4.6. Moisture Content for Void curve (0.4% fiber)

Sample No. 1 2 3 4
Assumed Water Content % 8 12 16 20
Weight of Soil + Mold gm 3730 3909 3957 3942
Weight of Soil gm 1596 1775 1823 1808
Dry Density kN/m3 13.90292 14.94468 15.0985 14.7025
Table 4.7. Dry Density for Void curve (0.4% fiber)

Figure 4.26. Zero Void Curve (with 0.4% fibers)

48
4.4.4 With 0.6% Fiber Content

Sample No. 1 2 3
Can No. P-9 P-3 P-11
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 11.81 13.7 11.61
Weight of Empty can + Weight
(W2) gm 29.1 34.41 38.36
of soil
Weight of can + Weight of dry
(W3) gm 27.04 31.8 33.92
soil
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 2.06 2.61 4.44
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 15.23 18.1 22.31
w=(Ww/ 13.525935 14.419 19.901389
Moisture Content %
Ws)x100 65 9 51
Table 4.8. Moisture Content for void curve (0.6% fiber)

Sample No. 1 2 3
Assumed Water Content % 12 16 20
Weight of Soil + Mold gm 4369 4457 4427
Weight of Soil gm 2235 2323 2293
Dry Density kN/m3 19.7879875 20.4064 19.22202016
Table 4.9. Dry Density for void curve (0.6% fiber)

49
 Figure 4.27. Zero Void Curve (with 0.6% fibers)

4.4.5 With 0.8% Fiber Content

Sample No. 1 2 3
Can No. H-1 P-6 P-4
Weight of Empty can (W1) gm 11.81 9.86 9.82
Weight of Empty can + Weight of
(W2) gm 29.07 30.17 27.27
soil
Weight of can + Weight of dry
(W3) gm 27.04 27.3 24.07
soil
Weight of Water Ww= W2-W3 gm 2.03 2.87 3.2
Weight of soil solids Ws= W3-W1 gm 15.23 17.44 14.25
w=(Ww/ 16.4564220
Moisture Content % 13.329 22.4561
Ws)x100 2
Table 4.10. Moisture Content for void curve (0.8%)

Sample No. 1 2 3
Assumed Water Content % 12 16 20
Weight of Soil + Mold gm 4431 4457 4406
Weight of Soil gm 2297 2323 2272
Dry Density kN/m3 20.3723 20.0495651 18.6486
50
 Table 4.11. Dry Density for void curve (0.8% fiber)

Figure 4.28. Zero Void Curve ( with 0.8% fibers)

4.5 California Bearing Ratio:

 Proving ring Constant (C) = 3 lb. /div

 L.C. of Penetration dial gauge = 0.001 inches

4.5.1 Without Fiber Content

Penetration Dial Gauge Load Dial

Penetration Load
Reading Gauge Reading
PDR PDR x LC LDR LDR x C
divisions inch divisions lbs.
0 0 0 0
25 0.025 15.5 46.5
50 0.05 23 69
75 0.075 30.5 91.5
100 0.1 34 102
125 0.125 37 111
150 0.15 41.5 124.5
175 0.175 43 129
200 0.2 46.5 139.5
250 0.25 48 144
300 0.3 49.5 148.5
400 0.4 51 153
51
 500 0.5 54 162
Table 4.12. Load Calculations (without fibers)

Standard Load

Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 3000 lbs.

Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 4500 lbs.

Actual Load

Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 102 lbs.

Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 139.5 lbs.

CBR are at 0.1inch Penetration 3.4 %

CBR are at 0.2inch Penetration 3.1 %

CBR value 3.4 %

Table 4.13. CBR value (without fibers)

Figure 4.29. Penetration Curve (without fibers)

4.5.2 With 0.2% Fiber Content

Penetration Dial Gauge Load Dial Gauge

Penetration Load
Reading Reading
PDR PDR x LC LDR LDR x C

52
 divisions inch divisions lbs.
0 0 0 0
25 0.025 16 48
50 0.05 25 75
75 0.075 34 102
100 0.1 42 126
125 0.125 48 144
150 0.15 53.5 160.5
175 0.175 56 168
200 0.2 58.5 175.5
250 0.25 60.5 181.5
300 0.3 62 186
400 0.4 63.5 190.5
500 0.5 65 195
Table 4.14. Load calculations (with 0.2% fibers)

Standard Load

Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 3000 lbs.

Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 4500 lbs.

Actual Load

Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 126 lbs.

Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 175.5 lbs.

CBR are at 0.1inch Penetration 4.2 %

CBR are at 0.2inch Penetration 3.9 %

CBR value 4.2 %

Table 4.15. CBR value (with 0.2% fibers)

53
 Figure 4.30. Load penetration curve (with 0.2% fibers)

4.5.3 With 0.4% Fiber Content

54
 Load Dial
Penetration Dial Gauge Reading Penetration Load
Gauge Reading
PDR PDR x LC LDR LDR x C
divisions inch divisions lbs.
0 0 0 0
25 0.025 14 42
50 0.05 29 87
75 0.075 45.5 136.5
100 0.1 53 159
125 0.125 59 177
150 0.15 64.5 193.5
175 0.175 68 204
200 0.2 71.5 214.5
250 0.25 73.5 220.5
300 0.3 75 225
400 0.4 77 231
500 0.5 79 237
Table 4.16. Load calculation (with 0.4% fibers)

Standard Load
Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 3000 lbs.
Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 4500 lbs.
Actual Load
Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 159 lbs.
Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 214.5 lbs.

CBR are at 0.1inch Penetration 5.3 %

CBR are at 0.2inch Penetration 4.766666667 %

CBR value 5.3 %

Table 4.17. CBR value (with 0.4% fibers)

55
 Figure 4.31. Load penetration (with 0.4% fibers)

4.5.4 With 0.6% Fiber Content

Penetration Dial Gauge Load Dial

Penetration Load
Reading Gauge Reading
PDR PDR x LC LDR LDR x C
divisions inch divisions lbs.
0 0 0 0
25 0.025 19 57
50 0.05 38.5 115.5
75 0.075 51 153
100 0.1 62 186
125 0.125 71.5 214.5
150 0.15 77 231
175 0.175 83 249
200 0.2 86.5 259.5
250 0.25 88 264
300 0.3 90.5 271.5
400 0.4 94 282
500 0.5 97 291
Table 4.18. Load calculations (with 0.6% fibers)

Standard Load

Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 3000 lbs.

Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 4500 lbs.

Actual Load

56
 Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 186 lbs.

Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 259.5 lbs.

CBR are at 0.1inch Penetration 6.2 %

CBR are at 0.2inch Penetration 5.76666 %

CBR value 6.2 %

Table 4.19. CBR value (with 0.6% fibers)

One Point CBR (56 blows/layer)

350

300

250
Load (lbs)

200

150

100

50

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Penetration (inches)

Figure 4.32. Load penetration (with 0.6% fibers)

4.5.5 With 0.8% Fiber Content

Penetration Dial Gauge Load Dial

Penetration Load
Reading Gauge Reading
PDR PDR x LC LDR LDR x C
divisions inch divisions lbs.
0 0 0 0
25 0.025 17 51
50 0.05 35.5 106.5
75 0.075 48 144
100 0.1 58.5 175.5
125 0.125 61 183

57
 150 0.15 67.5 202.5
175 0.175 75 225
200 0.2 80 240
250 0.25 83 249
300 0.3 85.5 256.5
400 0.4 89 267
500 0.5 93 279
Table 4.20. Load calculation (with 0.8% fibers)

Standard Load
Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 3000 lbs.
Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 4500 lbs.
Actual Load
Standard Load for 0.1in Penetration 175.5 lbs.
Standard Load for 0.2in Penetration 240 lbs.

CBR are at 0.1inch Penetration 5.85 %

CBR are at 0.2inch Penetration 5.3333 %

CBR value 5.85 %

Table 4.21. CBR value (with 0.8% fiber)

Figure 4.33. Load penetration curve (with 0.8% fibers)

58
4.6 Final Result

Optimum Moisture
Sr. # Jute Fiber Percentage Dry Density CBR
Content
1 0 13.5 21.17 3.4
2 0.20% 16.1 17.1 4.2
3 0.40% 21.3 15.1 5.3
4 0.60% 14.41 20.41 6.2
5 0.80% 13.33 20.37 5.85
Table 4.22. OMD, MDD, CBR

Figure 4.34. Effect of jute fiber on OMC ~ MDD ~ CBR

59
60
Chapter 5 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

61
5.1 Conclusions:

Soil used for testing was A-7-6 [AASHTO classification] and CH according to USCS
classification.The Liquid limit of the soil is 55.5%.The plastic limit of the soil is
26.8%.The plasticity index of the soil is 28.7%.The maximum dry density of the soil is
21.7 KN/m3 and the optimum moisture content is 13.5%.The jute fibers were added with
different %ages to check the effect on bearing properties of the soil.By adding fibers in
the soil up-to 0.4%, the moisture content increased from 13.5% to 21.3%. The dry density
decreased from 21.17% to 15.1%.The CBR value increased from 3.4% to 6.2% by adding
fibers up-to 0.6% and then the value decreased.

5.2 Recommendations

Reinforcement of 0.6% jute fiber in this soil can be used in sub grade of flexible
payments.Carry out the study of the effect on the structure of the soil by adding natural
fibers.By covering the soil with bitumen and some other reinforcement agent, we can
protect the bio-degradation of fibers.The effect of jute fiber can be studied on other
problematic soils.The effect of jute fiber on permeability characteristics can also be
studied.

62
REFERENCES:
Changxi Huang, Xinghua Wang "Factors Affecting the Swelling-Compression
Characteristics of Clays in Yichang, China"

J. David Rogers, Robert Olshansky, and Robert B. Rogers 'DAMAGE TO

FOUNDATIONS FROM EXPANSIVE SOILS'

John D. Nelson, Debora J. Miller, Expansive Soils – Problems and Practice in Foundation
And Pavement Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering Colorado State University,
1992

National Lime Association, Lime-Treated Soil Construction Manual - Lime Stabilization

& Lime Modification, Bulletin 326, 2004

Ismaiel, H. A. H., Treatment and improvement of the geotechnical properties of different

soft fine-grained soils using chemical stabilization, Shaker, 2006;

Larisa CHINDRIS, Paul STEFANESCUU, 'EXPANSIVE SOIL STABILIZATION -

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS', University of Petroşani, Romania, 2017.

H. P. Singh, M. Bagra, IMPROVEMENT IN CBR VALUE OF SOIL REINFORCED

WITH JUTE FIBER, 2013

R.R Singh , Er. Shelly Mittal , IMPROVEMENT OF LOCAL SUBGRADE SOIL FOR
ROAD CONSTUCTION BY THE USE OF COCONUT COIR FIBER ,2014

Wasim Tariq, Effects of Jute Fibers on Engineering Properties of Expansive Soils,

University Of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, 2018

Rao, P.J. “Jute Geotextile for improving the performance of Highway Embankment on
soft Marine Soil”, Proc. Nat. Sem, on Jute based Geotextiles, New Delhi, 1996

Ash”, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 17, pp. 1339-1353.

Cokca, E. (2001), “Use of Class C fly ash for the stabilization of an expansive soil”,

ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and Geo environmental Engineering. Vol. 127, Issue 7,
pp. 568–573.

Holtz, W. G., and Gibbs, H. J. (1956), “Engineering properties of expansive clays”

Transactions ASCE. Vol. 121, pp. 641–677.

Aggarwal, P. and Sharma, B. (2010),“Application of Jute Fiber in the Improvement of

Subgrade Characteristics”

Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 19, Issue 3, pp. 242-248.

63
Lawton E.C., Khire, M.V. and Fox, N.S. (1993). “Reinforcement of soils by multi
oriented geosynthetic inclusion.” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE,
119(2),257-275.

Gosavi, M., Patil, K.A" Mittal, S. and Saran, S (2004). "Improvements ofproperties of
black cotton soil subgrade through synthetic reinforcement." Joumal of Institution of
Engineers (India), 84,257-262.

IS: 2720, Part XVI, 1965. Laboratory determination of CBR, Bureau of Indian
Standards; New Delhi.

IS: 2720, Part VII, 1965. “Determination of Moisture content –Dry density Relation
using Light Compaction”, Bureau of Indian Standards; New Delhi.
Phanikumar, B. R., Naga Reddayya, S. and Sharma, R. S. (2001), “Volume Change

Behavior of Fly Ash Treated Expansive Soils”, 2nd International Conference on Civil
Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India. Vol. 2, pp. 689– 695.

Phanikumar, B.R., and Sharma, R. (2007), “Volume Change Behavior of Fly

Ash Stabilized Clays”, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 19, SPECIAL
ISSUE: Geochemical Aspects of Stabilized Materials, pp. 67–74.

Phanikumar, B.R. (2009), “Effect of Lime and Fly Ash on Swell, Consolidation and

Shear Strength Characteristics of Expansive Clay: A comparative study”, Journal

of Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An international journal, Vol. 4, Issue 2, pp.
175181.
Prakash, K., and Sridharan, A. (2009), “Beneficial Properties of Coal Ashes and Effective
Solid Waste Management”, Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive
Waste Management, ASCE, Vol. 13, Issue 4, pp. 239-248.

Radhakrishnan, G., Kumar, M.A., and Raju, G.V.R.P. (2014), “Swelling Properties of
Expansive Soils Treated with Chemicals”, American Journal of Engineering Research.
Vol. 3, Issue 4, pp. 245-250.

Raut, J.M., Bajad, S.P., and Khadeshwar, S.P. (2014), “Stabilization of Expansive Soils
Using Geo Fibers and Murrum”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,
Engineering and Technology. Vol. 3, Issue 7.

Water Contents”, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering. Vol. 2,

Issue 5.

Sridharan, A., Pandian, N. S., and Rajasekhar, C. (1996), “Geotechnical

64
Characterization of Pond Ash, Ash ponds and Disposal Systems, Narosa Publising
House, New Delhi, India, pp. 97–110.

Xing, C., and Ji-ru, Z. (2002), “Stabilization of Expansive Soil by Lime and Fly Ash”,
Journal of Wahan University of Technology – Mater. Sci. Ed., Vol. 14, Issue 4, pp. 73-77.

Sivakumar Babu, G.L., and Vasudevan, A.K.(2008) “Strength and Stiffness Response of
Coir -Reinforced Tropical Soil”. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering,
ASCE/September2008/571-578.

65