A PROJECT REPORT

ON
SOIL STABILIZATION USING GEOSYNTHETICS
Submitted by
MITESH RATHI
Under the Guidance of
Mr. AhzamShadab
Assistant Professor
in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
CIVIL ENGINEERING



Faculty of Engineering & Technology
ManavRachna International University, Faridabad
JUNE, 2014












Acknowledgement





We would like to express our sincere gratitude toour project guide Mr. AhzamShadabfor
giving us the opportunity to work on this topic. It would never be possible for us to take this
project to this level without his innovative ideas and hisrelentless support and
encouragement.




1. PrashantSheoran, 10/fet/c(f)/1035
2. Ankur Gill,
3. MiteshRathee(10/Fet/C(F)/1038)
4. Ajay Berwal, 10/fet/c(f)/1036
5. Armaan,






















Declaration




Weherebydeclarethat this project report entitled Soil Stabilization Using Geosynthetics by
MITESH RATHI (10/Fet/C(F)/1038), being submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degreeof Bachelor of Technology in CIVIL ENGINEERINGunder
Faculty of Engineering & Technology of ManavRachna International University Faridabad,
during the academic year 2014, is a bonafide record of our original work carried out under
guidance and supervisionof MR. AHZAM SHADAB, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR , CIVIL
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT and has not been presented elsewhere.






1. PrashantSheoran, 10/Fet/c(f)/1035
2. Ankur Gill,
3. MiteshRathi, (10/Fet/C(F)/1038)
4. Ajay Berwal, 10/Fet/c(f)/1036
5. Armaan,

















ManavRachnaInternational University, Faridabad
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Department of Civil Engineering

June, 2014Certificate





This is to certify that this project report entitled SOIL STABILIZATION USING
GEOSYNTHETICS by MITESH RATHI (10/FET/C(F)/1038)submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degreeof Bachelor of Technology in CIVIL
ENGINEERING under Faculty of Engineering & Technology of ManavRachna International
University Faridabad, during the academic year 2014, is a bonafide record of work carried out
under my guidance and supervision.




Mr. AhzamShadab
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR Department. Of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
ManavRachna International University, Faridabad





Dr. B.K. Singh
Professor and Head of the Department






CONTENT

Chapter PAGE NO

1. Introduction 1-2

1.1 Goals and Objectives 1
1.2 Details and Terminology 2
1.3 Organization of Project 2

2. Literature Review 3-8

2.1 Introduction to Geosynthetics 3
2.2 Theory of Compaction 7

3. Problem Statement 9

3.1 Requirements 9
3.2Commonoly used method for improvement of soil properties 9

4. Experiments and Results 10-25

4.1 Scope of work 10
4.2 Procedure for Experiments 10
4.3 Result of Performed Experiments 16
4.4 Comparative Statement 25

5. Conclusion 26


Bibliography 27

List of Figures

Fig 2.1 Differnet types of Geosynthetics 5
Fig 2.2 Soil Layer Separaton using Geosynthetics 6
Fig 2.3 Soil Reinforcement 6
Fig 2.4 Soil Filtration 7
Fig 2.5 Soil Drainage 7
Fig 4.1 Sieves of different Sizes 11
Fig 4.2 Casagrande Apparatus 12


Fig 4.3 Different Instruments Used in Proctor 13
Fig 4.4 Water Mixing in soil 13
Fig 4.5 Proctor Apparatus 14
Fig 4.6 Trimming of Soil 14
Fig 4.7 Pyncometer Apparatus 14
Fig 4.8 Triaxial Machine 16
Fig 4.9 Failure Due to load applied 16


LIST OF TABLES PAGE NO


Table 1.1 Sieve analysis 16
Table 4.2 Proctor test results for parent soil 17
Table 4.3 Proctor test result with 0.1% Geosynthetic 19
Table 4.4 Proctor test result with 0.2% Geosynthetic 21
Table 4.5 Proctor test result with 0.4% Geosynthetic 22
Table 4.6 Proctor test result with 0.6% Geosynthetic 23



CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
For any land-based structure, the foundation is very important and has to be strong to support
the entire structure. In order for the foundation to be strong, the
soil around it plays a very critical role. So, to work with soils, we need to have proper
knowledge about their properties and factors which affect their behavior. The process of soil
stabilization helps to achieve the required properties in a soil needed for the construction
work.
From the beginning of construction work, the necessity of enhancing soil properties has come
to the light. Ancient civilizations of the Chinese, Romans and Incas utilized various methods
to improve soil strength etc., some of these methods were so effective that their buildings and
roads still exist.
In India, the modern era of soil stabilization began in early 1970s, with a general shortage of
petroleum and aggregates, it became necessary for the engineers to look at means to improve
soil other than replacing the poor soil at the building site. Soil stabilization was used but due
to the use of obsolete methods and also due to the absence of proper technique, soil
stabilization lost favor. In recent times, with the increase in the demand for infrastructure,
raw materials and fuel, soil stabilization has started to take a new shape. With the availability
of better research, materials and equipment, it is emerging as a popular and cost-effective
method for soil improvement.
Here, in this project, soil stabilization has been done with the help geosynthetic fibers.


1.1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The objective of the project was to analyze geotechnical fibres (i.e. asbestos fibre) with
different proportions of water content, mixed with soil. The parameters that were to be
brought out in the laboratory were MDD and OMC. This experimentation was to be carried
out in relation to its use as a core filler material in construction of road embankments.The aim
of the entire activity striking economy in construction of roads and improving the soil
properties by developing it as a construction material with functional geotechnical properties
as a replacement of soil.
Acquisition of samples for the project was done from Palwal Haryana. The Standard Proctor
tests were carried out simultaneously from the same batch to minimize variability due to
difference in constituencies of lots. Water was added to the sample on weight/weight
percentage basis by hit and trial method. Samples taken from each round of compaction were
kept in oven at 105 degrees for 24 hours before taking the dry weight. Dry densities obtained
from each sample were noted and a graph plotted with water content on the X axis and dry
density on the Y axis. On joining the points obtained by a smooth line, MDD was obtained at
a definite OMC, represented by the crest of the graph where the slope is zero. Asbestos Fibre
was added to soil in different percentages to study if there is any considerable change in
geotechnical properties. The graphs and observations obtained from these experiments are
presented henceforth in this report.



1.2 DETAILS AND TERMINOLOGY
OMC The maximum content at which a specified compactive force can compact a soil
mass to its maximum dry unit weight.

COMPACTION Compaction is a process that brings about an increase in soil density or
unit weight, accompanied by a decrease in air volume. There is usually no change in water
content. For a given compactive effort, the maximum dry unit weight occurs at optimum
water content.

PAVEMENT Road surface or pavement is the durable surface material laid down on an
area intended to sustain traffic. Such surfaces are frequently marked to guide traffic.

MDD (Maximum Dry Density) The dry density in g/cc corresponding to the maximum
point on the moisture content /dry density curve should be reported as maximum dry density.

1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE PROJECT
The objective of the project was to analyze geotechnical fibres (i.e. asbestos fibre) with
different proportions of water content, mixed with soil. The parameters that were to be
brought out in the laboratory were MDD and OMC. This experimentation was to be carried
out in relation to its use as a core filler material in construction of road embankments. The
aim of the entire activity striking economy in construction of roads and improving the soil
properties by developing it as a construction material with functional geotechnical properties
as a replacement of soil.

Acquisition of samples for the project was done from Palwal Haryana. The Standard Proctor
tests were carried out simultaneously from the same batch to minimize variability due to
difference in constituencies of lots. Water was added to the sample on weight/weight
percentage basis by hit and trial method. Samples taken from each round of compaction were
kept in oven at 105 degrees for 24 hours before taking the dry weight. Dry densities obtained
from each sample were noted and a graph plotted with water content on the X axis and dry
density on the Y axis. On joining the points obtained by a smooth line, MDD was obtained at
a definite OMC, represented by the crest of the graph where the slope is zero. Asbestos Fibre
was added to soil in different percentages to study if there is any considerable change in
geotechnical properties. The graphs and observations obtained from these experiments are
presented henceforth in this report.


CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Soil stabilization is the process of altering some soil properties by different methods,
mechanical or chemical in order to produce an improved soil material which has all the
desired engineering properties.
Soils are generally stabilized to increase their strength and durability or to prevent erosion
and dust formation in soils. The main aim is the creation of a soil material or system that will
hold under the design use conditions and for the designed life of the engineering project. The
properties of soil vary a great deal at different places or in certain cases even at one place; the
success of soil stabilization depends on soil testing. Various methods are employed to
stabilize soil and the method should be verified in the lab with the soil material before
applying it on the field.
Principles of Soil Stabilization:
Evaluating the soil properties of the area under consideration.
Deciding the property of soil which needs to be altered to get the design value and choose
the effective and economical method for stabilization.
Designing the Stabilized soil mix sample and testing it in the lab for intended stability and
durability values.

2.1 INTRODUCTION TO GEOSYNTHETICS
Geosynthetics are the generally polymeric products used to solve civil engineering problems.
This includes eight main product
categories: geotextiles, geogrids, geonets,geomembranes, geosynthetic clay
liners, geofoam, geocells and geocomposites. The polymeric nature of the products makes
them suitable for use in the ground where high levels of durability are required. Properly
formulated, however, they can also be used in exposed applications. Geosynthetics are
available in a wide range of forms and materials, each to suit a slightly different end use.
These products have a wide range of applications and are currently used in many
civil, geotechnical, transportation, geoenvironmental,hydraulic, and
private development applications including roads, airfields, railroads, embankments, retaining
structures, reservoirs, canals, dams, erosion control, sediment control,landfill liners, landfill
covers, mining, aquaculture and agriculture.





Types of Geosynthetics
Geotextiles form one of the two largest groups of geosynthetics. Their rise in growth
during the past 35 years has been nothing short of extraordinary. They are indeed textiles
in the traditional sense, but they consist of synthetic fibers rather than natural ones such as
cotton, wool, or silk. Thus bio degradation and subsequent short lifetime is not a problem.
These synthetic fibers are made into flexible, porous fabrics by standard weaving
machinery or are matted together in a random non woven manner. Some are also knitted.
The major point is that geotextiles are porous to liquid flow across their manufactured
plane and also within their thickness, but to a widely varying degree. There are at least
100 specific application areas for geotextiles that have been developed; however, the
fabric always performs at least one of four discrete functions: separation, reinforcement,
filtration, and/or drainage.
Geogrids represent a rapidly growing segment within geosynthetics. Rather than being a
woven, nonwoven or knitted textile fabric, geogrids are polymers formed into a very
open, gridlike configuration, i.e., they have large apertures between individual ribs in the
transverse and longitudinal directions. Geogrids are (a) either stretched in one, two or
three directions for improved physical properties, (b) made on weaving or knitting
machinery by standard textile manufacturing methods, or (c) by laser or ultrasonically
bonding rods or straps together. There are many specific application areas, however,
geogrids function almost exclusively as reinforcement materials.
Geonets, and the related geospacers by some, constitute another specialized segment
within the geosynthetics area. They are formed by a continuous extrusion of parallel sets
of polymeric ribs at acute angles to one another. When the ribs are opened, relatively
large apertures are formed into a netlike configuration. Two types are most common,
either biplanar or triplanar. Alternatively many very different types of drainage cores are
available. They consist of nubbed, dimpled or cuspated polymer sheets, three-dimensional
networks of stiff polymer fibers in different configurations and small drainage pipes or
spacers within geotextiles. Their design function is completely within the drainage area
where they are used to convey liquids or gases of all types

Geomembranes represent the other largest group of geosynthetics, and in dollar volume
their sales are greater than that of geotextiles. Their growth in the United States and
Germany was stimulated by governmental regulations originally enacted in the early
1980s for the lining of solid-waste landfills. The materials themselves are relatively thin,
impervious sheets of polymeric material used primarily for linings and covers of liquids-
or solid-storage facilities. This includes all types of landfills, surface impoundments,
canals, and other containment facilities. Thus the primary function is always containment
as a liquid or vapor barrier or both. The range of applications, however, is great, and in
addition to the environmental area, applications are rapidly growing in geotechnical,
transportation, hydraulic, and private development engineering (such as aquaculture,
agriculture, heap leach mining, etc.).
Geosynthetic clay liners, or GCLs, are an interesting juxtaposition of polymeric materials
and natural soils. They are rolls of factory fabricated thin layers of bentonite
claysandwiched between two geotextiles or bonded to a geomembrane. Structural
integrity of the subsequent composite is obtained by needle-punching, stitching or
adhesive bonding. GCLs are used as a composite component beneath a geomembrane or
by themselves in geoenvironmental and containment applications as well as in
transportation, geotechnical, hydraulic, and many private development applications.

Geofoam is a product created by a polymeric expansion process of polystyrene resulting
in a foam consisting of many closed, but gas-filled, cells. The skeletal nature of the cell
walls is the unexpanded polymeric material. The resulting product is generally in the form
of large, but extremely light, blocks which are stacked side-by-side providing lightweight
fill in numerous applications.

Geocells (also known as Cellular Confinement Systems) are three-dimensional
honeycombed cellular structures that form a confinement system when infilled with
compacted soil. Extruded from polymeric materials into strips welded together
ultrasonically in series, the strips are expanded to form the stiff (and typically textured
and perforated) walls of a flexible 3D cellular mattress. Infilled with soil, a new
composite entity is created from the cell-soil interactions. The cellular confinement
reduces the lateral movement of soil particles, thereby maintaining compaction and forms
a stiffened mattress that distributes loads over a wider area. Traditionally used in slope
protection and earth retention applications, geocells made from advanced polymers are
being increasingly adopted for long-term road and rail load support. Much larger geocells
are also made from stiff geotextiles sewn into similar, but larger, unit cells that are used
for protection bunkers and walls.

A geocomposite consists of a combination of geotextiles, geogrids, geonets and/or
geomembranes in a factory fabricated unit. Also, any one of these four materials can be
combined with another synthetic material (e.g., deformed plastic sheets or steel cables) or
even with soil. As examples, a geonet or geospacer with geotextiles on both surfaces and
a GCL consisting of a geotextile/bentonite/geotextile sandwich are both geocomposites.
This specific category brings out the best creative efforts of the engineer and
manufacturer. The application areas are numerous and constantly growing. The major
functions encompass the entire range of functions listed for geosynthetics discussed
previously: separation, reinforcement, filtration, drainage, and containment.

Fig2.1 Different types of Geosynthetics

Advantages of using geosynthetics
Separation is the placement of a flexible geosynthetic material, like a porous
geotextile, between dissimilar materials so that the integrity and functioning of both
materials can remain intact or even be improved. Paved roads, unpaved roads, and
railroad bases are common applications. Also, the use of thick nonwoven geotextiles
for cushioning and protection of geomembranes is in this category. In addition, for
most applications of geofoam and geocells, separation is the major function.

Fig2.2 Soil Layer Separation using Geosynthetics
Reinforcement is the synergistic improvement of a total systems strength created by
the introduction of a geotextile, geogrid or geocell (all of which are good in tension)
into a soil (that is good in compression, but poor in tension) or other disjointed and
separated material. Applications of this function are in mechanically stabilized and
retained earth walls and steep soil slopes; they can be combined with masonry facings
to create vertical retaining walls. Also involved is the application of basal
reinforcement over soft soils and over deep foundations for embankments and heavy
surface loadings. Stiff polymer geogrids and geocells do not have to be held in tension
to provide soil reinforcement, unlike geotextiles. Stiff 2D geogrid and 3D geocells
interlock with the aggregate particles and the reinforcement mechanism is one of
confinement of the aggregate. The resulting mechanically stabilized aggregate layer
exhibits improved loadbearing performance. Stiff polymer geogrids, with very open
apertures, in addition to three-dimensional geocells made from various polymers are
also increasingly specified in unpaved and paved roadways, load platforms and
railway ballast, where the improved loadbearing characteristics significantly reduce
the requirements for high quality, imported aggregate fills, thus reducing the carbon
footprint of the construction.

Fig 2.3 Soil Renforcement
Filtration is the equilibrium soil-to-geotextile interaction that allows for adequate
liquid flow without soil loss, across the plane of the geotextile over a service lifetime
compatible with the application under consideration. Filtration applications are
highway underdrain systems, retaining wall drainage, landfill leachate collection
systems, as silt fences and curtains, and as flexible forms for bags, tubes and
containers.

Fig2.4 Soil Filtration
Drainage is the equilibrium soil-to-geosynthetic system that allows for adequate liquid
flow without soil loss, within the plane of the geosynthetic over a service lifetime
compatible with the application under consideration. Geopipe highlights this function,
and also geonets, geocomposites and very thick geotextiles. Drainage applications for
these different geosynthetics are retaining walls, sport fields, dams, canals, reservoirs,
and capillary breaks. Also to be noted is that sheet, edge and wick drains are
geocomposites used for various soil and rock drainage situations.

Fig2.5 Soil Drainage
Containment involves geomembranes, geosynthetic clay liners, or some
geocomposites which function as liquid or gas barriers. Landfill liners and covers
make critical use of these geosynthetics. All hydraulic applications (tunnels, dams,
canals, surface impoundments, and floating covers) use these geosynthetics as well.



2.2 THEORY OF COMPACTION
Compaction is the process of increasing the bulk density of a soil or aggregate by driving out
air. For any soil, for a given amount of compactive effort, the density obtained depends on
the moisture content. At very high moisture contents, the maximum dry density is achieved
when the soil is compacted to nearly saturation, where (almost) all the air is driven out. At
low moisture contents, the soil particles interfere with each other; addition of some moisture
will allow greater bulk densities, with a peak density where this effect begins to be
counteracted by the saturation of the soil. Compaction is used in construction of highway
embankments, earth dams and many other engineering structures, loose soils must be
compacted to improve their strength by increasing their unit weight. Degree of Compaction is
measured in terms of Dry Unit Weight.
There are five principle reasons to compact soil:
1. Increases load-bearing capacity
2. Prevents soil settlement and frost damage
3. Provides stability
4. Reduces water seepage, swelling and contraction
5. Reduces settling of soil

Objectives for Compaction
Increasing the bearing capacity of foundations
Decreasing the undesirable settlement of structures
Control undesirable volume changes
Reduction in hydraulic conductivity
Increasing the stability of slopes.
Compaction Effects
In general, soil densification includes
Compaction
Consolidation

Compaction is one kind of densification that is realized by rearrangement of soil particles
without outflow of water. It is realized by application of mechanical energy. It does not
involve fluid flow but wish moisture changing altering.
Consolidation is another kind of soil densification with fluid flow. Consolidation is primarily
for clayey soils. Water is squeezed out from pores under load.
There are four control factors affecting the extent of compaction:
1. Compaction effort;
2. Soil type and gradation;
3. Moisture content; and
4. Dry unit weight (dry density).


CHAPTER 3
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The purpose of the project is Stabilization of soil using geosynthetics. The project also aims
at finding out the optimum mix proportion of geosyntheticfibre and soil so as to utilize the
same for construction of embankments. The maximum benefit obtained from mixing
geosyntheticfibres i.e. asbestos fibre can be used to increase the bearing capacity of soil.
Whereas the basic problem statement is to mix asbestos fibre with soil at different
proportions and compute various properties and results of compaction and strength.

3.1 REQUIREMENTS
To increase the bearing capacity of the soil.
To increase the consistency of the soil.
To increase the relative density of the soil.

3.2 COMMONLY USED METHODS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF SOIL
PROPERTIES:
PRE LOADING: Simply place a surcharge fill on top of the soil that requires
improvement Once sufficient consolidation has taken place, the fill can be removed
and construction takes place.
SOIL REPLACEMENT: One of oldest and simplest methods is simply to remove and
replace the soil.
SOIL STABLISATION: stabilization of soil is done using admixtures to enhance the
soil quality most common admixture is Portland cement, lime and asphalt.
GROUTING: When low-slump compaction grout is injected into granular soils, grout
bulbs are formed that displace and densify the surrounding loose soils.
In-place Densification of Soil:
(a) Vibroflotation : Probe includes the vibrator mechanism and water jets , probe is lowered
into the ground using a crane .Vibratory eccentric force induces densification and water jets
assist in insertion and extraction
(b) Compaction piles : in this method piles are inserted to compact the soil.
(c) Stone column : in this method water is jetted into the ground forming a large vertical hole.
The hole is filled with gravel (stone) from the surface.
(d)Blasting: it uses deep densification of the soil can be accomplished by blasting.


CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS
4.1 SCOPE OF WORK
The experimental work consists of the following steps:
1. Specific gravity of soil
2. Determination of soil index properties (Atterberg Limits)
i) Liquid limit by Casagrandes apparatus
ii) Plastic limit
3. Particle size distribution by sieve analysis
4. Determination of the maximum dry density (MDD) and the corresponding optimum
moisture content (OMC) of the soil by Proctor compaction test
5. Preparation of reinforced soil samples.
6. Determination of the shear strength by:
ii) Unconfined compression test (UCS).


4.2 PROCEDURE FOR EXPERIMENTS
1. Sieve Analysis- It is carried out to obtain grain size of soil particles .The soil is sieved
through a set of sieves. Sieves are generally made of spur brass and phosphor bronze (or
stainless steel). The sieves are designed by the size of square openings in mm or microns.
Sieves of various sizes ranging from 80mm to 75 microns are available .The dia. Of sieve is
generally bet. 15 to 20 cm.
Procedure- The soil sample is taken in suitable quantity. The soil should be oven dried for 24
hrs at 110 degree.It should not contain any lumps. If necessary , it should be pulverised. The
sample is sieved through 4.75mm IS sieve.The portion retained on the sieve is the gravel
fraction material.It can be shake manually or machenical using a shaker. The weight of soil
retained on each sieve is obtained. The sample is placed in the top sieve and the set of sieves
is kept on a mechanical shaker and the machine I started. Normally 10 min.s of shaking is
enough for mostly soils.The mass of the retained on each and on pan is obtained to the
nearest 0.1 gm. The mass of the retained soil is checked against the original mass.

Fig.4.1. Sieves of different sizes
2. Liquid Limit- The liquid limit is the water content at which the soil changes from the
liquid state to the plastic state. At the liquid limit the clay is practically like a liquid, but
possesses a small shearing strength. The shearing strength at the stage is the smallest value
that can be measured in the laboratory. The liquid limit of soil depends upon the clay mineral
present. The stronger the surface charge and the thinner the particle, the greater will be the
amount of adsorbed water and, therefore , the higher will be the liquid limit. The liquid limit
is determined in the laboratory either by Casagrandes apparatus or by cone penetration
method. The device used in Casagrande method consists of a brass cup which drops through a
ht. of a 1 cm on a hard base when operated by the handle. The device is operated by turning
the handle which raises the cup and lets it drop on the rubber base. The ht. of drop is adjusted
with the help of adjusting screws.
Procedure- About 120 gm. of an air dried soil sample passing through 4-5 micron sieve is
taken in a dish and mixed with distilled water to form a uniform paste. A portion of this paste
is placed in the cup of the liquid limit device, and the surface is smoothened and a levelled
with a spatula to a maximum depth of 1 cm. A groove is cut through the sample along the
symmetrical axis of the cup, preferably in one stroke, using a standard grooving tool. IS 2720
part B recommends two types of grooving tool: (1) Casagrandetool , (2) ASTM tool. The
CAsagrande tool cut a groove of width 2mm at the bottom, 11mm at the top and 8mm deep.
The ASTM tool cuts a groove of width 2mm at the bottom, 13.6 mm at the top and 10mm
deep the Casagrande tool is recommended for normal fine grained soils, whereas the ASTM
tool is recommended for sandy, fine grained soils, in which the Casagrande tool tends to tear
the soil in the groove.
After the soil pat has been cut by a proper grooving tool, the handle is turned at a rate of 2
revolutions per second until the two parts of the sample come into the contact at the bottom
of the groove along a distance of 12mm. The groove should close by a flow of the soil and
not by slippage between the soil and the cup when the groove closes by a flow, it indicates
the failure of the slopes formed on the two sides of the groove.

Fig. 4.2 Casagrande Apparatus
3.Plastic Limit- Plastic limit is the water content below which the soil stops behaving as a
plastic material. It begins to crumble which rolled into a thread of soil of 3 mm dia. . At this
water content , the soil loses its plasticity and passes to a semi solid state.
Procedure- For determination of the plastic limit of a soil , it is air dried and sieved through a
4-5 micron IS sieve. About 30 gm. Of soil is taken in an evaporating dish. It is mixed
thoroughly with distilled water till it becomes plastic and can be easily moulded with fingers.
About 10gm. Of the plastic soil mass is taken in one hand and a ball is formed. The ball is
rolled with fingers on a glass plate to form a soil thread of uniform dia. The rate of rolling is
kept about 80 to 90 strokes per minute. IF the dia. Of thread becomes smaller than 3 mm ,
without crack formation it shows that the water content is more than the plastic limit. The soil
is knead further. This results in the reduction of the water content as some water is
evaporated due to the heat of the hand the soil is rerolled and the procedure repeated till the
thread crumbles the water content at which the soil can be rolled into a thread of
approximately 3 mm in dia. Without crumbling is known as the plastic limit (PL or w
p
). The
test is repeated, taking a fresh sample each time . The plastic limit is taken as the average of 3
values. The plastic limit is reported to the nearest whole no. The shear strength at the plastic
limit, is about 100 times that at the liquid limit.
4. Standard proctor test- To assess the amount of compaction and the water content
required in the field , the compaction test are done on the same soil in the laboratory. The
tests provide a relationship bet. the water content and the dry density. The water content at
which the maximum dry density is attained is obtained from the relationship provided by the
test Proctor (19930 used a standard mould of 4 inches internal dia. And an effective ht. of 4.6
inches , with a capacity of 1/30 cubic foot. The mould had a detachable base plate , and
removable collar of 2 inches ht. at its top. The soil was compacted in the mould in three equal
layers, each layer was given 25 blows of 5.5 pounds rammer falling through a ht. of 12
inches. A curve was obtained bet. The dry density and the water content.
IS : 2720 (Part 7 ) recommends essentially the same specification as a Standard Proctor test,
with some minor modification and metrification. The mould recommended is of 100mm dia.,
127.3 mm ht. and 1000 ml capacity. The rammer recommended is of 2.6 kg mass with a free
drop of 310mm and a face dia. Of 50 mm. The soil is compacted in 3 layers. The mould is
fixed to a detachable base plate. The collar is of 60 mm ht..
If the percentage of soil retained on 4.75 mm sieve is more than 20 % , a larger mould of
internal dia. 150 mm , effective ht. 127.3 mm and capacity 2250 ml is recommended.
Procedure- About 3 kg of air dried pulverised soil passing 4.7 mm sieve is taken. Water is
added to the soil to bring its water content to about 4 % if the soil is coarse grained and to
about 8 5 if it is fine grained. The content should be much less than the expected optimum
water content. The soil is mixed thoroughly and covered with a wet cloth and left for
maturing for about 15-30 mins..The mould is cleaned dried and greased lightly. The mass of
the empty mould with the base plate, but without collar , is taken. The collar is then fitted to
the mould. The mould is placed on a solid base and filled with fully matured soil to about 1/3
its ht. The soil is compacted by 25 blows of the rammer , with a free fall of 310 mm . ( The
no. of blows required for the bigger mould of 2250ml capacity is 56 instead of 25). The
blows are evenly distributed over the surface the soil surface is scratched with a spatula
before the second layer is placed. The mould is filled to about 2/3 ht. with the soil and
compact again by 25 blows. Likewise, the third layer is placed and compacted. The third
layer should project about the top of the mould into the collar by not more than 6mm. The
collar is rotated to break to the bond bet. The soil in the mould and that in collar. The collar is
than removed , and the soil trimmed of flush with the top of the mould. The mass of the
mould, base plate and the compacted soil is taken and thus the mass of the compacted soil is
determined. The bulk density of the soil is computed from the mass of the compacted soil and
the volume of the mould. Representative soil samples are taken from the bottom, middle and
top of the mould determining the water content. The dry density is computed from the bulk
density and the water content.The soil removed from the mould is broken with hand. More
water is added to the soil so as to increase the water content by 2-3%. It is thoroughly mixed
and allowed to mature. The test is repeated and the dry density and the water content are
determined.







Fig.4.3Different Instruments used in ProctorFig. 4.4 Water Mixing in soil











Fig. 4.5 Proctor Apparatus Fig.4.6Trimming of soil

5. Pycnometer- It is use to determine specific Gravity. It is a glass jar of 1 litre capacity
and fitted with a screw type brass conical cap the cap has a small hole of 6 mm dia. A rubber
or fibre washer is placed between the cap and also on jar. The cap is screwed down to the
same mark such that the volume of the pyncometer used in calculation remains constant.
Procedure- A sample of 200-400gm is taken in the pyncometer and weighted. Water is then
added to the soil in the pyncometer to make it about half full. The contents are thoroughly
mixed using a glass rod to remove the entrapped air. More and more water is added and
stirring process continued till the pyncometer is filled flush with the hole in the conical cap.
The pyncometer is wiped dry and weighed. The pyncometer is then completely emptied. It is
washed thoroughly and filled with water, flush with the top hole. The pyncometer is wiped
dry and weighed.

Fig.4.7Pyncometer Apparatus
M1= mass of pycnometer
M2= mass of pycnometer + wet soil
M3 = mass of pycnometer + wet soil + weight of water
M4= mass of pycnometer filled with water only
Specific Gravity (G) = M2-M1/(M2-M1)-(M3-M4)

6. Triaxial Compression test Apparatus-
The triaxial compression test, or simply triaxial test, is used for the determination of shear
characteristics of all types of soils under different drainage conditions. In this test , a
cylindrical specimen is stressed under condition of axial symmetry. In the first stage of the
test, the specimen is subjected to an all round confining pressure on the sides and at the top
and the bottom. This stage is known as the consolidation stage.
In the second stage of the test, call the shearing stage and additional axial stress known as the
Deviator stress, is applied on the top of the specimen through a ram. Thus, the total stess in
the axial direction at the time of shearing is equal to (sigma c + sigma d). It may be noted that
when the axial stress is increased the shear stresses develop on inclined planes due to
compressive on the top.
The vertical sides of the specimen are principal planes as there are no shear stresses on the
sides. The confining pressure is equal to the minor principal strss. The top of the bottom
planes are the major principal planes. The total axial stress which is equal to the sum of
confining pressure and deviator, is the major principal stress. Because of the axial symmetry,
the intermediate principal stress is also equal to the confining pressure.
It consist of a circular base that has a pedestal. The pedestal has one or two holes which are
used for the drainage of the specimen in the drained test or fpr the pour pressure measurement
in an undrained test. A triaxial cell is fitted to the top of the base plate with the three wing
nuts after the specimen has been placed on the pedestal. The triaxial cell is a Perspex cylinder
which is permanently fixed to the top cap and the bottom brass collar. There are three tie rods
which support to the cell. The top cap is a bronze casting with its central boss forming a bush
through which a stainless steel ram can slide. The ram is so designed that it has minimum of
friction at the same time does not permit any leakage. There is an air release valve in the top
cap which is kept upon when the cell is filled with water ( orglycerine) for applying the
confining pressure. An oil valve is also provided in the top cap to fill light machine oil in the
cell to reduce the leakage of water past the ram in long duration tests. The apparatus is
mounted on a loading frame. The deviator stress is applied to the specimen from a strain
controlled loading machine. The loading system consist of either a screw jack operated by an
electric motor and gear box or a hydraulic ram operated by a pump.

4.8 Triaxial Machine 4.9 Failure due to Load applied



4.3 RESULTS OF PERFORMED EXPERIMENTS
1. Sieve Analysis Test Results for Parent Soil
Wt. of soil sample=966gms
IS SEIVE
NO.
MASS
RETA
INED
(gms)
CUMM.
RETAIN
ED ED
(Gms.)
CUMM.
%
RETAIN
ED
TOTAL
PASSIN
G %age
4.75mm 0 0 0 0
2.36 mm 212 21.94 21.94 78.06
1.18 mm 104 10.76 32.70 67.30
600
micron
254 24.22 56.92 43.08
300
microne
54 5.59 62.51 37.49
150 86 8.9 71.40 28.60
microne
75
microne
126 13.04 84.44 15.56
Pan 150 15.11 99.55 0.45
Total 966 529.42
Table 4.1 Sieve Analysis
Fines Modulus= sum of cumulative percentage weight Retained/100=529.42/100=5.29.

2.0Pycnometer Test Results for Parent Soil
A sample of 200-400gm is taken in the pyncometer and weighted. Water is then added to the
soil in the pyncometer to make it about half full. The contents are thoroughly mixed using a
glass rod to remove the entrapped air. More and more water is added and stirring process
continued till the pyncometer is filled flush with the hole in the conical cap. The pyncometer
is wiped dry and weighed. The pyncometer is then completely emptied. It is washed
thoroughly and filled with water, flush with the top hole. The pyncometer is wiped dry and
weighed.
M1= mass of pycnometer
M2= mass of pycnometer + wet soil
M3 = mass of pycnometer + wet soil + weight of water
M4= mass of pycnometer filled with water only
M1=.469kg
M2=.669kg
M3=1.160
M4=.989
Specific Gravity (G) = M2-M1/(M2-M1)-(M3-M4)
= 6.89

3.0 Proctor Test
For Parent Soil Results are-
Table 4.2 Proctor Test Results for Parent soil


Graph 4.1-On parent soil

0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
M
a
x
i
m
u
m

D
r
y

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
k
g
/
m
3
)


Water Content%
Parent Soil
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 1 2 3 4
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

(
k
p
a
)

Deformation (mm)
Parent Soil
Strength (Kpa)
Contai
ner
no.
%a
ge
of
wat
er
Wt.
of
Mo
uld
W1
in
kg
W
2
in
kg
Dry
Dens
ity
kg/m
3
Moistu
re
Conte
nt
M.D.D
In kg /m
3
Wt.
of
soil
requi
red
for
Test(
in
Gms)
Water
Requi
red
For
Test(i
n ml.)
OM
C
Triaxi
al
Appar
atus
(streng
th
Kpa)
14 5 3.82
5
.04
5
.0
43
1737
.60
.0444(
4.4)
1664.36(1
.664)
121.9
0
5.364 23.8
16
238
10 10 4.02
6
0.0
43
.0
41
1941
.39
.044(4.
4)
1858.83(1
.858)
136.0
9
5.98 26.5
8
252
4 15 4.10
6
0.0
57
.0
54
2073
.88
.052(5.
2)
1970.9(1.
9709)
144.3
6
7.509 39.0
3
243
Graph 4.2- Strength Parameters on Parent Soil

After adding .01% (3gm) geosynthetics `the results are:

Table4.3- Proctor Test Result with 0.1% Geosynthetic

Graph 4.3- Corresponding to 0.1% of Geosynthetic

Cont
ainer
no.
%age
of
water
Wt.
of
Mou
ld
W1 W
2
Densi
ty
(kg/m
3
)
Moistur
e
Content
in %
M.D.D Wt. of
soil
requir
ed for
Test(i
n
Gms)
Water
Requir
ed for
Test
(in
ml.)
OM
C
Triaxial
Apparat
us
(Strengt
h Kpa)
4
5%
4.03
3
0.0
25
.0
23
1946.
3
8.6(.08
6)
1792.17(1.
792)
131.26 11.28 97.0
7
270
2 10% 4.13
4
0.0
31
.0
29
2047.
78
6.8(.06
8)
1917.3(1.9
17)
140.44 12.07 82.1
3
282
12 15% 4.12
1
0.0
36
.0
32
2034.
73
12.5(.0
125
1808.6(1.8
080
132.46 16.55 206.
9
277
16 20% 4.08
0
.02
9
.0
27
1987.
55
7.4(.07
4)
1850.55(1.
850)
135.54 10.03 74.2
2
265


Graph 4.4- Strength Parameters after adding 0.1% of Geosynthetic









After adding 0.2% Geosynthetic the results are:
Table 4.4- Proctor Test Results with 0.2% Geosynthetic
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 1 2 3 4
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

(
k
p
a
)

Deformation (mm)
Strength Parameters after adding 0.1%
geosynthetics
Strength (Kpa)


Graph 4.5- Strength Parameters after adding 0.2% of Geosynthetic
Contai
ner no.
%a
ge
of
wat
er
Wt.
of
Mo
uld
W1 W
2
Dry
Dens
ity
Moist
ure
Conte
nt
M.D.D Wt.
of
soil
requi
red
for
Test(i
n
Gms)
Water
Requi
red
For
Test(i
n ml.)
O
MC
Triaxia
l
Appar
atus
(streng
th
Kpa)
115 5 3.82
3
0.0
43
.0
41
1735.
59
4.6 1659.17(1.
659)
121.5
2
5.59 25.
17
295
24 10 4.03
4
0.0
42
.0
40
1947.
4
4.7 1859.9(1.8
59)
136.1
7
6.40 30.
08
310
35 15 4.13
7
0.0
39
.0
37
2050.
79
5.12 1950.9(1.9
50)
142.8
3
7.31 37.
44
304
1 20 4.07
8
.05
4
.0
51
1992.
5
5.5 1888.6(1.8
880)
138.1
4
7.59 41.
77
287

Graph 4.6- Strength Parameters after adding 0.2% of Geosynthetic


After adding .04% (12gm) of Geosynthetic results are :

Table 4.5.- Proctor Test Result with 0.4% Geosynthetic



0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

(
k
p
a
)

Deformation (mm)
Strength Parameters after adding 0.2%
geosynthetics
Strength (Kpa)

Cont
ainer
no.

%a
ge
of
wat
er
Wt.
of
Mou
ld
W1 W2 Density Moistur
e
Content
M.D.D Wt. of
soil
require
d for
Test(in
Gms)
Water
Require
d For
Test(in
ml.)
O.M.
C
Triaxial
Apparat
us
(strengt
h Kpa)
2 6 4.05
1
.03
2
0.03
0
1946.4
6
6.2 1849.7(1.84
9)
135.4 8.3 52.06 400
1 10 4.29
0
.02
4
0.02
2
4.016 8.3 2035.4(2.03
5)
149.06 12.37 102.6
9
418
12 14 4.14
7
.04
4
0.04
2
3.968 4.54 1972.08(1.9
72)
144.44 6.48 29.41
2
406
10 18 4.13
2
.03
4
o.03
2
3.905 5.8 1933.6(1.93
3)
141.59 8.21 47.63 384

Graph 4.7 Corresponding to 0.4% of Geosynthetic


Graph 4.8- Strength Parameters after adding 0.4% of Geosynthetic









0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

(
k
p
a
)

Deformation (mm)
Strength Parameters after adding 0.4%
geosynthetics
Strength (Kpa)
After Adding .06% geosynthetic results are:

Table 4.6- Proctor Test Results with 0.6% Geosynthetic



Graph 4.9 Corresponding to 0.6% of Geosynthetic

Co
ntai
ner
no.
%ag
e of
wate
r
Wt.
of
Moul
d
W1 W2 Densit
y
Moist
ure
Conte
nt
M.D.D Wt. of
soil
required
for
Test(in
Gms)
Water
Requi
red
For
Test(i
n ml.)
O.M.
C
Triaxial
Apparatus
(strength
kpa)
16 5 3.890 0.0
26
.024 1796.8
2
7.69 1668.51(1.66
8)
122.181 9.35 71.40 450
3 10 4.094 .02
6
.024 2007.6
2
7.69 1864.2(1.864
)
136.53 10.5 274.3
4
470
4 15 4.051 0.0
27
0.02
3
1964 14.8 1710.8(1.710
)
125.25 18.5 79.79 455
2 20 3.975 0.0
44
.036 1864.0
8
18.18 1579.7(1.579
)
115.71 20.8 378.4
0
442

Graph 4.10- Strength Parameters after adding 0.6% of Geosynthetic



4.4 Comparative statement.
5% 10% 15% 20%
Maximum Dry Density(parent soil) 1.6643 1.8583 1.9709 fails
MDD usinggeosynthetic (0.01%) 1.7920 1.9173 1.808 1.850
MDD usinggeosynthetic (0.02%) 1.659 1.859 1.950 1.888
MDD usinggeosynthetic(0.04%) 1.8492.035 1.972 1.933
MDD usinggeosynthetic(0.06%) 1.668 1.7108 1.864 1.579


5% 10% 15% 20%
Optimum moisture cont. (parent soil) 23.816 26.58 39.04 fails
OMC of geosynthetic (0.01%) 97.07 82.13 206.9 74.2
OMC of geosynthetic (0.02%) 25.71 30.08 37.44 41.70
OMC of geosynthetic(0.04%) 52.06 102.6 29.419 47.84
OMC of geosynthetic(0.06%) 71.4 274.3 79.79 378.49










0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 1 2 3 4 5
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

(
k
p
a
)

Deformation (mm)
Strength Parameters after adding 0.6%
geosynthetics
Strength (Kpa)
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
On the basis of present experimental study, the following conclusions are drawn:
1.THE Value of cohesion increases due to inclusion of fibre. The variation of cohesion with
percentage of fiber content is observed to be non linear.the value obtained for cohesion
indicates that soil obtained is of very stiff nature.
2.THE Shear strength of the soil is improved due to the addition of the fibre.upto some extent
shear strength increases considerably and later Small reduction is observed.
3. THE ADDITION Of fibre results in reducing the consolidation settlement of clayey soil .it
had an insignificant effect on the soil characteristics.
4.fibre significantly reduced the extent and distribution of cracks due to desiccation .it
improves the strength behavior of unsaturated clayey soils and can potentially reduce ground
improvement costs by adopting this method.
5.the most important point is the environmental concern regarding the effects of waste
material in soil and the problems and threats that is related to their excessive usuage and
disposal.this gives an effective solution to waste treatment of soil.
6. 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 well as energy.
Based on direct shear test on soil sample- 1, with fiber reinforcement of 0.01%, 0.2%,0.4%
and 0.6%, the increase in strength was found to beput the values .












BIBLIOGRAPHY
SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING : DR KR ARORA
Soil mechanics and foundations: Dr.bcpunimia, akjain
Soil testing for engineers: S MITTAL
International geosynthetic s society website
Geosynthetica.net
Geosynthetics from Wikipedia