CONTENTS

 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 AIM OF PROJECT
 LITERATURE REVIEW
 METHODOLOGY ADOPTED
 RESULTS
 PROGRESS OF PROJECT
 EXPECTED OUTCOME
 SCHEDULE OF THE PROJECT

ABSTRACT
In many situations, industrial and
infrastructural projects are considered on soft
and weak soil of low bearing capacity. Under
these circumstances, the geotechnical
engineers normally opt for a suitable ground
improvement technique, to improve bearing
capacity and reduce settlements. In these
situations, use of Geosynthetics has been
proven. But, use of Geosynthetics is not cost
effective. Geosynthetics gives tensile strength
to the soil, which is very poor in tension.
If a replacement is found for this type of
geosynthetics material, which can be of low
cost and easily available then it proves to be
economical. For this purpose, an emptied
cement bag made out of polymeric material can
be used as a geosynthetic material. Improved
bearing capacity can be expected when a
emptied cement bags are used as a reinforcing
and stabilizing material to the various soils. A
detoriated emptied cement bag is used as a
stabilizing material to the cohesive soil.
Cohesive soils have less density, less load
bearing capacity. So, expansive soils are
stabilized using emptied cement bags as a
stabilizing material. The load bearing capacity
and density are found to be increased when an
emptied cement bag is used as a stabilizing
material.
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
• SOIL REINFORCEMENT:
In a modern context, reinforced soil has
become a viable and cost-effective technique
only over the last 30 years. This was brought
about by the development of geosynthetic
reinforcements engineers from strong and
durable polymers. These geosynthetic
reinforcements enable substantial tensile loads
to be supported at defined deformations over
extended design lives. These geotextiles are
used as reinforcement to the non cohesive soils
and stablilize the cohesive soils.
BENEFITS OF REINFORCED SOIL
 Reinforced soil is a very cost-effective
technique compared to other construction
techniques. The major benefits of reinforced
soil are:

• The inclusion of reinforcement in soil

improves the shear resistance of the soil
thereby improving its structural capability.
• The inclusion of reinforcement enables
the use of poorer quality soils to be used
as structural components.
Land acquisition can be kept to a minimum
because reinforced structures can be made
steeper than would otherwise be possible. SOIL
STABILIZATION
 • Soil stabilization is a general term for
anyphysical,chemical,biologicalor
combined method of changing a natural
soil to meet an engineering purpose
Improvements include weight bearing
capacities etc,.
Stabilizing soils is an extremely cost effective
method of converting poor quality soil into a
strong impermeable medium. A technique has
become viable to use strong and durable
polypropylene material for the stabilization of
the soil.
BENEFITS OF STABILIZED SOIL
The major benefits of stabilized soil are:

• Saves money.
• Saves time.
 • Saves environmental impact.
• Saves wastes.

The materials used for stablizing are easily

available.
Geotextiles are used as reinforcement in
the soil, which is poor in compression but good
in tension. The action is similar to that of steel
bars in a reinforced concrete slab.
AIM OF PROJECT
1.TO REINFORCE SOIL USING
EMPTIED CEMENT BAGS AS A
REINFORCING MATERIAL.
2.TO STABILIZE THE COHESIVE
SOILS USING DETORIATED
EMPTIED CEMENT BAG AS A
STABILIZING MATERIAL.
LITERATURE REVIEW
• 1) Ajay Kumar Agarwal- “Effect of waste
synthetic bag pieces for reinforcement of soil”,
FEBRUARY 2015.

Expansive soils have a tendency for volume

changes due to change in moisture content and
exhibits very low bearing capacity. Stabilization of
such soil by waste cement bags is used commonly. To
improve the bearing capacity of soil they are
reinforced with waste synthetic bags.

Synthetic pieces were obtained from the

synthetic cement bag, which are made of strong and
flexible cast polypropylene. These empty cement
bags were washed with clean running water and dried
at room temperature, were cut into the pieces of
 various sizes and are used for the reinforcement of
soil.

2) V. Ramana Murthy- “Introduction to ground

improvement engineering using cement
bags” ,DECEMBER 2013.
The soil bags are currently being explored for their
use to improve bearing capacity of footings besides
emergency works.
This study revealed that the ultimate bearing
capacity of sand and clay beds is increased by 2-4 times.

3) Ajjarapu Sreerama Rao- “Jute geotextile

application in Kakinada port area”, MARCH
1988.
The use of geotextiles in ground improvement is
too well known to be emphasized here. One of the most
common uses of geotextiles has been in the construction
and rehabilitation of both permanent and temporary
roadways.Geotextiles are particularly effective where
 roads are constructed over weak subgrade soils, having
CBR value less than 2.0.

4) Koutsourais,M.,Sandri.- “Soil Interaction

Characteristics of Geotextiles and
geogrids”, 2000.
Being produced from natural resources,
geotextiles are eco-friendly. Since synthetic
geotextiles are expensive in India, cheaper
substitutes like cement bags have become
more popular.

5) Koerner.R.M. “Designing with

Geosynthetics”,Prentice Hall,
Eaglewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1999.
A mix has been designed to improve the
bearing capacity of soil by using waste
synthetic bag pieces.
 Gray D.H –“Behaviour of fabric versus
fibre reinforced sand”, 1986, Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, 804-820.
An experimental program was undertaken to
investigate the effects of discrete short
polypropylene fiber (PP-fiber) on the strength and
mechanical behavior of clayey soil.
7) Aiban, S.A., -“A study of sand stabilization in
Eastern Saudi Arabia”,1994, Engineering
Geology, 65-97.
Improvement of desired properties like
bearing capacity, shear strength can be
undertaken by a variety of soil stabilization
techniques.

8) Shah, S.P., - “Do fibres increase the

tensile strength of sand”, ACI
Materials Journal, 595-602.
 The use of Polyproplene Fibres
increases the tensile strength and bearing
capacity of the soil.
9) Ranjan G., Vasan R.M., Charan
H.D., -“Behaviour of fibre reinforced
sand”, Geotextiles and
Geomembranes, 1994, 555-565.

The residual strength of cement–

fiber soil specimens increases with
increased fiber content.
10) Yetimogula T., Salbas - “A study on
shear strength of sand reinforced with
fibres”, Geotextiles and
Geomembranes , 2003, 103-110timoglu
T., Salbas - “A study on shear strength
of sand.
 Geotextiles has been in the
construction and rehabilitation of both permanent
and temporary roadways.

WOVEN SACKS
• The Woven Sacks are highly demanded in
various industries such as pharmaceuticals,
fertilizers, sugar, polymers, agro and
others for the packaging of goods in big
quantities.
• These sacks are manufactured using
laminated polypropylene and are able to
survive while rough filling, conveying and
loading conditions.
CEMENT BAGS
Cement bags are innovative and cost-effective
packaging concept with light weight cement bags.

• The laminated Polypropylene bags

have special prolonged shelf that result in
better resistant to humid conditions.
 • Cement bags have high strength
along with increased tear resistance.
Hence, these bags survive rough handling
situation with practically no broken bags
during filling, conveying, loading and
transportation.
In well shape of bags facilitates easy
handling, compact storage, and efficient
transportation. It is equipped with valve that
facilitates easy filling.

ADVANTAGES OF CEMENT BAGS

• Bags are cheap and easy to acquire.
• The materials inside cement bags can be
various construction wastes, such as
crushed concrete, asphalt and tile wastes.
Thus contribute greatly to the recycling of
waste materials.
 • No special construction equipment is
required.
Less noise and vibrations are produced during
construction. In comparison to the pile driving
method, that is commonly used in soft/weak
foundation reinforcement.

CHARACTERISTICS OF
CEMENT BAGS
• Much greater bursting strength.
• Good Tensile strength.
• Resistance to tearing.
• Reusable.
• Can be air permeable and moisture,
pollutants, bacteria, mildew and oil
resistant.
 • Less expensive.
• Easily available

METHODOLOGY ADOPTED
• STAGE-1: (FOR COHESIONLESS
SOILS)
• The soil properties are determined by
conducting various basic tests on it.
• The soil is tested for California bearing ratio.
• The properties of emptied cement bags are
determined by conducting various tests on
them.
• Then the soil is reinforced with emptied
cement bags as a Geosynthetic material..
Then an increase is expected in the shear strength
parameters and California bearing ratio value.
 • A comparison is drawn on the results
of tests done on soil with and without
using emptied cement bags.

STAGE-2: (FOR COHESIVE SOILS)

• The clay properties are determined by
conducting various basic tests(like
compaction, differential free swell, liquid
limit and plastic limit) on it.
• Clay is tested for UCC test and direct
shear test.
• A detoriated emptied cement bag material
is added in the soil in different
proportions and tested for its engineering
properties.
• Enhancement in engineering properties
of soil is expected.
DETERMINATION OF
PROPERTIES OF
COHESIONLESS SOILS
S.NO TEST PROPERTY

1 Sieve Analysis Grain size dist

determination of

2 Direct Shear Test Shear strength param

angle of f

3 Compaction Test OMC & Maximu

4 CBR Test CBR v

DETERMINATION OF THE SHEAR

STRENGTH
PARAMETERS
Shear strength parameters can be determined by
conducting direct shear test.
c = 0 kg/sq. cm
ɸ = 36°
 0.8
Shear strength (kg/sq.cm)

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Normal stress (kg/sq.cm)

 DETERMINATION OF GRAIN
SIZE DISTRIBUTION & TYPE
OF SOIL
• Grain size distribution and type of soil can be
determined by conducting sieve analysis test.
• Co-efficient of uniformity=6.5
• Co-efficient of curvature=1.38
• As per the IS specifications, the given soil is
well graded sand(SW).

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

CURVE
 120

100

80

60
% Fines

40

20

0
0.01 0.1 1 10
-20
Sieve size(mm)

MODIFIED COMPACTION
TEST
 1.7

1.69
Dry density(g/cc)

1.68

1.67

1.66

1.65

1.64

1.63
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Water content(%)
 DETERMINATION OF
OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT AND MAXIMUM
DRY DENSITY
 Optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density of the soil can be
determined by conducting modified
compaction test.
1)Optimum moisture content=6.41%
2)Maximum dry density=1.695g/cc
 CBR TEST WITHOUT
CEMENT BAGS

250

200
Force(kN)

150

100

50

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Penetration(mm)
DETERMINATION OF
PROPERTIES OF AN EMPTIED
CEMENT BAG
S.NO. TEST RESUL
1. Thickness test Thickness of
cement bag is de
2. Puncture shear test Puncture sh
determin
3. Tensile test Tensile stren
determin
 DIRECT SHEAR TEST
USING EMPTIED CEMENT
BAG
Shear strength parameters can be determined by
conducting direct shear test with emptied cement bags as a
reinforcing material.
Shear strength parameters are found to be increased
when a emptied cement bag is used.
c = 0 kg/sq. cm
ɸ = 42°
 COMPARISON OF DIRECT
SHEAR TEST WITH AND
WITHOUT CEMENT BAGS

DIRECT SHEAR TEST WITHOUT CEMENT

BAGS:
• c= 0 kg/sq.cm
• ɸ = 36°
DIRECT SHEAR TEST WITH CEMENT
BAGS:
• c= 0 kg/sq.cm
• ɸ = 42°
 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO
TEST USING EMPTIED
CEMENT BAG AT A DISTANCE
OF H/2
• CBR value at 2.5mm penetration=44.34%
• CBR value at 5mm penetration=56.75%
CBR TEST USING EMPTIED
CEMENT BAG AT A
DISTANCE OF H/3
• CBR value at 2.5mm penetration=48.2%
CBR value at 5mm penetration=63.72%
 COMPARISON OF CBR TEST
WITH CEMENT BAGS AND
WITHOUT CEMENT BAGS
CBR TEST WITHOUT CEMENT BAGS:
• CBR value at 2.5mm penetration=22.46%
• CBR value at 5mm penetration=27.85%
CBR TEST WITH CEMENT BAGS AT A
DISTANCE OF H/2:
• CBR value at 2.5mm penetration=44.34%
• CBR value at 5mm penetration=56.75%
CBR TEST WITH CEMENT BAGS AT A
DISTANCE OF H/3:
• CBR value at 2.5mm penetration=48.2%
• CBR value at 5mm penetration=63.72%
STABILIZATION OF
COHESIVE SOIL USING
DETORIATED
POLYPROPLENE MATERIAL
DETERMINATION OF
PROPERTIES OF COHESIVE
SOIL
S.NO TEST RESUL
1 Differential Free Swell Test DFS value is de
2 Liquid limit and Plastic limit Test Liquid limit and P
is determi
3 Compaction Test OMC & Maxim
density
4 Direct Shear Test Cohesion & Angl
5 Unconfined Compressive Strength Unconfined Co
Strength and U
Cohesio
DETERMINATION OF
OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT AND MAXIMUM
DRY DENSITY
 Optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density of the clay can
be determined by conducting
compaction test.
1)Optimum moisture content=14%
2)Maximum dry density=2.0g/cc
LIQUID LIMIT AND
PLASTIC LIMIT
 The Liquid limit and Plastc limit
values are determined by conducting
Liquid limit test and Plastic limit test.
RESULT:
• The liquid limit for the clay sample is
42%.
The plastic limit for the clay sample is
26.93%.
DIFFERENTIAL FREE
SWELL TEST
 The differential free swell value can
be determined by conducting
differential free swell test.
RESULT:
• The differential free swell value for
the clay sample is 14.28%(Less than
20).
As the free swell index is less than 20, it can
be concluded that the degree of swelling is
low.
DIRECT SHEAR TEST WITHOUT
CEMENT BAGS
 Shear strength parameters can be
determined by conducting direct shear
test.
RESULT:
c= 0.5 kg/sq.cm
ɸ= 0°

DIRECT SHEAR TEST WITH

POLYPROPYLENE MATERIAL
 Direct shear strength parameters can
be determined by conducting test
with emptied cement bags as a
stabilizing material.
  Shear strength parameters are
found to be increased when a
emptied cement bag is used.
RESULT:
c = 0.8 kg/sq. cm
ɸ = 18°