http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 886 [email protected]
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) Volume 8, Issue 10, October 2017, pp. 886–895, Article ID: IJMET_08_10_096
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=8&IType=10
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
ESTIMATION OF BEARING CAPACITY OF
BLACK COTTON SOIL USING ROCK DUST
AND GEO-TEXTILE SHEET: AN
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
N. Vijay Kumar
Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, K L University,
Vaddeswaram, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
SS.Asadi
Associate Dean Academics & Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
K L University, Vaddeswaram, Guntur,Andhra Pradesh, India
A.V.S. Prasad
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, K L University,
Vaddeswaram, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
ABSTRACT
While increasing of population its effects on reduction of available land as its
decrease softness of soil and become weak due to construction of heavy buildings and
civil engineering structures etc. soil is a natural resource and it is widely available on
the land and in civil engineering structures have to be carried out on weak or less
bearing soils. Owing such soil poor shear strength and high swelling and
enlargement, a great diversity of ground modification techniques such as soil
stabilization and reinforcement are employed to improve mechanical behavior of
soils, thereby escalate the reliability of construction. The meticulous stabilization of
substructure soils constitutes an increasingly important issue in the present in civil
engineering world. This present study carried out with intension to evaluate the effects
of quarry dust and Geotextile on the geotechnical properties of the locally available
expansive soil from Hyderabad city. Tests which are to be carried out on the sample
dispense with specific gravity, compaction, CBR. These tests are to be conducted at by
adding 5%, 10%, 15% of quarry dust and placing Geotextile sheet at the depth of
50mm, 100mm, and 150mm from the top.
Keywords: Geosynthetic materials BC soil, Particle size Distribution, California
bearing ratio.
N. Vijay Kumar, SS.Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 887 [email protected]
Cite this Article: N. Vijay Kumar, SS.Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad, Estimation of
Bearing Capacity of Black Cotton Soil Using Rock Dust and Geo-Textile Sheet: An
Experimental Study, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology
8(10), 2017, pp. 886–895.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=8&IType=10
1. INTRODUCTION
In Civil engineering practice the load from super structure is to be transferred to a soil layer
through footing that is capable to withstand this load with adequate factor of safety under
tolerable settlement. There are various sub soils such as soft marine clay, new born sandy area
by dunes, reclaimed land where in adequately strong layer may not be available at shallow
depth. It becomes therefore necessary to transfer the load at a great depth where strong
bearing layer is available by adopting pile foundation, pier foundation, cassion foundation.
This method of insertion of structural component into the soil medium is highly expensive
and installation causes many practical complications. If this soft soil medium is not too deep,
stone columns, lime piles and other stabilization techniques such as grouting, vibro-flotation,
compaction piles are also in common. These methods are also proved to be uneconomical,
time consuming and laborious.With the investigation made on use of geosynthetics for the
purpose of improvement of sub-soil properties, soil reinforcement by geotextile,
geomembrane, geogrids and geocomposits has gained momentum. It is claimed that use of
geosynthetics as soil reinforcement has many advantages over conventional soil improvement
method. In that it is less expensive, easy to construct and highly effective in improving the
soil properties Due to reasons stated above, research work on reinforced soil in different
disciplines of geotechnical construction has been under taken all over the world. (Dembiki et
al (1988), Haroon et al (1990), Ingar (1990). In our country, 9excellent research work has
been under taken since last four decades Murthy and Shridharan 1988, Verma and Char 1986.
2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To study the effect of quarry dust column encased with geosynthetic in improving the
strength characteristics of black cotton soil.
2. To study the load bearing capacity of geosynthetic encased quarry dust columns with
single columns and predict the settlement reduction factor of reinforced ground with
the un reinforced ground.
3. Soil is good in compression and weak in tensile strength and even soil don’t have
tensile strength naturally therefore the weakness of soil takes place to reduce the
weakness of soil reinforcement is made and its improved strength characteristics is
studied.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1Materials used
3.1.1 Stone dust
The stone dust is a waste product produced in granite industry while cutting huge granite
rocks to the desired shapes. About 3000 metric ton of granite dust/slurry is produced per day
as a by- product during manufacturing of granite tiles and slabs from the raw blocks. The
granite cutting industries are dumping these wastes in nearby pits or open lands. This leads to
serious environmental pollution and occupation of vast area of land especially after the slurry
dries up. Stabilization of expansive soils using admixtures controls the adverse effects on the
Estimation of Bearing Capacity of Black Cotton Soil Using Rock Dust and Geo-Textile Sheet: An
Experimental Study
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 888 [email protected]
foundations and structures. Experimental studies have been carried out in the laboratory by
adding admixtures like stone dust to the expansive soils at different proportions. This study
envisages the effect of stone dust on compaction characteristics (OMC & MDD) and
California bearing ratio (CBR) of black cotton soil and 5%, 10%, and 15% stone dust by
weight of dry soil.
Figure 1.2.1 stone dust at Railapur village.
3.1.2 Geosynthetic
The investigation made on use of geosynthetic for the purpose of improvement of sub-soil
properties, soil reinforcement by Geotextile, Geomembrane, Geogrids and Geocomposits has
gained momentum. It is claimed that use of geosynthetic as soil reinforcement has many
advantages over conventional soil improvement method. In that it is less expensive, easy to
construct and highly effective in improving the soil properties.
Figure 1.5.1 Geotextile
3.2 Process of the methodology
3.2.1 Determination of (California Bearing Ratio) CBR of soil in re-moulded condition
In this the following equipments are used Compression machine, Proving ring, Dial gauge,
Timer Sampling tube, Split mould, Verniercaliper, Balances
Figure 1 CBR Test Setup.
N. Vijay Kumar, SS.Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 889 [email protected]
The dry density for remoulding should be either the field density or if the sub grade is to
be compacted, at the maximum dry density value obtained from the Proctor Compaction test.
If it is proposed to carry out the CBR test on an unsoaked specimen, the moisture content for
remoulding should be the same as the equilibrium moisture content which the soil is likely to
reach subsequent to the construction of the road. If it is proposed to carry out the CBR test on
a soaked specimen, the moisture content for remoulding should be at the optimum and soaked
under water for 96 hours.Soil Sample–The material used in the remoulded specimen should
all pass through a 19 mm IS sieve. Allowance for larger material may be made by replacing it
by an equal amount of material which passes a 19 mm sieve but is retained on a 4.75 mm IS
sieve. This procedure is not satisfactory if the size of the soil particles is predominantly
greater than 19 mm. The specimen may be compacted statically or dynamically.
3.2.2 Compaction by Dynamic Method
For dynamic compaction, a representative sample of soil weighing approximately 4.5 kg or
more for fine grained soils and 5.5 kg or more for granular soil shall be taken and mixed
thoroughly with water. If the soil is to be compacted to the maximum dry density at the
optimum water content determined in accordance with light compaction or heavy compaction,
the exact mass of soil required is to be taken and the necessary quantity of water added so that
the water content of soil sample is equal to the determined optimum water content. The mould
with extension collar attached is clamped to the base plate. The spacer disc is inserted over the
base plate and a disc of coarse filter paper placed on the top of the spacer disc. The soil water
mixture is compacted into the mould in accordance with the methods specified in light
compaction test or heavy compaction test.
3.2.3 Step by Step processing of Methodology
1. The mould containing the specimen with the base plate in position but the top face
exposed is placed on the lower plate of the testing machine.
2. Surcharge weights, sufficient to produce an intensity of loading equal to the weight of
the base material and pavement is placed on the specimen.
3. To prevent upheaval of soil into the hole of the surcharge weights, 2.5 kg annular
weight is placed on the soil surface prior to seating the penetration plunger after which
the remainder of the surcharge weight is placed.
4. The plunger is to be seated under a load of 4 kg so that full contact is established
between the surface of the specimen and the plunger.
5. The stress and strain gauges are then set to zero. Load is applied to the penetration
plunger so that the penetration is approximately 1.25 mm per minute.
6. Readings of the load are taken at penetrations of 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 4.0, 5.0,
7.5, 10.0 and 12.5 mm.
7. The plunger is then raised and the mould detached from the loading equipment.
3.2.4 Load- Penetration Curve
The load penetration curve is plotted taking penetration value on x-axis and Load values on
Y-axis. Corresponding to the penetration value at which the CBR is desired, corrected load
value is taken from the load-penetration curve and the CBR calculated as follows California
bearing ratio = (PT/PS) x100 Where PT = Corrected unit (or total) test load corresponding to
the chosen penetration curve, and PS = Unit (or total) standard load for the same depth of
penetration as for PS taken from standard code.The CBR values are usually calculated for
penetration of 2.5 mm and 5 mm. The CBR value is reported correct to the first decimal place.
Estimation of Bearing Capacity of Black Cotton Soil Using Rock Dust and Geo-Textile Sheet: An
Experimental Study
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 890 [email protected]
Figure 2 Preparation of Geotextile.
Figure 3 mixing of stone dust with BC soil.
Figure 4 BC soil with 15% of stone dust.
Figure 5 Testing of CBR with Geotextile.
N. Vijay Kumar, SS.Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 891 [email protected]
4. RESULTS &DISCUSSION
Table 1 Compaction test of Soil Sample
s.no Description Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4
1 Weight of mould +wet soil(w2)(gm) 3610 3762 3860 3800
2 Weight of wet soil(w2-w1) (gm) 1690 1842 1940 1880
3 Empty mould no 1 2 3 4
4 Weight of empty container (gm) 33.14 33.30 32.66 29.05
5 Weight of container + wet soil 53.44 58.29 68.41 51.90
6 Weight of container + dry soil 51.92 56.01 64.20 48.83
7 Weight of water(5-6) gm 1.52 2.28 4.21 3.07
8 Weight of dry soil(6-4) gm 18.78 22.71 31.54 19.78
9 Water content =(7*100/8) % 8.09 10.03 13.34 15.52
10 Wet density =2/v in g/cc 1.69 1.84 1.94 1.88
11 Dry density=10/(1+w/100) in g/cc 1.56 1.67 1.71 1.62
Optimum moisture content = 12% Maximum dry density = 1.71 g/cc
Figure 6 Compaction graph for Moisture content (x-axis) v/s Dry density (y-axis).
Table 2 California bearing ratio of soil sample
S.no Penetration dial
reading
Penetration in
(mm)
Proving ring dial readings in
divisions Load in (kg)
1 0 0 0 0
2 50 0.5 5.1×5 =25.5 21.80
3 100 1 9.2×5 =46 39.32
4 150 1.5 10.8 ×5=54 46.16
5 200 2 11.3×5 =56.5 48.30
6 250 2.5 12×05 =60 51.29
7 300 3 13.2× 5=66 56.89
8 350 3.5 14.2× 5=71 61.20
9 400 4 14.9×5 =74.5 64.22
10 450 4.5 15.3×5 =76.5 65.94
11 500 5 16.2×5 =81 69.25
12 550 5.5 16.7×5 =83.5 71.39
Estimation of Bearing Capacity of Black Cotton Soil Using Rock Dust and Geo-Textile Sheet: An
Experimental Study
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 892 [email protected]
13 600 6 17.1×5 =85.5 73.10
14 650 6.5 17.6×5 =88 75.23
15 700 7 18.3×5 =91.5 78.23
16 750 7.5 19.4×5 =97 82.93
17 800 8 20.1×5 =100.5 85.92
18 850 8.5 20.9×5 =104.5 89.34
1}. CBR value of soil at 2.50 mm penetration = ( × 100) = 3.74
2}. CBR value of soil at 5 mm penetration = ( × 100)= 3.36.. CBR value of the given
soil is 3.74.
Table 3 Properties of BC soil mixed with stone dust
S.no Property Percentage replacement of stone dust
0 % 5% 10% 15%
1 Liquid limit 58 47 45 42
2 Plastic limit 29 32 30 35
3 Plasticity index 29 15 15 7
4 OMC (%) 15 15 14 12
5 MDD (KN/m3) 1.71 1.82 1.95 2.14
6 CBR (%) 3.74 4.80 5.67 6.08
Figure 7 Various proportions of stone dust used and their CBR value.
Table 4 Properties of BC soil mixed with Geo-textile at varying depths
Sl. no Property Geo textile at various depths from top
0 mm 10 mm 15 mm 20 mm
1 Liquid limit 58 58 58 58
2 Plastic limit 29 29 29 29
3 Plasticity index 29 29 29 29
4 OMC (%) 15 15 15 15
5 MDD (KN/m3) 1.71 1.71 1.71 1.71
6 CBR (%) 3.74 7.92 7.33 6.99
N. Vijay Kumar, SS.Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 893 [email protected]
Figure 8 Variations in the CBR value by placing Geo textile sheet at various depths.
Figure 9 CBR moulds with only black cotton soil, stone dust with BC soil, and geo textile with BC
soil
Table 5 Comparison of BC soil when mixed with stone dut and Geotextile
Sl no. Increase of CBR values when BC soil added with stone dust and Geotextile
1 Black cotton
soil
BC soil
+5% stone
dust
BC soil +
10%of
stone dust
BC
soil+15%
of stone
dust
BC soil
with
Geotextile
at depth of
20 mm
BC soil
with
Geotextile
at depth of
15 mm
BC soil
with
Geotextile
at depth of
10 mm
2 3.74 4.80 5.67 6.09 6.99 7.33 7.92
Figure 10 Variations in CBR value by replacing it with stone dust in (5%, 10% and 15%) by dry
weight and by placing Geo textile sheet at (50mm, 100mm and 150mm) deep.
Estimation of Bearing Capacity of Black Cotton Soil Using Rock Dust and Geo-Textile Sheet: An
Experimental Study
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 894 [email protected]
5. CONCLUSION
These are the California bearing ratio test results obtained from tests conducted on black
cotton with replacement of quarry dust and placing geo textile sheet.
1. With the addition of 5% of quarry dust by weight the C.B.R. value for plain soil is
increased from 3.74% to 4.80%.
2. With the addition of 10% of quarry dust by weight the C.B.R. value for plain soil is
increased from 3.74% to 5.67%.
3. With the addition of 15% of quarry dust by weight the C.B.R. value for plain soil is
increased from 3.74% to 6.08%.
4. With the placement of a geo textile sheet at a depth of 150mm from the top of the soil
the C.B.R value for the plain soil increased from 3.74% to 6.99%.
5. With the placement of a geo textile sheet at a depth of 100mm from the top of the soil
the C.B.R value for the plain soil increased from 3.74% to 7.33%.
6. With the placement of a geo textile sheet at a depth of 50mm from the top of the soil
the C.B.R value for the plain soil increased from 3.74% to 7.92%
From the above discussion it is concluded that with the addition of 15%quarry dust for
black cotton soil the C.B.R value is increased by % and by placing the geo textile at a depth
of 50mm from the top of the soil surface the C.B.R value is increased by %.
Thus through this experimental comparison of increasing the bearing capacity of black
cotton soil using stone dust and geo textile sheet. We conclude stating that use of geo textile
greatly influences the bearing capacity of soil to required degree of extent.
REFERENCES
[1] Ahmet Demir1, et al.,(2013), An experimental study on behavior of geosynthetic
reinforced stone columns 2nd International Balkans Conference Of Civil
Engineering,BCCCE,23-25 May2013,Epoka University.
[2] Ali, K et..al (2010), Behaviour of reinforced stone columns in soft soils: an experimental
study IndianGeoTechnical conference 2010, Geotrends
[3] ChungsikYoo, A.M.ASCE (2010), Performance of Geosynthetic-Encased Stone Columns
in Embankment Construction: Numerical Investigation. A.M.ASCE1J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng.20 10.136:1148-1160
[4] Gupta.R and A. Trivedi (2010), Behavior of model circular footings on silty soils with
cellular supports.
[5] HamedNiroumand, et al.(2011), Soil Improvement by Reinforced Stone Columns Based
on Experimental Work. EJGE VOL.16[2011],BUND,L
[6] Joel Gneil,AbdelemalekBouazza (2008), Improvement of soft soils using geogrid encased
stone columns.
[7] J.A Black, Sivakumar, et al.,(2007), Reinforced Stone Columns in Weak Deposits:
Laboratory Model Study
[8] KameshwarRao et al., (2012), Comparative study of experimental and theoretical load
carrying capacity of stone column with and without encasement of geosynthetics IJAET
ISSN:2231-1963
[9] Murugesan.S and Rajagopal.K (2009), Shear load tests on stone columns with and without
geosyntheticencasement. Geotextiles and Geomembranes 24(2012) 349-358 ASCE(20),
[10] S. Murugesan and K.Rajagopal (2007), Model tests on geosynthetic-encased stone
columns. ASCE9(1),30-35
N. Vijay Kumar, SS.Asadi and A.V.S. Prasad
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 895 [email protected]
[11] Mohammed Y. et.al., (2010), Improvement of soft clays by end bearing stone columns
encased with geogrids.
[12] Mereena K.P. et.al., (2009), Triaxial compression of clay reinforced with quarry dust fibre
column
[13] Nagaraju S. S. and Mhaiskar S. Y. (2009), Experiments on use of geotextiles and
geocomposits in paved roads, IGC-90, I/section, II/article 6, P.89-92.
[14] Natrajan T. K., Murthy A.V.S.R. and Jai Bhagwan (2008), Geotextile Reinforcement in
Soils, IGC-87, Banglore, Dec.87, Vol.1, P. 335 to P.338.
[15] Parab S. R., Chodankar D. S., Shirgaunkar R. M., Fernandes M., Parab A. B., Aldonkar S.
S., Savoikar P. P. Geotubes for Beach Erosion Control in Goa International Journal of
Earth Sciences and Engineering 1013, ISSN 0974-5904, Volume 04, No 06 SPL, October
2011, P. 1013-1016.
[16] Patel N.M.; Reinforcing with A Geotextile Layer And Covering Pad, First Indian
Geotechnical Conferance on Reinforced Soil and Geotextiles (2008), P. B-3 to P. B-7,
(2008).
[17] Purkayastha and Bhaumik(2008), Performance of geogrid and geotextile below
foundation on soft soil, IGC-1988, Allahabad, Dec-88, Vol.I, P. 199 – 204
[18] Raghvendra H. B. and Krishnaswamy N.R.; Triaxial Behavior of Soil Reinforced With
Geotextile, IGC-90, I/Section, II/Art-8, P.99 to P.103.,(2008)
[19] Rao G. V, Kate J.M. and Katti A. R. (2007), Interface friction behavior of geogrids by
pullout test, IGC-90, I / section, II/article-9, P. 105-108.
Top Related