Project Report On Pavement Design

Performance evaluation of weak sub grade soil and treating the subsequent layers of the
pavement by using advanced stabilization technique
CHAPTER - 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 GENERAL
1.1 Pavement:
That with which anything is paved; a floor or covering of solid material, laid so as to
make a hard and convenient surface for travel; a paved road or sidewalk; a decorative interior
floor of tiles colored bricks.
1.2 Types of pavement:

Pavements are typically divided into the following three general categories:
1) Flexible
2) Rigid
and
3) Unpaved (gravel or dirt).
1.2.1 Flexible (Bituminous Pavements):

Flexible pavements are constructed of several layers of natural granular material
covered with one or more waterproof bituminous surface layers, and as the name imply, are
considered to be flexible. A flexible pavement will flex (bend) under the load of a tires. The
objective with the design of a flexible pavement is to avoid the excessive flexing of any
layer, failure to achieve this will result in the over stressing of a layer, which ultimately will
cause the pavement to fail. In flexible pavements, the load distribution pattern changes from
one layer to another, because the strength of each layer is different. The strongest material
(least flexible) is in the top layer and the weakest material (most flexible) is in the lowest
layer. The reason for this is that at the surface the wheel load is applied to a small area, the
result is high stress levels, deeper down in the pavement, the wheel load is applied to larger
area, and the result is lower stress levels thus enabling the use of weaker materials.
Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum
Page 1
Fig 1.1 Load distribution of flexible pavement
1.2.2 Rigid (Concrete) Pavements:

Rigid pavements are composed of a PCC surface course. Such pavements are substantially
stiffer than flexible pavements due to the high modulus of elasticity of the PCC material.
Further, these pavements can have reinforcing steel, which is generally used to reduce or
eliminate joints. The increased rigidity of concrete allows the concrete surface layer to bridge
small weak areas in the supporting layer through what is known as beam action. This allows
the placement of rigid pavements on relatively weak supporting layers, as long as the
supporting layer material particles will not be carried away by water forced up by the
pumping action of wheel loads.
Fig - 1.2 Load distribution of rigid pavement
Page 2
1.3 PAVEMENT FUNCTIONS:

The primary functions of a pavement are to:
Provide a reasonably smooth riding surface:

A smooth riding surface (Low Roughness) is essential for riding comfort, and over
the years it has become the measure of how road users perceive a road. Roughness
can arise from a number of causes, most often however it is from pavement distress
due to structural deformation.
Provide adequate surface friction (skid resistance):

In addition to a riding comfort, the other road user requirement is that of safety.
Safety, especially during wet conditions can be linked to a loss of surface friction
between the tyre and the pavement surface. A pavement must therefore provide
sufficient surface friction and texture to ensure road user safety under all conditions.
Protect the sub grade:

The supporting soil beneath the pavement is commonly referred to as the sub grade,
should it be over-stressed by the applied axle loads it will deform and lose its ability
to properly support these axle loads. Therefore, the pavement must have sufficient
structural capacity (strength and thickness) to adequately reduce the actual stresses so
that they do not exceed the strength of the sub grade. The strength and thickness
requirements of a pavement can vary greatly depending on the combination of sub
grade type and loading condition (magnitude and number of axle loads).
Provide waterproofing:
The pavement surfacing acts as a waterproofing surface that prevents the under laying
support layers including the sub grade from becoming saturated through moisture
ingress. When saturated, soil loses its ability to adequately support the applied axle
loads, which will lead to premature failure of the pavement.
Page 3
1.4 FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PERFORMANCE OF A

PAVEMENT
1.4.1 Traffic:
Traffic is the most important factor influencing pavement performance. The
performance of pavements is mostly influenced by the loading magnitude, configuration and
the number of load repetitions by heavy vehicles. The damage caused per pass to a pavement
by an axle is defined relative to the damage per pass of a standard axle load, which is defined
as an 80 KN single axle load. Thus a pavement is designed to withstand a certain number of
standard axle load repetitions (E80s) that will result in a certain terminal condition of
deterioration.
1.4.2 Moisture (water):

Moisture can significantly weaken the support strength of natural gravel materials,
especially the sub grade. Moisture can enter the pavement structure through cracks and holes
in the surface, laterally through the sub grade, and from the underlying water table through
capillary action. The result of moisture ingress is the lubrication of particles, loss of particle
interlock and subsequent particle displacement resulting in pavement failure.
1.4.3 Sub grade:

The sub grade is the underlying soil that supports the applied wheel loads. If the sub
grade is too weak to support the wheel loads, the pavement will flex excessively which
ultimately causes the pavement to fail. If natural variations in the composition of the sub
grade are not adequately addressed by the pavement design, significant differences in
pavement performance will be experienced .
1.4.4 Construction quality:

Failure
to
obtain
proper
compaction,
improper
moisture
conditions
during
construction, quality of materials, and accurate layer thickness (after compaction) all directly
affect the performance of a pavement. These conditions stress the need for skilled staff and
the importance of good inspection and quality control procedures during construction.
Page 4
1.5 NEED FOR STUDY:

It is evident from the present scenario that highways are deteriorating and the
increasing cost of pavement construction also the construction of roads on a weak sub grade
soil is a major challenge to the highways engineers to construct a stabilized pavement for
heavy wheel load configuration.
There is a need to find out some alternative to materials to improve the stabilization
point of view of the roads. Any material which contains the silicon and aluminum in
amorphous state can be a source of binding, stabilizing and improving performance of the
pavement where Geo grid adds to an added advantage for its improving its strength. Fly ash,
GGBS, Quarry dust which contains this are considered to be waste product. They are
produced abundantly in India and hence can be utilized.
An effort has been made in this study to investigate the influence of these above
products for study of the pavement.
1.6 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY:

The objectives of this experimental study are:
To explore the possibility of using locally available materials and by using Geo grid,
Fly ash, GGBS, Quarry dust in various proportions to get the best combination for the
performance of pavement.
To design the flexible pavement for the best combination of proportion obtained
which yields the best strength for pavement.
To match the CBR of red soil with the CBR of black cotton soil with the various
proportions of above mentioned materials.
Page 5
1.7 SCOPE OF WORK:

The experimental investigations on the properties of red soil and black cotton soil for
different combination of Fly ash, GGBS and Quarry dust are undertaken. The test procedures
currently available for normal soil have been used. Fly-Ash (Class F) from Raichur thermal
plant & GGBS from Bellary Jindal Steel Plant were considered as the source materials. The
interpretation of the data and the analysis are on similar lines to the standard tests conducted
on the soil such as, Specific gravity, Moisture content, Plastic limit, Liquid limit, Modified
Proctor test, CBR test.
Page 6
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents an overall background on the current knowledge in the field of
highway construction. Emphasis is on the more recent works with respect to use of Fly ash,
Ground granulated blast furnace slag, Quarry dust and Geo grids which help us to have
better evaluation of weak sub grade soil and improving subsequent layers of the pavement
by using advanced stabilization techniques.
2.2 STABIZATION MATERIALS

2.2.1 FLY ASH
Fly ash by itself has little cementatious value but in the presence of moisture it reacts
chemically and forms cementatious compounds and attributes to the improvement of strength
and compressibility characteristics of soils. It has a long history of use as an engineering
material and has been successfully employed in geotechnical applications.
Pandianet.al. (2002), Studied the effect of two types of fly ashes Raichur fly ash (Class F)
and Neyveli fly ash (Class C) on the CBR characteristics of the black cotton soil. The fly ash
content was increased from 0 to 100%. Generally the CBR/strength is contributed by its
cohesion and friction. The CBR of BC soil, which consists of predominantly of finer
particles, is contributed by cohesion. The CBR of fly ash, which consists predominantly of
coarser particles, is contributed by its frictional component. The low CBR of BC soil is
attributed to the inherent low strength, which is due to the dominance of clay fraction. The
addition of fly ash to BC soil increases the CBR of the mix up to the first optimum level due
to the frictional resistance from fly ash in addition to the cohesion from BC soil. Further
addition of fly ash beyond the optimum level causes a decrease up to 60% and then up to the
Second optimum level there is an increase. Thus the variation of CBR of fly ash-BC soil
mixes can be attributed to the relative contribution of frictional or cohesive resistance from
Page 7
fly ash or BC soil, respectively. In Neyveli fly ash also there is an increase of strength with
the increase in the fly ash content, here there will be additional puzzolonic reaction forming
cementitious compounds resulting in good binding between BC soil and fly ash particles.
2.2.2 GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNANCE SLAG

The hydraulic potential of blast furnace slag was first discovered in Germany in 1862.
In 1865, lime-activated blast furnace slag started to be produced commercially in Germany
and in 1880 GGBS was first used in combination with Portland cement (Concrete Society,
1991). In Europe, GGBS has been used for over 100 years. In North America, the history of
the use of GGBS in quality concrete dates back about 50 years (Yazdani, 2002). In Southeast
Asian countries including Mainland China and Hong Kong, GGBS was used in concrete in
around 1990. Between 1955 and 1995, about 1.1 billion tonnes of cement was produced in
Germany, about 150 million tonnes of which consisted of blast furnace slag (Geiseler et al,
1995). In China, the estimated total GGBS production was about 100 million tonnes in 2007
(Chen, 2006). It has major applications in soil stabilization and improves the properties of the
soil.
2.2.3 QUARRY DUST

Construction of pavements in expansive soil areas creates a lot of problems for civil
engineers because of its low California bearing ratio (CBR) value and alternate swell-shrink
behavior when the soil comes in contact with water. This results not only in high cost of
construction but also necessitate frequent repairing as cracks of different shapes and varying
depth are seen on these soils .There are different techniques to increase the CBR value and to
reduce the swelling pressure of soil. Stabilization using industrial wastes is one of them.
Stabilization of expansive soil has been done by addition of different types of industrial
waste. Quarry dust is another industrial wastes produced as by product during crushing of
large size stones in crusher units during production of coarse aggregates. Quarry dust has
been added to expansive soil alone (Gupta et al., 2002) or in combination with lime
(Sabat and Das 2009; Sabat, 2012) for stabilization purposes.
Page 8
2.2.4 GEO GRID

The first, and original, geogrids (called unitized or homogeneous types, or more
commonly referred to as 'punched and drawn geogrids') were invented by Dr Frank Brian
Mercer in the United Kingdom at Netlon, Ltd., and were brought in 1982 to North America
by the Tensar Corporation. A conference in 1984 was helpful in bringing geogrids to the
engineering design community. A similar type of drawn geogrid which originated in Italy by
Tenax is also available, as are products by new manufacturers in Asia.
The second category of geogrids are more flexible, textile-like geogrids using bundles
of polyethylene-coated polyester fibers
as
the
reinforcing
component.
They
were
first
developed by ICI Linear Composites LTD in the United Kingdom around 1980. This led to
the development of polyester yarn geogrids made on textile weaving machinery. In this
process hundreds of continuous fibers are gathered together to form yarns which are woven
into longitudinal and transverse ribs with large open spaces between. The cross-over are
joined by knitting or intertwining before the entire unit is protected by a subsequent
coating. Bitumen, latex,
or PVC is
the
usual coating
materials. Geosynthetics within
this
group are manufactured by many companies having various trademarked products. There are
possibly as many as 25 companies manufacturing coated yarn-type polyester geogrids on a
worldwide basis.
The third categories of geogrids are made by laser or ultrasonically bonding together
polyester or polypropylene rods or straps in a grid like pattern. Two manufacturers currently
make such geogrids.
Page 9
CHAPTER 3
MATERIAL USED FOR SOIL STABILIZATION
3.1 FLY ASH
Fly ash, also known as flue-ash, is one of the residues generated in combustion, and
comprises the fine particles that rise with the flue gases. Ash which does not rise is
termed bottom ash. In an industrial context, fly ash usually refers to ash produced during
combustion of coal. Fly ash is generally captured by electrostatic precipitators or other
particle filtration equipment before the flue gases reach the chimneys of coal-fired power
plants, and together with bottom ash removed from the bottom of the furnace is in this case
jointly known as coal ash. Depending upon the source and makeup of the coal being burned,
the components of fly ash vary considerably, but all fly ash includes substantial amounts
of silicon
dioxide (SiO 2 )
(both amorphous and crystalline)
and calcium oxide(CaO),
both
being endemic ingredients in many coal-bearing rock strata.

Toxic constituents depend upon the specific coal bed makeup, but may include one or
more of the following elements or substances found in trace quantities (up to hundreds
ppm): arsenic, beryllium, boron, cadmium, chromium, chromium, cobalt, lead,manganese,
mercury, molybdenum, selenium, strontium, thallium and vanadium, along
with dioxins and PAH compounds
3.1.1 CLASS F FLY ASH

The
burning
of
harder,
older
anthracite
and
bituminous coal typically produces Class F fly ash. This fly

ash
is pozzolanic in
20% lime (CaO).
nature,
Possessing
and
contains
pozzolanic
less
properties,
than
the
glassy silica and alumina of Class F fly ash requires a

cementing agent, such as Portland cement, quicklime, or
hydrated lime, with the presence of water in order to react
and produce cementitious compounds. Alternatively the addition of a chemical activator such
as sodium silicate(water glass) to a Class F ash can lead to the formation of a geopolymer.
Page 10
3.1.2 SOIL STABILIZATION

Soil stabilization is the permanent physical and chemical alteration of soils to enhance
their physical properties. Stabilization can increase the shear strength of a soil and/or control
the shrink-swell properties of a soil, thus improving the load-bearing capacity of a sub-grade
to support pavements and foundations. Stabilization can be used to treat a wide range of subgrade materials from expansive clays to granular materials. Stabilization can be achieved
with a variety of chemical additives including lime, fly ash, and Portland cement. Proper
design and testing is an important component of any stabilization project. This allows for the
establishment of design criteria as well as the determination of the proper chemical additive
and admixture rate to be used to achieve the desired engineering properties. Benefits of the
stabilization process can include: Higher resistance (R) values, Reduction in plasticity,
Lower permeability, Reduction of pavement thickness, Elimination of excavation - material
hauling/handling - and base importation, Aids compaction, Provides all-weather access
onto and within projects sites. Another form of soil treatment closely related to soil
stabilization is soil modification, sometimes referred to as mud drying or soil conditioning.
Although some stabilization inherently occurs in soil modification, the distinction is that soil
modification is merely a means to reduce the moisture content of a soil to expedite
construction, whereas stabilization can substantially increase the shear strength of a material
such that it can be incorporated into the projects structural design. The determining factors
associated with soil modification vs soil stabilization may be the existing moisture content,
the end use of the soil structure and ultimately the cost benefit provided. Equipment for the
stabilization and modification processes include: chemical additive spreaders, soil mixers
(reclaimers), portable pneumatic storage containers, water trucks, deep lift compactors, motor
graders.
Page 11
3.2 GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNANCE SLAG

Ground-granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS or GGBFS) is obtained by quenching
molten iron slag (a by-product of iron and steel-making) from a blast furnace in water or
steam, to produce a glassy, granular product that is then dried and ground into a fine powder.
3.2.1 PRODUCTION AND CHEMICAL COMPOSITION

The chemical composition of a slag varies considerably depending on the
composition of the raw materials in the iron production process. Silicate and aluminate
impurities from the ore and coke are combined in the blast furnace with a flux which lowers
the viscosity of the slag. In the case of pig iron production the flux consists mostly of a
mixture of limestone and forsterite or in some cases dolomite. In the blast furnace the slag
floats on top of the iron and is decanted for separation. Slow cooling of slag melts results in
an unreactive crystalline material consisting of an assemblage of Ca-Al-Mg silicates. To
obtain a good slag reactivity or hydraulicity, the slag melt needs to be rapidly cooled or
quenched below 800 C in order to prevent the crystallization of merwinite and melilite. To
cool and fragment the slag a granulation process can be applied in which molten slag is
subjected to jet streams of water or air under pressure. Alternatively, in the pelletization
process the liquid slag is partially cooled with water and subsequently projected into the air
by a rotating drum. In order to obtain a suitable reactivity, the obtained fragments are ground
to reach the same fineness as Portland cement.
The main components of blast furnace slag are CaO (30-50%), SiO 2 (28-38%),
Al2 O 3 (8-24%), and MgO (1-18%). In general increasing the CaO content of the slag results
in raised slag basicity and an increase in compressive strength. The MgO and Al2 O3 content
show the same trend up to respectively 10-12% and 14%, beyond which no further
improvement can be obtained. Several compositional ratios or so-called hydraulic indices
have been used to correlate slag composition with hydraulic activity; the latter being mostly
expressed as the binder compressive strength.
Page 12

Soil stabilization is widely used in connection with road, pavement and foundation
construction. It improves the engineering properties of the soil, e.g.:
Strength - to increase the strength and bearing capacity,
Volume stability - to control the swell-shrink characteristics caused by moisture changes,
Durability - to increase the resistance to erosion, weathering or traffic loading. Normally,
lime or cement (or a combination) is used for soil stabilization.
Page 13
3.3 QUARRY DUST

The technique of soil stabilization is usually adopted with the purpose of rendering
plastic soils coherent to the standards and requirements of engineering Projects.
A variety of ground improvement technique have been developed and successfully
applied in several areas. The selection of appropriate ground improvement technique depends
on the soil that is to be treated, the availability of materials required and economic viability.
All the techniques basically involve introduction of different material in the soil deposit.
Quarry dust/crusher dust is obtained as soil solid wastes during crushing of stones to
obtain aggregates.
Now a days different types of materials like lime, cement, fly ash etc. are used.
Quarry dust exhibits high shear strength which is highly beneficial for its use as a
geotechnical material Soosan et al. (2001a). It has a good permeability and variation in water
content does not seriously affect its desirable properties.
Quarry dust can be used as a substitute for sand to improve the properties of lateritic
soil Soosan et al. (2001b). Sridharan et al. (2005), conducted studies on the effect of quarry
dust on the geotechnical properties of soil used in highway construction and concluded that
the CBR value steadily increased with increase in percentage of quarry dust.
And
the improvement in CBR value can be contributed to the significant
improvement in angle of shearing resistance. Higher CBR values of soil-quarry dust mixes
enhance their potential for use as a sub base for flexible pavement.

The use of quarry dust is to ensure economic stabilization of soil and also used under
flexible pavements to increase the load carrying capacity of the pavement by distributing the
load through a finite thickness pavement Eze-Uzoamaka and Agbo (2010). The quarry dust
can be used to know the compressive and tensile strength of the stabilized soil.
The effect of quarry dust on the stability of soil aggregate mix used in a base course
and summarizes that the quality of quarry dusts in a soil aggregate mix has a major influence
on maximum density, strength, frost resistance and drainage.
Page 14
3.4 GEO GRID

A geogrid is geosynthetic material used
to
reinforce soils and similar materials.
Geogrids are commonly used to reinforce retaining walls, as well as sub bases or subsoils
below roads or structures. Soils pull apart under tension. Compared to soil, geogrids are
strong in tension. This fact allows them to transfer forces to a larger area of soil than would
otherwise be the case.
Geogrids are commonly made polymer materials, such as polyester, polyethylene or
polypropylene. They may be woven or knitted from yarns, heat-welded from strips of
material or produced by punching a regular pattern of holes in sheets of material, then
stretched into a grid.
The development of methods of preparing relatively
rigid polymeric materials by tensile drawing,[1] in a sense "cold
working," raised the possibility that such materials could be
used
in
the
reinforcement
of
soils
for
walls, steep
slopes, roadway bases and foundation soils. Used as such, the

major function of the resulting geogrids is in the area of
reinforcement. This area, as with many other geosynthetics,
Fig 3.4 Geogrid
is very active, with a number of different products, materials, configurations, etc., making up
today's geogrid market. The key feature of all geogrids is that the openings between the
adjacent sets of longitudinal and transverse ribs, called apertures, are large enough to allow
for soil strike-through from one side of the geogrid to the other. The ribs of some geogrids
are often quite stiff compared to the fibers of geotextiles. As discussed later, not only is rib
strength important, but junction strength is also important. The reason for this is that in
anchorage situations the soil strike-through within the apertures bears against the transverse
ribs, which transmits the load to the longitudinal ribs via the junctions. The junctions are, of
course, where the longitudinal and transverse ribs meet and are connected. They are
sometimes called nodes.
Page 15
3.4.1 HOW DO GEOGRID WORKS?

Geogrids
work
by
interlocking
with
the
granular or soil material placed over them. The

apertures allow for strike-through of the cover soil
material which then interlocks with the ribs (flat
straps/bars) providing confinement of the overlaying
granular/soil material due to the stiffness and strength
of the ribs as shown in figures.
Fig 3.4.1.1
3.4.2 WHERE ARE GEOGRID USED?

There are several major markets for geogrids. These are base reinforcement, earth
retaining wall construction including veneer stabilization, the segmental retaining wall
market, embankment reinforcement and pile cap platforms. Biaxial geogrids are primarily
used in base reinforcement applications, while the uniaxial geogrids are often used in the
other markets. This document will only be concentrating on base reinforcement and biaxial
geogrids. The base reinforcement market is just what the name implies. These are
applications where an engineer is trying to improve the performance of a gravel base over
poor soils, trying to minimize the amount of gravel in the base course design, or increasing
the life of the surface cover, concrete or asphalt. Geogrids are used under parking lots, airport
runways, gravel construction roads, highways, dam levees and railroad tracks.
Page 16
CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS
4.1 GENERAL
This chapter includes the experimental investigation carried out to study the different
properties of Red soil and Black cotton soil. The various tests which are been carried out are
being explained in this chapter. This chapter also includes the effect of different materials
used during the experimental investigation on properties of soil and also the details about
testing procedures of different tests performed during the investigation.
The Red soil and Black cotton soil used throughout the project for the different tests
was procured from Kineye, Belgaum (Goa Belgaum Highway). The tests listed below
where carried out in Jain College of Engineering, Belgaum at their Geo-technical Laboratory
and CBR tests where been carried out and Gogte Institute of Technology, Belgaum at their
Geo technical Laboratory.
4.2 TESTS CONDUCTED

The different tests which were conducted are as listed below:
4.2.1 SPECIFIC GRAVITY
The specific gravity of a substance is the ratio of the unit weight of the substance to
the unit weight of water. Specific gravity of a soil is the measure of its strength or quality of
the material. Soils having low specific gravity are generally weak in strength. Specific
gravity is defined as the ratio of the mass of a given volume of soil sample to the mass of an
equal volume of water at the same temperature.
FORMULATION
Specific Gravity =
=(
) (
4.2.1
Where,
W1 Empty weight of density bottle
W3 Wt of 1/3rd of Soil, Water and bottle
W2 Wt 1/3rd of Soil and bottle
W4 Wt of Fully filled water in density bottle
Page 17
4.2.2 MOISTURE CONTENT
Moisture content of soil is nothing but to determine the water content of soil sample
by oven drying method. The experiment forms an essential part of any other laboratory
experiments.
FORMULATION
Moisture content =
..4.2.2
where,
W1 Wt of container
W2 Wt of Wet Soil + container
W2 Wt of Dry Soil + container
4.2.3 LIQUID LIMIT

The liquid limit is determined in the laboratory with the help of the standard liquid
limit apparatus designed by Casagrande. Liquid limit is the water content corresponding to
arbitrary limit between liquid limit and plastic limit of consistency of a soil. It is defined as
the minimum water content at which the soil is still in liquid state, but has a small shearing
strength against flowing. It is also defined as the minimum water content at which apart of
soil cut by a groove of standard dimensions, will flow together for a distance of 12mm under
an impact of 25 blows in the casagrande device. The tested sample is oven dried for 24 hrs to
get moisture content.
FORMULATION
Moisture content =
.4.2.3
where,
W1 Wt of container
Page 18
4.2.4 PLASTIC LIMIT
Plastic limit is the water content corresponding to an arbitrary limit between the
plastic and the semi-solid states of consistency of a soil. It is defined as the minimum water
content at which a soil just begins to crumble when rolled into a thread approximately 3mm
in dia. The tested sample is oven dried for 24 hrs to get moisture content.
FORMULATION
.4.2.4
Moisture content =
where,
W1 Wt of container
4.2.5 MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST

Higher compaction is needed for heavier transport and military aircraft. The modified
proctor test was developed to give a higher standard of compaction. In this test, the soil is
compacted in standard proctor mould but in 5 layers, each layer being given 25 blows of a
4.5 kg hammer dropped through a height of 18 inches. The compactive energy given to the
soil in this test is 27260 kg-cm per 1000 cm3 which is about 4.5 times the Standard Proctor
test. The effect of higher compaction is to increase the maximum dry density and to decrease
the optimum moisture content.
FORMULATION
Bulk Density (b ) =
gm/cc..4.2.5.1
Dry Density (d ) =
gm/cc .4.2.5.2
Page 19
4.3 CALCULATIONS
4.3.1 RED SOIL
=(
Specific Gravity =
) (
= 2.180.
Moisture content =
) (
= 4.738
Liquid limit
= 50 at 25 no. of blows.
Plastic limit
= 26.92
Modified Proctor
Bulk Density (b ) =
=
gm/cc
= 2.033
gm/cc
Dry density ( d ) =
= 1.69
gm/cc
Sl no.
Density Determination
12%
16%
20%
Wt. of mould + soil W1 grams
4385
4385
4385
Wt of empty mould W2 grams
6378
6502
6472
Wt of compacted soil W1-W2 grams
1993
2117
2087
Bulk Density b gm/cc
2.033
2.16
2.12
Dry Density d
1.69
1.77
1.72
Page 20
4.3.2 PROPERTIES OF THE RED SOIL

A sample of 3 kg soil was taken for the test to be conducted,
Table 4.3.2.1 Results of different tests carried.
SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.18
Moisture content
4.73%
Liquid limit
50%
Plastic limit
26.93%
Maximum dry density
1.775 gm/cc
Optimum moisture content
21.8%
RED SOIL
1.78
1.77
1.76
DRY DENSITY
1.75
1.74
1.73
1.72
red soil modified proctor
1.71
1.7
1.69
1.68
19
20
21
22
23
24
MOISTURE CONTENT
Fig 4.3.2.1 Modified proctor compaction test
Page 21
4.3.3 MIX-1 PROPERTIES OF THE RED SOIL WITH 5% GGBS ,

10%FLY ASH AND 10 % QUARRY DUST
A sample of 3 kg soil was taken for the test to be conducted for the particular mix. In
this soil, a mix was prepared containing 5% GGBS, 10% Fly ash, 10% quarry dust. The
respective percentages are replaced with 3 kg of soil.
SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.58
Moisture content
5.69%
Liquid limit
41.13%
Plastic limit
29.85%
Maximum dry density
1.81 gm/cc
19.8%
RED+5%GGBS+10%FLY ASH + 10% DUST

1.82
1.8
DRY DENSITY
1.78
1.76
1.74
RED+5%GGBS+10%FLY
ASH + 10% DUST
1.72
1.7
1.68
1.66
17
18
19
20
21
MOISTURE CONTENT
Page 22

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.21
Moisture content
4.3%
Liquid limit
41.79%
Plastic limit
29.60%
Maximum dry density
1.82 gm/cc
18%
RED+5%GGBS+12%FLY ASH +12% DUST

1.84
1.82
DRY DENSITY
1.8
1.78
RED+5%GGBS+12%FLY
ASH +12% DUST
1.76
1.74
1.72
1.7
0
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 23

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.56
Moisture content
4.53%
Liquid limit
36.49%
Plastic limit
21.62%
Maximum dry density
1.855 gm/cc
17%

1.88
1.86
DRY DENSITY
1.84
1.82
1.8
RED+5%GGBS+14%FLY
ASH +14% DUST
1.78
1.76
1.74
1.72
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 24

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.2
Moisture content
2.68%
Liquid limit
37.12%
Plastic limit
22.22%
Maximum dry density
1.805 gm/cc
19%

1.84
1.82
1.8
DRY DENSITY
1.78
1.76
1.74
RED+5%GGBS+16%FLY
ASH +16% DUST
1.72
1.7
1.68
1.66
1.64
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 25
4.3.7 MIX-5 PROPERTIES OF THE RED SOIL WITH 5% GGBS,

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.06
Moisture content
2.53%
Liquid limit
38.56%
Plastic limit
27.37%
Maximum dry density
1.79 gm/cc
21%

1.8
1.78
DRY DENSITY
1.76
1.74
1.72
RED+5%GGBS+18%FLY
ASH +18% DUST
1.7
1.68
1.66
1.64
0
10
15
20
25
MOISTURE CONTENT
Page 26

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.34
Moisture content
2.15%
Liquid limit
38.93%
Plastic limit
16.9%
Maximum dry density
1.85 gm/cc
17%

1.86
1.84
DRY DENSITY
1.82
1.8
1.78
1.76
RED+5%GGBS+20%FLY
ASH +20% DUST
1.74
1.72
1.7
1.68
0
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 27
4.3.9 PROPERTIES OF THE BLACK COTTON SOIL

A sample of 3 kg soil was taken for the test to be conducted ,As black cotton soil is
expansive in nature it was necessary to conduct the following tests.
SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.22
Moisture content
4.88%
Liquid limit
60.14%
Plastic limit
29.83%
Maximum dry density
1.55 gm/cc
30%
BLACK COTTON
1.8
1.6
1.4
DRY DENSITY
1.2
1
0.8
black cotton
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
20
40
60
MOISTURE CONTENT
Page 28
4.3.10 MIX-1 PROPERTIES OF THE BLACK COTTON SOIL WITH

5% GGBS, 10%FLY ASH AND 10 % QUARRY DUST
SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.74
Moisture content
5.74%
Liquid limit
67.08%
Plastic limit
30.98%
Maximum dry density
1.68 gm/cc
22%
BLACK+5%GGBS+10%FLY ASH + 10% DUST

1.7
1.68
DRY DENSITY
1.66
1.64
1.62
1.6
BLACK+5%GGBS+10%F
LY ASH + 10% DUST
1.58
1.56
1.54
1.52
0
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 29

5% GGBS, 12%FLY ASH AND 12% QUARRY DUST
SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.18
Moisture content
6.8%
Liquid limit
58.04%
Plastic limit
33.84%
Maximum dry density
1.53 gm/cc
26%
BLACK+5%GGBS+12%FLY ASH +12% DUST

1.54
DRY DENSITY
1.535
1.53
BLACK+5%GGBS+12%F
LY ASH +12% DUST
1.525
1.52
1.515
10
20
30
40
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 30

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.17
Moisture content
4.83%
Liquid limit
67.94%
Plastic limit
28.07%
Maximum dry density
1.59 gm/cc
25%

1.595
DRY DENSITY
1.59
1.585
BLACK+5%GGBS+14%FLY
ASH +14% DUST
1.58
1.575
1.57
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 31

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
1.91
Moisture content
4.61%
Liquid limit
60.93%
Plastic limit
35%
Maximum dry density
1.57 gm/cc
23%

1.58
1.56
DRY DENSITY
1.54
1.52
BLACK+5%GGBS+16%FLY
ASH +16% DUST
1.5
1.48
1.46
1.44
1.42
1.4
0
10
20
30
40
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 32

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.65
Moisture content
3.77%
Liquid limit
59.19%
Plastic limit
39.85%
Maximum dry density
1.55 gm/cc
26%
DRY DENSITY

1.57
1.56
1.55
1.54
1.53
1.52
1.51
1.5
1.49
1.48
1.47
1.46
BLACK+5%GGBS+18%FL
Y ASH +18% DUST
10
20
30
40
MOISTURE CONTENT

Page 33

SERIAL NO.
TESTS
RESULT
Specific gravity
2.42
Moisture content
4.53%
Liquid limit
62.63%
Plastic limit
31.61%
Maximum dry density
1.627 gm/cc
14%

1.64
1.63
DRY DENSITY
1.62
1.61
1.6
BLACK+5%GGBS+20%F
LY ASH +20% DUST
1.59
1.58
1.57
1.56
1.55
10
20
30
MOISTURE CONTENT
Page 34
4.4 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST

This is a penetration test developed by the California division of highways, as a
method for evaluating the stability of soil sub grade and other flexible pavement materials
test results have been co related with flexible pavement thickness requirements for highways
and air fields. The CBR test may be conducted in the laboratory on a prepared specimen in a
mould or in-situ in the field.
California bearing ratio is the ratio of force per unit area required to penetrate in to a
soil mass with a circular plunger of 50mm diameter at the rate of 1.25mm /min.
Based
on the modified proctor test
results for different combinations of Red soil ad

Black cotton soil, the best combination which
yielded the best results i.e. max MDD and OMC
where considered for the CBR test.
Further to this obtained combination we
used Geo grids of cell size 1cm1cm as
reinforce material to strengthen the weak soil
and improve CBR value of the soil and hence
reduce the thickness of pavement.
Fig 4.4.1 CBR Test

The best combination is listed below:
MIX - 3 Red Soil with 5% GGBS, 10% Fly ash and 10% Quarry dust.
MIX 1 Black Soil with 5% GGBS, 10% Fly ash and 10% Quarry dust.
Page 35
4.4.1 TEST PROCEDURE

Take representative sample of soil weighing approximately 6kg and mix thoroughly at OMC.
Record the empty weight of the mould with base plate, with extension collar removed
(m1).
Replace the extension collar of the mould.
Insert a spacer disc over the base plate and place a coarse filter paper on the top of the
spacer disc.
Place the mould on a solid base such as a concrete floor or plinth and compact the wet
soil in to the mould in five layers of approximately equal mass each layer being given
56 blows with 4.90kg hammer equally distributed and dropped from a height of 450
mm above the soil.
Between 1st and 2nd layer of best mix combination of soil Geo-grid is placed .Geogrid is not used for only red soil and black soil but only used for mix.
The amount of soil used shall be sufficient to fill the mould, leaving not more than
about 6mm to be struck off when the extension collar is removed.
Remove the extension collar and carefully level the compacted soil to the top of the
mould by means of a straight edge.
Remove the spacer disc by inverting the mould and weigh the mould with compacted
soil (m2).
Place a filter paper between the base plate and the inverted mould.
Replace the extension collar of the mould.
Page 36
Load
Plunger of 50mm diameter
Surcharge
Soil layer above Geo grid
Geo - grid
Soil layer compacted in 4 lifts
4.4.2 FORMULATION
CBR value is calculated using the relation:
CBR, % =
.4.4.2
Page 37
CBR value for Red soil
SL.no
Penetration
Proving ring
Load applied
(mm)
reading
(kg)
0.5
65
06.89
142
15.05
1.5
214
22.68
285
30.21
2.5
360
38.16
432
45.79
567
60.1
697
73.88
10
7.5
857
90.84
11
10
1056
111.93
12
12.5
1202
127.41
13
15
1330
140.90
Table 4.4.2.1 CBR value of Red soil
CBR RED SOIL

160
140
Load in KN
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
10
15
20
Penetration in mm
Fig -4.4.2.1 load penetration curve for red soil
Page 38
Calculations :
Area of plunger of dia 5 cm = 19.6 cm2
Pressure at 2.5 mm penetration =
kg/cm2
kg/cm2
CBR, % =
At 2.5 mm penetration
=
= 2.78%
3.0%
=
= 3.58%
4.0%
Considering CBR value = 3.0%
Page 39
CBR value for Red soil with 5%GGBS,14%Fly ash,14%Quarry dust & Geogrid
SL.no
Penetration
Proving ring
Load applied
(mm)
reading
(kg)
0.5
68
12.58
138
25.53
1.5
210
38.85
280
51.8
2.5
351
64.94
420
77.7
558
103.23
696
128.76
10
7.5
1054
194.99
11
10
1395
258.07
12
12.5
1785
330.22
13
15
2348
434.38
Load in KN
CBR RED MIX COMBINATION

500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
10
15
20
Penetration in mm
Page 40
Calculations:
kg/cm2
kg/cm2
CBR, % =
=
= 4.73%
5.0%
=
= 6.25%
Page 41
CBR value for Black cotton soil
SL.no
Penetration
Proving ring
Load applied
(mm)
reading
(kg)
0.5
95
7.6
170
13.6
1.5
250
20
330
26.4
2.5
405
32.4
468
37.44
579
46.32
662
52.96
10
7.5
784
62.72
11
10
829
66.32
12
12.5
860
68.8
CBR BLACK COTTON SOIL

80
70
Load in KN
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
10
15
Penetration in mm
Page 42
Calculations :
kg/cm2
kg/cm2
CBR, % =
=
= 3.13%
3.0%
=
= 3.4%
4.0%
Page 43
CBR value for Black cotton soil with 5%GGBS,10%Fly ash,10%Quarry dust&Geogrid
SL.no
Penetration
Proving ring
Load applied
(mm)
reading
(kg)
0.5
70
12.95
140
25.9
1.5
208
38.48
271
50.14
2.5
330
61.05
382
70.67
485
89.72
570
105.45
10
7.5
755
139.67
11
10
885
163.73
12
12.5
965
178.53
13
15
1020
188.7
Load in KN
CBR BLACK COTTON SOIL MIX

200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
10
15
20
Penetration in mm
Page 44
Calculations :
kg/cm2
kg/cm2
CBR, % =
=
= 4.45%
5.0%
=
= 5.12%
Page 45
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT
5.1 GENERAL
The design of flexible pavement involves the interplay of sveral variables such as, the
wheel loads, traffic, climate, terrain, and subgrade conditions. With a view to have a unified
approach for working out the design of flexible pavement, IRC guidelines are being
followed. These are based on CBR values. For the purpose of the guidelines, flexible
pavements are considered to include the pavements which have the bituminous surfacing and
granular base and sub base courses conforming to IRC standards.
Based on the performance of existing designs using analytical approach, simple
design charts and a catalogue of pavement designs have been added for use of field
Engineers. The pavement designs for sub grade CBR values ranging from 2% - 10% and
design traffic ranging from 1msa 150msa for an average annual pavement temperature of
35 C. For estimating the design traffic the following information is needed,
i.
Initial traffic after construction in terms of number of commercial vehicles per day
(CVPD).
ii.
Traffic growth rate during the design life of percentage.
iii.
Design life in number of years.
iv.
Vehicle damage factor (VDF)
v.
Distribution of commercial traffic over the carriage way.
Based on these, the design thickness is obtained from the charts in IRC 37-2001.
5.2 CALCULATION
For the design consideration the following data where being obtained from the
Transport Department of Goa and Karnataka State. The values are listed below,
i.
Number of commercial vehicle as per last count (P) = 2000
ii.
Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles (r) = 8.5%
iii.
Number of years between last count and year of completion of construction (x) = 3
years
Page 46
iv.
Design life in years (n) = 10 years
v.
Vehicle damage factor (F) = 4.5 for more than 1500 vehicles.
vi.
Lane distribution factor (D) = 75% for 2 lane single carriage way.
For Red Soil only:

As per IRC Method 37 2001 the design procedure is as follows:
A = P (1 + r) x
..5.2.1
= 2000 (1 + 0.085)3
= 2554.57
2555.
Design traffic in terms of cumulative number of standard axles,
N = 365
= 365
..5.2.2
)
= 46.68msa.
Corresponding to this design traffic, pavement thickness can be calculated from IRC chart for
Pavement Design Catalogue.
Referring to the Fig 3.8 (b) in IRC 37 - 2001 corresponding to CBR 3% pavement
thickness required is 810 for 30msa and 830 for 50msa. Interpolating these values, the
pavement thickness for 46.68msa,
t = 810 +
= 826.68
)
(
) ..5.2.3
830mm.
The pavement composition may be

Sub Base = 380mm
Base = 250mm
Dense Bituminous macadam (DBM) = 160mm
Bituminous concrete = 40mm
The total pavement thickness a per IRC design guidelines is 830mm.
Page 47
For Red Soil Mix:
A = P (1 + r) x
= 2000 (1 + 0.085)3
= 2554.57
2555.
N = 365
= 365
= 46.68msa.
Referring to the Fig 3.8 (d) in IRC 37 - 2001 corresponding to CBR 5% pavement
t = 710 +
= 726.68
)
(
730mm.

Sub Base = 300mm
Base = 250mm
There is 100mm reduction in the pavement thickness for Red soil Mix as compared to
only Red soil without any admixture.
Page 48
For Black Cotton Soil only:
A = P (1 + r) x
= 2000 (1 + 0.085)3
= 2554.57
2555.
N = 365
= 365
= 46.68msa.
Referring to the Fig 3.8 (a) in IRC 37 - 2001 corresponding to CBR 2% pavement
t = 900 +
= 920.85
)
(
925mm.

Sub Base = 460mm
Base = 250mm
Page 49
For Black Soil Mix:
A = P (1 + r) x
= 2000 (1 + 0.085)3
= 2554.57
2555.
N = 365
= 365
= 46.68msa.
Referring to the Fig 3.8 (d) in IRC 37 - 2001 corresponding to CBR 5% pavement
t = 710 +
= 726.68
)
(
730mm.

Sub Base = 300mm
Base = 250mm
There is 195mm reduction in the pavement thickness for Black cotton soil Mix as
compared to only Black cotton soil without any admixture.
Page 50
CHAPTER 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 SUMMARY
In the present study, an attempt has been made to find out the effect of Fly ash,
GGBS, Quarry dust and Geo grids use in the stabilization of soil and construction of flexible
pavement. Here in the study six types of Red soil mixes and six Black cotton soil mixes were
carried out. The details of the mixes are as below;
1) Red Soil:
i.
Mix 1 Red Soil with 5% GGBS, 10% Fly ash, 10% Quarry dust.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
2) Black Cotton Soil:

i.
Mix 1 Black Cotton Soil with 5% GGBS, 10% Fly ash, 10% Quarry dust.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
In this study, For Red Soil Mix-3 showed comparatively better performance, where
as other Mixes are comparatively have lesser MDD and Specific gravity. It can be inferred
that higher the MDD results in higher strength of soil sub grade to withstand the heavy wheel
loads coming on the pavement, durability, also the expansive nature of soil is reduced in the
particular Mix - 3. The study has been limited use of GGBS 5% only.
Page 51
In this study, For Black Cotton Soil Mix - 1 showed comparatively better
performance, where as other Mixes are comparatively have lesser MDD and Specific gravity.
There is drastic change in the properties of Black Cotton Soil and we obtained the similar
properties of as that of Red soil Mix 3. It can be inferred that higher the MDD results in
higher strength of soil sub grade to withstand the heavy wheel loads coming on the
pavement, durability, also the expansive nature of soil is reduced in the particular Mix - 1.
The study has been limited use of GGBS 5% only.
Page 52
6.2 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the experimental investigations some of the major conclusions of this work
are drawn:
1) The investigation have shown that using GGBS along with Fly ash and Quarry dust as
base materials, it is possible to stabilize the weak sub grade soil.
2) By using Geo grid as reinforcing material to the soil the load sustaining property of soil
and strength is increased because of good interlocking of Soil granules.
3) There is 100mm reduction in the pavement thickness for Red soil Mix as compared to
only Red soil without any admixture.
4) There is 195mm reduction in the pavement thickness for Black cotton soil Mix as
compared to only Black cotton soil without any admixture.
5) As thickness of pavement reduces the cost of pavement construction and maintenance
also reduced hence increasing the durability of pavement, sustaining higher wheel
loads.
6) By using these stabilizing materials we can strengthen the weak soil not only in pavement
construction but also in Building Construction, the Safe bearing Capacity(SBC) can be
enhanced or improved.
Page 53
6.3 SCOPE OF THE FUTURE STUDY

1. Study on the properties of soil using combination of Fly ash and Blast furnace slag and
Quarry dust on short term properties such as water absorption, Shear stresses are very
much required to get the required confidence on the material.
2. The percentage of GGBS was restricted to 5% only. Hence we can study the properties
for different percentages of GGBS.
3. It will also be interesting to investigate the behaviour of Soil at different molar ratio of
NaOH.
4. In this study, the design of flexible pavement is carried out further the study can be
extended to the design of Rigid pavements.
5. In this study, only Geo grids are used as reinforcing materials further the study can be
extended to the Geo cells, Geo nets, Geo textiles etc.
Page 54
6.4 BIBLOGRAPHY
Textbook
of Soil Mechanics and Foundations by Dr. B.C. Punmia, Ashok Kumar
Jain, Arun Kumar Jain.
Textbook of Highway
Research
Engineering by Dr. S.K. Khanna and Dr. C.E.G. Justo.
Paper on Performance evaluation of Geo synthetic Reinforced Un-Paved
Roads by Prof. Gali Madhavi Latha, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
Research
Paper
on
Stabilization
of
Expansive
soils
using
Fly
ash
by
S.Bhuvaneshwari, R.G. Robinson, S.R. Gandhi.
Research
Report on Final Report on Durability and Strength development of
Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag by Peter W.C. Leung and H.D. Wong.
Research Paper
on Improving the Geo- Technical Properties of Soil by using Fly-
Ash and Quarry dust by Akshaya Kumar Sabat, Bidula Bose.
IRC Code 37 2001 Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements.
Page 55

Project Report On Pavement Design

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Project Report On Pavement Design

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Performance evaluation of weak sub grade soil and treating the subsequent layers of the

pavement by using advanced stabilization technique

1.2 Types of pavement:

3) Unpaved (gravel or dirt).

1.2.1 Flexible (Bituminous Pavements):

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

Fig 1.1 Load distribution of flexible pavement

1.2.2 Rigid (Concrete) Pavements:

Fig - 1.2 Load distribution of rigid pavement

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

1.3 PAVEMENT FUNCTIONS:

Provide a reasonably smooth riding surface:

Provide adequate surface friction (skid resistance):

Protect the sub grade:

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

1.4 FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PERFORMANCE OF A

1.4.2 Moisture (water):

1.4.3 Sub grade:

1.4.4 Construction quality:

1.5 NEED FOR STUDY:

1.6 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY:

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

1.7 SCOPE OF WORK:

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

2.2 STABIZATION MATERIALS

2.2.2 GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNANCE SLAG

2.2.3 QUARRY DUST

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

2.2.4 GEO GRID

materials. Geosynthetics within

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

(both amorphous and crystalline)

and calcium oxide(CaO),

being endemic ingredients in many coal-bearing rock strata.

3.1.1 CLASS F FLY ASH

bituminous coal typically produces Class F fly ash. This fly

20% lime (CaO).

glassy silica and alumina of Class F fly ash requires a

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

3.1.2 SOIL STABILIZATION

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

3.2 GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNANCE SLAG

3.2.1 PRODUCTION AND CHEMICAL COMPOSITION

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

3.2.2 SOIL STABILIZATION

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

3.3 QUARRY DUST

the improvement in CBR value can be contributed to the significant

3.3.1 SOIL STABILIZATION

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

3.4 GEO GRID

reinforce soils and similar materials.

slopes, roadway bases and foundation soils. Used as such, the

Fig 3.4 Geogrid

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

3.4.1 HOW DO GEOGRID WORKS?

granular or soil material placed over them. The

3.4.2 WHERE ARE GEOGRID USED?

Dept. of Civil Engineering, JCE, Belgaum

4.2 TESTS CONDUCTED

W3 Wt of 1/3rd of Soil, Water and bottle

W2 Wt 1/3rd of Soil and bottle

W4 Wt of Fully filled water in density bottle