Stabilisation with cement is an effective way to increase the stiffness of base and subbase layers and to improve the rutting of subgrade. The aim of the study is to investigate the effect of different percentages of cement additives (1.5%, 3.0%, 4.5% and 6.0%) on the resilient modulus of coarse-grained soil used on road foundations. The influence of the compaction method, the standard Proctor and the modified Proctor, as well as the sample curing time is analysed. The cement addition significantly increases the resilient modulus and reduces the resilient axial strain. Extending the curing time from 7 to 28 days also improves the resilient modulus. The change in the compaction energy from standard to modified does not increase the resilient modulus of the stabilised gravelly sand due to its compaction characteristics. The test results of the resilient modulus of the gravelly sand stabilised with cement indicate the possibility of using it as a material for the road base and subbase due to meeting the AASHTO requirements. However, the non-stabilised gravelly sand does not meet the above requirements. It has been sheared during cyclic tests at the first load sequence, regardless of the compaction method.

The aim of this study was to compare the stiffness of gravelly sand under various load conditions—static conditions using the CBR test and cyclic conditions using the resilient modulus test. The tests were conducted on natural soil and soil improved by the addition of polypropylene fibers and/or 1.5% cement. The impacts of the compaction and curing time of the stabilized samples were also determined. The soil was sheared during the Mr tests, even after fiber reinforcement, so the resilient modulus value for the unbound sand could not be obtained. The cement addition improved Mr, and the curing time also had an impact on this parameter. The fiber addition increased the value of the resilient modulus. The CBR value of the compacted gravelly sand was relatively high. It increased after adding 0.1% fibers in the case of the standard compacted samples. The greater fiber addition lowered the CBR value. For the modified compacted samples, each addition of fibers reduced the CBR value reduced the CBR value. The addition of cement influenced the CBR increase, which was also affected by the compaction method and the curing time. The addition of fibers to the stabilized sample improved the CBR value. The relationship Mr=f(CBR) obtained for all data sets was statistically significant but characterized by a large error of estimate.

No abstract

The classic test for soil or aggregate bearing capacity in road construction is the CBR test. The results of the CBR were determined for gravelly sand and sand with the addition of 1.5% cement, as well as for their mixtures with 18 mm long polypropylene fibres in the amounts of 0.1%, 0.2% and 0.3%. The effect of compaction and time of curing of samples stabilised with hydraulic binder were also determined. The natural soil without cement and fibre additions had relatively high CBR values. The additions of 0.1% and 0.2% polypropylene fibres to the dry mass of the soil resulted in an approximately 2-fold increase in the CBR value for the samples compacted using the standard method. Increasing the amount of fibres to 0.3% caused a reduction in the CBR value to that obtained without fibre addition. For samples compacted using the modified Proctor method, the observations are different. Only the sample with 0.2% fibre addition achieved a slightly higher CBR value. Moreover, the addition of 1.5% cement and the length of treatment increased the CBR values.