Correlation-Based Studies on Resilient Modulus Values for Fiber-Reinforced Lime-Blended Clay

Abstract

In the design protocols of pavement subgrade layers, the resilient modulus (M R ) property assumes importance in evaluating the performance during their life-time under sustainable repeated or dynamics traffic-loads. The aim of this study is to evaluate the improvements achieved on the subgrade layers of fiber-treated lime-blended expansive soil. Two types of fibers exhibiting different surface properties were considered and their length(s) and dosage(s) (by dry weight of soil) were varied as 6 mm and 12 mm; and 0.2% and 0.6%, respectively. To ensure bonding between fiber and soil particles, dehydrated lime has been added to the soil-fiber mixture. The compacted specimens were cured up to 28 days. Dynamic resilient modulus M R tests were carried out in the laboratory for soil-lime-fiber mixtures using dynamic triaxial device. The obtained M R values were correlated with California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and Unconfined Compression Strength (UCS) values and appropriate models have been proposed to estimate M R . The results show significant increments in M R due to fiber reinforcement and are affected by fiber type, length and dosage. The proposed models considering CBR and UCS to predict M R have shown excellent correlations.

Sustainable assessment and carbon footprint analysis of polysaccharide biopolymer-amended soft soil as an alternate material to canal lining

“…Soil stabilization can be classified into physical, mechanical, chemical, and biological approaches. Among these techniques, chemical stabilization is the most widely employed for enhancing particle interfacial interactions in soil by adding chemicals like Portland cement (Moh, 1962;Suksun et al, 2010;Jurong and Siau, 2021), lime (Moghal et al, 2016;Moghal et al, 2020a;Moghal et al, 2020b;Al-Mahbashi et al, 2021;Moghal et al, 2021;Shaker et al, 2021;Syed et al, 2021), fly ash (Moghal and Sivapullaiah, 2011;Moghal and Moghal, 2012;Mohammed et al, 2018), nano calcium silicate (Mohammed and Moghal, 2016;Moghal et al, 2023), coal gauge (Ashfaq et al, 2021;Ashfaq et al, 2022a;Ashfaq et al, 2022b), blast furnace slag (Sruthi et al, 2022), bitumen (Shubber et al, 2009), granite dust (Amulya et al, 2022), and geopolymer binder (Wang et al, 2021). Despite the simplicity of this procedure, chemically treated soil presents environmental risks, making them less desirable.…”