Development of Low Cost Soil Stabilization Using Recycled Material

Abstract

Abstract. Recycled tyres have been used in many geotechnical engineering projects such as soil improvement, soil erosion and slope stability. Recycled tyres mainly in chip and shredded form are highly compressible under low and normal pressures. This characteristic would cause challenging problems in some applications of soil stabilization such as retaining wall and river bank projects. For high tensile stress and low tensile strain the use of fiberglass would be a good alternative for recycled tyre in some cases. To evaluate fiberglass as an alternative for recycled tyre, this paper focused on tests of tensile tests which have been carried out between fiberglass and recycled tyre strips. Fibreglass samples were produced from chopped strand fibre mat, a very low-cost type of fibreglass, which is cured by resin and hardener. Fibreglass samples in the thickness of 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm were developed 100 mm x 300 mm pieces. It was found that 3 mm fibreglass exhibited the maximum tensile load (MTL) and maximum tensile stress (MTS) greater than other samples. Statistical analysis on 3 mm fibreglass indicated that in the approximately equal MTL fibreglass samples experienced 2% while tyre samples experienced 33.9% ultimate tensile strain (UTST) respectively. The results also showed an approximately linear relationship between stress and strain for fibreglass samples and Young's modulus (E), ranging from 3581 MPa to 4728 MPa.

An Overview of Liquefaction Mitigation Countermeasures

“…While the overall cost is influenced by various factors, including material price, dosage, construction method, and environmental impact, some insights can be gained. Nanomaterials, fiber-reinforced soils, and recycled materials are considered cost-effective, offering advantages such as minimal environmental impact and ease of operation [73,[79][80]. However, the complexity of microbial processes and the limitations of certain methods for specific soil types highlight the need for careful cost assessment [81].…”