International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2012)

CBR Improvement of Clayey Soil with Geo-grid

Reinforcement
Pardeep Singh1, K.S.Gill2
1

Assistant Professor, GNDEC, Ludhiana

2
Professor, GNDEC, Ludhiana
In addition, reinforced soils are often treated as
composite materials in with reinforcement resisting
tensile stress and interacting with soil through
friction. Although three is lot of information and
experience with geo-synthetic reinforcement of subgrade soils, many pavement failures still occur.
These failures may be due to lack of understanding
of how these materials influence the engineering
properties of sub-grade soils and what is the
optimum position of reinforcement. Therefore a
compressive laboratory program is required to study
strength characteristics of both reinforced and un reinforced sub-grade soils also to investigate their
behaviors under cycle leading.

Abstract The quality and life of pavement is greatly

affected by the type of sub-grade, sub base and base course
materials. The most important of these are the type and
quality of sub-grade soil. But in India most of the flexible
pavements are need to be constructed over weak and
problematic sub-grade. The California bearing ratio (CBR) of
these sub-grade have very low, it needs to more thickness of
pavement. Decrease in the availability of suitable sub base and
base materials for pavement construction have leads to a
search for economic method of converting locally available
problematic soil to suitable construction materials. The
present research have to study the effect of geo-grid
reinforcement on maximum dry density (MDD), Optimum
Moisture Content (OMC), California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
and E-Value of sub-grade soil. The clayey type of soil and one
type of geo--grid were selected for this study. From the study
it is clear that there is considerable improvement in California
Bearing Ratio (CBR) of sub-grade due to geo-grid
reinforcement. In case of without reinforcement (Geo-grid)
the soaked CBR value was 2.9% and when geo-grid was
placed at 0.2H from the top of the specimen the CBR
increases to 9.4%.

Keywords
reinforcement

CBR,

E-Value,

geo-grid,

MDD,

This work describes the beneficial effects of

reinforcing the sub-grade layer with a single layer of
geo-grid at different positions and thereby
determination of optimum position of reinforcement
layer. The optimum position was determined based
on California Bearing Ratio (CBR value) and
unconfined compression tests were conducted to
decide the optimum position of geo-grid.

OMC,

II. LITERATURE SURVEY

I. INTRODUCTION

The concept of reinforcement is not new. Early

civilizations commonly used sun-dried soil bricks as
a building material. Somewhere in their experience
it became an accepted practice to mix the soil with
straw or other fiber available to them to improve the
properties (Dean, 1986). Various materials were
used in reinforcement of both pavement materials
and sub-grade soils. They can vary greatly, either in
form (strips, sheets, grids, bars, or fibers), texture
(rough or smooth), and relative stiffness (high such
as steel or relatively low such as polymeric fabrics),
(Donald and Ohashi, 1983). Haas (1985) showed that
flexible pavements could be effectively reinforced
with the polymer geo-grid.

Desirable properties of sub-grade are high

compressive and shear strength, permanency of
strength under all weather and loading conditions,
ease and permanency of compaction, ease of
drainage and low susceptibility to volume changes
and frost action.
Since sub-grade soils vary
considerably, the interrelationship of texture,
density, moisture content and strength of sub-grade
materials is complex. are sub-grade, sub-base, base
course and hearing course effect of geo-grid
reinforcement on maximum dry density (MDD),
optimum moisture content (OMC), California
Bearing Ratio and E value of sub-grade soils.

315

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2012)
This involves asphalt thickness savings from 50
mm to 100 mm, or the ability to carry two or three
times more traffic loads for equal thicknesses. Nejad
and Small (1996) investigated the influence of geo grid reinforcement of the granular base of a flexible
pavement constructed on sand. They found that geo grid could significantly decrease the permanent
deformation in the pavement by 40% to 70%.
Ling and Liu (2001) carried out some static and
dynamic tests on model sections to find out the
contribution of geo-synthetic reinforcement to the
stiffness and strength of asphalt pavements. The
reinforcement layer (geo-grid) was laid above the
sub-grade and a final layer of asphalt concrete was
placed. The study showed that the settlement over
the loading area of reinforced pavement was reduced
when compared with un-reinforced pavement.
Srinivas Rao, B. and Jagloxshmi S (2008), carried
out effect of fiber reinforcement of soil sub -grade
beneath flexible pavements, in this work the study
on strengthening of soil sub-grade with polymer
reinforcement was carried out. The CBR test was
carried out without fiber reinforcement. The CBR
value of soil without fiber is 3.3%. After addition of
fiber reaction the high CBR value was achieved.
Professor Stelin, V.K., Prof. Ravi, E. and Arun
Murugen, R.B.(in 2010) carried out the experiment
on shrink Behavior of expensive clay using geo synthetics. In this paper attempt is made to control
the expansion on swelling clays with geo -synthetics.
Swelling tests were conducted on expensive clay
with varying orientation and number of layers of
geo-grid, geo-membrane and geo-textile and they
found the result that the load carrying capacity of
swollen clay with geo-grid is high.
Raju, N. Ramakrishna (2010) reported that the
usage of geo-synthetics in earth dams and
embankments to provide additional stability.
Reinforcement of embankment/filling on soft soil
reduces construction material quantities, reduces
land acquisition and reduces construction time.

TABLE 1
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND CLASSIFICATIONS OF SOIL

Property

Soil

Dry Density (gm/cc)

1.70

Optimum Moisture Content

(OMC) %

16.0

Specific gravity

2.60

Coefficient of uniformity
(Cu)

Coefficient of curvature (Cc)

0.18

Liquid Limit(%)

28

Plastic Limit (%)

15

Plasticity Index

13

Unified classification

CL- Clay of low

compressibility

One type of geo-grid was used to reinforce the subgrade soil. Various properties of geo-grid considered for
this study are given in table 2.
TABLE 2
PROPERTIES OF GEO-GRID

III. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME

Material selection: One type of clayey soil was selected for

this study. The index properties: liquid limit, plastic limit
and plasticity index were determined. Important physical
properties and classification of soil are given in table no. 1.

316

Property

Grid

Mesh aperture size(nominal) mm

22 x 22

Tensile strength in longitudinal direction at

2% strain (kN/m)

5.8

Stiffness in longitudinal direction (kN/m)

290

Elongation in machine direction

16.5%

Tensile strength in transverse direction at 2%

strain (kN/m)

5.2

Stiffness in transverse direction (kN/m)

260

Elongation in transverse direction

10%

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2012)
A. California bearing ratio (CBR) test
CBR tests were conducted on selected soil, unreinforced
and reinforced with a single layer of geo-grid. To reinforce
a sample, the geo-grid was placed in a single layer at
different positions: 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of the
specimen height from the top surface. It was cut in the form
of circular disc of diameter slightly less than that of the
specimen to avoid separation in the specimen by the
reinforcing layer. The dry weight required for filling the
mould was calculated based upon the maximum dry density
(MDD) and corresponding optimum moisture content was
achieved from standard proctor test. A total of five
samples of unreinforced and reinforced type were tested
after soaking in water for four days. The load penetration
curve was drawn for the soil samples with geo-grid at
different positions and the CBR values were calculated
from these curves. Table 3 shows the results of CBR tests
under different test conditions. It is clear that considerable
amount of increase in CBR value of soil with geo-grid
reinforcement, for example, in case of unreinforced soil the
CBR value is 2.9% and with geo-grid reinforcement the
CBR value increases to 9.4%. The highest increase in the
CBR value was achieved when geo-grid was placed at 20%
depth from the top of the specimen.

FIGURE 1
LOAD V/S PENETRATION CURVE

IV. CONCLUSIONS
In the present study, reinforced benefits of different
layers of a flexible pavement are evaluated in terms of their
strength parameters like, CBR and E-value and the
important findings of this research are summarized below:

TABLE 3
RESULTS OF CBR TESTS FOR DIFFERENT POSITIONS OF GEOGRIDS

Position of
geo-grid
from top of
specimen

Unsoaked
CBR

Soaked
CBR

1.

No geo-grid

6.5

2.9

2.

0.2H

16.05

9.4

3.

0.4H

13.86

7.2

4.

0.6H

10.9

5.8

5.

0.8H

7.2

3.16

Sr. No.

1.

The CBR of a soil increases by 50-100% when it

is reinforced with a single layer of geo-grid. The
amount of improvement depends upon the type of
soil and position of geo-grid.

2.

CBR of sub-grade soil is 3.6% without

reinforcement and when geo-grid was placed at
0.2H from the top, The CBR value increased to
8.7%.

3.

The stress-strain behaviour of sub-grade soils

under static load condition improved considerably
when geo-grid was provided at optimum position.

REFERENCES
[1] Krishnaswamy, N.R. and Sudhakar, S. (2005). Analytical and
experimental Studies on geo-synthetic reinforced road sub-grade.
Journal of Indian Road Congress, 66 (1), 151-200.

[2]

317

IRC: SP 72 (2007). Guidelines for the design of flexible pavement

for low volume roads. Tavel, P. 2007 Modeling and Simulation
Design. AK Peters Ltd.

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 6, June 2012)
[3] Subba Rao K.S (2000), Swell-shrink behavior of expensive
soils, Geo-technical challenges. Indian Geotechnical Journal,
30, 1-69.
[4] Indian Standard: 2720 (Part 16): 1987, Methods of tests for
soil- part (16): Laboratory determination of California
bearing ratio.
[5] Gosavi, M. Patil, K.A Mittal, S. Saran, S. (2004), Improvement of
properties of black cotton soil sub-grade through synthetic
reinforcement. Journal, Institution of Engineers (India), Volume 84,
pp.257-262.

[6] Chandra, S and Mehndiratta, H.C (2002), effect of shoulder

on life of flexible pavement. HRB -67, Indian Road
Congress, New Delhi, pp 37-46.
[7] Dean R Freitag (1986), soil randomly reinforced with fibers.
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Volume 112,
No.8, pp 823-826.
[8]

Nejad, F. M. and small, J.C. (1996), effect of geo -grid

reinforcement in model track tests on pavements. Journal
of transportation engineering, ASCE, volume 122(6), pp
468-474.

[9]

Ling H.I. and Liu Z. (2001), performance of geosynthetic

reinforced asphalt pavements. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, Volume 127, (2), pp 177-18

318