International Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 353–370 | Cite as

An Experimental Investigation on Effect of Adding Natural and Synthetic Fibres on Mechanical and Behavioural Parameters of Soil–Cement Materials

  • Milad Tajdini
  • Masoud Hajialilue Bonab
  • Sina Golmohamadi
Research Paper
  • 100 Downloads

Abstract

Soil–cement is a mixture of Portland cement, soil and water that sticks together due to the hydration of the cement and compression of its components to create a dense, durable compound, which has low permeability and is resistant to erosion. Unfortunately, these mixtures do not perform well under tensile load because soil–cement materials are brittle. In this study, three types of fibres were used to reinforce the materials to compensate for this flaw: jute (a natural fibre), polypropylene, and steel (a synthetic fibre) fibres. These fibres were randomly added to the soil–cement mixture in three percentages (1, 2, and 3%). Tests were then conducted on three different soil–cement gradations each with three fine contents of different mineral types (nine different gradations in total). First, sand equivalent and Atterberg limits were conducted on the soil samples. Then compaction, unconfined compression strength, indirect tensile strength and flexural tests were conducted on the soil–cement samples in two conditions: control (unreinforced) and reinforced soil–cement samples. Results showed an undeniable role of fibres in changing the behaviour of the soil–cement–fibre matrix from brittle to ductile producing post-peak behaviour. The results also show that compressive, tensile and flexural strengths of soil–cement materials improved dramatically by adding steel fibres to the matrix.

Keywords

Soil–cement materials Compressive strength Tensile strength Flexural strength Natural and synthetic fibres Gradation type 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

There is no funding for this research.

References

  1. 1.
    Adaska WS (2006) State of the art report on soil cement. ACI Committe 230. 24 pGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hansen KD (1996) Soil cement for embankment dams. Volume 54 of bulletinGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tajdini M, Nabizadeh A, Taherkhani H, Zartaj H (2016) Effect of added waste rubber on the properties and failure mode of kaolinite clay. Int J Civ Eng 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s40999-016-0057-7
  4. 4.
    Kaniraj SR, Havanagi VG (2001) Behaviour of cement-stabilized fibre reinforced fly ash–soil mixtures. Geotech Geoenviron Eng 127(7):574–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Consoli C, Vendruscolo A, Fonini A, Rosa D (2009) Fibre reinforcement effects on sand considering a wide cementation range. Geotext Geomembr 27:196–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Consoli C, Montardo P, Donato M (2004) Effect of material properties on the behavior of sand–cement–fibre composites. Ground Improv 8:77–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maher H, Ho C (1993) Behavior of fibre-reinforced cemented sand under static and cyclic loads. Geotech Test J 16:330–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Park S (2009) Effect of fibre reinforcement and distribution on unconfined compressive strength of fibre-reinforced cemented sand. Geotext Geomembr 27:162–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Park S, Kim Y, Choi S, Shin E (2004) Unconfined compressive strength of cemented sand reinforced with short fibres. J Korean Soc Civ Eng 28:213–220Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khattak J, Alrashidi M (2006) Durability and mechanistic characteristics of fibre reinforced soil–cement mixtures. Int I Pavement Eng 7:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tang C, Shi B, Gao W, Chen F, Cai Y (2007) Strength and mechanical behavior of short poly propylene fibre reinforced and cement stabilized clayey soil. Geotext Geomembr 25:194–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chakroborty S, Kundu SP, Roy A, Adhikari B, Majmudar SB (2013) Polymer modified jute fibre as reinforcing agent controlling the physical and mechanical characteristics of cement mortar. Constr Build Mater 49:214–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sukontasukkul P, Jamsawang P (2012) Use of steel and polypropylene fibres to improve flexural performance of deep soil–cement column. Constr Build Mater 29:201–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tajdini M, Mahinroosta R, Taherkhani H (2014) An investigation on the mechanical properties of granular materials in interface with asphaltic concrete. Constr Build Mater 62:85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mariana R, Andrew C, Nicholas H (2006) Properties of asphalt concrete layer interfaces. ASCE 18:467–471Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mariana R, Andrew C, Nicholas H (2005) effect of bond condition on flexible pavement performance. ASCE 11:880–888Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Arman A, Barclay RT, Casias TJ, Crocker DA, Adaska WS, De Graffenreid RL, Hess JR, Kuhlman RH, Mueller PE, Roof HC, Super DW (1990) State-of-the-art report on soil-cement. ACI Mater J 87(4):395–417Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tajdini M, Hajialiluebonab M, Hasanzadeh M (2016) An investigation on the effective parameters of compressive and flexural strength of soil cement material with numerical modelling on the coffer dam of Bakhtiarie’s dam as a case study. Sharif J Sci Technol (in Persian) Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ASTM D2419-14 (2004) Standard Test Method for sand equivalent method American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). West Conshohocken PA, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Portland Cement Association (PCA) (1986) Soil-cement for facing slopes and lining channels, reservoir and lagoons. Publication IS126.05W, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, 8 pGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bahmani SH, Huat B, Asadi A, Farzadnia N (2014) Stabilization of residual soil using SiO2 nanoparticles and cement. Constr Build Mater 64:350–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ferkel H, Hellmig R (1999) Effect of nano powder deagglomeration on the densities of nano crystalline ceramic green bodies and their sintering behaviour. Nano Struct Mater 11(5):617–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chauhan S, Mittal S, Mohanty B (2008) Performance evaluation of silty sand subgrade reinforced with fly ash and fibre. Geotext Geomembr 26:429–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sobhan K, Mashnad M (2002) Tensile strength and toughness of soil–cement–fly ash composite reinforced with recycled high density polyethylene strips. J Mater Civil Eng ASCE 14:177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Prabakara J, Sridhar R (2002) Effect of random inclusion of sisal fibre on strength behaviour of soil. Constr Build Mater 16:123–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Miller J, Rifai S (2004) Fibre reinforcement for waste containment soil liners. ASCE J Environ Eng 130:891–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mattone R (2005) Sisal fibre reinforced soil with cement or cactus pulp in bahareque technique. Cem Concr Compos 27:611–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Segetin M, Jayaraman K, Xu X (2007) Harakeke reinforcement of soil–cement building materials. Build Environ 42:3066–3079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Medjo R, Riskowski G (1994) Effects of fibres and cement on the mechanical behaviour of soil–cement reinforced with sugar cane bagasse. Hous Sci 18:79–89Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ghavami K, Filho R, Barbosa P (1999) “Behaviour of composite soil reinforced with natural fibres. Cem Concr Compos 21:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gümüşer C, Şenol A (2014) Effect of fly ash and different lengths of polypropylene fibres content on the soft soils. Int J Civ Eng 12(2):134–145Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ma H, Li Z (2013) Microstructures and mechanical properties of polymer modified mortars under distinct mechanisms. Constr Build Mater 47:579–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Monteny J, De Belie N, Vincke E, Verstraete W, Taerwe L (2001) Chemical and microbiological tests to simulate sulfuric acid corrosion of polymer-modified concrete. Cem Concr Res 31(9):1359–1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Li G, zhao X, Rong C, Wang z (2010) Properties of polymer modified steel fibre-reinforced cement concretes. Constr Build Mater 24(7):1201–1206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shaker FA, El-Dieb AS, Reda MM (1997) Durability of styrene-Butadiene latex modified concrete. Cem Concr Res 27(5):711–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang R, Wang PM, Li XG (2005) physical and mechanical properties of styrene-butadiene rubber emulsion modified cement mortars. Cem Concr Res 35(5):900–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tang C, Shi B, Zhao L (2010) Interfacial shear strength of fibre reinforced soil. Geotext Geomembr 28:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Chew S, Kamruzzaman A, Lee F (2004) Physicochemical and engineering behavior of cement treated clays. Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2004 130(7):696–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Al-Rawas AA, Hago A, Al-Sarmi H (2005) Effect of lime, cement and sarooj (artificial pozzolan) on the swelling potential of an expansive soil from oman. Build Environ 40(5):681–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mir B (2015) Some studies on the effect of fly ash and lime on physical and mechanical properties of expansive clay. Int J Civ Eng 13(3 and 4B):203–212Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Felt EJ (1955) Factors influencing physical properties of soil-cement mixtures. Highw Res Board Bull 108:138–162Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Park SS (2011) Unconfined compressive strength and ductility of fibre-reinforced cemented sand. Constr Build Mater 25:1134–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bouhicha M, Aouissi F, Kenai S (2005) Performance of composite soil reinforced with barely straw. Cem concr Compos 27:617–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Chakraborty S, Kundu S, Roy A, Basak R, Adhikari B, Majumder SB (2013) Improvement of the mechanical properties of jute fibre reinforced cement mortar. Constr Build Mater 38:776–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vice presidency for strategic planning and supervision (2013) Road general technical specification. Code 101, Islamic Republic of IranGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    ŠtimacGrandić I, Grandić D, Bjelanović A (2015) Evaluation of torsional stiffness in beam and slab bridge decks based on load testing. Int J Civ Eng 15:255–266Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chen DP, Miao CW, Liu JP, Tang MS (2015) Advances in multi-scale simulation of hygro-thermo- mechanical deformation behavior of structural concrete. Int J Civ Eng 15:267–277Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mojezi M, Jafari MK, Biglari M (2015) Effects of mean net stress and cyclic deviatoric stress on the cyclic behavior of normally consolidated unsaturated kaolin. Int J Civ Eng 15:175–184Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Alibolandi M, ZiaieMoayed R (2015) Liquefaction potential of reinforced silty sands. Int J Civ Eng 15:195–202Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Allahvedi A, Hashemi H (2015) Investigating the resistance of alkali-activated slag mortar exposed to magnesium sulfate attack. Int J Civ Eng 15:379–387Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kamal MM, Safan MA, Etman ZA, Abd-elbaki MA (2015) Effect of steel fibres on the properties of recycled self-compacting concrete in fresh and hardened state. IJCE 15:400–410Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mobini MH, Khaloo A, Hosseini P, Esrafili A (2015) Mechanical properties of fiber-reinforced high-performance concrete incorporating pyrogenic nanosilica with different surface areas. Constr Build Mater 101:130–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rivera-Gómez C, Galán-Marín C, Bradley F (2014) Analysis of the influence of the fibre type in polymer matrix/fibre bond using natural organic polymer stabilizer. Polymers 6:977–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of TabrizTabrizIran

Personalised recommendations