EFFECT THE SHAPE OF GRAVEL ON IMPROVING CBR AND COMPACTION BEHAVIOUR OF CLAYEY SOIL
Investigating the effect of adding various types and shapes of materials on the behaviour of engineering properties of clayey soil is very important. In this study, various shapes of gravels have been used with different ratios (from 0 to 50% with 10% intervals) to show their effect on improving the mechanical properties of clayey soil. Many tests have been conducted on clayey and clayey- gravel soil mixtures. Modified compaction tests showed that by increasing percentages of gravel, amount of maximum unit weight (MUW) increased and optimum moisture content (OMC) decreased especially when rounded gravel was added. The increasing in amount of MUW of the clayey soil was about 10.32% after adding 50% of rounded gravel and it was about 8.98% after increasing same amount of crushed one. Values of California Bearing Ratio (CBR) increased after adding more amounts of gravel with more extent during adding crushed gravel. The addition of 50% gravel by weight to clayey soil resulted in 101.47% increase in the maximum CBR value for rounded gravel and 198.53% for crushed gravel. The swelling ratio decreased from 4.5% for the clayey soil to 0.2% after adding 40% of rounded gravel while it decreased to 0.56% after adding same ratio of crushed one. After adding 50% of both shapes gravel, a slight change in swelling ratio was appeared by increasing from 0.2% to 0.45% for rounded gravel and from 0.56% to 0.87% for crushed one.
Cho, G.C., Dodds, J., Santamarina, J.C., 2006. Particle shape effects on packing density, stiffness, and strength: natural and crushed sands. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132:591–602.
Cubrinovski, M., Ishihara, K., 2002. Maximum and minimum void ratio characteristics of sands. Soil Found. 42 (6), 65–78.
de Graff-Johnson, J.W.S., Bhatia H.S, Gidigasu, D.M., 1969. The strength characteristics of residual micaceous soils and their application to stability problems. In: Proc. 7th Int’l Conf Soil Mech Found Engrg Mexico, 165–172.
Donaghe, R.T., Torrey, V.H., 1994. A compaction test method for soil–rock mixtures in which equipment size effects are minimized. Geotechnical testing journal, GTJODJ 17 (3), 363–370.
Dyskin, A.V., Estrin Y, Kanel-Belov, A.J, Pasternak, E., 2001. Toughening by fragmentation-how topology helps. Adv Eng Mater 3(1), 885–888.
Gilboy, G., 1928. The compressibility of sand–mica mixtures. Proc. ASCE 2, 555–568.
Gray, M.N., Cheung, S.C.H., Dixon, D.A., 1984. Swelling pressures of compacted bentonite/sand mixtures. MRS Proceedings, 44, 523–530. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1557/PROC-44-523.
Guimaraes, M., 2002. Crushed stone fines and ion removal from clay slurries-fundamental studies. Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
Hight, D.W., Georgiannou, V.N., Martin, P.L., Mundegar A.K., 1998. Flow slides in micaceous sand. In: Yanagisawa E, Moroto N, Mitachi T (eds) Problematic soils. Sendai, Japan, 945–958.
Kakou, B.G., Shimizu H., Nishimura S., 2001. Residual strength of colluvium and stability analysis of farmland slope. Agric Eng Int CIGR J Sci Res Dev 3, 1–12.
Kenny, T.C., 1977. Residual strength of mineral mixture. Proceedings 9th International Conference of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 1, 155–160.
Kuerbis, R., Negussey, D. and Vaid, Y.P., 1988. Effect of Gradation and Fines Content on the Undrained Response of Sand. In: Hydraulic Fill Structures (edited by D.J.A. Van Zyl and S.G. Vick), Geotechnical Special Publication 21, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, U.S.A., 330-345.
Lees, G., 1964. A new method for determining the angularity of particles. Sedimentology 3, 2–21.
Lupini J.F., Skinner A.E. and Vaughan P.R., 1981. The drained residual strength of cohesive soils. Géotechnique 31 (2), 181-213.
Mitchell, J.K., Soga, K., 2005. Fundamentals of Soil Behaviour, 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., USA.
Miura, K., Maeda, K., Furukawa, M., Toki S., 1998. Mechanical characteristics of sands with different primary properties. Soils Found 38, 159–172.
Petley, D.J., 1966. The shear strength of soils at large strains. PhD thesis, University of London.
Santamrina J.C., Cho G.C., 2004. Soil behavior: the role of particle shape. In: RJJardine, DMPotts, KG Higgins (Eds) Advances in geotechnical engineering: the skempton conference, vol 1. Thomas Telford, London, 604–617
Shimobe, S., Moroto N., 1995. A new classification chart for sand liquefaction. In: Ishihara K (ed) Earthquake geotechnical engineering. Balkema, Rotterdam, 315–320.
Thevanayagam, S., 2007. Intergrain contact density indices for granular mixes- II: liquefaction resistance. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 6 (2), 135–146.
Troncoso, J.H., Verdugo, R., 1985. Silt content and dynamic behaviour of tailing sands. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 3, 1311–1314.
Vallejo, L.E., Mawby, R., 2000. Porosity influence on the shear strength of granular material–clay mixtures. Engineering Geology, 58, 125–136.
Xenaki, V.C., Athanasopoulos, G.A., 2003. Liquefaction resistance of sand–silt mixtures: an experimental investigation of the effect of fines. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 23, 183–194.
It is the policy of the Journal of Duhok University to own the copyright of the technical contributions. It publishes and facilitates the appropriate re-utilize of the published materials by others. Photocopying is permitted with credit and referring to the source for individuals use.
Copyright © 2017. All Rights Reserved.