Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
behzad996@yahoo.co
and
Bujang B. K. Huat
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Putra Malaysia
bujang@eng.upm.edu.my
ABSTRACT
This article describes a laboratory study on stabilizing peat soil using Ordinary Portland
Cement (OPC) as binding agent and Polypropylene fibers as additive. Due to high initial
water content of the stabilized peat soil samples and in-order to gradually reduce their
moisture content, the stabilized peat soil samples kept in normal air temperature and out of
water intrusions to drier condition during the curing period. This process of curing the
stabilized peat soil with cement is been named Air Curing Technique. Laboratory tests used
for the strength evaluations of stabilized peat soil are Unconfined Compression Strength
(UCS), and California Bearing Ratio (CBR). Air Curing periods used are 28, 90, 180 days for
the UCS tests and 90 days for the CBR (soaked, and un-soaked) tests. As the curing time for
the stabilized peat soil continues the moisture content decreases, thus weight of Water/weight
of Cement (W/C) reduces, and as a result stabilized peat soil is hardened and gains strength.
The result of strength tests show significant strength improvement of stabilized peat soil
through curing period. Also polypropylene fibers when added to the stabilized peat soil with
cement, not only give more strength values to the stabilized peat, rather contribute a
considerable amount of uniformity and intactness to the stabilized peat as well.
KEYWORDS:
INTRODUCTION
Peat is one that contains a significant amount of organic materials. Peat is well known to
deform and fail under a light surcharge load, and it is characterized with low shear strength, low
compressibility, and high water content (Huat, 2004). Generally any ground that is to be
subjected to additional loads which exceed its previous load condition or level, geotechnical
requirements for design on that ground are to be established. These requirements include a set of
Transfer the load to a more stable soil layer without improving the properties of the
in-situ soil.
Remove the soft soil and replace it, fully or partially, with better quality fill.
TEST MATERIALS
Peat soil samples used for the study, were collected as disturbed and undisturbed according to
AASHTO T86-70 and ASTM D42069 (Bowels 1978, and Laboratory Testing, 1980) from
Kampung, Jawa on the western part of Malaysia. Table 1 presents the properties of the in-situ
(field) peat soil.
Binding agent used for this study was Ordinary Portland Cement (Table 2), and
polypropylene fibers (Figure 1) as none chemically reactive additive used to reinforce the
stabilized peat soil (Table 3).
3
Table 1: Properties of the peat soil
Standard Specifications*
Properties
Depth of sampling
Moisture Content
In-situ (natural) bulk density
Specific gravity
Classification/Von post
Liquid Limit
Plastic Index
Organic content
UCS (Undisturbed)
CBR (Undisturbed)
ASTM D2216
BS 1337
BS 1337
ASTM D2974
ASTM 2166-6, AASHTO T208-706
ASTM D1883-73, AASHTO T193-63
Values
5 60 cm.
198 - 417 %
10.23 10.4 kN/m3
1.22
H4 H5
160 %
N.P.
80.23%
28.5 kPa
0.782%
Oxide
3CaO SiO2
2CaO SiO2
3CaO Al2O3
4CaSO4, Al2O3, Fe2O3
CaSO4 2H2O or CaSO4
Abbreviation
C3S
C2S
C3A
C4AF
Gypsum
Specification
Natural
0.91 gr/cm3
12mm
18 micron nominal
300 440 MPa.
6000 9000 (N/mm2)
None
160C
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
In order to examine the effect of cement admixture and polypropylene fibers on the load
bearing capacity of peat soil, index properties tests on the peat soil have been conducted. The
tests include: Sieve Analysis, Water Content, Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Organic Content,
specific gravity, Fiber Content. Strength values for the undisturbed peat soil as well as the
stabilized peat soil (mixture of peat, OPC, and fibers) have been investigated by Unconfined
Compression Strength (UCS) and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests. Peat soil used for the
stabilized samples of UCS, and CBR tests were at their natural (field) moisture contents, and
therefore no water was added or deducted from the peat soil during the mixing process of peat,
cement, and fibers.
4. Mixtures dosages
For UCS tests, each set of samples consist of peat soil having natural moisture contents plus
15, 30, and 50% of Ordinary Portland Cement(e.g. 15% cement means in each 100 gr. of peat soil
having natural (field) moisture content, 15 gr. ordinary portland cement powder added) with and
without polypropylene fibers. The Polypropylene fibers amounts used for the stabilized UCS
soil samples were 0.1, 0.15, and 0.25 %( e.g. 0.15% fibers means for each 100 gr. of peat soil
with its in-situ (field) moisture content, 0.15 gr. of polypropylene fibers added).
For California Bearing Ratio (un-soaked, and soaked) tests, each sample consists of peat soil
with natural moisture content plus 15, 25, 30, 40, and 50% of Ordinary Portland Cement (e.g.
25% cement means for each 100 gr. of natural peat soil at its in-situ moisture content 25 gr. of
cement added), with and without additive ( polypropylene fibers). The polypropylene fibers
amount used for the stabilized CBR soil samples was 0.15% (e.g. for each 100 gr. of peat soil
with its in-situ moisture content, 0.15 gr. fibers added).
100
75
50
25
0.10%
0.15% Fiber
0.20%
0.10%
0.15% Fiber
0.20%
Fiber+15%
+15%
Fibers +15% Fiber+25%
+25%
Fibers +25%
Cement+
Cement
Cement
Cement+
Cement
Cement
Peat
+Peat
+Peat
Peat
+Peat
+Peat
Figure 2: Different percentage of fibers and cement mixed with peat soil versus percent strength
increase of UCS after 90 days of curing.
80
60
40
15%cement+peat+0.15%fibers
25%cement+peat+0.15%fibers
20
40%cement+peat+0.15%fibers
50%cement+peat+0.15%fibers
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Figure 3: Number of days for soaked CBR samples versus percentage of weight increased during
five weeks of soaking.
Unconfined Compresion
Strength(kpa)
450
350
250
peat+15%cem ent
150
peat+15%cem ent+0.15
%fiber
50
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
Curing time(days)
a) 15% cement
Unconfined Compresion
Strength(kpa)
700
600
500
peat+30%cem ent
400
peat+30%cem ent+0.15
%fiber
300
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
b) 30% cement
Unconfined Compresion
Strength(kpa)
650
600
550
peat+50%cem ent
500
peat+50%cem ent+0.15
%fiber
450
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
c) 50% cement
Figure 4: Curing time versus Unconfined Compression Strength values for the stabilized peat
soil with different percent of Ordinary Portland Cement (15, 30, 50%) and 0.15% of
polypropylene fibers.
peat+30%cem ent
peat+50%cem ent
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
50
100
150
Age(days)
Figure 5: Curing ages of stabilized peat samples with different percentages of cement for
Unconfined Compression Strength tests versus W/C.
UCS test results of 0 (immediately after mixing), 7, 28, 90, and 180 days for stabilized peat
with OPC in Figure 6 show that, as W/C values are decreased through curing process, the UCS
values are increased. Therefore, Air Curing process cause the stabilized peat soil samples to
gradually lose their moisture contents and become drier and as the stabilized peat soil become
drier(water content is reduced), the UCS values increase.
peat+15%cem ent
600
peat+30%cem ent
500
peat+50%cem ent
400
300
200
100
0
0
Figure 6: Water-Cement Ratio versus Unconfined Compression Strength of stabilized peat with
different percentage of cement.
Also the results obtained from Figure 5 and 6 justify the Air Curing Technique used for the
stabilized peat soils with cement, instead of the usual curing technique of water submergence
method used for stabilized peat soil samples with cement practiced in the past.
11
40
Unsoaked
Soaked
CBR (%)
30
20
10
be
tur
di s
Un
t
t
at
eat
eat
eat
ea
ea
pe
r+p
r+p
r+p
t +p
t +p
e
e
e
nt +
n
n
b
b
b
e
e
e
i
i
i
%f
%f
%f
em
em
em
.15
.15
.15
%c
%c
%c
15
30
50
t +0
t +0
t +0
n
n
n
e
e
e
em
em
em
%c
%c
%c
15
30
50
t
ea
dp
Figure 7: CBR values for the undisturbed peat and different percentage of OPC and fibers for the
stabilized peat soil cured for 90 days.
Conclusion
In this study, peat soil has been stabilized with Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) as a binding
agent alone, and also stabilized with, OPC, and Polypropylene fibers as none reactive chemical
additive. Air Curing Technique that is to keep the stabilized peat soils with OPC in normal air
temperature and out of water intrusion during the curing period is been used. This technique will
cause the stabilized peat soils to gradually lose their moisture content through curing period and
become drier. The binding agent and the additive as well as the curing technique have proved to
increase Unconfined Compression Strengths(UCS) values of the stabilized peat soil samples at
28, 90, and 180 days.
The result of UCS tests for stabilized peat soil with OPC with different percentage of
polypropylene fibers show that 0.15% is the optimum percentage to provide maximum UCS
values. Curing the stabilized peat soil samples in air, will cause the Water Cement Ratio (W/C)
of the samples to reduce. As the W/C for the stabilized peat soils are reduced through air curing
period, the UCS and CBR values increase.
Peat soil at its natural state, when mixed with OPC has high initial W/C (W/C > 0.5) and it
maintains enough W/C during the air curing process even through 180 days of curing period for
hardening process to take place, and does not need extra moisture (being submerged in water) for
the hardening process.
Air Curing Technique of stabilized peat soil during six months with 15% of OPC (less than
190 kg/m3), will increase the UCS of in-situ peat soil by over 13 folds (from 28.5 Kpa. to 380
Kpa.), and increases the UCS value of in-situ peat by over 14 folds when 0.15% (less than 2
kg/m3) polypropylene fibers added to the mixture of peat and OPC.
REFERENCES
1. Axelsson K., Johansson Sven- Erick, Anderson Ronny. (2002). Stabilization of Organic
Soils by Cement and Puzzolanic Reactions-Feasibility Study., Swedish deep
stabilization Research Centre, Report 3, English translation, 15-16.
2. Black A. J, Sivakumar V., Madhav R. M., and Hamil A. G. (2007). Reinforced Stone
Column in Weak Deposit: Laboratory Model Study., Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 1154-1161.
3. Bowles E. J. (1978). Engineering properties of soil and their measurements, 2nd edition,
United States, McGraw-Hill, 189-197.
4. British Standards Institution (1990).Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering
purposes. London, BS 1337.
5. Davis E. H., Troxell E G., and Hoauk F.W. G. (1982). The testing of engineering
materials, 4th edition. United States of America, McGraw-Hill. Inc., 336-344.
6. Design of Normal Concrete Mixes. (1975). Road note No. 4, Department of the
Environment, Building Research Establishment, United Kingdom, Her Majestys
Stationary Office, 5-30.
7. Duraisamy Y., Huat B.B.K , Muniandy R.,and Abdul A. A. (2006). Effect of Cement on
the Compressibility of Tropical peat Soil.,GSM-IEM Oktober forum on Engineering
Geology and Geotechnical engineering , petalang jaya, Malaysia.
8. Engineering and Design Laboratory Testing, Engineer.(1980). No 11102-2-1906
Manual.Department of the Army, United States of America.
9. Hebib S.,and Farrell R., E. (2003). Some experiences on the stabilization of Irish peats.
Can. Geoteh J., 40:107-120.
10. Fei M. C, Huat B.B.K., and Duraisamy Y. (2007). Influence of Chemical
admixtures
(cement and peat) on Index and Mechanical properties of Tropical peat soil. American
Journal of Environmental Sciences, Science public.
11. Huat B.B.K. (2004). Organic and Peat Soils Engineering, University Putra
Malaysia. 5-11.
12. Huat B. B.K., and Faisal Hj. Ali (2007). Ground Improvement Technology, University
Putra Malaysia. 105.
13. Mullik K. A., Walia P., and Sharma N. S. (2006), Application of Polypropylene Fiber
Reinforced Concrete (PFRC) with Vacuum Processing.Advances in Bridge Engineering,
Walia International Machines Corp., New Delhi, India.
14. Nagu P.S., Chandarkaran S., Sankar N. (2008). Behavior of lime stabilized clayey soil,
reinforced with nylon fibers. National Institute of technology, Calcutta, India.
13
16. Polypropylene Fibers, 2005. Technical data sheet, Version no. 0010 edition 3, Sika Fiber,
Malaysia.
2008 ejge