CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
Many native soils require some stabilization to provide a strong base and/or sub-base for road
construction. Roads often cross soft, saturated or expansive clay soils with very low bearing
capacity and fine soil material subject to erosion by seasonal rain. The construction and/or
rehabilitation of secondary feeder roads are often in remote rural regions, where quarry
aggregate is scarce and must be hauled long-distance, adding complexity, time and cost to
every project. Construction of such roads often necessitates thick pavement layers and
extensive earthworks.
These roads also need to support heavy loaded trucks in addition to car traffic. They typically
need to be built with limited budgets, yet with sufficient long-term durability to serve the
rural communities throughout rainy seasons, without degradation and repairs.
The challenge is how to achieve a strong and durable base and sub-base layer over a weak
subgrade in a fast and cost-effective manner utilizing marginal available materials.
Alternative cement and chemical stabilizers are complicated and time-consuming to apply
while their long-term effectiveness is unreliable. In addition stabilizers are often affected by
rain and water, as any cracks provide entry for water and eventual weakening of the road
base.

Alternative

subgrade

replacement

is

time-consuming

and

expensive.

Cellular Confinement Systems (CCS) is the best solution to overcome these challanges are
widely recognized in the construction industry as a permanent soil stabilization BMP used for
a variety of applications including: erosion control and soil stabilization on steep slopes,
revetments and flexible channel lining systems, roadway load support and stabilization, and
earth retention structures. The goal of this report is to identify potential uses for temporary
construction erosion and sediment control applications.
Typically, CCS panels or mats, also commonly referred to as CCSs, consist of High
Density Polyethylene (HDPE) strips ultrasonically bonded together to form a threedimensional honeycomb matrix that can be filled with soil, sand, aggregate, or concrete. The
relatively lightweight panels are shipped in a compact, collapsed form that are expanded at
the job site. The panels typically come in a variety of cell sizes, and in perforated and nonperforated formats. Originally, CCS mats were developed by the United States Army Corps
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

of Engineers (USACE) for building roads on soft and sandy soils. The USACE developed the
first material testing guidelines for CCS in their Technical Report GL-86-19. Currently CCS
is available through a number of proprietary distributors and is manufactured by a few
companies, some of which manufacture the panels under patent license from USACE.
The BMP Fact Sheets are provided in Appendix A and summarize the results of the
investigation and research of the various proprietary systems including descriptions,
definitions, applications, advantages, limitations, costs, installation guidelines, and
maintenance/inspection items.

.
Figure.1.1 Cellular confinement system

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

CHAPTER 2
CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEM
2.1 Historical Development
Since the beginning of civilazation man has attempted to use soil with other materials to
enable if for being used for his requirement. Typical uses include use of branches of trees etc
to support track over marshy area, to built large structures,temple such as ziggurats of
Babylonia, to build hutments with woven mats of reeds etc. These have also been used in part
of Great Wall of China.
CCS( Cellular confinement system) is honeycomb three-dimensional cell structures that
provided containment of compacted fill soils. Decreased the lateral movement of the soil
particles and form a mat or rigid for the distribution of loads applied to a wider area slab
movement.the system usually known as Geocell The term Geocell also have two part, first
is geo which mean soil or earth and second is cell which means cellular type of shape for
infill material such as soil. CCS were used in the construction of canals, embankments,
retaining walls, railways and roads (Dash et al., 2003).
New types CCS are made of a new polymer structure characterized by low temperature
flexibility similar to high density polyethylene (HDPE). (Pokharel, 2010, Yang, 2010). The
base layer reinforced CCS mattress In road construction, acts as a rigid slab or a mattress for
distribution the traffic load vertically on a broader subgrade. Therefore, the vertical forces
applied to the subgrade was decreased and the capacity was increased. (Marto et al., 2013).
Pokharel et al. (2010) stated that the concept of lateral confinement cell structures dating
back to 1970. CCS come in different shapes and sizes. Figure 2 shows the typical
configurations of CCS reinforcing elements: (1) Vertical perforated elements prepared as a
cellular, honeycomb-like structure. (2) Vertical geogrid elements prepared by cutting
geogrids. This type of CCS is hand made from geogrid chevron or diamond pattern.

2.2. Cellular confinement system

CCSs produced by a well known company in USA were used in this study.* The CCSs are
comprised of strips of high-density polyethylene (1 mm thick and 254 mm wide) welded
together at 305 mm intervals. When expanded, the cells form 2.5 m 3 18 m panels, with each
expanded CCS having a diameter of 250 mm and depth of 200 mm.The material and structure
of the CCSs were characterized using tensile tests conducted following the procedure
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

described in ASTM D 4885 and ASTM D4437. Tests were conducted on the bulk material (a
sectionof HDPE without welds) using ASTM D 4885 and onwelded material using ASTM D
4437. In all cases, specimens having wide-strip dimensions (200 mm 3 200 mm) were used.
Tests on the welded material were conducted in peel and shear modes. A tensile test of the
bulk material containing a weld at the center was also conducted to assess the influence of
discontinuities at the center of the specimen on the tensile strength of the CCS material.Three
replicate tests of each type were conducted.A summary of the test results is provided .Nearly
identical results were obtained from the replicate tests. Thus only averages are reported . Note
that the stiffness was highest for the bulk material and slightly lower (5%) for the bulk.
(Figure 2.2.)

Figure 2.2. : Close view of CCS pockets

2.3. Methodology
A. Procedure

Step 1: collect disturbed soil sample from nearby site.

Step 2: find out soil properties like liquid limit, OMC, MDD etc.
Step3: prepare the specimen of different tests with the soil only in three to four layers

according to test requirement.

Step 4: add CCS in sample at varying depth to find effective depth.
Step 5: perform various test on sample to find different soil properties like CBR
(California bearing ratio), plate load.

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Step 6: compare different soil properties such as bearing capacity, shear strength,
strength and cost of all results for soil with and without CCS.

B. List of Different Test for Soil

Sub soil Geotechnical Investigations (Borehole method) including collection of

undisturbed samples and Standard Penetration Test (SPT).

Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DCPT).
Field Density, Moisture Content and Void Ratio Test.
Standard and Modified Compaction Proctor Test.
Static and Cyclic Plate Load Test.
Field CBR Test by Dynamic Cone Penetration.
Specific Gravity and Porosity Test.
Grain Size Analysis by Sieving and Hydrometer.
Atterberg Limits and Indices.
Soil Classification.
Consolidation Test.
Unconfined Compression Test.
Direct Shear Test.
Triaxial Compression Test.

C. Ground Improvement Technique

Vibro Techniques
Vibro Compaction
Vibro Replacement (Stone Columns)
Grouted Stone Columns (GSC)
Vibro Concrete Columns (VCC)
Dry Deep Soil Mixing
Vacuum consolidation
Preloading
Heating
Ground freezing

2.4. Different configurations of CCS reinforcement elements

CCS come in different shapes and size.Figure.2.4. shows the different types of configuration
of Systems.

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

(a) Perforated CCS (Bathurst and Jarrett, 1998). (b) Handmade CCS (Dash et al., 2003).

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

(c) Handmade CCS diamond pattern

(d) Handmade CCS chevron pattern

(Dash et al., 2003)

(Dash et al., 2003).

Figure.2.4. Different structure and shape of CCS

CHAPTER 3
MATERIALS AND DESIGN METHODS

3.1. CCSs cell fill materials and envelope

The fill materials were coarse or fine granular noncohesive materials. The former were
crushed quarrylimestone, 60 to 180mm in grain size. This material is typical for a talus slope.
It is hereafter referred to as stone. The rock Young modulus was 57 700MPa. The average
crushing resistance of stones 100mm in size was 30 kN. The latter consisted of Hostun sand
or scrapped tyres. Hostun sand is a well documented and well-graded sand whose size
distribution ranges from 0.08 to 1mm and with a friction angle of 32.5_ (cohesion nil). The
scrapped tyres result from the puncturing of end-of-life tyres. This material contains 30% by
mass of circular pieces 25mm in diameter and 10mm in average thickness, the rest having no
particular shape (Fig. 2). This material was considered both for waste recycling purposes and
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

to take advantage of its particular mechanical characteristics, very different from the
properties of more classical granular geomaterials.
Sand was used alone or as a mixture containing 30% by mass of tyres. This mixture
constitutes a reinforced and lightweight composite material (Zornberg et al., 2004; Gotteland
et al., 2005). The envelope was made up of a hexagonal, or doubletwisted, wire mesh. The
mesh height and width were 80mm and 100 mm, respectively, and the wire had a 2.7mm
diameter. The tensile strength of this wire mesh was 51 kN/m. For fine fill materials, a
containment non-woven needle punched geotextile was used in combination with the wire
mesh. The CCSs, or cells, considered in this study were cubic in shape, 500mm in height.
Gabion cages are generally parallelepiped in shape but subdivided into three cubic parts that
are considered here as the elementary unit. Prior to filling, the cells were placed in a wooden
box in order to prevent any lateral deformation. Stone cells, i.e. CCSs filled with the coarse
material, were filled placing the stones flat. Fine materials were poured dry then slightly
compacted. No internal connecting wire was placed across the cell, contrary to what is
generally done on real structures. The average cell weight was 205, 203 and 195 kg for
stones, sand and mixture cells, respectively (Fig. 3). Their precise density is not known as
it was not possible to accurately determine the volume occupied by the fill material.

3.2. Design Method

Design of the solutions was based on mechanistic-empirical method for flexible pavements
using the layered elastic model, based on the following parameters (Figure 3.2.):

CBR according to seasonal damage.

Evaluation of Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL's) based on 18-kip single axle
(W18).

Definition of the NPA CCS reinforcement properties, including the Modulus

Improvement Factor (MIF) for fully and partially confined zones.

Examination of fatigue and rutting failure criteria.

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Figure 3.2. KOAC-NPC Enclosed Hangar Test Facility and Road Base Test Sections

3.3. Ideal for Porous Surfaces

Cellular confinement system, can be used as a porous ground layer in many situations. The
porosity of the perforated cells, combined with the porosity of the loose infill material, allows
water penetration both vertically and horizontally making Honeycomb structure the ideal
choice for sustainable urban drainag system (SUDS) applications. Unlike typically saturated
ground, Honeycomb structure retains the structure of the surface by reinforcing and
containing the infill, stabilising the ground and preventing erosion/subsidence.

3.4. Ideal for Ground Stabilisation

Cellular confinement system acts as a reinforced structure for all granular infills. Unlike other
systems, Honeycomb structure uses the confinement of infills to provide load support and
erosion control for many situations. Once filled, it provides a stable surface for both
pedestrian and trafficked areas such as driveways, paths, car parks, golf courses and artificial
surface sports fields. Manufactured from High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) strips and
ultrasonically welded into a cellular system, the high tensile strength of the weld and the
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

geotextile combined provide an ideal structure that prevents infill from spreading, thus
preventing subsidence and rutting.

3.5. Installation
3D Structural CCSs are supplied as collapsed, lightweight bundles that are easily transported
and installed on site. The high tensile strength ensures that the whole system can tolerate the
strains that occur from the installation stage and keep the surface secure over a long period of
time.
Any gullies must be filled and the surface level and well compacted.
An anchor shelf 0.2m deep and 0.5m wide should be excavated along the top of the slope.
The 3D Structural CCS is pulled out laid at the top of the slope. The CCSs follow
the gradient of the slope without buckling or warping.
Depending on the design requirements and application, high strength Polyester
Tendons, Galvanized Industrial staples, Stell J pins and Earth Anchors are used to fix
the CCSs to the substrate prior to filling.
Infill materials include: topsoil with selected vegetation; granular fills such
as sand/gravel/stone; and concrete. CCSs allow the use of on-site poor quality
granular infills instead of costly imported material.
The rigidity of the HDPE walls prevents buckling during topsoil filling. Once the cells are
filled to their maximum size, the structure becomes rigid and monolithic. Vegetating the site
improves the efficiency of the CCSs.

CHAPTER 4
USES IN DIFFERENT SECTORS AND ITS WORKING METHODS
4.1. Load Support
As a road base reinforcement system, the Honeycomb structure spread loading across the
extent of the cellular confinement. The cells behave like a stiff, yet flexible horizontal
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

laminar element beneath the supported load bearing surface. By isolating and supporting the
load bearing surface from the softer subgrades below, Honeycomb structure successfully
solves load bearing problems and provides a subtle and invisible finish to all surfaces.
Derived from the ability of Honeycomb structure to perform soil compaction.
Supports the soil and gives up to 17 times normal load bearing capacity.
Can be used for heavy duty load support in road systems.

4.1.1. Working
The load redistribution that occurs within the confined zone involves 3-dimensional
interaction between the infill and the cellular structure. Vertical stress applied to the infill
induces a horizontal active pressure at the perimeter of the cell. The infill wall interface
friction transfers loads in to the cell structure which in turn mobilises resistance in
surrounding cells. It is also evident that cells which surround a loaded cell offer greater
passive resistance due to the lateral strain in the vicinity of the load. The combined effect of
these mechanisms make the Honeycomb structure layer a composite mattress with high
flexural stiffness and load support capabilities.

4.2. Slope and Channel Protection

When used on slopes, Honeycomb structure confines and reinforces vegetation by increasing
the natural resistance to erosion. On non-vegetated slopes it prevents the down slope
migration of the infill, resulting in an overall greater stability across the slope. When used on
channels, river beds and swales, Honeycomb structure increases the shear strength of the
selected infill against the flow of water. The water is directed above the infilled cells,
allowing the root zone to remain undisturbed. Honeycomb structure provides an attractive
and economical alternative to concrete lined channels, or can be used within concrete to
create a flexible concrete slab with inbuilt expansion joints.

Improves hydraulic performance of infill materials.

Can be used within concrete to create inbuilt expansion joints when used to create an

armoured channel lining.

Can be designed for site specific circumstances - flow rates,environmental concerns,

ecological aspects and aesthetic requirements are all taken into account.
Can be used to help control flow.
Perforations mean that drainage issues can also be tackled.

4.2.1. Working

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

In the case of vegetated slopes, Honeycomb structure confines and reinforces the vegetative
mat and the cells increase the vegetations natural resistance to erosive forces protecting the
rootzone from loss of soil particles. Especially effective in areas of sheet or intermittent
concentrated flow.
On non-vegetated slopes, Honeycomb structure improves the erosion resistance of granular
infill, dissipating hydraulic energy and preventing down slope migration of particles.
Drainage occurs through cells via the perforations. In fully saturated conditions, the drainage
of excess water keeps infill friction at a maximum, preventing down slope sliding forces from
becoming too big. In vegetated slopes, the perforations allows water to move across the
cells and down slope, as well as allowing roots to grow from cell to cell. This gives the added
benefit of creating greater vegetative strength in times of short-term hydraulic events (high
flows).
.4.3.

Earth Retention

When layered vertically, the Honeycomb structure cells become an earth retention system and
can be used to construct a retaining wall, Honeycomb structure provides both face protection
and reinforcement, as well as the added bonus of a completely natural aesthetic. Its cellular
structure confines soils and prevents them from moving, ultimately preventing erosion, but in
the process offering many other benefits. The confined soils offer horizontal terraces where
grass growth can thrive and provide natural soak away that capture excess stormwater. By
placing the Honeycomb structure panels infront of the earth, the thickness of the wall is
significantly increased, which in turn increases the weight of the wall and its retaining ability.

Maintains structural stability against all loading through its mass and the frictional

values of the infill.

Is able to provide a solution on site to compressible soils.
Can be constructed in difficult to access locations.

4.3.1. Working
Simple gravity or composite retaining walls can be constructed rapidly using local infill
materials. The cellular structure reinforces the fill throughout the entire width of the wall
which when combined with the frictional forces acting between the layers, produces a
homogenous structural mass. This mass is further solidified by the growth of vegetation,
where the rootzone interlocks the layers and seals the soils together further.

4.4. Tree Root Protection

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Taking its use as load support, Honeycomb structure has become the way to protect tree roots
from the pressures of trafficking and loading from above. Whether it to protect a new sapling,
or to introduce protection for a fully established tree, Honeycomb structure can provide the
relief needed for the roots to thrive.

Protects tree roots from the pressures of loading.

Offers protection without the need to prevent access by foot or by vehicle.
Promotes the migration of water and nutrients.
Eventually ensures the preservation of the tree.

4.4.1. Working
By using the load redistribution features to evenly spread loading, Honeycomb structure
reduces point loading and the associated pressures on tree roots beneath. By confining the
soils, lateral movement is prevented, and the ground is stabilised, keeping a flat, firm ground
in place and stopping compaction of sub-soils, which put greater pressure on tree roots.
Beneath the Honeycomb structure tree roots are free to grow, and the relieved pressure
promotes the migration of both water and nutrients, which eventually ensures the long-term
preservation of the tree itself.

4.5. Embankment
The soft soil often poses design, construction and maintenance hazards to civil engineering
structures founded on them. Construction of embankment over soft soil or weak soil is very
difficult work. Some soils are so weak that they cant take the load of construction
equipments. Problems may arise during the construction stage due to the inability of the soft
soil to provide adequate support to the construction equipments. Post construction, the
excessive settlement and insufficient bearing capacity of the soft subgrade may lead to loss of
stability of the overlying structures. Rotational slip failure of embankments, cracking and
differential settlement of soil under embankments are some of the failures associated with
construction of structures on soft soils. In such condition generally upper layer of weak soil
is removed and some strong soil is used. The depth of removal of weak soil depends upon the
load coming on the soil and strength of the soil. This process governs the overall construction
cost of embankment. Use of CCS mattress over the soft soil can reduce the settlement and
increase the load carrying capacity . CCS act as rigid mattress and it distribute the applied
load over larger area due to which pressure intensity on the soft soil decreases. A study
reported the use of CCS mattress at Greatham Creek Bridge, England. The mattress was
placed under a 5 meter high embankment over soft silt which was 7 meter deep. The lateral
strain reported was small and the vertical settlement was found to be reduced by 50%. The
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

author attributed the reduction in settlement to the lateral restraint offered by the CCS
material that prevents the material from spreading and hence reduces the stresses coming
onto the soft sub grade. Similar type of performance was found by Cowland and Wong 1993
for road in Hong Kong when CCS mattress was used under the embankment. Use of CCS
increases the stiffness of embankment and it can also reduce cost up to 30%.

4.6. Foundation
Strength and stiffness of soil is most important criteria for the construction of foundation of
over the soil. Failure of foundation takes place when soil is not strong enough to take load or
because of excessive settlement may be a reason of failure. Construction of foundation over
the weak soil can be done either by selecting suitable foundation like pile, raft etc. or can be
done by modification of properties of soil by some ground improvement techniques.
Generally use of modification of soil properties may economical. Several studies and
researches have been done over the use of CCSs reinforcement under the foundation. Value of
sub grade modulus can be increased by inclusion of CCSs. As it provides the 3D confinement
to soil, thus provides rigidity to the soil and thereby increasing the bearing capacity of soil.

4.7. Reinforce wall

Use of CCS in the retaining wall is very popular now. In such retaining wall concrete panel is
not required (Figure 4.7.). Vegetation can also be grown in such reinforced wall. CCSs are
used to confine the soil which results in the increase of shearing strength and preventing the
failure of the structure. So there are lot of applications of CCSs in reinforce wall. Researchers
studied about the use of CCSs in reinforce walls. It has been seen that deformation settlement
on both wall and backfill is increased with increasing the facing angle and surcharge. In
facing type walls displacement and settlement is more as compare to the gravity type because
of its light weight. While in gravity type two modes of failure often seen are failure due to
sliding and failure due to overturning. So to avoid these circumstances reinforcement of
retaining walls is required. CCS reinforced retaining walls are also performed better in case
of earthquake loading. Due to CCS reinforcement the deformation in such retaining wall can
be suppress effectively.

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Figure:4.7. CCS flexible retaining walls.

CHAPTER 5
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND TYPICAL APPLICATIONS
5.1. Design Considerations for Load Support
Infill properties
Infill quality
Subgrade strengths
Trafficking
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

5.1.1. Typical Applications

Permeable surfacing
Water crossings
Car parks
Foundations
Grass car parks
Footpaths
Driveways
Structural supports
Temporary site access
Pipeline/sewer support
Road stabilisation
Rail stabilisation
Cart paths

5.2. Design Considerations Earth Retention

Wall height
Surcharge loading
Overturning stability
Shear strength
Foundation substrate strength

5.2.1. Typical Applications

Structural supports
Retaining walls
Vegetated/Green walls
Economical land development
Stormwater capture
Support for hillside roads
Noise abatement walls
Steepened embankments
Dams and flood defence bunds
Retention bunds
Culvert head walls
Sound barriers
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

5.3. Design Considerations for Slope and Channel Protection

Slope angle
Slope drainage
Slope length
Slope substrate
Hydrology
Required finish

5.3.1. Typical Applications

Slope protection
Slope stabilisation
Channel lining
River lining
Coastal protection
Revetments
Water crossings
Balancing ponds
Embankment slopes
Containment dykes and levees
Noise abatement walls
Swales and drainage ditches
Stormwater containment lagoons
Process water channels
Culvert outfalls
Intermittent drainage channels
Dams or spillways
Abutment protection
Geomembrane protection
Landfill lining covers and drainage
Steep slopes

5.4. Design Considerations for Tree Root Protection

Infill properties
Infill quality
Subgrade strengths
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Trafficking
Root depths

5.4.1. Typical Applications

Drives
Estate roads
Tracks/Trails
Car parks

5.5. Advantages of CCS

Steeper gradients: Suitable for slopes up to 1V: 1H as long as slope stability is

maintained.
Economical: Replaces the use of expensive stones and their transportation with

locally available soil fill.

Installation: 8- 10 times faster than conventional methods; easy to transport owing to

its flat and collapsible structure.

Aesthetics: Supports development of vegetation.
Environmental Friendly: Zero quarrying needs and minimal transportation resulting in

lower carbon footprint.

Material Durability: Long lasting and resistant to extreme soil and weather conditions.
Manpower: Lower manpower requirement comprising of unskilled labour.
Infilling: Can be in-filled with soil / concrete / gravel.
Reduction of road-structure thickness as different from the conventional solutions,

due to elimination of deep soil replacement,

Increasing shear resistance of the CCS infill materials due to its their confinement and

compaction within the cells,

Reduction of soil settlement as the effect of natural compaction and prevention of

lateral movements of aggregate infill of CCS,

Reduction of high stresses to the subbase as the result of the improved load

distribution on the adjacent CCSs.

Enabling stormwater filtration through the bedding layers thanks to the application of

loose materials,
Stability and erosion resistance of earth slope surfaces,
Soil reinforcing and stabilisation for example under road
Embankments and sports fields.

5.6. Advantages of Perforations:

5.6.1. Lateral Drainage
Allow for lateral drainage on slopes and reduces hydrostatic build-up.
5.6.2. Earth Retention
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Makes earth retention and various slope works possible.
5.6.3. Shear Strength
Increases shear strength as infill interacts with the cell walls creating a 3D friction.
5.6.4. Interface Friction
Tests indicate that perforated cell walls are more effective at increasing the interface
friction between the cell walls when compared to textured cell walls.
5.6.5. Impermeable Subgrades
Impermeable subgrades do not cause a problem as the lateral drainage offered by
the perforations allow water to drain elsewhere.

5.7. Different type of infills used in CCS

With reference to the design requirements and geotechnical site conditions, the application of
different types of infill materials is possible:
topsoil with various selected vegetation,
various mineral materials including sand, gravel, aggregate or stones
concrete of various strengths and surface finishes,
on-site fill materials,
with reference to the design requirements combined options of the ones above.

CONCLUSION
This paper summarized the experimental work of using CCS in ground improvement under
an intense rainfall condition, which recently recurs with an increasing rate owing to climate
change and extreme weather. The result shows that the installation of CCS can indeed
effectively improve the bearing capacity of the loose-to-moderate ground subject to high
water content as a result of intense rainfall. The increased bearing capacity should possibly
result from the equivalent cohesion as CCS and sand are integrated as a composite
material. In addition, the deformed CCS inducing a large passive earth pressure in the soil
within cell pockets would prevent the development of tension cracks close to the footing,
which was observed in the natural ground without the CCS reinforcement.

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

REFERENCES
1: Dhiraj Kumar,Gourav Dhane,Akash Priyadarshee,''PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT
FORM OF SOIL REINFORCEMENT:A REVIEW'',International Journal of Science
Technology & Management, Volume No 01, Feb 2015 pp 667-677
2:Gourav Dhane ,Dhiraj kumar ,Akash priyadarshee ,''CCS:An Emerging Technique
of Soil Reinforcement In Civil Engineering Field'',IOSR Journal of Mechanical and
Civil Engineering(IOSR-JMCE),e-ISSN:2278-1684,p-ISSN:2320-334X ,pp 59-63
3: Chowdhury Swaraj and Suman Shakti,''A Review of Studies on CCS-reinforced
Foundations'',Research Journal of Recent Science,Vol. 4(ISC-2014),24-30(2015) pp
24-30
4: Manish Yadav,Arvind kumar Agnihotri,Akash Priyadarshee,Gauraw
Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page

CELLULAR CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS

Dhane,''Application of CCSs in Reinforcement of Soil: A Review'', Journal of Civil
Engineering and Environmetal Technology,Vol 1,No;5 August,2014 ,pp 60-64

Department of Civil Engineering,CISAT,2016

Page