Vol. 5 No. 01 (2024)
Articles

Enhancing California Bearing Ratio through Optimized Compaction Efforts: A Study on Alluvial Soils in North India

PDF
  • Jaskiran Sobti,
  • Daljeet Sidhu
Jaskiran Sobti
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.
Daljeet Sidhu
Principal Consultant cum Director, Dr. D Project and Resource Management Services (OPC) Pvt. Ltd. Ludhiana.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.38094/jocef50173

Published 2024-02-24

Keywords

  • California Bearing Ratio,
  • Compactive Effort,
  • Modified Proctor Test Flexible Pavement,
  • Perpetual Pavement

How to Cite

[1]
J. Sobti and D. Sidhu, “Enhancing California Bearing Ratio through Optimized Compaction Efforts: A Study on Alluvial Soils in North India”, JoCEF, vol. 5, no. 01, pp. 1-6, Feb. 2024.

Copyright (c) 2024

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

The quantity of soil required for embankment construction is enormous. Often the soil is brought to the site in dumpers in multiple rounds. This to and from movement of the wagons leads to the deterioration of the existing flexible pavement. In the absence of good earth nearby, using existing soils to act as a subgrade material upon meeting the desired strength and stability characteristics is the need of the hour. The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) is an indicator of soil's strength, which further depends on the degree of compaction of soil. In this study, an effort has been made to find the required compaction efforts to achieve maximum CBR value finding its applicability for both conventional flexible and perpetual pavements. Three different types of alluvial soils in North India were tested for CBR with varying compaction efforts using the modified Proctor test. The effect of mixing different soils was also considered to find the effectiveness of mechanically mixing soils on the required compaction efforts. It was observed that there is a constant upsurge in the CBR of soils upon an increase in the percentage compactive effort up to a certain limit. In the case of clayey soils, the rate of increase is less as compared to the well-graded sands. This study also highlights the effect of mechanical mixing of such soils with sandy soils in desired proportions giving rise to amplified values of CBR ratio of the soil blend. The regression analysis was also conducted to examine a correlation between the compactive effort and CBR values and it was best represented by exponential function for different types of soils.

PDF

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. F.,C Ali, and S.,M. Waleed "Behaviour of sand-clay mixtures for road pavement subgrade", Internation Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol.18, pp. 714-726, 2015.
  2. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP).. Correlation of CBR values with soil index properties. ‘Guide For Mechanistic-Empirical Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures.’, 2001.
  3. T.K., Roy, B.C., Chattopadhyay, S.K. Roy, “Prediction of CBR from Compaction Characteristics of Cohesive Soil”. Highway Research Journal, July-Dec, pp. 77-88, 2009.
  4. A.U, Rehman, K., Farooq, H., Mujtaba, “Prediction of California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and compaction characteristics of granular soils”. Acta Geotechnica Slovenica, pp. 63-72, 2017.
  5. R. S., Patel and M. D., Desai, “CBR Predicted by Index Properties for Alluvial Soils of South Gujarat”. Indian Geotechnical Conference, 79-82, 2010.
  6. S., Noor, A,. Singh, “Use of Genetic Programming to Evaluate Proctor Properties of Compacted Soils”. International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology 1, 4, 2012.
  7. B., Yildirim, O., Gunaydin, “Estimation of California bearing ratio by using soft computing systems”. Expert Syst Appl /vol 38(5), pp 6381–6391, 2011.
  8. H., Nagaraj, and B., Suresh, “Influence of clay mineralogy on the relationship of CBR of fine-grained soils with their index and engineering properties'', Transportation geotechnics, Vol. 15, pp 29-38, 2018.
  9. K. S., Kumar, P. M., Nanduri, and P. N., Kumar, “Validation of Predicted California Bearing Ratio Values from Different Correlations”, Amer. Jour. Engg. Res. (AJER), Vol 3 (8), pp 344–352, 2014.
  10. A., Mishra and J.P. Tegar, “Correlation of CBR with Index Properties of Soil of Kolar Region (Bhopal) using Regression Analysis”. International Research of Engineering and technology (IRJET), Vol 6(7), pp 3603-3612, 2019.
  11. Y. V., Katte, S. M., Mfoyet, B., Manefouet, A. S. L., Wouatong, and L.A., Bezeng., “Correlation of California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Value with Soil Properties of Road Subgrade Soil”. Vol 37, pp 217–234, 2019.
  12. S. K. , Alam , A., Mondal, and A. , Shiuly, “Prediction of CBR Value of Fine Grained Soils of Bengal Basin by Genetic Expression Programming, Artificial Neural Network and Krigging Method”, J Geol Soc India, Vol 95, pp 190–196, 2020.
  13. A., Bharath, M., Manjunatha, B. R., Tangadagi, T. V. Reshma, and S. Preethi, “Influence and correlation of maximum dry density on soaked & unsoaked CBR of soil”. Vol 47 (13), pp 3998-4002, 2021.
  14. S., Muthu Lakshmi, M., Arshad Gani, V., Kamalesh, V., Mahalakshmi, P.M. Padmesh, “Correlating unsoaked CBR with UCC strength for SC and SP soil”, Materials Today: Proceedings, Vol 43(2), pp 1293-1303, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.029, 2021.
  15. F. J., Haupt, and F., Netterberg, “Prediction of California Bearing Ratio and compaction characteristics of Transvaal soils from indicator properties”. Journal of the South African institution of civil engineering., Vol 63(2), pp 47–56, 2021.
  16. S. A., Kleyn., “Possible developments in pavement foundation design”. Transactions of the South African Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol 5(12), pp 286–292, 1955.
  17. S., Muthu Lakshmi, S. Geetha and M., Selvakumar, “Predicting soaked CBR of SC subgrade from dry density for light and heavy compaction”. Materials Today Proceedings, Vol 45 (2), pp 164-1670, 2021.
  18. A., Bisht, “Sand futures: Post-growth alternatives for mineral aggregate consumption and distribution in the global south”. 191, 107233, 2022.
  19. M., Svampa, “Commodities consensus: Neoextractivism and enclosure of the commons in Latin America”. South Atlantic Q., Vol 114 (1), pp. 65-82, 2022.
  20. F., Krausmann, S., Gingrich, N., Eisenmenger, K.H., Erb, H., Haberl, M. Fischer-Kowalski, “Growth in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century”. Ecol. Econ., Vol 68 (10), pp 2696-2705, 2009.
  21. IS:2720 (Part 5) Indian Standard, Methods of test for soils, Part 5: Determination of liquid limit and plastic limit, Bur. Indian Stand, New Delhi,1985.
  22. IS 1498-1970 “Classification and Identification of Soils for General Engineering Purposes” Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
  23. IS: 2720 (Part IV) Indian standard method of test for soils grain size analysis, Bureau of Indian standards, New Delhi.
  24. IS 2720: Part 16: 1987 Methods of test for soils-Part 16: Laboratory determination of CBR, Bureau of Indian Standards, and New Delhi.