EVALUATION OF SOAKED AND UNSOAKED CBR VALUES OF SOIL BASED ON THE COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/mjce.v28.15712Keywords:
Subgrade soil, optimum moisture content, maximum dry density, soaked CBR, unsoaked CBR, compaction energyAbstract
Subgrade of a pavement should be strong enough to give adequate support to the pavement and for supporting and distributing the wheel loads. The design and behaviour of a flexible pavement depends mainly on the stability of the subgrade soil, which can be increased by compacting the soil at optimum moisture content (OMC) thus achieving maximum dry density (MDD). In this study, Modified Proctor Compaction Test (MPCT) was conducted by giving 5 different number of blows per layer so as to establish a relationship of compaction energy with OMC & MDD. Also, OMC and MDD are one of the most important parameters influencing California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test. CBR is a penetration test used for evaluating the mechanical strength of subgrade soil and for determining the thickness of the pavement required. Determination of soaked and unsoaked CBR value for a soil is time consuming and a laborious process. Hence in this paper an attempt has been made to arrive at regression equations to correlate soaked and unsoaked CBR values for the silty clay (CL) soil with the compaction characteristics, so that based on OMC and MDD, CBR value of soil can be predicted thus avoiding the time consuming process of conducting CBR tests. The soil sample used in this project was a disturbed sample collected from Thiruporur District in Chennai.References
Agarwal, K.B. and Ghanekar, K.D. (1970) Prediction of CBR from Plasticity Characteristics of Soil, Proceedings of 2nd South-East Asian Conference on Soil Engineering, Bangkok, Singapore, 571-576.
Anjaneyappa and Amarnath, M. S. (2012) Strength and Performance Characteristics of Soil Compacted at Different Energy Levels, International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, 5(2): 347-351.
Cheng, L. and Jack, B.E. (1981) Soil and Foundations, 7th Edition, New Jersey:Pearson Prentice-Hall,85 pp.
Datta, T. and Chottopadhyay, B.C. (2011) Correlation between CBR and Index Properties Of Soil, Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference, Kochi, India, 131 – 133.
Deepak, Y., Jain, P.K. and Rakesh, K. (2014) Prediction Of Soaked CBR Of Fine Grained Soils From Classification And Compaction Parameters, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies, III(IV): 119-121.
Dilip Kumar, T. (2014) A Study of Correlation Between California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Value With Other Properties of Soil, IJETAE, 4(1): 559 – 562.
IS 2720 (1983) Indian Standard Methods of Test for Soils, Part 8 – Determination of Water Content – Dry Density Relation using Heavy Compaction (Second Revision).
IS 2720 (1987) Indian Standard Methods of Test for Soils, Part 16 - Laboratory Determination of CBR (Second Revision).
Mehrab Jesmani, A., Nasiri, M. and Hoseini, S. M. R. (2008) Optimum Water Content and Maximum Dry Unit Weight of Clayey Gravels at Different Compactive Efforts, EJGE, 13: 1-14.
Naveen, B., Shirur and Santosh Hiremath, G. (2014) Establishing Relationship between CBR Value and Physical Properties of Soil, IOSR-JMCE, 11(5): 26-30.
Patel, R. S. and Desai, M.D. (2010) CBR Predicted by Index Properties of Soil for Alluvial Soils of South Gujarat , Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference, IIT Bombay, Vol. I, 79-82.
Ramasubbarao, G.V. and Siva Sankar, G. (2013) Predicting Soaked CBR Value of Fine Grained Soils Using Index and Compaction Characteristics, Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 7(3): 354-360.
Roy, T. K.., Chattopadhyay, B.C. and Roy, S.K. (2009) Prediction of CBR from Compaction Characteristics of Cohesive Soil, Highway Research Journal, July-Dec., 77-88.
Sathawara Jigar, K. and Patel, A.K. (2013) Comparison Between Soaked And Unsoaked CBR, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies, II(III):132-135.
Venkatasubramanian, C. and Dhinakaran, G. (2011) ANN model for predicting CBR from index properties of soils, International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, 2(2): 605-611.
