Research ArticleStrength Performance Based on Flexibility from Laterite SoilUsing Tire Powder and Micro Silica
Behrouz Gordan1 and Azlan Adnan2
1University College of Omran & Toseeh, Hamedan 65157 35617, Iran2Engineering Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Research Group (e-SEER), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
Correspondence should be addressed to Behrouz Gordan; [email protected]
Received 4 June 2015; Revised 29 September 2015; Accepted 29 September 2015
In terms of environmental issues and human health, one of the advisable techniques to improve soil behavior is the use of scrap tiresfor soil structures. According to the literature, Tire-Derived Aggregates (TDA) are one of the valuable materials in different fieldof Geotechnical that can be used. TDA properties correspond to some important factors such as high level of flexible, lightweight,high permeability and economic material comparing with sand. Strength performance based on increasing flexibility from lateritesoil is the main goal of this study. For this purpose, tropical laterite soil was mixed using TDA and micro silica (MS). As a researchmethod, unconfined tests were carried for thirteen samples based on different percentage of the additives. As a result, the significantreduction for elasticity modulus and strength was observed when soil mixed just using TDA. In addition, the rate of strain at thepeak of the curve was dramatically increased. The best performance was found using 6% additives when the ratio was 3% MS and3% TDA. In fact, the effect of MS was more to increase strength. To recommend, the seepage controlling will investigate at next.
1. Introduction
In order to stabilize soil, soil improvement is one of theinteresting research areas in order to increase the level ofstrength using some additives. For this purpose, an applica-tion of the cement material is completely investigated basedon some research studies [1–3]. In addition, the lime effecton the laterite stabilization was another topic for this type ofsoil [4–6]. As stated by Mckinley et al. [7], chemical anal-ysis of contaminated soil strengthened using limestone wasinvestigated. The stabilization treatment of clay slope topsoilwas recently performed using organic polymer soil stabilizer[8]. Strength behavior and microstructural characteristics oftropical laterite soil treated with sodium silicate-based liquidstabilizer were carried out [9]. In the industrial countries,one of the important problems is the reduction of disposalmaterials. In this case, the wastematerials aremore applicableutilized to provide other engineering products. The tire isone of the applicable waste materials, as used in different
industries and construction engineering. In the last twodecades, it is well known that soil properties can be improvedusing TDA [10–12]. An excellent performance of earth damsunder resonance motion was recently presented [13]. Theyused TDA with MS for laterite soil to reduce damage in theearthen dam during an earthquake. This technique was verygood in terms of dynamic behavior. Consequently, the soilresistance is one of the specific aspects in geotechnical prob-lems. Soil strength is one of the basic properties commonlyknown with maximum stress.This value is assessable accord-ing to measure of soil behavior, as can be computed based onthe stress-strain relation. However, this value correspondedto themaximum level for structural loading.Therefore, accu-rate determination of soil strength is essential with respect totriaxial effects. This research tried to estimate flexibility andsoil strength as objective, unconfined test in a soil mechaniclaboratorywas performed. Laterite soilmixed using two addi-tives such as TDA andMS. In order to obtain the bestmixtureformula, additives with different percentage were tested.
Hindawi Publishing CorporationJournal of MaterialsVolume 2015, Article ID 830903, 6 pageshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/830903
This study included two steps; material properties are intro-duced in the first step. Secondly, the soil strength basedon unconfined compressive strength test was carried [14].According to this standard, each sample should be testedthree times. After that, the average of results should be com-puted.
2.1. Materials. Laterite is clayey soil with reddish color andamounts of iron oxides used in this study. This soil can befound commonly in tropical zones [15]. The soil samples arefrom a hillside (Balai Cerap) located at the Skudai campusin Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). Tables 1 and 2 showphysical and chemical properties of this soil. Based onparticlesize test [16], maximum size and minimum size of lateriteranged between 2.00mm and 0.075mm, respectively.
In terms of additives, two materials such as TDA and MSwere mixed. TDA was a powder material (80 meshes) pro-vided from Yong Fong Rubber Industries Sdn Bhd.The pow-der material MS was provided from Syarikat Honda Indus-tries Sdn Bhd. Figure 1 shows all materials, as introduced.
2.2. Test Procedure. Considering of the lateritic soil indicatedthe best performance base on using air-dried soil insteadof oven drying [17]. In this case, the significant changes its
Table 1: Characteristics of the natural laterite soil.
Engineering and physical properties ValuesPh (L/S = 2.50) 5.31Specific gravity 2.88External surface area (m2g−1) 42.1Liquid limit, LL (%) 74Plastic limit, PL (%) 42Plasticity index, PI (%) 32BS classification MHMaximum dry density (Kgm−3) 1330Optimum moisture content (%) 35
Table 2: Oxides and chemical composition of laterite soil.
Chemical composition (oxides) Value (%)SiO2
25.15Al2O3
30.85Fe2O3
36.2CO2
7.8
plasticity and compaction properties according to oven dry-ing. Hence, laterite soil was prepared with air-dried method.The air-dried soil was broken into smaller sizes, and it wasclassified through a 2mm. The required amount of water
Figure 2: Sample, (a) during test, (b) after failure, and (c) sample section.
known as optimumwater content (OMC)was determined forthe natural soil using BS 1377: part 4: 1990 (clause 3.3.4.1) [18].Series of standard proctor compaction tests were carried tomeasure the optimum moisture contents for laterite soil. Interms of using different percentage based on weight, Table 3presents sample in this study with respect to the differentmixture.
Figure 2 shows one sample during the test. In thisfigure, the sample was under load with a rate of 1mm perminute. In addition, failure with 45 degrees was observed
(see Figure 2(b)). Finally, Figure 2(c) shows the distributionof material in the sample with homogenized performance.
3. Results and Discussion
In order to analyze results with better understanding, sam-ples, one until five, were compared, as shown in Figure 3. Asseen, by looking at the tire effect on strength distribution, thisperformance was reverse for TDA. It means that the increaseof TDA percentage (dashed lines) led to the significant
4 Journal of Materials
Sample 1Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
Sample 5
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.080.01Strain
0.0050.00
100.00150.00200.00250.00300.00350.00
Stre
ss (k
Pa)
(0.065, 106.98)
(0.06, 167.57)
(0.0425, 232.74)(0.0325, 263.57)
(0.0225, 306.29)
0.00
Figure 3: Distribution of stress strain in sample (1–5).
Sample 2 Sample 7
Sample 6
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.050.00
Strain
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
Stre
ss (k
Pa)
(0.0325, 263.57) (0.0425, 262.21)
(0.0425, 249.45)
(a)
Sample 3
Sample 8
Sample 9
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
Stre
ss (k
Pa)
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.050.00
Strain
(0.0425, 276.20)
(0.045, 232.74)
(0.035, 175.39)
(b)
Sample 11
Sample 4
Sample 10
0.06 0.070.03 0.04 0.050.01 0.020.00
Strain
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
Stre
ss (k
Pa)
(0.0425, 197.34)
(0.045, 131.77)
(0.06, 157.67)
(c)
Sample 12Sample 13
Sample 5
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.070.00
Strain
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
Stre
ss (k
Pa)
(0.0425, 129.71)(0.07, 144.27)
(0.065, 106.98)
(d)
Figure 4: Distribution of stress strain in samples.
reduction of strength, as can be seen in the peak of stress-strain curves. On the other hand, this procedure can leadto increasing flexibility with respect to expansion of thestrain value. For example, strain value was 0.0225 in sample 1(laterite) when it was dramatically increased in sample 5 with0.065. In addition, it can be seen that the maximum stresswas 35% of the total value (306.29 kPa for sample 1) in sample5 when it was, respectively, 85%, 75%, and 55% in samples 2,
3, and 4. It means that the reduction of stress with respect toincreased TDA indicated the nonlinear trend.
To improve the strength, the authors decide to use microsilica (MS). Therefore, four groups were tested in this study,as can be shown in Figure 4. According to this figure, thestrain performance was increased in all groups at least inone sample. According to stress-strain curves in Figure 4(a),samples 6 and 7 show more percentage of the final strain
Journal of Materials 5
12000
16000
14000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Sample 1
15283.72
Sample 2
9829.37
Sample 3
7336.18
Sample 4
2582.62
Sample 5
1495.9
Elas
ticity
mod
ulus
(kPa
)Figure 5: Elasticity modulus in sample 1 to 5.
9829.37
6936.68
8710.86
Sample 2 Sample 6 Sample 70
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Elas
ticity
mod
ulus
(kPa
)
(a)
7336.18
9718.62
8505.91
Sample 3 Sample 8 Sample 90
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Elas
ticity
mod
ulus
(kPa
)
(b)
Sample 4 Sample 10 Sample 11
2582.62
5581.1
6536.48
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Elas
ticity
mod
ulus
(kPa
)
(c)
Sample 5 Sample 12 Sample 13
1495.9
4362.86
2655.89
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Elas
ticity
mod
ulus
(kPa
)
(d)
Figure 6: Distribution of elasticity modulus in sample.
(failure point) in the stress-strain curves but stress was a littlebit lower than sample 3. Based on assessment of the stress-strain curves in Figure 4(b), both samples (8 and 9) wereunsuccessful to increase stress but strain was increased in oneof them (see sample 8).
In contrast, Figure 4(c) shows the reverse trend. Bothsamples (10 and 11) were successful to increase stress, butthe strain rate was reduced. This behavior was similar inFigure 4(d) for distributing stress. Sample 13 shows morevalue of stress and strain in comparison to sample 5.However,the distribution of elasticity modulus was very important insamples. Therefore, the elasticity modulus was compared insample 1 to 5, as shown in Figure 5. As expected, this valuewas reduced according to increased TDA in samples. Thisreduction was the nonlinear trend. This behavior indicatedthat the stiffness was reduced with more flexibility.
Figure 6 shows the distribution of the elasticity modulusin four groups as mentioned earlier. As can be seen, elasticity
modulus was increased in all groups excepted Figure 4(a).Sample 12 shows the maximum rate of the raise up elasticitymodulus in samples with 4362.86 kPa when it was 1495.9 kPain sample 5 (2.91 times). This ratio was, respectively, 2.53 and1.32, for Figures 6(c) and 6(b).
From the above discussions, it can be inferred that sample7 shows the best performance. Not only the strain rate with4.25% was increased in comparison to 2.25% for tropicallaterite soil but also both additives led to reduced elasticitymodulus with respect to increased flexibility.
4. Conclusion
Based on results from unconfined soil test for tropical lateritesoil that mixed using two additives such as a tire powder(mesh 80) and micro silica, it can be concluded that themaximum stress for laterite was 306.29 kPa while strainrate was 0.0225, and elasticity modulus was 15283.72 kPa.
6 Journal of Materials
The increased flexibility with reduced elasticity modulus wasfound using tire aggregate in the soil. Maximum rate of strainwith 7% occurred when tropical laterite mixed using 10%tire and 5% micro silica. The micro silica was mostly causedto increase elasticity modulus. It was found that lateritewith 10%TDA and 4% showed maximum rate (2.91 times)to enhance elasticity modulus. The best performance wasconsequently obtainedwith respect to control of some factorssuch as stress, strain, and elasticity modulus. It was found by3% TDA and 3% micro silica. In this area, strain rate was0.0425 as stress was 262.21 Kilopascal.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper.
Acknowledgment
This study ismade possible by the support of the InternationalDoctorate Fellowship of Universiti TeknologiMalaysia, and itis very much appreciated.
References
[1] K. J.Osinubi andA. B.Medubi, “Evaluation of cement andphos-phatic waste admixture on tropical black clay road foundation,”in Proceedings of 4th International Conference on StructuralEngineering Analysis andModelling (SEAM ’97), pp. 9–11, Accra,Ghana, July 1997.
[2] M. A. Mustapha, “Effect of bagasse ash on cement stabilizedlaterite,” in Proceedings of the Seminar in the Department of CivilEngineering, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria, 2005.
[3] M. Alhassan and A. M. Mustapha, “Effect of rice husk ashon cement stabilized laterite,” Leonardo Electronic Journal ofPractices and Technologies, vol. 11, pp. 47–58, 2007.
[4] D. O. A. Osula, “Lime modification of problem laterite,” Engi-neering Geology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 141–154, 1991.
[5] K. J. Osinubi, “Influence of compactive efforts and compactiondelays on lime-treated soil,” Journal of Transportation Engineer-ing, vol. 124, no. 2, pp. 149–155, 1998.
[6] K. J. Osinubi, “Influence of compactive efforts on lime-slagtreated tropical black clay,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engi-neering, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 175–181, 2006.
[7] J. D. Mckinley, H. R. Thomas, K. P. Williams, and J. M. Reid,“Chemical analysis of contaminated soil strengthened by theaddition of lime,” Engineering Geology, vol. 60, no. 1–4, pp. 181–192, 2001.
[8] J. Liu, B. Shi, H. Jiang, H. Huang, G. Wang, and T. Kamai,“Research on the stabilization treatment of clay slope topsoil byorganic polymer soil stabilizer,”EngineeringGeology, vol. 117, no.1-2, pp. 114–120, 2011.
[9] N. Latifi, A. Eisazadeh, and A. Marto, “Strength behavior andmicrostructural characteristics of tropical laterite soil treatedwith sodium silicate-based liquid stabilizer,” EnvironmentalEarth Sciences, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 91–98, 2014.
[10] D. N. Humphrey and W. P. Manion, “Properties of tire chipsfor lightweight fill,” in Proceedings of the ASCE Conference onGrouting, Soil Improvement and Geosynthetics, pp. 1344–1355,ASCE, New Orleans, La, USA, February 1992.
[11] I. Ahmed, “Laboratory study on properties of rubber-soils,”Tech. Rep. FHWA-IN-JHRP-93-4, 1993.
[12] K. R. Reddy and A. Marella, “Properties of different size scraptire shreds: implications on using as drainagematerial in landfillcover systems,” in Proceedings of the 17th International Confer-ence on Solid Waste Technology and Management, Philadelphia,Pa, USA, October 2001.
[13] B. Gordan andA. Adnan, “Excellent performance of earth damsunder resonance motion using isolator damping layer,” Shockand Vibration, vol. 2014, Article ID 432760, 15 pages, 2014.
[14] British Standards, “Determination of the unconfined compres-sive strength,” BS 1377-7, 1990.
[15] A. Marto, N. Latifi, and H. Sohaei, “Stabilization of lateritesoil using GKS soil stabilizer,” Electronic Journal of GeotechnicalEngineering, vol. 18, pp. 521–532, 2013.
[16] BS 1377-2, “Determination of the particle size in soil,” 1990.[17] R. K. Goswami and C. Mahanta, “Leaching characteristics
of residual lateritic soils stabilised with fly ash and lime forgeotechnical applications,”WasteManagement, vol. 27, no. 4, pp.466–481, 2007.
[18] BS 1377-4, “Determination of the optimum water content insoil,” 1990.
