STUDY ON STABILIZATION OF SOIL USING POLYTHENE COVER

A mini project carried out at

MAHATMA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

During
June, 2018k
By

Ch. MANOJ (16261A0172)

K.MANOJ (16261A0190)
R.PRASHANTH (16261A01A8)
S. RAMCHANDER (16261A01B4)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

MAHATMA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(Affiliated to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad)
Approved by AICTE, New Delhi
Sponsered by Chaitanya Bharathi Educational Society
GANDIPET, HYDERABAD-500075.T.S.(INDIA)
www.mgit.ac.in
June, 2019
 MAHATMA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(Affiliated to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad)
Approved by AICTE, New Delhi

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Certificate
This is to certify that this report “STUDY ON STABILIZATION OF SOIL USING
POLYTHENE COVERS” is a bonafide record of work done by
CH.MANOJ(16261A0172),K.MANOJ(16261A0190),R.PRASHANTH(16261A01A8),
S.RAMCHANDER(16261A01B4) through internship training at MAHATMA GANDHI
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY and submitted for a Mini Project to the Department of Civil
Engineering, Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Technology, Gandipet, Hyderabad.

Internalguide Dr. K. V. Ramana Reddy

Mr.K.SaranRao Professor & HOD
Assistant Professor.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We express our sincere gratitude to Mr.k.SaranRao, ASST Professor, Civil Engineering
Department, for this valuable guidance. Timely suggestions during the entire duration of this
project work, without which this would not have been possible.
We would like to express our sincere thankfulness to Dr. K. V. Ramana Reddy, Head of the
Department for supervising the project and giving us his kind cooperation and encouragement
throughout the project.
We would like to thank Mrs.D.Kiranmaye, ASST Professor, Civil Engineering Department for
timely suggestions and encouragement throughout the project.
We would like to thank Mrs.D.Kiranmaye, ASST. Professor for permitting us to conduct the
experimental work in the geotechnical engineering laboratory.

Ch.MANOJ(16261A0172)
K.MANOJ(16261A0190)
R.PRASHANTH(16261A01A8)
S.RAMCHANDER(16261A01B4)
 CONTENTS
1. LIST OF FIGURES
2. LIST OF TABLES
3. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
4. CHAPTER 2 LABORATORY TESTS
2.1 Determination of specific gravity of soil
2.2 Determination of liquid limit of soil
2.3 Determination of plastic limit of soil
2.4 Determination of free swell index
2.5 Determination of optimum moisture content
by standard proctor test and maximum dry density of
clay soil
2.6 California Bearing Ratio test
6. CONCLUSION
7. REFERENCE
ABSTRACT
The project presents the study carried out with polythene cover used in strengthening the
subgrade. The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test is conducted on a mixture of polyhene covers
and soil. In this study, the effect of inclusion of waste polythene cover on the soil is investigated.
Polythene cover is added to the soil in the proportions of 1% and 2% by weight and CBR test is
conducted.
Soil is the remains of certain types of rocks that have been eroded and weathered to form fine
particles. Clay particles are very small and therefore can hold more water. The clay is generally
weak and has no stability in heavy loading. Some properties of soil are determined in this study.
The management of polythene covers has become a growing problem in recent years. Polythene
covers represent one of several special wastes that are difficult for municipalities to handle.
Whole covers are difficult to landfill because they tend to float on the surface. Stockpiles of
polythene covers are located in many communities, resulting in reduction of impact on public
health, environment and aesthetic problems.
With the addition of polythene cover in soil, the study reveals the significant variation in the
bearing capacity.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In today’s world due to rapid growth of urbanization and modernization leads to scarcity of land
for construction. The increasing value of land and due to limited availability of site for
construction of structures and roads are done on land having expansive clays. The stability of
structure of road depends on soil properties on which it has built. The constructions can be
economical if the soil is good at shallow depth below the ground surface. In this case shallow
foundations such as raft foundations or footings can be used. However if the soil available on top
surface is weak and strong stratum is available at greater depth foundations such as pile
foundation, deep foundation, and well foundation can be used. Such foundations are not
economical for small structures. In some cases soil condition are so poor even at greater depths.
Developing countries like India mainly depend on the polythene covers for their carrying
products. There is a continuous development and growth in the usage of polythene covers. The
growth and usage of polythene covers have not only caused air pollution etc. but also has created
problems in discarding the polythene covers. Polythene covers does not decompose and as a
result, an economically feasible and environmentally sound disposal method has to be found out.
One of the common and feasible ways to utilize these waste products is to go for construction of
roads, highways and embankments. If these materials can be suitably utilized in construction of
roads, highways and embankments then the pollution problem caused by the industrial wastes
can be greatly reduced. Huge amount of soil is used in the construction of roads and highways
but sufficient amount of soil of required quality is not available easily. Utilization of various
industrial wastes such as polythene covers as a soil replacement not only solves environmental
problems but also provides a new resource for construction industry. Structures are not only
constructed on the soil but also with soil for example embankments, earth dams, airfield and
highway pavements. Soils in general are used as constructed materials as available in nature with
a little processing.
CHAPTER 2
LABORATORY TESTS ON SOIL
In this study we are going to determine the following properties of the soil
• Specific gravity of the soil
• Liquid limit & plastic limit of the soil
• Optimum moisture content (OMC) of the soil
• Maximum dry density of the soil
• CBR value of soil mixed with different proportions of polythene cover
2.1 DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL:
Specific gravity: Specific gravity (G) is defines as the ratio of the unit weight or dry density of
soil solids only to the unit weight or density of distilled water at standard temperature.
Material used:
• water or naphtha.
• Soil sample which is passing through 0.425mm I.S sieve.
Code of reference: I.S: 2720: part-3 section-1: 1980
Procedure:
• Weigh a clean dry specific gravity bottle with cap accurate to 0.01g (W1) with stopper.
• Place 10-20 grams of oven dried soil sample into specific gravity bottle and weigh it
(W2).
• Fill specific gravity bottle to half of its height with kerosene and mix it thoroughly.
Remove entrapped air voids by using a vacuum pump or any suitable method. Fill the
specific gravity bottle with water, flush with top and replace screw top. Dry the specific
gravity bottle from outside and weigh it (W3).
• Remove the contents, wash specific gravity bottle. Pour kerosene, flush and weigh it
(W4).
• Remove contents, wash and pour distilled water and weigh it (W5).
• Repeat the above steps one more time to arrive to an average value.

Specific gravity bottle

Fig:2.1
Observations:
Weight of empty
density bottle W1 26
(grams)
Weight of bottle +
oven dried soil 60
W2 (grams)
Weight of bottle +
soil + water W3 78
(grams)
Weight of bottle +
kerosene W4
(grams)weight of
bottle + water W5 99
(grams)
Specific gravity of
sample G =(W2 –
W1)*SK /((W4 – 2.615
W1) – (W3 –
W2))
Table 1
Result: Specific gravity of the tested soil sample = 2.615
2.2 DETERMINATION OF LIQUID LIMIT OF SOIL:
Liquid limit: liquid limit is defined as the water content at which the soil has little or no shear
strength and when it just begins to flow.
Material used: soil sample which is passing through 0.425mm I.S. sieve.
Code of reference: I.S. 2720-part-5:1970
Procedure:
• Weigh about 150g of oven dried soil sample and mix it thoroughly with certain
percentage of distilled water in a dish to form an uniform paste
• Place a portion of the paste in the cup of liquid limit device and smoothen the surface to a
maximum depth of about 10mm. the paste in the cup is divided into two halves by
holding the grooving tool and device vertical. Thus, a V-shaped gap, 2mm wide at the
bottom and 11mm at the top 8mm deep will be formed. Before the commencement of the
test the height of fall of the cup should be set for 1cm using a measuring block.
• Rotate the handle at an uniform rate of about two revolutions per second and count the
number of revolutions till the gap between two halves of the soil close through a distance
of 10mm. the groove should be closed by how in the soil itself but not by slippage
between the soil and the cup.
• Take approximately 10g of soil in container for moisture content determination
preferably the closed portion of the groove.
• By changing the water content suitably, repeat the experiment to obtain at least five sets
of values so that the number of blows lies between 10 and 40.
Observations: Table2
Water 35 40 45 48 50 53
content
added (%)
Number 94 73 54 33 28 16
of blows
 Liquid limit test
Fig : 2.2

Result: liquid limit of the tested soil sample = 51%

2.3 DETERMINATION OF PLASTIC LIMIT OF SOIL:
Plastic limit: Plastic limit denotes the boundary between plastic and semi-solid states of soil, at
which soil can be moulded to any shape. Specifically, it is the water content at which soil tend to
crack when rolled into threads of about 3mm diameter.
Code of reference: I.S :2720-part 5 :1970
Material used: Soil sample which is passing through0.425mm IS sieve.
Procedure:
• Mix thoroughly about 30g of soil with water in such a way that the soil mixture can be
made into threads.
• Make three or four convenient parts of soil mixture. Make an ellipsoidal lump of wet soil
sample and roll on glass plate with hand until a thread of 3mm diameter is obtained. If it
is not possible, dry the part by pressing between palms and repeat rolling till a thread of
3mm is possible.
• When the thread of about 3mm diameter shows signs of cracks, stop the test.
• Put the pieces of soil thread in a moisture can and then obtain the water content which
represents the plastic limit of soil sample.
Observations:
Container number 1
Weight of empty container W1(grams) 29
Weight of container + wet soil W2(grams) 47
Weight of container + dry soil W3(grams) 43

Table 3
Determination of plastic limit and plasticity index of the soil:
Plastic limit:
Water content (%) = (W2-W3/W3-W1)*100 = 28.5%
Plasticity index:
IP = WL – WP =51– 28.5 = 22.5%
IP of A-line =0.73 (LL -20) = 22.63%
Classification of soil:
If (IPA-line > IPSoil ), it is silt.
If (IPA-line < IPSoil), it is clay.
 Fig:2.3
Result:
Plastic limit of the tested soil sample WP = 28.5%
Plasticity index of the tested soil sample IP = 22.5%
2.4 DETERMINATION OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT BY
STANDARD PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST AND MAXIMUM DRY
DENSITY OF CLAY SOIL
Optimum moisture content: The optimum moisture content of the soil is the water content at
which a maximum dry unit weight can be achieved after a given compaction effort. A maximum
dry unit weight would have no voids in the soil.
Maximum dry density: Maximum dry density of the soil is the dry density of the soil obtained
by the compaction of soil at its optimum moisture content.
Code of reference: I.S: 2720 part-7:1974
Material used: Soil passing through 4.75mm I.S sieve.
Apparatus used:
• Standard proctor cylindrical mould with collar and base.
• Standard rammer of 2.65kg weight.
• I.S sieve number 4.75, weigh balance, oven, measuring jar, straight edge, mixing tools.
Standard proctor test: It is a quantitative test developed by proctor in 1933 in connections with
construction of earth dam. If the soil is properly mixed with water and compacted.
• There is a marked improvement in engineering properties.
• Compaction means rapid reduction of air voids by mechanical means with water leading
to compressibility and permeability of soils.
Procedure:
• Determine the weight of empty mould W1. Assemble the base and collar and apply a thin
coat of oil inside.
• Weigh about 2.5kg of air dried soil passing through sieve I.S 4.75mm into a tray and
spread it.
• Add a known quantity of water about 14% and mix the soil thoroughly.
• Place the moist soil in the mould in three layers. Compact each layer with 25 blows of the
rammer faking through 31cm. The blows should be uniformly spread over the entire
surface of the soil. Each layer is compacted uniformly before the next one is spread for
proper bond .The final compacted soil should extend slightly and remove it by pulling it
upwards slowly.
• Rotate the collar slightly and remove it by pulling it upwards slowly.
• Trim the soil with a straight edge and level the top of the mould. Remove the soil cake
from the base and weigh it W2.
 • Take the representative soil cake for water content determination after it is taken out
using an extractor.
• Repeat the procedure with increase in the water content in increments of 2-3 %
depending upon the rate of increase in the weight of soil from and its decrease later.
Observations:
Height of the mould = 12.76cm
Diameter of the mould = 10cm
Volume of the mould =1002.16cm
Number of 1 2 3 4
trials
Weight of 4180 4180 4180 4180
empty mould
W1 (grams)
Weight of 5991 6060 6092 6059
mould +
compacted soil
W2 (grams)
Weight of 1811 1880 1912 1879
compacted soil
W = W2 – W1
(grams)
Added water 14 17 20 23
content (%)
Wet density = 1.80 1.87 1.90 1.874
W/V (g/cm3)

Table 4
Determination of actual water content:
S.NO. 1 2 3 4
Weight of 28 29 28 29
empty
container W1
(grams)
Weight of 35 42 41 46
container +
wet soil W2
(grams)
Weight of 32 39 38 43
container + dry
soil W3
(grams)
Actual water 42 23 23 17.6
content W
=(W2 –W3)/
(W3-W1)*100
(%)
Dry density= ( 1.26 1.46 1.54 1.59
wet density) /
(1+W)
(g/cm3)

Table 5
Graph: plot a curve between percentage of water content and dry density. Find optimum
moisture content and maximum dry density of the soil.
 Fig:2.4.1
Graph : optimum moisture content

Standardproctortest
Fig:2.4.2
2.5 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS.
PROCEDURE:
• Clean the sieves of sieve shaker using cleaning brush if any particles are struck in the
openings.
• Record the weight of each sieve and receiving pan.
• Dry the specimen in oven for 3-4 minutes to get the dried specimen (ignore, if the specimen
is already dried).
• Weigh the specimen and record its weight.
• Arrange the sieves in order as the smaller openings sieve to the last and larger openings sieve
to the top. (Simply, arrange them to the ascending order of sieve numbers – No.4 sieve on top
and no.200 sieve at bottom)- Sieve numbers and the particle sizes are provided below in a
chart for further understanding.
• Keep the weight recorded specimen on the top sieve and then keep the complete sieve stack
on the sieve shaker (Don’t forget to keep the lid and receiving pan).
• Allow the shaker to work 10-5 minutes – use the clock here.
• Remove the sieve stack from the shaker and record the weight of each sieve and receiving
pan separately.
Grain
Size <0.075 0.075
(mm) - 4.75 > 4.75

Sample Sand
Silt&Clay(%) Gravel(%)
No. (%)

86.00 14.00 0.00

Table 6

RESULT: From sieve analysis soil sample is identified as silty clay.

2.6 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST:
It was developed by California Department of Transportation. The CBR test is penetration test
meant for the evaluation of subgrade strength of roads and pavements. The results obtained by
these tests are used with the empirical curves to determine the thickness of pavement and its
component layers. This is the most widely used method for the design of flexible pavement.

Sample preparation:
Take about 3 to 5.5 kg of soil which depends upon the desired density we want to achieve, and
mix it thoroughly with the required water. Fix the extension collar and the base plate to the
mould. Insert the spacer disc over the base. While preparing samples for soaked CBR, Place the
filter paper on the top of the spacer disc. Compact the mix soil in the mould using either light
compaction or heavy compaction. For light compaction, compact the soil in 3 equal layers, each
layer being given 55 blows by the 2.6 kg rammer. For heavy compaction compact the soil in 5
layers, 56 blows to each layer by the 4.89 kg rammer. Remove the collar and trim off soil. Turn
the mould upside down and remove the base plate and the displacer disc. Put filter paper on the
top of the compacted soil (collar side) and clamp the perforated base plate on to it. Place the
adjustable stem and perforated plate on the compacted soil specimen in the mould. Place the
weights to produce a surcharge equal to the weight of base material and pavement to the nearest
2.5kg on the perforated plate. Immerse the whole mould and weights in a tank of water allowing
free access of water to the top and bottom of specimen for 96 hours for soaked conditions. After
96 hours of soaking take out the specimen from the water and remove the extension collar,
perforated disc, surcharge weights and filter paper. Drain off the excess water by placing the
mould inclined for about 15 minutes.

Procedure:
Place the mould on the lower plate of the testing machine with top face exposed. To prevent
upheaval of soil in to the hole of surcharge weights, place 2.5kg annular weights on the soil
surface prior to seating the penetration plunger after which place the reminder of the surcharge
weights. Set the stress and strain gauges to zero. Apply the load at the rate of 1.25 mm / min.
Take the readings of the load at penetration of 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0,4, 5, 7.5,10 and 12.5.
CBR values are usually calculated for penetrations of 2.5 mm and 5mm. Generally the CBR
values at 2.5mm penetration 18 will be greater than 5mm penetration and in such a case the
former is taken as the CBR value for design purposes. If the CBR value corresponding to a
penetration of 5mm exceeds that for 2.5mm, the test is repeated. If identical results follow, the
bearing ratio corresponding to 5mm penetration is taken for design.100 Standard Loads Adopted
for Different Penetrations for the Standard Material with a CBR value of %
Observations:
Penetration of the Standard Load (lb) Penetration of Standard load (kg)
plunger (inch) plunger(mm)
0.1 3000 2.5 1370
0.2 4500 5.0 2055
0.3 5700 7.5 2630

TABLE 7
CBR TEST OF SILTYCLAY SOIL WIYHOUT REINFORCEMENT:
Penetration dial guage Load dial guage
Dial guage Penetration Proving ring Load
reading reading
(mm) (Kg)
0 0 11 163.9
50 0.5 15 223.5
100 1 17 253.3
150 1.5 19 283.1
200 2 20 298
250 2.5 21 312.1
300 3 22 327.8
350 3.5 22.5 335.25
400 4 23 342.7
450 4.5 24 357.6
500 5 24.5 365.05
550 5.5 25 372.5
600 6 25.5 379.95
650 6.5 26 387.4
700 7 27 402.3
750 7.5 27.5 409.75
800 8 28 417.2
850 8.5 28.5 424.65
900 9 29 432.1
Table 8
 CBR test graph of clay soil without reinforcement
Fig: 2.6.1
Results:
CBR @2.5mm penetration =21.75
CBR @5mm penetration =17.401
CBR test With 1% reinforcement(polythene covers):
Penetration dial guage Load dial guage
Dial guage Penetration Proving ring Load
reading reading
(mm) (Kg)
0 0 3 44.7
50 0.5 7 104.3
100 1 10 149
150 1.5 12 178.8
200 2 14 208.6
250 2.5 15 223.5
300 3 16 238.4
350 3.5 17 253.3
400 4 18 268.2
450 4.5 19 283.1
500 5 20 298
550 5.5 20.5 305.45
600 6 21 312.9
650 6.5 22 327.8
700 7 22.5 335.25
750 7.5 23 342.7
800 8 23.5 350.15
850 8.5 24 357.6
900 9 25 372.5

Table 9
CBR test graph with 1% reinforcement
Fig:2.6.2
Result:
CBR @2.5mm penetration =11.96
CBR @5mm penetration =10.87
CBR test with 2% reinforcement(polythene covers):
Penetration dial guage Load dial guage
Dial guage Penetration Proving ring Load
reading reading
(mm) (Kg)
0 0 3 44.7
50 0.5 5 74.5
100 1 7 104.3
150 1.5 9 134.1
200 2 11 163.9
250 2.5 12 178.8
300 3 13 193.7
350 3.5 14 208.6
400 4 14.5 216.05
450 4.5 15 223.5
500 5 16 238.4
550 5.5 16.5 245.85
600 6 17 253.3
650 6.5 17.5 260.75
700 7 18 268.2
750 7.5 18.5 275.65
800 8 19 283.1
850 8.5 19.5 290.55
900 9 20 298

Table 10
 CBR test graph with 2% reinforcement
Fig:2.6.3

Result:
CBR @2.5mm penetration =15.22
CBR @5mm penetration =13.77
Total experimental work:
S.no Soil sample Results
1 Specific gravity 2.615
2 Liquid limit(LL) 51%
3 Plastic limit(PL) 28.5%
4 Plasticity index(PI) 22.5%
5 Wet density (rb) 1.861
6 Dry density(rd) 1.462
7 OMC 23%
8 Aspect ratio 4
9 CBR test without reinforcement
CBR @2.5mm penetration 21.75
CBR @5mm penetration 17.401

10 CBR test with 1% reinforcement

CBR @2.5mm penetration 11.96
CBR @5mm penetration 10.87

11 CBR test with 2% reinforcement

CBR @2.5mm penetration 15.22
CBR @5mm penetration 13.74
CONCLUSION
Following conclusions can be drawn from the results obtained through experimental
investigation.
• It has been observed that the OMC and Maximum dry density of soil decreases with increase
in polythene covers. Since it does not absorb water OMC decreases for the mix.
• As the compaction was carried out immediately after mixing and rubber is inert material which
does not reacts with soil, so no chemical reaction is expected in this process of hydration. The
reduction in maximum dry density with increasing CRP content might be the result of the
replacement of soil particles by cover particles in a given volume; they partially filled the voids
between the soil particles and prevented them from coming into a closer state of packing, and
their lower specific gravity resulted in less density of soil cover mix.
• The study shows an improvement in the soil sample when mixed with polythene. Polythene
cover- causes change in the strength.
Reference
1.Arora, K. R. (2004). Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering. Standard Publishers Distributors.
2.Kumar, M. A., Prasad, D. S. V. and Prasadaraju, G.
V. R. (2009). Utilisation of industrial waste in flexible
pavement construction. Electronic Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 13
3.IS: 1888(1982), Method of Load Test on Soils. Indian
Standards Institutions, New Delhi