Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous Pavement: Conference Paper

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/326461352
Cement Treated Sub-Base for Bituminous Pavement
Conference Paper · May 2018
CITATIONS READS
0 8,875
5 authors, including:
Sharad Pagar Yogesh Sangale

Guru Gobind Singh College of Engineering and Research Center Nashik Late Sau Kantabai Bhavarlalji Jain College of Engineering
6 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Construction Industry and Mediation View project
Analysis and Design of Box Culvert for Storm Water Drainage System for Runway at Airport View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Sharad Pagar on 18 July 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

6th International Conference on Recent Trends in Engineering & Technology (ICRTET - 2018)
Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous

Pavement
1
Aher D.D., 2Sangale Y. B., 3Pagar S. R., 4Yadnesh Patil, 5Rahul Rayate
1
Lecturer, 2Assistant Professor, 3Assistant Professor, 4 Lecturers, 5 PG-Students
1
Department of Civil Engineering,
1
SNJB’s COE,Chandwad, Nashik, Maharashtra, India.
Abstract: In India, due to massive infrastructure construction activities are taking place both in rural and urban area have
caused scarcity of construction materials. The pavement industry looks for ways of improving lower quality materials that are
readily available for use in road way construction. Cement /lime treatment has become an accepted method for increasing the
strength and durability of soils and marginal aggregates, reducing quantity of aggregates. Indian roads congress (IRC)
developed a special publication for mix design of base/ subgrade. No pavement design guideline is presently available cement
treated sub base. To overcome this problem, the objective of present research work is to develop a pavement design chart using
cement and lime stabilized sub base for rural and urban roads with light and medium traffic (up to 50 MSA). It not only saves
money but also helps to increase life cycle of roads.
Index Terms - cement treated sub-base for bituminous pavement.

I. INTRODUCTION
For road bases, there is a variety of soils or granular materials available for construction, but they may exhibit insufficient
properties (e.g. low bearing capacity, susceptibility for frost action), which then results in substantial pavement distress and
reduction of the pavement life [1-5]. However, some addition of a stabilizing agent such as cement, bitumen, lime or some non-
traditional agents can improve the properties of soil. Among these different stabilized materials, cement-bound materials develop a
quite high stiffness and strength, and exhibit good performance for pavement serviceability and high durability. Stabilized bases
can provide cost-effective solutions to many common designs and construction situations. Cement Treated Base (CTB) is a
traditional method applied in road bases materials to improve its engineering properties due to the hardening of cement when
moisture is present and extends the period of curing times. Bound base materials provide additional strength and support without
increasing the total thickness of the pavement layers. Depending on project needs, CTB increases the construction speed, enhances
the structural capacity of the pavement, or in some cases reduce the overall time project. In addition, a stiffer base reduces
deflections due to heavy traffic loads, thereby extending pavement life. Base thickness of CTB is reduced because of high bearing
strength compared to unbound granular base thicknesses [6-10]
II. Methodology
This chapter briefly summarizes the findings of studies performed at the Center for Highway Research and by other
investigators in two major areas pertaining to cement-treated materials: factors affecting the tensile strength of cement-treated soil
and shrinkage characteristics of cement-treated base materials. In addition, two mix design procedures are reviewed. The findings
concerning tensile strengths are evaluated in more details.
Figure1: Methodology
III. STUDY OF PAVEMENT COMPOSITION.
The sub-base and the base layer can be unbound (e.g. granular) or chemical stabilized with stabilizers such as cement, lime, fly
ash and other cementitious stabilizers. In case of pavements with cementitious base, a crack relief layer provided between the
bituminous layer and the cementitious base delays considerably the reflection crack in the bituminous course. This may consist of
crushed aggregates of thickness 100 mm of WMM conforming to IRC/MORTH Specifications or Stress Absorbing Membrane
Interlayer (SAMI) of elastomeric modified binder at the rate of about 2 litre/m2 covered with light application of 10 mm aggregates
to prevent picking up of the binder by construction traffic (AUSTROADS).
 Unbound sub-base layer
875 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

International Journal for Research in Engineering Application & Management (IJREAM)
Special Issue – ICRTET-2018 ISSN : 2454-9150
Sub-base materials may consist of natural sand, moorum, gravel, laterite, kankar, brick metal, crushed stone, crushed slag and
reclaimed crushed concrete/reclaimed asphalt pavement or combinations thereof meeting the prescribed grading and physical
requirements. When the sub-base material consists of combination of materials, mixing should be done mechanically either using
a suitable mixer or adopting mix-in-place method. The sub-base should have sufficient strength and thickness to serve the
construction traffic.
 Specifications of granular sub-base (GSB) materials conforming to MORTH:
Specifications for Road and Bridge Works are recommended for use. These specifications suggest close and coarse graded
granular sub-base materials and specify that the materials passing 425 micron sieve when tested in accordance with IS:2720 (Part
5) should have liquid limit and plasticity index of not more than 25 and 6 respectively. These specifications and the specified
grain size distribution of the sub-base material should be strictly enforced in order to meet strength, filter and drainage
requirements of the granular sub-base layer. When coarse graded sub-base is used as a drainage layer, Los Angeles abrasion value
should be less than 40 so that there is no excessive crushing during the rolling and the required permeability is retained and fines
passing 0.075 mm should be less than 2 per cent.
 Strength parameter
The relevant design parameter for granular sub-base is resilient modulus (MR), which is given by the following equation:
MRgsb = 0.2h0.45 X MR subgrade
Where h = thickness of sub-base layer in mm

MR value of the sub-base is dependent upon the MR value of the subgrade since weaker subgrade does not permit higher modulus
of the upper layer because of deformation under loads.
 Study of Rut resistance & fatigue resistance
The design procedures are based on the structural analysis of a multi-layered pavement subject to traffic loading. The design is
based on the criteria that strains at three critical locations do not exceed certain values. These limiting strains, shown in Fig. 1, are
as follows:
• The horizontal tensile strain ε1 at the bottom of the asphalt layer.
• The horizontal tensile strain ε2 at the bottom of the cemented layer.
• Vertical compressive strain ε3 at the top of the subgrade.
Sr.no Property Specified Value
1 Passing 75 mm sieve 100%
2 Passing 26.5 mm sieve 95-100%
3 Passing 75 micron sieve 15-100%
4 Plasticity Index >10 %
5 Organic Content 2%
6 SO4 Content 0.2%
7 Minimum Lime 2.5 %
8 Degree of Pulverization >60%
9 UCS As per contract specification
 Mix design procedures

The procedures used by two agencies, the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and the Texas Highway Department (THD) are
summarized below. The PCA method is suggested for use with any type of soil in any part of the country; whereas, the method
used by the Texas Highway Department is an example of a simplified mix design developed through experience with the use of
locally available materials in the design and construction of cement-treated bases and sub bases within the State of Texas.
 Standard Requirements for Graded Soil Aggregate Use in Bases or Highways
ASTM comprises quality-controlled graded aggregates may be expected to provide appropriate stability and load support for
use as highway or airport bases or sub-bases. This requirement delineates the aggregate size variety and ranges in mechanical
analyses for standard sizes of coarse aggregate and screenings for use in the construction and maintenance of various types of
highways. The gradation of the final composite mixture shall conform to an approved job mix formula, within the design range
prescribed by ASTM D 448, ASTM D 1241 and ASTM D 2940, subject to the appropriate tolerances.
 Mix Design of Cement Treated Sub Base (CTSB)

Figure2. Process Cycle for CTB and CTSB
1. Physical and chemical testing of aggregate, cement, water.

2. Selection of Proportion of Material like GSB, dust and cement (% weight) to form CTSB is done with the help of MORTH
table 400-4.
3. Sieve Analysis of final CTSB is done and compared with MORTH table 400-4.
4. Then, Modified Proctor test is done to determine Max. Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content of CTSB with min.
cement content according to IS 2720 (Part 8).
5. Find Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index according to IS 2720 (part 5).
6. Plasticity Modulus and Product are determined according to IS 2720 (part 5).
7. Find Uniformity Coefficient as specified.
8. 10% Fines value is determined according to IS 2386 (Part 4)
9. Water absorption of material larger and less than 10mm in size is found out according to IS 2386 (part 3).
10. Then cubes are casted with the help of Vibro Hammer (DLC).
IV. OBSERVATIONS.
Trials: CTSB - Cubes casted at different moisture contents for Determining OMC & MDD.
Trial No.01 Cement - 2 % and Moisture Content - 2%.
Table 2. Cement 2% and Moisture content 2%
i. Moisture Content - 4.0 %.

ii. Moisture Content - 6.0 %


iii. Moisture Content - 8.0 %.

Table.5 Cement 2% and Moisture content 8%
iv. Moisture Content - 10.0 %

Table 6 Cement 2% and Moisture content 10%.
v. Moisture Content - 12.0 %.

Table7Cement 2% and Moisture content 12%

Graph 3 DD VS WC- 2% cement content.

OMC=9.4%
MDD=2.34 gm/cc
Graph 4. CS VS WC- 2% cement content
Six numbers of trials were taken for Moisture content 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and in each trail percentage of cement is
varied from 2% to 6%. The graphs are plotted for all the combinations. Complete set of tables are not produced here due to
limited space.
V. RESULTS.
For 4% cement content and 8% water content, We get,
Maximum Dry Density: 2.388 gm/cc
Optimum moisture content: 8%
Maximum compressive strength: 5.8 MPa.
Table 8 Thickness and width comparison

Table 9 Cost of conventional road for 1 km in length.
Table 10 Cost of treated road for 1 km in length
Difference= Rs. 1,46,92,225- Rs. 1,04,17,237.5= Rs. 42,74,987.5
VI. CONCLUSION
The following conclusions can be drawn from the study:
 Longer Life of pavements.
 Speed of the Project Completion is accelerated.
 Reduced Use of Aggregates.
 Less local construction traffic due to fast construction.
 Transportation/haulage is reduced.
 Reduced Project Cost (approx. 15 lakhs per KM)
 Reduced thickness of pavement.
 Reduction of bitumen consumption due to strong Sub Base.
 Aggregate consumption is less for the case of stabilized base compared to that of the conventional method.
 Uniform distribution of Load in Cement treated service road as compared to conventional road.
 Resistance against cracking and fatigue cracking.
 Best option in low lying water clogged area.
REFERENCES
[1]. Suphat C., et al, Shrinkage behavior of cement modified base course materials for western Australian pavements, (2013).
[2]. Amiruddun B. I., et al, Laboratory Investigation on the Strength Characteristics Of Cement-Treated Base, (2004).
[3]. Indian roads congress Standard specifications and
[4]. Code of Practice for Construction of Concrete Roads, IRC: 15-2011
[5]. Tentative guidelines for the design of flexible pavements, IRC: 37-2012
View publication stats

Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous Pavement: Conference Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous Pavement: Conference Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous Pavement: Conference Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Cement Treated Sub-Base for Bituminous Pavement

Conference Paper · May 2018

Sharad Pagar Yogesh Sangale

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Construction Industry and Mediation View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous

Index Terms - cement treated sub-base for bituminous pavement.

 Unbound sub-base layer

875 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Where h = thickness of sub-base layer in mm

 Mix design procedures

876 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Figure2. Process Cycle for CTB and CTSB

1. Physical and chemical testing of aggregate, cement, water.

Table 2. Cement 2% and Moisture content 2%

i. Moisture Content - 4.0 %.

ii. Moisture Content - 6.0 %

877 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

iii. Moisture Content - 8.0 %.

iv. Moisture Content - 10.0 %

v. Moisture Content - 12.0 %.

878 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Graph 3 DD VS WC- 2% cement content.

Graph 4. CS VS WC- 2% cement content

879 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Table 9 Cost of conventional road for 1 km in length.

Table 10 Cost of treated road for 1 km in length

Difference= Rs. 1,46,92,225- Rs. 1,04,17,237.5= Rs. 42,74,987.5

[4]. Code of Practice for Construction of Concrete Roads, IRC: 15-2011

880 | ICRTET0171 www.ijream.org © 2018, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

View publication stats

You might also like