A Comparative Study of Cement-Treated Sub-Base and Granular Sub-Base

Abstract

It\'s no secret that countries around the world are fast progressing, and the infrastructure sector plays a critical role in this process. The infrastructure sector is heavily dependent on transportation. Compared to rivers, trains, airlines, and other modes of transportation, the majority of countries rely on roads and highways for transportation of all types. Crushed rock and murrum are common subbase materials for road construction in underdeveloped nations. In many locations, these materials are scarce and difficult to obtain. Fast transportation and conveyance are a top priority for India\'s Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). As a result, there is an enormous demand for building materials. The expense of producing the base layer material used in pavements, including as drilling, blasting, crushing, and transporting, makes it an expensive choice. However, when subjected to high traffic and/or strong weather, this material does not hold up. In addition, it is difficult to find in urban regions. Among the topics covered in this research are, the strength parameters of the road, total cost of construction and the time required for its construction. Comparative study of CTSB and GSB is explained in this paper. As a result, this material saves on construction costs by reducing the thickness of the crust. The Unconfined compressive strength, California bearing ratio of the cement-treated basis and sub-base is tested and results are obtained. It demonstrates that this material has superior strength and performance than that of typical materials when compared to those requirements. The CTSB methods saved the most money on construction costs of road, as evidenced by the findings. Using cement-treated foundation and sub-base instead of typical base material for road construction is shown in this paper.

Introduction

I. INTRODUCTION

Today, India is the world's fastest-growing economy. The development of a country depends heavily on its ability to get people and goods around. To ensure speedier conveyance of all goods, materials, and cities, the interconnectedness of capital, ports, and industrial zones must be well-connected.

Motorways, railroads, and canals are all part of the transportation industry. Roads are essential for all modes of transportation in India. The material used for base layers in pavements is costly as it requires production cost i.e., drilling, blasting, crushing, transportation etc.?

Cement-Treated Sub-bases are the non-conventional pavement layers used for improving the mechanical characteristics of base and sub-base courses. With the usual construction approach, GSB WMM as a base layer, the amount of material needed is also quite large, which raises both the material and overall cost of the project. Reduce the pavement's thickness by using an alternative base layer to save on both material and financial costs as well as increase efficiency.

II. OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

1. To see how CTSB technology affects the thickness of the flexible pavement.?
2. To study the strength parameters and thickness parameters.?
3. Compare the total cost analysis for CTSB method over conventional method.?
4. Calculate speed of project completion with quality.

III. METHODOLOGY ADOPTED

A. Test Conducted for Checking the Strength Parameters of Cement Treated sub base and Granular Sub-Base.

The OMC is calculated by the Procter Test after the Sub-Base material has been graded in accordance with MoRT&H guidelines. The granular material is then tested for CBR, and the CBR is then tested after the granular material has been treated with Cement of Proportion 2%, 3%, 4% and 5%, respectively. UCS Test is also conducted on CTSB for checking of strength parameter.

1. Gradation Test: For Gradation, the granular material is collected from the given site and gradation of those materials is conducted. % Retained over different sieves of the material is shown in the table and graph given below.

2. Optimum Moisture Content: Optimum Moisture Content for achieving maximum density of granular material is calculated by Modified Proctored Test. Water Content is added until maximum density is achieved. Curve for OMC is shown in the figure below.

3. California Bearing Ratio Test: CBR test is conducted for both CTSB & GSB. The results for them are given in the table below.

4. Unconfined Compressive Strength Test: UCS test is conducted only on CTSB for checking the strength parameter. The results of it are given in the table below.

C. Time of Construction

Time of construction for GSB is:

1. Earthwork - Requires 3-4 days
2. Gradle – Requires 2-3 days
3. Modified penetration Macadam – 2-3days (Keep open for traffic for at least 7 days)
4. Bituminous Macadam – 2 days
5. Bituminous concrete – 2 days

So, in total of 25-30 days are required for the DBM road of 1 km using advanced machinery.

Time of construction of CTSB is:

a. Earthwork – Requires 1-2 days

b. Cement Spreading – 1/2 day

c. Mixing by CTSB machine – 1/2 day

d. Curing (sprinkling water) – 7 days

e. Laying with paver and compaction – 1 day

f. Rolling – 1-2 days

So, in total of 10-12 days are required for the construction of 1 km road by CTSB technology.

D. Figures

Conclusion

1) Project cost reduced by nearabout 30% using CTSB as compared to conventional method. 2) Accelerated speed of the project completion with 40% less time required. 3) Because CTSB has a higher bearing strength than unbound granular base, the base thickness is lowered by almost 400 mm. 4) Due to a robust Sub Base, bitumen use is reduced.

References

[1] Aher D.D., Sangale Y. B., Pagar S. R., Yadnesh Patil, Rahul Rayate, “Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous Pavement” , 6th International Conference on Recent Trends in Engineering & Technology (ICRTET - 2018) [2] B. Sudharshan Reddy, G. Sreenivasa Reddy, C. Sashidhar, “Pavement Design Of Cement Treated Recycled Concrete Aggregate Bases For Low Volume Roads”, Journal Of Critical Reviews Issn- 2394-5125 Vol 7, Issue 18, 2020 [3] Bani Lotfi And Matthew W. Witczak, “Dynamic Characterization Of Cement-treated Base And Subbase Materials”, Transportation Research Record 1031. [4] Ganesh D. Gavhane, Prof. Abhishek M. Loya, “A Study On Performance Analysis Of Cement Treated Base And Cement Treated Sub-base In Flexible Pavement”, Aegaeum Journal ,Volume 8, Issue 6, 2020 [5] Rasha. Abd Al-RedhaGhani, Dr. Mohammed A. Al-Jummaily and Dr. Ahlam K. R. Al-Zerjawi ,“Study of cement treated base aggregate properties for pavement structure”, International Journal of Information Research and Review | January 2018. [6] Sanjay Singh, Animikh Banerjee, Leevesh Kumar, “Design of CTSB & CTB Cubes and its Analysis”, International Journal For Research In Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.177volume 7 Issue V, May 2019. [7] Vaibhav P. Patil, Asst. Prof. A. V. Karvekar, “A Review on a Study of Cement Treated Base and Sub-Base in Flexible Pavement”, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), July-2016. [8] Xuemei Liu, David Thambiratnam, Sabrina Fawzia, Jun Wu, “Parametric study on cement treated aggregate panel under impact load”, Archives of Civil and Mechanical engineering 18 (2018) 622-629.

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Prof. Akshay Bharat Rahane, Ms. Sakshi Ashok More, Mr. Sanket Vasant Shinde, Ms. Shivani Vilas Daundkar, Ms. Dnyaneshwari Rajendra Ahire. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.