Full Thesis

PERFORMANCE OF JUTE GEOTEXTILE REINFORCED
HYDRAULIC FILLED SUBGRADE
BY
MD. ASGOR HOSSAIN
MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

(GEOTECHNICAL)
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
MARCH, 2012
PERFORMANCE OF JUTE GEOTEXTILE REINFORCED
HYDRAULIC FILLED SUBGRADE
BY
MD. ASGOR HOSSAIN
A Project Thesis Submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering of Bangladesh

University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, in partial fulfillment of the requirement
for the degree
of
MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

(GEOTECHNICAL)
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
MARCH, 2012
The thesis titled ‘‘PERFORMANCE OF JUTE GEOTEXTILE REINFORCED HYDRAULIC
FILLED SUBGRADE”, submitted by Md. Asgor Hossain, Student Number-040504207P, and
Session: October-2005 has been accepted as satisfactory in partial fulfillment of the requirement
for the degree of Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering (Geotechnical) on 29 March 2012.
BOARD OF EXAMINERS
Dr. Abdul Jabbar Khan Chairman

Professor (Supervisor)
Department of Civil Engineering
BUET, Dhaka-1000
Dr. Abu Siddique Member

Professor
BUET, Dhaka-1000
Dr. Mohammad Shariful Islam

Associate Professor Member
BUET, Dhaka-1000
APPENDIX-A
Table A.1. Data for Grain Size Distribution
Location : Hatirjheel site 0+250m Sample No:

Wt. of Sample: 400gm
Sieve Sieve Wt Wt of Wt of % Cum % %

No opening Sieve Sieve + Soil Retained Retained Finer
(mm) (gm) soil (gm) Retain
(gm)
#4 4.750 520.7 520.7 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#8 2.360 487.8 487.9 0.1 0.02 0.02 99.98
#16 1.180 429.2 429.7 0.5 0.13 0.15 99.85
#30 0.600 407.1 408.9 1.8 0.45 0.60 99.40
#50 0.300 379.3 420.1 40.8 10.20 10.80 89.20
#100 0.150 350.7 561.2 210.5 52.63 63.43 36.58
#200 0.075 351.1 429.3 78.2 19.55 82.98 17.03
Pan 0.000 370.0 437.9 67.9 16.98 99.95 0.05
Total 399.80
Table A.2. Data for Standard Proctor Test
Location : Hatirjheel site 0+250m
Sl. No. Moister Content(%) Dry Density(kN/m3)

1 12.53 15.34
2 14.93 15.76
3 16.77 16.87
4 18.80 16.76
5 12.53 15.34
60

Wt. of Sample:450gm

(mm) (gm) soil (gm) retain
(gm)
#4 4.750 520.7 520.7 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#8 2.360 487.8 487.9 0.1 0.02 0.02 99.98
#16 1.180 429.2 429.7 0.5 0.11 0.13 99.87
#30 0.600 407.1 408.3 1.2 0.27 0.40 99.60
#50 0.300 379.3 425.6 46.3 10.29 10.69 89.31
#100 0.150 350.7 596.5 245.8 54.62 65.31 34.69
#200 0.075 351.1 439.3 88.2 19.60 84.91 15.09
Pan 0.000 370.0 437.9 67.9 15.09 100.00 0.00
Total 450
Location : Hatirjheel site 0+350m
Sl. No. Moister Content (%) Dry Density (k/m3)

1 12.53 15.34
2 13.91 15.90
3 16.02 16.98
4 18.80 16.76
61
Table A.5. Data Table for Grain Size Distribution
Location : Hatirjheel site 0+650 Sample No:

Wt. of Sample: 400gm

(gm)
#4 4.75 520.7 520.7 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#8 2.36 487.8 487.8 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#16 1.18 429.2 429.2 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#30 0.60 407.1 407.7 0.6 0.15 0.15 99.85
#50 0.30 379.3 419.1 39.8 9.95 10.10 89.90
#100 0.15 350.7 561.3 210.6 52.65 62.75 37.25
#200 0.075 351.1 429.5 78.4 19.60 82.35 17.65
Pan 0.00 370.0 440.6 70.6 17.65 100.00 0.00
Total 399.99
Table A.6. Data Table for Standard Proctor Test
Sl. No. Moister Content (%) Dry Density (kN/m3)

1 10.63 15.60
2 12.47 16.10
3 17.29 16.79
4 18.80 16.76
62
Location : Keraniganj site 9+250m Sample No:

Wt. of Sample:297gm

(gm)
#4 4.750 517.7 517.7 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#8 2.360 491.9 491.9 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#16 1.180 425.9 425.9 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#30 0.600 402.2 403.4 1.2 0.40 0.40 99.60
#50 0.300 375.3 378.4 3.1 1.04 1.45 98.55
#100 0.150 355.1 436.4 81.3 27.37 28.82 71.18
#200 0.075 348.3 429.8 81.5 27.44 56.26 43.74
Pan 0.000 364.2 494.1 129.9 43.74 100.00 0.00
Total 297

1 15.30 15.80
2 19.16 16.26
3 20.96 16.02
25.13 14.02
63

Wt. of Sample:258gm

(gm)
#4 4.75 517.7 517.7 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#8 2.36 491.7 491.7 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#16 1.18 426 426 0 0.00 0.00 100.00
#30 0.6 402.3 402.7 0.4 0.16 0.16 99.84
#50 0.3 375.2 378.1 2.9 1.12 1.28 98.72
#100 0.15 354.8 412.6 57.8 22.40 23.68 76.32
#200 0.075 347.6 426.4 78.8 30.54 54.22 45.78
Pan 0 364.5 482.6 118.1 45.78 100.00 0.00
Total 258

1 11.44 15..49
2 13.91 15.90
3 18.40 16.37
4 20.65 16.15
5 22.12 15.80
64
APPENDIX- B
Table B.1. Data for load-penetration curve without JGT at 85.71% compaction
Location: Hatirjheel site at Ch 0+250m
Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected
Reading (mm) Reading (In lb) (In kN) CBR(%)
25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11
50.00 1.250 10 60.38 0.27
75.00 1.875 20 118.75 0.53
100.00 2.500 28 165.44 0.74 4
125.00 3.125 41 241.32 1.07
150.00 3.750 50 293.85 1.31
175.00 4.375 60 352.21 1.57
200.00 5.000 72 422.25 1.88 9 10
250.00 6.250 85 498.13 2.22
300.00 7.500 95 556.49 2.48
350.00 8.750 105 614.86 2.74
400.00 10.000 117 684.90 3.05
450.00 11.250 127 743.26 3.31
500.00 12.500 134 784.12 3.49
550.00 13.750 141 824.98 3.67
600.00 15.000 146 854.16 3.80
650.00 16.250 150 877.51 3.90
700.00 17.500 155 906.69 4.03
750.00 18.750 156 912.53 4.06
800.00 20.000 158 924.20 4.11
Table B.2. Data for load-penetration curve without JGT at 92.86% compaction.

25.00 0.625 6 37.04 0.16
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 20 118.75 0.53
100.00 2.500 30 177.11 0.79 4
125.00 3.125 40 235.48 1.05
150.00 3.750 50 293.85 1.31
175.00 4.375 62 363.89 1.62
200.00 5.000 75 439.76 1.96 10 11
250.00 6.250 88 515.64 2.29
300.00 7.500 99 579.84 2.58
350.00 8.750 110 644.04 2.87
400.00 10.000 119 696.57 3.10
450.00 11.250 127 743.26 3.31
500.00 12.500 135 789.96 3.51
550.00 13.750 142 830.81 3.70
600.00 15.000 148 865.83 3.85
650.00 16.250 153 895.02 3.98
700.00 17.500 156 912.53 4.06
750.00 18.750 158 924.20 4.11
800.00 20.000 160 935.87 4.16
65

25.00 0.625 7 42.87 0.19
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 23 136.26 0.61
100.00 2.500 35 206.30 0.92 5
125.00 3.125 45 264.66 1.18
150.00 3.750 58 340.54 1.52
175.00 4.375 70 410.58 1.83
200.00 5.000 84 492.29 2.19 11 12
250.00 6.250 95 556.49 2.48
300.00 7.500 105 614.86 2.74
350.00 8.750 115 673.23 3.00
400.00 10.000 125 731.59 3.25
450.00 11.250 134 784.12 3.49
500.00 12.500 140 819.14 3.64
550.00 13.750 146 854.16 3.80
600.00 15.000 151 883.34 3.93
650.00 16.250 154 900.85 4.01
700.00 17.500 157 918.36 4.09
750.00 18.750 160 935.87 4.16
800.00 20.000 162 947.55 4.22
Table B.1. Data for load-penetration curve with JGT at 85.71% compaction.
Strain Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Dial (mm) Reading (In lb) (In kN) CBR(%)
Reading
25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11
50.00 1.250 10 60.38 0.27
75.00 1.875 18 107.08 0.48
100.00 2.500 25 147.93 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 35 206.30 0.92
150.00 3.750 46 270.50 1.20
175.00 4.375 55 323.03 1.44
200.00 5.000 64 375.56 1.67 8 9
250.00 6.250 75 439.76 1.96
300.00 7.500 86 503.96 2.24
350.00 8.750 95 556.49 2.48
400.00 10.000 109 638.21 2.84
450.00 11.250 119 696.57 3.10
500.00 12.500 128 749.10 3.33
550.00 13.750 136 795.79 3.54
600.00 15.000 142 830.81 3.70
650.00 16.250 148 865.83 3.85
700.00 17.500 153 895.02 3.98
750.00 18.750 156 912.53 4.06
800.00 20.000 158 924.20 4.11
66

25.00 0.625 6 37.04 0.16

50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 18 107.08 0.48
100.00 2.500 26 153.77 0.68 33
125.00 3.125 34 200.46 0.89
150.00 3.750 43 252.99 1.13
175.00 4.375 54 317.19 1.41
200.00 5.000 66 387.23 1.72 9 9
250.00 6.250 83 486.45 2.16
300.00 7.500 95 556.49 2.48
350.00 8.750 108 632.37 2.81
400.00 10.000 120 702.41 3.13
450.00 11.250 127 743.26 3.31
500.00 12.500 135 789.96 3.51
550.00 13.750 142 830.81 3.70
600.00 15.000 148 865.83 3.85
650.00 16.250 153 895.02 3.98
700.00 17.500 156 912.53 4.06
750.00 18.750 158 924.20 4.11
800.00 20.000 160 935.87 4.16

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11
50.00 1.250 9 54.55 0.24
75.00 1.875 17 101.24 0.45
100.00 2.500 25 147.93 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 35 206.30 0.92
150.00 3.750 47 276.34 1.23
175.00 4.375 58 340.54 1.52
200.00 5.000 70 410.58 1.83 9 10
250.00 6.250 83 486.45 2.16
300.00 7.500 94 550.66 2.45
350.00 8.750 102 597.35 2.66
400.00 10.000 112 655.72 2.92
450.00 11.250 120 702.41 3.13
500.00 12.500 127 743.26 3.31
550.00 13.750 136 795.79 3.54
600.00 15.000 143 836.65 3.72
650.00 16.250 149 871.67 3.88
700.00 17.500 153 895.02 3.98
750.00 18.750 157 918.36 4.09
800.00 20.000 160 935.87 4.16
67

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11

50.00 1.250 11 66.22 0.29
75.00 1.875 21 124.59 0.55
100.00 2.500 30 177.11 0.79 4
125.00 3.125 39 229.64 1.02
150.00 3.750 51 299.68 1.33
175.00 4.375 63 369.72 1.64
200.00 5.000 74 433.93 1.93 10 11
250.00 6.250 87 509.80 2.27
300.00 7.500 100 585.68 2.61
350.00 8.750 112 655.72 2.92
400.00 10.000 120 702.41 3.13
450.00 11.250 129 754.94 3.36
500.00 12.500 138 807.47 3.59
550.00 13.750 144 842.49 3.75
600.00 15.000 149 871.67 3.88
650.00 16.250 155 906.69 4.03
700.00 17.500 160 935.87 4.16
750.00 18.750 163 953.38 4.24
800.00 20.000 166 970.89 4.32

25.00 0.625 6 37.04 0.16
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 20 118.75 0.53
100.00 2.500 29 171.28 0.76 4
125.00 3.125 40 235.48 1.05
150.00 3.750 51 299.68 1.33
175.00 4.375 62 363.89 1.62
200.00 5.000 75 439.76 1.96 10 11
250.00 6.250 86 503.96 2.24
300.00 7.500 95 556.49 2.48
350.00 8.750 108 632.37 2.81
400.00 10.000 120 702.41 3.13
450.00 11.250 127 743.26 3.31
500.00 12.500 135 789.96 3.51
550.00 13.750 142 830.81 3.70
600.00 15.000 148 865.83 3.85
650.00 16.250 153 895.02 3.98
700.00 17.500 156 912.53 4.06
750.00 18.750 158 924.20 4.11
800.00 20.000 160 935.87 4.16
68

25.00 0.625 7 42.87 0.19
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 23 136.26 0.61
100.00 2.500 35 206.30 0.92 5
125.00 3.125 45 264.66 1.18
150.00 3.750 58 340.54 1.52
175.00 4.375 70 410.58 1.83
200.00 5.000 84 492.29 2.19 11 12
250.00 6.250 95 556.49 2.48
300.00 7.500 105 614.86 2.74
350.00 8.750 115 673.23 3.00
400.00 10.000 125 731.59 3.25
450.00 11.250 134 784.12 3.49
500.00 12.500 140 819.14 3.64
550.00 13.750 146 854.16 3.80
600.00 15.000 151 883.34 3.93
650.00 16.250 154 900.85 4.01
700.00 17.500 157 918.36 4.09
750.00 18.750 160 935.87 4.16
800.00 20.000 162 947.55 4.22

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11

50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 21 124.59 0.55
100.00 2.500 30 177.11 0.79 4
125.00 3.125 39 229.64 1.02
150.00 3.750 48 282.17 1.26
175.00 4.375 58 340.54 1.52
200.00 5.000 65 381.40 1.70 8 9
250.00 6.250 74 433.93 1.93
300.00 7.500 85 498.13 2.22
350.00 8.750 96 562.33 2.50
400.00 10.000 104 609.02 2.71
450.00 11.250 115 673.23 3.00
500.00 12.500 124 725.76 3.23
550.00 13.750 132 772.45 3.44
600.00 15.000 139 813.30 3.62
650.00 16.250 142 830.81 3.70
700.00 17.500 148 865.83 3.85
750.00 18.750 151 883.34 3.93
800.00 20.000 155 906.69 4.03
69

25.00 0.625 6 37.04 0.16
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 21 124.59 0.55
100.00 2.500 32 188.79 0.84 4
125.00 3.125 42 247.15 1.10
150.00 3.750 51 299.68 1.33
175.00 4.375 61 358.05 1.59
200.00 5.000 68 398.91 1.77 9 10
250.00 6.250 78 457.27 2.03
300.00 7.500 89 521.47 2.32
350.00 8.750 98 574.00 2.55
400.00 10.000 108 632.37 2.81
450.00 11.250 119 696.57 3.10
500.00 12.500 130 760.77 3.38
550.00 13.750 137 801.63 3.57
600.00 15.000 144 842.49 3.75
650.00 16.250 151 883.34 3.93
700.00 17.500 154 900.85 4.01
750.00 18.750 157 918.36 4.09
800.00 20.000 159 930.04 4.14

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11
50.00 1.250 9 54.55 0.24
75.00 1.875 17 101.24 0.45
100.00 2.500 25 147.93 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 35 206.30 0.92
150.00 3.750 45 264.66 1.18
175.00 4.375 58 340.54 1.52
200.00 5.000 69 404.74 1.80 9 10
250.00 6.250 81 474.78 2.11
300.00 7.500 92 538.98 2.40
350.00 8.750 102 597.35 2.66
400.00 10.000 112 655.72 2.92
450.00 11.250 120 702.41 3.13
500.00 12.500 130 760.77 3.38
550.00 13.750 139 813.30 3.62
600.00 15.000 148 865.83 3.85
650.00 16.250 155 906.69 4.03
700.00 17.500 161 941.71 4.19
750.00 18.750 166 970.89 4.32
800.00 20.000 170 994.24 4.42
70

25.00 0.625 12 72.06 0.32
50.00 1.250 20 118.75 0.53
75.00 1.875 30 177.11 0.79
100.00 2.500 45 264.66 1.18 6
125.00 3.125 65 381.40 1.70
150.00 3.750 90 527.31 2.35
175.00 4.375 105 614.86 2.74
200.00 5.000 115 673.23 3.00 15 17
250.00 6.250 128 749.10 3.33
300.00 7.500 142 830.81 3.70
350.00 8.750 155 906.69 4.03
400.00 10.000 160 935.87 4.16
450.00 11.250 172 1005.91 4.48
500.00 12.500 178 1040.93 4.63
550.00 13.750 180 1052.60 4.68
600.00 15.000 181 1058.44 4.71
650.00 16.250 182 1064.28 4.73
700.00 17.500 183 1070.11 4.76
750.00 18.750 184 1075.95 4.79
800.00 20.000 185 1081.79 4.81

25.00 0.625 12 72.06 0.32
50.00 1.250 20 118.75 0.53
75.00 1.875 30 177.11 0.79
100.00 2.500 45 264.66 1.18 6
125.00 3.125 65 381.40 1.70
150.00 3.750 90 527.31 2.35
175.00 4.375 105 614.86 2.74
200.00 5.000 125 731.59 3.25 16 18
250.00 6.250 138 807.47 3.59
300.00 7.500 152 889.18 3.96
350.00 8.750 161 941.71 4.19
400.00 10.000 168 982.57 4.37
450.00 11.250 172 1005.91 4.48
500.00 12.500 178 1040.93 4.63
550.00 13.750 180 1052.60 4.68
600.00 15.000 181 1058.44 4.71
650.00 16.250 182 1064.28 4.73
700.00 17.500 183 1070.11 4.76
750.00 18.750 184 1075.95 4.79
800.00 20.000 185 1081.79 4.81
71

25.00 0.625 12 72.06 0.32
50.00 1.250 20 118.75 0.53
75.00 1.875 30 177.11 0.79
100.00 2.500 45 264.66 1.18 6
125.00 3.125 65 381.40 1.70
150.00 3.750 90 527.31 2.35
175.00 4.375 105 614.86 2.74
200.00 5.000 130 760.77 3.38 17 18
250.00 6.250 144 842.49 3.75
300.00 7.500 158 924.20 4.11
350.00 8.750 166 970.89 4.32
400.00 10.000 170 994.24 4.42
450.00 11.250 176 1029.26 4.58
500.00 12.500 180 1052.60 4.68
550.00 13.750 184 1075.95 4.79
600.00 15.000 187 1093.46 4.86
650.00 16.250 188 1099.30 4.89
700.00 17.500 189 1105.13 4.92
750.00 18.750 190 1110.97 4.94
800.00 20.000 191 1116.81 4.97

25.00 0.625 10 60.38 0.27

50.00 1.250 20 118.75 0.53
75.00 1.875 35 206.30 0.92
100.00 2.500 50 293.85 1.31 7
125.00 3.125 66 387.23 1.72
150.00 3.750 79 463.11 2.06
175.00 4.375 90 527.31 2.35
200.00 5.000 102 597.35 2.66 13 14
250.00 6.250 120 702.41 3.13
300.00 7.500 132 772.45 3.44
350.00 8.750 145 848.32 3.77
400.00 10.000 152 889.18 3.96
450.00 11.250 157 918.36 4.09
500.00 12.500 162 947.55 4.22
550.00 13.750 166 970.89 4.32
600.00 15.000 171 1000.08 4.45
650.00 16.250 175 1023.42 4.55
700.00 17.500 177 1035.09 4.61
750.00 18.750 179 1046.77 4.66
800.00 20.000 180 1052.60 4.68
72

25.00 0.625 12 72.06 0.32
50.00 1.250 20 118.75 0.53
75.00 1.875 30 177.11 0.79
100.00 2.500 45 264.66 1.18 6
125.00 3.125 65 381.40 1.70
150.00 3.750 90 527.31 2.35
175.00 4.375 105 614.86 2.74
200.00 5.000 125 731.59 3.25 16 18
250.00 6.250 140 819.14 3.64
300.00 7.500 156 912.53 4.06
350.00 8.750 166 970.89 4.32
400.00 10.000 175 1023.42 4.55
450.00 11.250 180 1052.60 4.68
500.00 12.500 182 1064.28 4.73
550.00 13.750 184 1075.95 4.79
600.00 15.000 185 1081.79 4.81
650.00 16.250 186 1087.62 4.84
700.00 17.500 187 1093.46 4.86
750.00 18.750 188 1099.30 4.89
800.00 20.000 190 1110.97 4.94

25.00 0.625 12 72.06 0.32
50.00 1.250 25 147.93 0.66
75.00 1.875 45 264.66 1.18
100.00 2.500 65 381.40 1.70 8
125.00 3.125 88 515.64 2.29
150.00 3.750 108 632.37 2.81
175.00 4.375 120 702.41 3.13
200.00 5.000 130 760.77 3.38 17 18
250.00 6.250 144 842.49 3.75
300.00 7.500 158 924.20 4.11
350.00 8.750 166 970.89 4.32
400.00 10.000 171 1000.08 4.45
450.00 11.250 176 1029.26 4.58
500.00 12.500 180 1052.60 4.68
550.00 13.750 183 1070.11 4.76
600.00 15.000 185 1081.79 4.81
650.00 16.250 187 1093.46 4.86
700.00 17.500 188 1099.30 4.89
750.00 18.750 189 1105.13 4.92
800.00 20.000 190 1110.97 4.94
73
Location: Keraniganj site at Ch 9+250m

25.00 0.625 5 31.20 0.14

50.00 1.250 10 60.38 0.27
75.00 1.875 15 89.57 0.40
100.00 2.500 20 118.75 0.53 3
125.00 3.125 24 142.10 0.63
150.00 3.750 29 171.28 0.76
175.00 4.375 35 206.30 0.92
200.00 5.000 40 235.48 1.05 5 5
250.00 6.250 48 282.17 1.26
300.00 7.500 55 323.03 1.44
350.00 8.750 61 358.05 1.59
400.00 10.000 66 387.23 1.72
450.00 11.250 71 416.42 1.85
500.00 12.500 75 439.76 1.96
550.00 13.750 79 463.11 2.06
600.00 15.000 82 480.62 2.14
650.00 16.250 84 492.29 2.19
700.00 17.500 85 498.13 2.22
750.00 18.750 86 503.96 2.24
800.00 20.000 87 509.80 2.27

25.00 0.625 3 19.53 0.09
50.00 1.250 9 54.55 0.24
75.00 1.875 17 101.24 0.45
100.00 2.500 22 130.42 0.58 3
125.00 3.125 29 171.28 0.76
150.00 3.750 36 212.13 0.94
175.00 4.375 43 252.99 1.13
200.00 5.000 50 293.85 1.31 6 6
250.00 6.250 62 363.89 1.62
300.00 7.500 71 416.42 1.85
350.00 8.750 77 451.43 2.01
400.00 10.000 81 474.78 2.11
450.00 11.250 84 492.29 2.19
500.00 12.500 87 509.80 2.27
550.00 13.750 90 527.31 2.35
600.00 15.000 92 538.98 2.40
650.00 16.250 93 544.82 2.42
700.00 17.500 94 550.66 2.45
750.00 18.750 95 556.49 2.48
800.00 20.000 96 562.33 2.50
74

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11
50.00 1.250 10 60.38 0.27
75.00 1.875 15 89.57 0.40
100.00 2.500 22 130.42 0.58 3
125.00 3.125 33 194.62 0.87
150.00 3.750 44 258.83 1.15
175.00 4.375 55 323.03 1.44
200.00 5.000 64 375.56 1.67 8 10
250.00 6.250 77 451.43 2.01
300.00 7.500 85 498.13 2.22
350.00 8.750 90 527.31 2.35
400.00 10.000 95 556.49 2.48
450.00 11.250 100 585.68 2.61
500.00 12.500 105 614.86 2.74
550.00 13.750 108 632.37 2.81
600.00 15.000 110 644.04 2.87
650.00 16.250 113 661.55 2.94
700.00 17.500 115 673.23 3.00
750.00 18.750 116 679.06 3.02
800.00 20.000 117 684.90 3.05

25.00 0.625 2 13.69 0.06
50.00 1.250 4 25.36 0.11
75.00 1.875 7 42.87 0.19
100.00 2.500 10 60.38 0.27 1
125.00 3.125 13 77.89 0.35
150.00 3.750 17 101.24 0.45
175.00 4.375 20 118.75 0.53
200.00 5.000 23 136.26 0.61 3 3
250.00 6.250 29 171.28 0.76
300.00 7.500 34 200.46 0.89
350.00 8.750 39 229.64 1.02
400.00 10.000 43 252.99 1.13
450.00 11.250 49 288.01 1.28
500.00 12.500 54 317.19 1.41
550.00 13.750 58 340.54 1.52
600.00 15.000 61 358.05 1.59
650.00 16.250 63 369.72 1.64
700.00 17.500 64 375.56 1.67
750.00 18.750 65 381.40 1.70
800.00 20.000 66 387.23 1.72
75

25.00 0.625 2 13.69 0.06
50.00 1.250 5 31.20 0.14
75.00 1.875 8 48.71 0.22
100.00 2.500 11 66.22 0.29 1
125.00 3.125 15 89.57 0.40
150.00 3.750 18 107.08 0.48
175.00 4.375 21 124.59 0.55
200.00 5.000 25 147.93 0.66 3 3
250.00 6.250 31 182.95 0.81
300.00 7.500 36 212.13 0.94
350.00 8.750 41 241.32 1.07
400.00 10.000 46 270.50 1.20
450.00 11.250 50 293.85 1.31
500.00 12.500 53 311.36 1.39
550.00 13.750 56 328.87 1.46
600.00 15.000 59 346.38 1.54
650.00 16.250 62 363.89 1.62
700.00 17.500 64 375.56 1.67
750.00 18.750 65 381.40 1.70
800.00 20.000 66 387.23 1.72

25.00 0.625 2 13.69 0.06
50.00 1.250 5 31.20 0.14
75.00 1.875 8 48.71 0.22
100.00 2.500 12 72.06 0.32 2
125.00 3.125 16 95.40 0.42
150.00 3.750 20 118.75 0.53
175.00 4.375 24 142.10 0.63
200.00 5.000 28 165.44 0.74 4 4
250.00 6.250 33 194.62 0.87
300.00 7.500 38 223.81 1.00
350.00 8.750 42 247.15 1.10
400.00 10.000 46 270.50 1.20
450.00 11.250 49 288.01 1.28
500.00 12.500 52 305.52 1.36
550.00 13.750 55 323.03 1.44
600.00 15.000 58 340.54 1.52
650.00 16.250 60 352.21 1.57
700.00 17.500 62 363.89 1.62
750.00 18.750 63 369.72 1.64
800.00 20.000 64 375.56 1.67
76

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11
50.00 1.250 11 66.22 0.29
75.00 1.875 20 118.75 0.53
100.00 2.500 30 177.11 0.79 4
125.00 3.125 42 247.15 1.10
150.00 3.750 53 311.36 1.39
175.00 4.375 64 375.56 1.67
200.00 5.000 73 428.09 1.90 9 10
250.00 6.250 85 498.13 2.22
300.00 7.500 98 574.00 2.55
350.00 8.750 108 632.37 2.81
400.00 10.000 114 667.39 2.97
450.00 11.250 122 714.08 3.18
500.00 12.500 130 760.77 3.38
550.00 13.750 135 789.96 3.51
600.00 15.000 142 830.81 3.70
650.00 16.250 148 865.83 3.85
700.00 17.500 152 889.18 3.96
750.00 18.750 156 912.53 4.06
800.00 20.000 158 924.20 4.11

25.00 0.625 5 31.20 0.14
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 20 118.75 0.53
100.00 2.500 30 177.11 0.79 4
125.00 3.125 42 247.15 1.10
150.00 3.750 56 328.87 1.46
175.00 4.375 68 398.91 1.77
200.00 5.000 77 451.43 2.01 10 11
250.00 6.250 90 527.31 2.35
300.00 7.500 102 597.35 2.66
350.00 8.750 112 655.72 2.92
400.00 10.000 122 714.08 3.18
450.00 11.250 130 760.77 3.38
500.00 12.500 137 801.63 3.57
550.00 13.750 141 824.98 3.67
600.00 15.000 145 848.32 3.77
650.00 16.250 148 865.83 3.85
700.00 17.500 150 877.51 3.90
750.00 18.750 152 889.18 3.96
800.00 20.000 153 895.02 3.98
77

25.00 0.625 6 37.04 0.16
50.00 1.250 13 77.89 0.35
75.00 1.875 21 124.59 0.55
100.00 2.500 33 194.62 0.87 4
125.00 3.125 45 264.66 1.18
150.00 3.750 58 340.54 1.52
175.00 4.375 70 410.58 1.83
200.00 5.000 81 474.78 2.11 10 11
250.00 6.250 92 538.98 2.40
300.00 7.500 101 591.51 2.63
350.00 8.750 114 667.39 2.97
400.00 10.000 123 719.92 3.20
450.00 11.250 130 760.77 3.38
500.00 12.500 138 807.47 3.59
550.00 13.750 142 830.81 3.70
600.00 15.000 148 865.83 3.85
650.00 16.250 152 889.18 3.96
700.00 17.500 155 906.69 4.03
750.00 18.750 158 924.20 4.11
800.00 20.000 160 935.87 4.16

25.00 0.625 3 19.53 0.09

50.00 1.250 8 48.71 0.22
75.00 1.875 14 83.73 0.37
100.00 2.500 19 112.91 0.50 2
125.00 3.125 24 142.10 0.63
150.00 3.750 30 177.11 0.79
175.00 4.375 36 212.13 0.94
200.00 5.000 42 247.15 1.10 5 5
250.00 6.250 53 311.36 1.39
300.00 7.500 65 381.40 1.70
350.00 8.750 76 445.60 1.98
400.00 10.000 85 498.13 2.22
450.00 11.250 92 538.98 2.40
500.00 12.500 98 574.00 2.55
550.00 13.750 104 609.02 2.71
600.00 15.000 108 632.37 2.81
650.00 16.250 112 655.72 2.92
700.00 17.500 115 673.23 3.00
750.00 18.750 116 679.06 3.02
800.00 20.000 117 684.90 3.05
78

25.00 0.625 5 31.20 0.14

50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 21 124.59 0.55
100.00 2.500 30 177.11 0.79 4
125.00 3.125 41 241.32 1.07
150.00 3.750 50 293.85 1.31
175.00 4.375 61 358.05 1.59
200.00 5.000 70 410.58 1.83 9 9
250.00 6.250 83 486.45 2.16
300.00 7.500 94 550.66 2.45
350.00 8.750 102 597.35 2.66
400.00 10.000 109 638.21 2.84
450.00 11.250 116 679.06 3.02
500.00 12.500 122 714.08 3.18
550.00 13.750 129 754.94 3.36
600.00 15.000 136 795.79 3.54
650.00 16.250 140 819.14 3.64
700.00 17.500 145 848.32 3.77
750.00 18.750 148 865.83 3.85
800.00 20.000 151 883.34 3.93

25.00 0.625 7 42.87 0.19
50.00 1.250 15 89.57 0.40
75.00 1.875 26 153.77 0.68
100.00 2.500 38 223.81 1.00 5
125.00 3.125 49 288.01 1.28
150.00 3.750 60 352.21 1.57
175.00 4.375 70 410.58 1.83
200.00 5.000 78 457.27 2.03 10 11
250.00 6.250 92 538.98 2.40
300.00 7.500 103 603.19 2.68
350.00 8.750 114 667.39 2.97
400.00 10.000 123 719.92 3.20
450.00 11.250 130 760.77 3.38
500.00 12.500 136 795.79 3.54
550.00 13.750 141 824.98 3.67
600.00 15.000 147 860.00 3.83
650.00 16.250 152 889.18 3.96
700.00 17.500 156 912.53 4.06
750.00 18.750 160 935.87 4.16
800.00 20.000 162 947.55 4.22
79
Table B.31. Data for load-penetration curve without JGT at 13.29% (Loose)
compaction. Location: Hatirjheel site at Ch 0+350m

25.00 0.625 0 2.02 0.01
50.00 1.250 0.5 4.93 0.02
75.00 1.875 1 7.85 0.03
100.00 2.500 1.5 10.77 0.05 0.24
125.00 3.125 2 13.69 0.06
150.00 3.750 2 13.69 0.06
175.00 4.375 2 13.69 0.06
200.00 5.000 2 13.69 0.06 0.30
250.00 6.250 3 19.53 0.09
300.00 7.500 3.5 22.44 0.10
350.00 8.750 4 25.36 0.11
400.00 10.000 5 31.20 0.14
450.00 11.250 5.5 34.12 0.15
500.00 12.500 6.5 39.95 0.18
550.00 13.750 7.5 45.79 0.20
600.00 15.000 8 48.71 0.22
650.00 16.250 9 54.55 0.24
700.00 17.500 10 60.38 0.27
750.00 18.750 11 66.22 0.29
800.00 20.000 12 72.06 0.32
Table B.31. Data for load-penetration curve without JGT at 13.92% (Loose)
compaction. Location: Hatirjheel site at Ch 0+350m

25.00 0.625 8 48.71 0.22
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 16 95.40 0.42
100.00 2.500 22 130.42 0.58 3
125.00 3.125 26 153.77 0.68
150.00 3.750 31 182.95 0.81
175.00 4.375 34 200.46 0.89
200.00 5.000 38 223.81 1.00 5
250.00 6.250 47 276.34 1.23
300.00 7.500 55 323.03 1.44
350.00 8.750 63 369.72 1.64
400.00 10.000 69 404.74 1.80
450.00 11.250 76 445.60 1.98
500.00 12.500 83 486.45 2.16
550.00 13.750 89 521.47 2.32
600.00 15.000 95 556.49 2.48
650.00 16.250 102 597.35 2.66
700.00 17.500 106 620.70 2.76
750.00 18.750 112 655.72 2.92
800.00 20.000 118 690.74 3.07
80
Table B.32. Data for load-penetration curve with JGT at 13.29% (Loose)
compaction. Location: Kraniganj site at Ch 9+335m

25.00 0.625 0.5 4.93 0.02
50.00 1.250 1 7.85 0.03
75.00 1.875 1.5 10.77 0.05
100.00 2.500 1.5 10.77 0.05 0.24
125.00 3.125 2 13.69 0.06
150.00 3.750 2 13.69 0.06
175.00 4.375 2 13.69 0.06
200.00 5.000 3 19.53 0.09 0.43
250.00 6.250 4 25.36 0.11
300.00 7.500 5 31.20 0.14
350.00 8.750 6 37.04 0.16
400.00 10.000 8 48.71 0.22
450.00 11.250 9 54.55 0.24
500.00 12.500 11 66.22 0.29
550.00 13.750 13 77.89 0.35
600.00 15.000 15 89.57 0.40
650.00 16.250 17 101.24 0.45
700.00 17.500 20 118.75 0.53
750.00 18.750 22 130.42 0.58
800.00 20.000 25 147.93 0.66
Table B.33. Data for load-penetration curve with JGT at 13.92% (Loose)
compaction. Location: Kraniganj site at Ch 9+335m

25.00 0.625 8 48.71 0.22
50.00 1.250 12 72.06 0.32
75.00 1.875 16 95.40 0.42
100.00 2.500 22 130.42 0.58 3
125.00 3.125 26 153.77 0.68
150.00 3.750 31 182.95 0.81
175.00 4.375 34 200.46 0.89
200.00 5.000 38 223.81 1.00 5
250.00 6.250 47 276.34 1.23
300.00 7.500 55 323.03 1.44
350.00 8.750 63 369.72 1.64
400.00 10.000 69 404.74 1.80
450.00 11.250 76 445.60 1.98
500.00 12.500 83 486.45 2.16
550.00 13.750 89 521.47 2.32
600.00 15.000 95 556.49 2.48
650.00 16.250 102 597.35 2.66
700.00 17.500 106 620.70 2.76
750.00 18.750 112 655.72 2.92
800.00 20.000 118 690.74 3.07
81
APPENDIX- C
Table C.1. Data for load vs. penetration curve in Hatirjheel project ch.0+250 at
Point-1 without JGT.
Strain Dial Strain Load Dial Load Load Field Corrected Field
Reading (mm) Reading (In lb) (In kN) CBR(%) CBR(%)
25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18
50.00 1.250 15 85.62 0.38
75.00 1.875 23 131.28 0.58
100.00 2.500 32 182.66 0.81 4
125.00 3.125 41 234.03 1.04
150.00 3.750 50 285.40 1.27
175.00 4.375 61 348.19 1.55
200.00 5.000 70 399.56 1.78 9 9
250.00 6.250 79 450.93 2.01
300.00 7.500 90 513.72 2.29
350.00 8.750 98 559.38 2.49
400.00 10.000 103 587.92 2.62
450.00 11.250 106 605.05 2.69
500.00 12.500 109 622.17 2.77
550.00 13.750 112 639.30 2.84
600.00 15.000 114 650.71 2.90
650.00 16.250 116 662.13 2.95
700.00 17.500 117 667.84 2.97
750.00 18.750 118 673.54 3.00
800.00 20.000 118 673.54 3.00
Strain Dial Strain Load Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected Field
25.00 0.625 9 51.37 0.23
50.00 1.250 18 102.74 0.46
75.00 1.875 26 148.41 0.66
100.00 2.500 36 205.49 0.91 5
125.00 3.125 47 268.28 1.19
150.00 3.750 59 336.77 1.50
175.00 4.375 72 410.98 1.83
200.00 5.000 86 490.89 2.18 11 11
250.00 6.250 97 553.68 2.46
300.00 7.500 106 605.05 2.69
350.00 8.750 115 656.42 2.92
400.00 10.000 124 707.79 3.15
450.00 11.250 132 753.46 3.35
500.00 12.500 139 793.41 3.53
550.00 13.750 143 816.24 3.63
600.00 15.000 147 839.08 3.73
650.00 16.250 150 856.20 3.81
700.00 17.500 152 867.62 3.86
750.00 18.750 153 873.32 3.89
800.00 20.000 154 879.03 3.91
82
25.00 0.625 8 45.66 0.20
50.00 1.250 17 97.04 0.43
75.00 1.875 25 142.70 0.63
100.00 2.500 35 199.78 0.89 4
125.00 3.125 45 256.86 1.14
150.00 3.750 57 325.36 1.45
175.00 4.375 70 399.56 1.78
200.00 5.000 82 468.06 2.08 10 10
250.00 6.250 95 542.26 2.41
300.00 7.500 103 587.92 2.62
350.00 8.750 112 639.30 2.84
400.00 10.000 121 690.67 3.07
450.00 11.250 128 730.62 3.25
500.00 12.500 136 776.29 3.45
550.00 13.750 139 793.41 3.53
600.00 15.000 142 810.54 3.61
650.00 16.250 146 833.37 3.71
700.00 17.500 148 844.78 3.76
750.00 18.750 149 850.49 3.78
800.00 20.000 150 856.20 3.81
Point-1 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 11 62.79 0.28
50.00 1.250 22 125.58 0.56
75.00 1.875 35 199.78 0.89
100.00 2.500 49 279.69 1.24 6
125.00 3.125 61 348.19 1.55
150.00 3.750 74 422.39 1.88
175.00 4.375 90 513.72 2.29
200.00 5.000 108 616.46 2.74 14 14
250.00 6.250 122 696.38 3.10
300.00 7.500 131 747.75 3.33
350.00 8.750 140 799.12 3.56
400.00 10.000 149 850.49 3.78
450.00 11.250 158 901.86 4.01
500.00 12.500 165 941.82 4.19
550.00 13.750 172 981.78 4.37
600.00 15.000 176 1004.61 4.47
650.00 16.250 180 1027.44 4.57
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
83
Point-2 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 12 68.50 0.30
50.00 1.250 21 119.87 0.53
75.00 1.875 34 194.07 0.86
100.00 2.500 48 273.98 1.22 6
125.00 3.125 61 348.19 1.55
150.00 3.750 74 422.39 1.88
175.00 4.375 91 519.43 2.31
200.00 5.000 109 622.17 2.77 14 14
250.00 6.250 123 702.08 3.12
300.00 7.500 132 753.46 3.35
350.00 8.750 141 804.83 3.58
400.00 10.000 150 856.20 3.81
450.00 11.250 158 901.86 4.01
500.00 12.500 165 941.82 4.19
550.00 13.750 172 981.78 4.37
600.00 15.000 176 1004.61 4.47
650.00 16.250 180 1027.44 4.57
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
Point-3 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 9 51.37 0.23
50.00 1.250 18 102.74 0.46
75.00 1.875 32 182.66 0.81
100.00 2.500 45 256.86 1.14 6
125.00 3.125 58 331.06 1.47
150.00 3.750 71 405.27 1.80
175.00 4.375 89 508.01 2.26
200.00 5.000 105 599.34 2.67 13 13
250.00 6.250 123 702.08 3.12
300.00 7.500 132 753.46 3.35
350.00 8.750 141 804.83 3.58
400.00 10.000 150 856.20 3.81
450.00 11.250 158 901.86 4.01
500.00 12.500 165 941.82 4.19
550.00 13.750 172 981.78 4.37
600.00 15.000 176 1004.61 4.47
650.00 16.250 180 1027.44 4.57
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
84
25.00 0.625 6 34.25 0.15
50.00 1.250 13 74.20 0.33
75.00 1.875 22 125.58 0.56
100.00 2.500 35 199.78 0.89 4
125.00 3.125 47 268.28 1.19
150.00 3.750 60 342.48 1.52
175.00 4.375 77 439.52 1.96
200.00 5.000 94 536.55 2.39 12 13
250.00 6.250 118 673.54 3.00
300.00 7.500 132 753.46 3.35
350.00 8.750 141 804.83 3.58
400.00 10.000 150 856.20 3.81
450.00 11.250 157 896.16 3.99
500.00 12.500 163 930.40 4.14
550.00 13.750 170 970.36 4.32
600.00 15.000 174 993.19 4.42
650.00 16.250 178 1016.02 4.52
700.00 17.500 180 1027.44 4.57
750.00 18.750 182 1038.86 4.62
800.00 20.000 183 1044.56 4.65
25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18 17
50.00 1.250 15 85.62 0.38
75.00 1.875 25 142.70 0.63
100.00 2.500 38 216.90 0.97 5
125.00 3.125 51 291.11 1.30
150.00 3.750 64 365.31 1.63
175.00 4.375 81 462.35 2.06
200.00 5.000 98 559.38 2.49 12 13
250.00 6.250 120 684.96 3.05
300.00 7.500 132 753.46 3.35
350.00 8.750 141 804.83 3.58
400.00 10.000 150 856.20 3.81
450.00 11.250 158 901.86 4.01
500.00 12.500 165 941.82 4.19
550.00 13.750 172 981.78 4.37
600.00 15.000 176 1004.61 4.47
650.00 16.250 180 1027.44 4.57
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
85
25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18 17
50.00 1.250 17 97.04 0.43
75.00 1.875 27 154.12 0.69
100.00 2.500 40 228.32 1.02 5
125.00 3.125 53 302.52 1.35
150.00 3.750 66 376.73 1.68
175.00 4.375 85 485.18 2.16
200.00 5.000 100 570.80 2.54 13 14
250.00 6.250 121 690.67 3.07
300.00 7.500 135 770.58 3.43
350.00 8.750 144 821.95 3.66
400.00 10.000 153 873.32 3.89
450.00 11.250 158 901.86 4.01
500.00 12.500 165 941.82 4.19
550.00 13.750 172 981.78 4.37
600.00 15.000 176 1004.61 4.47
650.00 16.250 180 1027.44 4.57
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
Point-1 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 12 68.50 0.30 17
50.00 1.250 25 142.70 0.63
75.00 1.875 40 228.32 1.02
100.00 2.500 55 313.94 1.40 7
125.00 3.125 70 399.56 1.78
150.00 3.750 85 485.18 2.16
175.00 4.375 105 599.34 2.67
200.00 5.000 124 707.79 3.15 16 16
250.00 6.250 142 810.54 3.61
300.00 7.500 155 884.74 3.94
350.00 8.750 165 941.82 4.19
400.00 10.000 173 987.48 4.39
450.00 11.250 180 1027.44 4.57
500.00 12.500 184 1050.27 4.67
550.00 13.750 190 1084.52 4.83
600.00 15.000 193 1101.64 4.90
650.00 16.250 195 1113.06 4.95
700.00 17.500 201 1147.31 5.10
750.00 18.750 202 1153.02 5.13
800.00 20.000 202 1153.02 5.13
86
Point-2 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 10 57.08 0.25 17
50.00 1.250 20 114.16 0.51
75.00 1.875 30 171.24 0.76
100.00 2.500 41 234.03 1.04 5
125.00 3.125 51 291.11 1.30
150.00 3.750 64 365.31 1.63
175.00 4.375 79 450.93 2.01
200.00 5.000 97 553.68 2.46 12 13
250.00 6.250 115 656.42 2.92
300.00 7.500 128 730.62 3.25
350.00 8.750 138 787.70 3.50
400.00 10.000 148 844.78 3.76
450.00 11.250 156 890.45 3.96
500.00 12.500 163 930.40 4.14
550.00 13.750 169 964.65 4.29
600.00 15.000 172 981.78 4.37
650.00 16.250 176 1004.61 4.47
700.00 17.500 178 1016.02 4.52
750.00 18.750 180 1027.44 4.57
800.00 20.000 181 1033.15 4.60
Point-3 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 11 62.79 0.28
50.00 1.250 24 136.99 0.61
75.00 1.875 38 216.90 0.97
100.00 2.500 52 296.82 1.32 7
125.00 3.125 69 393.85 1.75
150.00 3.750 83 473.76 2.11
175.00 4.375 100 570.80 2.54
200.00 5.000 116 662.13 2.95 15 15
250.00 6.250 140 799.12 3.56
300.00 7.500 153 873.32 3.89
350.00 8.750 163 930.40 4.14
400.00 10.000 170 970.36 4.32
450.00 11.250 177 1010.32 4.49
500.00 12.500 181 1033.15 4.60
550.00 13.750 187 1067.40 4.75
600.00 15.000 190 1084.52 4.83
650.00 16.250 192 1095.94 4.88
700.00 17.500 193 1101.64 4.90
750.00 18.750 194 1107.35 4.93
800.00 20.000 195 1113.06 4.95
87
reading (mm) Reading (In lb) (In KN) CBR(%) CBR(%)
25.00 0.625 11 62.79 0.28 17
50.00 1.250 24 136.99 0.61
75.00 1.875 38 216.90 0.97
100.00 2.500 52 296.82 1.32 7
125.00 3.125 68 388.14 1.73
150.00 3.750 84 479.47 2.13
175.00 4.375 105 599.34 2.67
200.00 5.000 125 713.50 3.17 16 16
250.00 6.250 144 821.95 3.66
300.00 7.500 157 896.16 3.99
350.00 8.750 167 953.24 4.24
400.00 10.000 175 998.90 4.44
450.00 11.250 182 1038.86 4.62
500.00 12.500 186 1061.69 4.72
550.00 13.750 191 1090.23 4.85
600.00 15.000 193 1101.64 4.90
650.00 16.250 195 1113.06 4.95
700.00 17.500 198 1130.18 5.03
750.00 18.750 200 1141.60 5.08
800.00 20.000 202 1153.02 5.13
Point-2 without JGT
25.00 0.625 15 85.62 0.38
50.00 1.250 30 171.24 0.76
75.00 1.875 45 256.86 1.14
100.00 2.500 60 342.48 1.52 8
125.00 3.125 75 428.10 1.90
150.00 3.750 93 530.84 2.36
175.00 4.375 112 639.30 2.84
200.00 5.000 132 753.46 3.35 17 17
250.00 6.250 150 856.20 3.81
300.00 7.500 162 924.70 4.11
350.00 8.750 170 970.36 4.32
400.00 10.000 178 1016.02 4.52
450.00 11.250 185 1055.98 4.70
500.00 12.500 188 1073.10 4.77
550.00 13.750 192 1095.94 4.88
600.00 15.000 195 1113.06 4.95
650.00 16.250 198 1130.18 5.03
700.00 17.500 200 1141.60 5.08
750.00 18.750 201 1147.31 5.10
800.00 20.000 202 1153.02 5.13
88
Point-3 without JGT
25.00 0.625 12 68.50 0.30
50.00 1.250 22 125.58 0.56
75.00 1.875 35 199.78 0.89
100.00 2.500 50 285.40 1.27 6
125.00 3.125 63 359.60 1.60
150.00 3.750 76 433.81 1.93
175.00 4.375 92 525.14 2.34
200.00 5.000 110 627.88 2.79 14 15
250.00 6.250 125 713.50 3.17
300.00 7.500 138 787.70 3.50
350.00 8.750 145 827.66 3.68
400.00 10.000 152 867.62 3.86
450.00 11.250 159 907.57 4.04
500.00 12.500 166 947.53 4.22
550.00 13.750 173 987.48 4.39
600.00 15.000 177 1010.32 4.49
650.00 16.250 181 1033.15 4.60
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
Point-1 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 11 62.79 0.28
50.00 1.250 24 136.99 0.61
75.00 1.875 40 228.32 1.02
100.00 2.500 54 308.23 1.37 7
125.00 3.125 70 399.56 1.78
150.00 3.750 86 490.89 2.18
175.00 4.375 108 616.46 2.74
200.00 5.000 127 724.92 3.23 16 17
250.00 6.250 145 827.66 3.68
300.00 7.500 158 901.86 4.01
350.00 8.750 168 958.94 4.27
400.00 10.000 176 1004.61 4.47
450.00 11.250 183 1044.56 4.65
500.00 12.500 187 1067.40 4.75
550.00 13.750 192 1095.94 4.88
600.00 15.000 194 1107.35 4.93
650.00 16.250 196 1118.77 4.98
700.00 17.500 199 1135.89 5.05
750.00 18.750 200 1141.60 5.08
800.00 20.000 201 1147.31 5.10
89
Point-2 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 15 85.62 0.38
50.00 1.250 30 171.24 0.76
75.00 1.875 45 256.86 1.14
100.00 2.500 62 353.90 1.57 8
125.00 3.125 78 445.22 1.98
150.00 3.750 98 559.38 2.49
175.00 4.375 118 673.54 3.00
200.00 5.000 135 770.58 3.43 17 17
250.00 6.250 150 856.20 3.81
300.00 7.500 162 924.70 4.11
350.00 8.750 170 970.36 4.32
400.00 10.000 178 1016.02 4.52
450.00 11.250 185 1055.98 4.70
500.00 12.500 188 1073.10 4.77
550.00 13.750 192 1095.94 4.88
600.00 15.000 195 1113.06 4.95
650.00 16.250 198 1130.18 5.03
700.00 17.500 200 1141.60 5.08
750.00 18.750 201 1147.31 5.10
800.00 20.000 202 1153.02 5.13
Point-3 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 12 68.50 0.30
50.00 1.250 22 125.58 0.56
75.00 1.875 35 199.78 0.89
100.00 2.500 50 285.40 1.27 6
125.00 3.125 63 359.60 1.60
150.00 3.750 76 433.81 1.93
175.00 4.375 95 542.26 2.41
200.00 5.000 111 633.59 2.82 14 14
250.00 6.250 127 724.92 3.23
300.00 7.500 138 787.70 3.50
350.00 8.750 146 833.37 3.71
400.00 10.000 154 879.03 3.91
450.00 11.250 160 913.28 4.06
500.00 12.500 167 953.24 4.24
550.00 13.750 173 987.48 4.39
600.00 15.000 177 1010.32 4.49
650.00 16.250 181 1033.15 4.60
700.00 17.500 182 1038.86 4.62
750.00 18.750 183 1044.56 4.65
800.00 20.000 184 1050.27 4.67
90
Table C.19. Data for load vs. penetration curve in Keraniganj project ch.9+250 at
25.00 0.625 9 51.37 0.23

50.00 1.250 17 97.04 0.43
75.00 1.875 27 154.12 0.69
100.00 2.500 37 211.20 0.94
125.00 3.125 47 268.28 1.19
150.00 3.750 58 331.06 1.47
175.00 4.375 68 388.14 1.73
200.00 5.000 77 439.52 1.96 10 10
250.00 6.250 88 502.30 2.23
300.00 7.500 96 547.97 2.44
350.00 8.750 102 582.22 2.59
400.00 10.000 105 599.34 2.67
450.00 11.250 108 616.46 2.74
500.00 12.500 111 633.59 2.82
550.00 13.750 114 650.71 2.90
600.00 15.000 116 662.13 2.95
650.00 16.250 117 667.84 2.97
700.00 17.500 119 679.25 3.02
750.00 18.750 121 690.67 3.07
800.00 20.000 122 696.38 3.10
Point-2 without JGT
25.00 0.625 8 45.66 0.20

50.00 1.250 16 91.33 0.41
75.00 1.875 24 136.99 0.61
100.00 2.500 33 188.36 0.84 4
125.00 3.125 42 239.74 1.07
150.00 3.750 49 279.69 1.24
175.00 4.375 56 319.65 1.42
200.00 5.000 61 348.19 1.55 8 8
250.00 6.250 67 382.44 1.70
300.00 7.500 72 410.98 1.83
350.00 8.750 77 439.52 1.96
400.00 10.000 81 462.35 2.06
450.00 11.250 84 479.47 2.13
500.00 12.500 87 496.60 2.21
550.00 13.750 89 508.01 2.26
600.00 15.000 91 519.43 2.31
650.00 16.250 92 525.14 2.34
700.00 17.500 93 530.84 2.36
750.00 18.750 94 536.55 2.39
800.00 20.000 95 542.26 2.41
91
Point-3 without JGT
25.00 0.625 9 51.37 0.23

50.00 1.250 17 97.04 0.43
75.00 1.875 26 148.41 0.66
100.00 2.500 35 199.78 0.89 4
125.00 3.125 44 251.15 1.12
150.00 3.750 53 302.52 1.35
175.00 4.375 62 353.90 1.57
200.00 5.000 71 405.27 1.80 9 9
250.00 6.250 80 456.64 2.03
300.00 7.500 86 490.89 2.18
350.00 8.750 91 519.43 2.31
400.00 10.000 95 542.26 2.41
450.00 11.250 99 565.09 2.51
500.00 12.500 103 587.92 2.62
550.00 13.750 105 599.34 2.67
600.00 15.000 107 610.76 2.72
650.00 16.250 108 616.46 2.74
700.00 17.500 109 622.17 2.77
750.00 18.750 110 627.88 2.79
800.00 20.000 110 627.88 2.79
Point-1 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18

50.00 1.250 15 85.62 0.38
75.00 1.875 20 114.16 0.51
100.00 2.500 26 148.41 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 33 188.36 0.84
150.00 3.750 38 216.90 0.97
175.00 4.375 45 256.86 1.14
200.00 5.000 52 296.82 1.32 7 7
250.00 6.250 57 325.36 1.45
300.00 7.500 62 353.90 1.57
350.00 8.750 68 388.14 1.73
400.00 10.000 71 405.27 1.80
450.00 11.250 74 422.39 1.88
500.00 12.500 76 433.81 1.93
550.00 13.750 78 445.22 1.98
600.00 15.000 79 450.93 2.01
650.00 16.250 81 462.35 2.06
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 83 473.76 2.11
800.00 20.000 85 485.18 2.16
92
Point-2 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18

50.00 1.250 15 85.62 0.38
75.00 1.875 20 114.16 0.51
100.00 2.500 26 148.41 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 33 188.36 0.84
150.00 3.750 38 216.90 0.97
175.00 4.375 43 245.44 1.09
200.00 5.000 48 273.98 1.22 6 6
250.00 6.250 55 313.94 1.40
300.00 7.500 62 353.90 1.57
350.00 8.750 68 388.14 1.73
400.00 10.000 71 405.27 1.80
450.00 11.250 74 422.39 1.88
500.00 12.500 76 433.81 1.93
550.00 13.750 78 445.22 1.98
600.00 15.000 79 450.93 2.01
650.00 16.250 81 462.35 2.06
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 83 473.76 2.11
800.00 20.000 85 485.18 2.16
Point-3 with JGT.
25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18
50.00 1.250 15 85.62 0.38
75.00 1.875 20 114.16 0.51
100.00 2.500 26 148.41 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 33 188.36 0.84
150.00 3.750 38 216.90 0.97
175.00 4.375 45 256.86 1.14
200.00 5.000 52 296.82 1.32 7 7
250.00 6.250 58 331.06 1.47
300.00 7.500 65 371.02 1.65
350.00 8.750 70 399.56 1.78
400.00 10.000 72 410.98 1.83
450.00 11.250 74 422.39 1.88
500.00 12.500 76 433.81 1.93
550.00 13.750 78 445.22 1.98
600.00 15.000 79 450.93 2.01
650.00 16.250 81 462.35 2.06
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 83 473.76 2.11
800.00 20.000 85 485.18 2.16
93
Strain Dial Strain Load Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

25.00 0.625 7 39.96 0.18

50.00 1.250 15 85.62 0.38
75.00 1.875 20 114.16 0.51
100.00 2.500 26 148.41 0.66 3
125.00 3.125 33 188.36 0.84
150.00 3.750 38 216.90 0.97
175.00 4.375 43 245.44 1.09
200.00 5.000 48 273.98 1.22 6 6
250.00 6.250 55 313.94 1.40
300.00 7.500 62 353.90 1.57
350.00 8.750 68 388.14 1.73
400.00 10.000 71 405.27 1.80
450.00 11.250 74 422.39 1.88
500.00 12.500 76 433.81 1.93
550.00 13.750 78 445.22 1.98
600.00 15.000 79 450.93 2.01
650.00 16.250 81 462.35 2.06
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 83 473.76 2.11
800.00 20.000 85 485.18 2.16
Point-2 without JGT

25.00 0.625 5 28.54 0.13
50.00 1.250 10 57.08 0.25
75.00 1.875 15 85.62 0.38
100.00 2.500 21 119.87 0.53 3
125.00 3.125 27 154.12 0.69
150.00 3.750 32 182.66 0.81
175.00 4.375 37 211.20 0.94
200.00 5.000 41 234.03 1.04 5 5
250.00 6.250 49 279.69 1.24
300.00 7.500 56 319.65 1.42
350.00 8.750 62 353.90 1.57
400.00 10.000 67 382.44 1.70
450.00 11.250 71 405.27 1.80
500.00 12.500 74 422.39 1.88
550.00 13.750 77 439.52 1.96
600.00 15.000 79 450.93 2.01
650.00 16.250 81 462.35 2.06
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 82 468.06 2.08
800.00 20.000 83 473.76 2.11
94
Point-3 without JGT

25.00 0.625 6 34.25 0.15
50.00 1.250 12 68.50 0.30
75.00 1.875 18 102.74 0.46
100.00 2.500 24 136.99 0.61 3
125.00 3.125 30 171.24 0.76
150.00 3.750 35 199.78 0.89
175.00 4.375 41 234.03 1.04
200.00 5.000 46 262.57 1.17 6 6
250.00 6.250 54 308.23 1.37
300.00 7.500 61 348.19 1.55
350.00 8.750 67 382.44 1.70
400.00 10.000 70 399.56 1.78
450.00 11.250 73 416.68 1.85
500.00 12.500 75 428.10 1.90
550.00 13.750 77 439.52 1.96
600.00 15.000 78 445.22 1.98
650.00 16.250 80 456.64 2.03
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 82 468.06 2.08
800.00 20.000 83 473.76 2.11
Point-1 with JGT.

25.00 0.625 3 17.12 0.08
50.00 1.250 6 34.25 0.15
75.00 1.875 9 51.37 0.23
100.00 2.500 13 74.20 0.33 2
125.00 3.125 17 97.04 0.43
150.00 3.750 22 125.58 0.56
175.00 4.375 27 154.12 0.69
200.00 5.000 32 182.66 0.81 4 4
250.00 6.250 38 216.90 0.97
300.00 7.500 44 251.15 1.12
350.00 8.750 48 273.98 1.22
400.00 10.000 52 296.82 1.32
450.00 11.250 56 319.65 1.42
500.00 12.500 60 342.48 1.52
550.00 13.750 64 365.31 1.63
600.00 15.000 67 382.44 1.70
650.00 16.250 70 399.56 1.78
700.00 17.500 73 416.68 1.85
750.00 18.750 75 428.10 1.90
800.00 20.000 77 439.52 1.96
95
Point-2 with JGT.

25.00 0.625 3 17.12 0.08
50.00 1.250 6 34.25 0.15
75.00 1.875 9 51.37 0.23
100.00 2.500 13 74.20 0.33 2
125.00 3.125 17 97.04 0.43
150.00 3.750 22 125.58 0.56
175.00 4.375 27 154.12 0.69
200.00 5.000 32 182.66 0.81 4 4
250.00 6.250 38 216.90 0.97
300.00 7.500 44 251.15 1.12
350.00 8.750 48 273.98 1.22
400.00 10.000 52 296.82 1.32
450.00 11.250 56 319.65 1.42
500.00 12.500 60 342.48 1.52
550.00 13.750 64 365.31 1.63
600.00 15.000 67 382.44 1.70
650.00 16.250 70 399.56 1.78
700.00 17.500 73 416.68 1.85
750.00 18.750 75 428.10 1.90
800.00 20.000 77 439.52 1.96
Point-3 with JGT.

25.00 0.625 5 28.54 0.13
50.00 1.250 10 57.08 0.25
75.00 1.875 15 85.62 0.38
100.00 2.500 21 119.87 0.53 3
125.00 3.125 27 154.12 0.69
150.00 3.750 32 182.66 0.81
175.00 4.375 37 211.20 0.94
200.00 5.000 40 228.32 1.02 5 5
250.00 6.250 48 273.98 1.22
300.00 7.500 56 319.65 1.42
350.00 8.750 61 348.19 1.55
400.00 10.000 66 376.73 1.68
450.00 11.250 71 405.27 1.80
500.00 12.500 73 416.68 1.85
550.00 13.750 75 428.10 1.90
600.00 15.000 78 445.22 1.98
650.00 16.250 80 456.64 2.03
700.00 17.500 81 462.35 2.06
750.00 18.750 82 468.06 2.08
800.00 20.000 82 468.06 2.08
96
APPENDIX - D
LOAD VS. PENETRATION CURVE OF LABORATORY CBR TEST
Location Hatirjheel Ch. 0+250 without JGT
MC=13.79%
γd = 15.24 kN/m3
CPL= 2.1 kN
CCBR= 10%
Figure D.1. Load vs. penetration curve for 48 blows without JGT in 85.71%
compaction of standard Proctor test.
MC=12.68%
γd = 15.52 kN/m3
CPL= 2.2 kN
CCBR= 10%
97
MC=11.79%
γd = 15.69 kN/m3
CPL= 2.4 kN
CCBR= 12%
Location Hatirjheel Ch. 0+250 with JGT
MC=12.56%
γd = 15.41 kN/m3
CPL= 1.9 kN
CCBR= 9%
Figure D.4. Load vs. penetration curve for 48 blows with JGT in 85.71%
98
MC=13.37%
γd = 15.68 kN/m3
CPL= 2.0 kN
CCBR= 9%
MC=11.17%
γd = 16.29 kN/m3
CPL= 2.0 kN
CCBR= 10%
99
MC=13.73%
γd = 15.25 kN/m3
CPL= 2.15 kN
CCBR= 11%
MC=13.17%
γd = 15.37 kN/m3
CPL= 2.15 kN
CCBR= 11%
100
MC=14.15%
γd = 15.91 kN/m3
CPL= 2.4 kN
CCBR= 12%
MC=12.56%
γd = 15.33 kN/m3
CPL= 1.75 kN
CCBR= 9%
101
MC=13.62%
γd = 15.60 kN/m3
CPL= 1.95 kN
CCBR=10%
MC=14.22%
γd = 15.90 kN/m3
CPL= 2.0 kN
CCBR=10%
102
MC=16.15%
γd = 16.29 kN/m3
CPL= 3.4 kN
CCBR= 16%
MC=16.67%
γd = 16.63 kN/m3
CPL= 3.6 kN
CCBR= 18%
Figure D.14. Load vs. penetration curve 52 blows without JGT in 92.86%
103
MC=16.58%
γd = 16.72 kN/m3
CPL= 3.7 kN
CCBR= 18%
MC=16.33%
γd = 16.23 kN/m3
CPL= 2.8 kN
CCBR= 14%
104
MC=16.41%
γd = 16.30 kN/m3
CPL= 3.60 kN
CCBR=18%
MC=16.24%
γd = 16.61 kN/m3
CPL= 3.55 kN
CCBR=18%
105
Location Keraniganj Ch. 9+250 without JGT
MC=13.20%
γd = 15.32 kN/m3
CPL= 1.05 kN
CCBR=5%
MC=13.07%
γd = 15.43 kN/m3
CPL= 1.31 kN
CCBR= 6%
106
MC=14.00%
γd = 15.76 kN/m3
CPL=2.1 kN
CCBR= 10%
Location Keraniganj Ch. 9+250 with JGT
MC=12.87%
γd = 14.95 kN/m3
CPL= 0.61 kN
CCBR= 3%
107
MC=13.43%
γd = 15.29 kN/m3
CPL= 0.66 kN
CCBR=3%
MC=13.93%
γd = 15.39 kN/m3
CPL=0.80 kN
CCBR=4%
108
MC=14.01%
γd = 15.59 kN/m3
CPL= 2.10 kN
CCBR=10%
MC=13.73%
γd = 15.67 kN/m3
CPL= 2.2 kN
CCBR= 11%
109
MC=15.02%
γd = 16.04 kN/m3
CPL=2.3 kN
CCBR= 11%
MC=13.45%
γd = 14.95 kN/m3
CPL=1.1 kN
CCBR=5%
110
MC=13.51%
γd = 15.45 kN/m3
CPL= 1.91 kN
CCBR=9%
MC=15.42%
γd = 16.02 kN/m3
CPL=2.15 kN
CCBR=11%
111
Figure D.31. Load vs. penetration curve for without JGT in 13.29%
Figure D.32. Load vs. penetration curve for without JGT in 13.92%
112
Figure D.33. Load vs. penetration curve for with JGT in 13.29%
Figure D.34. Load vs. penetration curve for with JGT in 13.92%
113
APPENDIX - E
LOAD VS. PENETRATION CURVE OF FIELD CBR TEST
MC=5.83%
CPL= 1.79 kN
CCBR= 9%
Figure E.1. Load vs. penetration curve in Hatirjheel project ch. 0+250 at Point-1without
JGT.
MC=6.11%
CPL= 2.19 kN
CCBR= 11%
Figure E.2. Load vs. penetration curve in Hatirjheel project ch. 0+250 at Point-2 without
JGT.
114
MC=6.01%
CPL= 2.10 kN
CCBR= 10%
JGT.
MC=5.83%
CPL= 2.75 kN
CCBR= 14%
Figure E.4. Load vs. penetration curve in Hatirjheel project ch. 0+250 at Point-1 with
JGT.
115
MC=6.11%
CPL= 2.79 kN
CCBR= 14%
JGT.
MC=6.01%
CPL= 2.70 kN
CCBR= 13%
JGT.
116
MC=6.16%
CPL= 2.70 kN
CCBR= 13%
JGT.
MC=5.60%
CPL= 2.70 kN
CCBR= 13%
JGT.
117
MC=5.98%
CPL= 2.79kN
CCBR= 14%
JGT.
MC=6.16%
CPL= 3.17 kN
CCBR= 16%
JGT.
118
MC=5.60%
CPL= 2.60 kN
CCBR=13%
JGT.
MC=5.98%
CPL= 3.10 kN
CCBR=15%
JGT.
119
MC=7.05%
CPL= 3.3 kN
CCBR= 16%
Figure E.13. Load vs. penetration curve in Hatirjheel project ch.0+650 at Point-1 without
JGT.
MC=7.12%
CPL= 3.4 kN
CCBR= 17%
JGT.
120
MC=6.10%
CPL=2.95 kN
CCBR=15%
JGT.
MC=7.06%
CPL= 3.40 kN
CCBR=17%
Figure E.16. Load vs. penetration curve in Hatirjheel project ch.0+650 at Point-1 with
JGT.
121
MC=7.12%
CPL= 3.5 kN
CCBR=17%
JGT.
MC=6.10%
CPL= 2.9 kN
CCBR= 14%
JGT.
122
MC=8.84%
CPL=2 kN
CCBR= 10%
Figure E.19. Load vs. penetration curve in Keraniganj project ch. 9+250 at Point-1
without JGT.
MC=7.40%3
CPL= 1.55 kN
CCBR= 8%
without JGT.
123
MC=8.62%
CPL= 1.8 kN
CCBR=9%
without JGT.
MC=8.84%
CPL=1.32 kN
CCBR=7%
with JGT.
124
MC=7.40%
CPL= 1.22 kN
CCBR=6%
with JGT.
MC=8.62%
CPL= 1.32 kN
CCBR= 7%
with JGT.
125
MC=9.84%
CPL=1.22 kN
CCBR= 6%
without JGT.
MC=8.90%
CPL=1.04 kN
CCBR= 5%
without JGT.
126
MC=8.79%
CPL= 1.17 kN
CCBR=6%
without JGT.
MC=9.84%
CPL=0.9 kN
CCBR=4%
with JGT.
127
MC=8.90%
CPL=0.9 kN
CCBR=4%
with JGT.
MC=8.79%
CPL=1.1 kN
CCBR=5%
with JGT.
128
CHAPTER THREE
LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS AND TEST RESULTS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
To achieve the objectives of this study a series of laboratory investigations have been
carried out in the Geotechnical Laboratory of BUET. Soil Samples from 3 (three)
chainages of “Integrated Development of Hatirjheel Area Including Begunbari Khal
Project” Dhaka (Figure 3.1) and 2 (two) chainages of “Turag-Ruhitpur Baorvita Road
Project” Keraniganj, Dhaka (Figure 3.2), have been collected. Different types of JGT
have been collected form BJMC. All salient properties of JGT has been determined.
Grain size distribution, specific gravity, maximum dry density (Standard Proctor Test)
soaked and unsoaked CBR values of soil has been determined. CBR values of JGT-
Soil system has also been determined.
3.2 SELECTION OF SITES FOR THE STUDY
The study was undertaken in two road projects one part in “Integrated Development
of Hatirjheel Area Including Begunbari Khal Project” Begunbari Dhaka, at Ch.
0+250m to Ch. 0+650m (Figure 3.1), where road embankment was raised upto
subgrade level by hydraulic filled soil. This Project was executed by "16 Engineer
Construction Battalion of Bangladesh Army". The aim of this project is to construct a
express way and a service way along both side of the lake. For this reason sides of the
lake was widened and raised above the highest flood level by hydraulic filled soil.
Another part in “Turag-Ruhitpur Baorvita Road Project” Keraniganj, Dhaka at Ch.

9+250m to Ch. 9+335m (Figure 3.2), where road embankment was raised upto
subgrade level by carried earth. This project was executed by Roads & Highway
department, Dhaka division, Dhaka. The aim of the “Turag-Ruhitpur Baorvita Road
Project” is to connect two regional roads to facilitate traffic movement.
33
Ch. 0+650m
Ch. 0+350m
Ch. 0+250m
Figure 3.1. Location Map of “Integrated Development of Hatirjheel Area Including

Begunbari Khal Project” ,Dhaka.
Turag
Ch. 9+250m Baorvita
Ch. 9+335m
Figure 3.2. Location Map of "Turag-Ruhitpur Baorvita Road Project",Keraniganj,

Dhaka.
34
3.3 TEST OF MATERIALS
Materials including soil of the two selected sites, different types of JGT were
collected for laboratory investigations. Comprehensive laboratory test carried out in
the Geotechnical laboratory of Civil Engineering Department of Bangladesh
University of Engineering University (BUET).
3.3.1 Soil
Hydraulic filled soils at Ch. 0+250m, Ch. 0+350m Ch. 0+650m of Hatirjheel project
and carried earth soils at Ch. 9+250m, Ch. 9+335 of Keraniganj project were
collected. In the laboratory Particle size distribution, Standard proctor test, Maximum
dry density, Optimum water content and Specific gravity, have been determined.
Soil of Hatirjheel project at Ch. 0+250m contains most of the particles size ranges
from 0.06mm to 0.150mm shown in Figure 3.3. This soil contains 83% sand and 17.%
finer passing through sieve no 200 (0.075 mm). According to Unified Soil
Classification System this soil is classified as silty-sand with symbol SM. Maximum
dry density and optimum moisture content of the soil found 16.95 kN/m3 and 17.6%
respectively from standard Proctor test shown in Figure 3.4.
Sand = 83%
% Finer No. 200 Sieve (0.075mm) = 17%
Figure 3.3. Particle size distribution curve of Hatirjheel soil at Ch. 0+250m.
35
Max • d = 16.95 kN/m3
OMC = 17.6%
Figure 3.4. Dry density vs. moisture content curve of Hatirjheel soil at Ch. 0+250m.
from 0.06mm to 0.150mm shown in Figure 3.5. This soil contains 85% sand and 15%
Sand= 85%
% Finer No. 200 Sieve (0.075mm) = 15%
36
Max • d = 17.00 kN/m3
OMC = 16.7%
Sand= 82%
% Finer No. 200 Sieve (0.075mm) = 18%
37
Max • d = 16.90 kN/m3
OMC = 18.1%
Soil of Keraniganj project at Ch. 9+250m contains most of the particles size ranges
dry density and optimum moisture content of the soil found 16.30 kN/m3 and 19.6 %
Sand= 56%
% Finer No. 200 Sieve (0.075mm) = 43%
Figure 3.9. Particle size distribution curve of Keraniganj soil at Ch. 9+250m.
38
Max • d = 16.30 kN/m3
OMC = 19.6%
Figure 3.10. Dry density vs. moisture content curve of Keraniganj soil at Ch.9+250m
Soil of Keraniganj project at Ch. 9+335m contains most of the particles size ranges
from 0.06mm to 0.150mm shown in Figure 3.11. This soil contains 54% and 46%
Sand = 54%
% Finer No. 200 Sieve (0.075mm) = 46%
Figure 3.11. Particle size distribution curve of Keraniganj soil at Ch.9+335m.
39
Max • d = 16.40 kN/m3
OMC = 18.9%
Figure 3.12. Dry density vs. moisture content curve of Keraniganj soil at Ch.9+335m.
3.3.2 JUTE GEOTEXTILE
To select the JGT, 7 (Seven) types of JGT have been tested to select the appropriate
JGT for this study. DWF Cloth (Plain), Standard Binola, L Twill Cloth, Standard B
Twill Cloth, Lt Cees Cloth (Plain) and A Twill Cloth have been examined in the
laboratory. i) Average Mass per unit Area, ii) Average thickness (under a pressure of
2kPa), iii) Average Grab Tensile Strength at 22oC (RT), iv) Average Grab Tensile
Elongation at 22oC (RT), v) Average Strip Tensile Strength at 21oC (RT), vi) Average
Strip Tensile Elongation at 22 oC (RT), and vii) Average CBR Puncture Resistance at
22oC (RT) have been determined. The results are shown in Table-3.1. Khan (2008)
have carried out systematic laboratory tests in order to determine the index properties,
mechanical behavior and hydraulic characteristics of a range of untreated and treated
JGTs as shown in Table 3.2.
On the basis of laboratory investigations DWF Cloth (Plain) JGT were selected for
this thesis. Because, DWF Cloth (Plain) JGT has low mass per unit area as well as
sufficient strength.
40
Table 3.1. Test Results of untreated JGT.
Test Parameter Direction Test Unit Test Result

Standard DWF Cloth Standard L Twill Standard B Lt Cecs A Twill
(Plain) Binola Cloth Twill Cloth Cloth Plain Cloth
Average Mass per unit ASTM
- gm/m2 522.71 614.75 731.19 645.24 614.89 673.27
Area 5261
Average Thickness (under ASTM
- mm 1.76 1.33 1.52 2.30 2.18 1.87
a pressure of 2kPa) 5199
N 431.60 535.63 882.90 523.85 482.65 696.51
Average Grab Tensile MD ASTM
Strength at 22oC (RT) XMD 4632
N 572.90 451.26 639.61 535.63 651.38 443.41
MD % 44.00 62.67 38.40 20.27 22.13 22.40
Average Grab Tensile ASTM
Elongation at 22oC (RT) 4632
XMD % 50.93 66.13 56.53 17.60 23.73 33.07
MD kN/m 19.82 18.05 26.45 20.26 16.32 27.91
Average Strip Tensile ASTM
Strength at 22oC (RT) 4595
XMD kN/m 20.39 20.5 22.37 24.62 29.17 20.38
MD % 14.20 14.00 16.00 15.60 18.00 16.00
Average Strip Tensile ASTM
Elongation at 22oC (RT) 4595
XMD % 13.20 15.00 13.00 16.40 13.60 14.60
Average CBR Puncture ASTM
- N 2360 2517 3473 3278 2692 3076
Resistance at 22oC (RT) 6241
RT=Room Temperature
MD= Machine Direction
XMD=Cross Machine Direction
41
Table 3.2: Test Results of Treated JGT, Untreated JGT and Synthetic Geotextile (after Khan 2008).
Wide
width CBR
Mass per Grab tensile
Thickness tensile puncher Burst strength AOS
Product Condition unit area strength (N) Permittivity (s-1)
(mm) strength resistance (kPa) (mm)
(gsm) MD/XM
(kN/m) (N)
MD/XMD
0.0 to
Jute Treated 1600 3.5 15/18 800/700 4000 1500 0.06
<0.075
Untreated 800 2.8 10/12 400/220 1500 1250 0.28 0.28
0.0 to<
Canvas Treated 1200 2.5 27/15 1100/400 1800 1600 0.0
0.075
Untreated 500 1.3 23/14 850/400 1700 2400 0.03 0.09
DW Twill Treated 1400 3.1 25/32 1000/900 1700* 2600 0.21 <0.075
Untreated 750 2.4 23/26 900/750 4500 2400 0.25 0.8
Hessian Untreated 300 1.5 12/14 210/220 1500 1400 1.19 1.0
Synthetic Non-woven 240-640 2.0-4.5 [18-48]/ [1160-2590]/ 2660-5450 3800-4500 0.4-1.8 <0.075
geotextile [15-31] [780-1900]
MD= Machine Direction, XMD=Cross Machine Direction, *Reduced after Treatment
42
3.4. CBR TESTS ON LABORATORY COMPACTED SAND
Soils of 5(five) chainages of the two embankments were collected and CBR tests were
performed on laboratory following ASTM method D1883. Apparatus for CBR test
mainly consist of Loading machine, Mold, Rammer, Expansion Measuring Apparatus,
Penetration Piston and Gauge. To evaluate the effect of JGT on subgrade, CBR values
of sand without JGT and with JGT were determined.
3.4.1 CBR TEST ON LABORATORY COMPACTED SAND WITHOUT JGT
To prepare sample for CBR test without JGT, a mold was filled in three layers and
compacted with 48,52 and 54 blows by a hammer of 2.27 kg (5 lb). Different blows
were used to get different dry density. A schematic diagram of three layers are shown
in Figure 3.13. Molds were immerged in water allowing free access of water at the top
and bottom of the mold. The molds were allowed to soak in water for 96 hours. After
96 hours the sample were taken out of water and allow it to drain downward for 15
minutes. The specimen was taken to the loading machine. Set the penetration piston
and both stress and penetration gauge as shown in Figure 3.14. Load applied on the
piston and recorded the gauge reading at penetrations 0.025 in. to 0.20 in. Load vs.
penetration curves were drawn (Shown in appendices-A) and corrected load at 5mm
penetration was read from the graph. From corrected penetration load CBR values
were calculated. CBR= (Test load/ Standard load) x100
Layer-3
Layer-2
Layer-1
Figure 3.13. A schematic diagram of CBR test mold.
43
Figure 3.14. View of Laboratory CBR test.
3.4.2 CBR TEST ON LABORATORY COMPACTED JGT – SAND SYSTEM
A series of CBR test were performed on hydraulic fill sandy soil with JGT. No
specific standard laboratory setup for evaluating the effect of JGT on CBR is
available. However, guideline suggested by ASTM D 1883-87 was followed. The
soils were compacted in three layers. JGT sample of diameter higher than the mold
was cut and placed the JGT below second layer from the top of the mold. To anchored
the JGT against sliding few parts of JGT folds upward as shown in Figure 3.13. The
molds were compacted by 48, 52 and 54 blows to achieve different dry densities. The
prepared molds were immerged in water allowing free access of water at the top and
bottom of the mold. The molds were allowed to soak for 96 hours. After 96 hours the
sample were taken out of water and allow it to drain downward for 15 minutes. The
Specimen was taken to the loading machine. Set the penetration piston and both stress
and penetration gauge as shown in Figure 3.15. Load vs. penetration curve for each
test was drawn (shown in appendix-A) and corrected penetration load was read from
the graph. CBR values were calculated from the corrected penetration load.
44
Sigle layer JGT folds up
Layer-3
Layer-2
Layer-1
Figure-3.15. Arrangement of CBR test with JGT
3.5 COMPARISON OF CBR VALUES WITHOUT JGT AND WITH JGT
Corrected soaked CBR values of soil from Hatirjheel at Ch. 0+250m without JGT is
10% and with JGT is 9% at 85.71% compaction. At 92.86% compaction corrected
soaked CBR values are 11% without JGT and 9% with JGT. At 96.43% compaction
corrected soaked CBR values are 12% without JGT and 10% with JGT. These are
shown in Figure 3.16.
Figure 3.16. Laboratory corrected soaked CBR curve without JGT and
with JGT of soil from Hatirjheel at Ch. 0+250m.
45
corrected soaked CBR values are 12% without JGT and 10% with JGT. These are
soaked CBR values are 18% without JGT and also 18% with JGT. At 96.43%
compaction corrected soaked CBR values are 18% without JGT and also 18% with
JGT. These are shown in Figure 3.18
46
Corrected soaked CBR values of soil from Keraniganj at Ch. 9+250m without JGT is
5% and with JGT 3% at 85.71% compaction. At 92.86% compaction corrected soaked
CBR values are 6% without JGT and 3% with JGT. At 96.43% compaction corrected
soaked CBR values are 10% without JGT and 4% with JGT. These are shown in
Figure 3.19
with JGT of soil from Keraniganj at Ch. 9+250m.
Corrected soaked CBR values of soil from Keraniganj at Ch. 9+335m without JGT
are 10% and with JGT 5% at 85.71% compaction. At 92.86% compaction corrected
corrected soaked CBR values are 11% without JGT and with JGT. These are shown in
Figure 3.20.
47
It was observed from the CBR values that JGT did not change the results
considerably. To get the effect of JGT, tests were conducted on different dry densities.
At loose condition (free falling of soil into the mold from cone) of 13.29 kN/m3 dry
density, CBR value without JGT is 0.34% and CBR value with JGT is 0.47% as
shown in Figure-3.21. At 13.92 kN/m3 dry density, CBR value without JGT is 5% and
with JGT is also 5% . At 15.33 kN/m3 dry density, CBR value without JGT is 11%
and with JGT is 9%. These results indicate that CBR value increase with JGT in soft
soil which complies with Koerner (1998).
Figure 3.21. Variation of CBR values with dry densities with and without JGT.
48
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Jute is an important item of international trade for Bangladesh, though gradually its
contribution to exports has been declined as a percentage of total exports, but its contribution
to agriculture and employment remains significant. In spite of low prices, farmers have
continued to grow jute mainly for want of suitable alternatives. The loss of market share by
jute to synthetic has been attributed mainly to the price factor. In addition, synthetics, as an
industry, has been more progressive in terms of manufacturing new products to meet exact
end user specifications and have invested substantial sums of money in research and
development. Synthetics are also dominated by huge multinational and national companies.
Therefore, they have been able to displace jute from many segments of the market by
superior product specifications and financial strength.
The jute industry of Bangladesh is also characterized by inadequate technology development

and the absence of large multinational players. The relatively small size of the industry has
also contributed to its weakness in the markets. Inability to respond quickly to market needs
with consumer friendly specifications and standards for new products have affected the
growth of this industry. Inadequate research and development in products and lack of
improvement of processing machinery have also contributed to the present state of affairs.
However, jute has some natural advantages and specific consumer preferences and such
market segments have been retained (IJSG, 2004).
1.2 STRATEGY FOR JUTE SECTOR
Efforts by international and bilateral donor agencies have also not been commensurate with
the size of the problem nor have the efforts of producing and consuming countries been
consistent and effective in the external market. All these factors have contributed to a
declining market. The forecast, with the present parameters of production and consumption,
does not appear to be bright. It is in this context, there is a need for finalization of a new
1
strategy for jute. The major issues in the consideration of a strategy for jute (IJSG, 2004) are
as follows:
(a) The traditional packaging segment will still account for a major share of the jute
market. The continuing loss of market share in this segment to synthetic substitutes
needs to be arrested and if possible reversed.
(b) Efforts to increase market share for jute products need to take into account the
volume of jute that can be consumed. Products like geotextiles, which have a large
potential, have to receive focus both in terms of product development and market
promotion.
(c) The emerging environmental considerations and consumer preferences need to be
taken advantage of for promoting new and diversified products. Among these
products, jute and jute blended fabrics, natural fibre floor coverings, ropes and cords,
non-woven, composites, pulp and paper, building and insulation material are key
items
(d) Increased production of fibres is not considered an area of importance and no
measures are contemplated in this direction. An initiative of increase production may,
at this point of time, lead to a further decline in price.
(e) Improvement in the quality of fibre however, shall remain an area of focus. The
emphasis on higher yields has resulted in an unintentional deterioration of quality in
certain areas of production. Maintenance, and if possible, improvement of quality
shall be attempted by a properly drawn up “seed programme” covering production,
certification and distribution preferably through private sector initiatives with
monitoring and control by the Government.
(f) The cost-competitiveness of jute products needs to be improved to compete with
cheaper synthetics products. The levels of technology at the processing and
manufacturing stage need to be improved considerably. Improvement in productivity
in the existing factories shall be a key area of intervention.
(g) Though there is a demand for environment-friendly products, jute diversified
products have not been able to take a significant share of this market. In spite of
products development, market development efforts for diversified products have not
been significant. Focused and effective market development efforts for diversified
products, therefore, shall be a key area of concern. New environmental considerations
have prompted many countries to legislate in favor of environment-friendly products
In spite of this, the cost of disposal of non-biodegradable products is still not reflected
2
in the pricing of these products. The movement towards more environment-friendly
products in packaging is also hampered by the absence of adequate product
development and the inability of jute products to be price-competitive. Development
of new products to capitalize on the opportunities shall be and area of focus.
Given the dynamics of the market and the environmental concerns and keeping in view the
declaration of the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in the year 2002 and the
key elements of the Doha Development Agenda of 2001, the strategy for jute focuses highly
on the development of new applications of jute products using the advantages of natural
fibres. A concerted efforts to develop specifications/standards and new application areas are
to be made to reach this development goal.
1.3 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Roads in Bangladesh are generally constructed either on existing ground using box cutting
method or on earth embankment raised above the highest recorded flood level. Construction
by box cutting is applicable where the subgrade consists mainly of clay type soils and where
existing ground is generally above the flood level. Now a days most of the roads in
Bangladesh are constructed on dredged filled earth embankments. During dredge filling earth
embankments are not adequately compacted. This often results in low relative density. In
order to construct road pavement structure on such fills, first, the loose subgrade has to be
compacted and then an improved subgrade (ISG) layer has to be provided on which the
subsequent sub-base, base and wearing courses are placed. Provision of ISG layer and
compaction of loose subgrade not only involves extra cost, quality control of compaction
work becomes very difficult.
Synthetic geotextiles and geogrids have been successfully used as road subgrade
reinforcement in order to increase the load carrying capacity of the reinforced soil subgrade
system and thereby to reduce the total thickness of the pavement, Koerner (1998). Design
methods and charts for this purpose are also available. The method of reinforcing subgrades
with geosynthetics is found to be more effective on weaker subgrades where geosynthetics
are likely to deform enough to mobilize its full tensile strength and thereby increase the load
carrying capacity of the reinforced subgrade to its full extent.
3
Khan & Rahman (2009) carried out a research work to identify the feasibility of using jute
geotextiles (JGT) as reinforcement on clay subgrade instead of geosynthetics through
laboratory tests. They found that CBR value of clay subgrade with jute geotextiles increases
up to 1.5 times higher than the subgrade without JGT. It was also found that jute geotextile is
more effective in weaker subgrade of CBR value less than 2%.
In this study, an effort has been made to evaluate the effect of using JGTs as reinforcement
on hydraulic filled subgrade in the laboratory as well as in the field. On the basis of the
laboratory and field CBR test results a field trial will be carried out to identify the
performance of JGT-sand subgrade system and also to appreciate the shortcoming/ limitation
of the laboratory test methodology.
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The major objectives of this research are as follows:
a) To identify the effect of load carrying capacity of JGT- sand (Hydraulic filled)
subgrade system through laboratory testing.
b) To assess the feasibility of using JGT on sandy (Hydraulic filled) subgrade for
flexible pavement design and construction through field trial.
It is expected that the results obtained from the research can be used for the design
considerations of flexible pavements.
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
Geotextiles performs many functions which could be utilized for road construction, like
filtration, separation, reinforcement, slope stabilization etc. In this study, concentration was
only given on reinforcement characteristics of JGT. JGT was used for the purpose of
evaluating the performance as subgrade reinforcement in a pavement. It is obvious that
increased number of study areas would provide more consistent results in different
geotechnical conditions.
4
1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Organization “16 Engineer Construction Battalion of Bangladesh Army” responsible for

“Integrated Development of Hatirjheel Area Including Begunbari Khal Project” Dhaka and
Superintending Engineer Roads & Highway Department responsible for “Turag-Ruhitpur
Baorviti Road Project’ Keraniganj, Dhaka were requested to allow small segments in their
project to carry out the study.
The research work is based on two hypotheses as follows:
a) Immediate functions of JGT under flexible pavement: In immediate function, upon

application of load from the vehicle the load will be distributed to the underlying JGT
will produce vertical deformation of it. As JGT deforms vertically downward in plane
stress will be produced in the JGT which will try to pull out. However as JGT spreads
over the road surface (anchored in the lab sample) it cannot be pulled out. For this
reason it is likely to resists vertical movement of JGT thereby increase load carrying
capacity of the subgrade.
b) Long term functions of JGT under flexible pavement: In long term function, JGT will
act as an in plane drain for subgrade. Due to application of load from the vehicle wet
subgrade will be consolidated by discharging water through JGT. This accelerated
consolidation process will increase bearing capacity i.e. CBR value of the subgrade.
In order to achieve the objectives as mentioned previously, the following methodology was
adopted:
a) To carry out this research programme, two segments of road were selected. One in
“Integrated Development of Hatirjheel Area Including Begunbari Khal Project” at
Begunbari on Hydraulic filled embankment. Another Segment of road selected in
“Turag-Ruhitpur Baorvita Road Project” at Keraniganj, Dhaka on carried earth
embankment. Soil samples were collected from both sites for necessary laboratory
tests following ASTM methods.
5
b) In the laboratory, soaked CBR values of the soil of 5(Five) chainages of two segments
of two embankments were determined at different dry densities with JGT and without
JGT.
c) In the field, CBR values of the subgrade on 5(Five) chainages of two embankments
were determined without JGT and with JGT.
d) To attain the actual condition of the hydraulic filled subgrade no compaction efforts
were given on the embankment in both sites.
1.7 THESIS LAYOUT
The complete research work are divided in number of chapters for achieving the stated
objectives so that it becomes easier to understand the chronological development of the work.
Briefly the contents of each chapter are presented below:
Chapter One includes background, objectives, scope and research methodology of the study.
Chapter Two includes the literatures regarding flexible pavement design methods and
geosynthetics. Thereafter, it contains latest research programs on subgrade soil reinforcement
by geotextiles. Finally, this chapter ends with the review of JGTs including the research work
related to geotechnical applications.
Chapter Three focuses on selection of the project site, laboratory investigations of the
materials, identification of JGT and discussion of laboratory results and data analysis.
Chapter Four focuses on the procedure of field CBR test, discussion, review on field test
results and comparison of laboratory test results and field test results.
Chapter Five presents the major findings and conclusions of the present investigation.
Recommendations basing on the present research and also recommendations for further
research in this field are also presented in this chapter.
6
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 GENERAL
The main focus of this research study is the feasibility study of using JGT over hydraulic
filled subgrade soil as reinforcement for flexible pavement through laboratory tests and field
tests. Therefore, in this chapter, related literature in regard to the study has been discussed in
details. In the following sections mechanisms, functions of different components, previous
studies related to this field are highlighted.
2.2 INTRODUCTION TO THE PAVEMENT DESIGN PROCESS
Effective pavement design is one of the most important aspects of project design. The
pavement is the portion of the highway which is most obvious to the motorist. The condition
and adequacy of the highway is often judged by the smoothness or roughness of the
pavement. Deficient pavement conditions can result in increased user costs and travel delays,
braking and fuel consumption, vehicle maintenance repairs and probability of increased
crashes. The pavement life is substantially affected by the number of heavy load repetitions
applied, such as single, tandem and quad axle trucks, buses, tractor trailers and equipment. A
properly designed pavement structure will take into account the applied loading.
2.2.1 Pavement Design Terms and Definitions
The following terms and abbreviations are commonly used in pavement design.
• Equivalent Single Axel Load (ESAL) – The conversion of mixed vehicular traffic
into its equivalent single-axle, 18-Kip Load. The equivalence is based on the relative
amount of pavement damage.
• Daily ESAL (T18) – The average number of equivalent 18-Kip loads which will be
applied to the pavement structure in one day. Normally, a 20-year design period is
used to determine the daily load.
• ESAL Applications per 1000 Trucks and Combinations – A factor which reflects
the relative mix of sizes and weights of trucks on various classes of highways (e.g.,
freeways, arterials, collectors, and local streets). Truck percentages typically exclude
two-axle, four-tire pickup trucks, the effect of which may be ignored.
7
• Subgrade – The sub-grade is a layer of natural soil or filled soil, ready to receive the
pavement materials over it.
• Bearing Ratio – The load required to produce a certain penetration using a standard
piston in a soil, expressed as a percentage of the load required to force the piston the
same depth in a selected crushed stone. Bearing Ration values are normally
determined using the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) text method.
• Design Bearing Ratio (DBR) – The selected bearing ratio used to design the
pavement. It is based on a statistical evaluation of the CBR test results on the soil
samples.
• Skid Resistance – A measure of the coefficient of friction between an automobile

tire and the roadway surface.
A flexible pavement structure consists of the following layers – the subgrade, subbase, base
course, intermediate course, surface course, and where determined necessary, a friction
course shown in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2.
• The subbase consists of granular material - gravel, crushed stone, reclaimed material
or a combination of these materials.
• The base course is a Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) or concrete pavement layer placed
upon the compacted sub-base. A gravel base course can be designed and specified for
low volume roadways (<2,000 vehicles per day) depending upon loading and other
design considerations.
• The intermediate course is an HMA pavement layer placed upon the base course.
• The surface course is the top HMA pavement layer and is placed upon the
intermediate course.
• A friction course is a specialized thin-lift wearing course which, when specified, is

placed over the surface course. Friction courses provide improved vehicle skid
resistance, but do not provide any structural value to the pavement. Typically friction
courses are placed on high volume limited access roadways.
8
Figure 2.1. Pavement Courses for Flexible Pavement (after Mass Highway-2006).
Surface Course
Base Course
Subbase Course
Improved Subgrde
Subgrade
Figure 2.2. Pavement Courses for Flexible Pavement (after GoB, 2005).
9
2.2.2 Principles and Procedure of Design
The strength of each layer is expressed in terms of the CBR and it is essential that the
materials used, and compaction obtained, for each layer achieves the required CBR for that
layer. If the underlying layers do not have the required CBR then the upper layers of road
pavement will fail even if they have been correctly constructed. The CBR requirement for the
various pavement layers of Type-I and Type-II roads (Figure 2.2) of Roads and Highway
Department are summarized in Table 2.1. Type-I is the national highways having base course
CBR ≥ 80% and Type –II is the district and regional roads having base course CBR ≥ 50%.
Road pavement require to be designed with the thickness of the various pavement layers,
including bituminous surfacing, being determined by estimating the cumulative number of
Equivalent Standard Axles (ESAs) that the road will be subject to over its design life, and
then reading off the required thickness for each layer from the design chart shown at Table
2.2.
Table 2.1 Required CBR for Pavement Layers (after GoB, 2005)
Pavement Layer CBR

Aggregate Base Type-I (National roads) ≥80%
Type-II (District and Regional roads) ≥50%
Subbase ≥25%
Improved subgrade ≥8%
Subgrade ≥5%
Embankment fill/nature ground ≥3%
2.2.3 Base Year Traffic Counts
For geometric pavement design of new roads, or the upgrading / widening of existing roads,
traffic counts must be undertaken to establish current Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)
on the road. At least one whole day (24 hours) traffic count in both directions of flow should
be undertaken on a typical weekday for sections of the road having more or less the same
volume.
For the design of road pavement an estimate is made of the cumulative number of heavy axle
loads that road pavement will be subjected to over its design life. Here cars, rickshaws and
other light traffic may be ignored with only trucks and other commercial vehicles being
considered.
10
For single carriageway roads the average truck and commercial vehicle flow in both
directions is adopted for design purposes i.e. 0.5 × the sum of both directions. For dual
carriageway should be subject to a separate design based on the forecast commercial traffic
for that carriageway (heaviest loaded lane).
2.2.4 Design Life and Traffic Growth Rates
For new roads and the full depth reconstruction of existing roads the design standards shown
in Table 2.3 are adopted. Where a new or reconstruction road is likely to lead to a significant
generation or diversion of traffic, detailed traffic studies should be undertaken to estimate the
additional traffic that will use the road in addition to the estimate base flow.
11
Table 2.2. Thickness Design Table for Flexible Pavements (after GoB, 2005)
Traffic ESA Surfacing (mm) Road bases (mm)* Subbases(mm)**

(million) Asphalt Asphalt Base (Selected one Type) Subgrade CBR%
Wearing Course Cement Bound Granular Base 5 8-25 >25
Course Granular Type-I Type-II
60-80 40 155 N/A N/A 300 150 0
40-60 40 104 N/A N/A 300 150 0
30-40 40 125 N/A N/A 300 150 0
Refer to BRRL for design advice

25-30 40 110 250 300 250 150 0
17-25 40 105 205 300 250 150 0
15-17 40 95 250 300 200 150 0
11-15 40 90 250 300 200 150 0
9-11 40 80 200 250 200 150 0
7-9 40 70 200 250 200 150 0
6-7 40 65 200 250 200 150 0
5-6 40 60 200 250 200 150 0
4-5 40 55 200 250 200 150 0
3-4 40 45 175 200 175 150 0
<3 40 35 150 175 150 150 0
* CBR of granular base Type- I is minimum 80% N/A-Not Applicable
* CBR of granular base Type- II is minimum 50%
** CBR of sub-base material is 25%
12
Table 2.3. Pavement Design Life and Traffic growth Rates (after GoB, 2005)
Type of Road Pavement Design Life Traffic Growth Rate

National Road 20 years 10% pa
Regional Road 20 years 7% pa
2.2.5 Determining Cumulative ESAs over the Pavement Design Life
For pavement design purpose all heavy commercial vehicles are expressed in terms of
the equivalent number of standard axles that they represent. A standard axle is taken
to be 8,160kg. Based on axle load studies previously undertaken in Bangladesh, the
equivalence factors have been determined as of Table. 2.4. Using recorded or
estimated AADT for the vehicles categories referred in Table 2.4 together with their
equivalence factors, estimate should be made of the current daily ESAs for the road.
This should then be multiple by 365 to obtain the annual ESAs for the road. To obtain
the cumulative ESA loading over the design life of the road, the current annual ESA
loading should be multiple by one factor shown in Table 2.5.
Table 2.4. Vehicles Equivalence Factors (after GoB, 2005)
Vehicles Category Equivalence Factors
Large Truck (dual axle) 4.8

Medium Truck (single axle) 4.62
Small Truck 1.0
Large Bus 1.0
Mini Bus 0.5
Table 2.5. Cumulative Growth Factors (after GoB, 2005)
Road Type Factor

National Road 57.3
Regional Road 41.0
The above factors have been derived from the following formula:
(1+r)n
Cumulative ESA =
r
13
Where,
r = annual traffic growth rate and
n = design life in years
(Note: For national roads, r=10% and n=20 years; for regional roads, r=10% and n=20
years).
2.2.6 Determination of Pavement layers
The estimate cumulative ESAs are then used to determine the various pavement layers
from the design chart shown in Table 2.2.
Determination of Improved Subgrade Thickness
It can be seen from the foregoing design chart that it assumes minimum subgrade
strength of 5% CBR. In Bangladesh, apart from higher ground within the Chittagong
Hill Tracks where in situ CBRs will be higher, most roads are constructed on
embankments that will have a CBR of less than 5%. Under these circumstances an
improved sub grade layer should be provided as shown in Table 2.6. In all cases,
subgrade material with a CBR of less than 2% should be removed and replaced with
fill material.
Table 2.6. Improved subgrade Requirements (after GoB, 2005)
CBR Compacted Thickness of Additional Layer to Provide

Required Required CBR
CBR of Underlying Layer
2% 3% 4% 5%
5% 250mm 150mm 100mm -
14
2.3 GEOSYNTHETIC
Geosynthetics are used to provide reinforcement, separation, drainage, and filtration

in civil engineering projects. The different types of geosynthetics include geotextiles,
geogrids, geonets, geomembranes, geocells, and geocomposites. Geotextiles are thin
permeable sheets of synthetic, polymer-based materials used to stabilize and improve
the performance of soil (Ingold and Miler, 1988); Geogrids are high-strength extruded
sheets of polymer-based material characterized by a grid pattern of openings
throughout the structure. Geonets have a netlike structure joined only at the
intersections and are used primarily for drainage purposes. Geomembranes are used as
a fluid or vapor barrier because of their ability to act as an impermeable membrane.
The combination of number of these can be used as geocomposites. The geometrical
design and strength characteristics of geotextiles and geogrids make the integration of
these products into flexible pavement construction process easy. A brief discussion of
the two types of geosynthetics most commonly used in pavements follows.
The geotextiles industry originated because of a shrinking demand for organic

textiles. As other world markets established self-sufficient textile production plants in
organics like cotton and wool, the European and United States textile industries,
which had been the previous textile suppliers, needed to adapt. With a surplus
production capability and limited demand, the textile industries began to develop
advances in textile science. This new science involved the manufacturing of textile
products using synthetics. Modern geotextiles do not come into the technology picture
until the late 1960’s. The infrastructure and the interstate system provided a potential
area where geotextiles could be used.
2.3.1 Manufacturing of Synthetic Geotextiles
The general performance of a geotextile is dictated by the characteristics of the

polymer from which it is created. The properties can be altered by chemical
(additives) or mechanical (stretching) adjustment. This mechanical alteration is
principally done to geogrids because they have enough thickness to sustain the tensile
forces. This results in greater strength at a reduced strain in the final geogrid product,
effectively increasing the stiffness of the material.
The overall production of geotextiles can be summed up by three basic manufacturing

stages; production of the polymer with its various additives, production of a
component, and conversion of the component into the finished geotextile. The
production of the original polymer with possible additives is completed at a chemical
15
plant to the manufacturer as pellets or granules. The manufacturer reheats the pellets
to form the components of the geotextile (Ingold and Miler, 1988). Koerner (1998)
also states that a vast majority of geotextiles are made from polypropylene or
polyester polymers formed into fibers or yarns (the choices are monofilament, multi-
filament, staple, slit-film monofilament, or slit-film multifilament), and finally into a
woven and non-woven fabric, which, when placed in the ground, is a geotextile. In
general, the words geotextile and fabric are used interchangeably.
2.3.2 Functions of Geotextiles in Pavements
Four specific functions that geotextile materials may provide are separation,
reinforcement, filtration, and moisture barrier. The following is a brief description of
each one of these functions (Koerner, 1998).
a. Separation: The placement of a flexible porous geotextile between

dissimilar materials so that the integrity and the functioning of both
materials can remain intact or can be improved.
b. Reinforcement: The often synergistic improvement of a total system

created by the inclusion of a geotextile (that is good in tension) into a soil
(that is usually poor in tension) or other disjointed and relatively weak
material.
2.3.2.1 Separation
Virtually all design theories of layered pavement systems assume that the construction
materials will remain as they are initially placed. However, there are two mechanisms
that may effectively reduce the thickness of the base course layer if it is constructed
over a soft subgrade soil (Christopher and Holtz, 1991, Al-Qadi et al., 1994).
One of these is the tendency for the subgrade fines to move into the voids between the
aggregate particles via subgrade pumping, particularly when the soil is wet. If the soil
fines are relatively non-plastic, such as with silt or lean clay, the soil particles may be
carried upward into the base course aggregate voids as excess pore water pressures
dissipate due to dynamic vehicular loading. If the subgrade soil fines are relatively
plastic, such as with elastic silt or fat clay, pore water pressure dissipation may occur
very slowly, and resulting migration of soil fines may be insignificant. However, as
observed by Bell et al. (1982), contamination by soil fines can still occur as a result of
subgrade softening. Water that resides in the base course, infiltrates from the road
16
surface, or results from lateral flow may pool in local depressions or indentations
created by compaction of aggregate particles. At these locations, water may combine
with the cohesive soil to form slurry. When surface loads are applied, it may be
extruded upward into the aggregate layer.
The second mechanism by which the thickness of the base course may be effectively
reduced is the penetration of aggregate stone particles into soft subgrade soil as local
shear failure of the soil occurs. This process also begins at the bottom of the base
course layer and also may lead to reduced particle-to-particle contact of the aggregate.
The degradation is greatly accelerated if the aggregate is compacted over a wet
subgrade or if the subgrade remains wet for extended periods during road use. Under
these wet conditions, soil softening may occur and the resistance to aggregate
penetration is reduced. Figure 2.3 illustrate the reduction of base course thickness as a
result of soil migration and aggregate penetration.
HMA
Base course
Subgrade
(a)
HMA
Base course
Subgrade
(b)
Figure 2.3. Typical subgrade and base course interface showing surface rutting as a
results of the migration of fines or penetration of aggregate (after Valentine, 1997).
17
2.3.2.2 Reinforcement
Reinforcement is described by Koerner (1998) as the often synergistic improvement

of a total system created by the inclusion of a geotextile (that is good in tension) into a
soil (that is usually poor in tension). When a geotextile is placed within the base
course or at the bottom of the base course, it is reported to reinforce a road section by
three principal methods; tensioned membrane reinforcement, shear type reinforcement
and anchor type reinforcement (Koerner, 1998; Christopher and Holtz, 1991).
Membrane Type
Tensioned membrane reinforcement occurs when a vertical load is applied to a

deformable soil that is reinforced with a geotextile, Koerner (1998) described the
horizontal stress that may be induced to a geotextile by using an equation from Taylor
(1998) Figure 2.4.
P 2 3 (1-2ν) cos2θ)
σn = [ 3sin θcos θ - ] (2.1)
πz2 (1+cosθ)
Where,
σn=Horizontal stress at depth z and angle θ
P= Applied vertical load
Z= Depth beneath the surface where is σn being calculated
ν = Poisons ratio and
θ = Angle from the vertical beneath the surface load P
Koerner observes that directly beneath the load, where θ=0
P
σn = - [0.5- ν] (2.2)
πz2
Figure 2.4. Membrane, and shear action in geosynthetic under vertical load ( after
John, N.W.M. 1987) .
18
The Poisson’s ratio for soils normally range between 0.3 to 0.5. It can be seen from
Equation 2.2, the greater the applied vertical load P, the greater the stress in the
geotextile, similarly, the smaller the distance, z, between the load and the fabric, the
greater the stress in the geotextile. Tensioned membrane reinforcement is a
charagteristic of both geotextiles and geogrids, and is a function of the geotextil’s
tensile modulus. Christopher and Holtz (1985) illustrate the effect of tensioned
membrane reinforcement by considering wheel load stresses transmitted to a weak
subgrade. If the magnitude of the stresses is high enough, plastic deformation of the
subgrade will result. If a geotextile is placed above the subgrade, it will also deform
under loading. If the geotextile has a sufficiently high tensile modulus, an appreciable
amount of tensile stress resistance may be developed.
The vertical resultant of the membrane resisting stress may act to help support
vehicular loading. However, it has been suggested (Christopher and Holtz, 1991) that
the tensioned membrane effect is negligible unless a rut depth of at least 100mm is
developed. Because of this requirement for a relatively high deformation, tensioned
membrane reinforcement is not usually considered to be a significant factor in low
deformation road systems, such as flexible and rigid pavements (Christopher and
Holtz, 1991).
Shear Type
Shear type reinforcement occurs as a result of shear stresses and strains at the bottom
of the base course under surface loading. It can be best visualized by means of direct
shear tests. A geotextile placed on a soil is loaded in a normal direction, and then two
materials sheared at their interface. The resulting shear strength parameters (adhesion
and geotextile-to-soil friction angle) can be obtained as described in a traditional
geotechnical manner using an adapted form of Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion.
Figure 2.4.
(cc/c)
τ =ca+ σ΄n tanδ (2.3)
Where,
τ = The shear strength (between geotextile and soil)
δ= Friction angle (between geotextile and soil)
σ΄n = Effective normal stress on sheared plane and
ca= Adhesion of the geotextile to the soil.
19
The shear strength parameters ca and δ can be compared to the strength parameter of
the soil itself (i.e. soil against soil).
τ =c+ σ΄n tanφ (2.4)
Where,
φ= Friction angle (soil to soil) and

c= Cohesion (soil to soil).
Furthermore,
ca
Ec= [ c ] x 100 (2.5)
tanδ
Ef= [ ] x100 (2.6)
tanφ
Where,
Ec=Efficiency of cohesion mobilized and
Ef=Efficiency of frictional angle mobilized.
These ratios, generally called efficiencies, have limiting values of zero to unity. A
value higher than 1 is not possible since it would have the failure plane moving into
the soil itself.
Anchor Type
Anchorage reinforcement is similar to the shear type, but now the soil acts on both
sides of the geotextile as a tensile force tends to pull the geotextile out of the soil. The
laboratory modeling of this type of mechanism is similar to direct shear test except
that now soil is stationary in both halves of the test device and the geotextile extends
out of the device at its centre. It is gripped externally and pulled, while normal
stresses act on the soil and geotextile within the shear test device. The situation is
readily described in terms of shear stress parameters by themselves and efficiencies.
Another approach could be to express the efficiency as a function of the amount of
mobilized fabric strength. Wide-width tensile values should be used in this case.
Efficiencies greater than unity can easily occur. As with the other types of
mechanisms of geotextile reinforcement, this category of geotextile anchorage is used
often.
20
Analytical Method
Giroud and Noiray [61] use the geometric model shown in Figure 2.6 for a tire wheel
load of pressure pec on a B by L area, which dissipates through ho thickness of stone
base without a geotextile and h thickness of stone base with a geotextile. The
geometry indicated results in a stress on the soil subgrade of po (without geotextile)
and p (with geotextile) as follows:
P
po= + γho (2.7)
2(B+2h0 tan α0) (L+2h0 tan α0)
P
p= + γh (2.8)
2(B+2h tan α) (L+2h tan α)
P in both equations is the axle load, and γ is the unit weight of the stone aggregate.
B
pec
L
B
pec
L
A'o B'o
B' A'
ho
h
po p
Ao Bo B A
2ao 2a ⌧
(a) (b)
Figure 2.5 Load distribution by aggregate layer (after Giroud and Noiray [61]) : (a)
case without geotextile; (b) case with geotextile.
Knowing the pressure exerted by the axle load through the aggregate and into the soil
subgrade, the shallow foundation theory of geotechnical engineering can now be
utilized. Assumed throughout in the analysis is that the soil is functioning in its
undrained condition and thus its shear strength is represented completely by the
cohesion (i.e. τ = c). Thus the tacit assumption that without geotextile the maximum
pressure that can be maintained corresponds to the elastic limit of the soil, that is,
21
po= πc+ γho (2.9)
and that with geotextile the limiting pressure can be increased to the ultimate bearing
capacity of the soil, that is,
p*= ( π+2)c + γh (2.10)
Thus for the case of no geotextile reinforcement, Equations 2.7 and 2.8 can be solved,
resulting in the desired aggregate thickness response curve without the use of a
geotextile.
P
c= (2.11)
2π(√ P/pc+2h0 tan α0) ( √ P/2pc +2h0 tan α0)
Where c= the soil cohesion,

P= the axle load,
pc = the tire inflation pressure,
ho = the aggregate thickness , and
α0= the angle of load distribution (≡ 26 deg.).
For the case where geotextile reinforcement is used, p* in Equation 2.10 is replaced
by p - pg, where pg is function of the tension in the geotextile; hence its elongation is
significant. On the basis of the probable deflected shape of the geotextile-soil system,
E€
pg= (2.12)
a √ (1+(a/2S)2
Where E = the modulus of geotextile,
€= the elongation (strain),
a = the geometric property (Figure 2.6), and
S= the settlement under the wheel (rut depth).
By combining Equations 2.8, 2.10, and 2.12 using p* = p - pg , Equation 2.13 results,
in which h is the unknown aggregate thickness. It can be plotted for various rut-depth
thickness and various moduli of fabrics shown in Figure 2.7.
P E€
(π+2)c= + (2.13)
2(B + 2h tan α) (L + 2h tan α) α √ (1+(a/2S)2
22
With these two sets of equations, the design method is essentially complete, since
both ho, (thickness without geotextile) and h (thickness with geotextile) can be
calculated. From these two values ∆h = ho - h can be obtained, which represents the
savings in aggregate due to the presence of fabric.
For convenience, however it can be read directly from Figure 2.7. This figure also
considers the effects of traffic. In this case, the required thickness (h') becomes h' =
h'o - ∆h, which is also given in the curves by subtracting the two ordinate values of h'o
and ∆h. The effect of service lifetime is accommodated in the form of the number of
vehicle passages.
Figure 2.6. Reducing aggregate thickness with geotextile (after Giroud and Noiray [61]).
23
2.3.3 Research Program on Use of Geotextile in Flexible Pavement Design
Several research programs were initiated over the past two decades to understand the
geotextile effectiveness in flexible pavement. In the following reviews, attention is
paid to the research related to the use of geotextiles at the base course-subgrade
interface.
Austin and Coleman (1993) conducted a full-scale field study near Greeneville,
Mississippi, to evaluate the performance of geotextile stabilization of unpaved road
constructed over very soft soil. When the initial investigation of the test site was
performed, it was learned that the subgrade soil consisted of a fat clay meeting USCS
classification of CH. It had natural water content between 27% to 40%, and LL of
73% to 85%, and PL of 23% to 33%. It was also determined that the CBR value of
this soil ranged from 3% to 6%.
The investigators sought to obtain a subgrade with CBR values less than about 1%
thus, the test site was flooded for a period of eight months and then drained. This
process had the desired effect, reducing the CBR values to between 0.6 and 0.9% in
most locations. The in-situ CBR values were measured using two procedures. The
first of these was described as a field-bearing ratio test, although details of the test
were not provided and no specific test procedure was referenced. The second
procedure used a dynamic cone penetrometer device to measure soil strength within
the top 300mm of the subgrade. The geotextiles used to stabilize the road section
included four types of polypropylene geotextiles. The geotextiles were installed on the
test road, overlapping adjacent sections in the direction of fill placement. Each test
section was approximately 6m X 6m.
The test sections were loaded by a two axle dump truck with the rear dual-tire axle
loaded to approximately 80 kN. The tire pressures were maintained at 550 kPa. The
performance of each test section was based on the number of vehicle passed that
induced surface deflections of 50mm and 75mm. The number of passed was
converted to ESALs using a factor of 1.13 per each actual vehicle pass. To minimize
the influence that adjacent sections had on each other, date collection stations were
established at the midpoints of each test section. In addition to deflection
measurements data collection includes measurements of in-situ CBR values of the
subgrade and base, as well as dry densities, moisture, and thickness measurements of
the base. After loading of the test road was completed, each test section was carefully
excavated and the percent contamination of the base aggregate by subgrade soil was
evaluated. Although some of the results presented were not logical (such as a lower
24
number of passed to failure needed to fail a strong section compared to a weak
section), it was clear that the use of geotextiles significantly improved the
performance of each test section compared to the control sections. The research also
demonstrated the effectiveness of the geotextile as a separator. The investigators
observed that no contamination of the base aggregate occurred at the geotextile
stabilized sections.
Experimental and analytical investigations were conducted to evaluated the

performance of geotextile –reinforced flexible pavement sections by Al-Qadi et al.
(1994). Geotextile materials were incorporated in the pavement systems at the bottom
of the base layers. Eighteen pavement sections, constructed at a test facility, were
tested. The pavement sections were constructed to model a typical secondary road in
Virginia which is built over a weak granular (silty sand) subgrade material; the CBR
ranged from 2-5.4%. The base material was 21-A (in accordance with Virginua
classification) crushed granite used at two different thicknesses, 150mm and 200mm.
Loading of the pavement sections was accomplished through the use of a computer
controlled pneumatic system that delivered 552 kPa through a 300mm-diamter rigid
plate at a frequency of 0.5 Hz. The resulting displacement of the pavement surface
was monitored by an array of linear variable displacement transformers (LVDTs).
Aziz and Ramswami (1989) carried out extensive laboratory and field investigations
on JGTs. Dynamic load test was conducted on JGT placed under aggregate. The sub
grad materials used was clay having a nature water content of 40% which was
consolidated first for one month under 9 kN/m2 overburden pressure. The simulated
contact pressure was 255 kN/m2 and up to 1000 applications were made. The result
reveals that with the applications of JGT, the reduction of rut depth is more than 50%.
This result is analogous to Lai and Robnett (1981) who carried out similar test on a
geosynthetic known as “Typar”.
Aziz and Ramswami (1989) also conducted short time and sustained long term static
loading test. The performance of JGT of the satisfactory in all the test. In order to
study the influence of JGT of the strength of clayey sub grade, unconfined
compression tests and CBR test were carried out in the laboratory on samples
compacted with and without JGT in saturated and unsaturated conditions. The
laboratory test results conclusively show that the soil is seen to be better compactable
when JGT is used and the stress – strength characteristics of the soil are better with
the JGT than without it. Since the laboratory test result gave only a qualitative
indication of the beneficial effects of JGT, plate load tests were conducted to evaluate
the in-situ behaviour of the subgrade. The test results confirmed that JGT significantly
25
improves the bearing capacity and settlement behavior of the subgrade soil. The result
of the tests carried out using JGT was in tune with similar tests using synthetic fabric.
The studies conducted by Aziz and Ramswami (1989) on JGT for sub grade
stabilization concluded that weak sub grade do benefit immensely and contribute to
road performance in its initial life for four to six month period after opening the road
to traffic. Thereby, the common road defects arising during the early stages due to sub
grade defects are to larger extent prevented from showing up. The JGT however
deteriorates gradually and ceases to function after having improved the sub grade
strength significantly.
Rao et. al. (1998) conducted a case study on construction of embankment on soft
marine soil using JGT at Kakinada Port, Andra pradesh, India. The objective of the
study was to reinforce the highway embankment with the help of JGT by minimizing
post construction settlement, lateral spreading of fill material etc economically. The
bearing capacity was found inadequate without reinforcement. Woven JGT was
treated with Cupro-ammonium sulphate to increase the resistance of the fabric
towards biodegradability. The test was performed 30 month after laying JGT and
obtained results show that water content, void ratio and compression index decreased
and CBR value of the sub grade soil increased by the use of JGT. The reducing their
compressibility and increasing their strength as reflected from the good performance
even after a lapse of 7 years.
CCRI (1997) carried out a case study on use of JGT as separated at Kandla Port,
Gujrat, India. The objective of the study was to mitigate the problem of intermixing of
subbase and sub grade and consisting soft soil. The sub grade was compacted to the
optimum moisture content and dry density of sub grade. Non woven JGT was laid
over the compacted subgrade as separator. Base course consisting of 300 mm
thick,60-125 mm size stone aggregated followed by 40-60 mm size stone aggregated
was provided. A thin layer of 3.0 cm moorum was provided as cushion between the
stone layers to reduce the direct impact of large sized aggregate on JGT. The road
section was observed for 4 month and no sign of distress was observed and settlement
was negligible. The study concluded that JGT preformatted the desired function and
use of right of JGT for the separated purpose is desirable to obtain the optimum result.
Department of Civil Engineering of Jadavpur University (JU, 2001) conducted a case

study on widening and strengthening of Munshihar–Rajpur Road , west Bengal, India.
The objective of the study was to strengthen at the widened portion on the both sides
of the existing blank top road. JGT was laid on the extended portion after compacting
26
the sub grade with a power roller of 8 -10 tones capacity. A single layer of brick flat
soling was laid on JGT to protect it from the puncturing impact of coarse aggregate.
Over that two layers of jhama metal and stone metal consolidation (WBM) were thick
bituminous seal coat. Post work study revealed no sign of distress and the surface was
smooth. Excavation was made near the edge of the pavement and sample was colleted
from the sub grade below the JGT layer. Soil below pavement was found to be highly
compacted. The study concluded that the average CBR value of sub grade before
application of JGT was 3.5% and after 1 year of the completion of work it was found
to be 6% (interpolated from cohesion value).
S. A. Naeini and M. Mirzakhanlari (2008) conducted a series of CBR test on

geotextile reinforced soil. The curves for both the un-reinforcement and reinforcement
were plotted on the same graph to facilitate comparisons. The penetration resistance
for 2 mm, 5 mm and 5 mm were obtained from the curve and the corresponding CBR
for both the un-reinforcement and reinforcement samples calculated. The desired
CBR value was chose as the greater of the computed values at 2.5 mm and 5 mm
penetration. The calculation of the CBR is based on the following equation.
Stress (kPa.)
po = X 100
Standard Stress (kPa)
The mobilization of soil strength via reinforcing geosynthetic material is based on the
general lateral restrains caused by the frictional interaction and interlocking between
soil sample and geosynthetics. The strength mobilization due to the inclusion of
geosynthetics was very unique in the soil samples with very low CBR. This
observation confirms the strength mobilization principle of the geosynthetic materials
in general which emphasized that the strength mobilization of reinforcing
geosynthetic material very much depends on the range of CBR of soil sample. The
smaller the soil sample CBR, the more effective the strength mobilization effects of
geosynthetic material in general.
The study concluded that geotextiles can provide substantial improvement to the
performance of a pavement section constructed on a low CBR subgrade. The
stabilization mechanisms of geotextiles with separation mechanisms (provided by
geotextiles) begging and important factor in improving pavements performance. The
suty also showed quantitative improvement in service life and cost savings when
geotextiles are incorporated in the pavements. In addition, the study provided key
information on the contamination potential in pavements not stabilized with
geotextiles.
27
2.4 JUTE GEOTEXTILE
2.4.1 Jute Fibre
Jute is one of the world’s most important vegetables fibres, being exceeded in
production quantity only be cotton. It is collected mainly from two commercially
important species, namely, White Jute (Corchorus capsularis) and Tossa Jute
(Corchaorus olitorius). It was first used as an industrial raw material for making
packaging materials as a replacement for European-grown flax and hemp. A
temperate, wet and humid climate with alluvial soil is conducive for the growth of
jute. It is a photo-reactive plant and for that long hour of day, light is necessary for its
rapid growth, Mohy (2005).
2.4.2 Physical Properties of Jute
Jute consists of fibre bundles arranged in several layers between the central bollow
woody core and the outer skin. The individual fibres are held together by non-
celulosic materials such as lignin, hemi-cellulose, pectin etc to form fibre strand.
Jute’s quality is normally characterized by colour, luster, strength, cleanliness,
flexibility, length, proportion of roots and moisture content. Naturally, good quality
jute should possess good colour. This should be lustrous as more lustrous jute is found
to be stronger. In Indian variety of jute known as “Shamla Daisee” although darkish
blue in colour, is well known for its high strength, lustre and fineness. The fibre
should be fine, long and strong and the body should be clean. The percentage of roots
should be low. Faults like knots, sticks, specks etc should be absent. The water
content must not exceed the standard limit. Important physical properties of jute fibre
are listed in Table 2.7. A jute fibre is considered to be of good quality when yarn spun
having; a) quality ratio (Q.R) above 90, b) a low coefficient of variance (C.V) and
c) fibre possesses high elasticity and low frictional properties.
Q.R indicated the strength of the yarns, being expressed as the ratio of breaking
strength in pound (lb) to the strength of yarn in lb/spindle of 14400 yards and
multiplied by 100. C.V indicates the irregularity in the weight per unit in a short
length of the yarn. Q.R above 90 and C.V below 23 indicates fibre of good quality.
Q.R above 80 and C.V below 25 indicates fibre of medium quality whereas Q.R
below 80 and C.V above 35 means fibre of poor quality, Mohy (2005).
28
Table 2.7. Important physical properties of jute fibre (after Abdullah, 2008)
Ser No Parameters Values

1 Jute cell /ultimate width 15-20 microns
2 Jute cell/ultimate width 1-6 mm
3 Jute fibre/ultimate width (Average) 184 m
4 Jute fibre/ultimate width (Average) 2.5 m
5 Tenacity 2.7-5.3 g/tex
6 Specific gravity 1.48
7 Moisture regain at 65HRH/22c 13.8%
8 Fineness (gm/100m) 1.4-1.65 tex
9 Breaking elongation 0.8-1.8%
10 Refractive index (Parallel) 1.577
11 Refractive index (Perpendicular) 1.536
12 Fluorescence with corning filter Bluish white
13 Phosphorescence Yellow
14 Phosphorescence (time) 15 sec
15 Swelling in water (Diameter) 20-21%
16 Swelling in water (Area) 40%
17 Stiffness (Average) 185
18 Specific heat 0.324 cal/g/c
19 Water retention 70%
20 Young’s Modulus
a) White 0.86-1.74 dynes/cm2x1000
b) b) Tossa 0.86-1.74 dynes/cm2x1000
21 Modulus of Rigidity
c) White dynes/cm2x109
d) b) Tossa 4.42 dynes/cm2x109
22 Linear density 0.94-2.94 tex
23 Density 1.52-1.59
29
2.4.3 Chemical Composition of Jute Fibre
Jute is lignocelluloses fibre composed of cellulose (58%-65%), hemicelluloses (21%-

22%), lignin (12%-14%), protein (0.8%-1.5%), pectin (0.2%-0.5%), fat and wax
(0.4%-0.8%), mineral matter (0.6%-1.2%) and traces of tannin and coloring material.
Except for cellulose, all other components are functioning more or less as cementing
materials. Stiffness and lower wet strength of jute are closely related to the reinforced
resinous structure. It has been observed that the molecular weight, fiber length and
degree of polymerization of jute cellulose are comparatively smaller than those of
cotton. Jute fiber consists of crystalline, para-crystalline and non-crystalline,
amorphous reins. Cellulose is the major portion within the crystalline part of jute
fiber. The high moisture regain property of jute fibre compared to other fibres is
attributable to these special characteristic of jute fibre. The hemicelluloses units of
jute are fairly simple and of low molecular weight and susceptible to action of alkali.
Lignin is the single-most important component in jute which in fact distinguishes it
from other textile fibre. Some of the peculiar characteristics of the fibre such as
yellowing or photo degradation are attributed to its presence.
Jute is acidic in nature and its acidity is due to the presence of phenolic hydroxyl
group present in lignin. The contribution of cementing materials (lignin,
hemicelluloses) on the tensile properties of jute fibre both in dry and wet conditions is
enormous. It has been observed that when jute is treated with chemical reagents
employed in textile pretreatments and bleaching processes, lignin, hemicelluloses and
other encrusting substances are attacked and to some extent removed. Lignin also
protects jute from ultra-violet and visible radiations emitted by sun. Jute is degraded
by heat, mildew acids and alkali; Jute burns like other cellulosic fibres.
2.4.4 Treatment of Jute Fibre
Jute is a biodegradable natural fibre. This fibre is also hygroscopic. Bangladesh is

situated in a tropical, humid and flood affected country. Jute used for geotechnical
engineering purposed has to sustain an unfriendly environment where it loses it’s all
the properties very rapidly. One of the single most problems of using jute in the soil
water interaction phase is the biodegradation. To increase the design life of jute, few
works have been carried out by some researchers like Prodhan (1994), and also by
other organizations and institutes. Recently a wide range of geojute has been
developed at BIRI by blending jute with hydrophobic fibre like coir or by
modification with bitumen, latex and was resinous materials. These treatment
techniques may enhance the life of JGTs up to or even more than 20 years,
30
Khan (2008). A summary of blending jute with different materials is shown in Table
2.8. Following are three different types of blending:
a. Jute with natural fibre i.e. jute with cotton, coir, flax etc.
b. Jute with synthetic fibre like jute blended with polythene, polypropylene,
nylon, polyester, poly-acrylic etc.
c. Modification/Treatment of jute with bitumen, latex, was, resinous material.
Blending jute with natural fibre like cotton for making finished and apparel products
is a common technology where jute is modified with chemical and softening agents.
Again union fabrics of jute mixture are made by inserting warp and weft thread with
different fibres. For making geotextile materials, low quality cotton is used in
blending and union fabrics.
Some researchers have tried to blend jute with synthetic materials like acryline,
polyethylene, polypropylene, polyester rayon etc. In this process compatibility of
blending items plays the significant role. Modification of mixing fibres is necessary
for increasing their compatibility through chemical, bio-chemical or mechanical
treatment. An investigation was carried out by Rao, p.et al (1994) at Central Road
Research Institute. New Delhi, India on is types of blended jute products. These were
non-woven fabrics consisting of varying proportions of jute (j) and polypropylene
(PP). It is seen from the results that mechanical properties (grab tensile strength,
interface friction angle etc) enhanced when synthetic materials are added with jute.
On the other hand, hydraulic property (permittivity) is reduced with the addition of
synthetic material.
2.4.5 Types of Jute Geotextile
Bangladesh Jute Mill Corporation (BJMC) manufactures several kinds of JGT,

namely DWF Cloth (Plain), Standard Binola, L Twill Cloth, Standard B Twill Cloth,
Lt Cees Cloth (Plain) and A Twill Cloth. Physical properties of JGT are mass per unit
area, Strip tensile strength, Grave tensile strength, CBR puncture resistance
permeability
31
Table 2.8. Summary of Blending Jute with Different Materials (after Khan, 2008)
Type Compo- Possible Biodegra- Moisture Mass/ Tensile

sition Durability dability content Unit Area Strength
(lb)
Woven jute Jute 2-6 Quick 12-14% 220-280 120-140
in different months
structure
Woven jute Jute and 6-20 months Slow 7-10% 220-280 240-660
in different Coir
structure
Woven jute 6-18 months Long run 3-8% Variable 140-700
in different weight
structure
Non-woven Bitumen 5-20 months Slow 8-12% 800 300-800
and
Carbon
Woven with 5-20 months Long run 5-7% ≥800 300-800
different
construction
Non-woven Jute, 5-12 months Long run 5-7% ≥800 ≥800
jute blanket
and
latex
32
CHAPTER FOUR
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
In this study detailed field CBR tests have been performed. From field test results, it
was found that CBR values of hydraulic fill soil which is mainly of sandy soil is
generally more than 8%. Even though if hydraulic dredged fill carried earth soil allow
for natural settlement it will gain CBR value more than 5%.
4.2 MEASUREMENT OF FIELD CBR VALUES
Field CBR apparatus consist of three parts i) proving ring, ii) loading arm and iii) 2΄΄
dia plunger shown in Figure 4.1. To measure the CBR value, the CBR apparatus were
clamed with the chassis of a medium truck having weight of about 5 tons as shown in
Figure 4.2. A dial gauge was attached with the proving ring to measure penetration of
the plunger. The dial gauge was touched to horizontal bars which were rests on two
stands as shown in Figure 4.2. Load of truck was applied by the apparatus and
recorded at penetrations 0-20mm.
Chesis of truck
Clamp Loading arm
Proving ring
Loading gauge
Penetration gauge
Horizontal bar
Stand
2" dia planger
Figure 4.1. Schematic diagram of field CBR test apparatus.
49
Figure 4.2. View of Field CBR test without JGT.
Penetrations were taken without JGT as well as with JGT in a point. After taking
penetration without JGT, it was spread over the subgrade and the truck was moved
front or rare about 12 inches to displace from the previous point which was already
compacted by the plunger. JGT was clamped with pegs at the two sides of the plunger
of CBR apparatus to prevent sliding as shown in Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4. It is to be
mentioned here that 5 mm penetration of the plunger is not enough to produce
sufficient strain in the JGT to slide. Because JGT consist of jute strings swing
together. Load vs. penetration curves were drawn and CBR values were calculated.
Road embankment of Hatirjheel was get compacted due to movement of the vehicle.
Tests were conducted on the outer side of the embankment which was relatively less
compacted soil.
50
JGT Roller over a 58 " Dia Ms Rod
JGT Over Subgrade
JGT Clamed by Peg with the Ms Rod
Figure 4.3 Schematic Diagram of JGT Spreading over subgrade
Figure 4.4. View of Field CBR test with JGT.
51
4.3 COMPARISON OF CBR VALUES WITH JGT AND WITHOUT JGT
In Hatirjheel site at Ch.0+250, CBR values are 9% without JGT and 14% with JGT at
Point-1; CBR values are 11% without JGT and 14% with JGT at Point-2 and CBR
values are 10% without JGT and 13% with JGT at Point-3. Comparison of CBR
values are shown in Figure 4.5. It is to be mentioned here that during field test dry
density was not measured that is why comparison has been shown in point basis.
Location of points of Hatirjheel site are shown in Figure 3.1.
Figure 4.5. Comparison of field subgrade CBR without JGT and with JGT Ch 0+250
In Hatirjheel site at Ch.0+350, CBR values are 12% without JGT and 16% with JGT
at Point-1; CBR values are 12% without JGT and 12% with JGT at Point-2; and CBR
values are 13% without JGT and 15% with JGT at Point-3. Comparison of CBR
values are shown in Figure 4.6.
52
In Hatirjheel site at Ch.0+650, CBR values are 16% without JGT and 16% also with
JGT at Point-1; CBR values are 17% without JGT and 17% also with JGT at Point-2
and CBR value is 14% without JGT and 14% also with JGT at Point-3. Comparison
of CBR values are shown in Figure 4.7.
In Keraniganj site at Ch.9+250, CBR values are 10% without JGT and 7% with JGT
at Point-1; CBR values are 8% without JGT and 6% with JGT at Point-2 and CBR
values are 9% without JGT and 7% with JGT at Point-3. Comparison of CBR values
are shown in Figure 4.8. Location of points of Keraniganj site are shown in Figure
3.2.
53
In Keraniganj site at Ch.9+335, CBR values are 6% without JGT and 4% with JGT at
Point-1; CBR values are 5% without JGT and 4% with JGT at Point-2and CBR values
are 6% without JGT and 5% with JGT at Point-3. Comparison of CBR values are
4.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS
In this study series of laboratory and field tests have been performed. Summary of test
results are shown in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2
Table 4.1. Summary of laboratory CBR values in different compaction.

CBR value (%)
85.71% 92.86% 96.43%
Locations
Without With Without With Without With
JGT JGT JGT JGT JGT JGT
Hatirjheel Ch 0+250m 10 9 11 9 12 10
Hatirjheel Ch 0+350m 11 9 11 10 12 10
Hatirjheel Ch 0+650m 17 14 18 18 18 18
Keraniganj Ch 9+250m 5 3 6 3 10 4
Keraniganj Ch 9+335m 10 5 11 9 11 11
From the laboratory test it is observed that in Hatirjheel site at Ch 0+250m average
CBR value decrease by 15.15%; at Ch 0+350m average CBR value decrease by
14.71% and at Ch 0+650m average CBR value decrease by 5.67% due to use of JGT.
54
In Keraniganj site at Ch 9+250m average CBR value decrease by 52.38% and at Ch
9+335m average CBR values decrease by 21.88% due to use of JGT. It is to be
mentioned here that Hatirjheel site is compacted hydraulic filled subgrade on the other
hand Keraniganj site is carried earth uncompacted subgrade.
Table 4.2. Summary of field CBR values in different locations.

CBR value (%)
Poin-1 Poin-2 Poin-3
Locations
Without With Without With Without With
JGT JGT JGT JGT JGT JGT
Hatirjheel Ch 0+250m 9 14 11 14 10 13
Hatirjheel Ch 0+350m 12 16 12 12 13 15
Hatirjheel Ch 0+650m 16 16 17 17 14 14
Keraniganj Ch 9+250m 10 7 8 6 9 7
Keraniganj Ch 9+335m 6 4 5 4 6 5
From the field test results it is observed that in Hatirjheel site at Ch 0+250m average
CBR values increase by 37.60%; at Ch 0+350m average CBR values increase by
16.22% and at Ch 0+650m average CBR values do not change due to use of JGT. In
Keraniganj site at Ch 9+250m average CBR values decrease by 25.93% and at Ch
9+335m average CBR values decrease by 23.53%. It is to be mentioned here that
Hatirjheel site is compacted hydraulic filled subgrade on the other hand Keraniganj
site is carried earth uncompacted subgrade.
55
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
In this study series of laboratory and field investigations have been performed.
Concluding remarks of this study are as follows:
From the laboratory test results it is observed that CBR value decreases for the
soil (Sandy soil) of both sites due to use of JGT.
From the field test results it is observed that CBR value increases in Hatirjheel
site and decreases in Keraniganj site due to use of JGT.
From the field test results it is found that CBR value of hydraulic filled sandy
subgrade achieve more than 8% without proper compaction.
It is also observed from CBR tests in the laboratory as well as in the field that
8% CBR of subgrade is not as compacted as practically achieved in the field.
In the GoBs (LGED, R&D, PWD and others) road design, CBR value of ISG
are usually taken 8%. In Hatirjheel project CBR values of ISG were also taken
8%. So 8% CBR may be revised in higher value through necessary field test
over compacted ISG.
From the outcomes of my study, it can be concluded that JGT will not be
effective over hydraulic filled sandy subgrade for flexible pavement design.
56
5.2 RECOMMEDATIONS FOR FUTURE STUDY
Hatirjheel project was constructed by carried earth soil from a hydraulic filled
site. So, actual hydraulic filled situation did not achieve in Hatirjheel project.
For this reason further study to be conducted on a hydraulic filled
embankment.
As the segments of two road sites were not compacted by mechanical means
this is why compaction of those segments were not homogeneous. So field
CBR test may be performed over equal compacted hydraulic filled subgrade.
Field CBR tests can be performed over proper compacted improved subgrade
to redefine its CBR value for road constructions.
57
REFERNCES
Abdullah, A. B. M. (1999), “A Handbook on Synthetic Geotextiles Particularly
Natural Synthetic Geotextiles from jute and other Vegetable Fibres”, Bangladesh Jute
Research Institute, Dhaka, pp.33-87.
Abdullah, A. B. M. (2008), “Prospective Innovative Applications of jute Geotextiles”,

International Workshop on Jute Geotextiles, Technical & Commercial Prospects, 5th
and 6th April, Calcutta, India, pp. 69-86.
Al-Qadi, I. L., Brandon, T. L., Valentine, R. J., and Smith, T. E. (1994), “Laboratory
Evaluation of Geosynthetic Reinforced Pavement Sections”, Transportation Research
Record 1439, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., pp. 25-31.
ASTM D 1883-87, “Standard Test Method for CBR (California Bearing Ratio) of
Laboratory – Compacted Soils”.
Austin, D. N. and Coleman, D. M. (1993), “A Field Evaluation of Geosynthetic-

Reinforced Haul Roads over Soft Foundation Soils”, Proceedings of Geosynthetic
Conference, Vancouver, Canada, March 30 - April 1, pp. 65-80.
Aziz, M. A. and Ramaswami, S. D. (1989), “Some studies on Jute Geotextiles and

Their Applications”, Geosynthetic World, Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi.
Bell, L., MeCullough, L. M., and Snaith, M. S. (1982), “An Experimental

Investigation of Base Protection Using Geotextiles”, Proceedings of Second
International Conference on Geotextiles, Las Vegas, Nevada.
CCRI (1997), “Jute Geotextile Used as Separator at Kandla Port, Gujarat”,

Proceedings of the workshop on Jute Geotextile, IJMA/JMDC, Calcutta, pp 73-87.
Christopher B. R. and Holtz R. D. (1985), “Geotxtile Engineering Manual”, Federal

Highway Administration, Washington D. C.
Christopher B. R. and Holtz, R. D. (1991), “Geotxtile for Subgrade Stabilization in

Permanent Roads and Highway”, Proceedings of the IFAI Conference on
Geosynthetics, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.
GoB (2005), “Pavement Design Gide for Roads & Highways Department”,
Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Ministry of Communications,
Roads and Highways Division.
IJSG (2004), “Strategy for Jute Sector”, Fifth Session of the Council of the
International Jute Study Group held during 20-21 April 2004, Dhaka.
Ingold, T. S. and Miler, K. S. (1988), “Geotextile Handbook”, Thomas Telford,

London, England.
John, N. W. M. (1987), “Geotextiles”, Chapman and Hall, 29 West 35th Street, New
York, pp 42-43.
58
Khan, A. J. and Mohy, M. A. (2005), “Technical Assessment of Geojute for Long and
Short Term Geotechnical Applications”, Proceeding of Third Annual Paper Meet and
International Conference on Civil Engineering, p 357-368.
Khan, A. J. (2008), “Quality Control of Jute Geotextiles and Development of Testing

Facilities”, Proceedings of International Workshop on Jute Geotextiles - Technical
Potential & Commercial Prospects, Calcutta, April 2008, p. 101-119.
Khan and Rahman (2009), ‘Use of Jute Geotextiles in Road Construction’, Thesis
submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement for degree of M. Sc. Engineering
,Department of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and
Technology, Dhaka.
Koerner, R. M. (1998), “Designing with Geosynthetics”, Fourth edition, Prentice Hall

Inc., New Jersey, pp 171-190.
Lai, J. S. and Robnett, Q. L. (1981), “Design and use of Geotextiles in Road

Construction”, Proceedings of Third Conference of Road Engineering Association of
Asia and Australia, Taipei.
Mohy, M. A. (2005), “ Evaluation of Properties of Jute Geotextile and Its Assessment

for Short Term and Long term Civil Engineering Applications”, Thesis submitted in
partial fulfillment of requirements for degree of M. Sc. Engineering, Department of
Civil Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.
Prodhan, Z. H. (1994), “Integrated Jute Geotextile Reinforced Earth Structures

Design”, Proceeding of the Regional Seminar on New Application of Jute, 5th and 6th
December, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Prodhan, Z. H. (2001), “Application of Jute Geotextile for Different Structures

including Rural Roads with Slop Protection”, Project Paper on Slop Protection Work
at Pakulla-Lauhati Road in Delduar Upazilla under Tangail District, Bangladesh, pp
1-8.
Rao, J. P., Viswanadham, B. V. S. and Yadav (1994), "Jute Based Geotextiles &
Their Evaluation for Civil Engineering Applications'', Fifth International Conference
on Geotextiles, Geomembrane and Related Product , Singapore, 5-9 September,1994,
pp. 853-856.
Rao, J. P., Venisiri, N. and Rao, S. R. (1998), “A Case study on Construction of

Highway Embankment on Soft Marine Soil Using Jute Geotextile at Kakinada Port,
Andhra Pradesh” a UNDP sponsored project on ‘Development and Promotion of Jute
Geotextile’, Published in the Proceedings of Sixth International Conference on
Geosynthetics, Atlanta, pp 779-782.
Naeini S. A. and Mirzakhanlari M. (2008), “The Effect of Geotextile and Grading on

the Bearing Ratio of Granular Soils", EJGE, Vol. 13, pp. 1-8.
59
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
It is here by declared that this thesis or any part of this has not been submitted elsewhere for
the award of any degree or diploma.
Md. Asgor Hossain
ii
Affectionately Dedicated
To
My Mother, Wife, Son and Daughter

for their sacrifice and inspirations during this research.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to express his indebtedness and profound gratitude to his supervisor, Dr.
Abdul Jabbar Khan, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh University of
Engineering and Technology (BUET) for his unfailing guidance, constant supervision,
valuable suggestions, helpful criticism and encouragement given through the course of this
research work. Without his help in both academic and personal concerns throughout the
tenure of the research, this dissertation work could not be completed. The author expresses
his gratefulness to all members of the Department of Civil Engineering, BUET, specially the
members of the Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory, for providing necessary facilities and
cooperation during the period of research.
The author is grateful to Dr. Salina Hayat Ivy, Honorable Mayor of Narayanganj City
Corporation for giving him permission for this degree.
The author is grateful to Bangladesh Army to allow him a portion of road segment on
Hatirjheel project. A very special debt of deep gratitude to Major Khijir & Major Ferdous and
all members of “16 Engineer Construction Battalion of Bangladesh Army” for extending all
possible support to implement the design works.
The author expresses his gratitude to Kh. Golam Mostafa, the Sub-Divisional Engineer,
Roads & Highway Department of Dhaka division for providing him a segment of their road
at Keraniganj for research purpose.
The author expresses his gratitude to his mother Begaum Ambia Khatun for her constant
prayer to acquire this degree.
Finally, the author wishes to express his sincere thanks to his beloved wife Ms Yasmin
Hossain for her constant encouragement and sacrifices throughout the course of this study
and to his son Md. Abrar Hossain Hamim and daughter Habiba Firuj Anika who were always
the sources of his inspirations.
iv
ABSTRACT
In this study, DWF Cloth (plain) Jute Geotextile (JGT) has been used for the purpose of
subgrade soil reinforcement of a flexible pavement in two different road segments to evaluate
its performance.
One road segment is in Hatirjheel project at Bagunbari, Dhaka, where woven type untreated
DWF Cloth (plain) JGT has been used. Systematic laboratory investigation and field tests
have been carried out. The field test result shows that the CBR value does not increase
significantly due to use of JGT. It was observed that CBR value of hydraulic filled subgrade
reached upto 8% or above after normal dumping from the truck, i.e. without any compaction
effort.
Another road segment has been selected at Keraniganj in Dhaka under R&H Department
where the road embankment has been constructed by carried earth. To attain loose state of the
field, the embankment was not compacted by any means. It was also observed that CBR
value of subgrade reached to 5% without mechanical compaction. Systematic laboratory
investigations and field tests have been carried out. The test result shows that the CBR value
does not increase significantly due to use of JGT.
Therefore, it has been observed that JGT over the hydraulic filled sandy subgrade of a
flexible pavement will not be effective in increasing the CBR value of subgrade.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DECLARATION PAGE ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
NOTATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS xi
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 General 1
1.2 Strategy for Jute Sector 1
1.3 Background of the Study 3
1.4 Objectives of the Study 4
1.5 Scope of the Study 4
1.6 Research Methodology 5
1.7 Thesis Layout 6
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 General 7
2.2 Introduction to the Pavement Design Process 7
2.2.1 Pavement Design Terms and Definitions 7
2.2.2 Principles and Procedure of Design 10
2.2.3 Base Year Traffic Counts 10
2.2.4 Design life and Traffic Growth Rates 11
2.2.5 Determining Cumulative ESAs over the 13
Pavement Design Life
2.2.6 Determination of Pavement layers 14
2.3 Geosynthetic 15
2.3.1 Manufacturing of Synthetic Geotextiles 15
2.3.2 Functions of Geotextiles in Pavements 16
2.3.2.1 Seperation 16
2.3.2.2 Reinforcement 18
2.3.3 Research Programme on Use of Geotextile in 24
Flexible Pavement Design
vi
2.4 Jute Geotextile 28
2.4.1 Jute Fibre 28
2.4.2 Physical Properties of Jute 28
2.4.3 Chemical Composition of Jute Fibre 30
2.4.4 Treatment of Jute Fibre 30
2.4.5 Types of Jute Geotextile 31
CHAPTER TRHREE LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS AND TEST

RESULTS
3.1 Introduction 33
3.2 Selection of Sites for the Study 33
3.3 Test of Materials 35
3.3.1 Soil 35
3.3.2 Jute Geotextile 40
3.4 CBR test on Laboratory Compacted Sand 43
3.4.1 CBR test on Laboratory Compacted Sand 43
without JGT
3.4.2 CBR test on Laboratory Compacted JGT-Sand 44
System.
3.5 Comparison of CBR values with JGT and without 45
JGT
CHAPTER FOUR FIELD INVESTIGATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Introduction 49
4.2 Measurement of Field CBR Values 49
4.3 Comparison of CBR values with JGT and without 52
JGT
4.4 Concluding Remarks 54
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions 56
5.2 Recommendations for further Study 57
REFERENCES 58
APPENDIX
A Data Table of Grain Size Distribution and Standard 60
Proctor Test
B Data Table of Laboratory CBR Test 65
C DataTable of Field CBR Test 82
D Load vs. Penetration Curve of Laboratory CBR Test 97
E Load vs. Penetration Curve of field CBR Test 114
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Required CBR for Pavement Layers (after GoB, 2005). 10
Table 2.2. Thickness Design Table for Flexible Pavements (after GoB, 2005). 12
Table 2.3. Pavement Design Life and Traffic growth Rates (after GoB, 2005). 13
Table 2.4. Vehicles Equivalence Factors (after GoB, 2005). 13
Table 2.5. Cumulative Growth Factors (after GoB, 2005). 13
Table 2.6. Improved subgrade Requirements (after GoB, 2005). 14
Table 2.7 Important Physical Properties of Jute Fibre (after Abdullah, 2008). 29
Table 2.8. Summary of Blending Jute with Different Materials (after Khan, 2008). 32
Table 3.1. Test Results of untreated JGT. 41
Table 3.2. Test Results of Treated JGT, Untreated JGT and Synthetic Geotextile. 42
Table 4.1. Summary of laboratory CBR values in different compaction. 54
Table 4.2. Summary of field CBR values in different locations. 55
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Pavement Courses for Flexible Pavement (after Mass Highway-2006). 9
Figure 2.2. Pavement Courses for Flexible Pavement (after GoB, 2005). 9
Figure 2.3. Typical subgrade and base course interface showing surface rutting as 17
a results of the migration of fines or penetration of aggregate (after
Valentine, 1997).
Figure 2.4. Membrane action in JGT under vertical load ( after Taylor, 1998). 18
Figure 2.5. Load distribution by aggregate layer (after Giroud and Noiray) : (a) 21
case without geotextile (b) case with geotextile.
Figure 2.6. Reducing aggregate thickness with geotextile (after Giroud and 23
Noiray).
Figure 3.1. Location Map of “Integrated Development of Hatirjheel Area 34
Including Begunbari Khal Project”, Dhaka.
Figure 3.2. Location Map of "Turag-Ruhitpur Baorvita Road Project", 34
Keraniganj, Dhaka.
Figure 3.3. Particle size distribution curve of Hatirjheel soil at Ch. 0+250m. 35
Figure 3.4. Dry density vs. moisture content curve of Hatirjheel soil at Ch. 36
0+250m.
0+350m.
0+650m.
Figure 3.9. Particle size distribution curve of Keraniganj soil at Ch. 9+250m 38
Figure 3.10. Dry density vs. moisture content curve of Keraniganj soil at 39
Ch.9+250m.
Figure 3.11 Particle size distribution curve of Keraniganj soil at Ch. 9+335m. 39
Figure 3.12. Dry density vs. moisture content curve of Keraniganj soil at 40
Ch.9+335m.
Figure 3.13. A schematic diagram of CBR test mold. 43
Figure-3.14. View of Laboratory CBR test. 44
Figure 3.15 Arrangement of CBR test with JGT. 45
ix
Figure 3.16. Laboratory corrected soaked CBR curve without JGT and with JGT of 45
soil from Hatirjheel at Ch. 0+250m.
soil from Keraniganj at Ch. 9+250m.
Figure 3.20. Laboratory corrected soaked CBR curve without JGT and 47
Figure 3.21 Variation of CBR values with dry densities with and without JGT. 48
Figure 4.1. Schematic diagram of field CBR test apparatus. 49
Figure 4.2. View of Field CBR test without JGT. 50
Figure 4.3 Schematic Diagram of JGT Spreading over subgrade. 51
Figure 4.4. View of Field CBR test with JGT. 51
Figure 4.5. Comparison of field subgrade CBR value without JGT and with JGT 52
at Ch. 0+250m.
Figure 4.6. Comparison of field subgrade CBR value without JGT and with JGT at 52
Ch. 0+350m.
Ch. 0+650m.
Ch. 9+250m.
Ch. 9+335m.
x
NOTATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AADT = Average Annual Daily Traffic

AOS = Apparent Opening Size (mm or micron)
B = Width of Wheel Contact Area (m)
BDT = Bangladesh Taka
BJMC = Bangladesh Jute Mills Corporation
BS = British Standard
c = Unit Cohesion
cc = Cubic Centietre
CBR = California Bearing Ration
CCBR = Corrected California Bearing Ration
CCRI = Central Coir Research Institute
CL = Corrected Penetration Load
Cu = Coefficient of Uniformity
cu = Consolidated Undrained Shear Strength (kPa)
0
C = Degree Centigrade
C.V = Coefficient of variance
D10 = Diameter of Particle Corresponding to 10% Finer (mm)
D60 = Diameter of Particle Corresponding to 60% Finer (mm)
DOT = Department of Transportation
ESA = Equivalent Standard Axle
ft = Foot/feet
fps = Feet per Second
φ = Angle of Internal Friction
GI = Group Index
GIR = Geotextile –Induced Roughness
GoB = Government of Bangladesh
Gs = Specific Gravity of Soil
Gsm = Gram per Square Meter
γ = Unit Weight of Soil
HMA = Hot Mix Asphalt
xi
ISG = Improved Subgrade
JGT = Jute Geotextile
JMDC = Jute Manufactures Development Council
km = Kilometre
kN = Kilo Newton
kPa = Kilo Pascal
L = Length of Wheel Contact Area(m)
lb = Pounds
LGED = Local Government Engineering Department
LL = Liquid Limit
ml = Mililitre
M = Metre
MD = Machine direction
MPa = Mega Pascal
Mph = Miles per Hour
N = Newton or Number of Reinforcement Layer
N/A = Not Applicable
PI = Plasticity Index
PL = Plastic Limit
PWD = Public Works Department
qo = Allowable Bearing Capacity of Subgrade Soil (kPa)
qr = Stress Produced by Wheel Load on Road Surface (kPa)
qu = Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Subgrade Soil (kPa)
R&D = Research and Development
RHD = Roads and Highway Department
-1
S = Per Second
SPT = Standard Penetration Test
Sq-ft = Square Feet
Sq-m = Square Meter
T = Time (min, sec)
USCS = Unified System for Soil Classification
X = Shear Displacement
XMD =Cross Machine Direction
xii
z = Depth of Reinforcement from Road Surface(m)
xiii
xiv
PUBLISHED BY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PAVEMENT
MANAGEMENT OFFICE 605 SUWANNEE STREET, M.S. 32 TALLAHASSEE,
FLORIDA 32399-0450 DOCUMENT NO. 625-010-002-g MARCH 2008
xv

Full Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Thesis

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

Full Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PERFORMANCE OF JUTE GEOTEXTILE REINFORCED

HYDRAULIC FILLED SUBGRADE

MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

A Project Thesis Submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering of Bangladesh

MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Dr. Abdul Jabbar Khan Chairman

Dr. Abu Siddique Member

Dr. Mohammad Shariful Islam

Table A.1. Data for Grain Size Distribution

Location : Hatirjheel site 0+250m Sample No:

Sieve Sieve Wt Wt of Wt of % Cum % %

Table A.2. Data for Standard Proctor Test

Location : Hatirjheel site 0+250m

Sl. No. Moister Content(%) Dry Density(kN/m3)

Location : Hatirjheel site 0+350m Sample No:

Sieve Sieve Wt Wt of Wt of % Cum % %

Table A.4. Data for Standard Proctor Test

Location : Hatirjheel site 0+350m

Sl. No. Moister Content (%) Dry Density (k/m3)

Location : Hatirjheel site 0+650 Sample No:

Sieve Sieve Wt Wt of Wt of % Cum % %

Table A.6. Data Table for Standard Proctor Test

Location : Hatirjheel site 0+650m Sample No:

Sl. No. Moister Content (%) Dry Density (kN/m3)

Location : Keraniganj site 9+250m Sample No:

Sieve Sieve Wt Wt of Wt of % Cum % %

Table A.8. Data for Standard Proctor Test

Location : Keraniganj site 9+250m Sample No:

Sl. No. Moister Content(%) Dry Density(kN/m3)

Location : Keraniganj site 9+335m Sample No:

Sieve Sieve Wt Wt of Wt of % Cum % %

Table A.10. Data for Standard Proctor Test

Location : Keraniganj site 9+335m Sample No:

Sl. No. Moister Content(%) Dry Density(kN/m3)

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

25.00 0.625 6 37.04 0.16

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

25.00 0.625 4 25.36 0.11

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

25.00 0.625 10 60.38 0.27

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

Strain Dial Strain Dial Load Load CBR(%) Corrected

25.00 0.625 5 31.20 0.14