In some cases in geotechnical applications, structures must be constructed on problematic soils that may have less bearing capacity or excessive settlements. In order to improve the geotechnical properties of these kinds of soils, waste materials such as borogypsum [1,2,3], phosphogypsum [4,5,6,7,8], silica fume [9,10,11,12,13,14], fly ash [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24] and scrap tire rubber [25,26] have been used.
On the other hand, a wide range of reinforcements has been used to improve soil performance. Increasing the soil strength has caused increased interest in identifying new accessible resources for reinforcement. Due to offering faster, more effective and more economical solutions, these kinds of materials are preferred when compared with conventional methods. In the literature, metal strips , metal bars , rope fibers [29,30], geotextiles [31,32] and geogrids [33,34,35,36,37] are usually used as soil reinforcement materials.
Economic growth and changes in people's consumption and production patterns are resulting in rapid increase in the generation of solid waste in the world. The storage of these kinds of wastes creates some environmental problems and threatens human health. Recycling of solid waste materials decreases consumption of natural resources and also avoids the environmental problems that occur due to the storage of solid waste materials. Toothbrush is one of the domestic wastes produced by people. Davis and Hudson  indicated that approximately 50 million pounds of plastic toothbrushes are discarded each year in the United States. Even the cities with low economic growth have started producing toothbrush waste due to increased use of toothbrushes. As a result of the increasing importance given to oral and dental health all over the world, it is seen that every year millions of tons of waste toothbrushes are produced. This implies that on one hand, more toothbrushes are being used to meet the increased demand of oral and dental health, and on the other hand, more toothbrush waste is being generated.
In this study, the usability of toothbrush bristle, which is a waste material, as a propylene fiber reinforcement material in fine-grained soil was investigated. Therefore, fine-grained soil was mixed with waste toothbrush bristle (WTB) at ratios of 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.6% and 0.8% by dry total weight. The effect of toothbrush bristle on freezing–thawing behavior and unconfined compression strength (UCS) of reinforced samples with WTB was evaluated.
2 Materials and Methods
The high plasticity clayey soil used in these experiments was obtained locally from a landfill area, and it has been classified as CH according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) with ASTM D2487 . Some geotechnical properties of this clayey soil are summarized in Table 1. The toothbrush bristle was obtained by cutting from waste toothbrushes using a lancet. The length of bristles was approximately 10 mm (Figure 1a).
Some properties of clayey soil used in tests.
|Liquid limit1, wL (%)||57.8|
|Plastic limit2, wP (%)||24.4|
|Plasticity index, IP (%)||33.4|
|Optimum water content3, wopt (%)||23.6|
|Maximum dry unit weight3, γdmax (kN/m3)||15.3|
|Soil class (USCS)||CH|
The reinforced samples were prepared with WTB at ratios of 0%, 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.6% and 0.8% by weight of dry soil. Waste toothbrush bristle was mixed with soil randomly for unconfined compression and freezing–thawing tests. The dry clay was initially mixed with WTB manually (Figure 1b). After the dry mixing procedure, an appropriate amount of water was added to the WTB–clay mixture in order to get it to optimum water content. Maximum care was taken to ensure a homogeneous distribution of the toothbrush bristle in the clay. The WTB–clay mixtures were stored in a covered container for 24 h (Figure 1c). Mixtures were compacted in three layers into a 38 mm diameter and 76 mm high cylindrical mold at optimum water content. The sample preparation method was adapted from the standard compaction test method (ASTM D-698) .
The unconfined compression test was performed according to ASTM D 2166 . Unreinforced and reinforced samples were tested in an unconfined compression machine with 0.8 mm/min loading rate. The UCS ratio was used to examine the effect of WTB with respect to the number of freezing–thawing cycles. The UCS ratio was defined as the ratio of the UCS of reinforced samples to unreinforced samples (Eq.1). The UCS ratio value of unreinforced samples was assumed as 1.00.
The freezing–thawing tests were conducted in a programmable freezing–thawing cabinet. These tests were carried out on unreinforced and reinforced clay. Samples were wrapped in aluminum foil to prevent changes in their water content . A thin film layer of Vaseline was spread on the foil to prevent samples from sticking to the aluminum foil [45,46]. The prepared samples were placed in the programmable freezing cabinet to remain at −20°C for 6 h and at 25 °C for 6 h (Figure 2). This operation was named as one cycle . Numbers of freeze–thaw cycles were chosen in accordance with the literature as 3, 6, 9 and 12 freezing–thawing cycles [47,48,49].
The prepared reinforced and unreinforced samples and WTB ratios are summarized in Table 2. As can be seen from Table 2, one unreinforced sample and four different reinforced samples were used in this study. For each of the reinforced and unreinforced samples, five different test samples were prepared due to five different freezing–thawing cycles. Also, one more test sample was prepared for each of the unreinforced and reinforced samples and at the end these two test samples’ averages were used for calculation. As a result, a total number of 50 test samples were prepared and tested in this study.
Prepared samples, WTB ratios and number of freezing–thawing cycles.
|Sample Description||WTB Ratio (%)||Number of Cycles|
3 Results and Discussions
The stress–strain curves of reinforced and unreinforced samples at five different freezing–thawing cycles are given in Figure 3.
It is seen in Figure 3 that an increment in WTB ratio generally increases the peak shear stress at each freezing–thawing cycle. Furthermore, the reinforced samples tend to show higher shear stress than the unreinforced samples, especially at large strains. This behavior was also found by [51,52]. Figure 3 indicates that an increase in freezing–thawing cycles generally leads to a decrease in peak shear stress of reinforced and unreinforced samples. Similar behavior was also observed by [47,51,52,53,54,55,56].
The photos of reinforced and unreinforced samples after the unconfined compression test are presented in Figure 4. It has been observed in parallel to the findings available in the literature that the reinforced samples exhibit more ductile behavior than the unreinforced samples at each freezing–thawing cycle [57,58,59], as seen in Figure 4. It is assumed that WTB forms bonds and is randomly distributed into the soil, acting as a bridge between soil particles.
The peak stress values are used to calculate the undrained shear strength (cu) of the reinforced and unreinforced samples. The relationship between cu and WTB content is shown in Figure 5. It is clearly seen in Figure 5 that a significant increase is observed in cu with increasing WTB ratio at 0 and 3 freezing–thawing cycles. The increment in cu values is approximately 63% and 42% at 0 and 3 cycles, respectively. On the other hand, an increase in freezing–thawing cycles causes a decrease in cu values at high freezing–thawing cycles (i.e., 6–9 and 12). It may be attributed to the fact that pore water freezes and forms ice lenses in the pore space between the soil particles; then these ice lenses expand in volume and push particles of the soil and act like springs, increasing gaps among soil particles .
The UCS ratios for peak strengths are shown in Figure 6a. It can be seen from Figure 6a that the peak UCS ratios of all reinforced samples are higher than the unreinforced sample at zero cycle. However, the UCS ratio values start to decrease steadily between 0 and 9 cycles while there is an increase between 9 and 12 cycles. The relationship between the ultimate UCS ratio and freezing–thawing cycles is illustrated in Figure 6b. The ultimate UCS ratio values of all reinforced samples are generally higher than the unreinforced samples at all freezing–thawing cycles. It is seen that the ultimate UCS ratio values of reinforced samples are higher than the peak UCS values when Figures 6a and 6b are compared. This situation does not mean that the UCS of reinforced samples of ultimate strain is higher than the peak ones. This means that the strength loss of unreinforced samples at large strains is more pronounced than those at the peak strains.
The relationship of FTML with freezing–thawing cycles is shown in Figure 7. It should be noted that the lower the FTML value, the better the durability to freezing–thawing effect. Experimental results show that the FTML values of reinforced samples are generally lower than unreinforced samples (Figure 7). This means that the reinforced samples are more durable than the unreinforced samples.
In this study, a series of unconfined compression and freezing–thawing experiments were conducted in the laboratory in order to observe the freezing–thawing behavior of fine-grained soils reinforced with WTB in different ratios. The general results from the experiments are as follows:
- –The results indicate that WTB mixed with clayey soils can be used as a reinforcement fiber material.
- –Increment in toothbrush bristle ratio generally increases the peak shear stress at all freezing–thawing cycles.
- –The reinforced samples tend to exhibit higher shear stress at large strains when compared with the unreinforced samples.
- –An increase in freezing–thawing cycles generally leads to a decrease in peak shear stress of reinforced and unreinforced samples.
- –The reinforced samples exhibit more ductile behavior than unreinforced samples at each freezing–thawing cycle.
- –A significant increase is observed in cu with increasing toothbrush bristle ratio at 0 and 3 freezing–thawing cycles.
- –The FTML values of reinforced samples are generally lower than unreinforced samples.
In order to achieve more realistic judgments on the subject, experiments are recommended to be continued for further studies with different soil types, numbers of freezing–thawing cycles and WTB contents.
Support has been provided for this research work from the funds of the Scientific Research Project of Ataturk University. The authors express their gratitude to Ataturk University for this support.
Tulek, M. (2007). A study of the use of chemical waste gypsums in soil stabilization. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Doctoral dissertation, Yüksek lisans Tezi).[in Turkish].
Coruh E., Hinisoglu, S., Kocakerim, M., Arasan, S., Oltulu, M. (2013). Investigation of the usage of borogypsum in the subbase course as a stabilization material. EÜFBED – The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Journal, 6(2), 221–231.
Kütük-Sert, T., & Kütük, S. (2013). Physical and marshall properties of borogypsum used as filler aggregate in asphalt concrete. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 25(2), 266–273.
Gregory, C. A., Saylak, D., & Ledbetter, W. B. (1984). The use of by-product phosphogypsum for road bases and subbases. Transportation Research Record, 998, 47–52.
Degirmenci, N., Okucu, A., & Turabi, A. (2007). Application of phosphogypsum in soil stabilization. Building and environment, 42(9), 3393–3398.
Shen, W., Zhou, M., & Zhao, Q. (2007). Study on lime–fly ash–phosphogypsum binder. Construction and Building Materials, 21(7), 1480–1485.
Yilmaz, I., & Civelekoglu, B. (2009). Gypsum: an additive for stabilization of swelling clay soils. Applied clay science, 44(1–2), 166–172.
Shen, W., Zhou, M., Ma, W., Hu, J., & Cai, Z. (2009). Investigation on the application of steel slag–fly ash–phosphogypsum solidified material as road base material. Journal of hazardous materials, 164(1), 99–104.
Kalkan, E., & Akbulut, S. (2004). The positive effects of silica fume on the permeability, swelling pressure and compressive strength of natural clay liners. Engineering Geology, 73(1–2), 145–156.
Kalantari, B., Prasad, A., & Huat, B. B. (2011). Stabilising peat soil with cement and silica fume. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering, 164(1), 33–39.
Sattar, M. A. A., Daud, K. A., & Al-Azzawi, A. A. (2012). Effect of silica fume addition on the behavior of siltyclayey soils. Journal of Engineering and Sustainable Development, 16(1), 92–105.
Negi, C., Yadav, R.K. and Singhai, A.K.,a (2013). Effect of silica fume on engineering properties of black cotton soil. Inter. J. of Computational Eng. Research, 3(7), 1.
Negi, C., Yadav, R.K., and Singhai, A.K.,b (2013). Effect of silica fume on index properties of black cotton soil. Inter. J. of Scientific & Eng. Research, 4(8).
Gupta, C., & Sharma, R. K. (2014). Influence of micro silica fume on sub grade characteristics of expansive soil. International Journal of Civil Engineering Research, 5(1), 77–82.
Cokca, E. (1999). Effect of fly ash on swell pressure of an expansive soil. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 4, 14.
Consoli, N. C., Prietto, P. D. M., Carraro, J. A. H., & Heineck, K. S. (2001). Behavior of compacted soil-fly ash-carbide lime mixtures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(9), 774–782.
Phani Kumar, B. R., & Sharma, R. S. (2004). Effect of fly ash on engineering properties of expansive soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130(7), 764–767.
Nalbantoğlu, Z. (2004). Effectiveness of class C fly ash as an expansive soil stabilizer. Construction and Building Materials, 18(6), 377–381.
Prabakar, J., Dendorkar, N., & Morchhale, R. K. (2004). Influence of fly ash on strength behavior of typical soils. Construction and Building Materials, 18(4), 263–267.
Kolias, S., Kasselouri-Rigopoulou, V., & Karahalios, A. (2005). Stabilisation of clayey soils with high calcium fly ash and cement. Cement and Concrete Composites, 27(2), 301–313.
Edil, T. B., Acosta, H. A., & Benson, C. H. (2006). Stabilizing soft fine-grained soils with fly ash. Journal of materials in civil engineering, 18(2), 283–294.
Chauhan, M. S., Mittal, S., & Mohanty, B. (2008). Performance evaluation of silty sand subgrade reinforced with fly ash and fibre. Geotextiles and geomembranes, 26(5), 429–435.
Brooks, R. M. (2009). Soil stabilization with fly ash and rice husk ash. International Journal of Research and Reviews in Applied Sciences, 1(3), 209–217.
Cristelo, N., Glendinning, S., Miranda, T., Oliveira, D., & Silva, R. (2012). Soil stabilisation using alkaline activation of fly ash for self compacting rammed earth construction. Construction and building materials, 36, 727–735.
Akbulut, S., Arasan, S., & Kalkan, E. (2007). Modification of clayey soils using scrap tire rubber and synthetic fibers. Applied Clay Science, 38(1–2), 23–32.
Kalkan, E. (2013). Preparation of scrap tire rubber fiber–silica fume mixtures for modification of clayey soils. Applied Clay Science, 80, 117–125.
Fragaszy, R. J., & Lawton, E. (1984). Bearing capacity of reinforced sand subgrades. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 110(10), 1500–1507.
Huang, C. C., & Tatsuoka, F. (1990). Bearing capacity of reinforced horizontal sandy ground. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 9(1), 51–82.
Akinmusuru, J. O., & Akinbolade, J. A. (1981). Stability of loaded footings on reinforced soil. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 107(ASCE 16320 Proceeding).
Yetimoglu, T., Inanir, M., & Inanir, O. E. (2005). A study on bearing capacity of randomly distributed fiber-reinforced sand fills overlying soft clay. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 23(2), 174–183.
Guido, V.A., Chang, D.K., Sweeny, M.A. (1986). Comparison of geogrid and geotextile reinforced slabs. Canadian Geotech. J. 20, 435–440.
Ghosh, A., Ghosh, A., & Bera, A. K. (2005). Bearing capacity of square footing on pond ash reinforced with jutegeotextile. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 23(2), 144–173.
Omar, M.T., Das, B.M., Yen, S.C., Puri, V.K., Cook, E.E., a (1993). Ultimate bearing capacity of rectangular foundations on geogrid reinforced sand. Geotechnical Testing J, ASTM 16 (2), 246–252.
Omar, M.T., Das, B.M., Puri, V.K., Yen, S.C., b, (1993). Ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations on sand with geogrid reinforcement. Canadian Geotech. J. 30, 545–549.
Yetimoglu, T., Wu, J. T., & Saglamer, A. (1994). Bearing capacity of rectangular footings on geogrid-reinforced sand. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 120(12), 2083–2099.
Adams, M. T., & Collin, J. G. (1997). Large model spread footing load tests on geosynthetic reinforced soil foundations. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 123(1), 66–72.
Patra, C. R., Das, B. M., Bhoi, M., & Shin, E. C. (2006). Eccentrically loaded strip foundation on geogrid-reinforced sand. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 24(4), 254–259.
Davis, E. A., & Hudson, E. C. (2000). Development of new colors and style for recycled polypropylene toothbrushes. UMass Lowell, Chelsea Center for Recycling and Economic Development.
ASTM, D. (2011). 2487 (2006) Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). Book of Standards, 4(08).
ASTM, D. (2000). 698-00, Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12,400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)), ASTM International. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 4.
ASTM, D. 4318-00. 2000. Standard test method for liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index of soils. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 4, 08.
British Standard, B. S. 1377 part 2. 1990. Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes General Requirements and Sample Preparation.
ASTM, D. 2166 (2006). Standard test method for unconfined compressive strength of cohesive soil. ASTM standard D, 2166.
Kværnø, S. H., & Øygarden, L. (2006). The influence of freeze–thaw cycles and soil moisture on aggregate stability of three soils in Norway. Catena, 67(3), 175–182.
Qi, J., Ma, W., & Song, C. (2008). Influence of freeze–thaw on engineering properties of a silty soil. Cold regions science and technology, 53(3), 397–404.
Gullu, H., & Hazirbaba, K. (2010). Unconfined compressive strength and post-freeze–thaw behavior of fine-grained soils treated with geofiber and synthetic fluid. Cold regions science and technology, 62(2–3), 142–150.
Ghazavi, M., & Roustaie, M. (2010). The influence of freeze–thaw cycles on the unconfined compressive strength of fiber-reinforced clay. Cold regions science and technology, 61(2–3), 125–131.
Liu, J., Wang, T., & Tian, Y. (2010). Experimental study of the dynamic properties of cement-and lime-modified clay soils subjected to freeze–thaw cycles. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 61(1), 29–33.
Hazirbaba, K., Zhang, Y., & Hulsey, J. L. (2011). Evaluation of temperature and freeze–thaw effects on excess pore pressure generation of fine-grained soils. Soil dynamics and earthquake engineering, 31(3), 372–384.
Zaimoğlu, A. Ş., Hattatoğlu, F., Akbulut, R. K., & Yetimoğlu, T. (2012). Freeze-thaw behavior of fine grained soils subjected to surcharge loads. In 3rd International Conference on New Developments in Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 28–30.
Yarbaşı, N., Kalkan, E., & Akbulut, S. (2007). Modification of the geotechnical properties, as influenced by freeze–thaw, of granular soils with waste additives. Cold regions science and technology, 48(1), 44–54.
Kamei, T., Ahmed, A., & Shibi, T. (2012). Effect of freeze–thaw cycles on durability and strength of very soft clay soil stabilised with recycled Bassanite. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 82, 124–129.
Czurda, K. A., & Hohmann, M. (1997). Freezing effect on shear strength of clayey soils. Applied clay science, 12(1–2), 165–187.
Viklander, P., & Eigenbrod, D. (2000). Stone movements and permeability changes in till caused by freezing and thawing. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 31(2), 151–162.
Ahmed, A., & Ugai, K. (2011). Environmental effects on durability of soil stabilized with recycled gypsum. Cold regions science and technology, 66(2–3), 84–92.
Kamei, T., Ahmed, A., & Ugai, K. (2011). The performance of soft clay soil stabilized with recycled gypsum in wet environment. In Proceedings of the 14th Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering.
Yetimoglu, T., & Salbas, O. (2003). A study on shear strength of sands reinforced with randomly distributed discrete fibers. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 21(2), 103–110.
Freilich, B. J., Li, C., & Zornberg, J. G. (2010). Effective shear strength of fiber-reinforced clays. In 9th International Conference on Geosynthetics, Brazil, 1997–2000.
Zaimoglu, A. S. (2010). Freezing–thawing behavior of fine-grained soils reinforced with polypropylene fibers. Cold regions science and technology, 60(1), 63–65.
Tunç A. (2002). Geotechnic and Its Applications on Road Engineering. Atlas Publisher, İstanbul, Turkey [in Turkish].