The current pavement design guidelines, for example, Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG), heavily rely on the resilient moduli of pavement materials. Some locally available pavement materials may not meet the design requirements and often require the application of efficient stabilizers. Therefore, the characterization of natural and treated subgrade soils using resilient modulus is important for the design of durable flexible pavements. A research study was designed and conducted to investigate the effect of polymer emulsion treatment on the resilient characteristics of sandy soil, which is used in constructing highways and airport surfaces. A commercially available polymer emulsion was used to stabilize cohesionless soil, and an attempt was made to understand the influence of polymer emulsion dosage and curing time on the strength and resilient characteristics of treated soil mixtures. Several laboratory tests were conducted on mixtures prepared with different dosages and curing times to evaluate the improvement in unconfined compressive strength and resilient moduli properties of treated sandy soil. Multiple regression analyses were conducted on resilient moduli test results using two- and three-parameter models and identified the best model exhibiting a good fit with the experimental data. A case study was demonstrated using the resilient moduli of untreated and polymer emulsion-treated soil to determine the thickness of airfield pavement. Overall, the outcome of the study is expected to assist the state and federal agencies in stabilizing and using problematic sandy soils for constructing various pavement structures.
KolayP. K.DhakalB.Geotechnical Properties and Microstructure of Liquid Polymer Amended Fine-Grained Soils. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 38, 2020, pp. 2479–2491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-019-01163-x.
2.
LittleD. N.NairS.HerbertB.Addressing Sulfate-Induced Heave in Lime Treated Soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 136, No. 1, 2010, pp. 110–118. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000185.
3.
PuppalaA. J.IntharasombatN.VempatiR. K.Experimental Studies on Ettringite-Induced Heaving in Soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 131, No. 3, 2005, pp. 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:3(325).
4.
BehnoodA.Soil and Clay Stabilization With Calcium- and Non-Calcium-Based Additives: A State-of-the-Art Review of Challenges, Approaches and Techniques. Transportation Geotechnics, Vol. 17, 2018, pp. 14–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2018.08.002.
5.
RezaeimalekS.NasouriR.HuangJ.Bin-ShafiqueS.Curing Method and Mix Design Evaluation of a Styrene-Acrylic Based Liquid Polymer for Sand and Clay Stabilization. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 30, No. 9, 2018, p. 04018200. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002396.
6.
TaherZ. J.ScaliaJ.IVBareitherC. A.Comparative Assessment of Expansive Soil Stabilization by Commercially Available Polymers. Transportation Geotechnics, Vol. 24, 2020, p. 100387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2020.100387.
7.
KolayP. K.DhakalB.KumarS.PuriV. K.Effect of Liquid Acrylic Polymer on Geotechnical Properties of Fine-Grained Soils. International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2016, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-016-0071-5.
8.
TingleJ. S.SantoniR. L.Stabilization of Clay Soils With Nontraditional Additives. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2003. 1819: 72–84.
9.
SantoniR. L.TingleJ. S.WebsterS. L.Stabilization of Silty Sand With Nontraditional Additives. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2002. 1787: 61–72.
10.
IyengarS. R.MasadE.RodriguezA. K.BazziH. S.LittleD.HanleyH. J. M.Pavement Subgrade Stabilization Using Polymers: Characterization and Performance. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2013, pp. 472–483. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000612.
11.
HuangJ.KogbaraR. B.HariharanN.MasadE. A.LittleD. N.A State-of-the-Art Review of Polymers Used in Soil Stabilization. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 305, 2021, p. 124685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124685.
12.
SamuelR.PuppalaA. J.BanerjeeA.HuangO.RadovicM.ChakrabortyS.Improvement of Strength and Volume-Change Properties of Expansive Clays With Geopolymer Treatment. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2021. 2675: 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981211001842.
13.
GeorgeesR. N.HassanR. A.EvansR. P.JegatheesanP.Resilient Response Characterization of Pavement Foundation Materials Using a Polyacrylamide-Based Stabilizer. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2018, p. 04017252. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002109.
PuppalaA.MohammadL.AllenA.Engineering Behavior of Lime-Treated Louisiana Subgrade Soil. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1996. 1546: 24–31.
16.
PuppalaA. J.Estimating Stiffness of Subgrade and Unbound Materials for Pavement Design. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2008.
17.
PuppalaA. J.RamakrishnaA. M.HoyosL. R.Resilient Moduli of Treated Clays From Repeated Load Triaxial Test. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2003. 1821: 68–74. https://doi.org/10.3141/1821-08.
18.
ChakrabortyS.PuppalaA. J.BiswasN.Role of Crystalline Silica Admixture in Mitigating Ettringite-Induced Heave in Lime-Treated Sulfate-Rich Soils. Géotechnique, 2021, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.20.P.154.
19.
BanerjeeA.PuppalaA. J.CongressS. S. C.ChakrabortyS.LikosW. J.HoyosL. R.Variation of Resilient Modulus of Subgrade Soils Over a Wide Range of Suction States. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 146, No. 9, 2020, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.000233.
20.
PinillaJ. D.MillerG. A.CeratoA. B.SnethenD. S.Influence of Curing Time on the Resilient Modulus of Chemically Stabilized Soils. Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2011, pp. 364–372. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ103369.
21.
SeedH.ChanC.LeeC. E.Resilience Characteristics of Subgrade Soils and Their Relation to Fatigue Failures in Asphalt Pavements. Proc., International Conference on the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1962, pp. 77–113. https://trid.trb.org/view/716093. Accessed April 26, 2020.
22.
HanZ.VanapalliS. K.State-of-the-Art: Prediction of Resilient Modulus of Unsaturated Subgrade Soils. International Journal of Geomechanics, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2016, p. 04015104. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000631.
23.
Abu-FarsakhM.DhakalS.ChenQ.Laboratory Characterization of Cementitiously Treated/Stabilized Very Weak Subgrade Soil Under Cyclic Loading. Soils and Foundations, Vol. 55, No. 3, 2015, pp. 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.04.003.
24.
SolankiP.ZamanM. M.DeanJ.Resilient Modulus of Clay Subgrades Stabilized With Lime, Class C Fly Ash, and Cement Kiln Dust for Pavement Design. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2010. 2186: 101–110.
25.
MohammadL. N.HuangB.PuppalaA. J.AllenA.Regression Model for Resilient Modulus of Subgrade Soils. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1999. 1687: 47–54.
26.
FredlundD. G.BerganA. T.WongP. K.Relation Between Resilient Modulus and Stress Research Conditions for Cohesive Subgrade Soils. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1977. 642: 73–81. http://worldcat.org/isbn/0309026717.
27.
DrummE. C.ReevesJ. S.MadgettM. R.TrolingerW. D.Subgrade Resilient Modulus Correction for Saturation Effects. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 7, 1997, pp. 663–670. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1997)123:7(663).
28.
ThompsonM. R.RobnettQ. L.Resilient Properties of Subgrade Soils. Transportation Engineering Journal, Vol. 105, No. 1, 1979, pp. 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1061/TPEJAN.0000772.
SeedH.MitryF.MonosmithC.ChanC.Prediction of Pavement Deflection From Laboratory Repeated Load Tests. Report No. 35. NCHRP. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1967.
31.
UzanJ.Characterization of Granular Material. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1985. 1022: 52–59.
32.
WitczakM. W.Harmonized Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Resilient Modulus for Flexible Pavement Design. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2003.
33.
PuppalaA. J.HoyosL. R.PotturiA. K.Resilient Moduli Response of Moderately Cement-Treated Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Aggregates. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 23, No. 7, 2011, pp. 990–998. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000268.
34.
BhuvaneshwariS.RobinsonR. G.GandhiS. R.Resilient Modulus of Lime Treated Expansive Soil. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2019, pp. 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-018-0610-z.
35.
ASTM. Annual Book of ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) Standards. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2019.
36.
NewmanK.TingleJ. S.Emulsion Polymers for Soil Stabilization. Proc., 2004 FAA Worldwide Airport Technology Transfer Conference, Atlantic City, NJ, 2004. http://eprints.uanl.mx/5481/1/1020149995.PDF.
AASHTOT 307-99. Standard Method of Test for Determining the Resilient Modulus of Soils and Aggregate Materials. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2017, pp. 1–14.
39.
OoiP. S. K.ArchillaA. R.SandefurK. G.Resilient Modulus Models for Compacted Cohesive Soils. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2004. 1874: 115–124.
40.
ZhangJ.PengJ.ZhengJ.DaiL.YaoY.Prediction of Resilient Modulus of Compacted Cohesive Soils in South China. International Journal of Geomechanics, Vol. 19, No. 7, 2019, p. 04019068. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001446.
41.
HeymsfieldE.TingleJ. S.State of the Practice in Pavement Structural Design/Analysis Codes Relevant to Airfield Pavement Design. Engineering Failure Analysis, Vol. 105, 2019, pp. 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.06.029.
42.
AdolfM.PCASE 2.09 User Manual. US Army Corps of Engineers, Transportation Systems Center & Engineering Rsearch and Development Center, 2010.
43.
JonesM. P.WitczakM. W.Subgrade Modulus of the San Diego Test Road. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1977. 641: 1–6.
