IGC 2009, Guntur, INDIA

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

MODEL STUDIES ON GEOFIBER-REINFORCED SOIL

B.V.S. Viswanadham
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai; Mumbai400 076, India.
E-mail: viswam@civil.iitb.ac.in
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is to present the effect of discrete and randomly distributed geofibers in:
i) restraining cracking tendency of clay barrier subjected to differential settlements, ii) reducing swelling tendency of moistcompacted expansive soil, and iii) Efficacy of geofiber-reinforced soil as a fill material through laboratory model studies. For
this purpose, a number of experiments were carried-out for determining the influence of geofibers having various dosages and
length. Two types of geofibers namely polypropylene and polyester fibers were used. Three types of soils were used. Based
on the analysis and interpretation of model studies on geofiber-reinforced soil, the mechanism of discrete fiber reinforcement
in restraining cracking, swelling and potential of geofiber-reinforced soil as a fill material of soil could be explained. It can be
clearly stated that the geofiber-reinforced soil is a very effective method and which helps to restrain cracking of clay barrier at
the onset of differential settlements, to use the expansive soil deposits at the construction sites, and to promote geofiberreinforced soil as a fill material. However, one of the key issues to be focused for successful implementation of technique in
the field is in evolving at a methodology for mixing geofibers with soil.
1. INTRODUCTION
The concept of reinforcing soil masses by including some
kind of fiber was practiced by early civilizations which used
soil mixed with straw or other available fiber to improve
durability and strength of the dried brick used as building
materials. They found that fibrous soil works better than natural
soil. Reinforced soils can be obtained by either incorporating
continuous reinforcement inclusions (e.g., sheet, strip or bar)
within a soil mass in a defined pattern (i.e., systematically
reinforced soils) or mixing discrete fibers randomly with a
soil fill (i.e., randomly reinforced soils). However, randomly
distributed fiber reinforced soils have recently attracted
increasing attention in geotechnical engineering. In comparison
with systematically reinforced soils, randomly distributed
fiber reinforced soils exhibit some advantages. Preparation of
randomly distributed fiber reinforced soils mimics soil
stabilization by admixture. Randomly distributed fibers offer
strength isotropy and limit potential planes of weakness that
can develop parallel to oriented reinforcement.
Past research has demonstrated that the inclusion of randomly
distributed discrete fibers significantly improve the engineering
response of soils (Maher & Ho 1994; Rodatz & Oltmanns
1997; Nataraj & McManis 1997; Ziegler et al. 1998; Puppala &
Musenda (2000); Miller & Rifai 2004; Viswanadham et al.
2006; Cai et al. 2006, Sivakumar Babu & Vasudevan. 2008a
2008b, Das et al. 2009; Viswanadham et al. 2009a, 2009b,
and 2009c). Maher & Ho (1994) studied the mechanical
properties of a kaolinite/fiber soil composite. Fiber types
used were polypropylene and fiber glass. The study showed
that fibers increased the shear strength of the soil and also
increased ductility of kaolinite. In addition, increasing water
content reduced the contribution of fibers to composite

strength and ductility. The study also showed that increasing

fiber content increases the hydraulic conductivity of the soil,
for the same fiber types and lengths tested. Polypropylene
fibers were used to reduce tension cracks and the amount of
shrink/swell in compacted clay. It was observed that the
inclusion of fibers increased the tensile strength and
hydraulic conductivity of clay and provides ductile behavior
to material, but increase was more prominent at higher fiber
contents (Maher & Ho 1994 & Ziegler et al. 1998). Nataraj
& McManis (1997) reported that the soil reinforced with
fiber is able to hold together more deformation and
subsequently higher stresses at rupture.
Ayyar et al. (1989) have reported about the efficacy of
randomly distributed coir fibers in reducing the swelling
tendency of the soil. The efficacy of combination of fly ash
and polypropylene fibers in reducing swelling and shrinkage
characteristics was also reported (Puppala & Musenda 2000;
Punthutaecha et al. 2006). Puppala & Musenda (2000) and
Punthutaecha et al. (2006) showed that fiber reinforcements
enhanced the unconfined compressive strength and reduced
the swelling potential of expansive clays. Cai et al. 2006
reported an increase in fiber content led to reduction in swelling
potential of lime stabilized clayey soil. Viswanadham et al.
2009b & 2009c have reported about the efficacy of randomly
distributed polypropylene tape fibers in reducing the swelling
tendency of the expansive soil.
Use of Discrete and Randomly Distributed Fiber (DRDF)
reinforcement technique to decrease a soil's crack potential
can be explored as one of the viable techniques to address the
problem of cracking of compacted clay barrier at the onset of
non-uniform settlements. This technique was investigated
earlier by Rodatz and Oltmanns (1997) to develop as a new

947

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

liner construction material for landfill covers, especially

when high mechanical and thermal loadings are anticipated.
Miller & Rifai (2004) have explored to evaluate the affect of
discrete and randomly distributed fibers on the tensile
strength-strain characteristics of clayey soil and to restrain
desiccation cracking in compacted clay barriers of waste
containment systems. Very recently, Viswanadham et al.
(2006) & Viswanadham et al. (2009a) have evaluated the
influence of discrete and randomly distributed fibers on the
integrity of clay based landfill covers subjected to non-uniform
settlements. Their results indicate the fiber reinforcement has
significant potential in restraining cracks and restricting the
propagation of cracks across the depth of the clay barrier.
Failure of geotechnical structures, such as levees, dams,
vertical cuts, embankments etc. is very common and in most
of the cases causative force behind these is seepage. Efficacy
of fiber reinforcement in reducing the seepage velocity and
improving the piping resistance of soils investigated by
Sivakumar Babu & Vasudevan (2008a) and Das et al. 2009.
As discussed, use of discrete and randomly distributed fiber
reinforcement technique has significant effect on the
engineering response of soils. Past research has demonstrated
that the inclusion of randomly distributed discrete geofibers
(flexible polymeric fibers) significantly improve the engineering
response of soils. However, further work in this direction is
limited. This paper presents studies enveloping the effect of
discrete and randomly distributed geofibers in restraining:
i) cracking tendency of clay barrier subjected to differential
settlements, ii) swelling tendency of moist-compacted
expansive soil, and iii) efficacy of geofiber-reinforced soil as
a fill material through laboratory model studies.
2. MODEL STUDIES ON GEOFIBER-REINFORCED
SOIL
In this paper, for the model studies on geofiber-reinforced
soil (Sections 2.1 and 2.3), a large beam centrifuge available
at IIT Bombay was used. A geotechnical centrifuge can be
used to perform tests on models that represent full-scale
prototypes under normal field conditions. A 1/N scale model
tested at a centrifugal acceleration N times the earths gravity
(g) experiences stress conditions identical to those in the
prototype. The above technique of modeling in geotechnical
engineering can be extended to model compacted clay
barriers reinforced with randomly distributed discrete fibers,
with an aim to study the response of randomly reinforced soil
liners subjected to continuous non-uniform deformations
created artificially in the centrifuge. Centrifuge modeling
was essential in this regard because the cracking of the soil
liner is highly influenced by the presence of prototype stress
conditions. Hence, the application of this technique to the
present context of study is regarded to be more relevant. The
4.5 m radius large beam centrifuge at Indian Institute of
Technology Bombay (IIT Bombay), India was used in the
present study. The centrifuge capacity is 250 g-ton with a
maximum payload of 2.5 t at 100 g and at higher acceleration

of 200 g the allowable payload is 0.625 t. The centrifuge has

a swing basket at one end and an adjustable counterweight at
the other end.
2.1 Effect of Fiber Reinforcement on the Integrity
of Clay Barriers
Although compacted clay barriers are most widely used all
over the world (wherever clays are abundantly available),
very few attempts have been made to evolve at a viable
solution to retain their integrity at the onset of non-uniform
settlements. In the recent past, the interest of using fibers has
arisen to improve compacted clay performance as hydraulic
barriers without changing physical properties of soil. Figure 1
presents a schematic representation of a deformed geofiberreinforced clay barrier of landfill cover at the onset of
different settlements (of the order of s1, s2,). Generally,
compacted clay barriers with thickness ranging from 0.6 m
1.5 m are provided along with a cover soil (including drainage
layer of 0.3 m thickness) of 1.5 m thickness in landfill covers.
Use of Discrete and Randomly Distributed Fiber (DRDF)
reinforcement technique to decrease a soil's crack potential
can be explored as one of the viable techniques to address the
problem of cracking of CSL at the onset of non-uniform
settlements. This technique was investigated earlier by Rodatz
& Oltmanns (1997) to develop as a new liner construction
material for landfill liners, especially when high mechanical
and thermal loadings are anticipated. However, further work
in this direction is limited. Very recently, Miller & Rifai
(2004) and Viswanadham et al. 2009a have explored to
evaluate the affect of discrete and randomly distributed fibers
on the tensile strength-strain characteristics of clayey soil and
to restrain desiccation cracking and cracking due to bending
in CCLs of waste containment systems. In this section,
assuming that identical fibers are used in both centrifuge
model and in the field (Viswanadham et al. 2009a), the
significance effect of fibers in restraining cracking of clay
barrier at the onset of bending was demonstrated through
centrifuge model tests.

948

Landfill cover

Geofiber-reinforced
clay barrier

Fig. 1: Schematic Cross-Section of Geofiber-Reinforced

Clay Barrier Subjected to Differential Settlements

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

The model soil barrier material was found to have a liquid

limit of 38%, plastic limit of 16%, coefficient of permeability
of 0.4 10- 9 m/s, maximum dry unit weight of 15.9 kN/m3
and optimum moisture content of 22% (standard Proctor
compaction test). The selected soil is classified as CL type
according to Unified soil Classification system. Polypropylene
tape fibers 1.2 mm width, 0.021 mm thickness, breaking load
of 48.54 N, and 22% elongation at break were used. A fiber
dosage of 0.5% by dry weight of soil and aspect ratio of 45
was used. This was fixed based on the results reported by
Viswanadham et al. (2009a). Aspect ratio is defined as ratio
of length to breadth of the fiber. This implies that the aspect
ratio of 45 indicates 90 mm long fibers. Detailed discussion of
on model preparation and test procedure are discussed in detail
by Viswanadham et al. (2009a). Figure 2 shows front elevation
of the model before commencement of centrifuge test.
Centrifuge tests were performed at 40 g by subjecting the model
to a constant angular velocity of 93 revolutions per minute.

25 mm (1.0 m in prototype dimensions), in the case of

geofiber-reinforced clay barrier, partial penetration of cracks
at the zone of maximum curvature can be noted. Figure 4
presents variation of maximum outer fiber strain with radius
at the zone of maximum curvature for models SSL4 and
BFL2. As can be noted, the geofiber reinforced clay barrier was
observed to have strain at crack initiation of 1.52% and
sustain large non-uniform settlements. In the case of unreinforced clay barrier, the strain at crack initiation was
observed to be only 0.65% and observed to crack at radius of
170 m itself. This brings out the significant potential of fiber
reinforcement in not only restraining cracking of clay barrier
but also limiting the penetration of cracks extending up to
mid-depth only. The inclusion of fibers as a reinforcing
material affected the deformation behaviour of compacted
soil liner compliance to non-uniform settlements. The
improved soil-fiber mix enhances the function of soil liners
and covers as hydraulic barriers for waste containment
systems of landfills by decreasing the cracking potential.

Fig. 2: Front Elevation of Prepared Centrifuge Model

before Centrifuge Test (model: BFL2)

949

Fig. 3: Status of Un-Reinforced and Geofiber Reinforced

Clay Barriers at the End of Centrifuge Test
5
SSL4

4
Strain (%)

Controlled in-flight simulation of non-uniform settlements of

landfill in a geotechnical centrifuge was carried out using a
trap-door arrangement. Digital image analysis technique was
found to be very useful in arriving at strain at crack initiation
and in understanding the propagation of cracks in clay barrier
with and without geofiber reinforcement subjected to nonuniform settlements. In this section, results of two models,
namely SSL4 and BFL2 were discussed. Both the models
were moist-compacted at it maximum dry unit weight and
optimum moisture content and were tested without any cover
soil. Though cover soil imposes a confinement of the order
of 20 kPa, in order to observe the strain at crack initiation
and crack propagation in the clay barrier with and without
fiber reinforcement, presence cover soil was not considered.
In the case of model BFL2, the model soil barrier was mixed
randomly with fibers with a dosage of 0.5% and having
length of 90 mm was used. Long fibers were considered to
prevent pull-out failure (Viswanadham et al. 2006, 2009a).
Figure 3 presents status of un-reinforced and geofiber
reinforced clay barrier cross-sections at the end of centrifuge
test. Even after subjecting to a central settlement equal to

BFL2
SSL4 (crack initiation)

BFL2 (crack initiation)

Un-reinforced
clay barrier

Geofiber-reinforced
clay barrier

0
10

100

1000

Radius at the zone of maximum curvature (m)

Fig. 4: Variation of Maximum Outer Fiber Strain with

Radius at the Zone of Maximum Curvature

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

2.2 Use of Fibers for Restraining Swelling Tendency of

Expansive Soil
The fiber begins to be used as an admixture for restraining
swelling of expansive soils, which was based on encouraging
results obtained from tests on fiber-reinforced clay soil.
Discrete and randomly distributed coir fibers restrained
swelling effectively (Viswanadham 1989). Punthutaecha
et al. (2006) studied the efficacy of combination of fly ash
and polypropylene fibers in reducing swelling and shrinkage
characteristics. Cai et al. (2006) reported that an increase in
fiber content reduced heave and brittleness of lime-stabilized
expansive soils. Fiber-reinforcement of expansive soils
reduced swell potential (Puppala & Musenda 2000).
Very recently, Viswanadham et al. (2009b) reported that fibers
were effective in reducing the swelling pressure and swell
potential of clayey soils significantly. The soil used in the
experimental investigation had a free swell index (FSI) of
93%. It was collected from a depth of 1.5 m in Pune,
Maharashtra, India. The soil was found to have a specific
gravity of 2.72, liquid limit of 71%, plasticity index of 41%
and shrinkage limit of 12%. The X-ray diffraction spectra gave
the following mineralogical composition: montmorillonite - 48
to 50%, quartz - 30 to 32%, calcite - 1516% and anatase 12%. The total cation exchange capacity of the soil was
47.5 meg/100 g. Based on the plasticity properties, the soil
was classified as CH according to Unified Soil Classification
System. The fiber used for reinforcing the expansive soil
specimens was a polypropylene fiber and were similar to
those described in Section 2.1. The fiber content f was varied
as 0%, 0.25% and 0.50% by dry weight of expansive soil.
The length of the fibers was varied as 30 mm, 60 mm and 90
mm. 1-D Swell tests were conducted on un-reinforced and
fiber-reinforced expansive soil samples in the laboratory. The
clay-fiber blends were prepared at their respective OMC and
MDD. For compaction of blends at the respective OMC and
MDD, the required weight of fibers along with the required
weight of the oven-dry soil was used. A twin semi-circular
shaped fabricated mould with a front Perspex sheet was
developed for testing. Digital imaging technique was used to
observe heave of the soil in both un-reinforced and fiberreinforced conditions.

was found to have given better results (see Fig 5). The points
corresponding to 2H/3 were lying above those corresponding
to H/3 for all cases because heave would be higher in the top
layers of the soil. Figure 6 presents relationship between
fiber reinforcement effect ratio and fiber length for two fiber
contents (f = 0.25% and f = 0.50%). Fiber reinforcement effect
ratio Ifr is defined as a ratio of heave in reinforced to unreinforced sample. As can be seen from Figure 6, for a fiber
content equal to 0.25% by dry weight of the soil, fiber
reinforcement effect ratio was found to be 2.5 for a fiber
length l equal to 60 mm. For f = 0.5%, the fiber reinforcement
effect ratio was found to be close to 3 for a fiber length equals
to 30 mm. An approximate trend was indicated for a fiber
content of 0.5% through a broken line in Figure 6. Relationship
between fiber reinforcement effect ratio Ifr with fiber length
suggests that for a fiber content of 0.25%, 60 mm long fibers

Displacement profiles obtained from image analysis were

used for interpreting swell or upward movement profiles of
the specimens. Heave observed in the digital image analysis
was compared with that obtained from dial gauge readings.
Reduction in heave was directly proportional to fiber content
and fiber length. Figure 5 shows the variation of heave of
horizontal planes H/3 and 2H/3 from the bottom of the tube
specimens with fiber length for different fiber contents
(0.25% and 0.50%). At H/3, vertical movement was better
controlled at lower fiber lengths itself when the fiber content
was higher (0.50%). However, at a smaller dosage of fiber
(0.25%), higher fiber length was needed for effective control
of heave. A fiber dosage of 0.25% at a higher fiber length
950

H = thickness of soil sample

Fig. 5: Variation of Heave Measured Through Digital

Image Analysis with Fiber Length at 48 Hours
(after Viswanadham et al. 2009c)

Fig. 6: Variation of Ifr with Fiber Length

(after Viswanadham et al. 2009c)

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

Reduction in heave was the maximum at low aspect ratios at

both the fiber contents of 0.25% and 0.5%. Test results revealed
that fiber length is a key factor that influences the reinforcing
effect of fiber. Discrete and randomly distributed fibers were
found efficacious in reducing heave. More details pertaining
to this topic are presented by Viswanadham et al. 2009c.
2.3 Efficacy of Geofiber-Reinforced Soil as a Fill Material
Failure of geotechnical structures, such as levees, dams,
vertical cuts, embankments etc. is very common and in most
of the cases causative force behind these is seepage. Due to
raise of ground water table, pore water pressure increases or
it can be said that the negative suction in the soil decreases
and consequently shear strength of soil slope decreases.
Therefore it is extremely important to evolve at a proper
slope stabilization technique to protect these geotechnical
structures. With an aim to develop an alternative fill material
using a soil prone to seepage, use of discrete and randomly
distributed fiber inclusions to restrain seepage induced slope
failure is explored. Several researchers, like Gray and Ohashi
1983, Sivakumar Babu & Vasudevan 2008a, 2008b, Das
et al. 2009) studied effect of discrete and randomly
distributed geofibers (flexible polymeric fibers) on engineering
properties of soils through experimental investigations.
Previous researchers suggest that silty-sand types of soils are
more prone to seepage-induced failure, hence properties of a
silty-sand was achieved by mixing 80% locally available fine
sand and 20% commercially available kaolin by dry weight
and that soil was used as model soil for the present study.
The soil used in the present study has sand size particles of
80%, silt size particles of 10% and clay particles of 10%. An
average particle size d50 equals to 0.25mm. According to
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) it is classified as
SM type soil. The Maximum Dry unit weight (MDD) and
Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) of a soil were found to
be 18.75kN/m3 and 8% according to standard Proctor
compaction. The cohesion and angle of internal friction angle
of soil compacted at MDD and OMC were found to be equal
to 11.6 kPa and 27 and were determined according to direct
shear test conducted on saturated soil samples (Das 2009).
Polyester fibers were used in the present study. Polyester
fibers are commercialized under the brand name Recron
3s. It has a triangular cross section for better anchoring with

other ingredients of the mix. Specific gravity of polyester

fibers was 1.33 and a tensile strength of 600 MPa. The fibers
were found to have 10 denier and an equivalent diameter in
the range of 3355 m.
The slope model was prepared within a metal strong box
having internal dimensions 760 mm 200 mm 410 mm
with one side made up of a thick acrylic sheet to observe the
slope model during the centrifuge test. The slope model was
prepared considering a half portion of an embankment. The
prototype dimensions were: height of slope 7.2 m, crest
width 7.5 m and inclination of slope 1H: 2V at 30 gravities.
The dimensions were so chosen that it will represent an
embankment which at just stable condition with a Factor of
Safety (FOS) around 1 without any rise in the ground water
table for the soil parameters given in Section 2.3. A global
failure was observed for an un-reinforced slope at the onset
of seepage, as shown in Figure 7a for model ADF2. Failure
was observed to initiate with formation of tension cracks at
the crest and followed by a typical circular failure surface. In
comparison, geofiber reinforced slope with the same boundary
conditions, was found to be stable even after subjecting to
seepage of 20days, as shown in Figure 7b for model ADF1.
Some localized failures were noted to take place near the toe
of the slope for model ADF1. Model ADF1 is reinforced
with polyester fibers having fiber content f = 0.1% and length
of 25 mm. These combinations were decided based on the
results reported by Das (2009).
9

6
Yp (m)

were required and for a fiber content of 0.50%, 30 mm long

fibers were required to have a maximum benefit of fiber
reinforcement in restraining heave of expansive soil deposits.
One of the alternatives to construct new pavements on
expansive soil subgrades is to replace with a well-graded soil
having good strength characteristics. However, if the volume
of the expansive soil to be removed is large, then it turns out
to be highly uneconomical and not feasible from environmental
considerations. In such situations, use of optimum combinations
for length and dosage of fibers appears to be a viable
methodology to reuse existing expansive soils.

0
0

10

12

14

16

Xp (m)

Fig. 7(a): Slope Profile after Centrifuge Model

Tests for an Un-Reinforced Slope Model ADF2
(in prototype dimensions)
Stability analysis of the seepage induced slopes was carried
out using limit equilibrium based software package SLOPE/W
using ordinary Bishops method of slices. During stability
analysis, the position of phreatic lines was plotted directly
from the measured PPT data obtained from the centrifuge
model tests (Das 2009). Factor of Safety (FOS) was
calculated for each stage of seepage. Initially when the pore
water pressure kept on increasing FOS remained constant up
to a certain limit. After that it gradually dropped as the pore

951

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

water pressure increased considerably. For an un-reinforced

slope ADF2, FOS dropped below 1 at normalized pore water
pressure ratio of about 0.45. In the case of ADF1, FOS
started decreasing at pore water pressure ratio 0.36 but it
never dropped below 1, as shown in Figure 8. Pore water
pressure ratio (u/h) is the ratio of pore water pressure
measured by a PPT placed at half distance from the crest of
the slope horizontally from the seepage tank simulator to unit
weight times height of the slope.

homogeneously mixed Geofiber-Reinforced Soil (GRS) as an

alternative fill material. It can be noted that each application
was found to have variable optimum combinations of fiber
content and fiber length. Preparation of randomly distributed
fiber reinforced soils mimics soil stabilization by admixture.
Discrete fibers are simply added and mixed with the soil,
much like cement, lime, or other additives. However, one of
the key issues to be focused for successful implementation of
technique in the field is in evolving at a methodology for
mixing geofibers with soil.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Masters students Mr B.K.
Jha, Mr. Arghya Das and current research scholars Mr S.
Rajesh, and Ms Divya Nair for their support and executing
tests. Thanks are due to the support extended by the staff at
National Geotechnical Centrifuge Facility of Indian Institute
of Technology Bombay for their assistance throughout the
centrifuge study and thanks are also due to M/s Reliance
Industries Limited, Mumbai and M/s TechFab (India),
Mumbai for supplying polyester/polypropylene fibers.

Yp (m)

0
0

10

12

14

16

Xp (m)

Fig. 7(b): Slope Profile after Centrifuge Model Tests for

Fiber-Reinforced Slope Model ADF1 (prototype dimensions)
1.3
1.2

FOS

1.1
1
f = 0.1%: l = 25 mm (ADF1)

0.9

Unreinforced (ADF2)
0.8
0

0.1

0.2

0.3
u/ h

0.4

0.5

0.6

Fig. 8: Variation of Factor of Safety with u/h

This indicates that fibers can hold soil particles, restrict their
movement and consequently increased the FOS, even at very
high pore water pressures. Identical behaviour was observed
through physical centrifuge model test. Results of this study
indicate that the homogeneously mixed Geofiber Reinforced
Soil (GRS) can be an alternative fill material for constructing
levees, earthen dams, and other irrigation structures.
3. CONCLUSIONS
It can be clearly stated that the geofiber-reinforced soil is a
very effective method and which helps to restrain cracking of
clay barrier at the onset of differential settlements, to use the
expansive soil deposits at the construction sites, and to use

REFERENCES
Ayyar, T.S.R., Krishnaswamy, N.R. and Viswanadham,
B.V.S. (1989). Geosynthetics for Foundations on a
Swelling Clay, Proceedings of International Workshop
on Geotextiles, Bangalore, India, pp. 176180.
Cai, Y., Shi, B., Ng, C.W.W. and Tang, C. (2006). Effect of
Polypropylene Fiber and Lime Admixture on Engineering
Properties of Clayey Soil, Journal of Engineering
Geology, 87(34): 230240.
Das, Arghya (2009). Centrifuge Model Studies on the
Behaviour of Geofiber Reinforced Slopes Subjected to
Seepage, Masters of Technology Dissertation. Indian
Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India.
Das, Arghya, Jayashree, Ch. and Viswanadham, B.V.S.
(2009). Effect of Randomly Distributed Geofibers on the
Piping Behaviour of Embankments Constructed with Fly
Ash as a Fill Material, Geotextiles and Geomembranes,
27(4):341349.
Gray, D.H. and Ohashi, H. (1983). Mechanics of Fiber
Reinforcing in Sand, J. Geotech. Engg., ASCE,
109(3):335353.
Maher, M.H. and Ho, Y.C. (1994). Mechanical Properties
of Kaolinite/Fiber Soil Composite, Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 120(8): 13811393.
Miller, C.J. and Rifai, S. (2004). Fiber Reinforcement for
Waste Containment Soil Liners, J. of Environmental
Engineering, ASCE, 130(8): 891895.
Nataraj, M.S. and McManis, K.L. (1997). Strength and
Deformation Properties of Soils Reinforced with Fibrillated
Fibers, Geosynthetics International, 4(1): 6579.

952

Model Studies on Geofiber-Reinforced Soil

Punthutaecha, K., Puppala, A.J., Vanapalli, S.K. and Inyang,

H. (2006). Volume Change Behaviours of Expansive
Soils Stabilized with Recycled Ashes and Fibers, Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
ASCE, 18(2): 295306.
Puppala, A. and Musenda, C. (2000). Effects of Fiber
Reinforcement on Strength and Volume Change in
Expansive Soils, Transportation Research Record, 1736,
pp. 134140.
Rodatz, W. and Oltmanns, W. (1997). Permeability and StressStrain Behaviour of Fiber-Reinforced Soils for Landfill
Liner Systems, Advanced Landfill Liner Systems, H.
August, U. Holzlohner and T. Meggyes (Eds.), Thomas
Telford (Pubs.), 321332.
Sivakumar Babu, G.L. and Vasudevan, A.K. (2008a).
Seepage Velocity and Piping Resistance of Coir Fiber
Mixed Soils, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering, ASCE, 134(4): 485492.
Sivakumar Babu, G.L. and Vasudevan, A.K. (2008b).
Strength and Stiffness Response of Coir FiberReinforced Tropical Soil, Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, ASCE, 20(9): 571577.
Viswanadham, B.V.S., Jha, B.K. and Sengupta, S.S. (2009b).
Centrifuge Testing of Fiber Reinforced Soil Liners for
Waste Containment Systems, Journal of Practice

Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste

Management, ASCE, 13(1): 4558.
Viswanadham, B.V.S., Phanikumar, B.R. and Mukherjee,
R.V. (2009a). Swelling Behaviour of a Geofiber-Reinforced
Expansive Soil, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 27(1): 73
76.
Viswanadham, B.V.S., Phanikumar, B.R. and Mukherjee,
R.V. (2009c). Effect of Geofiber Reinforcement on
Swelling Behavior of an Expansive Soil, Geosynthetics
International, 26(5) (In press).
Viswanadham, B.V.S., Sengupta, S.S. and Muthukumaran,
A.E. (2006). Studies on the Deformation Behaviour of
Randomly Reinforced Soil Liners in a Geocentrifuge,
Proc. 8th International Conference on Geosynthetics, 18
22, September 2006, Yokohama, Japan, 4, pp. 16711674.
Zhang, Z., Farrag, K. and Morvant, M. (2003). Evaluation
of the Effect of Synthetic Fibers and Nonwoven Geotextile
Reinforcement on the Stability of Heavy Clay
Embankments, FHWA/LA.03/373. Louisiana Transportation Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA,
pp. 719.
Ziegler, S., Leshchinsky, D., Ling, H.I. and Perry, E.B. (1998).
Effect of Short Polymeric Fibers on Crack Development
in Clays, Soils and Foundations, 38(1): 247253.

953