Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CBR Vs Index Properties of Soil
CBR Vs Index Properties of Soil
ABSTRACT: Value of CBR is often required for geotechnical solutions of engineering road structures. For area
development projects using fillings requires placement of such fillings in proper order for high strength and low
compressibility. Huge quantity of filling material is used for construction of sub grade and CBR value for all such fills is
very important parameter and need to be assessed. But due to high cost and time requirement for such testing it generally
becomes difficult to map the variation in their value along the alignment. Correlations of CBR from different index
properties have been made by different researchers. However the validity and applicability of such correlation need to be
established for their acceptances in general practice. The predicted and tested values of CBR of various soils have been
used to check the applicability and limitations of available methods and are presented in this paper.
INTRODUCTION
Large scale road constructions are taking place over the
length and breadth of India due to adoption of highly
intensified activities in road construction like Pradhan
Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) and Golden
Quadrilateral Project etc. Almost the entire road network
consists of flexible pavements. For the design of flexible
pavement, CBR value is one of the important parameters.
Flexible pavement design in India was standardized in 1970
by the IRC which gives design curves from which the
thickness of different pavement layers for a given traffic
load and CBR value can be found. For the design of
flexible pavement, throughout the whole road, soil samples
at a certain distance are taken for the determination of CBR
value of soil sub grade. On the basis of these result, the
whole road is designed. However values obtained from tests
on soil samples collected from limited numbers of location
cannot be the representative value of the whole road.
Because throughout the road, such soils may have large
variations in their engineering properties due to variety of
reasons. So it is always difficult for transportation engineers
to obtain representative CBR values for use in design of
flexible pavement. This can be avoided only if large
numbers of soil samples are taken at a very short interval
throughout the road and consequently the number of CBR
tests will be large. CBR value can be measured directly in
the laboratory in accordance with IS 2720 part 16 on soil
samples acquired from site. Laboratory test takes at least
four days to measure the CBR value for each soil sample.
Though the procedure for evaluation of CBR is simple but
it is time consuming and costly because of the laborious
laboratory work involved. This would result in serious
delay in the progress of the project since in most situations
the materials for earthwork construction come from highly
variable sources. Any delay in the construction inevitably
leads to escalation of project cost. So it is not really
possible to take large numbers of samples. Not only for
design but after construction at the time of checking quality
also it may become very problematic. Since in the present
scenario quality control becomes very important, so during
131
PI
OMC
MDD
CBR
(SOAKED)
25
23.5
23
28.5
31.5
26.5
27
31
33
31
35
36
37
36
40.5
37
44.5
43
42
47
36.5
40
48
43
43
37
44.4
39
7
8.5
8
11.5
13.5
11.5
11
14
13
19
17
17
17
14.5
21
15.5
21.5
21
21
26
14.5
19
26
25
26
19.1
22.4
20.5
12
14
11.5
14.5
14.5
18
16.4
15.6
14.3
16.5
17.6
16
17.8
17
17
21.4
21.9
19
19.9
19
16
18.5
15.5
19
19.7
16.5
18.6
20.85
1.844
1.768
1.89
1.827
1.794
1.71
1.79
1.81
1.787
1.89
1.82
1.7
1.53
1.75
1.65
1.55
1.69
1.68
1.52
1.702
1.70
1.651
1.722
1.692
1.66
1.706
1.76
1.63
18.3
10.88
15.1
7.3
5.6
5
5.9
8.5
7.3
7
6.5
5.5
3.0
4.0
2.38
3.14
4.12
4.0
3.28
2.65
4.85
4.41
3.9
3.36
3.0
3.2
3.75
2.4
4.93
5.60
4.13
4.06
4.49
5.18
4.21
3.81
4.73
1.56
2.72
5.47
8.11
4.46
5.73
6.76
3.42
4.55
7.28
3.67
5.70
5.43
4.37
3.95
4.24
5.01
3.04
4.97
18.3
10.88
15.1
7.3
5.6
5
5.9
8.5
7.3
7
6.5
5.5
3.0
4.0
2.38
3.14
4.12
4.0
3.28
2.65
4.85
4.41
3.9
3.36
3.0
3.2
3.75
2.4
132
133
REFERENCES
1. Chandrasekhar, B.P., Vinayak Rao, V.R., and Prasada
Raju, G.V.R.(2003), A comprehensive study of soil
CBR assessment through Cleggs Impact test, Field and
Laboratory CBR test , Indian Highways, Vol31, No 7,
39-45
2. IRC: 37-1970,Guidelines for Flexible Pavement
Design, Indian Road Congress, New Delhi 1970
3. IRC: 37-2001,Guidelines for Flexible Pavement
Design. Indian Road Congress, New Delhi 2001
4. Karunaprema, K.A.K. and Edirisinghe, A.G.H.J.
(2002), A Laboratory study to establish some useful
relationship for the case of Dynamic Cone Penetration ,
Electronic journal of Geotechnical Engineering. Vol.7
5. Kaur,S., Boveja, V.B., and Agarwal, A. (2011),
Artificial Neural Network Modeling for Prediction of
CBR , Indian Highways, Vol. 39 , No 1, 31-38
6. Kumar , P., et el (2000), An Indigenous Impact Tester
for measuring Insitu CBR of Pavement Materials,
Highway Research Bulletin, IRC, No 63, 13-22
7. Patel, R. S. and Desai, M.D.(2010), CBR Predicted by
Index Properties of Soil for Alluvial Soils of South
Gujarat , Indian Geotechnical Conference, Proc. IGC,
Vol. I, 79-82
8. Roy,T.K. Chattopadhyay, B.C. & Roy, S.K.(2009)
Prediction of CBR from Compaction Characteristics of
Cohesive Soil, Highway Research Journal, July-Dec.,
77-88
9. Venkatraman, T.S., Samson ,M. And Ambili , T.S.
(1995), Correlation between CBR and Clegg Impact
Value , Proc. Nat. Sem. On emerging trends in
Highway Engineering, Centre for Transportation
Engineering, Bangalore, Vol. I , 25.1-25.5
10. Vinod, P. & Cletus Reena ,(2008), Prediction of CBR
value of Lateritic Soils using Liquid Limit and
Gradation Characteristics Data, Highway Research
Journal, Vol. I, No. 1,89-98