Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No.

Influence of tire fiber inclusions on shear strength of

sand
A. Edinçliler1 and V. Ayhan2
1
Associate Professor Dr, Earthquake Engineering Department, Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake
Research Institute, Bogazici University, Cengelkoy, Istanbul, Turkey, Telephone: +90 216 516 3225,
Telefax: +90 212 263 2204, E-mail: [email protected]
2
NAVA Construction Company, Aydin, Turkey, Telephone and fax: +90 533 521 1007,
E-mail: [email protected]

Received 31 July 2009, revised 29 March 2010, accepted 4 May 2010

ABSTRACT: Reinforcement of soils with natural and synthetic fibers is a viable technique for
increasing the soil strength. The objective of this study is to reinforce sand with tire waste
inclusions. In this study, two different experimental programs were performed. In the first program,
sand, tire crumb and tire crumb–sand mixtures were tested in the standard direct shear test
equipment to observe the optimum content for modifying the shear strength properties of the sand.
In the second program, large-scale direct shear tests were performed to observe the shear strength
improvement imparted by tire waste inclusions. Two different processed tire wastes were used: tire
crumb (TC) and fiber-shaped tire buffings (TB). The tire buffings were divided into two parts for
representing different aspect ratios (TB1 and TB2). The following factors were studied to evaluate
the influence of TC, TB1 and TB2 inclusions on the shear strength: normal stress, tire waste type,
aspect ratio, and tire waste content. Three factors were found to significantly affect the shear
strength values: normal stress, aspect ratio, and tire waste content. Also, it is seen that increasing
the aspect ratio of the fibers increases the shear strength of the mixture.

KEYWORDS: Geosynthetics, Waste tire, Reinforcement, Shear strength, Tire buffings, Embankment

REFERENCE: Edinçliler, A. & and Ayhan, V. (2010). Influence of tire fiber inclusions on shear
strength of sand. Geosynthetics International, 17, No. 4, 183–192. [doi: 10.1680/gein.2010.17.4.183]

1. INTRODUCTION sions (Gray and Ohashi 1983; Gray and Al-Refeai 1986).
Soil reinforcement is an effective and reliable technique The increase in strength and stiffness is reported to be a
for improving soil strength. In conventional reinforced-soil function of sand characteristics, e.g. particle size, shape,
structures, the inclusions (bars, grids, fabrics, strips etc.) and gradation; of fiber characteristics, e.g. weight fraction,
are either oriented in a preferred direction (e.g. system- aspect ratio, skin friction, and modulus of elasticity; and
atically reinforced soils), or discrete elements of fibers are of test conditions, e.g. confining stress (Gray and Maher
mixed into the soil (i.e. randomly reinforced soils). The 1989; Maher and Gray 1990; Al-Refeai 1991). It is
discrete fibers are simply added and mixed randomly with reported that the strength of reinforced sand increases with
the soil, in much the same way as cement, lime or other increase in fiber content, aspect ratio, and soil fiber
additives. Thus, by using randomly distributed fibers, a surface friction.
greater strength isotropy and the absence of potential The improvement of the engineering properties due to
planes of weakness is maintained. the inclusion of discrete fibers has been determined to be
Experimental results reported by various researchers a function of a variety of parameters, including fiber type,
(McGown et al. 1978; Verma and Char 1978; Hoare 1979; fiber length, aspect ratio (length/diameter), fiber content,
Gray and Ohashi 1983; Gray and Al-Refeai 1986; Gray orientation, and soil properties. The discrete fibers are
and Maher 1989; Maher and Gray 1990; Al-Refeai 1991) mixed randomly with soil in certain weight proportions,
have shown that fiber reinforcement causes a significant and these randomly used fibers lead to important advan-
improvement in the strength and stiffness of sand. More tages. One of the primary advantages of randomly dis-
importantly, fiber-reinforced soil exhibits greater extensi- tributed fibers is the absence of potential planes of
bility and a small loss of post-peak strength (greater weakness, which can develop parallel to oriented rein-
ductility in the composite material), as compared with forcement. The peak strength (shear, compressive, tensile,
sand alone or sand reinforced with high-modulus inclu- etc.) increased with increasing fiber content and length up
1072-6349 # 2010 Thomas Telford Ltd 183

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 184 Edinçliler and Ayhan

to a limiting amount of each, beyond which no additional using tire chips. These studies have shown that the
benefits were observed (Gray and Ohashi 1983; Gray and addition of tire chips increases the shear strength of sand,
Al-Refeai 1986; Arteaga 1989; Gray and Maher 1989; with friction angles as large as 658 being obtained for
Maher and Ho 1994; Ranjan et al. 1996; Webster and mixtures of dense sand containing 30% tire chips by
Santoni 1997). The inclusion of discrete fibers increased volume. The corresponding friction angle of sand alone
both the cohesion and the angle of internal friction of the was only 348.
specimens. The increase in cohesion of typically cohesion- Foose et al. (1996) investigated the feasibility of using
less materials due to the inclusion of discrete fibers was shredded waste tires to reinforce sand. Large-scale direct
termed the ‘apparent cohesion’ of the material (Arteaga shear tests were conducted on mixtures of dry sand and
1989; Liausu and Juran 1995; Stauffer and Holtz 1995). tire shreds. The authors investigated the effect of five
This paper focuses mainly on determining the possibi- factors affecting shear strength: normal stress, sand matrix
lity of using tire waste to reinforce sand. Processed tire unit weight, shred content, shred length, and shred orienta-
wastes—tire crumb (TC) and two different sizes of tire tion. They found that shred content and sand matrix unit
buffings (TB1 and TB2)—were used to assess the effect weight were the most significant characteristics affecting
of tire waste inclusions on the shear strength of the sand. the shear strength of the mixture.
Standard and large-scale direct shear tests were performed Attom (2006) conducted direct shear tests to study the
to observe the effect of normal stress, waste type, aspect shear strength behavior of mixtures of sand and shredded
ratio, and tire waste content in modifying the properties of tires under specific conditions. They reported that the
the sand. The test results are used to assess the suitability addition of shredded waste tires increased both the angle
of the composite materials for embankment construction. of internal friction and the shear strength of the sands.
Ghazavi and Sakhi (2005) studied the usefulness of
optimizing the size of waste tire shreds on the shear
2. BACKGROUND strength parameters of sand reinforced with shredded
The increasing stockpiles of tire waste have led to an waste tires. Different shred contents, shred widths and
interest in the development of new ways to reuse or aspect ratios were mixed with the sand at two different
recycle tire wastes. Tire wastes can be used with soil sand matrix unit weights and tested in a large shear box.
(ASTM D6270). Using tire wastes in embankment con- Thet found that shred content, shred width, shred aspect
struction is increasing as a result of the limited availability ratio for a given width, compaction, and normal stress are
of natural resources, and the increasing cost of disposal. influencing factors on the shear strength of the mixtures.
Because of their low unit weight, high strength and The shear strength of a mixture of tire shreds and soil is
widespread availability, tire wastes are finding increasing affected mainly by the confining stresses, the tire shred–
use as lightweight fill for embankment construction on soil ratio and the density of the mixture. In mixtures of
weak, compressible foundation soils (Bernal et al. 1997; tire shreds and sand, the tire shreds have a reinforcing
Humphrey 2007). Waste tires are processed to form tire effect (Edil and Bosscher 1992; Ahmed 1993; Foose 1993;
shreds, tire chips or tire crumbs. Another form of waste Edil and Bosscher 1994; Bernal et al. 1996; Hataf and
tire is tire buffings. These are the by-product of the tire Rahimi 2006).
retread process. Tire wastes are used as an additive to In the literature, there are some studies performed on
modify the properties of soil, rather than on their own as a tire shreds and tire chip–sand mixtures. The use of tire
fill material. buffings as a reinforcement element in sand is not a well-
Results of the literature studies of tire waste inclusions known technique, but there have been a few studies, by
in soil are summarized below. Edincliler et al. (2004) and Edincliler (2007).
Humphrey et al. (1993) sourced tire chips from three Edincliler et al. (2004) conducted large-scale direct
different companies, and conducted large-scale direct shear tests with tire buffings, sand, and sand–tire buffings
shear tests. Tire chip lengths smaller than 72 mm were mixtures with 10% tire buffings by weight. The tire
used in the tests. The authors reported friction angles buffings tested in their study had thicknesses ranging
ranging between 198 and 258 and cohesion of 7.7–8.6 kPa. between 1 and 4 mm and lengths ranging from 2 to
They stated that tire chips are useful in constructing 40 mm. They reported that the addition of 10% by weight
lightweight embankments over soft soils. of tire buffings to sand alters the deformation behavior of
Tatlisoz et al. (1998) conducted large-scale direct shear the mixture by stiffening the material at low strains, and
tests with tire chips, sand, sandy silt, and mixtures of sand softening it at large strains. Edincliler (2007) studied the
and tire chips, and sandy silt and tire chips. They reported use of waste tire–soil mixtures for embankment construc-
that the shear strength of the sand–tire mixtures increased tion. Large-scale direct shear tests were performed with
with increasing tire chip contents up to 30% by volume. sand, tire buffings, and mixtures with 5%, 10%, 20% and
In contrast, the friction angle of the sandy silt–chip 30% tire buffings by weight. The sand and tire buffings
mixtures was nearly independent of tire chip content. characteristics were the same as in the study by Edincliler
However, the shear strength of the sandy silt–tire chip et al. (2004). The laboratory test results showed that the
mixtures increased with increasing tire chip content, addition to sand of 10% of tire buffings by weight alters
primarily as the result of an increase in apparent cohesion. the deformation behavior of the mixture. Fiber-shaped tire
Ahmed (1993), Ahmed and Lovell (1993) and Edil and buffings stiffen the composite at low strains but soften it
Bosscher (1994) reported that sand can be reinforced at large strains. The initial stiffening of the shear stress–
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Influence of tire fiber inclusions on shear strength of sand 185
100
displacement characteristic may be considered to be an 90 Sand
advantage under low-strain cyclic loading, such as traffic 80

Per cent finer (%)

Tire crumb
70
loading, becaise of thr earlier mobilization of shear 60 Tire buffings
strength. 50
Ozkul and Baykal (2006) studied the compaction and 40
30
shear strength behavior of clay with tire buffings inclu- 20
sions. Mixtures of low-plasticity kaolinitic clay with 10% 10
0
by dry weight of tire buffing inclusions were prepared at 0.01 0.1 1 10
both standard and modified compaction energy. The Grain size (mm)
drained and undrained responses of the clay and composite
Figure 1. Grain size distribution curves of sand, tire crumb
soils were evaluated using the direct shear test. It was
and tire buffings
found that the drained shear strength of the clay was
essentially unchanged by the introduction of tire buffings,
nor by an increase in the level of compaction energy larger than 50 mm long were discarded so that the tests
employed. for tire buffings could be conducted in large-scale direct
Edincliler et al. (2004), Ozkul and Baykal (2006) and shear test equipment without significant boundary effects.
Edincliler (2007) have determined that the use of tire In this study, sieves no. 4 and no. 10 were used for grading
buffings as an additive causes the modification of the soil the tire buffings. Sieving does not convey much informa-
properties. tion on the actual dimensions, since most particles are
elongated in shape. For this reason, the sizes of the tire
buffings used in the tests were controlled by visual
3. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY observation.
For this study, the tire were graded and divided into two
3.1. General different groups. Group TB1 had thicknesses between 2.0
In this study, two different experimental programs were and 4.0 mm, and lengths ranging from 8 to 10 mm. TB2
conducted. Standard and large-scale direct shear tests were comprised samples with thicknesses ranging from 4.0 to
performed to determine the shear strength properties of 5.0 mm and lengths ranging from 10 to 50 mm. The aspect
sand with the inclusion of the tire wastes (Ayhan 2007). In ratio for TB1 ranged from 2 to 5 (average 3.0), and that
the first experimental program, sand, tire crumb and tire for TB2 ranged from 2 to 12.5 (average 7.0). During
crumb–sand mixtures were tested in the standard direct grading, it was seen that the tire buffings were composed
shear test equipment to observe the optimum content for of 34.5% of TB2 (retained on sieve no. 4), 33.5% of TB1
modifying the properties of the sand. In the second (retained on sieve no. 10) and 32% of dust (Figure 2). The
experimental program, large-scale direct shear tests were dust fraction, for which the particle size definition is finer
undertaken to observe the shear strength improvement than sieve no. 10 (2 mm), was eliminated. The average
induced by tire waste inclusion, and the test results are specific gravity of the tire buffings was found to be 1.08.
compared for the suitability of composite materials for
embankment constructions. Two different processed tire
wastes were used: tire crumb and fiber-shaped tire
3.3. Equipment and methods
buffings. The tire buffings were divided into two groups
(TB1 and TB2) to represent the different aspect ratios. In In the first experimental program, a standard direct shear
the second experimental program, the effects of processing test device (60 mm 3 60 mm) was used to observe the
type, normal stress, tire waste content and aspect ratio behavior of the tire waste–sand mixtures. To observe the
were determined. In the last part, the effect of tire waste changes of shear strength of the sample with the addition
inclusion as a reinforcing element is evaluated. of tire waste, samples with changing ratios from 0 to
100% were prepared. Sand, tire crumb and sand–tire
3.2. Materials crumb mixtures containing 15% (STC15), 25% (STC25),
The sand used was considered to be representative of 40% (STC40), 50% (STC50) and 75% (STC75) tire crumb
granular fill material commonly used in embankments, as by weight were tested. Tests were performed under normal
it has a uniform and well-graded grain size distribution
(Figure 1). The specific gravity of sand was found to be
2.74. The granular tire waste as tire crumb used in this
study was obtained from a company in Istanbul. Its
specific gravity was found to be 1.08, its particle size was
between 1 and 3 mm, and its aspect ratio was 1.
Tire buffings are a by-product of the tire retread
process, and have an elongated fibrous shape with variable
length. They were found in many dimensional forms,
(a) (b) (c)
including very fine particles of tire dust. The particle size
distribution of the tire buffings, as obtained from the
retreading industry, is also shown in Figure 1. Particles Figure 2. Graded tire buffings: (a) dust; (b) TB1; (c) TB2
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 186 Edinçliler and Ayhan

stresses of 25, 50 and 100 kPa. All tests were performed shows a general decrease. However, if the combined shear
according to ASTM D 3080. strengths are compared, it is seen that the addition of tire
In the second experimental program, a large-scale direct waste to sand does improve its shear strength. The shear
shear test equipment (300 mm 3 300 mm) designed and strength reaches a maximum value within a certain range
manufactured at Bogazici University was used (Baykal of tire waste content. This optimum tire crumb content is
1997). Vertical pressure was applied by means of an air approximately 15% by weight. From the results, it is
compressor, pressure regulator and air bag. Load readings clearly seen that tire waste content and normal stresses
were taken with a moment-compensated load cell, and have a significant effect on the improvement of the sand
axial deflections were measured by means of displacement properties. Figure 3 shows the change of internal friction
transducers. The maximum and minimum relative densi- angle with tire crumb addition. From Table 1, the highest
ties for the various composites were determined. The value of internal friction angle is obtained for the tire
calculated average relative densities were used to prepare crumb–sand mixture with 15% tire crumb (STC15), and
the test specimens. The specimens were well mixed in this value is slightly higher than that of sand alone. The
order to obtain uniform mixtures. In the experiments, care shear strengths in Table 1 show a slight decreasing trend
was taken to distribute the tire buffings in the mixture as with increasing tire content beyond 30%. Thus an upper-
randomly as possible. This was controlled by visual bound tire content of 30% was chosen for testing in the
observation. Test specimens were compacted in three large-scale direct shear box.
layers using a standard Proctor drop rammer. Each layer
was compacted to reach a prescribed thickness determined 4.2. Results of large-scale direct shear tests
prior to starting a test. When the sample was prepared at a Figure 4 shows the curves of shear stress against horizon-
prescribed unit weight, the normal stress was applied, and tal displacement for sand only. The shear stress initially
then the sample was sheared. increases rapidly, but the curve flattens when the horizon-
The first experimental program was used to determine tal displacement reaches 10 mm. Similar cirves for the
an upper-bound tire content ratio for the tests to be three types of tire waste (TC, TB1 and TB2) are shown in
conducted in the second experimental program. In this Figure 5. For TC, the shear stress increases until the
second program, sand alone and 100% tire waste compo- horizontal displacement reaches 45 mm. For TB1, the
nents TC, TB1 and TB2 were tested in the large direct increase in shear stress values is similar for tests con-
shear box. Three groups of tests on mixtures of sand and ducted under different normal pressures. The shear stress
TC, TB1 and TB2 at mix ratios of 10%, 20% and 30% by values under 20 and 40 kPa pressure are nearly indentical
weight were also conducted in the same shear box. until 25 mm displacement. The observations for TB2 are
During the tests, 20 kPa, 40 kPa and 80 kPa of normal similar.
stress was applied to each material tested. The tests were The test results for TC10, TC20 and TC30 are given in
continued until a constant shear stress value was reached. Figure 6. The shear stress increases rapidly as the

35
Internal friction angle

30
4. RESULTS 25
(degrees)

4.1. Results of standard direct shear tests 20

15
The results of the standard direct shear tests show the 10
effects of mixing tire crumb with sand on the shear 5
strength parameters. The test data and shear strength 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
parameters for tire crumb and sand mixtures are sum- Tire crumb (%)
marized in Table 1. The cohesion values showed unsteady
values, but these values are not the exact values; they are Figure 3. Internal friction angle against tire crumb
the apparent cohesion values. The internal friction angle percentage for standard direct shear tests

Table 1. Results of standard direct shear tests

Parameter Shear stress (kPa)

Sand STC15 STC25 STC40 STC50 STC75 TC100

Normal stress (kPa)

25 8.50 11.80 17.80 16.90 21.10 11.30 7.90
50 31.30 32.10 35.80 29.90 26.80 31.30 11.30
100 37.80 61.50 57.50 60.60 61.50 54.10 14.90
tan
0.42 0.66 0.51 0.58 0.55 0.55 0.09
Friction angle,
(degrees) 32.90 33.40 27.30 30.40 29.20 29.00 25.20
Cohesion, c (kPa) 0.00 1.50 6.90 1.60 3.80 0.00 6.10
Unit weight, ª (kN/m3 ) 14.60 13.60 11.70 9.10 8.50 7.60 5.80

Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Influence of tire fiber inclusions on shear strength of sand 187
100 100
90 90

Shear stress (kPa)

80 80
Shear stress (kPa)

70 σn ⫽ 80 kPa
70
60 σn ⫽ 80 kPa 60
50 50
40 40 σn ⫽ 40 kPa
σn ⫽ 40 kPa 30
30 σn ⫽ 20 kPa
20
20 σn ⫽ 20 kPa
10
10
0
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Horizontal displacement (mm) Horizontal displacement (mm)
(a)

Figure 4. Shear stress against horizontal displacement for 100

sand 90
80

Shear stress (kPa)

100 70
90 60 σn ⫽ 80 kPa
80 50
Shear stress (kPa)

70 40 σn ⫽ 40 kPa
60 30
σn ⫽ 20 kPa
50 20
40 σn ⫽ 80 kPa 10
30 0
σn ⫽ 40 kPa 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
20
σn ⫽ 20 kPa Horizontal displacement (mm)
10
(b)
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 100
Horizontal displacement (mm) 90
(a) 80
Shear stress (kPa)

100 70
90 60 σn ⫽ 80 kPa
80 50
σn ⫽ 40 kPa
Shear stress (kPa)

40
70
30 σn ⫽ 20 kPa
60
20
50
10
40
0
30 σn ⫽ 80 kPa 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
20 σn ⫽ 40 kPa Horizontal displacement (mm)
10 σn ⫽ 20 kPa (c)
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Figure 6. Shear stress against horizontal displacement for:
Horizontal displacement (mm)
(b)
(a) TC10; (b) TC20; (c) TC30
100
90 displacement increases. For TB1-10, under 20 and 40 kPa
80
pressure, the shear stresses reach their maximum value at
Shear stress (kPa)

70
an average displacement of 17 mm, whereas the shear
60
50 stress under 80 kPa pressure reaches its maximum value at
40 a displacement of 35 mm. The behavior under the lower
30 σn ⫽ 80 kPa pressures indicates that the mixture is still dominated by
20 σn ⫽ 40 kPa the sand. For TB1-20, at an average displacement value of
10 σn ⫽ 20 kPa 15 mm, all the test results under normal stresses of 20, 40
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 and 80 kPa increase slightly. The strength increase con-
Horizontal displacement (mm) tinues up to displacements in excess of 40 mm. For TB1-
(c) 30, the mixtures tested under the two lower normal
stresses show similar behavior, with maximum shear
Figure 5. Shear stress against horizontal displacement for:
(a) TC; (b) TB1; (c) TB2
strength reached at about 20 mm displacement. The mix-
ture tested under 80 kPa normal stress continues to show
an increase in shear stress up to about 50 mm displace-
horizontal displacement increases, and all three composi- ment.
tions reach constant shear stress values at an average Figure 8 shows the results of direct shear tests with
displacement of 20 mm. TB2 inclusions. For TB2-10, the shear stress rapidly
The results for mixtures of sand and TB1 at different reaches maximum values at average horizontal displace-
ratios are given in Figure 7. For all three mixtures, the ments of 15 mm, 40 mm and 50 mm for tests conducted at
shear stress initially increases rapidly as the horizontal 20 kPa, 40 kPa and 80 kPa normal stress, respectively. For
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 188 Edinçliler and Ayhan
100 100
90 90
80 σn ⫽ 80 kPa

Shear stress (kPa)

80
Shear stress (kPa)

70 σn ⫽ 80 kPa 70
60
60
50 σn ⫽ 40 kPa
50
σn ⫽ 40 kPa 40
40 30 σn ⫽ 20 kPa
30 σn ⫽ 20 kPa 20
20 10
10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Horizontal displacement (mm)
Horizontal displacement (mm) (a)
(a) 100
100 90
80

Shear stress (kPa)

90 σn ⫽ 80 kPa
70
Shear stress (kPa)

80
70 σn ⫽ 80 kPa 60
60 50 σn ⫽ 40 kPa
50 40
σn ⫽ 40 kPa 30
40 σn ⫽ 20 kPa
30 σn ⫽ 20 kPa 20
20 10
10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Horizontal displacement (mm)
(b)
Horizontal displacement (mm)
(b) 100
90
100
80
Shear stress (kPa)

90 70 σn ⫽ 80 kPa
80 60
Shear stress (kPa)

70 50 σn ⫽ 40 kPa
60 σn ⫽ 80 kPa 40
50 30 σn ⫽ 20 kPa
40 σn ⫽ 40 kPa 20
30 10
σn ⫽ 20 kPa 0
20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
10 Horizontal displacement (mm)
0 (c)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Horizontal displacement (mm)
Figure 8. Shear stress against horizontal displacement curves
(c)
for: (a) TB2-10; (b) TB2–20; (c) TB2–30
Figure 7. Shear stress against horizontal displacement for:
(a) TB1-10; (b) TB1–20; (c) TB1-30

stress. For TB2-30, the shear stress reaches a maximum

TB2-20, the shear stresses rapidly reaches maximum value at an average displacement of 25 mm, for the test
values at average displacements of 20 mm and 30 mm for conducted at a normal stress of 80 kPa. Table 2 shows a
the tests results conducted at 20 and 40 kPa normal stress, summary of the test data and shear strength parameters for
and at 40 mm for the test conducted at 80 kPa normal all the large-scale direct shear tests.

Table 2. Results of large-scale direct shear tests

Parameter Shear stress (kPa)

Sand TB1 TB2 TC TB1-10 TB1-20 TB1-30 TB2-10 TB2-20 TB2-30 TC-10 TC-20 TC-30

Normal stress
(kPa)
0 22.90 11.60 14.40 10.20 28.40 25.90 29.90 25.50 21.50 24.70 23.10 20.00 22.00
40 27.90 15.90 18.60 18.90 38.80 40.40 32.40 43.90 42.00 41.00 34.30 35.40 36.40
80 53.10 23.90 22.50 28.40 62.50 64.40 56.70 72.00 80.60 62.00 69.60 55.50 54.80
Friction angle, 34.20 11.60 7.40 16.40 29.80 32.40 25.20 37.40 45.40 32.00 38.30 29.50 28.10

(degrees)
Cohesion, c 0.00 7.60 12.40 5.40 16.50 13.90 17.80 11.50 2.20 13.40 5.05 10.90 12.80
(kPa)
Unit weight, ª 14.00 3.50 3.50 5.50 13.50 12.00 10.00 13.50 12.00 10.00 13.50 13.40 12.00
(kN/m3 )

Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Influence of tire fiber inclusions on shear strength of sand 189

ratio and normal stress. The failure envelopes for all

4.3. Discussion samples, obtained from the test results, are shown in
The results of the large-scale direct shear tests show that Figure 11. The lowest shear strength values are for the tire
internal friction angles of the composite materials contain- waste materials used alone. It is also clear that the tested
ing TB2 are higher than those for TC and TB1 (Table 2). tire waste additions improve the shear strength of the
The changes in internal friction angle and cohesion with sand.
varying types and percentages of tire waste inclusions are The cohesion values found in this study are apparent
shown in Figures 9 and 10, respectively. The highest values; they are given in Table 2. Humphrey et al. (1993)
internal friction angle (458) was obtained for a 20% found similar results. For the two types of fiber used in
addition of TB2 to sand (TB2-20) (Figure 9). However, this study, the aspect ratio and amount of the fibers had an
the cohesion values of the composite materials do not important effect on the shear strength of the reinforced
show any significant changes as the amount of tire waste soil, increasing it as the fiber content reached an optimum
changes (Figure 10). The cohesion values range mainly value. Increasing the aspect ratio of the fibers also
between 8 kPa and 14 kPa. They are not affected by the increased the shear strength of the mixture. The longer
type of tire fiber. As can be seen in Table 2, as the tire fibers have greater contact areas with the soil particles.
fiber aspect ratio increases (7.0 average), the shear The fibers that are found in the shear zone can be
strength of the composite is improved. visualized as anchors that resist the shear forces.
As can be seen in Table 2, the most significant charac- This study can be compared with the previous work on
teristics affecting the shear strength of the mixture are tire tire buffings by Edincliler (2007) (Table 3). In that study,
waste amount, tire waste shape (granular or fiber), aspect the tire buffings tested had thicknesses between 1 to
4 mm, and lengths from 20 to 40 mm. Particles larger than

60
20
TB1 percentages
TB1 percentages
Internal friction angle (degrees)

50 TB2 percentages 18
TB2 percentages
Crumb percentages 16
Crumb percentages
40 14
Cohesion (kPa)

12
30 10
8
20
6
4
10
2
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Tire waste amount (%) Tire waste amount (%)

Figure 9. Internal friction angles against tire waste Figure 10. Cohesion against tire waste percentage for large-
percentage for large-scale direct shear tests scale direct shear tests

90

80 Sand
TB1
70
TB2
TC
60
Shear stress (kPa)

TB1-10
50 TB1-20
TB1-30
40 TB2-10
TB2-20
30
TB2-30
TC-10
20
TC-20

10 TC-30

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Normal stress (kPa)

Figure 11. Shear stress against normal stress for all tests
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 190 Edinçliler and Ayhan

Table 3. Comparison of shear strength data with previous studies

Reference Test method Material Unit Shear strength

weight, ª parameters
(kN/m3 )

Humphrey et LSDS Product 1 (, 76 mm tire chips; 1) 7.0 c ¼ 8.6 kPa;
¼ 258

al. (1993) 305 mm 3 305 mm 3 228 mm (1) Product 2 (,76 mm tire chips; 1) 6.8 c ¼ 11.5 kPa;
¼ 198
406 mm 3 406 mm 3 228 mm (2) Product 3 (,76 mm tire chips; 1) 7.2 c ¼ 7.7 kPa;
¼ 21
Product 3 (,76 mm tire chips; 2) – c ¼ 4.3 kPa;
¼ 268
Foose et al. LSDS 90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (15 cm; random) 16.8  ¼ 37.9 kPa
(1996) (280 mm in diameter, 300 mm 90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (15 cm; vertical) 16.8  ¼ 18.6 kPa
high) 90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (15 cm; random) 14.7  ¼ 8.3 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (5 cm; vertical) 14.7  ¼ 37.2 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (5 cm; random) 14.7  ¼ 1.0 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (5 cm; vertical) 16.8  ¼ 20.7 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (5 cm; random) 16.8  ¼ 55.2 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (5 cm; vertical) 14.7  ¼ 32.4 kPa
90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (15 cm; vertical) 14.7  ¼ 32.4 kPa
90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (5 cm; random) 16.8  ¼ 32.4 kPa
90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (5 cm; vertical) 14.7  ¼ 13.8 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (15 cm; vertical) 16.8  ¼ 78.6kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (15 cm; vertical) 16.8  ¼ 22.8 kPa
90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (5 cm; vertical) 16.8  ¼ 29.0 kPa
70% Sand + 30% tire shreds (15 cm; random) 14.7  ¼ 42.1 kPa
90% Sand + 10% tire shreds (5 cm; random) 14.7  ¼ 19.3 kPa
Tatlisoz et al. LSDS 100% Tire chips 5.9 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 308
(1998) (280 mm in diameter, 300 mm 100% Sand 16.8 c ¼ 2 kPa;
¼ 348
high) %90 Sand + 10% tire chips 15.6 c ¼ 2 kPa;
¼ 468
%80 Sand + 20% tire chips 14.5 c ¼ 2 kPa;
¼ 508
%70 Sand + 30% tire chips 13.3 c ¼ 2 kPa;
¼ 528
100% Sandy silt 18.3 c ¼ 21 kPa;
¼ 308
90% Sandy silt + 10% tire chips 17.6 c ¼ 8 kPa;
¼ 538
80% Sandy silt + 20% tire chips 17.0 c ¼ 38 kPa;
¼ 548
70% Sandy silt + 30% tire chips 18.9 c ¼ 39 kPa;
¼ 538
Attom (2006) LSDS 10% Tire shreds + 90% sand 14 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 308
Sand A: 300 mm 3 300mm 20% Tire shreds + 80% sand 15 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 378
30%Tire shreds + 70% sand 15.5 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 418
LSDS 10% Tire shreds + 90% sand 14 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 288
Sand B: 300 mm 3 300mm 20% Tire shreds + 80% sand 15 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 358
30%Tire shreds + 70% sand 15.9 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 428
LSDS 10% Tire shreds + 90% sand 15 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 428
Sand C: 300 mm 3 300mm 20% Tire shreds + 80% sand 16 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 458
30%Tire shreds + 70% sand 16.6 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 488
LSDS Sand A 15.5 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 258
All sands: 300 mm 3 300mm Sand B 15.9 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 288
Sand C 16.6 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 368
Edincliler et al. LSDS Tire buffings 5.1 c ¼ 3.1 kPa;
¼ 2.28
(2004); 300 mm 3 300 mm 3 300 mm) Sand 15.3 c ¼ 6.9 kPa;
¼ 338
Edincliler, 2 mm , TB1 , 40 mm 5% TB + 95% sand 15.2 c ¼ 10.4 kPa;
¼ 28.28
(2007) 10% TB + 90% sand 14.9 c ¼ 8.7 kPa;
¼ 298
20%TB + 80% sand 14.2 c ¼ 15.5 kPa;
¼ 5.38
30%TB + 70% sand 13.6 c ¼ 10.7 kPa;
¼ 8.38
This study LSDS Tire buffings (TB1) 5.5 c ¼ 7.6 kPa;
¼ 11.68
300 mm 3 300 mm 3 300 mm) Sand (S) 14.0 c ¼ 0 kPa;
¼ 34.28
8 mm , TB1 , 10 m TB1-10 (10% TB1 + 90% sand) 13.5 c ¼ 16.5 kPa;
¼ 29.88
TB1-20 (20% TB1 + 80% sand) 12.0 c ¼ 13.9 kPa;
¼ 32.48
TB1-30 (30% TB1 + 70% sand) 10.0 c ¼ 17.7 kPa;
¼ 25.28
LSDS Tire buffings (TB2) 3.5 c ¼ 12.4 kPa;
¼ 7.48
300 mm 3 300 mm 3 300 mm) Sand (S) 14.0 c ¼ 0.0 kPa;
¼ 34.28
40 mm , TB4 , 50 mm TB2-10 (10% TB2 + 90% sand) 13.5 c ¼ 11.5 kPa;
¼ 37.48
TB2-20 (20% TB2 + 80% sand) 12.0 c ¼ 2.2 kPa;
¼ 45.48
TB2-30 (30% TB2 + 70% sand) 10.0 c ¼ 13.4 kPa;
¼ 32.08

40 mm were eliminated. From the literature and this study, use of tire buffings with a higher aspect ratio (average
it is evident that fiber-shaped tire buffings can be used to 7.0) changed the deformation behavior of the mixture.
reinforce sand, and that the longer fibers used in this study Mixtures of tire buffings and sand may be useful as soil
are more efficient than those used in previous studies. The reinforcement in embankment construction, allowing the
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Influence of tire fiber inclusions on shear strength of sand 191

embankment to resist larger strains without failure under Attom, M. F. (2006). The use of shredded waste tires to improve the
static loads than for sand alone. Because of the high length- geotechnical engineering properties of sands. Environmental
Geology, 49, No. 4, 497–503.
to-diameter ratio of the tire buffings, interface friction
Ayhan, V. (2007). Determination and Assessment of Shear Strength
between the tire waste and the sand is readily mobilized. Parameters of Sand with Tire Waste Inclusions, MSc thesis,
Even at low weight percentages, such as 20%, the deforma- Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey, 103 pp. (in English).
tion behavior of the mixture is altered considerably. Baykal, G. (1997). Development of a Model Unit for Pellet Aggregate
Production Using Fly Ash and Optimization of the Pelletization
Process, TUBİTAK Construction Technology Research Group
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Project No: INTAG 627.
Bernal, A., Lovell, C. W. & Salgado, R. (1996). Laboratory Study on the
The aspect ratio and amount of fibers have an important Use of Tire Shreds and Rubber-Sand in Backfills and Reinforced
effect on the shear strength of the reinforced soil, which Soil Applications’ FHWA/IN/JHRP-96/12, Purdue University, West
reaches its maximum value as the fiber content reaches an Lafayette, IN, USA.
optimum value. Increasing the aspect ratio of the fibers Bernal, A., Salgado, R., Swan, R. H. & Lovell, C. W. (1997). Interaction
between tire shreds, rubber-sand and geosynthetics. Geosynthetics
(TB2) also increases shear strength of the mixture: the International, 4, No. 6, 623–643.
longer fibers have a greater contact area with the soil Edil, T. B. & Bosscher, P. J. (1992). Development of Engineering Criteria
particles. for Shredded or Whole Tires in Highway Applications, Report No.
On the basis of the experimental results, the following WI 14-92, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
conclusions can be drawn.
Edil, T. B. & Bosscher, P. J. (1994). Engineering properties of tire chips
and soil mixtures. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 17, No. 4, 453–
• Increasing the aspect ratio of tire buffings (TB2) led 464.
to an increase on the overall shear strength, for the Edincliler, A. (2007). Using of waste tire-soil mixtures for embankment
range of aspect ratios considered in this study. This construction. International Workshop on Scrap Tire Derived
can be explained as being due to the increased Geomaterials: Opportunities and Challenges, Kanto branch of
Japanese Geotechnical Society, pp. 319–328.
contact area with the soil particles. Edincliler, A., Baykal, G. & Dengili, K. (2004). Determination of static
• The shear strength increases with increasing content and dynamic behavior of recycled materials for highways.
of tire buffings, up to a maximum value for buffings Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 42, No. 3, 223–237.
content in the vicinity of 20% (TB2-20). Any further Foose, G. J. (1993). Reinforcement of Sand by Tire Chips, MS thesis,
increase in the tire buffings content caused a Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
decrease in strength. Foose, G. J., Benson, C. H. & Bosscher, P. J. (1996). Sand reinforced
• The shear strength improvement induced by the with shredded waste tires. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
inclusion of tire buffings was sensitive to the amount 122, No. 9, 760–767.
of applied normal stress. Gray, D. H. & Al-Refeai, T. (1986). Behavior of fabric versus fiber-
• Internal friction angles as large as 458 were obtained. reinforced sand. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 112,
No. 8, 804–820.
The friction angle for unreinforced sand is 348. Gray, D. H. & Maher, M. H. (1989). Admixture stabilization of sands
• From the failure envelopes of large-scale direct shear with discrete, randomly distributed fibers. Proceedings of the 12th
tests, it is seen that tire waste additions improve the International Conference on Soil Mechanics And Foundation
shear strength values of sand. Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Vol. 2, pp. 1363–1366.
Gray, D. H. & Ohashi, H. (1983). Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in
sand. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 109, No. 3,
In conclusion, four factors were found to affect the 335–353.
shear strength values significantly: normal stress, aspect Ghazavi, M. & Sakhi, M. A. (2005). Influence of optimized tire shreds
ratio, tire waste shape, and tire waste content. on shear strength parameters of sand. International Journal of
Geotechnics, 5, No. 1, 58–65.
Hataf, N. & Rahimi, M. M. (2006). Experimental investigation of bearing
REFERENCES capacity of sand reinforced with randomly distributed tire shreds.
Construction and Building Materials, 20, No. 10, 910–916.
Ahmed, I. (1993). Laboratory Study on Properties on Rubber Soils, Hoare, D. J. (1979). Laboratory study of granular soils reinforced with
Report No. FHWA/IN/JHRP-93/4, Joint Highway Research Project, randomly oriented discrete fibers. Proceedings of the International
Indiana Department of Transportation. Conference on Use of Fabrics in Geotechnics, Paris, France, Vol. 1,
Ahmed, I. & Lovell, C. W. (1993). Rubber soil as lightweight pp. 47–52.
geomaterial. Transportation Research Record, No. 1422, National Humphrey, D., Sandford, T., Cribbs, M. & Manison, W. (1993). Shear
Research Council, Washington, DC, pp. 61–70. strength and compressibility of tire chips for use as retaining wall
Arteaga, C. B. (1989). The Shear Strength of Ottawa Sand Mixed with backfill. Transportation Research Record, No. 1422, Transportation
Discrete Short Length Plastic Fibers, MSc thesis, Mississippi State Research Board, Washington, DC, 29–35.
University. Humphrey, D. N. (2007). Tire derived aggregate as lightweight fill for
Al-Refeai, T. (1991). Behavior of granular soils reinforced with discrete embankments and retaining walls. International Workshop on Scrap
randomly oriented inclusions. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 10, Tire Derived Geomaterials: Opportunities and Challenges, Kanto
No. 4, 319–333. Branch of Japanese Geotechnical Society, pp. 56– 81.
ASTM D 3080. Standard Test Method for Direct Shear Test of Soils Liausu, P. & Juran, I. (1995). Texsol: material properties and engineering
under Consolidated Drained Conditions. ASTM International, West performance. Transportation Research Record, No. 1474, Transpor-
Conshohocken, PA, USA. tation Research Board, Washington, DC, 3– 12.
ASTM D 6270. Standard Practice For Use of Scrap Tires in Civil Maher, M. H. & Gray, D. H. (1990). Static response of sands reinforced
Engineering Applications. ASTM International, West with randomly distributed fibers. Journal of Geotechnical Engineer-
Conshohocken, PA, USA. ing, ASCE, 116, No. 11, 1661–1677.

Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 192 Edinçliler and Ayhan

Maher, M. H. & Ho, Y. C. (1994). Mechanical properties of kaolinite/ tion Research Record, No. 1474m Transportation Research Board,
fiber soil composite. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Washington, DC, 82–95.
120, No. 8, 1381–1393. Tatlisoz, N., Edil, T. B. & Benson, C. H. (1998). Interaction between
McGown, A., Andrawes, K. Z. & Al-Hasani, M. M. (1978). Effect of reinforcing geosynthetics and soil-tire chip mixtures. Journal of
inclusion properties on the behavior of sand. Géotechnique, 28, No. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 124, No. 11,
3, 327–46. 1109–1119.
Ozkul, Z. & Baykal, G. (2006). Shear strength of clay with rubber fiber Webster, S. L. & Santoni, R. L. (1997). Contingency Airfield and Road
inclusions. Geosynthetics International, 13, No. 5, 173–180. Construction Using Geosynthetic Fiber Stabilization of Sands,
Ranjan, G., Vasan, R. M. & Charan, H. D. (1996). Probabilistic analysis Technical Report GL-97-4, US Army Engineer Waterways
of randomly distributed fiber-reinforced soil. Journal of Geo- Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, USA.
technical Engineering, 122, No. 66, 419–426. Verma, B. P. & Char, A. N. (1978). Triaxial tests on reinforced sand.
Stauffer, S. D. & Holtz, R. D. (1995). Stress–strain and strength behavior Proceedings of the Symposium on Soil Reinforcement and
of staple fiber and continuous filament-reinforced sand. Transporta- Stabilizing Techniques, Sydney, Australia, pp. 29–39.

The Editor welcomes discussion on all papers published in Geosynthetics International. Please email your contribution to
[email protected] by 15 February 2011.

Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 4

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD] on [15/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.