Development of kenaf mat for slope stabilization

M. M. Ahmad, M. B. H. Ab Manaf, and N. Z. Zainol

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1885, 020165 (2017); doi: 10.1063/1.5002359

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5002359
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1885/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics
 Development of Kenaf Mat for Slope Stabilization
M. M. Ahmad1, a), M. B. H. Ab Manaf1, b) and N. Z. Zainol1, c)
1
Department of Civil Engineering Technology. Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis
(UniMAP), P.O. Box 77, D/A Pejabat Pos Besar Kangar, Perlis, 01000, Malaysia

Corresponding author: a)[email protected]

b)
[email protected]
c)
[email protected]

Abstract. This study focusing on the ability of kenaf mat to act as reinforcement to laterite compared to the
conventional geosynthetic in term of stabilizing the slope. Kenaf mat specimens studied in this paper are made up
from natural kenaf fiber with 3mm thickness, 150mm length and 20mm width. With the same size of specimens,
geosynthetic that obtain from the industry are being tested for both direct shear and tensile tests. Plasticity index of
the soil sample used is equal to 13 which indicate that the soil is slightly plastic. Result shows that the friction angle
of kenaf mat is higher compared to friction between soil particles itself. In term of resistance to tensile load, the
tensile strength of kenaf mat is 0.033N/mm2 which is lower than the tensile strength of geosynthetic.

INTRODUCTION
Slope stability is one of the major concerns for geotechnical and civil engineers all over the world due to the
high risk contribution which may lead to soil erosion and landslide. In order to secure the stability of the slope,
various type of method were introduced such as by installing erosion control blanket/mat, retaining wall, cover the
slope with selected vegetation that may help in improving the soil strength or even removing the upper soil of the
slope to create a flatter slope. In addition, stability of the slope may be increased by reinforcing it with
geosynthetics. A standout amongst the most well-known geosynthetic materials used to fortified soil is geotextiles
[1]. In the same time, natural fibers have been famous for over the last few years where a number of researchers
focusing on many investigation regarding its properties to act as load bearing constituents in composite materials.
Nowadays, there are a lot of fibers that already achieved the state of commercialization such as wood, cotton, silk
and wool due to their huge availability, reasonable price, eco-friendly, renewable and also promising performance
[2].

Kenaf is non-wood fiber crop that has attracted the interest of many researchers because of their short plantation
cycle, high fiber yield and great mechanical properties such as good tensile strength [3]. Besides, kenaf plant is
found to be highest producers of biomass in terms of tons/land/time and do not need any exact specific weather
condition [4]. This shows that kenaf plant has important potential economic and environmental benefit where kenaf
has the ability to absorb nitrogen and phosphorus included in the soil and accumulates carbon dioxide at a clearly
high rate [4, 5]. Application of kenaf fiber as a kenaf mat for increasing the slope stabilization has been implemented
in recent years [6, 7]. Hence, deeper study is conducted to investigate the ability of natural kenaf mat compared to
the existing geosynthetic for the same purpose. The presence of plant fiber associated with the soil may increase the
strength of the soil and the stability of the slope [6].

3rd Electronic and Green Materials International Conference 2017 (EGM 2017)
AIP Conf. Proc. 1885, 020165-1–020165-4; doi: 10.1063/1.5002359
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1565-2/$30.00

020165-1
 Early years when the geosynthetic products were introduced, synthetic material such as polypropylene,
polyethylene and polyester are the common material used for it production [8]. Later on, increasing inclination to
use natural fiber including from kenaf plant as a geosynthetic products had received attention before being exploited
for many applications such as in technology and manufacturing because of its characteristic which are
environmental friendly, ability to control the greenhouse emission effect, safe to handle and able to renewable
particularly because of their bio-degradability [2, 5, 9]. Recent study found that both tensile modulus and tensile
strength of kenaf mat composite is stronger than that of bamboo and jute mat [10].

As recent study shows that kenaf having good potential in term of its mechanical properties, it is significant to
investigate the potential of kenaf mat for the application in geotechnical field as slope stabilization technique. This
research conducted to study the tensile capacity and the friction resistance between kenaf mat and soil as both
parameters are important indicator for slope reinforcement application.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Kenaf mat and geosynthetic as shown in Figure 1 used in this research were obtained from industry and factory.
The specimen then being cut into two different shapes according to the size needed for direct shear test (60mm x
60mm) and tensile test (100mm x 15mm). The type of soil used is laterite which obtained from Mukim Titi Tinggi,
Perlis, Malaysia. The amount of soil taken is approximately 5kg. The soil sample used in this study is classified as
disturbed sample due to the handling and storing period before the experiments. The soil is classified as sandy silt
type with percentage of silt is 61.74%. Liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index of soil is 34, 21 and 13
respectively.

(a) (b)

FIGURE 1. Materials used in this study: (a) kenaf mat; (b) geosynthetic

The direct shear test performed to determine the angle of friction between kenaf mat and soil. Although triaxial
test is the better way to assess soil shear strength parameter, direct shear test is able to provide better visualization
and more suitable to assess the friction angle between geosynthetic and soil. Three (3) different specimen (soil,
kenaf mat with soil and geosynthetic with soil) were tested and under 5, 10 and 20kg of load. Standard reference
used is ASTM D3080 and ASTM D5321 was followed accordingly. Different samples selected in order to compare
the angle of friction within soil particle itself and also the friction angle between kenaf mat and geosynthetic with
soil. Three (3) sample of each from kenaf mat and geosynthetic having size of 100mm x 15mm were prepared for
tensile test. Tensile test was conducted according to ASTM D3039 at speed of 1mm/min in order to investigate the
tensile strength of both kenaf mat and geosynthetic. The average value will be calculate and taken as the tensile
strength of those material.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Figure 2 shows the result of direct shear test for all specimens. The cohesion value in this case is referred to as
the adhesion between geosynthetic or kenaf mat to the soil. In this study, the cohesion values for both kenaf mat and

020165-2
geosynthetic specimen are higher than the cohesion value for soil sample. This indicates that with the application of
kenaf mat and geosynthetic, more force is required to cause shear failure to the soil. The capability of the materials
to hold in contact with soil when the forces applied may able to increase the stability state of the soil than soil
without reinforcement. This behavior can be understand by looking into the result of frictional angle in Table 1.
Both kenaf mat and geosynthetic specimen shows higher frictional angle compared to soil sample. Since frictional
angle between kenaf and geosynthetic with soil increases the frictional resistance for both samples also increases.
The increase in frictional resistance making both kenaf and geosynthetic specimens require higher force to cause
shear failure compared to soil sample. The percentage of increment of frictional angle for kenaf and geosynthetic
specimens compared to soil specimen is 13% and 41% respectively. Based on the results obtained from direct shear
test, both cohesion and frictional angle parameter for kenaf specimen are higher than that of soil sample. Although
those values are slightly lower if compared to geosynthetic sample, it is still a good improvement which indicates
great potential to be used as slope stabilization technique.

FIGURE 2. Direct shear test results

TABLE 1. Values of cohesion and frictional angle

Sample Cohesion, C (kPa) Frictional angle, Ø
Soil 9.31 6.35°
Soil+kenaf 12.07 7.17°
Soil+geotextile 12.59 8.93°

As kenaf mat is intent to be used for slope reinforcement, the tensile strength is very important. Most of the soil
especially slit and clay are very weak in tension and requires material that possessed good tensile strength to act as
reinforcement. Table 2 shows the tensile test result for kenaf mat and geosynthetic. Tensile strength observed from
three specimens of kenaf mat are 0.01431, 0.04000 and 0.04596N/mm2 that contributing maximum force at
0.85831, 2.40008 and 2.75771N respectively. Averagely, 2.00537N of force applied yields tensile strength of kenaf
mat which is 0.00342N/mm2. The result shows low value of strength and inconsistency. This may occur due non-
uniform structure of kenaf mat and the fiber itself. Compared to geosynthetic, the tensile strength of kenaf mat is
very low which indicates low tensile load carrying capacity of kenaf mat specimen. Specimens 1, 2 and 3 of
geosynthetic sample expressed maximum stress values which are 3.00937, 2.49916 and 1.19951N/mm2

020165-3
respectively. Average value of maximum force which caused the specimen to achieve it tensile strength is
67.0804N. This can be explained by the quality and condition of the geosynthetic that is much more uniform
compared to kenaf mat.

TABLE 2. Result of tensile test

Kenaf Mat Geosynthetic
Specimen Maximum Force Maximum Stress Maximum Force Maximum
No. (N) (N/mm2) (N) Stress (N/mm2)
1 0.85831 0.01431 90.2812 3.00937
2 2.40008 0.04000 74.9747 2.49916
3 2.75771 0.04596 35.9853 1.19951
Average 2.00537 0.03342 67.0804 2.23601

CONCLUSION

This paper presents the experimental result of tensile strength and frictional angle of kenaf mat for slope
stabilization technique. The collected data from two experiments conducted give multiple information regarding the
tensile strength of kenaf mat and frictional angle between kenaf mat and soil. Different type of reinforced materials
provides different strength to the soil. Even though the kenaf mat sample which are in natural state are not giving the
highest value in term of tensile strength and frictional angle, it was proven that the kenaf mat is able to increase the
stability and strength of the soil by providing environmental friendly reinforcement for slope as it has high frictional
angle. It is highly recommended that further study to be carried on the improvement of mechanical properties of
kenaf mat with chemical treatment or coating technique. This will improve the properties of kenaf as well as the
ability to function as slope reinforcement.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The writers would like to acknowledge the financial support received from Short Term Grant (STG) provided by
Universiti Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP) and the assistance of the final year student, Nor Shuhada Mohammad Noh
from Civil Engineering Technology Program.
REFERENCES
1. Noorzad, R., & Mirmoradi, S. “Laboratory evaluation of the behavior of a geotextile reinforced clay”
(Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 2010) pp 386-392
2. M. Ghosh, “Suitability of natural fibres in geotextile applications,” (2009) pp 497–501
3. I. Ali, K. Jayaraman, and D. Bhattacharyya, Ind. Crops Prod. 61, 293–302 (2014)
4. M. Nurul, A. M. Taib, M. A. Kassim, M. Ariffjamaludin, and T. Ismail, “Studies on Tensile and Water
Absorption Properties on Kenaf (Hibiscus Cannabinus) Fibre Mat/Polyester Composite Using Chemical
Treatment.”
5. E. Momeni, R. Nazir, D. J. Armaghani, M. For, M. Amin, and E. T. Mohamad, Jurnal Teknologi P
REDICTION OF U NCONFINED C OMPRESSIVE S TRENGTH OF R OCKS : A REVIEW PAPER,” 11,
43–50 (2015)
6. S. M. Hejazi, M. Sheikhzadeh, S. M. Abtahi, and A. Zadhoush, Constr. Build. Mater. 30, 100–116 (2012)
7. S. Artidteang, D. T. Bergado, T. Tanchaisawat, and J. Saowapakpiboon, Lowl. Technol. Int. 14(2), 1–8 (2012)
8. A. K. S. Gupta, “Geotextiles: opportunities for natural-fibre products,” (Geotextiles: opportunities for natural,
1991) pp. 10–15
9. Nosbi, N., Akil, H., Ishak, Z. A. M., and Bakar, A. A., Mater. Des. 31(10), 4960–4964 (2010)
10. T. Hojo, X. U. Zhilan, Y. Yang, and H. Hamada, Energy Procedia 56, 72–79 (2014)

020165-4