Construction

and Building

Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916

MATERIALS
www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Experimental investigation of bearing capacity of sand

reinforced with randomly distributed tire shreds
N. Hataf *, M.M. Rahimi
Department of Civil Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

Received 30 June 2004; received in revised form 3 May 2005; accepted 30 June 2005
Available online 25 August 2005

Abstract

A series of laboratory model tests has been carried out to investigate the using of shredded waste tires as reinforcement to in-
crease the bearing capacity of soil. Shred content and shreds aspect ratio are the main parameters that affect the bearing capacity.
Tire shreds with rectangular shape and widths of 2 and 3 cm with aspect ratios 2, 3, 4 and 5 are mixed with sand. Five shred contents
of 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% by volume were selected. Addition of tire shreds to sand increases BCR (bearing capacity ratio)
from 1.17 to 3.9 with respect to shred content and shreds aspect ratio. The maximum BCR is attained at shred content of 40% and
dimensions of 3 · 12 cm. It is shown that increasing of shred content increases the BCR. However, an optimum value for shred con-
tent is observed after that increasing shreds led to decrease in BCR. For a given shred width, shred content and soil density it seems
that aspect ratio of 4 gives maximum BCR.
 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Sand; Tire shred; Bearing capacity

1. Introduction reinforcements can be classified into two major catego-

Plant roots stabilize soils, through reinforcement of
soil in nature, against erosion and failure of deep slopes.
Presently, reinforcement is an effective and reliable tech-
nique for increasing strength and stability of soils. The
technique used today varies in the applications ranging
from retaining structures and embankments to surged
stabilization and surface drainage systems.
The first type of reinforcement used in modern soil
reinforcement has been developed by Vidal [1,2] using
long steel strips. Fortunately, variety of materials with
different shapes and techniques are nowadays used
in civil engineering applications. In general soil
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 711 628 7505; fax: +98 711 628
7294.
E-mail addresses: nhataf@shirazu.ac.ir, nhataf@yahoo.com (N.
Hataf).
ries (by their stiffness): (1) ideally inextensible and (2)
ideally extensible inclusions. The former includes high
modulus metal strips and bars, while the latter includes
relatively low modulus natural and synthetic fibers,
plant roots and polymer fabrics.
Soil reinforced with randomly-distributed inclusions
is another type of reinforced-soil, which have attracted
considerable attraction over past years, such as concrete
technology and more recently in soils [3–6]. In this type
of soil reinforcement, soil is mixed randomly with
discrete small inclusions such as tire shreds, fibers,
filaments and small meshes until it become like a homo-
geneous material.
Reuse and recycling of scraped tires is essential to
avoid growing stockpiles of discarded tires around
the world, e.g. approximately 240 million tires are dis-
posed in United States each year and currently 5 bil-
lion tires are stockpiled [7,8]. Uses for scrap tires in

0950-0618/$ - see front matter  2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.06.019
 N. Hataf, M.M. Rahimi / Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916 911

Nomenclature

A shear cross-section area of soil; / angle of internal friction angle

AR total cross-sectional area of inclusions h angle of shear distortion;
reinforcements rv vertical confining pressure on shear plane;
ER elastic modulus (longitudinal stiffness) of Z thickness of shear zone;
fiber reinforcement; x lateral displacement in a direct shear test;
ES elastic modulus of sand or soil; tR mobilized tensile strength of inclusions per
BCR bearin capacity ratio; unit area of soil
2RUP tensile rupture strain in reinforcement; TR ultimate tensile strength of inclusions;
2MAX maximum tensile strain in soil; DSR shear strength increase from reinforcement;

a
civil engineering applications are growing recently.
Scrap tires are used in the production of paving material
which is called rubber modified asphalt and in retaining
walls as embankment materials [9]. More recently tires
were shredded into smaller pieces producing a bulk
material, which was used as subgrade fill alone or mixed
with granular soil to improve the engineering properties
of the soil [10–13].
The main objective of this study is to investigate the
feasibility of using shredded waste tires as reinforcement
to increase the bearing capacity of soil. Thus a series of
laboratory loading tests have been carried out on sand
reinforced with randomly distributed tire shreds to b
determine the effects of shred content and shred aspect
ratio on bearing capacity of reinforced soil.

2. Theory

Modeling of states of stress and strain in reinforced

sand during deformation and failure is complex and dif-
ficult. Sophisticated finite element analyses employing
appropriate constitutive relationships to describe the
behavior of sand reinforcement can be used for this pur-
pose [14]. Simpler analyses based on limit equilibrium of
forces can however be used to predict shear strength of
reinforced sand and to identify important parameters
for experimental investigation. The latter approach
was adopted in the present study.
The model proposed by Wu [15] only considers an
inclusion oriented perpendicularly to the shear surface.
This model tacitly assumes full mobilization of the ten-
sile strength of the inclusions (or roots). WaldronÕs
model [16] meanwhile is based on only partial mobiliza-
tion of inclusion tensile strength depending upon the
amount of inclusion elongation during shear. Neither
model places any constraint on the distribution or
location of the reinforcing inclusions. The reinforcement
model is shown in Fig. 1. Reinforcements may be ori-
ented initially perpendicular to the shear plane,
Fig. 1(a) or at some arbitrary angle, Fig. 1(b). Shearing
Fig. 1. Fiber reinforcement model: (a) perpendicular orientation to
shear surface; (b) fiber oriented at angle (i) to shear surface.
causes the reinforcement to distort as shown in Fig. 1,
thereby mobilizing tensile resistance in the inclusion.
The tensile force in the reinforcement can be divided
into a component normal and tangential to the shear
plane. The normal component increases the confining
stress on the failure plane thereby mobilizing additional
shear resistance in the sand where as the tangential com-
ponent directly resists shear.
If many inclusions are present their cross section
areas are computed and the total reinforcement concen-
tration is expressed in terms of a reinforcement area
ratio (AR/A), or as a ratio of reinforcement total shear
cross-sectional area to total area.
The shear strength increase from this type of rein-
forcement in sand thus can be estimated from the
following expressions:
912 N. Hataf, M.M. Rahimi / Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916

DS R ¼ tR ðsin h þ cos h tan /Þ; ð1Þ Table 1

Engineering properties of soil used in the study
DS R ¼ tR ðsinð90  wÞ þ cosð90  wÞ tan /Þ; ð2Þ
" # Soil properties Values
1 Coefficient of uniformity (Cu) 1.0
w ¼ tan1 1
; ð3Þ
k þ ðtan 1 iÞ Coefficient of curvature (Cc) 8.0
Minimum unit weight (KN/m3) 15.2
in which DSR is the shear strength increase from rein- Maximum unit weight (KN/m3) 17.85
forcement; tR is the mobilized tensile strength of inclu- Cohesion (KN/m2) 0
Angle of internal friction (peak) 24
sions per unit area of soil; / is the angle of internal
Relative density (Dr %) 40 ± 5
friction of sand; h is the angle of shear distortion; i is
the initial orientation angle of inclusion with respect to
shear surface; x is the horizontal of shear displacement; For better performance tire shreds are cut from waste
z is the thickness of shear zone; k is the shear distortion tires with approximately the same size and thickness.
ratio (k = x/z). Tires are cut with a special cutter by hand into rectangu-
The mobilized tensile strength per unit area of soil lar shape and different sizes (see Fig. 3). As much as 170
(tR) is the product of the tensile stress in the inclusion tires are used for the tests. Soil is mixed with different
at the shear plane and the area ratio or concentration tire shred contents and size. The shred contents in this
of the inclusions in the shear plane: study are 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% by volume.
 
AR The shreds widths are 2 and 3 cm with aspect ratio of
tR ¼ rR ; ð4Þ
A 2, 3, 4 and 5. Physical properties of the tire shreds are
presented in Table 2.
in which rR = tensile stress developed in the inclusion at
the shear plane; and AAR ¼ inclusions area ratio: 3.2. Footing and testing apparatus

Model footing was made of steel with a cylindrical

3. Experimental investigation
3.1. Materials tested
A relatively uniformly graded sand is used in this
study. The sand is classified as SW by Unified Soil Clas-
sification System (USCS). The particle size distribution
of the sand is shown in Fig. 2. Engineering properties
of the soil are listed in Table 1.
shape 15-cm diameter and 7 cm thickness. A cylindrical
tank with 1.0 m diameter and 1.0 m height was built.
Testing tank was made from steel plate, 4 mm of thick-
ness, to accommodate the sand. The steel cylindrical
tank was designed big enough to avoid boundary effect
on bearing capacity. A static loading system was used by
using a simple lever arm system. Load and settlements
were measured using the load cell and dial gauges.
3.3. Test procedure

Sand and tire shreds were measured properly with

100 respect to the desired tire shreds contents in the test pro-
90 gram (10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% volume of shreds
compared to total volume). Then, the soil and tire
80 shreds were mixed carefully using a spade. The tank
was, then, filled up to specified thickness (20 cm) with
PERCENT FINER (%)

70
the mixed material. Each layer was tamped and com-
60 pacted with a specific wooden plate, dropping from a
50 certain height (certain energy for each layer) before the
next layer was poured. Small cans were used to identify
40
sand density in different places in the tank. Relative den-
30 sity of sand ranged from 35% to 45% with respect to
shred content. Relative density decreased with increas-
20
ing shred content because shreds absorbed compaction
10 energy. Footing was loaded statically until failure
reached. The settlement of the footing was measured
0
for each load. The bearing capacity was obtained using
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
tangent method. In this method, two tangents were plot-
GRAIN SIZE
ted along the initial portion and latter portion of the
Fig. 2. Grain size distribution curve for sand. load–settlement curve and the load corresponding to
 N. Hataf, M.M. Rahimi / Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916 913

Fig. 3. Typical tire shreds used in this study.

Table 2 aspect ratio is about 4. For a constant shred content

Physical properties of tire shreds
Properties Values
Bulk unit weight (KN/m3)
Specific gravity of
cohesion (KN/m2)
Angle of internal friction (degree) 23
the intersection of these two lines was taken as ultimate
bearing capacity of the footing.
3.4. Testing program
The sum of 34 tests were carried out on circular foot-
ing on reinforced soil with different tire shred contents
and aspect ratios, as shown in Table 3. The results of
all tests were compared to the results of tests carried
out on unreinforced soil to indicate the effect of reinforc-
ing on bearing capacity of the soil.
minimum BCR was observed for 2 · 4 cm shreds. This
might be because of the short length of shreds when
5.8 tensile force becomes greater than pull out resistance
1.08 force of the reinforcements. So it can be concluded that
0 for better performance a minimum length of shred must
be provided. It can also be seen that for a certain width
increase in length, greater than optimum length,
decreases the BCR. This may be due to the fact that
increasing the length will decrease area ratio (i.e.,
AR/A), which is an important parameter as mentioned
earlier in reinforced soil behavior. The 3 · 12 cm shreds
have maximum BCR for all shred contents. Maximum
600
U. Soil
500 10% Tire chips
20% Tire chips
400
30% Tire chips
Load (.1 N)

50% Tire chips

4. Test results 300

In general addition of tire shreds to sand increases the

bearing capacity and limit reductions in post peak resis- 200
tance. Effect of sand reinforcement on bearing capacity
(as the ratio of reinforced soil bearing capacity to 100
unreinforced soil bearing capacity BCR) is shown in
Table 3.
Figs. 4–10 show load–settlement curves for sand rein- 0
0 2 4 6 8
forced with tire shreds obtained from performed tests.
Fig. 11 shows BCR values versus aspect ratios of Settlement (cm)
shreds for different width and shred contents. It seems Fig. 4. Load–settlement curves for 2 · 8 cm shreds with different shred
that for both selected widths (2 and 3 cm) optimum contents.

Table 3
Bearing capacity ratio (BCR) for reinforced sand
Tire shreds content (%) Size of shreds
2 · 4 cm 2 · 6 cm 2 · 8 cm 2 · 10 cm 3 · 6 cm 3 · 9 cm 3 · 12 cm
10 1.17 1.46 1.46 1.56 1.56 1.73 1.83
20 1.6 2.03 2 1.97 1.9 2.13 2.2
30 2.15 2.73 2.8 2.84 2.69 2.8 3
40 – 3.2 3.4 – – – 3.9
50 – 2.95 3.3 – – – 3.9
914 N. Hataf, M.M. Rahimi / Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916

600 U. Soil 500

500 Random size (20%Tire

450
Shreds)
400
400 10% Tire Shreds
Load (.1 N)

350
300 20% Tire Shreds

300

Load (.1 N)
200 30% Tire Shreds
250
50% Tire Shreds
100
200
40% tire chips
0
0 2 4 6 8
150

Settlement (cm) Unreinforced soil

100
10% Tire Shreds
Fig. 5. Load–settlement curves for 2 · 6 cm shreds with different shred
50 20% Tire Shreds
contents.
30% Tire Shreds
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
700 Settlement (mm)
U. Soil
600 Fig. 8. Load–settlement curves for 2 · 10 cm shreds with different
shred contents.
10% Tire chips
500
20% Tire chips
Load (.1 N)

400
30% Tire chips 400
300
40% Tire chips 350
200 Unreinforced soil
50% Tire chips 300
100
250
Load (1.N )

10% Tire Shreds

0 200
0 1 2 3 4 5
20% Tire Shreds
Settlement (cm) 150

Fig. 6. Load–settlement curves for 3 · 12 cm shreds with different 100

30% Tire Shreds
shred contents.
50

0
600 U. Soil 0 1 2 3 4 5
Settlement (mm)

500 10% Tire chips Fig. 9. Load–settlement curves for 2 · 4 cm shreds with different shred
contents.

400
20% Tire chips
Load (.1 N)

300 and minimum BCR reached were 3.9 and 1.17 for 40%
30% Tire chips
tire shreds of 3 · 12 cm and 10% tire shreds of
2 · 4 cm, respectively.
200
The effect of shred contents on BCR is shown in
Fig. 12. As this figure depicts increasing shred content
100 increases BCR. However, it seems that there is an opti-
mum shred content (about 40%) after that BCR will not
0 increase further if shred content is increased.
0 1 2 3 4 5 The behavior of soil mixed with tire shreds in high
Settlement (cm) tire shreds content tends to be more influenced by the
Fig. 7. Load–settlement curves for 3 · 9 cm shreds with different shred tire shreds material and intensity of the composite mate-
contents. rial rather than the soil characteristics [8].
 N. Hataf, M.M. Rahimi / Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916 915

400 5. Conclusion
350
A series of laboratory test have been carried out on
Unreinforced soil
300 the model of shallow footing resting on reinforced
sand. Tire shreds were used as reinforcement elements.
250
Load (.1 N)

10% Tire Shreds Two parameters were selected to identify their influence
200 on bearing capacity of sand: shred content and shred
aspect ratio. It was found that addition of 10% shreds
150
20% Tire Shreds by volume increases BCR from 1.17 to 1.83 (increasing
100 bearing capacity from 17% to 83%), 20% tire shreds
increases BCR from 1.6 to 2.2, 30% tire shreds increase
50 30% Tire Shreds
BCR from 2.15 to 3, 40% tire shreds increases BCR
0 from 3.2 to 3.9 and 50% tire shreds increases BCR from
0 1 2 3 4 5
2.95 to 3.9 with respect to shreds width and aspect
Settlement (mm)
ratio.
Fig. 10. Load–settlement curves for 3 · 6 cm shreds with different Aspect ratio of 4 was found as the best aspect ratio
shred contents. for two widths used in this study (i.e., 2 and 3 cm).
Shreds of 4 cm length and smaller work improperly
as reinforcement because of the small length. Opti-
3.5 mum shred content found in this study is 40%, further
addition of shreds will not increase the BCR
significantly.
3 30% Tireshreds (b=2cm)

30% Tireshreds (b=3cm)

2.5 References
20% Tireshreds (b=3cm)
BCR

20% Tireshreds (b=2cm) [1] Schlosser F, Long NT. Recent results in French research on
2 reinforced earth. J Const Div-ASCE 1974;100(Co3):223–37.
10% Tireshreds (b=3cm) [2] Vidal H. La terre armee. Paris: Annales de LÕInstitute Technique
du Batiment et des Travaux publics; 1966. p. 888–938 [in French].
10% Tireshreds (b=2cm)
1.5 [3] Andersland OB, Khattak AS. Shear strength of kaolinite/fiber soil
mixture. In: Proceedings of the international conference on soil
reinforcement, vol. I, Paris, France; 1979. p. 11–6.
1 [4] Gray Donald H., Member A, ASCE, Ohashi Harukazu, Mechan-
2 3 4 5 6 ics of fiber reinforcement sand. J Geotech Eng-ASCE 109(3),
Aspect ratio 1983.
[5] Gray DH, Al-Refeai Talal. Behavior of fabric-versus fiber-
Fig. 11. Bearing capacity ratio (BCR) vs. aspect ratio of shreds. reinforced sand. J Geotech Eng 1986;112(8):804–20.
[6] Hoare DJ. Laboratory study of granular soils reinforced with
randomly oriented discrete fabrics. In: Proceedings international
conference on the use of falorics in geotechnics, vol. I. Paris,
France: LÕEcole National des ponts et chaussees; 1977. p. 47–52.
[7] Markets for scrap tiers. EPA/530-SW-90-074A, US Environmen-
4.5 tal Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington (DC);
1991
4 [8] McGown A, Andrawes KZ, Al-Hasani MM. Effect of inclusion
3.5 properties on the behavior of sand. Geotechnique
2*6 cm Tire Shreds 1978;28(3):327–46.
3 2*8 cm Tire Shreds [9] Foose GJ, Benson GH, Bosscher pg. Sand reinforced with
3*9 cm Tire Shreds shredded waste tires. J Geotech Eng 1996;122(9):760–7.
2.5
[10] Hataf N, Baziar A, Use of tire shreds for bearing capacity
BCR

3*12 cm Tire Shreds

2 improvement of shallow footings on sand. In: 3rd international
2*4 cm Tire Shreds conference on ground improvement techniques; 1999. p. 189–94.
1.5 [11] NCHRP. Appropriate use of waste and recycled materials in
2*10 cm Tire Shreds
1 transportation industry, Project 4-21,Transportation Research
3*6 cm Tire Shreds
Board; 2001.
0.5 [12] Edil TB. Mechanical properties and mass behavior of shredded
0 tire soil mixtures. In: Proceeding of the international workshop on
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 lightweight geomaterial, March 26–27, Tokyo, Japan; 2002.
Shreds percent % [13] Abichou T, Tawfiq K, Edil T, Benson C. Behavior of a soil-tire
shreds backfill for modular block wall. In: Aydileck A, Wartman
Fig. 12. Bearing capacity ratio (BCR) vs. shred content. J, editors. Beneficial reuse of waste materials in geotechnical and
916 N. Hataf, M.M. Rahimi / Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006) 910–916

transportation applications, GSP No. 127. Reston (VA): ASCE.
p. 162–72.
[14] Andrawes KZ, McGown A, Mashhour MM, Wilson-Fahmy RF.
Tension resistant inclusions in soils. J Geotech Eng Divi
1980;106:1313–26. No. GT12, Proc. Paper 15928.
[15] Wu TH. Investigation of landslides on Prince of Wales Island,
Alaska. Geotechnical Engineering Report No. 5, Department of
Civil Engineering, OH State University, Columbus (OH); 1976.
[16] Waldron LJ. Shear resistance of root-permeated homogeneous
and stratified soil. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 1977;41:843–9.