Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Study on CBR of Railway Track Foundations with Geosynthetic Reinforcement

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Indian Geotechnical Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Several series of laboratory California bearing ratio (CBR) tests have been conducted to evaluate the influence of geosynthetics on load bearing behaviour of railway track formations over clay subgrade. The effects of subgrade strength, subballast thickness, placement depth of geogrid reinforcement, number of geogrid layers and geotextile at subballast base have been brought out. With a layer of geogrid in the subballast, the increase in bearing resistance and stiffness of the track bed can be as high as 115% and 83% in case of strong subgrade and 97% and 61% for weak subgrade, respectively. An additional increase in CBR due to four layers of geogrid can be as high as 35% and 59%, for strong and weak subgrade condition, respectively. The CBR test parameters were correlated with the plate load tests parameters, through regression analysis. The obtained equations are found to be reasonably good in predicting the subgrade modulus and the strain modulus values of the track beds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Li D, Selig ET (1998) Method for railroad track foundation design. I: development. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 124(4):316–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jain VK, Keshav K (1999) Stress distribution in railway formation-a simulated study. In: Proceeding 2nd international symposium on pre-failure deformation characteristics of geomaterials–IS Torino, vol 99 pp 653–658

  3. RDSO (2007) Guidelines for blanket layer provision on track formation. RDSO-GE-0011 Research design and standard organisation, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi

  4. Koerner RM (1990) Designing with Geosynthetics. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  5. Guido VA, Chang DK, Sweeney MA (1986) Comparison of geogrid and geotextile reinforced earth slabs. Can Geotech J 23(4):435–440. https://doi.org/10.1139/t86-073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Das BM, Khing KH (1994) Foundation on layered soil with geogrid reinforcement-effect of a void. Geotext Geomembr 13(8):545–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-1144(94)90018-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gabr MA, Hart JH (2000) Elastic modulus of geogrid-reinforced sand using plate load tests. Geotech Test J ASTM 23(2):245–250. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ11049J

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Alawaji HA (2001) Settlement and bearing capacity of geogrid-reinforced sand over collapsible soil. Geotext Geomembr 19(2):5–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(01)00002-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhou H, Wen X (2008) Model studies on geogrid or geocell reinforced sand cushion on soft soil. Geotext Geomembr 26(3):231–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2007.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dash SK, Majee A (2021) Geogrid reinforcement for stiffness improvement of railway track formation over clay subgrade. Int J Geomech ASCE 21(9):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0002128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. IRC-37 (2018) Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements. IRC: 37–2018, Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi

  12. Tolou Kian AR, Sadeghi J, Zakeri J (2020) Influences of railway ballast sand contamination on loading pattern of pre-stressed concrete sleeper. Construct Build Mater 233:117324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. IS 1498 (1970) Classification and identification of soils for general engineering purposes. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  14. IS, 2720–8 (1983) Methods of test for soils: determinaion of water content-dry density relation using heavy compaction. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  15. IS, 2720–11 (1993) Methods of test for soils: Determination of the shear strength parameters of a specimen tested in unconsolidated undrained triaxial compression without measurement of pore water pressure. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  16. ASTM D6637, D6637M (2015) Standard test method for determining tensile properties of geogrids by the single or multi-rib tensile method. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA

    Google Scholar 

  17. ASTM D4595 (2011) Standard test method for tensile properties of geotextiles by the wide-width strip method. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA

    Google Scholar 

  18. Araya A, Molenaar A, Houben L (2010) Characterization of unbound granular materials using repeated load CBR and triaxial testing. In: Paving materials and pavement analysis pp 355-363

  19. IS 2720–16 (1987) Method of test for soil: Laboratory determination of CBR. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  20. Terzaghi K (1943) Theoretical Soil Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Wyroslak M (2017) Establishing relationships between parameters of the controlled compaction soil by using various in-situ tests. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 245:022041. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/245/2/022041

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The experiments were carried out through funding from IIT Kharagpur, under laboratory grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, 721302, India

    Sujit Kumar Dash & Anjan Majee

Authors
  1. Sujit Kumar Dash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anjan Majee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sujit Kumar Dash.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dash, S.K., Majee, A. A Study on CBR of Railway Track Foundations with Geosynthetic Reinforcement. Indian Geotech J 53, 744–760 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-023-00710-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-023-00710-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation