Project Report on

Evaluating Properties of Subgrade Soils Reinforced with

Plastic Waste
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements
of the degree of

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING

(A.Y. 2024-2025)
by
KAUSTUBH PATIL (33)
MRUDULA SAWNT (43)
JATIN SHETIGAR (47)
SHREYA WAYKAR (53)

Under the Guidance of

Arpit Vyas
Assistant Professor

Department of Civil Engineering,

(Academic Year 2023-24)
 Certificate
This is to certify that the project entitled “EVALUATING PROPERTIES OF
SUBGRADE SOILS REINFORCED WITH PLASTIC WASTE ” is a bonafide work of
Kaustubh Patil (33), Mrudula Sawant (43), Jatin Shetigar (47), Shreya Waykar (53)
submitted to the Thakur College of Engineering and Technology, Mumbai (An Autonomous
College affiliated to University of Mumbai) in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the
award of the degree of “Bachelor of Engineering” in “Department of Civil Engineering”.

Signature : Signature :-
Name : Arpit Vyas Name of HOD: Dr. Seema Jagtap
Designation: Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering
 ABSTRACT
Scarcity of traditional construction materials has motivated researchers to explore alternatives, and besides crushed
glass, reclaimed asphalt pavement, and scrap tires, to name a few, plastic waste (unwanted or unusable plastic
objects) has also gained attention in recent years. Plastic waste is traditionally re-used or recycled, but it often ends up
as trash on curbsides, in landfills, or in our seas and oceans. The substantial amount of plastic waste produced
annually worldwide, and its environmental repercussions are the rationale for exploring alternatives in order to
recycle plastic waste into construction materials. This exploration can also benefit many industries and would help
minimising adverse environmental impacts associated with dumping tones of plastic waste in landfills. Using plastic
waste material with soil for soil reinforcement purposes has revealed some improvements in terms of strengths of
materials, but nevertheless, this potentiality has not been fully assessed for different types and forms of plastic waste
with natural subgrade soil in the road industry. In this paper, ground, flaky, and pelleted shapes of four sorted types of
plastic waste from a recycling market were combined with silty or clayey gravel and sand soil of the A-2-7 AASHTO
type. These plastic types are: low density polyethylene (LDPE), high density polyethylene (HDPE), polyethylene
terephthalate (PETE), and polypropylene (PP) resins. Their various geotechnical properties have been assessed
thoroughly. The investigation process entails assessing compaction, Californian Bearing Ratio (CBR), strength,
resilient modulus, and permeability properties for both natural sub-grade soil and modified sub-grade soil with the
aforementioned types of plastic waste. The results obtained show that the addition of plastic wastes decrease the
maximum dry densities of the subgrade soils because of the lower relative density of the plastic material compared to
the soil particles. It is also found that the addition of plastic wastes can increase or decrease the CBR and MR values
of the subgrade. The nature of change (increase or decrease) and its magnitude are a function of the plastic content,
shape and type. Permeability values of many subgrade soil samples increased with the addition of plastic waste,
whereas the hydraulic conductivity of some soils modified with plastic remained unchanged. Subgrade soils with
plastic had higher friction angle and lower compressive strength than plastic-free soils. The results of this research
suggest that partial replacement of subgrade soil material with plastic waste may prove useful in road subgrade
applications.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
At the outset of our project, we take this opportunity to express our sincere heartfelt
gratitude to our project guide and mentor, MR. ARPIT VYAS who with his guidance and
valuable advice helped us in the project. We are also thankful to Dr B. K. Mishra, Principal
TCET, Mumbai, Dr Seema Jagtap, Head CED, TCET, Mumbai, for giving a lot of freedom
and encouragement and the faculty members of TCET, Mumbai, for providing all kind of
possible help throughout for the completion of RBL-II Project.

Kaustubh Patil (33)

Mrudula Sawant (43)
Jatin Shetigar (47)
Shreya Waykar (53)
 TABLE of CONTENTS
Abstract

Chapter 1. Industry Linkage

1.1 Inputs received from Industry (formal communication proof)

1.2 Rubrics for Industry Linkage

Chapter 2. Business canvas

2.1 One-page Report (Business Canvas screenshots)

2.2 Rubrics for Business canvas

Chapter 3. Pitch Presentation

3.1 Screenshots of Presentation Slides

3.2 Rubrics for Pitch Presentation

Chapter 4. Participation in Competition

4.1 Screenshots of Presentation

4.2 Rubrics for Project Competition

4.3 Proof of Participation/certificate in Outside Project competition (if

any)

Chapter 5. Research Paper

5.1 Research Paper (Document /PDF)

5.2 Rubrics for Technical Paper Writing

5.3 Proof of Paper Publication

Chapter 6. Research Outcome Achieved

6.1 Screenshot of Research Outcome Quiz

6.2 Proof of Achievement

Chapter 1: Industry Linkage

Industry linkage for evaluating soil subgrade reinforced with plastic waste typically involves collaborations
between academia, government bodies, construction firms, and environmental agencies. Here are some
ways industry linkage can contribute to this process:

Construction and Civil Engineering Firms: These firms can provide field sites, equipment, and practical
insights. They may also assist with real-world applications by testing and evaluating soil reinforced with
plastic waste in live projects, such as road construction or embankments.
Recycling and Waste Management Companies: These companies are essential for sourcing and processing
the plastic waste materials. Collaborations can focus on establishing the best types and treatments of plastic
waste for soil reinforcement, as well as logistical and economic viability.
Government Agencies and Regulatory Bodies: They ensure that projects comply with environmental
standards and building codes. They can help streamline regulations for using plastic waste in subgrades,
offer funding for sustainable infrastructure projects, and support pilot projects for new applications.
Research Institutions and Universities: Academic research teams provide the scientific expertise needed to
evaluate soil properties, durability, and performance when reinforced with plastic waste. Their role includes
designing experiments, analyzing data, and developing theoretical models to guide practical applications.
Testing and Certification Laboratories: Independent laboratories can perform quality assurance and
certification tests, ensuring the reinforced soil meets safety and performance standards. This is critical for
industry-wide acceptance of these new materials.
Environmental NGOs and Sustainability Consultants: These groups can evaluate the environmental impact
of using plastic waste in soil subgrades and provide assessments or certifications on sustainability practices,
aligning the project with broader environmental goals.
Through partnerships in these areas, evaluations can assess properties like compressive strength, load-
bearing capacity, durability, water permeability, and long-term environmental effects.

Rubrics for Industry Linkage Evaluation

 Very
Excellent
Good Good Average Marks
(20
Sr. No Description (15 (10 Marks) (05 Marks) Percenta
Marks)
Marks) 50 Percent 25 Percent ge
100
75
Percent
Percent
Societal A feasibility study Social Practical Practical Issue is
Benefit and all of a project's relevance study feasibilit addressed
Practical relevant and with y and without any
Feasibility factors—including practical associati study justification
(GA9, economic, feasible on report
GA12) technical, legal, study without
and scheduling report any
considerations—to with study
ascertain the associatio report.
likelihood of n.
completing the
project
successfully.
Industry Industry Industry Supported Industry Industry
Support sponsored/technic Sponsore technical associati communica
( GA8) ally supported/ d and ly on for tion is
inputs received supported part of initiated
technicall project through
y emails and
discussions

Cost Cost consideration Cost Cost Cost Cost model

Effectivene looking into effective effective model is is partially
ss demand and with but addresse addressed
( GA11) inflow in the survey/stu relevanc d
market. dy report e after
finished
product
existence
is not
clear
Timeline Time factor in Within Delay is Timeline Timeline is
( GA4) which project is time tolerable is prepared
going to be frame /as to some prepared not clear.
completed. per extent but not
industry and feasible
needs and subject
expectatio to
ns market
conditio
ns and
Chapter 2. Business Canvas
Rubrics for Business Canvas Evaluation
 Excellent Very Good Good Average
Sr No. (20 Marks) (15 Marks) (10 Marks) (05 Marks) Marks
100 Percent 75 Percent 50 Percent 25 Percent Percentage

Product Idea Well A creative Average Poorly

and Value thought out, product that is/ product considered and
Proposition creative, and may be viable that may be presented
(GA 3, GA 6, unique in the market somewhat product that
GA 8) product that is place. practical in the may not be
viable to the market place. practical in the
market place. Specific market place.
customer Few specific
Specific problems cited customer No specific
customer and needs with problems cited customer
problems cited back up data to and needs back problems cited
and needs with show market up data to show and lacks back
extensive back potential. market up data to show
up data to show Specific key potential. Some market
MULTIPLE features of key features of potential.
market product match product do Specific key
potential. the customers match the features of
Specific key problems/needs. customers product do not
features of problems/needs. match the
product match customers
the customers problems/needs.
problems/needs.

Customer Clear Clear Little No clear

Segments and understanding understanding understanding understanding
Customer of specific of specific of specific of specific
Relationships customers in customers with customers, but customers and
(GA 4, GA 6, MULTIPLE potential size of missing missing
GA 7) markets. market. potential size of potential size of
market. market.
In depth three Three part
part plan to plan to attract, Identified few Missing steps to
attract, keep keep and grow steps to attract, keep and
and grow customers with attract, keep grow the
customers with specific and grow the customer.
specific benchmarks. customer. Missing the
benchmarks. Clear Vague understanding
Specific understanding understanding of needed
understanding of the complete of needed relationship
of the complete customer relationship with customer.
customer relationship with customer.
relationship needs.
needs.

Extensive Specific
Channels research of B2B/B2C Little B2B/B2C Unclear
Revenue B2B/B2C channels of channel B2B/B2C
 channels of distribution understanding. Streams and channel
distribution with citations Identification of Cost understanding.
with citations for each few specific Structure Missing
for each specific and channels and (GA 10, GA 11) specific
specific and alternative alternative channels and
alternative channels. channels. alternative
channels. channels.
Clear A general
Clear understanding understanding No
understanding of the profit of the profit understanding
of the profit stream for the stream for the of the profit
stream for the product/service. product/service stream for the
product/service . product/service.
in MULTIPLE Explanation of
markets. critical costs General critical Missing critical
for costs for costs for
Explanation of product/service product/service product/service
critical costs with sources. without sources. without sources.
for
product/service
with sources
for
MULTIPLE
markets.
An extensive A complete list Incomplete list Key Partners, Missing list of
list of key of key partners, of key Activities and key partners,
partners, suppliers, partners, Resources suppliers,
suppliers, resources suppliers, (GA 8, GA resources
resources required of each resources 9) required of each
required of each key partner. required of each key partner.
key partner. key partner.
List of key Missing the list
List of key activities with General list of of key
activities with backup data on key activities activities
backup data on needs to without without backup
needs to achieve key backup data on needs
achieve key activities. data on needs to achieve
activities for to achieve key
MULTIPLE Complete list of key activities.
markets. resources activities.
needed with Missing the list
Complete list of citations for General list of of resources
resources connecting with resources needed and
needed with the resources, needed without their citations
citations for and sorted by citations for for
connecting with prioritization. connecting with connecting with
the resources, the resources, the resources,
and sorted by and vague and missing
prioritization prioritization. prioritization.
by
MULTIPLE
markets.
The presenter Each presenter Presenter Subject Presenter does

has a complete understands vaguely Knowledge not understand

understanding their position understands and Delivery their position on
of "Business on the their position (GA 6, GA 7, the Business
Model Canvas", Business on the GA 12) Model Canvas,
product and Model Canvas Business product
customer product Model Canvas, knowledge, and
segment in the knowledge, and product sources
executive sources knowledge, and referenced in
Chapter 3. Pitch Presentation
Rubrics for Pitch Presentation Evaluation
 Very
Good
Excellent Good Average Marks
(10
Description (20 (15 (05 Percent
Marks)
Marks) Marks) Marks) age
Sr. No 50
100 75 25
Percent
Percent Percent Percent
Introduction, • Strong and Exceeds Meets Meets Does Not
Preparednes engaging introduc Expectations Expectation Some Meet
s and tion; s Expectatio Expectati
organizati • Draws the s ons
on (GA2, audience into
GA 3, presentation •
Thoroughly
GA 10)
prepared, well-
organized,
logical sequence
of information
that the listener
could easily
follow.
Subject • Clear, thorough Exceeds Meets Meets Does Not
Knowledge • description of Expectations Expectation Some Meet
(GA1, product or s Expectatio Expectati
GA2) service. s ons
• Communicates
benefits and/or
how
product/services
solve a problem.
Visual • Correct spelling Exceeds Meets Meets Does Not
Aids/Material and grammar used Expectations Expectation Some Meet
s on all handouts s Expectatio Expectati
(GA4, used to support s ons
GA5) the pitch (if
applicable).
Persuasion • Compelling Exceeds Meets Meets Does Not
(GA 6, GA pitch that Expectations Expectation Some Meet
10) successfully s Expectatio Expectati
convinces s ons
listener/audience
that the product
or service is
beneficial and
why it is the best
on the market.
Delivery • Effectively and Exceeds Meets Meets Does Not
and Time creatively delivers Expectations Expectation Some Meet
Managemen pitch with eye s Expectatio Expectati
t (GA 10, contact and s ons
GA enthusiasm that
12) engages the
listener/audience
. • Speaks
clearly and
distinctly.
• Presentation is
between 2-3
minutes, and was
obviously
rehearsed.
CHAPTER 4. PARTICIPATION IN COMPETITION
 Rubrics for Participation in Competition

Parameter Excellent Very Good Good Average Marks

(20 Marks) (15 Marks) (10 Marks) (05 Marks) %
100 % 75 % 50 % 25 %
Problem Problem is Problem is Problem is not Problem is
definition defined clearly defined defined not defined at
GA 1,GA 2 and identifies adequately appropriately all. Scope is
underlying Scope is Scope is not not identified
issues. adequately identified at all and
Scope is identified and appropriately features are
identified and finalized with and features vague
finalized with features are not fully
features finalized
innovative
steps are taken
Functionality Product has Product has Product has Product has
GA 4 very good good chance some chance very less
chance of of of functioning chance of
functioning functioning with 30%- functioning k
80%-100% sufficing 60%- 50% stake nowledge
functionality. 80% of audience level.
functionality knowledge
level.
Design The solutions The solution The solution No
GA4,GA5 have very good has good has limited proficiency in
proficiency in proficiency in proficiency in using the
using the using the using the elements and
elements and elements and elements and principles of
principles of principles of principles of design.
design design with design, but
(Modularity, good results design is
cohesion etc) for the task. inappropriate
with high level for the task
of creativity for
the task.
Implementatio Use of Error Less No error
n Optimization, handling Documentatio handling
GA 5,GA 6 error handling techniques n of techniques
techniques Moderate Implementatio No
Documentation Documentati n Documentati
of on of Use of tools on of
Implementatio Implementati e,g, Github Implementati
n done Use on on
of tools e,g, Use of tools No Use of
Github, e,g, Github tools e,g,
integration Github
tools
Potential for Develops a Solution is Analyses of Only one
product clear Solution based on some of the solution is
conversion and has high criteria with alternatives or considered
GA 9, GA potential for with good constraints with
12 product chances of have lead to constraints
development product different and cannot be
development recommendati converted into
ons with some product
chance of
product
development
 Rubrics for Research Paper Presentation

Excellent Very Good Good Average Marks

Sr. No (20 Marks) (15 Marks) (10 Marks) (05 Marks) Percenta
100 Percent 75 Percent 50 Percent 25 Percent ge
Organization If the paper If the paper If the paper If the paper
of content includes all includes any 7 includes any 5-6 includes any 4
GA4 GA6 heads including topics out of topics out of 1) topics out of
1) abstract, 1) abstract abstract, 1) abstract,
2) introduction, 2) introduction, 2) introduction, 2) introduction,
3) objectives, 3) objectives, 3) objectives, 3) objectives,
4) methodology, 4) methodology, 4) methodology, 4)
5) experimental 5) experimental 5) experimental methodology,
plan, plan, plan, 5) experimental
6) result and 6) result and 6) result and plan,
discussion, discussion, discussion, 6) result and
7) conclusions, 7) conclusions, 7) conclusions, discussion,
8) future scope. 8) future scope. 8) future scope. 7) conclusions,
8) future scope.
Grammar and The writing is The writing is The writing is The writing
Format Compelling. generally dull and loses interest in
(GA7) Sentences are engaging unengaging. the reader.
well-phrased but has some dry Some sentences Errors in
and varied in spots. are awkwardly sentence
length and Sentences are constructed so structure is
structure. well phrased and that the reader is frequent
Word choice is there is some occasionally enough to be a
consistently variety in length distracted. major
precise and and structure. Word choice is distraction to
accurate. Word choice is merely the reader.
generally good. adequate, and Many words
the range of are used
words are inappropriate
limited.
Design and All 4 parameters Any 3 Only 2 Only 1
Implementati met: parameters met: parameters met: parameter
on 1) Modern Tool 1) Modern Tool 1) Modern Tool met:
(GA4, GA5) Usage Usage Usage 1) Modern Tool
2) Feasibility 2) Feasibility 2) Feasibility Usage
3) User 3) User 3) User 2) Feasibility
friendliness friendliness friendliness 3) User
4) Application 4)Application 4) Application friendliness
4) Application
Presentation Student Student is at ease Student is Student does
and Team demonstrates with information Uncomfortable not have grasp
Work full and answers all with of
(GA6, GA7) knowledge, queries without information and Information and
answering all elaboration. is able to answer can’t answer
queries with Made only basic queries about
explanations. movements or queries. subject.
Movements gestures that Very little No movement
seem smooth enhance movement or or descriptive
 and help the articulation. descriptive gestures.
audience Team is gestures. Team
visualize. concentrated wit Team members members are
Diverse talents h only one type are not passive only
are present in team of skill set. contributing one person is
with much for take some
different skill set multifaceted efforts
development of
idea
Quality of If student have If student have If student have If student have
publication published paper in published paper published paper published paper
(GA10, Peer in International/ in International in National
GA11) Reviewed National Journal Conference Conference
Quality Journal

5.3 Proof of Paper Publication (Mail/Certificate/copy of published paper

 CHAPTER 6. RESEARCH OUTCOME ACHIEVED

6.1 Screenshot of Research Outcome Quiz