Influence of Abacá Fiber Treated with Sodium Hydroxide on Undrained Shear Strength in Organic Silt
Abstract
1. Introduction
1.1. Organic Soil
1.2. Abacá Fiber
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sampling Site
2.2. Fiber Treatment
2.3. Homogenization Process of Organic Content and Abacá Fiber Dosage
2.4. Testing Program
2.5. Physical and Chemical Characterization of the Organic Soil
3. Results
3.1. Compaction Behavior
3.2. Unconfined Compression Strength
4. Discussion
4.1. Effect of Abacá Fibers on MDD and OWC
4.2. Effect of Abacá Fibers on Undrained Shear Strength
4.3. Effect of Abacá Fibers on Elastic Modulus
5. Conclusions
- Influence on compaction properties: The addition of treated abacá fibers caused a slight reduction in MDD and OWC. This behavior is attributed to the replacement of mineral and organic soil components with a lower-density fibrous material, which, due to chemical treatment, exhibits a lower water absorption capacity than the natural sapric organic matter of the soil.
- Significant strength improvement: Reinforcement with treated abacá fibers proved effective in increasing Su of the organic silt. A maximum increase of 104.13% was observed for a fiber content of 1.5% and length of 15 mm. ANOVA confirmed that fiber content, fiber length, and their interaction had a statistically significant effect on Su, explaining 99.56% of the observed variability. This improvement is attributed to the anchoring and friction mechanisms between the fibers and the soil matrix, as well as the NaOH treatment, which prevented biodegradation and increased the fiber surface roughness, thereby enhancing the reinforcement mechanism.
- Optimization of reinforcement parameters: Post hoc Tukey analysis indicated that fiber length significantly influences Su, with the best results obtained using 15 mm fibers. Regarding fiber content, the optimal dosage was identified as 1.5%, as no statistically significant differences were observed compared to the 2.0% dosage. The lack of additional benefit at higher contents is likely due to agglomerate formation, which can reduce the effectiveness of fiber reinforcement.
- Increase in ductility: Fiber incorporation transformed the soil behavior from brittle to ductile, as evidenced by a general reduction in E50 of up to 52.61%. However, this parameter exhibited a high variability. Although the ANOVA confirmed a significant effect of the experimental factors, its predictive power was moderate (R2 = 0.8236). This result, together with the post hoc Tukey analysis, which found no significant differences for most pairs of fiber lengths or contents, is attributed to the inherent heterogeneity of the organic soil. These findings indicate that E50 is more sensitive to soil variability than the undrained shear strength.
- Long-Term Durability and Environmental Considerations: The seven-day curing period does not allow for an assessment of fiber durability in active organic soils. Although NaOH treatment and the absence of visible decomposition are promising, microbial degradation and the potential gradual release of Na+ into soil cannot be ruled out. This release could affect the electrical conductivity, pH, and exchangeable cations of the sapric soils. Fibers were rinsed to minimize residual NaOH; however, future studies should monitor these parameters to ensure the long-term effectiveness and safety of fiber reinforcement.
- Necessity of NaOH treatment: Future research could quantitatively assess the need for fiber treatment by comparing untreated samples with fibers subjected to different curing durations. This approach allows the evaluation of the effect of fiber biodegradation on the undrained shear strength and elastic modulus.
- Limited Parameter Range: The study was limited to three fiber dosages (1, 1.5, and 2%) and three lengths (5, 10, and 15 mm). While this range allowed the identification of an optimal trend, the maximum strength might be achieved with longer fibers, which could introduce handling and homogenization challenges.
- Elastic Modulus Variability: The high variability observed in E50 can be attributed to the fact that only three tests were performed per combination. Future studies could consider testing a larger number of specimens per combination to reduce this variability and better clarify the elastic modulus trend.
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
MDD | Maximum dry density |
OWC | Optimum water content |
Su | Undrained shear strength |
E50 | Elastic modulus at 50% of maximum strength |
UCS | Unconfined Compressive Strength |
NaOH | Sodium hydroxide |
SEM | Scanning electron microscopy |
XRD | X-ray diffraction |
CBR | California Bearing Ratio |
CU | Consolidated undrained (triaxial test) |
R2 | Coefficient of determination |
ANOVA | Analysis of variance |
H7 | Von Post Classification: highly decomposed peat |
References
- Sharma, A.K.; Asce, A.M.; Kolathayar, S. Comparative Study of Sisal and PVA Fiber for Soil Improvement. In Geo-Congress 2019: Soil Improvement (GSP 309); American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, VA, USA, 2019; pp. 298–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kekeç, E.; Sert, S.; Arslan, E.; Bol, E.; Özocak, A. Experimental Investigation on the Variation in Shear Strength of Clayey Soil Reinforced with Randomly Distributed Alkali-Resistant Glass Fiber. Sak. Univ. J. Sci. 2022, 26, 438–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contreras, C.; Albuja-Sánchez, J.; Proaño, O.; Ávila, C.; Damián-Chalán, A.; Peñaherrera-Aguirre, M. The Influence of Abaca Fiber Treated with Sodium Hydroxide on the Deformation Coefficients Cc, Cs, and Cv of Organic Soils. Fibers 2024, 12, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; Wei, K.; Gu, J.; Huang, X.; Dai, X.; Liu, Q. Combined Effect of Biopolymer and Fiber Inclusions on Unconfined Compressive Strength of Soft Soil. Polymers 2022, 14, 787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baldin, C.R.B.; Kawanami, M.Y.; Costa, W.G.S.; Bordignon, V.R.; da Luz, C.C.; Izzo, R.L.D.S. Mechanical properties of a clay soil reinforced with rice husk under drained and undrained conditions. J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 2023, 15, 2676–2686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molina-Román, P.; Capelo, C.; Anaguano-Marcillo, M.; Solórzano, C.; Albuja-Sánchez, J.; Gómez, N.B.Y.; Khorami, M.; García-Troncoso, N.; Damián-Chalán, A. Analysis of the Influence of Sugarcane Bagasse Fibers in the Natural State on the Mechanical Properties of Concrete. J. Nat. Fibers 2025, 22, 2451407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmay, P.; Sanipatin, S.; Poalacin, D.; Donoso, D. Mejoramiento de las propiedades mecánicas del polipropileno reciclado mediante adición de fibras vegetales, polietilen terftalato y tratamiento térmico. Perfiles 2022, 1, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shantveerayyaa, K.; Kumar, C.L.M.; Shwetha, K.G.; Jima, F.; Fufa, K. Performance Evaluation of Hollow Concrete Blocks Made with Sawdust Replacement of Sand: Case Study of Adama, Ethiopia. Int. J. Eng. Trans. B Appl. 2022, 35, 1119–1126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medina-Martinez, C.J.; Sandoval-Herazo, L.C.; Zamora-Castro, S.A.; Vivar-Ocampo, R.; Reyes-Gonzalez, D. Natural Fibers: An Alternative for the Reinforcement of Expansive Soils. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Datta, N.M.; Achuthan, A. Stabilization of expansive soil with terrasil and coir fiber as a subgrade for pavement. E3S Web Conf. 2023, 391, 01019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Guo, P.; Li, X.; Lin, H.; Liu, Y.; Yuan, H. Behavior of fiber-reinforced and lime-stabilized clayey soil in triaxial tests. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brahmachary, T.K.; Rokonuzzaman, M. Investigation of random inclusion of bamboo fiber on ordinary soil and its effect CBR value. Int. J. Geo-Eng. 2018, 9, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albuja-Sánchez, J.; Alcívar, E.; Escobar, D.; Montero, J.; Realpe, G.; Muñoz, A.; Peñaherrera-Aguirre, M. Influence of Abaca Fiber Inclusion on the Unconfined Compressive Strength of Reconstituted Sandy Silts. Fibers 2022, 10, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, R.; Islam, R.; Sayeed, M.A.; Billah, M.M. Improvement of natural subgrade soil for road construction by the use of sugarcane fiber. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering 2024, Chattogram, Bangladesh, 12–14 December 2024; Available online: https://icace2024.cuet.ac.bd (accessed on 15 July 2025).
- Moslemi, A.; Tabarsa, A.; Mousavi, S.Y.; Monfared, M.H.A. Shear strength and microstructure characteristics of soil reinforced with lignocellulosic fibers-Sustainable materials for construction. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 356, 129246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bawadi, N.F.; Ahmad, N.S.; Mansor, A.F.; Anuar, S.A.; Rahim, M.A. Effect of natural fibers on the soil compaction characteristics. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 476, 012043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Łachacz, A.; Kalisz, B.; Sowiński, P.; Smreczak, B.; Niedźwiecki, J. Transformation of Organic Soils Due to Artificial Drainage and Agricultural Use in Poland. Agriculture 2023, 13, 634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Łachacz, A.; Bogacz, A.; Glina, B.; Kalisz, B.; Mendyk, Ł.; Orzechowski, M.; Smólczyński, S.; Sowiński, P. Origin, transformation and classification of organic soils in Poland. Soil Sci. Annu. 2024, 75, 195241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mushtaq, A.; Sachar, E.A. Determination of Shear Strength of Organic Soil in Kashmir. Int. J. Innov. Res. Eng. Manag. 2022, 9, 74–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meyer, Z.; Magdalena, O. Analysis of using the empirical model of organic soil consolidation to predict settlement. ACEE 2023, 16, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nur, A.S.; Alistair, D.G.; Habib, M.M. A Review on Experimental Investigations and Geotechnical Characteristic of Peat Soil Stabilization. Int. J. Adv. Res. Eng. Innov. 2023, 5, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navarro, G.; Navarro, S. Materia orgánica del suelo. In Química Agrícola, 2nd ed.; Aedos, S.A.E., Ed.; Mundi-Prensa: Madrid, Spain, 2003; Chapter 4; pp. 53–77. [Google Scholar]
- Tan, K.H. Colloidal Chemistry of Organic Soil Constituents. In Principles of Soil Chemistry, 4th ed.; Taylor and Francis Group: Athens, GA, USA, 2011; Chapter 5; pp. 75–130. [Google Scholar]
- Chong, W.A.; Chan, C.M.; Sani, S.; Rahman, N.K.A.; Yahya, N.F. Soil stabilisation for laying road foundations: Way forward with organic soil treatment. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2023, 1205, 012070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaneco, S.; Itoh, K.; Katsumata, H.; Suzuki, T.; Masuyama, K.; Funasaka, K.; Hatano, K.; Ohta, K. Removal of natural organic polyelectrolytes by adsorption onto tobermorite. Environ. Sci Technol. 2003, 37, 1448–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huat, B.; Kazemian, S.; Asadi, A. Experimental Investigation on Geomechanical Properties of Tropical Organic Soils and Peat. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2009, 2, 184–188. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26624651 (accessed on 10 July 2025).
- Calderón-Carrasco, A.; Galarza-Poveda, B.; Damián-Chalán, A.; Albuja-Sánchez, J. Effect of Storage Time on the Structural Integrity of Silts and Organic Soils: An Analysis of Moisture Content, Unconfined Compressive Strength, and Elasticity. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 8060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayanquer, J.; Anaguano-Marcillo, M.; Játiva, N.; Albuja-Sánchez, J. New Correlations for the Determination of Undrained Shear, Elastic Modulus, and Bulk Density Based on Dilatometer Tests (DMT) for Organic Soils in the South of Quito, Ecuador. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 8570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez, E.F.; Albuja-Sánchez, J.; Córdova, M. Integrated Geotechnical Analysis of Allophanic Volcanic Ash Soils: SDMT and Laboratory Perspectives. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 1386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solórzano-Blacio, C.; Albuja-Sánchez, J. Effect of Nanosilica on the Undrained Shear Strength of Organic Soil. Nanomaterials 2025, 15, 702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maity, J.; Chattopadhyay, B.C.; Mukherjee, S.P. Improvement of Characteristics of Clayey Soil Mixed with Randomly Distributed Natural Fibers. J. Inst. Eng. Ser. A 2018, 99, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdi, M.K.R.; Parsa-Pajouh, A.; Arjomand, M.A.; Abdi, M.R.; Parsapajouh, A.; Arjomand, M.A. Effects of Random Fiber Inclusion on Consolidation, Hydraulic Conductivity, Swelling, Shrinkage Limit and Desiccation Cracking of Clays. 2008. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228622495 (accessed on 25 July 2025).
- Gowthaman, S.; Nakashima, K.; Kawasaki, S. A state-of-the-art review on soil reinforcement technology using natural plant fiber materials: Past findings, present trends and future directions. Materials 2018, 11, 553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, G.; Zhang, C.; Zhao, M.; Guo, W.; Luo, Q. Comparison of Nanomaterials with Other Unconventional Materials Used as Additives for Soil Improvement in the Context of Sustainable Development: A Review. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.-X.; Guo, P.P.; Ren, W.X.; Yuan, B.X.; Yuan, H.P.; Zhao, Y.L.; Cao, P. Laboratory Investigation on Strength Characteristics of Expansive Soil Treated with Jute Fiber Reinforcement. Int. J. Geomech. 2017, 17, 04017101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fode, T.A.; Jande, Y.A.C.; Kivevele, T.; Rahbar, N. A Review on Degradation Improvement of Sisal Fiber by Alkali and Pozzolana for Cement Composite Materials. J. Nat. Fibers 2024, 21, 2335327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karimah, A.; Ridho, M.R.; Munawar, S.S.; Ismadi; Amin, Y.; Damayanti, R.; Lubis, M.A.R.; Wulandari, A.P.; Nurindah; Iswanto, A.H.; et al. A comprehensive review on natural fibers: Technological and socio-economical aspects. Polymers 2021, 13, 4280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Indrawati, S.; Yuwana, L.; Suyatno; Zainuri, M. The Characterization of Structures and Porosity of Abaca Fiber. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2024, 2780, 012005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Winckell, A. Los Paisajes Naturales del Ecuador, 1st ed.; Centro Ecuatoriano de Investigación Geográfica: Quito, Ecuador, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Albuja-Sánchez, J.D. Determination of the undrained shear strength of organic soils using the cone penetration test and Marchetti’s flat dilatometer test. Int. Soc. Soil Mech. Geotech. Eng. 2021, 6, 26–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villagómez, D. Evolución Geolgica Plio-Cuaternaria del Valleinterandino Central en Ecuador (Zona de Quito-Guayllabamba-Sanantonio); Escuela Politécnica Nacional: Quito, Ecuador, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Khalid, M.Y.; Imran, R.; Arif, Z.U.; Akram, N.; Arshad, H.; Al Rashid, A.; Márquez, F.P.G. Developments in chemical treatments, manufacturing techniques and potential applications of natural-fibers-based biodegradable composites. Coatings 2021, 11, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, M.; Takagi, H.; Nakagaito, A.N.; Li, Y.; Waterhouse, G.I.N. Effect of alkali treatment on interfacial bonding in abaca fiber-reinforced composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2016, 90, 589–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, W.; O’Kelly, B.C.; Yang, M.; Fang, K.; Li, X.; Li, H. Briefing: Specific gravity of solids relationship with ignition loss for peaty soils. Geotech. Res. 2020, 7, 134–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Kelly, B.C. Biodegradation of biosolids and specific gravity determination. Environ. Geotech. 2016, 6, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM D7928-21e1; Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Fine-Grained Soils Using the Sedimentation (Hydrometer) Analysis. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D1140-17; Test Methods for Determining the Amount of Material Finer than 75-m (No. 200) Sieve in Soils by Washing. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D4318-17e1; Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D2487-17e1; Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D2974-20e1; Determining the Water (Moisture) Content, Ash Content, and Organic Material of Peat and Other Organic Soils. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2020. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D854-23; Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by the Water Displacement Metod. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2023. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D1557-12(2021); Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 (2,700 kN-m/m3)). ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D2166/D2166M-16; Unconfined Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soil. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2016. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D4972-13; Test Method for pH of Soils. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2013. [CrossRef]
- ASTM D5715-00; Standard Test Method for Estimating the Degree of Humification of Peat and Other Organic Soils (Visual/Manual Method). ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2000. Available online: www.astm.org (accessed on 20 July 2025).
Laboratory Test | Parameter | Standard | Test Realized Number |
---|---|---|---|
Particle-Size Distribution | Gravel, sand, lime and clay fraction [%] | ASTM D 7928 [46] | 3 for each standard |
ASTM D 1140 [47] | |||
Atterberg Limits | LL, LP, IP [%] | ASTM D 4318 [48] | 3 for homogenized sample |
USCS Classification | Soil Classification | ASTM D 2487 [49] | 3 for homogenized sample |
Organic Content | Organic fraction [%] | ASTM D 2974 [50] | 9 triplicate tests on homogenized sample, for a total of 27 |
Specific Gravity | Gs | ASTM D 854 [51] | 2 for homogenized sample |
Laboratory Compaction | MDD and OWC | ASTM D 1557 [52] | 1 for each combination of dosage and fiber content at least |
Unconfined Compression Test | Su, E50 | ASTM D 2166 [53] | 3 for each combination of dosage and fiber content |
pH determination | pH | ASTM D 5298 [54] | 3 for homogenized sample |
Von Post Classification | H1 to H10 | ASTM D 5715 [55] | 3 for homogenized sample |
Property | Value | Property | Value |
---|---|---|---|
Sand fraction | 34.05% | Specific gravity | 1.98 |
Silt fraction | 59.94% | MDD | 0.6618 gr/cm3 |
Clay fraction | 6.01% | OWC | 75.53% |
Liquid limit, LL | 349.85% | Von Post Classification | H7 |
Plastic limit, PL | 194.95% | pH | 5 |
Plasticity index, PI | 154.90% | Average Organic Content [%] | 33.88% |
USCS classification | Organic silt with sand (OH) | Organic Content Standard Deviation | 2.17 |
Fiber Content [%] | Fiber Length [mm] | MDD [g/cm3] | OWC [%] | R2 | MDD Reduction [%] | OWC Reduction [%] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0.6618 | 75.53 | 0.8421 | ------- | ------- |
1 | 5 | 0.6235 | 69.51 | 0.9289 | 5.79% | 7.97% |
1.5 | 5 | 0.6226 | 69.02 | 0.9456 | 5.92% | 8.62% |
2 | 5 | 0.6256 | 70.86 | 0.9907 | 5.47% | 6.18% |
1 | 10 | 0.6185 | 69.49 | 0.9863 | 6.54% | 8.00% |
1.5 | 10 | 0.6225 | 70.13 | 0.9382 | 5.94% | 7.15% |
2 | 10 | 0.6333 | 68.94 | 0.9819 | 4.31% | 8.73% |
1 | 15 | 0.6192 | 69.86 | 0.9447 | 6.44% | 7.51% |
1.5 | 15 | 0.6225 | 70.17 | 0.9922 | 5.94% | 7.10% |
2 | 15 | 0.6294 | 72.47 | 0.9576 | 4.90% | 4.05% |
Fiber Content [%] | Fiber Length [mm] | Average Water Content [%] | Average Dry Density [g/cm3] | Average Degree of Saturation [%] | Average Void Ratio |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 72.89 | 0.62 | 65.87 | 2.20 |
1 | 5 | 72.40 | 0.60 | 62.14 | 2.31 |
1.5 | 5 | 72.77 | 0.59 | 61.26 | 2.35 |
2 | 5 | 72.47 | 0.60 | 62.22 | 2.31 |
1 | 10 | 72.58 | 0.60 | 63.03 | 2.28 |
1.5 | 10 | 72.28 | 0.60 | 61.74 | 2.32 |
2 | 10 | 72.40 | 0.60 | 62.34 | 2.30 |
1 | 15 | 72.66 | 0.61 | 63.68 | 2.26 |
1.5 | 15 | 72.48 | 0.60 | 62.33 | 2.30 |
2 | 15 | 72.62 | 0.60 | 61.87 | 2.32 |
Experimental Factor | Sum of Squares | Degrees of Freedom | Mean Square | F Value | p-Value | F Critical Value | Significance (ANOVA) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fiber Content | 91.53 | 2 | 45.77 | 158.65 | 3.70 × 10−12 | 3.55 | Yes |
Fiber Length | 1039.22 | 2 | 519.61 | 1801.18 | 1.86 × 10−21 | 3.55 | Yes |
Interaction | 39.22 | 4 | 9.81 | 33.99 | 3.65 × 10−8 | 2.93 | Yes |
Error | 5.19 | 18 | 0.29 | — | — | — | — |
Total | 1175.17 | 26 | — | — | — | — | — |
Coefficient of Determination (R2) | 0.9956 |
Fiber Length Comparisons | Fiber Content Comparisons | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean difference critical value | 1.12 | Mean difference critical value | 1.12 | ||
Pairwise Comparison | Mean Difference | Significant (Tukey Test) | Pairwise Comparison | Mean Difference | Significant (Tukey Test) |
15 mm vs. 5 mm | 15.20 | Yes | 1.5% vs. 2.0% | 0.03 | No |
15 mm vs. 10 mm | 7.60 | Yes | 1.5% vs. 1.0% | 3.89 | Yes |
10 mm vs. 5 mm | 7.59 | Yes | 1.0% vs. 2.0% | 3.92 | Yes |
Experimental Factor | Sum of Squares | Degrees of Freedom | Mean Square | F Value | p-Value | F Critical Value | Significance (ANOVA) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fiber Content | 0.50 | 2 | 0.25 | 12.28 | 4.33 × 10−4 | 3.55 | Yes |
Fiber Length | 0.17 | 2 | 0.08 | 4.10 | 3.42 × 10−2 | 3.55 | Yes |
Interaction | 1.05 | 4 | 0.26 | 12.83 | 4.12 × 10−5 | 2.93 | Yes |
Error | 0.37 | 18 | 0.02 | — | — | — | — |
Total | 2.08 | 26 | — | — | — | — | — |
Coefficient of Determination (R2) | 0.8236 |
Fiber Length Comparisons | Fiber Content Comparisons | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean difference critical value | 0.30 | Mean difference critical value | 0.30 | ||
Pairwise Comparison | Mean Difference | Significant (Tukey Test) | Pairwise Comparison | Mean Difference | Significant (Tukey Test) |
15 mm vs. 5 mm | 0.19 | No | 1.5% vs. 2.0% | 0.33 | Yes |
15 mm vs. 10 mm | 0.12 | No | 1.5% vs. 1.0% | 0.11 | No |
10 mm vs. 5 mm | 0.07 | No | 1.0% vs. 2.0% | 0.11 | No |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Albuja-Sánchez, J.; Romero, D.; Solórzano-Blacio, C. Influence of Abacá Fiber Treated with Sodium Hydroxide on Undrained Shear Strength in Organic Silt. Fibers 2025, 13, 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/fib13100139
Albuja-Sánchez J, Romero D, Solórzano-Blacio C. Influence of Abacá Fiber Treated with Sodium Hydroxide on Undrained Shear Strength in Organic Silt. Fibers. 2025; 13(10):139. https://doi.org/10.3390/fib13100139
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlbuja-Sánchez, Jorge, Doménica Romero, and Carlos Solórzano-Blacio. 2025. "Influence of Abacá Fiber Treated with Sodium Hydroxide on Undrained Shear Strength in Organic Silt" Fibers 13, no. 10: 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/fib13100139
APA StyleAlbuja-Sánchez, J., Romero, D., & Solórzano-Blacio, C. (2025). Influence of Abacá Fiber Treated with Sodium Hydroxide on Undrained Shear Strength in Organic Silt. Fibers, 13(10), 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/fib13100139