You are on page 1of 4

Delayed Compaction Effects on the Behaviour of Stabilized Soils

IGC 2009, Guntur, INDIA

DELAYED COMPACTION EFFECTS ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF


STABILIZED SOILS
S. Sahaya Vincy
P.G Student, Division of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Anna University
Chennai, Chennai600 025, India. E-mail: vincysahaya15@yahoo.com
M. Muttharam
Assistant Professor, Division of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Anna
University Chennai, Chennai600 025, India. E-mail:muttharam@annauniv.edu
ABSTRACT: Fly ash is the most abundant of all residues and its disposal not only needs enormous land, water and power
resources, but it also causes serious environmental hazards. In India there are about 82 thermal plants producing more than
95 millions tonnes of fly ash every year and the figure is likely to soar. The disposal of fly ash in ecologically suitable
manners has lately become a global concern. Standard Proctor tests were conducted on the soil-fly ash-lime mix (10% 20%,
30% fly ash and 2%, 4%, 6% lime), the maximum dry density decreased linearly and optimum moisture content increased
linearly with the increase of fly ash and lime content. Various UCC tests were conducted on the soil-fly ash-lime mix, for the
variation of lime 2%, 4% and 6%, fly ash 10%, 20% and 30% with the time delays (time delay between mixing the contents
with water and compaction) of 0, 3, 6 and 24 hrs. The prepared samples were tested to find out the effect of delayed
compaction on strength. The addition of 2% lime reduced the strength with time, 4% lime decreased the strength up to 6 hrs
after that it is increased, and 6% lime addition increased the strength with delayed compaction. Some of the samples were
curd for 7, 14 and 28 days in order to find out the strength with the age of curing. Curing periods increased the strength
considerably. 1% ammonium chloride was added with 2% lime and 10% fly ash and the UCC tests were conducted on the
specimens prepared with time delay. It is concluded that, ammonium chloride didnt affect the strength much with time delay.
CBR tests were conducted on the soil-fly ash-lime mix (2%, 4%, 6% lime and 10% fly ash) by delaying the compaction time
for 0, 1, 2 and 3 hrs. It is observed that time delay and the increasing percentage of lime and fly ash decreased the CBR
values.
1. INTRODUCTION
Soil can be used as a load bearing material or construction
material. When used for these purposes soil should posses
engineering properties to meet the requirements such as high
strength, low settlement etc. In many situations the soil
present in the field may be a problematic one such as
expansive soil. Expansive soils undergo volumetric changes
due to changes in water content. The swelling characteristics
of these soils depend on various factors such as the initial
water content and suction. However shrinkage occurs on
evaporation of water in dry seasons. This dual problem of
swelling and shrinkage causes damage to many lightly
loaded structures. In order to proceed with construction
under engineering conditions, some techniques are needed to
improve such properties of the soil. Soil Stabilization of
expansive soils with various additives is one of the
techniques to mitigate the problems possessed by expansive
soils (Sharma 2007). Chemical stabilization of expansive
soils involves additives such as cement, lime, bitumen,
calcium chloride, fly ash etc (Osinubi 2006). Soil stabilization
has been used in the buildings of roads & air-craft runways,
earth dams and embankments in erosion control (Osinubi
2006).

The strength and durability properties of expansive soils can


be improved by chemical stabilization. One of the ways of
attempting chemical stabilization is, mixing thoroughly the
stabilizers with soil at required moisture content and then
compacting the soil stabilization mix to the required density.
A delay between mixing the stabilizers with soil and
compaction of the soil-stabilizers mix leads to a decrease in
both density and strength for a fixed compactive effort. Most
of the time, the time delay is unavoidable one because of any
of the followings, sudden raining, delaying of compaction
equipments after mixing, insufficient workers, poor
transportations etc. These make the compaction process as a
delayed one. These delaying hours considerably affects the
strength of stabilized soils. Among the various chemicals
used for stabilizing the expansive soils, lime is very popular.
In addition, fly-ash which is a waste product from thermal
power station is also used for stabilizing expansive soil.
Hence study of compaction delay effects is needed, to find
the compaction effects of compaction delay between the
mixing and compaction on the engineering properties of
expansive soil stabilized with lime and fly ash. The primary
aim of this study is to find out the nature of compaction delay
effects on the properties of stabilized soil.

163

Delayed Compaction Effects on the Behaviour of Stabilized Soils

2. MATERIALS
Locally available expansive soil was to be used for the
experimental investigation. Soil sample was collected from
the local area at a depth of 0.5 m to 1.0 m. To characterize
the soil various experiments were conducted as per BIS
procedure. Laboratory grade hydrated lime and fly ash
collected from Ennore Thermal power plant, were used in
present study.
Table 1: Chemical Properties of Ennore Fly Ash
Chemical properties
Fly ash F
Chemical properties
% by mass
ASTM C618
class-F
SiO2
63.60
CaO
1.57
< 10
Al2O3
28.20
Fe2O3
2.99
MgO
0.54
5 (max)
Na2O
0.05
K2O
0.003
SO3
0.26
MnO
0.03
Loss on ignition
0.85
Soluble residue
Al2O3/Fe2O3
SiO2+Al2O3+Fe2O3
94.78
70 (min)

After the required period of time delay the specimens for


UCC test and CBR test were prepared, by applying Standard
Proctor Compactive energy. The UCC samples thus prepared
were cured at a relative humidity of 100% for various curing
periods before testing. For selected percentages of lime and
fly ash the UCC tests were conducted by adding the chemical
ammonium chloride, to find out whether it retards the effect
of delay between mixing and compaction on strength.
4. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
1.

Table 2: Physical Properties of Ennore Fly Ash


Physical properties
Fineness (m2/kg)
252
Specific gravity
2.09

Sl.
N
o
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

lime-fly ash mix to carryout Standard Proctor Compaction


test. Immediately after addition of water, the compaction is
carried out without any delay to get the compaction
characteristics of soil-lime-fly ash mix for the given
percentages of admixtures. After getting the compaction
curve, maximum dry density and corresponding optimum
moisture content is obtained for the given soil-lime-fly ash
mix. To find the effect of compaction delay on the various
properties of stabilized soil, the soil was mixed with the
required percentage of lime and fly ash in dry state. The
predetermined amount of water was added to the mix to
achieve the water content of the mix equal to the optimum
moisture content for the mix. Then this wet mix was left
undisturbed for a period of 0hr (no delay), 1hr, 3hrs, 6hrs,
12hrs and 24hrs. During the period of time delay, care is
taken to avoid the evaporation loss of water.

2.

Table 3: Index Properties of Clay


Parameter
Symbol or Values
percentag
e
Specific Gravity
Gs
2.43
Clay
%
76
Silt
%
18
Sand
%
6
Liquid Limit
%
86
Plastic Limit
%
29
Plasticity Index
Ip
57
IS Classification
CH
High Plasticity
Clay
MDD
g/cc
1.48
OMC
%
24

3.

4.

5.
3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
The expansive soil passing through 425 is mixed in dry
state with various percentages of lime and fly ash on weight
basis. The required amount of water was added to the soil164

Three different percentage of lime addition 2%, 4% and


6% was selected such that one percentage is less than
lime fixation point, another percentage is at lime fixation
point and the next percentage of lime is above lime
fixation point.
Three different percentage of fly ash addition was
proposed by taking into consideration the bulk
utilization of fly ash. At the same time due consideration
is given not to use very high fly ash, which is mere a
replacement not a stabilization. Hence the percentage of
fly ash addition was varied from 10% to 30%.
The time delay considered was selected to replicate the
practical situation. Few hours of time delay is normally
expected. Hence, the time delay of 0hrs, 1hr, 3hrs, 6hrs
and 24hrs are selected. In this 0hr time delay means,
immediately after mixing the soil-lime-fly ash mix with
water, the samples are compacted to the required
dimensions for various tests. This is included to have the
reference.
The compacted specimens were cured for 0days, 7days,
14days, and 28days before testing, since as per the
standards for lime stabilized soil, the strength should be
obtained for these curing periods.
Some of the UCC tests were conducted by adding 1%
ammonium chloride salt, to check whether this salt can
help in maintaining the strength of soil even there is
some time delay between mixing and compaction.

Delayed Compaction Effects on the Behaviour of Stabilized Soils

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS


Figure 1 presents the variation of maximum dry density of
soil-fly ash-lime mix with lime content. It can be seen from
Figure 1 that for the given fly ash content the addition of
lime decreased the Standard Proctor maximum dry density. It
can also be seen that for the given lime content, the effect of
increasing the fly ash content is to decrease the maximum
dry density. The reduction in the dry density with increase in
lime content is almost linear expect for fly ash addition of
20%. The reduction in dry density upon increase in lime
content may be due to the reduction between lime and soil
which makes the soil to reduce its plasticity. Further,the
dispersed structure of the soil is modified to flocculated due
to the soil-lime reaction, which inturn offers more resistance
against compactive energy. The effect of reduction in dry
density upon increase in fly ash content may be attributed to
the lower specfic gravity of fly ash compared to the soil.

Further addition of 30% fly ash and 2% ,4% and 6% of lime


with soil decreases the maximum dry density from 1.48 g/cc
to 1.4 g/cc, 1.34 g/cc, 1.3g/cc and increses the optimum
moisture content from 24% to 28%, 30% and 32%
respectively.

Fig. 2: Variation of UCC Strength with Time Delay and Lime


Content with 30%FA
Figure 2 shows the variation of UCC strength with the
variation of time delay and lime content, it has been observed
that, for 2% lime the strength has been decreased with time
delay. The delaying time above three hours increased the
strength after 6 hrs in the case of 4% lime. For 6% lime there
is little variation in strength

Fig. 1: Variation of Maximum Dry Density with Lime


Content
Table 4: MDD and OMC for Various Soil-Fly
Ash-Lime Mix
% of lime & % fly
MDD in
OMC in %
ash
g/cc
0% & 0%
1.48
24
2% & 10%
1.45
26
4% & 10%
1.40
28
6% & 10%
1.35
30
2% & 20%
1.43
27
4% & 20%
1.39
29
6% & 20%
1.32
31
2% & 30%
1.40
28
4% & 30%
1.34
30
6% & 30%
1.30
32

Fig. 3: Variation of UCC Strength with Time Delay and


Percentage of Lime Content with 20% FA

From Table 4 it is observed that addition of 10% of fly ash


and 2%, 4% and 6% of lime with soil decreases the
maximum dry density from 1.48 g/cc to 1.45 g/cc,1.4 g/cc
and 1.35g/cc and increses the optimum moisture content
from 24% to 26%, 28% and 30% respectively. Similarly
addition of 20% fly ash and 2%, 4% and 6% of lime with soil
decreases the maximum dry density from 1.48 g/cc to 1.43
g/cc, 1.39 g/cc, 1.32g/cc and increses the optimum moisture
content from 24% to 27%, 29% and 31% respectively.

Figure 3 shows the variation of UCC strength with time


delay and lime content. For the addition of 2% lime there is a
no major difference in strength between the without delay
and to the 24 hrs delay. 24 hrs delays with the addition of 4%
lime have attained the strength almost equal to the strength of
undelayed strength. In the case of 6% lime, the strength is
not much affected by time delay.

165

Delayed Compaction Effects on the Behaviour of Stabilized Soils

(2%, 4%, and 6%) and the percentage of fly ash was to be
maintained as constant 10% is shown in Figure 6.
6. CONCLUSIONS
1.
2.
3.
Fig. 4: Variation of UCC Strength with Time Delay and
Percentage of Lime Content with 10% FA

4.

Figure 4 shows the variation of UCC strength with the


variation of time delay and lime content, it has been observed
that, for 2% lime the strength has been decreased with time
delay. The delaying time above three hours increased the
strength after 6 hrs in the case of 4% lime. For 6% lime there
is a little increase in strength with time delay.

5.

6.

7.

The maximum dry density decreased with increasing fly


ash content and lime content.
The optimum moisture content increased with increasing
fly ash and lime content.
Compaction delay affects the strength of soil-lime-fly
ash mix, if the lime content is less than lime fixation
point and the effect is to reduce the strength.
For the lime addition equal to lime fixation point, the
effect of compaction delay is to reduce the strength
initially for shorter compaction delay and slightly
increases the strength upon further delay.
If the addition of lime is above the lime fixation point,
the compaction delay does not have any detrimental
effect on strength.
The addition just 1% of ammonium to soil-lime-flyash
mix increased the strength considerably. Further the
compaction delay has not affected the strength and for
various periods of time delay, the strength remained
unchanged.
Compaction delay affects the CBR value for all the
percentages of lime addition. The CBR value reduces
with increase in time delay. However, the rate of
reduction in CBR value decreases as the lime content
increases.

REFERENCES
Fig. 5: Variation of UCC Strength with Time Delay and
Percentage of Lime Content
Figure 5 shows the difference in strength between the soil-fly
ash-lime-ammonium chloride mix to the soil-fly ash lime
mix. Fig shows that the strength was increased with the
addition of ammonium chloride.

Fig. 6: Variation of CBR with Time Delay and Lime Content


CBR test was conducted on the soil-fly ash- lime mix by
delaying the time, varying the percentages of lime content

Kolawole J. Osinubi (1998). Influence of Compactive Effort


and Compaction Delays on Lime-Treated Soil, Journal
of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 2,
pp. 149155.
Kolawole J. Osinubi and Charles M.O. Nwaiwu (2006).
Compaction Delay Effects on Properties of Lime-Treated
Soil, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE,
Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 250258.
Sanjeev Kumar and Vijay K. Puri (2001). Geotechnical
Properties of Fly Ash and Lime-fly Ash Stabilized Coal
Mine Refuse, Environmental Geotechniques, Vol. 2, pp.
785789.
Scott M. Mackiewicz and Glen Ferguson E. (2005).
Stabilization of Soil with Self-Cementing Coal Ashes,
Kleinfelder, 7802 Barton, Lenexa, Kansas 66214.
Sunil S. Pusadkar and Ramasamy, G. (2005). Collapse
Behaviour of Compacted Coal Ash Fills, Geotechnical
Testing Journal, ASTM, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 297303.
Tuncer B. Edil, Hector A. Acosta and Craig H. Benson
(2006). Stabilizating Soft Fine-Grained Soils with Fly
Ash, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering in Civil
Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 283294.

166