You are on page 1of 11

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY

WOO-SIK KIM , NGUYEN MINH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG

Corresponding Author: Du-Hwoe Jung
Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civil Engineering
Pukyong National University
Korea.

ABSTRACT
This paper describes the effect of factors on the strength characteristics of cement treated clay
from laboratory tests performed on cement mixed clay specimens. It is considered that several
factors such as soil type, sample preparing method, quantity of binder, curing time, etc. can have
an effect on strength characteristics of cement stabilized clay. A series of unconfined
compression tests have been performed on samples prepared with different conditions. The
results indicated that soil type, mixing method, curing time, dry weight ratio of cement to clay
(A w), and water-clay to cement (wc/c) ratio were main factors which can have an influence on
unconfined compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, and failure strain of cement stabilized
clay. Unconfined compressive strength of soil-cement samples prepared from dry mixing method
was higher than those prepared from wet mixing method.

KEYWORDS: Cement Stabilized Clay, Deep Mixing Method, soft clay, unconfined compressive
strength, modulus of elasticity, failure strain.

INTRODUCTION A comparative study, carried out by Shiells
The behavior of soft clay can be improved et al. (2003), on the strength of soil cement
with soil-cement columns created by a deep admixture of these two mixing methods,
mixing method (DMM). Soil-cement stated that the wet mix method generally
columns are used primarily to reduce used a dosage rate higher than the dry
settlement and improve stability. The deep mixing method. The dosage rate ranged
mixing method encompasses a group of from 180 to 400 kg/m3 for the wet mixing
technologies that provide in situ soil method and it ranged from 90 to 180 kg/m3
treatment. The method in which dry for the dry mixing method. However, Lin
powdered cement is used as a stabilizing and Wong (1999) inversely reported that the
agent is generally known as the dry method unconfined compressive strength of
of deep mixing, whereas the use of improved soil using cement slurry was
stabilizing agent in a slurry form is referred lower than that using cement powder. This
to as the wet method of deep mixing. The may be attributed to the difference in water
dry mixing method is usually used to cement ratio of stabilized soils prepared
improve soft clay that has high natural water from two mixing methods. Specimens
content because of sufficient groundwater to prepared from the wet mixing method had
hydrate the cement (Esrig 1999) 2001). The higher water content and further increased
wet mixing method is generally the water-cement ratio, and thereby result ing
recommended for dry or arid environments in lower strength. These results from Shiells
or sites with deep ground water tables. et al. (2003) and Lin and Wong (1999)
Although the dry mixing technology is should not be compared each other because
predominant in Scandinavian countries and sample preparation methods are different in
the wet mixing method has been frequently these two investigations.
used in Japan, there is a very limited
conclusive research available on the choices The main purpose of this study is to
of one of these two methods, which one can investigate the strength characteristics of
result in a better improvement. cement stabilized clay samples prepared
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING, DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY
VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 PP116-126
© 2005 CAPE PENINSULA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

20 6 52. Their physical and mechanical properties were determined TEST R ESULTS AND DISCUSSION and compared in Table 1. dry exist in Scandinavian and Japanese methods.21 Wet 2 Clay 2 6 52. In order to investigate several factors affecting strength characteristics of cement PROPERTIES OF NATURAL SOFT CLAY stabilized clay. where the peak Specific Gravity 2.2 presented in Figure 1 for various dry weight Liquid Limit LL(%) 48. (%) Wet 10 45. from Nak-dong river basin.71 100 57.55 method 6 52.71 300 82. CONDITIONS Normal Portland cement was used for Table 2: Sample preparation methods and test conditions employed in the study Initial Additional Modified initial Cement mixed clay paste Number water water to water content of water-clay to Initial Test Soil Mixing of content of cement ratio of natural soil after Dry weight ratio cement content Water number group Method of cement toclay samples natural clay cement slurry mixing ratio content (%) (%) (%) (%) .71 15 4.71 100 72.71 200 72.27 75. Additionally. Samples with Aw of 15% and 20% Liquid Index (IL ) 1.46 6 52.27 66.71 100 67.71 10 7. weight ratio of cement to clay (A w).4 ratio of cement to clay (Aw).71 10 6.71 50 57.71 100 62.10 6 52. the effects of other mixing methods.52 50. water.71 20 3.5 6.64 60. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG with different mixing methods and mixing sample preparation in both dry and wet conditions.19 117 JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING.5 peak strengths and larger failure strains.01 method 6 52.71 10 6. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM.96 6 52.27 57.3 14.2 showed brittle failures.71 5 11.22 100 55.71 8 7.0 42. a sample preparation method proposed by clay to cement (wc/c) ratio.6 Water Content w(%) 52.7 27.71 10 8. 2002) was employed in also evaluated to provide a better the study.01 Wet 3 Clay 2 6 52.8 18.77 61.67 strengths achieved at lower strains and their Grain size distribution residual strengths were much lower than Sand 5% 8% Sieve (% < #200) 95% 92% their peak strengths.71 100 60.22 100 55.22 10 5. Samples with Plastic Limit PL (%) 24.7 45. On the other hand. Although some differences important factors including curing time.71 10 5.61 2. It is E50 (Kpa) 779 1239 also interesting to realize from Figure 1 that the failure strain tends to decrease with SAMPLE PREPARATION AND TEST increasing unconfined compressive strength. STRESS-STRAIN CURVES Stress-strain curves obtained from Table 1: Properties of natural clays unconfined compression tests on soil- Properties Clay 1 Clay 2 cement samples cured for 28 days are Unit weight (kN/m3 ) 17.2 higher cement content showed more brittle Plasticity Index (Ip ) 23.22 10 5. q u (kPa) 41 65 samples with lower Aw showed decreased Axial failure strain εf (%) 9. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 .88 6 52.20 1 Clay 1 Dry 10 45.71 150 67. samples were prepared with Two different types of clays were obtained different conditions as indicated in Table 2.54 54.51 58.77 52.71 10 6.27 57.71 100 62. on the strength Japanese Coastal Development Institute of charcateristics of cement treated clay were Technology (CDIT. understanding of the behavior of cement stabilized clay.8 failures.52 50.2 1.59 56.59 6 52.

10 soil-cement samples were reactions between stabilizing agent. cementing specimens prepared from cement powder phases are produced and calcium and shows a rapid increase in pH value (due to hydroxide ions in solution are constinuously the hydration of cement) compared to consumed and more must be dissolved to specimens prepared from slurry cement maintain solution equilibrium. clay prepared with clay 1 by each mixing method minerals.. This result increase with time reflects the cumulative associates with the reports of Massaki effects of a cementation process (Locat et (1996) and Gotoh (1996) that the strength of al. During this period. 1996). Furthermore. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY 118 VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . that were soil-cement samples mixed by dry mixing dependent of sequence of soil-cement method was much higher than that by wet mixing. as indicated in Table 2. 3) To investigate the effect of mixing methods The strength of soil cement specimens is on strength characteristics of soil-cement gained as results of physical and chemical samples. strength. and water including hydration. As shown in Figure pozzolanic reaction. carbonation etc. 2) The During the pozzo lanic reactions. the rate of strength gain was appeared to be much Unconfined compressive strength of both faster for dry mixed samples compared to soil-cement samples tended to develop wet mixed samples. After JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG 2000 Aw = 20% Aw = 15% 1600 Aw = 10% Aw = 8% Deviator stress (Kpa) Aw = 5% 1200 800 400 0 0 1 2 3 4 Axial Strain (%) Figure 1: Stress-strain curve s of unconfined compression test on soil-cement samples tested after 28 days of curing EFFECT OF MIXING M ETHOD AND CURING specimens prepared from cement powder TIME than those prepared from cement slurry. ion exchange. 2. more and more Combination from these conclusions results efficiency particle or aggregate bonds are in the higher strength gain of soil cement created by the neoformed minerals. the unconfined compressive strength of flocculation. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. other experiment conditions. Thus. Strengh (Fam and Santamarina. mixing method. Strength gaining of (1998) reported that the compaction of wet cement stabilized soil is mainly caused by a mixed samples was much less uniform than combination of cement hydration and the dry mixed specimens with the same pozzolanic reaction that are time dependent. a stiffer structures matrix of mechanically felt as a rapidly increase in stabilized soil would be formed. 1990). In the early stage of the curing soil cement samples increase with increasing period where the pozzolanic reactions are pH value. These differences in rapidly in an early curing stage and the two mixing methods may be explained by development of strength tended to slow the reasons hereafter: 1) Hampton and Edil down afterwards. or of mixing method.

for soils stabilized by the dry pronounced as in initial stage. the 28-day unconfined compressive least three following reasons: i) completion strength. whereas this (Kitazume et al. and Hayashi et al. which is typically used for design of pozzolanic reactions due to exhaustion of value.2 times the 28-day values or products are still produced in abundance but 1.9848 600 600 400 400 200 Wet mixing method 200 R2 = 0.8 times the 56 days value Especially. similar to results indicated by with greater difficulty for solutes to diffuse Yang et al. difference were about 1. designers may can be 1.7 times the 7-day values and about 0. are generally about 1. strengths are about 1.8 times the 7-days values of strength. the 28-day unconfined compressive has already a new.5 times the 28-day values for estimate a time schedule for construction. since the soil method. R = 0.67.9848 ∆ Dry mixing method 800 800 qu = 217 ln(t)+18. ii) reactions are still going on but day values. which is strengths were about 1 to 2 times the 7-day consistent with data published in literatures values for wet mixing method.9412 Wet mixing method qu = 86 ln(t)+60. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG exceeding this period. a reduction in the rate For soils stabilized by the wet mixing of increase of shear strength results from at method. or iii) reaction approximate 1. more rigid structure.523 x qu.9404 4 ∆ Dry mixing method: R = 0. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. Based on the predicted strength gains dry mixing method.9295 2 Axial failure strain (%) 30000 3 E 50 (kPa) 20000 2 ∆ Dry mixing method 10000 (a) 2 E50 = 52.5 times the 7- cement. their effects on strength are not as Similarly. 1000 1000 ∆ Dry mixing method Unconfined compressive strength qu (Kpa) Unconfined compressive strength qu (Kpa) R2 = 0. wet method.9163 1 (b) 2 Wet mixing method: R = 0. These test values is into the that the unconfined compressive strength of range of qu with the change of curing time soil-cement sample increases almost linearly indicated by Bruce (2000) that the 28-day with a logarithmic curing time. The 56-day strengths is within the soil cement matrix. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . (1998).319 x q u .2 to 2.9412 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 10 100 Curing time (days) Curing time (days) (a) In arithmetic scale (b) In logarithmic scale Figure 2: Relationship between qu of soil-cement samples and curing time for dry and wet mixing methods 50000 5 Wet Mixing Method 40000 2 E50 = 64. 2003. R = 0. The 60-day strengths in the soil cement specimens.8176 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Unconfined compressive strength q u (kPa) Unconfined compressive strength q u (kPa) Figure 3: Comparison of test results between wet and dry mixing methods 119 JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. R2 = 0. R2 = 0.5 to 2. it can be found from Figure 2b of strength.4 times for 2003).

(2004) were similar to the recovery is attributed by a combination of curve shown in Figure 4a. 15%. (2003). (1996) (b) After Lin (2000) Figure 4: Comparison of the relationship between qu and Aw of cement stabilized clay JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. This strength Bouazza et al. (1996) proposed that the method is about 160 and 259 kPa. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. All these samples were tested after 7. This aspect was also modulus of elasticity and the unconfined investigated in the study to validate these compressive strength of soil-cement samples two conflicting investigation results. soft clay sample of 41 kPa. the unconfined EFFECT OF DRY WEIGHT RATIO OF CEMENT TO compressive strength of samples after 3 days CLAY. This implies that soil. relationship between unconfined respectively. and 20% by wet method. strength tend to show more brittle failures. (2000) proposed a different relationship exrothemic hydration process. However. The modulus of elasticity tended to investigated by performing unconfined increase with increasing unconfined compression tests on soil-cement samples compressive strength. and Figure 3b shows a relationship between the axial failure strain and the unconfined The influence of cement content on compressive strength of soil-cement unconfined compressive strength was samples. down. (1996). This implies that Active Zone. and studied by Shen et al. As expected. that is much higher than the compressive strength and cement content unconfined compressive strength of natural can be divided into 3 zones: Inactive Zone. implies that soil-cement samples with higher 8%. unconfined modulus of elasticity whereas soil-cement compressive strength showed a tendency to samples using the dry method provided increase with increasing cement content. This cement samples were mixed with Aw of 5%. whereas the failure prepared with clay 2. 14 and In addition. The shape of the relationship was appeared to be similar to that proposed by Bergado et al. The unconfined compressive strength cement samples using the wet method tend increased rapidly increased up to the cement to show more brittle failures compared to content of 20% and then tended to slow those using the dry method. AW (C EMENT CONTENT) of curing for both dry and wet mixing Bergado et al. and Inert Zone as shown in the recovery of strength of cement mixed Figure 4a. 10%. greater failure strain. Lin cementation (pozzolanic reaction). NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG As shown in Figure 2 also. between unconfined compressive strength and cement content of soil-cement as shown Figure 3a shows a relationship between the in Figure 4b. soil-cement samples using the 28 days of curing and test result was plotted wet method provided slightly higher in Figure 5. The ratio of additional strain tended to decrease with increasing water to cement was fixed at 100%. A a) After Bergado et al. The shapes of the relationship clay after mixing is progressed very fast curve between qu and Aw presented by which was also consistent with results Tatsuoka and Kobayashi (1983). DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY 120 VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . Soil- unconfined compressive strength.

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. This is defined as a the ratio of initial water content of the soil q u = ( wc / c ) (1) b (%) to the cement content. Aw (%) Figure 5: Variation of qu with Aw A conclusion about the more important effect between the cement content Aw and Figure 6 depicts the role of wc/c ratio on curing time can be also given from Figure 5 unconfined compressive strength which the change of unconfined development of soil cement samples tested compressive strength is higher due to after 28 days of curing. water/cement ratio.9945 ∆ 7 days curing: R = 0. On the certain curing time is only dependent upon other hand. The importance of this ratio time (Nagaraj. cement content has more influence on Unconfined compressive strength of soil- unconfined compressive strength than cement samples tended to decrease with curing time. The relation shown in mineralogy. The denominator Aw corresponding to the curing time and clay would reflect the level of bonding that could water content. cement and curing water content.9818 2 Unconfined compressive strength qu (Kpa) 1500 ◊ 14 days curing: R2 = 0. wc/c.9311 2 1000 500 0 0 5 10 15 20 Dry weight ratio of cement to clay. it should be possible to estimate the wc/c. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG 2000 Ο 28 days curing: R = 0. 121 JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. The wc/c is a paramount parameter combining the effects where a and b are constant obtained by of water content and cement content. be induced. increasing wc/c ratio. In genaral. which least-squares regression depending on the is more advantageous than the parameter characteristic of clay. The relationship of variation of cement content than due to the wc/c ratio and q u appears to be nonlinear change of curing time. with increasing wc/c ratio.9 are obtained with this natural clays. (2001) suggested that a prime exponential Equation (1) in which the factor governing the engineering parameters unconfined compressive strength decrease of cement-stabilized soil is the clay. which is structural parameter how much cement content is needed for reflecting both the effects of microfabric and obtaining a required level of strength their cementation. EFFECT OF CLAY WATER/CEMENT RATIO The best trend line produced by fitting the (WC/C) curve to the data is displayed under Miura et al. engineering evaluation. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . It should be possible However. which have different relathionship. exhibit different strength Equation (1) merits an examination for characteristics after mixing with cement. 2002). the strength development of a to estimate how far increasing the cement particular clay-cement mixture after a content can reduce the cutting time. Consequently. the over the range of wc/c ratio investigated. R-square is emphasized by Najaraj (2002) that the values in excess of 0.

strength improvement (Gotoh.7/1. Comparison of soil cement mixture is performed on clays 1 two tests indicated that the unconfined JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. Atterberg limits. Influence of natural clay type on qu of soil cement mixture cured at 7. 2 R = 0. mineralogy. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG 4000 Unconfined compressive strength qu (Kpa) (wc/c) Ο qu(28 days) = 5588. the influence of natural clay fundamental level.9456 3000 Nagaraj's trend line Miura's trend line 2000 1000 Jacobson's trend line 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Water-clay to cement content (wc/c) ratio Figure 6: Comparison of test data and published data 1000 Unconfined compressive strength qu (Kpa) ∆ Clay 2 qu = 212. unconfined compression Miura et al. pH value and each of these properties may affect the etc. and cement type. The trend line of cement to clay. To derive a strength relation that incorporates EFFECT OF NATURAL CLAY TYPE all relevant factors. testing results of soil cement samples However. but type on unconfined compressive strength of is extremely complicated. different physical and chemical properties. 1996). The index properties of two on soil-cement samples cured for 28 days is clay type were summarized in Table 1. is ideal and desirable.76. from others. 800 2 R = 0. R = 0. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. the trend line proposed by prepared from two type of natural clay were Nagaraj (2002) was appeared to be far off compared each other. dry weight ratio presented in Figure 6.67. and additional water to obtained from unconfined compressive tests cement ratio. (2001) and Jacobson (2002). especially at a In this section. This can be attributed to differences in the characteristics of natural Each clay has its own mineralogy with clay such as water content.364 . organic content. wet mixing method. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY 122 VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 .9014 600 400 200 ◊ Clay 1 2 qu = 86 ln(t)+60. 14 and 28 days A comparison of test results obtained from and 2 under the same conditions of curing the study with data published in literatures is time. As fairly consistent with the results reported by shown in Figure 7.22 ln(t)+118.9412 0 1 10 100 Curing time (%) Figure 7..

about 1% to 3. Due to difference in water content of soil cement columns system can be two natural clays.5 for soil clay 1 and 6. and Compared to the failure strain of natural sulfates being as reaction inhibitors clay. natural soil clay 2 is only 14.g. The strength decreases with increasing or uniformity of soil cement that is organic content or decreasing pH produced. This can is interaction. prepared from natural clay 1. This reason can be attributed to the grain size distribution or clay The relationship between unconfined mineralogy. Gotoh 1996). the higher the uniformity value. at 1% to 3. of soil cement.5 for soil clay 2. structures founded on soft soil improved by i. value of natural clays ware 9.76. Or general peak shear strength of soil cement samples speaking is that the ground chemistry performed on unconfined compression test of each site is different will result in was small. This scatter is partly due to the variability in iv. therefore. The failure strain has also a large natural clay 1 is higher of clay 2.3. the effect of cement decrease with Erdil et al. Thereby. and also degree of mixing. it is AXIAL FAILURE STRAIN OF SOIL CEMENT important to consider the small failure strain SAMPLES of the cement columns which will reduce the Determining the axial train of soil cement interaction of the cement columns with the mixture at failure state is significant part to unstabilized soil between the columns. That is. (1991). Therefore. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. It can seen indicated in Table 1. The effect of cement compressive strength and failure strain of gradually increases with decreasing soil cement samples obtained from test clay content or increasing sand results on unconfined compression tests in proportion in natural clay. specimens prepared natural clay 2 than the axial failure strain is. ii. v. the sand from the figure that the failure strain proportion of clay 2 is 8%.5% with a unconfined compressive strength than those compressive strength largely varies about prepared from clay 1 in conformity from 100 to 2000 kPa. the soil unconfined compression strengt and that cement specimens prepared from clay failure occurs at relatively small axial 2 produced higher unconfined strains.5%. while this value for is fairly large as axial failure strain is high. investigated. influence on the reduction of the bearing Resulting in the higher unconfined capacity and on the increase of lateral compressive strength of soil cement displacement of the columns. consistent results have been reported e. the scatter in the increasing plasticity index of natural relationship between unconfined soil. while this decreases in general with increasing of clay 1 is only 5%. Basing on this made from natural clay 1. Bergado et al (1996) also reported that Balasubramanian and Buensuceso (1989). carbonates. Similar and with study of Taki and Yang (1991). the stability analysis of explained by several reasons hereafter. type of cement (Massaki 1996. 1990). As laboratory is shown in Figure 8. The organic content and pH values are the soil from which the soil cement is considered to be the most influential derived. In this section. mixing method. the water content of evaluated. The plasticity index of natural compressive strength and axial failure strain soil clay 1 is 23. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG compressive strength of soil cement samples mixing cement columns and unstabilized made from natural clay 2 is greater than that soil around the columns. while this different implications. by iii. evaluate the interaction between deep 123 JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . Besides. proportion of soil cement mixture. the smaller is the scatter. different constituent mixing soil parameters to the strength of soil. Another approach is also due to the difference in chlorite. It can be seen that the axial strain at the (Locat et al.

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. unstabilized soil between the columns 4. method. The trend line showing an effect of from wet mixing method. al. the following can be appropriate. The axial failure strain of soil cement provided slightly higher modulus of samples is much smaller than that of elasticity whereas soil-cement samples natural clays and thus the interaction using the dry method provided greater of the brittle cement columns with the failure strain. The cement content has more samples prepared from dry mixing influence on unconfined compressive method tended to show more brittle strength than curing time failures compared to those prepared 7. Soil-cement samples with higher 5. soil-cement (2002). The unconfined compressive strength tended to develop rapidly in an early of soil-cement samples prepared from curing stage and the development of dry mixing method was greater than strength tended to slow down those prepared from wet mixing afterwards. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY 124 VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 .3624) R2 = 0. with dry and wet mixing methods 2. 1. However. (1996). samples using the wet method 8. (2001) and Jacobson strength.223xqu(-0. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. Unconfined compressive strength of cement content showed more brittle both soil-cement samples prepared failures. soil-cement 6. Unconfined compressive strength will reduce. whereas the samples cured for 28 days was fairly failure strain tended to decrease with consistent with the results reported by increasing unconfined compressive Miura et al. water-clay to cement content ratio 3. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG 5 Clay 1 Wet mixing method Dry mixing method 4 Clay 2 Different dry weight ratio of cement to clay Axial failure strain 0f (%) Different ratio of additional water to cement 3 2 1 εf (%) = 21. However. The modulus of elasticity tended to obtained from unconfined increase with increasing unconfined compressive tests on soil-cement compressive strength. The shape of the unconfined compression tests carried out on relationship was appeared to be soil-cement samples prepared with different similar to that proposed by Bergado et conditions. Result that the showed a tendency to increase with applicability of a composite shear increasing cement content.7212 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Unconfined compressive strength qu (kPa) Figure 8: Relationship between qu and axial failure strain of soil cement samples. CONCLUSION cement content of 20% and then Based on the results obtained from tended to slow down. The strength analysis to ground stabilized unconfined compressive strength with soil cement columns in present increased rapidly increased up to the design practice is uncertain longer.

. Mixing Method: Principle.. H... A.A.” ASCE. “Behaviour of DCM Netherlands Columns under Highway Erdil..” Journal of Geotechnical Cement Treated Soils. Fam. 294-304 “Study of Clay-Cement Sluries with Massaki. on Ground Improvement Affecting the Strength of Cement Geosystems. Hampton. J. Balasubramaniam. 3. (1996). S.. No. and III: The Verification and Properties of Ohishi. “The Overconsolidated “Strength Gain of Organic Ground Behaviour of Lime Treated Soft Clay” With Cement Type Binders. I. P. “Factors Affecting Engineering for Transportation Strength Gain in Lime-Cement Projects. 399-404.. Nishikawa. A. “Strength and Stress-Strain Thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Characteristic of a Lime Treated Philosophy. M.C. T. ASCE.” “Lime Cement Column Ground ASCE 125. Conf. Bergado. Horpibulsuk. and Edil. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. Stabilization for I-15 in Salt Lake Locat. A. Hayashi. 309-320. (2002). Tuncer. 1. Gotoh. (2000). on Ground Improvement Miura. Vol. Brazil. M. ASCE press. Design and 120New Orleans.. No. Tranportation University.. Adnan. I. Anderson. City. R. Virginia Tech. 125 JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. Miura. M. A.. MA. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . ASCE press. “Study on Soil Properties 2nd Int.A. 586-597. Embankment at Bridge Approaches. January. Research Record. Boston.” Grouting and Ground 99-167. Treated Soil. T. (1999). S. “Engineering Behavior of Structural Design and Construction. J. Vol. 4. Construction. R. S. "An Introduction to the Laboratory Testing Procedure. (2002). Soil Mech. R. Observation of Long-Term Strength of 234-304.. A.” Grouting and Engineering. Tokyo. B. (2001).. K.” Proc. R. J. FHWA-RD. N. (2003). E. H. Vol. M. K. 27. Jio de Janeiro.. of IS-Tokyo 96. 120. October. And Improvement for Big Digs.Volume Kitazume. 135-148. Washington D. Nanyang Technical cohesive Soil”. found. ASCE Technology). The Lin.. (1989). Berube M. M. settlements at bridge abutments. 3. Institute geotechnical applications . 104-115. 1295. 1335-1338.” Practice Periodical on (1990). Columns and Development of a Bruce. N. Conf. of IS-Tokyo 96.” (1991)." DRAFT Federal on Long-Term strength of Cement Highways Administration. 2. 2nd Int. Choquette M. Q. Kwan. “Field and Other Environments. and Wong. ASCE. The Deep Geotechnical Special Publication No. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. 598-609. Conf. K. and Balasubramaniam. Engng.” Grouting and Bouazza. J. Geotechnical Special Publication. 365-373. Balkema. Takeshi.14-17 May 1996. and Buensuceso. (2000).” Soil Proc 12th Int. N. D. ASCE Special Publication Treated Coode Island Silt by the Soil No. G. Proc. (1996). Proc. Cement Treated Bangkok Soft Clay.. and Nagaraj. 1421-1428. New Orleans. “Study on Soil Mechanical and Electromagnetic Properties Affecting the Strength of Waves. Terashi. A. Conf. M. 399-404. (1996). T. (1996). A. and Soft Ground Improvement in Lowland Terashi. and Chapman. Proc. (1998). 4. B.” Deep Mixing Methods as used in Master Thesis. Proceedings of the 3rd CDIT (Coastal Development Institute of International Conference. B. Tokyo. No. L. and MacKenna.81. of the 3rd (2004) “Strength Properties of Cement In.. D. K. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG REFERENCES Geosystems. S. Treatment. Treated Soils. deep cement mixing to reduce Esrig. Ohishi. (2003) “Laboratory Tests Treated Ground... Q. and Santamaria. P. C. Geotechnical Jacobson. Mixing Method”. M. Deep Mixing. Cement Treated Soil. Ground Treatment. “Use of Stabilization. and Basma. Vol. No. Soil Lin. G. No.

J. cement-treated soft clay... 421-26. S. “Elevation of Property 8th European Con. 5. “Soil- Ground Improvement Techniques. (2002). No. Yagihashi. and Filz. 120. and Yang. Conf. No. “Deep Mixing: An Owner's Cement Stabilized Clay at High Water Perspective. Japanese Treatment. Soil ASCE GSP. NGUYEN M INH TAM & DU-HWOE JUNG S. Geotechnical Society. “Engineering Behavior of M. (1991). Nagaraj. A. DESIGN ANDTECHNOLOGY 126 VOLUME 3 NUMBER 2 2005 ISSN 1726-0531 . (2001). ASCE GSP. O. F.” Soils and Found. (ATC-7). L... of SMFE. 96-110 JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING. 120. Miura.”. Proc. GSP.” Proc. D. W. Conf.” Grouting and Ground Mixing For Stabilization of Very Soft Treatment. D. 489-500.81. “One Day Lecture on Taki. T. and Koga. of the 3rd Int. ASCE Technical committee of Thick Deposit special conference. of the 3rd Int. (1998). D. Pelnik III. No. J. N. New Orleans.”. and Installation of Deep Mixing Yoshizawa. (1983). of the (2003). Improvement for Big Digs. Han. “Triaxial strength characteristics of Shen.. N. ASCE 634-645.” Grouting and Ground Content. Dong A University. 41. “Dry Jet Columns. S. S. 33 – 46. Shiells. Boston. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STRENGTH OF CEMENT STABILIZED CLAY W OO-SIK KIM. New Orleans.S. Denver. Proc. and Kobayashi. cement mixed wall technique”. H. Changes in Surrounding Clays due to Yang. Soils and Organics Soil. Tatsuoka.. CO. S.. Vol. P. October. S. MA. Korea.. (2003). Busan. No... T. 59-95. G.