Harsha Book

A LABORATORY STUDY ON THE EFFICIENCY OF STEEL
SLAG ON IMPROVING THE PROPERTIES OF AN EXPANSIVE

SOIL AS SUBGRADE FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS UNDER
CYCLIC PRESSURES
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

the award of the degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
BY
B. HARSHATH VARMA
(15021D1924)
under the esteemed guidance of

Dr. D. KOTESWARA RAO
B. Tech., M.Tech., C.C.A & D.T.W., Ph. D.
Professor of Civil Engineering
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING KAKINADA (AUTONOMOUS)
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY KAKINADA
KAKINADA, ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA - 533003
2015-2017
i
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING KAKINADA (AUTONOMOUS)
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, KAKINADA
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that dissertation entitled " A LABORATORY STUDY ON

THE EFFICIENCY OF STEEL SLAG ON IMPROVING THE PROPERTIES
OF AN EXPANSIVE SOIL AS SUBGRADE FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
UNDER CYCLIC PRESSURES " being submitted by B. HARSHATH VARMA
bearing Roll No. 15021D1924, in partial fulfilment of requirements for the
award of the degree of Master of Technology in SOIL MECHANICS AND
FOUNDATION ENGINEERING to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological
University, Kakinada, is a record of bonafide work carried out by her under
my guidance and supervision.
The results reported in this thesis have not been submitted to any other
university or institute for the award of any degree or diploma.
Thesis Adviser Head of the Department
Dr. D. Koteswara Rao Dr. K. Ramu

Professor of Civil Engineering Professor & Head of Civil Engineering
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
University College of Engineering University College of Engineering
JNTUK, Kakinada-533003 JNTUK, Kakinada-533003
ii
DECLARATION
I B. HARSHATH VARMA, hereby declare that the project entitled ''A

LABORATORY STUDY ON THE EFFICIENCY OF STEEL SLAG ON
IMPROVING THE PROPERTIES OF AN EXPANSIVE SOIL AS SUBGRADE
FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS UNDER CYCLIC PRESSURES " under the
esteemed guidance of Dr. D. Koteswara Rao, Submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the award of the degree, Master of Technology in
SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING and submitted to
the Department of Civil Engineering, University College of Engineering,
Kakinada (Autonomous), Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University
Kakinada.
I also declare that this project is of my own effort and has not been
copied from any one and I have taken only citations from the sources which
are mentioned in the references.
This work was not submitted earlier at any other University or

Institute for award of degree.
B. HARSHATH VARMA
Roll No: 15021D1924
Department of Civil Engineering
University College of Engineering
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Kakinada
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to express my deep sense of gratitude and respect towards my

project guide, Dr. D. Koteswara Rao, Director, Faculty Development,
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University College of
Engineering, Kakinada (Autonomous), for his guidance right from the
selection of project and for his valuable suggestions throughout the project
work.
I am very much obliged to Dr. K. Ramu, Professor and Head,

Department of Civil Engineering for his support during, and till the
completion of the project.
I express my gratitude to Dr. K Purnanandham, Dr. G.V.R Prasada

Raju. Who taught me and inspired me throughout my course.
I is my pleasure in expressing my gratitude to Dr. G.V.R Prasada

Raju, Principal, Dr. B. BalaKrishna and Dr. A. M. Prasad Vice-Principals of
University College of Engineering Kakinada (Autonomous), for having made
all the facilities in the campus for carrying out this dissertation work.
I am also thankful to all the Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff of

Civil Engineering Department, for their direct and indirect help provided to
me in completing the project.
I am very thankful to my friends for their support during the entire

project period.
I am thankful to my parents for their continuous support and

encouragement for successful completion of the project work
B. HARSHATH VARMA
(15021D1924)
iv
ABSTRACT
The problem with expansive soils has been recorded all over the world. In
monsoon they imbibe water and swell and in summer they shrink on
evaporation of water there from. Because of this alternative swelling and
shrinkage, lightly loaded civil engineering structures like residential
buildings, pavements and canal linings are severely damaged.
Expansive Soil is one such problematic soil which is annoying

Geotechnical engineers. To overcome the problems posed by Expansive
Soils, various remedial measures like soil replacement, pre wetting,
moisture control, lime stabilization have been practiced with various degrees
of success. However, these techniques suffer from certain limitations with
respect to their adaptability, like longer time periods required for pre wetting
the highly plastic clays, difficulty in constructing the ideal moisture barriers,
pulverization and mixing problems in case of lime stabilization and high cost
for hauling suitable refill material for soil replacement etc.
Many researchers all over the world are working, to evolve more
effective and practical treatment methods, to solve the problems caused to
pavements laid on marine clays. Investigations on soil stabilization revealed
with some other availability materials like fly ash, quarry dust, lime, waste
rubber, waste plastics etc., may be effectively used.
Construction of structures over weak or soft soils possesses

difficulties like differential settlements, poor strength and high
compressibility. Expansive soils are poor in strength and they will result in
poor pavement support, ultimately affects the pavement performance and its
life period. Expansive soil also affects the design and construction of the
pavements, resulting in higher cost of construction and early failure of
pavement.
v
Soil stabilization is one of the modification technique used to improve
the geotechnical properties of soil and has become the major practice in
construction engineering which enables the effective utilization of industrial
waste as a stabilizer. This technique becomes more popular because of its
easy availability and adaptability. Stabilization is a method of using the
available waste materials for the production of roads construction.
The present work describes a study carried out to check the

improvements in the properties of expansive soil with the addition of steel
slag. Steel slag are mixed with untreated soil in varying percentages to
obtain the optimum percentage of admixture required for the soil
stabilization. In this comparative study on laboratory tests such as
atterberg’s limit, compaction test, CBR test and cyclic plate load test were
carried out for both untreated and treated expansive soil.
vi
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
LIST OF TALES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF PLATES xvi
Chapter Page No.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. General 1
1.2. Discussion of various studies on Expansive soil 3
1.2.1 Problems 3
1.2.2 Remedies 3
1.2.3 Case Study 3
1.3. Usage of Waste Materials 5
1.4. Need for the Study 6
1.5. Objectives of the Study 7
1.6. Organization of Thesis 7
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 General 8
2.2 Origin of Expansive soil 10
2.3 Nature of Expansive soil 12
2.4 Soil Mineralogy 13
2.4.1 Kaolinite group 13
2.4.2 Montmorillonite group 14
2.4.3 Illite group 15
2.5 Identification and classification of Expansive soils 16
2.6 Methods of Recognizing Expansive soils 17
2.7 Causes of Swelling 18
2.8 Swell Pressures 18

2.9 Factors affecting Swelling 18
vii
2.10 Problems associated with the Expansive soil 19
2.10.1 Foundation Damage 21
2.11 Methods of Treatment 28
2.11.1 Stabilization using Fly Ash 29
2.11.2 Stabilization using Quarry Dust 33
2.11.3 Stabilization using rice Husk Ash 34
3.11.4 Stabilization using Copper Slag 37
3.11.5 Stabilization using Silica Fume 38
3.11.6 Stabilization using other Industrial Wastes 39
2.12 Summary 45
3. STUDY METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 46
3.2 Materials used and their properties 46
3.2.1 Soil and its composition 46
3.2.2 Steel Slag 48
3.2.3 Uses 48
3.2.4 Gravel 51
3.3 Laboratory Experimentation 52
3.3.1 Grain Size Analysis 52
3.3.2 Water Content 52
3.3.3 Free Swell 53
3.3.4 Atterberg limits 54
3.3.4.1 Liquid Limit 54
3.3.4.2 Plastic Limit 55
3.3.4.3 Compaction Test 55
3.3.5 Strength Tests 57
3.3.5.1 CBR Test 57
3.3.6 Specific Gravity Test 58
3.3.7 Cyclic Plate Load Test 59
3.4 Summary 62
4. DISCUSSION ON TEST RESULTS
4.1 Introduction 63
4.2 Laboratory Test Results 63
4.2.1 Free Swell 63
viii
4.2.2 Atterberg Limits 65
4.2.2.1 Liquid limit of Expansive soil treated with
percentage variation of Steel Slag 65
4.2.2.2 Plastic limit of Expansive soil treated with
4.2.2.3 Plasticity Index of Expansive soil treated with
4.2.3 Compaction Properties 68
4.2.3.1 OMC & MDD Values of untreated Expansive soil 68
4.2.3.2 OMC & MDD Values of treated Expansive soil
with 5% of Steel Slag 69
4.2.3.6 OMC & MDD Values of Expansive soil treated
with different percentages of Steel Slag 73
4.2.3.7 MDD Values of Expansive soil treated with
different percentages of Steel Slag 74
4.2.4 California Bearing Ratio Test results of Expansive soil
treated with various percentage of Steel Slag 75
4.2.5 The Properties of untreated and treated Expansive soil
with optimum percentages of Steel Slag 85
4.2.6 Laboratory Cyclic plate load tests on untreated and
treated Expansive soil using model tanks for
flexible pavements 86
4.2.6.1 General 86
4.2.6.2 Laboratory Cyclic plate load test results of
untreated and treated Expansive soil
subgrade model flexible pavement 87
ix
4.2.6.3 Laboratory Cyclic plate load test results of
treated and treated Expansive soil
subgrade model flexible pavement 87
4.3 Summary 108
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 General 109
5.2 Summary 109
5.3 Conclusions 110
5.4 Further Scope of Work 111
6. REFERENCES 112
x
LIST OF TABLES
S.No. DESCRIPTION Page No.

2.1 Swelling potential vs Plasticity Index 17
3.1 Properties of Expansive soil 47
3.2 Chemical properties of Steel Slag 49
3.3 Physical properties of Steel Slag 50
3.4 Properties of Gravel 51
3.5 Construction details of different model 62
4.1 Properties of untreated and treated Expansive soil 64
4.2 Liquid limit values of Expansive soil treated with
4.3 Plastic limit values of Expansive soil treated with
4.4 Plasticity Index values of Expansive soil treated
with percentage variation of Steel Slag 67
4.5 Optimum Moisture Content and Maximum
Dry Density of Untreated Expansive soil 69
Dry Density of Expansive soil Treated with
5% Steel Slag 70
10% Steel Slag 71
15% Steel Slag 72
20% Steel Slag 73
4.10 OMC and MDD of Expansive soil treated
with Percentage variation of Steel Slag 74
4.11 CBR values of untreated Expansive soil 75
xi
4.12 CBR values of Expansive soil treated with 5%
of Steel Slag 78
of Steel Slag 79
of Steel Slag 81
of Steel Slag 82
4.16 CBR values of expansive soil treated with
4.17 Properties of untreated and treated Expansive
soil with an optimum percentage of Steel Slag 85
4.18 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of
untreated Expansive soil subgrade model
flexible pavements at OMC 92
the Expansive soil treated with 15% Steel Slag
for flexible pavements at OMC 96
Treated and Untreated Expansive soil for Flexible
Pavements at OMC 107
xii
LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 Differ entially lift adjacent pool decks and
house f oundations 4
1. 2 A design f or a swimming pool placed in
expansive soils 5
2.1 major soil types in India 10
2.2 Atomic Structure of Kaolinite 13
2.3 Atomic Structure of Montmorillonite 14
2.4 Atomic Structure of Illite 15
2.5 A rectangular slab with uniformly loaded 22
2.6 Damage to home supported on shallow piers 23
3.1 Experimental set up for conducting Cyclic plate

load test 60
4.1 Liquid limit values of Expansive soil treated with

4.2 Plastic limit values of Expansive soil treated with

4.3 Plasticity Index values of Expansive soil treated

with percentage variation of Steel Slag 68
Dry Density of Untreated Expansive soil 69
5% Steel Slag 70
xiii
10% Steel Slag 71
15% Steel Slag 72
20% Steel Slag 73
4.9 Composite graph of OMC and MDD values of

Expansive soil treated with different percentage
of Steel Slag 74
4.10 MDD of Expansive soil treated with Percentage

variation of Steel Slag 75
4.11 CBR values of untreated Expansive soil 77

of Steel Slag 77
of Steel Slag 80
of Steel Slag 80
of Steel Slag 83
4.16 Composite graph of CBR of Expansive soil treated
with different percentage of Steel Slag 83
4.17 CBR values of expansive soil treated with
untreated expansive soil model flexible
pavement at OMC 88
xiv
the Expansive soil treated with 15% Steel Slag
for Model Flexible Pavement 89
15% Steel Slag + Single Geotextile
as Reinforcement and Separator for treated
Expansive soil Flexible Pavement at OMC 90
15% Steel Slag + Double Geotextile
as Reinforcement and Separator for treated
Expansive soil Flexible Pavement at OMC 91
xv
LIST OF PLATES

2.1 Damage in flexible pavement 20
2.2 Polygonal pattern of surface cracks in the

dry season 20
2.3 Cracks in Expansive soil 21
2.4 Void created under concrete drainage

interceptor ditch by contraction of soils 24
2.5 Cracks in the wall due to soil settlement 27
2.6 Stair-Steps corner crack 27
2.7 external wall damage due to shrinkage of soil 28
3.1 Pulverized Expansive soil 46
3.2 Steel Slag 48
3.3 Casagrande Apparatus 54
3.4 Plastic limit 55
3.5 Compaction Test Apparatus 56
3.6 Experimental set up for Cyclic plate load test 61
3.7 Author conducting the Cyclic plate load test 61
xvi
Stabilization of Expansive Soil using Steel Slag as an Admixture
CHAPTER - I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The features of expansive soil behavior which have been
critically reviewed are soil structure, swelling potential (intrinsic
expansiveness), swelling pressure, volumetric (swelling and
shrinking) strains, shear strength, cyclic swelling strain and the
associated effects of applied external load. The definitions and
methods of determining these features are considered and their
shortcomings are noted. In addition, the different heave
prediction methods and soil models, published over the last 50
years are reviewed. The degree of empiric ism or rationality of the
models and methods are highlighted.
Expansive or swelling soils are soils that, because of their

mineralogical composition, experience large volume changes or
volumetric strains when subjected to moisture changes. They
swell on wetting and shrink on drying respectively. (Bolt, 1955;
Jennings and Knight, 1957). These soils are commonly referred to
in literature as active soils, swelling soils or volumetrically active
soils. In this thesis, they are called expansive soils (Gromko,
1974; Gens and Alonso, 1992). The ability of the soil mineral to
adsorb and absorb water is its intrinsic property, which results
from its mineral composition. Schreiner (1987) called it intrinsic
expansiveness.
The uncertainties related to the civil enginee ring structures

founded on expansive soils have motivated several researchers to
1
study this topic in detail (Wild et al. 1998; Boardman et al.

2001). The important challenges are the excessive volume change
during wetting and drying cycles and low strength of expansive
soils. Different measures have been proposed and methodologies
adopted for overcoming the problems associated with expansive
soil. One of the methods is to strengthen foundation to minimize
the effect of expansiveness on the former, which inc lude belled
piers, granular pile anchors, sand cushion techniques etc.
(Phanikumar 2009).
Another effective method for expansive soil is stabilization

by the use of additives that helps to minimize the volume change
due to swelling. The different additives used for stabilizing
expansive soil include lime, cement, cohesion less material like
sand and fly-ash. Among these, lime treated has gained a lot of
popularity due to its capability to reduce swelling. However, a few
studies advocate against the use of lime in specific type of
expansive soil comprising of sulfate due to the undesirable
reaction enhancing heave (Hunter 1988).
A substantial literature has concluded this severity an

extent of damage inflicted by soil deposits of swelling nature, to
various structures, throughout the world (Ganapathy, Joneqs and
Jones, Abduljauwad, Osama and Ahmed, Zhang). The loss caused
due to damaged structures proved the need for more reliable
investigation, of such soils and necessary methods to eliminate or
reduce the effect of soil volume change. Additives, including lime,
fly ash, Portland cement, saw dust and more recently synthetics
are available that will lessen these problems when mixed in the
proper amounts with problem soils. These additives may be used
2
separately or in combination and each has construction issues

related to its performance.
1.2 DISCUSSION OF VARIOUS STUDIES ON EXPANSIVE SOILS
1.2.1 Problems:
All over the world, problems of expansive soil includes

cracking and breakup of pavements, railways and highway
embankments, roadways, building foundations, irrigation
systems, water lines, canal and reservoir linings. The estimated
damage was very expensive to the pavements running over the
expansive soil subgrades.
1.2.2 Remedies:
Various remedial methods like soil replacement, pre -

wetting, moisture control, chemical stabilization have been
practiced with varying degrees of success. Unfortunately the
limitations of these techniques have been questions regarding
their adaptability in all conditions. Therefore, work is done all
over, to alleviate the problems caused to any structure laid on
expansive soil strata.
1.2.3 Case Study - Swimming Pools
Swimming pools constructed near home foundations in expansive

soil soils are frequently sources of damaging moisture. Such
swimming pool shells are typically constructed of air blown
mortar (gunite). The gunite skin of a swimming pool is rarely
designed for swell p ressures generated by expansive soils.
Furthermore, in all swimming pools the water percolates through
the shell and adds significant amounts of water to adjacent soils.
Since pools are generally in arid climates, this creates a moisture
3
differential which can be severe enough to differentially lift

adjacent pool decks and house foundations, as shown in Fig. 1.1.
It can lead to destruction of the pool itself.
A design for a swimming pool shell in a highly expansive soil

environment is presented in Fig 1.2. Pools of this design have
been constructed at several locations in California with great
success. Construction begins with over -excavation for the pool.
The excavation is lined with a single sheet of Hypalon R or
similar HDPE membrane material to provide a barrier for the
collection of moisture that seeps naturally through the pool shell.
A second line of defense consists of crushable Enkamat K to
retard potential swelling pressures against the pool sides. This
also serves as a vertical sub-drain material to guide water to a
central collection drain beneath the pool. This drain between the
liner and gunite shell then feeds into a drain pipe to convey water
off the site. This system works best in sloping areas that can
provide positive drainage from below t he pool. The same design,
however, could be used in flat terrain through the use of an
impervious sump and automatic pump beneath the pool.
Figure 1.1 Differentially lift adjacent pool decks and house

foundations
4
Figure 1.2 A design for a swimming pool placed in expansive

soils.
1.3 USAGE OF WASTE MATERIALS

steel slag is generated as a residue during the production of
steel. It has been declared a useful construction material, not an
industrial waste most of the developed countries. It is recycled as
an admixture for the construction of roads, soil stabilization, and
base and for the surfacing of flexible pavement. The best
management option for this by product is its recycling. This leads
to reduction of landfills reserved for its disposa l, saving the
natural resources and attaining properties of steel slag and its
utilization for road construction in different ways. Steel slag has
been utilized worldwide in waterway construction. Applications
include use of slag for erosion control, miner al filter applications,
bank reinforcement, and construction of dikes, reefs and sea
walls.
5
1.4 NEED FOR THE STUDY
The technology of road construction is subject to change to

cope up with changing vehicular pattern, construction materials
and sub grade condition. Majority of the foundation failures
could be attributed with the presence of poor soil underneath the
foundation. Expansive soils because of the specific physico -
chemical make-up are subjected to volume changes with the
change in their ambient environment. The losses due to extensive
damage to highways running over expansive clay beds are
estimated to be billions of dollars all over the world. In many
countries like India, these soils are so aerially spread that the
alteration of highway routes cannot be made possible by avoiding
these soils.
In order to make a road network to be economical the
pavement should be made of least thickness. The best location,
however, is the one, which results in minimum total cost for the
construction of roads, which satisfies the traffic requirements. To
realize the objective, new methods and new materials of
construction have been continuously explored in Civil
Engineering applications.
In order to achieve both the needs of improving expansive

soils and also to make use of industrial wastes in the best
possible way, the present experimental study has been carried
out by using steel slag (a byproduct of steel industry) for
stabilizing the expansive soil to suit it as subgrade for flexible
pavements.
6
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objectives of the present experimental study are

 To determine the properties of the Expansive soil.
 To evaluate the properties of expansive soil when treated
with an optimum percentage of steel slag as an admixture.
 To evaluate the performance of treated expansive soil as
sub-grade for flexible pavement under cyclic pressures.
1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THESIS

 In addition to the present introductory chapter, this work
has been presented in five chapters as follows.
 In the second chapter, an overview of various remedial
measures to overcome the problems posed by expansive
soils has been covered.
 In the third chapter, experimental investigations carried out
in the laboratory were discussed.
 In the fourth chapter, results of the experimental
investigation carried out and the discussion about the
results is presented.
 Chapter five, which is the concluding chapter , gives the
summary & conclusions of the work.
******
7
CHAPTER - 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 GENERAL
Expansive soils, which are also called as swell -shrink soil,
have the tendency to shrink and swell with variation in moisture
content. As a result of this variation in the soil, significant
distress occurs in the soil, which is subsequently followed by
damage to the overlying structures. During periods of greater
moisture, like monsoons, these soils imbibe the water, and swell;
subsequently, they become soft and their water holding capacity
diminishes. As opposed to this, in drier seasons, like summers,
these soils lose the moisture held in them due to evaporation,
resulting in their becoming harder. Generally found in semi -arid
and arid regions of the globe, these type of soils are regarded as
potential natural hazard – if not treated, these can cause
extensive damage to the structures built upon them, as well
causing loss in human life. Soils whose composition includes
presence of montmorillonite, in general, display these kinds of
properties. Tallied in billions of dollars annually worldwide, these
soils have caused extensive damage to civil engineering
structures.
Also called as Black Cotton soils, expansive soils in the

Indian subcontinent are mainly found over the Deccan trap
(Deccan lava tract), which includes Maharashtra, Andhra
Pradesh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and some scattered places in
Odisha. These soils are also found in the river valley of Narmada,
Tapi, Godavari and Krishna. The depth of black cotton soil is very
large in the upper parts of Godavari and Krishna, and the north -
8
western part of Deccan Plateau. Basically, after the chemical

decomposition of rocks such as basalt by various de composing
agents, these are the residual soils left behind at the place of
such an event. Cooling of volcanic eruption (lava) and weathering
another kind of rock – igneous rocks – area so processes of
formation of these type of soils. Rich in lime, alumina , magnesia,
and iron, these soils lack in nitrogen, ph osphorus and organic
content.
Consisting of high percentage of soil sized particles, the

color of this soil varies from black to chestnut brown. 20% of the
total land area, on an average, of this countr y is roofed by
expansive soils. These soils are suitable for dry farming and for
the growth of crops like cotton, rice, wheat, cereal, tobacco,
sugarcane, oilseeds, citrus fruits and vegetables; the reason
behind it is owed to the moisture retentive capaci ty of expansive
soils, which is high.
In the semi-arid regions, just in the last couple of decades,

damages due to the swelling shrinking action of expansive soils
have been observed prominently in form of cracking and break -up
of roadways, channel and reservoir linings, pavements, building
foundations, waterlines, irrigation systems, sewer lines, and slab -
on-grade members.
9
Figure 2.1: Major Soil Types in India
2.2 ORIGIN OF EXPANSIVE SOIL
Expansive soils are mostly found in the arid and semi -arid
regions and it covers very large area of the world. It covers nearly
20% of the landmass in India and includes almost the entire
10
Deccan plateau, Western Madhya Pradesh, parts of Gujarat,

Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, and Maharas htra.
The swelling soils are commonly known by the name of Black
Cotton Soils. For swelling to occur, these soils must be initially
unsaturated at some water content. If the unsaturated soil gains
water content, it swells. On the other hand, if a decrease in water
content occurs the soil shrinks. The presence of montmorillonite
soil in these soils imparts them high swell –shrink potentials.
The Malwa region occupies a plateau in western Madhya

Pradesh and south -eastern Rajasthan, with Gujarat in the west.
To the south and east is the Vindhya Range and to the north is
the Bundelkhand upland. The plateau is an extension of the
Deccan Traps, formed between 60 and 68 million years ago at the
end of the Cretaceous period. In this region the main classes of
soil are black, brown and bhatori (stony) soil. The volcanic, soil-
like soil of the region owes its black color to the high iron content
of the basalt from which it formed. The other two soil types are
lighter and have a higher proportion of sand.
As the Malwa region is mainly dominated by Black Cotton

Soil, it is one of the types of expansive soil, which has a potential
for shrinkage and swelling under changing moisture conditions.
The lightly loaded structures and pave ment are more sustainable
to the damage by the differential movement caused by the
expansive soil. Various types of distress in buildings are occurs,
which are provided with conventional open foundation, raft
foundation or latest under reamed pile foundati ons. Similarly in
the pavements large cracks occur due to the non -consideration of
the expansive behavior of subgrade.
11
Soil mineral is the key element which divulges the swelling

characteristics to any ordinary non-swelling or non-shrinking
soil. Montmorillonite, out of several types of soil minerals has the
maximum amount of swelling potential. In -situ formation of chief
soil minerals occurs under alkaline conditions, or sub -aqueous
decomposition of blast rocks can be seen the origin of such soil –
expansive soil. These type of soils can also be formed due to
weathering under alkaline environments, and under adequate
supply of magnesium or ferric or ferrous oxides. Given there’s a
good availability of alumina and silica, the formation of
Montmorillonite is favored.
2.3 NATURE OF EXPANSIVE SOIL
Swelling in soils can be sub-categorized into two distinctive

types, namely:
 Elastic rebound in the compressed soil mass due to
reduction in compressive force.
 Imbibing of water resulting in expansion of water -sensitive
soils.
Swelling soils are the soils that exhibit latter type of swelling,
where the soil minerals with largely inflating lattice are present.
One of the fundamental characteristics of soil is tha t they display
little cohesion and strength when wet, but they become hard
when devoid of water. However, all of them do not swell due to
wetting action. Decrease in ultimate bearing capacity at
saturation, and large differential settlement due to this occ urs.
Thus, soils exhibit foundation problems.
12
2.4 SOIL MINERALOGY
On the basis of their crystalline arrangement, soil minerals

can be categorized into three general groups, namely:
 Kaolinite group
 Montmorillonite group
 Illite group
2.4.1 KAOLINITE GROUP
A soil mineral which has a chemical composition

Al 2 Si 2 O 5 (OH) 4 is called Kaolinite. This type of soil mineral has a
layered silicate, with linkage to one octahedral sheet of alumina
through oxygen atoms. China soil or Kaolin is the name given to
rocks that are rich in this mineral. A thickness of 7Å is exhibited
by the stacked layers of kaolinite; as a result of this, kaolin
group of minerals are seen to be the most stable, which is also
because of the fact that wat er cannot enter between the sheets to
inflate that unit cell.
Figure 2.2: Atomic structure of kaolinite
13
2.4.2 MONTMORILLONITE GROUP
Two silica tetrahedral sheets combined with a central

alumina octahedral sheet comprise the structural arrangement of
Montmorillonite. The bond between crystal links is weak here.
Thus, the soil containing higher percentage of Montmorillonite
minerals demonstrate high shrinkage and swelling
characteristics, depending on the nature of exchangeable cat ions
present. The common layer of a Montmorillonite unit is formed by
one of the hydroxyl layers of the octahedral sheet and the tips of
the tetrahedrons from each silica sheet. Atoms which are common
to both silica and gibbsite layers never participate in the process
of swelling. During weak bond between the crystal forms, water
can penetrate, breaking the structures to 10Å structural units.
Figure 2.3: Atomic structure of montmorillonite
14
2.4.3 ILLITE GROUP
As far as structural arrangement is concerned, Illite

minerals fall between Montmorillonite and Kaolinite group. As in
case of Montmorillonite unit structure, two silica tetrahedral
sheets combined with a central alumina octahedral sheet
comprise the structural arrangement of Illite. The spacing
between the elementary silica-gibbsite-silica sheets depends
largely upon the availability of water to occupy the space. Owing
to this reason, Montmorillonite is believed to have an expanding
lattice. However, in presence of excess water, Illite can split up
into individual layers of 10Å thick.
Figure 2.4: Atomic structure of Illite
15
2.5 IDENTIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE

SOILS
Some laboratory tests are available for the identification

purposes of swelling soils. By differential thermal analysis,
Microscopic examination, and X-ray diffraction. The presence of
Montmorillonite in soil minerals allows the judgment of the
expansiveness of the soil. This aspect is however very technical in
nature. A simple aspect, as opposed to the before mentioned
methods, is the free-swell test, that’s done in the laboratory. This
test is conducted by adding10 gm of dry soil, passing through a
425 μ sieve into two separate 100 cc graduated jar – one filled
with water, and the other with kerosene. Swelling occurs in the
jar containing water. The swelled volume of the soil is then noted
(after 24 hours period), and subsequently, the free swell index
values, in percentage, are calculated. IS: 2720 -II was followed for
free swell index test.
(𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒−𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒)
Free swell value [𝐼𝑛] (in % ) = 𝑥 100
𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒
Good grade, high swelling, commercial Bentonite has been

reported to have free swell values varying from 1200% to 2000% .
In general, the swelling potential of a soil is rel ated to plasticity
index. With corresponding range of plasticity index, various
degrees of swelling capacities are as indicated through the
following table:
16
Table 2.1: Swelling potential vs Plasticity Index
Swelling Potential Plasticity Index

Low 0-15
Medium 15-24
High 24-46
Very High >46
Several factors participate in deciding whether or not a soil with

high swelling potential exhibit swelling characteristics. One of
these factors, that occupy greatest importance, is the difference
between soil moisture content at the time of construction, and
final (equilibrium) moisture content finally achieved under
various conditions allied with the complicated structure. The soil
has a high swelling capacity if the equilibrium moisture content
is higher than the soil moisture content. Large swelling pressure
may develop as a result of the up heaving of the soil or structure,
causing swelling.
2.6 METHODS OF RECOGNIZING EXPANSIVE SOILS
Grouped into three categories, following are the methods of

recognizing expansive soils:
 Mineralogical identification
 Indirect methods, such as soil suction, activity and index
properties
 Direct measurement.
Impractical and uneconomical in practice, methods of

mineralogical identification still hold importance in exploring
17
basic properties of soil minerals. Direct measurement, out of the

remaining two categories, offers the most useful data.
By their shattered or fissured condition, or obvious
structural damage to existing buildings caused by such soils,
potentially expansive soils are usually identified in the field. To
classify expansive soil, potential swell, or potential expansion, or
the degree of expansion is a favored term used; from this,
geotechnical engineers establish how good or bad the expansive
soils are.
2.7 CAUSES OF SWELLING
There are different theories, but the mechanism of swelling

is still unclear. No conclusion to the mechanism has been
reached. Soil consisting high percentage of soil or colloid, with
Montmorillonite mineral present as the chief mineral is o ne of the
most universally accepted reasons for the swelling of soils.
2.8 SWELL PRESSURES
The pressure exerted by expansive soil when they swell,

owing to their contact with water, is called swell pressure. The
estimation of this swell pressure and likel y becomes a very
important task for designing a structure on such soils, or
building the core of a dam, or constructing a road embankment,
or taking a canal through such soils.
2.9 FACTORS AFFECTING SWELLING

Initial moisture content or the molding water in case of a re-
molded sample is the most influencing factor. “The behavior of re-
molded soils is much as undisturbed soils”, as per Holts’ and
Gibbs’ findings. For a given dry density, the value of initial water
content will be a key factor in determining the water affinity of a
18
given sample, as well as its swell pressure. Minimum moisture

content (𝑤𝑛) required by a soil for swelling to begin beneath a
pre-paved sub-grade is given by:
wn(%) = 0.2 w1 + g Where, w 1 = liquid limit
The factors that affect the swelling aspect of a soil largely depend
on the soil’s environmental conditions. With the intake of water,
swelling is more in a soil element which is close to the surface,
but if below the surface, the same soil exhibit negligible swelling
because the overburden pressure neutralizes the developing
swelling pressure of the dry soil.
Generally responsible for swelling are the following factors:
 Location of the soil sample from the ground surface
 Thickness, as well as shape of the sample
 Change in volume
 Temperature
 Nature of pore fluid
 Time
 Stress history
 Unit weight of the sample taken, etc.
2.10 PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXPANSIVE SOIL
Potentially expansive soils can typically be recognized in the

lab by their plastic properties. Inorganic soils of high plasticity,
generally those with liquid limits exceeding 50 percent and
plasticity index over 30, usually have high inherent swelling
capacity. Expansion of soils can also be measured in the lab
directly, by immersing a remolded soil sample and m easuring its
volume change. In the field, expansive soil soils can be easily
recognized in the dry season by the deep cracks, in roughly
polygonal patterns, in the ground surface (see Plate2. 2).
19
Plate 2.1 Damage in flexible Pavements
These cracks are approximately one inch wide at the top. The
zone of seasonal moisture content fluctuation can extend from
three to forty feet deep (see Plate 2.3). This creates cyclic
shrink/swell behavior in the upper portion of the soil column and
cracks can extend much greater depths than imagined by most
engineers.
Plate 2.2 Polygonal pattern of surface cracks in the dry

season.
20
Plate 2.3 This crack is at least 32 inches deep.
2.10.1 FOUNDATION DAMAGE
The most obvious way in which expansive soils can damage

foundations is by uplift as they swell with moisture increases.
Swelling soils lift up and crack lightly -loaded, continuous strip
footings, and frequently cause distress in floor slabs.
Because of the different building loads on different portions

of a structure's foundation, the resultant uplift will vary in
different areas. As shown in Fig. 2.6 , the exterior corners of a
uniformly-loaded rectangular slab foundation will only exert
about one-fourth of the normal pressure on a swelling soil of that
exerted at the central portion of the slab. As a result, the corners
tend to be lifted up relative to the central portion. This
phenomenon can be exacerbated by moisture differentials within
soils at the edge of the slab. Such differential movement of the
foundation can also cause distress to the framing of a structure.
21
Fig 2.5 A rectangular slab, uniformly loaded, will tend to lift

up in the corners because there is less confinement
In the following fig 2.5, At the beginning of the rainy season, the
piers are still supported by friction with the soil. When it begins
to rain, water enters deep into the soil through the cracks. After
5 to 10 large storms, the soil swells, lifting the house and piers.
In the dry season, the ground water table falls and the soil dries
and contracts. As tension cracks grow around the pier, the skin
friction is reduced and the effective stress of the soil increases
(due to drying). When the building load exceeds the remaining
skin friction, or the effective stress of the soil increase s to an all-
time high, adhesion is broken by this straining, and the pier
sinks.
22
Fig 2.6 Damage to home supported on shallow piers.
Drilled pier foundations have been used in California, Colorado

and Texas since the late 1950s to reduce expansive soil damage.
However, these types of foundations can also be adversely
affected by expansive soil behavior if the piers are not sufficiently
deep. Frequently, the corner piers of a pier -supported structure
are lifted up during swelling in the wet season, and th en break
their skin friction bond with the ground when the soil shrinks
away from the pier in the following dry season (Fig. 2. 5). Loss of
this "skin friction" decreases the pier's ability to support building
loads. This straining to the soil can become gr eat enough that the
pier falls. To prevent this style of damage, the piers must be
drilled well below the zone of seasonal moisture fluctuation, and
23
they must be designed with the assumption that the upper

portions of the pier will lose contact with the ad jacent soil.
Shallow pipes, especially plastic pipes, buried in the zone of

seasonal moisture fluctuation, are exposed to enormous stresses
by shrinking soils. If water or sewage pipes break, then the
resultant leaking moisture can exacerbate swelling da mage to
nearby structures.
Concrete drainage devices can be adversely affecte d by expansive

soils (see Plate 2.3). Swelling soils can lift and crack concrete
ditches, seriously impairing their ability to convey runoff.
Subsequent contraction may leave a void under the concrete,
leading to piping and erosion as runoff flows under the ditch.
Plate 2.4: Void created under concrete drainage inte rceptor

ditch by contraction of soils.
Expansive soils pose the greatest hazard in regions with

pronounced wet and dry seasons. The annual cycle of wetting and
drying causes soils to shrink and swell each year. Thus, the arid
regions of the country are much more susceptible to damage from
expansive soils than regions that maintain moist soil conditions
throughout the year.
24
The biggest problem in expansive soil areas is that of

differential water content. Sources of water in developed areas
are not limited to temporal weather cycles, but can be introduced
by people. A frequent source of damage is the differential swel ling
caused by pockets of moist soil adjacent to dry soil. For example,
lawn and garden watering creates a moist zone on the exterior of
a foundation, whereas the interior is dry; this creates differential
swelling pressure on foundation elements. There is frequently a
moisture differential between the soils beneath a house and those
that are more directly exposed to changes in the weather.
Cesspools, leaky pipes, and swimming pools are other common
sources of water.
The best way to avoid damage from expans ive soils is to

extend building foundations beneath the zone of water content
fluctuation. The reason is twofold: first, to provide for sufficient
skin friction adhesion below the zone of drying; and, second, to
resist upward movement when the surface soil s become wet and
begin to swell.
Successive drought years have demonstrated that the zone

of seasonal fluctuation can extend much deeper than previously
believed. Piers extending to depths of six feet can withstand
normal annual fluctuations, but do not appear adequate when
taken over the long haul, such as a two -year drought followed by
an extremely wet year.
Another way of mitigating expansive soil problems is to

collect surface runoff and to limit surface infiltration during the
rainy winter months. In Orange County, California, considerable
experience in subdivisions has shown that it is important to
provide for positive surface drainage away from all points around
25
building foundations. Much of this experience was incorporated

into the Appendix Ch.18 Excavation and Grading statutes of the
Uniform Building Code (UBC), which were not adopted in the
2000 IBC.
Generation of problems for all kinds of construction over

expansive soils is common, leading us to believe that such types
of soil are not suitable for these purposes. However, given the
placement of these kinds of soil over the country, it leaves
engineers no other choice but to develop different structures on
the soil, well aware of the risk. These structure s mainly are a
part of irrigation projects. Buildings, and other kinds of
structures constructed over these soils are subjected to
differential deflections. These deflections cause distressing, and
in turn leads to damage of the structure.
Moreover, the reduction in moisture content due to the

evaporation of water in soil causes shrinkage, and heaving of soil
occurs when there is a disproportionate increase in moisture
content. The level of ground water table also has a significant
impact on the moisture content of these soils, which in r eturn
affect the shrinkage-swelling cycles. In seasons which are dry in
nature, the surface of soil shrinks, however, lit tle evaporation is
there on the soil on which the building stands. This causes
differential settlement at plinth level, p osing danger to the
structure.
26
Plate 2.5 Cracks in the wall due to soil settlement
Plate 2.6 Stair-steps Corner Crack
If the construction of a building on such type of soil is done

in its dry season, the base of the structure’s foundation would
experience swelling pressures when the partially saturated soil
underneath starts imbibing water in the wet season, developing
swelling pressures. When the pressure imposed by the structure
on the foundation is less than the swelling pressure developed,
up liftmen of such a structure occurs, which would lead to
formation of cracks. The imposed bearing pressure if the building
27
is constructed in the wet season should be within the permissible

limits of bearing pressure for the soil. A better practice is to
construct a building during dry season, and completing it before
the onset of wet seasons.
Plate 2.7 External wall damage due to shrinkage of soil
2.11 METHODS OF TREATMENT
One of the methods of treatment of expansive soil to make

them fit for the construction purposes is called stabilization.
According to Petry (2002), assortment of stabilizers can be
grouped into:
 By-product stabilizers (Quarry dust, Fly ash, Slag,
Phosphor-gypsum, etc.)
 Traditional stabilizers (Cement, Lime, etc.)
 Non-traditional stabilizers (Sulfonated oils, Potassium
compounds, Polymer, Enzymes, etc.)
Lots of geo-environmental problems are a result of industrial by -
products whose disposal as fills in disposal sites adjacent to the
28
industries demand large chunks of land, which can otherwise be

utilized for construction, growing of vegetation, etc. purposes.
Various attempts by different researchers and organizations have
been made to utilize these by -products. Stabilization of expansive
soil is one of the ways of fulfilling such a thing.
2.11.1 STABILIZATION USING FLY ASH
Sharma et al. (1992) studied stabilization of expansive soil

using mixture of fly ash, gypsum and blast furnace slag. They
found that fly ash, gypsum and blast furnace slag in the
proportion of 6: 12: 18 decreased the swelling pressure of the soil
from 248 kN/m 2 to 17 kN/m 2 and increased the unconfined
compressive strength by 300% .
Srivastava et al. (1997) studied the change in micro structure

and fabric of expansive soil due to addition of fly ash and lime
sludge from SEM photograph and found changes in
microstructure and fabric when 16% fly ash and 16% lime sludge
were added to expansive soil.
Srivastava et al. (1999) have also described the results of

experiments carried out to study the consolidation and swelling
behaviour of expansive soil stabilized with lime sludge a nd fly
ash and the best stabilizing effect was obtained with 16% of fly
ash and 16% of lime sludge.
Cokca (2001) used up to 25% of Class-C fly ash (18.98 % of CaO)

and the treated specimens were cured for 7 days and 28 days.
The swelling pressure is found to decrease by 75% after 7days
curing and 79% with 28 days curing at 20% addition of fly ash.
29
Pandian et al. (2001) had made an effort to stabilize expans ive

soil with a class F Fly ash and found that the fly ash could be an
effective additive (about 20% ) to improve the CBR of Black cotton
soil (about 200% ) significantly.
Turker and Cokca (2004) used Class C and Class F type fly ash
along with sand for stabilization of expansive soil. As expected
Class C fly ash was more effective and the free swell decreased
with curing period. The best performance was observed with soil ,
Class C fly ash and sand as 75% , 15% and 10% respecti vely after
28 days of curing.
Satyanarayana et al. (2004) studied the combined effect of

addition of fly ash and lime on engineering properties of
expansive soil and found that the optimum proportions of soil: fly
ash: lime should be 70:30:4 for construction of roads and
embankments.
Phani Kumar and Sharma (2004) observed that plasticity,

hydraulic conductivity and swelling properties of the expansive
soil fly ash blends decreased and the dry unit weight and
strength increased with increase in fly ash content. The
resistance to penetration of the blends increased significantly
with an increase in fly ash content for given water content. They
presented a statistical model to predict the un-drained shear
strength of the treated soil.
Baytar (2005) studied the stabilization of expansive soils using

the fly ash and desulphogypsum obtained from thermal power
plant by 0 to 30 percent. Varied percentage of lime (0 to 8% ) was
added to the expansive soil -fly ash-desulphogypsum mixture. The
treated samples were cured for 7 and 28 days. Swelling
percentage decreased and rate of swell increased with increasing
30
stabilizer percentage. Curing resulted in further reduction in

swelling percentage a nd with 25% fly ash and
30% desulphogypsum additions reduced the swelling percentage
to levels comparable to lime stabilization.
Amu et al. (2005) used cement and fly ash mixture for
stabilization of expansive Soil. Three different classes of sample
(i) 12% cement, (ii) 9% cement + 3% fly ash and (iii)natural soil
soil sample were tested for maximum dry densities (MDD),
optimum moisture contents (OMC), California bearing ratio
(CBR), unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and the un -
drained Tri-axial tests. The results showed that the soil sample
stabilized with a mixture of 9% cement + 3% fly ash is better with
respect to MDD, OMC, CBR, and sheari ng resistance compared to
samples stabilized with 12% cement, indicating the importance of
fly ash in improving the stabilizing potenti al of cement on
expansive soil.
Sabat et al. (2005) observed that fly ash-marble powder can

improve the engineering properties of expansive soil and the
optimum proportion of soil: fly ash: marble powder was 65:20:15.
Punthutaecha et al. (2006) evaluated class F fly ash, bottom

ash, polypropylene fibers, and nylon fibers as potential
stabilizers in enhancing volume change pr operties of sulfate rich
expansive sub-grade soils from two locations (Dallas and
Arlington) in Texas, USA. Ash stabilizers showed improvements in
reducing swelling, shrinkage, and plasticity ch aracteristics by
20–80% , whereas fibers treatments resulted in varied
improvements. In combined treatments, class F fly ash mixed
with nylon fibers was the most effective treatment on both soils.
31
They also discussed the possible mechanisms, recommended

stabilizers and their dosages for expansive soil treatments.
Phanikumar and Rajesh (2006) discussed experimental study of

expansive soil beds stabilized with fly ash columns and fly ash -
lime columns. Swelling was observed in soil beds of 100 mm
thickness reinforced with 30 mm diameter fly ash columns and
fly ash-lime column. Heave decreased effectively with both fly ash
and fly ash-lime columns, with, lime stabilized fly ash showed
better results.
Wagh (2006) used fly ash, rock flour and lime separately and
also in combination, in different proportion to stabilize black
cotton soil from Nagpur Plateau, India. Addition of either rock -
flour or fly ash or both together to black cotton soil improve the
CBR to some extent and angle of shearing resistance increased
with reduced cohesion. However, in addition to rock -flour and fly
ash when lime is mixed to black cotton soil CBR value increases
considerably with increase in both cohesion and frictional
resistance.
Phani Kumar and Sharma (2007) studied the effect of fly ash
on swelling of a highly plastic expansive soil and compressibility
of another non-expansive high plasticity soil. The swell potential
and swelling pressure, when determined at constant dry unit
weight of the sample (mixture), decreased by nearly 50% and
compression index and coefficient of secondary consolidation of
both the soils decreased by 40% at 20% fly ash content.
Kumar et al. (2007) studied the effects of polyester fiber
inclusions and lime stabilization on the geotechnical
characteristics of fly ash-expansive soil mixtures. Lime and fly
ash were added to an expansive soil at ranges of 1–10% and 1–
32
20% , respectively. The samples with optimum proportion of fly

ash and lime content (15% fly ash and 8% lime) based on
compaction, unconfined compression and split tensile strength,
were added with 0, 0.5, 1.0,1.5, and 2% plain and crimped
polyester fibers by weight. The MDD of soil -fly ash-lime mixes
decreased with increase in fly ash and lime content. The polyester
fibers (0.5–2.0% ) had no significant effect on MDD and OMC of fly
ash-soil-lime-fiber mixtures. However, the unconfined
compressive strength and split tensile strength increased with
addition of fibers.
Buhler et al. (2007) studied the stabilization of expansive soils

using lime and Class C fly ash. The reduction in linear shrinkage
was better with lim e stabilization as compared to same% of Class
C fly ash.
2.11.2 STABILIZATION USING QUARRY DUST
The quarry dust or crusher dust obtained during crushing

of stone to obtain aggregates causes health hazard in the vicinity
and many times considered as an aggregate waste.
Gupta et al. (2002) made a study on the stabilization of b lack

cotton soil using crusher dust a waste product from Bundelkhand
region, India and optimal % of crusher dust (quarry dust) found
to be40% . There was decrease in liquid limit (54.10% to 24.2% ),
swelling pressure (103.6 kN/m 2 to 9.4 kN/m 2 ) and increases in
shrinkage limit(12.05% to 18. 7% ), CBR value (1.91 % to 8.06% ),
UCS value (28.1 kN/m 2 to 30.2 kN/m 2 ) with 40% replacement of
expansive soil with crusher dust.
Stalin et al. (2004) made an investigation regarding control of

swelling potential of expansive soils using quarry dust and
33
marble powder and observed that LL and swelling pressure

decreased with increase in quarry d ust or marble powder content.
Gulsah (2004) investigated the swelling potential of synthetically
prepared expansive soil (kaolinite and bentonite mixture), using
aggregate waste (quarry dust), rock powder and lime. Aggregate
waste and rock powder were added to the soil at 0 to 25% by
weight with lime varying from 0 to 9% by combined weight. There
was reduction in the swelling potential and the reduction was
increased with increasing percent stabilizers and days of curing.
Jain and Jain (2006) studied the effect of addition of stone dust
and nylon fiber to Black cotton soil and found that mi xing of
stone dust by 20% with 3% randomly distributed nylon fibers
decreased the swelling pressure by about 48% . The ultimate
bearing capacity increased and settlement decreased by inclusion
of fiber to stone dust stabilized expansive soil.
2.11.3 STABILIZATION USING RICE HUSK ASH
Rice husks are the shells produced during de -husking

operation of paddy, which varies from 20% (Mehta 1986) to 23%
(Della et al. 2002) by weight of the paddy. The rice husk is
considered as a waste material and is being generally disposed of
by dumping or burning in the boiler for processing paddy. The
burning of rice husk generates about 20% of its weight as ash
(Mehta 1986). The silica is the main constituent of rice husk ash
(RHA) and the quality (% of amorphous and un -burnt carbon)
depend upon the burning process (Nair et al. 2006).The RHA is
defined as a pozzolanic material (ASTM C 168 ASTM 1997) due to
its high amorphous silica content (Mehta 1986).
34
Rajan and Subramanyam (1982) had studied regarding shear

strength and consolidation characteristics of expansive soil
stabilized with RHA and lime and observe d that RHA contributes
to the development of strength as a pozzolanic material when
used as a secondary additive along with lime and cement. Under
soaked conditions, the soil stabilized with rice husk ash had low
strength. The RHA, lime combination also de creased the
compression index of stabilized soil.
Bhasin et al. (1988) made a laboratory study on the stabilization
of Black cotton soil as a pavement material using RHA, bagasse
ash, fly ash, lime sludge and black sulphite liquor with and
without lime. The bagasse ash and black sulphite liquor are
found to be not effective as a stabilizing agent. The addition of
lime sludge alone to black cotton soil improves the CBR values
marginally but reduces the UCS values. Lime sludge in
combination with lime improves the strength parameters of black
cotton soil sufficiently for its use as a sub -base material. The
rice-husk ash causes greater improvement than that caused by
fly ash and bagasse ash due to presence of higher % of reactive
silica in rice-husk ash in comparison to fly ash and bagasse ash.
In conjunction to lime both rice husk ash and fly ash improves
the properties of black cotton soil sufficiently meriting its use as
a sub-base material.
Muntohar and Hantoro (2000) used rice husk ash and lime for
stabilization of expansive soil by blending them together. The
RHA used were 7.5% , 10% and 12.5% and lime as 2% , 4%, 6%,
8% , 10% and 12% as replacement of expansive soil. Their PI
(plasticity index) decreased from 41.25% to 0.96% and swell
potential decreased from 19.23% to insignificant with 12 -12.5%
of RHA-lime mixture. There was also increase in CBR value (3 %
35
to 16 % ), internal friction angle (5 0 to 24 0 ) and cohesion (54.32

kN/m 2 to 157.19 kN/m 2 ), there by increased bearing capacity to
4131 kN/m 2 from 391.12 kN/m 2
Chandrasekhar et al. (2001) presented the results of laboratory

and field investigations carried out to understand the
characteristics of black cotton soil with stabilizing agents like
calcium chloride and sodium silicate in comparison with
conventional RHA-lime stabilization. The RHA-lime stabilization
resulted in maximum improvement and strength compared to all
other treatment. Calcium chloride treated road stretch showed
maximum reduction in ground heave compared to lime, sodium
silicate and RHA stabilized stretches, but maximum reduction in
shrinkage is observed in lime treated stretch, when additives are
used individually. When additives are used in combination,
Calcium chloride sodium silicate treated stretched showed
maximum reduction in heave compared to RHA – lime and calcium
chloride RHA stabilized stretches whereas highest reduction in
shrinkage is observed in RHA - lime stabilized stretch.
Ramakrishna and Pradeep Kumar (2006) had studied

combined effect of rice husk ash (RHA) a nd cement on
engineering properties of black cotton soil. RHA up to 15% in
steps of 5% and cement up to 12% in steps of 4% were added.
RHA and cement reduced the plasticity of the expansive soil. The
dry density of soil increased marginally with increase in OMC
after 4% cement addition. MDD of soil decreased and OMC
increased with the increase in the proportion of RHA-cement
mixes. The UCS of Black cotton soil increased linearly with
cement content up to 8% and at 12%, strength rate reduced. The
soaked CBR of the soil was found to be increased with cement
and RHA addition. Similar trends to that of UCS were observed
36
with the increase in CBR rate. At 8% cement content, CBR value

of soil was 48.57% and with combination of RHA at 5% , 10% and
15% , the values were 54.68% , 60.56% and 56.62% , respectively.
Sharma et al.(2008) had studied the engineering behavior of a

remolded expansive soil blended with lime, calcium chloride and
Rice-husk ash. The amount of RHA, lime and calcium chloride
were varied from 0 to 16% , 0 to 5% and 0 to 2% respectively by
dry weight of soil. The effect of additives on UCS & CBR was
found. The stress–strain behavior of expansive soil improved
upon the addition of up to 5% lime or 1% calcium chloride. A
maximum improvement in failure stress of 225 & 328% was
observed at 4% lime & 1% calcium chloride. A RHA content of
12% was found to be the optimum with regard to both UCS &
CBR in the presence of either lime or calcium chloride. An
optimum content of 4% in the case of lime and 1% in the case of
calcium chloride was observed even in soil – RHA mixes.
2.11.4 STABILIZATION USING COPPER SLAG (CS)
Copper slag is produced as a by-product of metallurgical

operations in reverberatory furnaces. It is totally inert material
and its physical properties are similar to natural sand.
Al-Rawas et al. (2002) made an investigation regarding the

effectiveness of using cement by pass dust, copper slag,
granulated blast furnace slag, and slag -cement in reducing the
swelling potential and plasticity of expansive soils from Al-Khod(a
town located in Northern Oman). The soil was mixed wi th the
stabilizers at 3, 6 and 9% of the dry weight of the soil. The
treated samples were subjected to liquid limit, plastic limit, swell
percent and swell pressure tests. The study showed that copper
37
slag caused a significant increase in the swelling potential of the

treated samples. The study further indicated that cation
exchange capacity and the amount of sodium and calcium cations
are good indicators of the effectivenes s of chemical stabilizers
used in soil stabilization.
Saravan et al. (2005) stabilized the expansive soil using 0% ,

10% , 20% ,30% , 40% , 50% ,60%, 70% and 80% of dry weight of
copper slag. The MDD increased, OMC decreased with increase in
CS content and free swell index decreased by 60% corresponding
to soil + 70% CS. However, the soaked CBR improved only after
addition of 2% of cement and the expansive soil found to be
suitable as a sub-grade material by utilizing 50% copper slag
waste along with 2% cement.
2.11.5 STABILIZATION USING SILICA FUME (SF)
Silica fume, a co-product from the production of silicon or

ferro-silicon metal, is an amorphous silicon dioxide - SiO 2 which
is generated as a gas in submerged electrical arc furnaces during
the reduction of very pure quartz. This gas vapor is condensed in
bag house collectors as very fine powder of spherical particles
that average 0.1 to 0.3 microns in diameter with a s urface area of
17 - 30 m²/g.
Dayakar et al. (2003) conducted laboratory investigation for
stabilization of expansive soil using silica fume and tannery
sludge with percentage of solid wastes varying from 0, 10, 20, 30,
40, 50, 60-70% . The addition of wastes did not improve the index
properties & maximum dry density but there was gain in strength
of the expansive soil with both tannery sludge and silica fume up
to 15% .
38
El-Aziz et al. (2004) investigated the effect of the engineering

properties of soils when blended with lime and Silica Fume (SF).
Based on a series of laboratory experiments with lime percentage
varying from 1% , 3% , 5% , 7%, 9% and 11% and SF at 5% , 10%
and 15% ,the plasticity Index and swell potential decreased from
40.25% to 0.98% and from 19.0% to insignificant, respectively, at
11% lime and 15% of SF. There was considerable improvement in
CBR value (3.0% to 17.0% ), angle of internal friction (60 to 250)
and cohesion (55.52 kN/m 2 to 157.54kN/m 2 ). The consolidation
settlement was lowered from 0.025 to 0.007m.
Kalkanand Akbulect (2004) studied the effect of silica fume on

the permeability, swelling pressure and compressive strength of
natural soil liners. The test results showed that the compacted
soil samples with silica fume exhibit quite low permeability,
swelling pressure and significantly high compressive strength as
compared to raw soil samples.
Khare et al. (2005) observed that addition of silica fume and
aluminum sludge did not improve the index properties and
maximum dry density of the expansive soil, but UCS values
increased up to 10% . As the above wa stes stabilizing agent have
cementitious components, curing further increased its UCS value.
2.11.6 STABILIZATION USING OTHER INDUSTRIAL WASTES
Srinivasulu and Rao (1995) studied the effect of baryte powder

as a soil stabilizer and added up to 20% of baryte powder to
expansive soil. The PI, OMC and cohesion decreased and MDD,
angle of internal friction and CBR values increase with increase
in baryte powder and hence can be effectively used for any
pavement in cohesive soil zones and for rural roads at minimum
cost.
39
Swami (2002) had made the feasibility study for utilization of

marble dust in highway sector. The marble dust was added up to
60% by an increment of 15% and found the optimum proportion
of expansive soil: marble powder as 75:25. Plasticity Index
decreased from 25.1% to 7% with 35% marble dust PI value at
15% and 25% marble powder were observed to be 15.37 % and
8.3% respectively. The dry density increased from 17.56 kN/m 3 to
18.34 kN/m 3 with 45% marble dust, but CBR value increased
(4.59 to 6.81% ) up to 25% marble dust and decreased with
further increase in marble powder.
Mishra and Mathur (2004) studied the stabilization of expansive

soil with phosphor gypsum (a waste product from phosphoric acid
industry) and observed that soil mixed with different proportions
of phosphor gypsum reduces its liquid and plasticity limit thereby
making the soil more workable. The free swell of the soil reduced
considerably and the CBR value of the soil increased from 2% to
9 %, when 40% phosphor gypsum was added. When the
proportion of phosphor gypsum was increased beyond 40% , the
mix could not be compacted properly.
Wagh et al. (2004) added sludges from three type of industry

textile industry, paper mill and sugar factory, by 10% , 15% , 20%
and 25% for improvement in soil properties of expansive soil.
With addition of textile industry sludge the free swell index (FSI)
decreased and MDD and UCS increased. Adding paper mill sludge
UCS increased but decrease in MDD and no considerable effect
on FSI. The FSI and MDD decreased and UCS increased with
addition of sugar factory sludge.
Parsons et al. (2004) presented a summary of the performance

of a wide range of soils (CH, CL, ML, SM, and SP) treated with
40
cement kiln dust (CKD), to improve the texture, increase strength

and reduce swell characteristics. Treatment with cement kiln
dust was found to be an effective; strength and stiffness were
improved and plasticity and swell potential were substantially
reduced. Durability of CKD treated samples in wet -dry testing
was comparable to that of soil samples treated with the other
additives, while performance was not as good in freeze thaw
testing. CKD treated samples performed very well in leaching
tests and in many cases showed additional reductions in
plasticity and some strength gains after leaching.
Koyuncu et al. (2004) used three types of ceramic waste,

namely, ceramic mud wastes (CMW), crushed ceramic tile wastes
(CCTW) and ceramic tile dust wastes (CTDW) for stabilization of
expansive soil with Na-bentonite. Swelling pressure and swelling
percent of Na-bentonite soil mixed with 40% CCTW decreased
86% and 57% , respectively.
Al-Rawas (2004) investigated the physical, engineering, chemical
and micro fabric characteristics of two soils from Oman treated
with incinerator ash produced at Sultan Qaboos University. The
soils were mixed with the incinerator ash at 0% , 10% , 15%, 20%,
25% and 30% by dry weight of the soils. The results showed that
the incinerator ash used was a non -hazardous waste material. All
treated samples showed a reduction in swell percent and
cohesion, and an increase in angle of internal fricti on with the
addition of incinerator ash for all curing periods and 20% and
30% additive showed reductio n of swell percent of the soils.
Amu et al. (2005) studied the effect of eggshell powder (ESP) on

the stabilizing potential of lime on an expansive soil. Based on
different engineering tests the optimal percentage of lime-ESP
41
combination was attained at a 4% ESP + 3% lime. But, MDD, CBR

value, UCS and un-drained tri-axial shear strength values
indicated that lime stabilization at 7% is better than the
combination of 4% ESP + 3% lime.
Mughieda et al. (2005) studied the feasibility of using composed

olive mills solid by product (COMSB), a solid byproduct which
causes environmental problems, in stabilization of expansive so il.
With addition of (COMSB) by 2-8% by weight, the PI, DD and UCS
decreased. It was also found that the sw ell potential was reduced
by 56-65% and the swelling pressure reduced by 56 -72%
corresponding to untreated soil. Slow direct shear test indicated
that the stabilizing agent decreased the cohesion intercept while
the angle of internal friction was increased by 45% -65% .
Nalbantoglu and Iawfin (2006) studied the stabilizing effect of

Olive cake residue on expansive Soil. Olive cake residue is a by -
product after olives have been pressed and olive oil extracted.
Olive cake residue was heated up to 550 OC about 1 hour and the
ash produced as a result of heating was added into the soil with
3, 5 and 7% by dry weight of soil. With olive cake residue up to
3% , there was reduction in plasticity, volume change, and an
increase in unconfined compressive strength, but with further
increase in olive cake residue UCS decreased and compressibility
increased. Red mud is a waste material generated by the Bayer
Process widely used to produce alumina from bauxite throughout
the world. Approximately, 35% to 40% per ton of bauxite treated
using the Bayer Process ends up as red mud waste.
Kalkan (2006) studied utilization of red mud as a stabilization

material for the preparation of soil liners. The test results showed
that compacted soil samples containing red mud and cement –red
42
mud additives have a high compressive strength and decreased

hydraulic conductivity and swelling percentage as com pared to
natural soil samples.
Degirmenci et al. (2007) investigated phosphor gypsum with

cement and fly ash for soil stabilization. Atterberg's limits,
standard Proctor compaction and unconfined compressive
strength tests were carried out on cement, fly ash and phosphor
gypsum stabilized soil samples. Treatment with cement, fl y ash
and phosphor gypsum generally reduces the plasticity index with
increase in MDD with cement and phosphor gypsum contents,
but decreased as fly ash content increased. The OMC decreased
and UCS increased with addition of cement, fly ash and phosphor
gypsum.
Seda et al. (2007) used waste tyre rubber for stabilization of
highly expansive soils. The index properties and compaction
parameters of the rubber, expansive soil, and expansive soil -
rubber (ESR) mixture were determined. While the ESR mixture is
more compressible than the untreated soil, both the swell percent
and the swelling pressure are significantly reduced by the
addition of rubber to the expansive soil.
Attom et al. (2007) investigated the effect of shredded waste tire

on the shear strength, swelling and compressibility properties of
the soil from northern part of Jordan. The shredded tires passed
US sieve number 4 were added to the soil at 2% , 4%, 6% , and 8%
by dry weight of soil. The test results showed that increasing the
amount of shredded waste tires increased the shear strength and
decrease plasticity index, maximum dry density, permeability,
swelling pressure, swell potential a nd the compression index of
the soil.
43
Okagbue (2007) evaluated the potential of wood ash to stabilize

soil. Results showed that the geotechnical parameters of soil are
improved substantially by the addition of wood ash. Plasticity
was reduced by 35% , CBR, UCS increased by 23 –50% and 49–
67% , respectively, depending on the compactive energy used. The
highest CBR and strength values were achieved at10% wood ash.
Peethamparan and Jain (2008) studied four CKD with different

chemical and physical characteristics in stabilizing Na -
Montmorillonite Soil. All CKDs considerably decreased the
plasticity index, thereby improving the workability of the soil,
while they also considerably increased the initial pH value of soil,
providing a favorable environment for further chemical pozzolanic
reaction. The addition of CKDs and subsequent compaction
substantially increased the UCS and the stiffness of the soil, thus
improving its structural properties. The extent of improvement of
the soil characteristics was found to be a function of the chemical
composition of the particular CKD, specifically its free lime
content. It was also found that the length of curing period after
compaction had a major ro le in the stabilization process.
Cokca et al. (2008) had utilized granulated blas t furnace slag
(GBFS), and GBFS-Cement (GBFSC) to overcome or to limit the
expansion of an artificially prepared expansive soil sample
(Sample A). GBFS and GBFSC were added to Sample A in
proportions of 5 to 25 percent by weight. Effect of these
stabilizers on grain size distribution, limits, swelling percentage
and rate of swell of soil samples were determ ined. Effect of curing
on swelling percentage and rate of swell of soil samples were also
determined. Leachate analysis of GBFS, GBFSC and samples
stabilized by 25 percent GBFS and GBFSC was performed. Use of
stabilizers successfully decreased the amount of swell while
44
increasing the rate of swell. Curing samples for 7 and 28 days

resulted in less swell percentages and higher rate of swell. He
had concluded that GBFS and GBFSC should not be used to
stabilize expansive soils in regions near to the drinking w ater
wells. A concise literature review as above is presented in Table
2.1. From the studies of the available literature it is observed
that various efforts have been made to study the possible
utilization of different industrial wastes for stabiliz ation of
expansive soil.
2.12 SUMMARY
In this chapter, about expansive soil and its origin and the
problems associated in using expansive soil as Sub -grade as well
as stabilization with different admixtures and related literatures
has been discussed briefly.
In the next chapter, the materials used and their properties

and different experimental procedures will be presented.
******
45
CHAPTER - 3
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, a brief description of the experimental
procedures adopted in this investigation and the methodology
adopted during the course of study are briefly presented.
3.2 MATERIALS USED AND THEIR PROPERTIES

In the following sections, the details of various materials
and chemicals used in the laboratory experimentation are
reported.
3.2.1 SOIL AND ITS COMPOSITION
The soil used was a typical black cotto n soil collected from
Bendamurilanka near Amalapuram in East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh State, India. The properties of soil are presented
in the Table 3.1. All the tests carried on the soil are as per IS
specifications.
Plate 3.1 Pulverized Expansive Soil
46
Table 3.1: Properties of Expansive Soil
S. No Property Properties
1. Grain size distribution
Gravel (%) 0
Sand (%) 7
Silt (%) 30
Soil (%) 63
2. Atterberg's limits
Liquid limit (%) 72
Plastic limit (%) 32.5
Plasticity index (%) 39.5
3. Compaction properties
Optimum Moisture Content,(O.M.C) (%) 29
Maximum Dry Density, (M.D.D) (g/cc) 1.48
4. Specific Gravity (G) 2.64
5. IS Classification CH
6. Soaked C.B.R (%) 1.82
7. Free swell (%) 140
47
3.2.2 STEEL SLAG
Steel slag is a by-product from the steel industries. Steel slag

is produced at steel melting shop during steel manufacturing.
During the process of manufacturing the steel, the waste
materials silicon and carbon are to be removed. This waste
product is said to be steel slag. The steel slag contains higher
amount of iron and its physical characteristics are similar to air -
cooled iron slag. The LD slag is cooled, crushed and screened.
The fines are utilized in sinter making and lumps are charged in
the blast furnace. The iron content is the major basic difference
between BF slag and steel slag, FeO is around 0.5% , whereas, in
case of steel slag, total iron content varies from16-23% .
3.2.3 USES:
 Steel slag is being used as a barrier material remedy for
waste sites where heavy materials tend to leach into the
surrounding environment.
 Steel slag has been used successfully to treat acidic water
discharges from abandoned mines.
 Slag cement has low heat of hydration, low alkali aggregate
reaction, high resistance to chlorides and sulphate and it
can substitute the use of 43 & 53 gr ades of ordinary
Portland cement.
Plate 3.2: Steel Slag
48
Table 3.2: Chemical Properties of Steel Slag
S. No Constituent elements Percent content (%)
1 Silica as SiO 2 14-18
2 Alumina as Al 2 O 3 1-1.5
3 Calcium as CaO 48-50
4 Iron as Fe 2 O 3 14-22
5 Magnesium as MgO 9-12
6 Manganese Oxide as MnO 1-1.5
7 Phosphorus as P 2 O 5 1-2
Courtesy to VISAKHA STEEL PLANT, AP India
49
Table 3.3: Physical Properties of Steel Slag
S. No Property Value
1 Specific Gravity 2.196
2 Grain Size Distribution
Gravel (% ) 0
Sand (% ) 92%
Silt (% ) 5%
Soil (% ) 3%
3 Composition Properties
Maximum Dry Density (g/cc) 1.92
Optimum Moisture Content (% ) 17.86%
4 Limits NP
5 California Bearing Ratio (%) 30.72%
50
3.2.4 GRAVEL
On the prepared soil beds, three layers of gravel each of

5cm compacted thickness, was laid to a total thickness of 15cm.
Table 3.4: Properties of gravel

S.No Property Values
1 Specific Gravity 2.67
2 Grain Size Distribution
Gravel (% ) 61
Sand (% ) 29
Silt &Soil (% ) 10
3 Compaction Properties
Maximum Dry Density (G/Cc) 19.94
OMC (% ) 11.54
4 Limits
Liquid Limit (% ) 24
Plastic Limit (% ) 17
Plasticity Index (% ) 7
5 Soaked CBR 15
51
3.3 LABORATORY EXPERIMENTATION

Different tests were conducted in the laboratory on the
expansive soil to study the behavior of expansive soil, w hen it is
treated with steel slag as an admixture.
The following tests were conducted as per IS code of practice.
3.3.1 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS (Sieve Analysis)
The weight of soil fraction aggregate retained on each

standard sieve is calculated as the percentage of the total weight
of the sample taken. The grain size distribution of
soils/aggregates is an essential requisite in material
characterization. Indian standard codes of practice I.S:1498 -1970
gives the standard size of various sieves. These sieves are
arranged in increasing order from bottom.
Dry sieve analysis is suitable for cohesion less soils and if

the soil contains a substantial quantity of fine particles, a wet
sieve analysis is required.
3.3.2 WATER CONTENT
The water content is defined as the ratio of the mass of

water to the mass of solids. Water content, also known as the
moisture content is expressed as per centage and used as decimal
in computation.
The water content of a soil is an important parameter that

controls its behaviour. It is a quantitative measure of the wetness
of a soil mass. The water content of a soil can be determined by
many methods of which oven drying method has been adopted
here. In this method the soil sample in the container is dried in
an oven at a temperature of 110°±5°C for 24 hours.
52
Water content, w = M w / M s = (M 2 -M 3 )/ (M 3 -M 1 )
Where, M 1 = mass of container, with lid
M 2 = mass of container, lid and wet soil
M 3 = mass of container, lid and dry soil
3.3.3 FREE SWELL (FS)
Free Swell (FS) is a parameter used for the identification of

the expansive soil.
For the determination of the free swell index of a soil, 20g of

dry soil passing through a 425µ size sieve is taken. One samp le of
10g is poured into a 100c c capacity graduated cylinder
containing water, and the other samp le of 10g is poured into a
100cc capacity graduated cylinder containing kerosen e oil.
Both the cylinders are kept undisturbed in a laboratory.

After 24 hours, the settled volumes of both the samples are
measured.
Settled soil volume in water – Settled soil volume in kerosene

FS= X 100
𝑆𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐾𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑒
Because kerosene is a non -polar liquid, it does not cause

any swell of the soil. Table 4.1 gives degree of expansion of a soil
depending upon its free swell index as per IS: 2720 (Part III-
1980).
53
3.3.4 ATTERBERG LIMITS
3.3.4.1 LIQUID LIMIT
Liquid limit is the moisture content at which 25 blows in

standard liquid limit apparatus will just close a groove of
standard dimensions cut in the sample by the grooving tool by
specified amount. The flow curve is plotted in the log -scale on the
x-axis, and the water content in the arithmetic scale on y -axis.
The flow curve is straight line drawn on the semi -logarithmic
plot, a nearly as possible through three or more plotted points.
The moisture content corresponding to 25 blows is read from this
curve rounded off to the nearest whole number and is reported as
the liquid limit of the soil.
Virgin soil and optimum percentage of Steel Slag i.e. (15% )

by dry weight are mixed with the soil and the liquid limit were
determined as per IS: 2720 (part-5)-1985.
Plate 3.3: Casagrande Apparatus
54
3.3.4.2 PLASTIC LIMIT
Plastic limit is the moisture content at which a soil when

rolled into thread of smallest diameter possible, starts crumbling
and has a diameter of 3mm.The Plastic limit (w p ) is expressed as
a whole number by obtaining the mean of the moisture contents
of the plastic limit.
Virgin soil and optimum percentage of Steel Slag i.e. (15% )

by dry weight is mixed with the soil and the plastic limit were
determined as per IS: 2720 (part-6)-1972.
Plate 3.4: Plastic Limit
3.3.4.3 COMPACTION TEST
From the compaction test, the maximum dry density (MDD)

and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) of the soil are found for
the selected type and amount of compaction based on the
procedure described in Indian standard codes of practice I.S:2720
(Part VIII – 1983).
The weight of mould with moist compacted soil is W gm.
Weight of empty mould = W m gm Volume of mould = V m cc
w  wm 
Wet density, m  g / cc
vm
55
Let the moisture content be = w %
m w  wm 
Then dry density,  d   g / cc
 w   w 
1   v m 1  
 100   100 
The compaction test is carried out at different proportion of VPW

% (5%,10% ,15%,20%,25% and 30% ) and corresponding MDD and
OMC is figured out fro m the graph.
Plate 3.5:Compaction Test Apparatus
 The OMC of the soil indicated the particular moisture

content at which the soil should be compacted to achieve
maximum dry density. If the compacting effort applied is
less, the OMC increases and the value can again be found
experimentally or estimated.
 In field compaction, the compacting moisture content is first
controlled at OMC and the adequacy of rolling or
compaction is controlled by checking the dry density
56
achieved and comparing with the maximum dry density.

Thus compaction test results (OMC and maximum dry
density) are used in the field control test in the co mpaction
projects.
 Compaction, in general in considered most useful in the
preparation of sub grade and other pavement layers and in
construction of embankments in order to increase the
stability and to decrease settlement. There is also a soil
classification method based on the maximum dry density in
the standard (proctor compaction test lower values
indicating weaker soil).
3.3.5 STRENGTH TESTS
3.3.5.1 CBR TEST
The CBR is a measure of shearing resistance of the material

under controlled density and moisture conditions. The load -
penetration curve for each specimen is plotted on natural scale.
The load values at 2.5 mm and 5.0 mm are obtained from the
load penetration curve to compute CBR values using the following
equation.
𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙

CBR (%) = 𝑋 100
𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙
Based on extensive CBR test data collected, empirical design

charts were developed by the California State Highway
Department, correlating the CBR value and flexible pavement
thickness requirement. For various traffic volumes different
design thickness curves are available.
57
The California bearing ratio tests (as per IS: 2720 (part -16)-
1979) were conducted on all the combinations listed in table, at
the end of the curing period (all the samples were soaked for 4
days).
Samples were prepared by compacting different mixes to the

maximum dry density of the soil. The initial moisture content for
these samples was maintained at optimum moisture content of
the soil. The amount of Steel Slag to be added to the amount of
water was arrived at based on the optimum moisture content of
the natural soil and the Steel Slag prepared. This Steel Slag was
added to the air dry soil and the mixture was thoroughly mixed.
3.3.6 SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST
Specific gravity of solid particles (G) is defined as the ratio

of the mass of a given volume of solids to the mass of an equal
volume of water at 4°C.
The specific gravity of solid particles can be determined

in a laboratory using a density bottle fitted with a stopper. The
mass of bottle, including that of stopper, is taken. About 5 -10g of
oven dry sample of soil is taken in bottle and weighed. Distilled
water is then added to cover the sample. The soil is allowed to
soak. More water is added until the bottle is half full. Air
entrapped in the soil is expelled by applying a vacuum pressure
in vacuum desiccators. More water is added to the bottle to make
it full. The stopper is inserted and the mass is taken. The bottle
is emptied, washed and then refilled with distilled water. The
bottle must be filled to the same mark as in the previous case.
The mass of water filled with water is taken.
G = (M 2 -M 1 )/ [(M 2 -M 1 ) – (M 3 -M 4 )]
58
Where M 1 =Mass of Empty bottle

M 2 =Mass of bottle and dry soil
M 3 =Mass of bottle, soil and water
M 4 =Mass of bottle filled with water
3.3.7 CYCLIC PLATE LOAD TEST
Plate Load Test is a field or laboratory test for determining

the ultimate load carrying capacity of soil and the maximum
settlement under an applied load. The dimensions of model
flexible pavement is of 20cm untreated or treated expansive
soil subgrade, 5cm of gravel cushion as sub base and WBM -III
as base course for conducting laboratory cyclic plate load
test. The plate load test basically consists of loading a steel plate
placed at the foundation level and recording the settlements
corresponding to each load increment. The load applied is
gradually increased till the plate starts to sink at a rapid rate.
The total value of load on the plate in such a stage divided by the
area of the steel plate gives the value of the ulti mate bearing
capacity of soil. The ultimate bearing capacity is divided by
suitable factor of safety (which ranges from 2 to 3 to arrive at the
value of safe load capacity of soil.
These tests were carried out on flexible pavements systems
in a circular steel tank of diameter 60cm as shown in plate 3.10 .
The loading was done through a circular metal plate of 10cm
diameter laid on the model flexible pavement system. The steel
tank was placed on the pedestal of the compression testing
machine. Two dial gauges of least count 0.01mm wer e arranged
as shown in plate 3.6 for obtaining the deformations. A 5 Ton
capacity hydraulic jack was placed on the loading. Cyclic load
tests were carried out at OMC state corresponding to tire
pressures of 500,560,630,700 and 100 0kPa. Each pressure
59
increment was applied until there was no significant change in

deformation between the consecutive cycles. The testing was
further continued till the occurrence of failure of the model
pavement to record the ultimate load for with or wi thout the geo-
textile as reinforcement and separator. These tests were
conducted on all the model flexible pavements pr epared. These
tests were carried out at OMC and in saturated states for a ll the
model flexible pavements.
Loading frame
Proving ring
Dial gauge
Extension rod
10cm dia circular plate
5cmWBM-III base course

Gravel sub base
5cm
20 Stabilized expansive soil

cm
Fig.3.1:Experimental set up for Conducting Cyclic Plate

Load Test
60
Plate 3.6: Experimental setup for Cyclic Plate Load Test
Plate 3.7: Author Conducting the cyclic Plate Load Test
3.3.7.1 PREPARATION OF SOIL LAYER FOR PAVEMENT SUB-

GRADE
Expansive soil of total thickness 30cms mixed with water at

OMC was compacted and laid in layers of 5cms compacted
thickness.
61
3.3.7.2 PREPARATION OF GRAVEL CUSHION FOR PAVEMENT

SUB-BASE
On the prepared sub base, three layers of gravel each of

5cm compacted thickness, was laid to a total thickness of 15 cm
which acts as a binding material.
Table 3.5: CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF DIFFERENT MODEL
S.No Type of Sub grade Sub-Base Base

course
1 Expansive Soil ----- -----
2 Untreated Expansive Soil Gravel WBM-III

3 Expansive Soil + 15% Steel Slag Gravel WBM-III
4 Expansive Soil + 15% Steel Slag
and provided single Geotextile as Gravel WBM-III
reinforcement & separator between
Sub grade and Sub-Base
5 Expansive Soil + 15% Steel Slag and
provided Double Geotextile as Gravel WBM-III
reinforcement & separator between
Sub Base and Base Course
3.4 SUMMARY
In this chapter, the details of laboratory experimentation

were presented. Analysis and discussion of test results will be
presented in the next chapter.
******
62
CHAPTER-4
DISCUSSION ON TEST RESULTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Details of the laboratory experimentation carried -out with

steel slag have been discussed in the previous chapter. In this
chapter a detailed discussion on the results obtained from
laboratory experimentation are presented.
4.2 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

In the laboratory, index tests and strength tests were
conducted by using different percentages of steel slag with a view
to determine the optimum percentage of steel slag as an
admixture.
The effect of addition of different proportions of steel slag to

the expansive soil on th e Atterberg's limits, free swell index and
strength properties are discussed in detail in the following
sections.
4.2.1 FREE SWELL
To determine the free swell of soil as per IS: 2720 (Part XL)
– 1977. Free swell or differential free swell, also termed as free
swell index, and is the increase in volume of soil without any
external constraint when subjected to submergence in water.
Free swell =( [V d - V k ] / V k ) x 100%
Where,
V d = volume of soil specimen read from the graduated cylinder

containing distilled water.
63
V k = volume of soil specimen read from the graduated cylinder

containing kerosene.
Table 4.1: PROPERTIES OF UNTREATED AND TREATED

EXPANSIVE SOIL
S.No Descriptions Untreated Treated with

Expansive Expansive Soil
Soil with 15% steel slag
1. Atterberg's limits
Liquid limit (% ) 72 54.98
Plastic limit (% ) 32.5 40.45
Plasticity index (% ) 39.5 14.53
2. Compaction properties
O.M.C (% ) 29 20.18
MDD(gm/cc) 1.48 1.801
3. Specific Gravity (G) 2.64 2.72
4. Soaked C.B.R (%) 1.82 14.34
5. Free swell (%) 140 40

Maximum Dry Density
(M.D.D) (g/cc)
64
4.2.2 ATTERBERG LIMITS
4.2.2.1 Liquid limit of expansive soil treated with percentage

variation of steel slag
The results of the limit tests on the soil samples in natural

state and when mixed with varying percentage of Steel Slag are
shown in fig. From the results, there is a decrease in both liquid
limit and plasticity index with increasing Steel Slag content. The
plastic limit show decreasing trends. The change in each of these
properties is obviously a change in water content due to increase
in Steel Slag.
Table 4.2 Liquid limit values of expansive Soil treated with

percentage variation of Steel Slag
S.No Steel Slag Liquid limit (%)
1 0 72
2 5 66.06
3 10 60.18
4 15 54.98
5 20 52.56
65
Fig 4.1 liquid limit values of expansive soil treated

with percentage variation of Steel Slag
72
75
66.06
65 60.18
liquid limit (%)
54.98
52.56
55
45
35
25
0 5 10 15 20 25
SS (%)
4.2.2.2 PLASTIC LIMIT TEST OF EXPANSIVE SOIL TREATED

WITH PERCENTAGE VARIATION OF STEEL SLAG
The result of plastic limit tests on expansive soil treated

with different percentage of Steel Slag are shown in Table 4.3 &
Figure 4.2. From the figure it can be seen that with increase in
percentage of Steel Slag, the plastic limit of soil goes on
increasing. The plastic limit increases from 32.52% to 42.24%
when Steel Slag is increased from 0 to 2 0% .
Table 4.3Plastic limit values of expansive soil treated with

percentage variation of Steel Slag.
S.No Steel Slag (%) Plastic limit (%)
1 0 32.5
2 5 33.89
3 10 37.52
4 15 40.45
5 20 42.24
66
Fig 4.2 Plastic limit values of expansive soil treated

45 42.24
40.45
Plastic limit (%)
40 37.52
33.89
3532.5
30
25
0 5 10 15 20 25
SS (%)
4.2.2.3 PLASTICITY INDEX OF EXPANSIVE SOIL TREATED

WITH DIFFERENT PERCENTAGES OF STEEL SLAG
The variation of plasti city index with percentage of Steel Slag is

shown in Table 4.4 & Figure 4.3. From the figure it can be
observed that the plasticity index goes on decreasing with
addition of Steel Slag content. The plasticity index decreases from
39.5% to 10.32% when Steel Slag is increased from 0 to 20% .
Table 4.4 Plasticity index values of expansive soil treated

with percentage variation of Steel Slag.
S.No Steel Slag (%) Plasticity Index (%)
1 0 39.5
2 5 32.17
3 10 22.66
4 15 14.53
5 20 10.32
67
Fig 4.3 Plasticity index values of expansive soil

treated with percentage variation of Steel Slag
4539.5
Plasticity Index (%)
35 32.17
22.66
25
14.53
15 10.32
5
0 5 10 15 20 25
SS(%)
4.2.3 COMPACTION PROPERTIES:
Compaction tests on different proportions of soil, with

different proportion of Steel Slag is presented and discussed in
term of their OMC and MDD values.
4.2.3.1 OMC & MDD Values of Untreated Expansive Soil

The results show that with the increase in Steel Slag
proportion up to 15% the MDD goes on increasing and OMC goes
on decreasing, by further addition of Steel Slag , there is a
decrease in the MDD values and OMC goes on increasing . From
this we can conclude that up to the optimum level of Steel Slag
the voids in between the soil particles will get filled by VPW
content and ratio more than 15% , most of the voids are filled and
no space for more Steel Slag to fill this voids.
68
Table 4.5 OMC and MDD values of Untreated Expansive soil
S.No OMC(%) MDD(g/cc)
1 22.14 1.31
2 26.29 1.43
3 29 1.48
4 31.6 1.44
5 35.33 1.32
Fig 4.4 OMC AND MDD values of untreated expansive

soil
1.5 1.48
1.43 1.44
1.45
MDD (g/cc)
1.4
1.35 1.31 1.32
1.3
1.25
1.2
15 20 25 30 35 40
OMC (%)
4.2.3.2 OMC and MDD values of Expansive soil treated with

5% of steel slag
Table 4.6 and Fig. 4.5 present the OMC & MDD values of
Expansive soil Treated with 5% steel slag.
69
Table 4.6 OMC and MDD values of Expansive soil treated with
5% of steel slag
1 23.10 1.49
2 24.72 1.59
3 26.12 1.62
4 28.42 1.57
5 30.13 1.49
Fig 4.5 OMC AND MDD values of Expansive soil

treated with 5% of steel slag
1.65 1.62
1.59
1.6 1.57
MDD (g/cc)
1.55
1.49 1.49
1.5
1.45
1.4
20 22 24 26 28 30 32
OMC (%)
4.2.3.3 OMC and MDD values of Expansiv e soil treated with

10% of steel slag
70
10% of steel slag
1 19.56 1.65
2 21.09 1.69
3 23.46 1.72
4 25.31 1.71
5 27.80 1.66

1.75
1.72
1.72 1.71
1.69
MDD (g/cc)
1.69
1.66
1.66 1.65
1.63
1.6
17 19 21 23 25 27 29
OMC (%)
4.2.3.4 OMC and MDD values of Expa nsive soil treated with
15% of Steel Slag
Expansive soil Treated with 15% steel slag .
71
15% of steel slag
S. No OMC(%) MDD(g/cc)
1 16.80 1.74
2 18.55 1.78
3 20.18 1.80
4 22.58 1.79
5 24.07 1.75

1.82
1.8
1.79
1.79 1.78
MDD (g/cc)
1.76 1.75
1.74
1.73
1.7
15 17 19 21 23 25
OMC (%)

20% of steel slag
72
20% of steel slag
S. No OMC(%) MDD(g/cc)
1 21.06 1.69
2 23.17 1.74
3 24.56 1.76
4 27.42 1.73
5 29.56 1.69

1.78 1.76
MDD (g/cc)
1.75 1.74
1.73
1.72
1.69 1.69
1.69
1.66
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
OMC (%)

different percentages of steel slag
73
Fig 4.9 present the OMC & MDD values of Expansive soil when
treated with different percentages
Fig 4.9 Composite graph of OMC and MDD values of

Expansive soil treated with different % of steel slag
1.9
1.8
1.7
MDD (g/cc)
1.6 5% of SS
1.5 10% of SS
1.4 15% of SS
1.3 20% of SS
1.2
17 21 25 29 33
OMC (%)
4.2.3.7 MDD values of Expansive soil treated with percentage

variation of steel slag
Table 4.10 & Fig 4.10 present the MDD values of Expansive soil
treated with percentage variation of steel slag.
Table 4.10 OMC and MDD values of expansive soil treated

S. No SS (%) OMC (%) MDD (g/cc)
1 0 29 1.48
2 5 26.12 1.62
3 10 23.46 1.71
4 15 20.18 1.80
5 20 24.56 1.76
74
Fig 4.10 MDD values of expansive soil treated with

2
1.801
1.76
1.8 1.71
MDD (g/cc)
1.62
1.61.48
1.4
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
steel slag(%)
MDD = 1.80 g/cc
4.2.4 California Bearing Ratio Test Results of Expansive Soil

Treated with Percentage Variation of Steel Slag
The Expansive soil was treated with different percentages of

Steel Slag.
(i). Table 4.11 and Figure 4.11 show the CBR values of
untreated expansive soil.
75
Table 4.11 CBR values of untreated expansive soil
Dial Gauge Penetration Proving Ring Load (kg)

reading (l) (mm) reading (P) P*6.14
0 0 0 0
50 0.5 2 12.28
100 1 2.5 15.35
150 1.5 3 18.42
200 2 3.5 21.49
250 2.5 4.5 27.63
300 3 5 30.7
350 3.5 5.5 33.77
400 4 5.5 33.77
450 4.5 6 36.84
500 5 6.5 39.91
550 5.5 6.5 39.91
600 6 8 49.12
700 7 11 67.54
800 8 13.5 82.89
900 9 14 85.96
1000 10 16 98.24
1100 11 18.5 113.59
1200 12 21 128.94
76
fig 4.11 C B R of untreated expansive soil

140
Penetration Resistance(Kg) 12, 128.94
120
11, 113.59
100 10, 98.24
9, 85.96
8, 82.89
80
7, 67.54
60
6, 49.12
40 5,36.84
4.5, 39.91
5.5, 39.91
3.5,4,33.77
33.77
2.5,3,27.63
30.7
20 2,18.42
1.5, 21.49
0.5,1,12.28
15.35
0 0, 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Penetration Depth(mm)
(ii). Table 4.12 and Figure 4.12 show the CBR values of
expansive soil treated with 5 % of steel slag.
fig 4.12 Soaked C B R of expansive soil treated

with 5% steel slag
200
Penetration Resistance (Kg)
12, 159.64
11, 153.5
150 9,
10, 150.43
141.22
8, 135.08
7, 132.01
6, 110.52
5.5, 107.45
100 4.5,5,98.24
101.31
3.5,4,85.96
3, 82.89
92.1
2.5, 73.68
50 2, 52.19
1.5, 36.84
1, 27.63
0.5, 18.42
0 0, 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
77
Table 4.12 CBR values of expansive soil treated with 5% of

steel slag

0 0 0 0
50 0.5 3 18.42
100 1 4.5 27.63
150 1.5 6 36.84
200 2 8.5 52.19
250 2.5 12 73.68
300 3 13.5 82.89
350 3.5 14 85.96
400 4 15 92.1
450 4.5 16 98.24
500 5 16.5 101.31
550 5.5 17.5 107.45
600 6 18 110.52
700 7 21.5 132.01
800 8 22 135.08
900 9 23 141.22
1000 10 24.5 150.43
1100 11 25 153.5
1200 12 26 159.64
78
(iii). Table 4.13 and Figure 4.13 show the CBR values of

steel slag

0 0 0 0
50 0.5 4 24.56
100 1 6 36.84
150 1.5 8 49.12
200 2 10 61.4
250 2.5 13 79.82
300 3 13 79.82
350 3.5 14 85.96
400 4 15 92.1
450 4.5 15 92.1
500 5 16 98.24
550 5.5 16 98.24
600 6 17 104.38
700 7 17 104.38
800 8 18 110.52
900 9 18 110.52
1000 10 19 116.66
1100 11 19 116.66
1200 12 19 116.66
79

with 10% steel slag
120 10, 116.66

11, 116.66
12, 116.66
8, 110.52
9, 110.52
100 6, 104.38
7, 104.38
5, 98.24
5.5, 98.24
4, 92.1
4.5, 92.1
3.5, 85.96
80 2.5,3,79.82
79.82
60 2, 61.4
1.5, 49.12
40 1, 36.84
20 0.5, 24.56
0 0, 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
(iv). Table 4.14 and Figure 4.14 show the CBR values of
expansive soil treated with 15% of steel slag.

with 15% steel slag
500
400 11, 386.82

12, 386.82
10, 374.54
9, 356.12
8, 343.84
7, 325.42
300 6, 300.86
5, 5.5, 264.02
245.6
4.5,
3.5,4,221.04239.46
227.18
200 2.5,3,196.48
214.9
2, 165.78
1.5, 122.8
1, 110.52
100
0.5, 73.68
0 0, 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
80
Table 4.14 CBR values of expansive soil treated with 15 % of

steel slag

0 0 0 0
50 0.5 12 73.68
100 1 18 110.52
150 1.5 20 122.8
200 2 27 165.78
250 2.5 32 196.48
300 3 35 214.9
350 3.5 36 221.04
400 4 37 227.18
450 4.5 39 239.46
500 5 40 245.6
550 5.5 43 264.02
600 6 49 300.86
700 7 53 325.42
800 8 56 343.84
900 9 58 356.12
1000 10 61 374.54
1100 11 63 386.82
1200 12 63 386.82
81
(v). Table 4.15 and Figure 4.15 show the CBR values of

steel slag

0 0 0 0
50 0.5 8 49.12
100 1 12 73.68
150 1.5 14 85.96
200 2 16 98.24
250 2.5 20 122.8
300 3 22 135.08
350 3.5 23 141.22
400 4 24 147.36
450 4.5 25 153.5
500 5 26 159.64
550 5.5 27 165.78
600 6 28 171.92
700 7 29 178.06
800 8 29 178.06
900 9 32 196.48
1000 10 34 208.76
1100 11 36 221.04
1200 12 36 221.04
82

with 20% steel slag
250
PenetrationResistance (Kg)
11, 221.04
12, 221.04
200 10, 208.76
9, 196.48
7, 178.06
8, 178.06
5.5,6,165.78
5,153.5
159.64
171.92
150 4.5,
3.5,4,141.22
3, 135.08
147.36
2.5, 122.8
100 2, 98.24
1.5, 85.96
1, 73.68
50 0.5, 49.12
0 0, 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
(vi). Figure 4.16 shows the CBR values of expansive soil treated
with different percentages of steel slag.
fig 4.16 Composite graph of C B R of expansive

soil treated with different % of SS
500
400
300
5% of SS
10% of SS
200
15% of SS
20% of SS
100
0
0 5 10 15
83
(v). Table 4.16 and Figure 4.17 show the CBR values of
expansive soil treated with percentage variation of steel slag.
Table 4.16 CBR values of expansive soil treated with

S. No Steel Slag (%) CBR (%)
1 0 2.01
2 5 5.36
3 10 9.73
4 15 14.34
5 20 11.51
Fig 4.17 CBR values of expansive soil treated with

16 14.34
14 11.51
12 9.73
CBR (%)
10
8
5.36
6
42.01
2
0 5 10 15 20 25
Steel Slag (%)
CBR (%) = 14.34
84
Discussion:
As per IRC codes 37:2001 and 37:2012, the minimum required

CBR value of a subgrade soil is 6-7%. In the present study it is
observed that the treated expansive soil has exhibited the CBR
value of 14.34% . Hence the treated expansive soil is suitable as
subgrade for flexible pavements as per IRC co des of practice.
4.2.5 THE PROPERTIES OF UNTREATED AND TREATED

EXPANSIVE SOIL WITH OPTIMUM PERCENTAGES OF STEEL
SLAG
The properties of both untreated and treated expansive soil

with optimum percentage s of Steel Slag (SS), are provided in the
following table 4.17.
Table 4.17: The properties of untr eated and treated expansive

soil with an optimum percentages of Steel Slag
S.No Expansive 85%Soil+

Property Symbol
soil 15% SS
1 Liquid Limit (% ) WL 72 54.98
2 Plastic Limit (% ) WP 32.5 40.45
3 Plasticity Index
IP 39.5 14.53
(% )
4 Free Swell Index

FSI 140 40
(% )
85
4 Soil
--- CH CH
Classification
5 Specific Gravity G 2.64 2.72
Optimum
6 Moisture O.M.C 29 20.18
Content (% )
7 Maximum Dry
M.D.D 1.48 1.801
Density (gm/cc)
8 CBR value (% ) --- 1.82 14.34
4.2.6 LABORATORY CYCLIC PLATE LOAD TESTS ON

UNTREATED AND TREATED EXPANSIVE SOIL USING MODEL
TANKSFOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
4.2.6.1 General
Cyclic plate load tests were carried out on untreated and

treated Expansive soil for flexible pavements in separate mod el
tanks under cyclic pressures 500kPa, 560kPa, 630kPa, 700kPa
and 1000kPa. The tests were conducted until the failure of the
Expansive soil as model flexible pavements at OMC condition.
4.2.6.2 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of

Untreated Expansive Soil Subgrade Model Flexible Pavement
Table 4.18 and Figure 4.19 shows the laboratory cyclic plate load
test results of untreated expansive soil subgrade model flexible
pavement. This model flexible pavement has exhibited an
ultimate pressure of 620 kPa at 2.41mm as deformation.
86
4.2.6.3 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of Treated

Expansive Soil subgrade model flexible pavement
Table 4.19 and Figure 4.20 show the laboratory cyclic plate load
test results of treated expansive soil subgrade model flexible
pavement. This model flexible pavement has exhibi ted an
ultimate pressure of 1400 kPa at 2.35 mm as deformation.
4.2.6.4 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of (15%

Steel Slag and single Geotextile as reinforcement and
separator) treated Expansive soil flexible pavement
Figure 4.20 show the laboratory cyclic plate load test results of
treated expansive soil subgrade model flexible pavement. This
model flexible pavement has exhibited an ultimate pressure of
2200 kPa at 2.13mm as deformation.
4.2.6.5 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Resul ts of (15%

Steel Slag and Double Geotextile as reinforcement and
separator) treated Expansive soil flexible pavement
Figure 4.21 show the laboratory cyclic plate load test results of
treated expansive soil subgrade model flexible pavement. This
model flexible pavement has exhibited an ultimate pressure of
3600 kPa at 2.34mm as deformation.
87
Stabilization of Expansive Soil using Steel Slag as Admixture
Fig 4.18 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of Untreated Expansive
Soil Model Flexible Pavement at OMC
Pressure(kPa)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
1 500, 0.94
Settlement(mm)
560, 1.66
2
380, 2.51 620, 2.41
3 520, 3.06
620, 3.45
4
620, 4.26
5 620, 4.92
Fig. 4.18 The untreated expansive soil subgrade model flexible pavement has exhibited the ultimate cyclic pressure of
620kN/m2 with the deformation of 2.41mm.
88
Stabilization of Expansive Soil using Steel Slag
Fig 4.19 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of the Expansive soil treated
with 15% steel slag for model Flexible Pavement Subgrade at OMC
Pressure(kpa)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
0
0.5
500, 0.63
560, 0.94
Settlement(mm)
1
620, 1.23
1.5 700, 1.46
1000, 1.76
2
1400, 2.39
2.5
1400, 2.61
3.5
Fig. 4.19 The treated expansive soil subgrade model flexible pavement has exhibited the ultimate cyclic
pressure of 1400kN/m 2 with the deformation of 2.35mm at OMC.
89
Fig 4.21 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of (15% Steel Slag and single
Geotextile as reinforecement and seperator) treated Expansive soil flexible pavement at
OMC
Pressure (kPa)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
0 560, 0.32
700, 0.68
0.5 1000, 0.84
1400, 1.01
1
settlement (mm)
1.5
1800, 2.09 2200, 1.69
2
2200, 2.73
2.5
3
2200, 3.52
3.5
4
Fig. 4.20 presents the laboratory cyclic plate load test results of (15% Steel slag + Single Geotextile as
reinforcement and separator ) treated Expansive Soil flexible pavement. This treated Expansive Soil
flexible pavement has exhibited the ultimate cyclic load o f 2200 kN/m 2 with the deformation of 2.13 mm
at OMC
90
Fig 4.21 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of (15% Steel Slag and Double
Geotextile as reinforecement and seperator) treated Expansive soil flexible pavement at
OMC
Pressure (kPa)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
0
1000, 0.710.84
1120, 1400, 0.88 1760, 1.03 2200, 1.1
1 3000, 1.48
settlement (mm)
3200, 2.12
2 3600, 1.97
3200, 3.02
3 3600, 3.5
3600, 4.25
4
3600, 5
5
Fig. 4.21 presents the laboratory cyclic plate load test results of (15% Steel slag + double Geotextile as
reinforcement and separator ) treated Expansive Soil flexible pavement. This treated Expansive Soil
flexible pavement has exhibited the ultimate cyclic load of 3600 kN/m 2 with the deformation of 1.97 mm
at OMC
91
Table 4.18 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of

Untreated Expansive soil sub grade model Flexible
Pavement at OMC
S.No Pressure Dial Dial Average Settlement
(kPa) gauge 1 gauge 2 (mm)
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 100 1 1 1 0.1
3 200 1 3 2 0.2
4 300 24 28 26 0.26
5 400 30 38 34 0.34
6 500 45 49 47 0.47
7 400 40 42 41 0.41
8 300 36 34 35 0.35
9 200 29 25 27 0.27
10 100 18 22 20 0.2
11 0 15 11 13 0.13
12 100 26 30 28 0.28
13 200 41 37 39 0.39
14 300 48 52 50 0.5
15 400 57 65 61 0.61
16 500 65 69 67 0.67
17 400 54 62 58 0.58
18 300 47 51 49 0.49
19 200 45 41 43 0.43
20 100 33 37 35 0.35
21 0 24 28 26 0.26
22 100 40 38 39 0.39
23 200 47 51 49 0.49
24 300 57 61 59 0.59
92
25 400 69 73 71 0.71
26 500 76 80 78 0.78
27 400 72 68 70 0.7
28 300 66 58 62 0.62
29 200 59 55 57 0.57
30 100 54 46 50 0.5
31 0 36 40 38 0.38
32 100 54 50 52 0.52
33 200 62 64 63 0.63
34 300 68 72 70 0.7
35 400 78 84 81 0.81
36 500 92 96 94 0.94
37 400 83 87 85 0.85
38 300 70 78 74 0.74
39 200 66 70 68 0.68
40 100 60 64 62 0.62
41 0 54 58 56 0.56
42 120 82 78 80 0.8
43 220 94 92 93 0.93
44 360 104 112 108 1.08
45 480 114 122 118 1.18
46 560 136 140 138 1.38
47 480 129 125 127 1.27
48 560 112 120 116 1.16
49 480 104 108 106 1.06
50 360 94 102 98 0.98
51 0 84 88 86 0.86
52 120 108 114 111 1.11
93
53 220 116 124 120 1.2
54 360 129 133 131 1.31
55 480 140 148 144 1.44
56 560 154 158 156 1.56
57 480 142 150 146 1.46
58 360 131 139 135 1.35
59 220 118 126 122 1.22
60 120 118 114 116 1.16
61 0 108 104 106 1.06
62 120 118 116 117 1.17
63 220 133 129 131 1.31
64 360 140 148 144 1.44
65 480 156 160 158 1.58
66 560 170 162 166 1.66
67 480 158 150 154 1.54
68 360 128 136 132 1.32
69 220 122 118 120 1.2
70 120 116 108 112 1.12
71 0 99 103 101 1.01
72 120 128 124 126 1.26
73 220 132 140 136 1.36
74 360 154 148 151 1.51
75 480 169 161 165 1.65
76 560 180 184 182 1.82
77 480 170 174 172 1.72
78 360 162 166 164 1.64
79 220 158 154 156 1.56
80 120 148 140 144 1.44
94
81 0 133 129 131 1.31
82 130 148 150 149 1.49
83 260 157 165 161 1.61
84 380 174 178 176 1.76
85 520 180 174 177 1.77
86 620 190 192 191 1.91
87 520 185 177 181 1.81
88 380 169 173 171 1.71
89 260 160 162 161 1.61
90 130 145 153 149 1.49
91 0 146 136 141 1.41
92 130 157 161 159 1.59
93 260 174 168 171 1.71
94 380 184 188 186 1.86
95 520 197 201 199 1.99
96 620 215 207 211 2.11
97 520 199 203 201 2.01
98 380 195 187 191 1.91
99 260 182 174 178 1.78
100 130 164 168 166 1.66
101 0 160 164 162 1.62
102 130 178 174 176 1.76
103 260 185 189 187 1.87
104 380 201 205 203 2.03
105 520 218 214 216 2.16
106 620 239 243 241 2.41
107 520 236 228 232 2.32
108 380 225 227 226 2.26
95
109 260 216 220 218 2.18
110 130 199 195 197 1.97
111 0 175 167 171 1.71
112 130 194 198 196 1.96
113 260 214 218 216 2.16
114 380 248 254 251 2.51
115 520 304 308 306 3.06
116 620 347 343 345 3.45
117 620 422 430 426 4.26
118 620 494 490 492 4.92
Table 4.19 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of the

Expansive soil treated with 15 % Steel Slag for Flexible
Pavements sub grade at OMC
S. No Pressure Dial Dial Settlement

Average
(kPa) gauge 1 gauge 2 (mm)
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 100 4 2 3 0.03
3 200 6 2 4 0.04
4 300 8 2 5 0.05
5 400 9 3 6 0.06
6 500 11 3 7 0.07
7 400 9 3 6 0.06
8 300 9 3 6 0.06
9 200 8 0 5 0.05
10 100 6 0 4 0.04
11 0 4 0 3 0.03
12 100 11 3 7 0.07
13 200 16 4 9 0.09
96
14 300 18 6 12 0.12
15 400 21 7 14 0.14
16 500 22 8 15 0.15
17 400 20 6 13 0.13
18 300 17 5 11 0.11
19 200 11 3 7 0.07
20 100 10 2 6 0.06
21 0 8 2 5 0.05
22 100 11 5 8 0.08
23 200 13 5 9 0.09
24 300 20 8 14 0.14
25 400 24 12 18 0.18
26 500 26 14 2 0.2
27 400 22 14 18 0.18
28 300 22 12 17 0.17
29 200 20 12 16 0.16
30 100 18 10 14 0.14
31 0 16 10 13 0.13
32 100 22 10 16 0.16
33 200 22 14 18 0.18
34 300 26 16 21 0.21
35 400 28 20 24 0.24
36 500 30 22 26 0.26
37 400 24 22 23 0.23
38 300 20 20 20 0.2
39 200 17 19 18 0.18
40 100 17 17 17 0.17
41 0 17 15 16 0.16
97
42 120 18 18 18 0.18
43 220 19 21 20 0.2
44 360 24 22 23 0.23
45 480 34 24 29 0.29
46 560 39 25 32 0.32
47 480 38 24 31 0.31
48 360 38 22 30 0.3
49 220 32 22 27 0.27
50 120 32 20 26 0.26
51 0 30 16 23 0.23
52 120 28 20 24 0.24
53 220 32 22 27 0.27
54 360 37 23 30 0.3
55 480 40 24 32 0.32
56 560 46 26 36 0.36
57 480 44 24 34 0.34
58 360 42 20 31 0.31
59 220 36 18 27 0.27
60 120 32 18 25 0.25
61 0 30 14 22 0.22
62 120 30 22 26 0.26
63 220 32 26 29 0.29
64 360 34 28 31 0.31
65 480 36 32 34 0.34
66 560 36 34 38 0.38
67 480 35 35 35 0.35
68 360 34 32 33 0.33
69 220 34 28 30 0.30
98
70 120 32 22 27 0.27
71 0 32 14 24 0.24
72 120 40 20 30 0.3
73 220 42 24 33 0.33
74 360 50 24 37 0.37
75 480 56 26 40 0.40
76 560 60 24 43 0.43
77 480 58 24 40 0.4
78 360 57 26 36 0.36
79 220 44 20 32 0.32
80 120 42 20 31 0.31
81 0 42 16 29 0.29
82 130 42 22 32 0.32
83 260 48 22 35 0.35
84 380 47 24 39 0.39
85 520 48 25 41 0.41
86 620 56 36 43 0.43
87 520 57 27 42 0.42
88 380 54 24 39 0.39
89 260 52 22 37 0.37
90 130 46 22 34 0.34
91 0 44 20 32 0.32
92 130 52 22 37 0.37
93 260 52 32 42 0.42
94 380 57 37 47 0.47
95 520 58 40 49 0.49
96 620 62 42 52 0.52
97 520 57 41 49 0.49
99
98 380 56 37 45 0.45
99 260 54 34 44 0.44
100 130 52 32 42 0.42
101 0 54 34 44 0.44
102 130 56 36 46 0.46
103 260 57 37 47 0.47
104 380 60 38 49 0.49
105 520 61 41 51 0.51
106 620 61 43 52 0.52
107 520 58 40 49 0.49
108 380 56 36 46 0.46
109 260 56 36 46 0.46
110 130 56 34 45 0.45
111 0 56 32 44 0.44
112 130 60 34 47 0.47
113 260 62 36 49 0.49
114 380 66 42 54 0.54
115 520 72 42 57 0.57
116 620 80 36 58 0.58
117 520 80 36 58 0.58
118 380 68 42 55 0.55
119 260 64 42 53 0.53
120 130 60 40 50 0.5
121 0 62 32 47 0.47
122 140 62 40 51 0.51
123 280 64 40 53 0.53
124 420 65 51 58 0.58
125 560 66 56 61 0.61
100
126 700 74 62 68 0.68
127 560 64 60 62 0.62
128 420 62 54 58 0.58
129 280 58 50 54 0.54
130 140 53 47 50 0.50
131 0 48 46 47 0.47
132 140 53 49 51 0.51
133 280 60 52 56 0.56
134 420 62 57 60 0.60
135 560 71 61 66 0.66
136 700 75 67 71 0.71
137 560 70 68 69 0.69
138 420 67 63 65 0.65
139 280 65 59 62 0.62
140 140 61 53 57 0.57
141 0 54 50 52 0.52
142 140 62 56 59 0.59
143 280 64 62 63 0.63
144 420 69 65 67 0.67
145 560 76 68 72 0.72
146 700 80 72 76 0.76
147 560 76 70 73 0.73
148 420 73 67 70 0.70
149 280 69 63 66 0.66
150 140 65 57 61 0.61
151 0 61 56 57 0.57
152 140 71 65 68 0.68
153 280 76 70 73 0.73
101
154 420 82 72 77 0.77
155 560 90 74 81 0.81
156 700 82 82 82 0.82
157 560 80 82 80 0.8
158 420 72 76 74 0.74
159 280 70 74 72 0.72
160 140 67 67 67 0.67
161 0 66 58 62 0.62
162 200 70 60 68 0.68
163 400 80 64 72 0.72
164 600 82 66 76 0.76
165 800 84 74 79 0.79
166 1000 92 76 84 0.84
167 800 84 80 81 0.81
168 600 84 70 77 0.77
169 400 82 64 73 0.73
170 200 78 62 70 0.7
171 0 72 62 67 0.67
172 200 78 64 71 0.71
173 400 86 66 76 0.76
174 600 88 74 81 0.81
175 800 92 76 84 0.84
176 1000 94 78 88 0.88
177 800 90 76 85 0.85
178 600 90 74 82 0.82
179 400 84 70 77 0.77
180 200 82 64 74 0.74
181 0 82 62 72 0.72
102
182 200 88 64 76 0.76
183 400 88 76 81 0.81
184 600 88 82 85 0.85
185 800 89 87 88 0.88
186 1000 95 89 92 0.92
187 800 91 83 87 0.87
188 600 87 79 83 0.83
189 400 84 78 81 0.81
190 200 81 79 80 0.80
191 0 78 74 76 0.76
192 200 84 78 81 0.81
193 400 89 83 86 0.86
194 600 89 85 89 0.89
195 800 96 88 92 0.92
196 1000 100 92 96 0.96
197 800 95 89 92 0.92
198 600 101 95 88 0.88
199 400 88 82 85 0.85
200 200 85 79 82 0.82
201 0 81 79 80 0.8
202 280 87 83 85 0.85
203 560 91 87 89 0.89
204 840 95 89 92 0.92
205 1120 97 93 96 0.96
206 1400 105 97 101 1.01
207 1120 101 95 98 0.98
208 840 98 92 95 0.95
209 560 94 86 90 0.90
103
210 280 89 87 88 0.88
211 0 88 84 86 0.86
212 280 96 88 92 0.92
213 560 98 94 96 0.96
214 840 102 96 99 0.99
215 1120 106 96 109 1.09
216 1400 110 102 106 1.06
217 1120 104 102 103 1.03
218 840 102 96 99 0.99
219 560 98 94 96 0.96
220 280 92 92 92 0.92
221 0 92 88 90 0.9
222 280 94 92 94 0.94
223 560 100 98 97 0.97
224 840 102 100 101 1.01
225 1120 108 102 103 1.03
226 1400 118 104 111 1.11
227 1120 112 102 107 1.07
228 840 108 98 103 1.03
229 560 104 96 100 1
230 280 104 92 98 0.98
231 0 102 92 96 0.96
232 280 104 98 100 1
233 560 106 104 105 1.05
234 840 110 106 108 1.08
235 1120 114 108 111 1.11
236 1400 122 110 116 1.16
237 1120 112 106 112 1.12
104
238 840 110 106 108 1.08
239 560 108 103 105 1.05
240 280 102 102 102 1.02
241 0 101 101 101 1.01
242 440 110 116 113 1.13
243 880 134 114 124 1.24
244 1320 148 116 132 1.32
245 1760 158 122 140 1.40
246 2200 168 126 148 1.48
247 1760 162 122 142 1.42
248 1320 156 126 134 1.34
249 880 146 122 126 1.26
250 440 132 112 117 1.17
251 0 112 102 107 1.07
252 440 126 114 120 1.2
253 880 148 116 132 1.32
254 1320 156 124 140 1.40
255 1760 162 132 147 1.47
256 2200 170 134 152 1.52
257 1760 168 132 148 1.48
258 1320 162 142 142 1.42
259 880 162 110 136 1.36
260 440 142 106 124 1.24
261 0 132 96 114 1.14
262 440 144 112 128 1.28
263 880 158 122 140 1.40
264 1320 162 130 146 1.46
265 1760 172 132 152 1.52
105
266 2200 180 134 157 1.57
267 1760 178 128 154 1.54
268 1320 176 126 149 1.49
269 880 174 122 142 1.42
270 440 144 120 132 1.32
271 0 142 118 120 1.2
272 440 144 120 127 1.27
273 880 167 145 156 1.56
274 1320 223 165 194 1.94
275 1760 278 174 226 2.26
276 2200 323 249 286 2.86
277 2200 373 331 352 3.52
4.2.6.4 LABORATORY CYCLIC PLATE LOAD TEST RESULTS

OFUNTREATED AND TREATED EXPANSIVE SOIL SUBGRADE
MODEL FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS AT OMC
The table 4.20 present the cyclic plate load test results of
untreated and treated expansive soil subgrade model flexible
pavements.
106
Table 4.20 laboratory cyclic plate load test results of

treated and untreated expansive soil for flexible pavements
at OMC.
S.No Type of Subgrade Sub- Base Pressure Settlement

Base course (kPa)
(mm)
1 Expansive Soil ----- ----- 160 2.58
2 Untreated Gravel WBM-III 620 2.41

Expansive Soil
3 Expansive Soil+ Gravel WBM-III 1400 2.35

15% Steel Slag
4 Expansive Soil+
15% Steel Slag and
single Geotextile
provided as Gravel WBM-III 2200 2.13
reinforcement &
separator between
Sub grade and
Sub-Base
5 Expansive Soil+
15% Steel Slag and
Double Geotextile Gravel WBM-III 3600 1.97
provided as
reinforcement &
separator between
Sub Base and Base
Course
107
Discussion
It has been observed from the laboratory cyclic plate load test results
that the double reinforced flexible pavement has exhibited maximum
cyclic pressure than the remaining untreated and treated flexible
pavements.
4.3 SUMMARY
The details of test results were presented in this chapter. The summary
of work done, conclusions and scope for future work will be presented
in the next chapter.
******
108
CHAPTER-5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 GENERAL
In this chapter, the summary of the work done was

presented along with the conclusions drawn from the study.
The scope for further research in this area was also suggested
at the end.
5.2 SUMMARY
Modern pavements are expected to provide a high level of

safety and comfort for their users. Pavements are commonly
designed using a combination of mechanistic and empirical
approaches. These methods involve selecting the appropriate
soil and pavement parameters and then calculating layer
thickness for the sub base, base and the concrete pavement as
appropriate. With any method, a strength parameter is used to
describe the sub grade or native material beneath the
pavement layers. Sub grade materials vary fr om soft soils to
rock. Variations in the sub grade, even over short distances,
are inevitable and can occur abruptly or gradually, depending
on the geological history of the surface soils. A high variability
in sub grade soil characteristics may dictate th e use of
conservative estimates that may lead to thicker pavements with
higher construction costs or poor performance and higher
maintenance costs. In order to alleviate these problems,
methods have been developed to try and minimize the
variability in sub grade characteristics.
In order to improve the engineering behavior of soils,

several improvement techniques are available in geotechnical
109
engineering practice. The fact that the selection of any one of

these methods for any problem can be made only after a
comparison with other techniques proves that the method is
well suited for a particular system. In fine -grained soils
chemical stabilization methods and reinforcement techniques
are well suited to improve their engineering behavior and to
make them less sensitive to environmental factors.
However, these and many other techniques were successful

only to a partial extent and hence the attempts to devise better
techniques are still on. In addition, majority of these works
have been confined to laboratory, under controlled conditions
on re-molded samples and hence fail to simulate many of the
field conditions. Despite years of practice and research, an
economical and satisfactory solution to the problems posed by
the expansive soil, continues to elude resear chers and
practicing engineers.
5.3 CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions were drawn based on the laboratory

studies carried out on this study.
1. From the laboratory st udies, it was observed that the Free

Swell of the expansive soil has been decreased by 71.42%
with the addition of 15 % Steel Slag when compared with
the untreated expansive soil.
2. From the laboratory studies, it was observed that the
liquid limit of the expansive soil has been decreased by
23.63% with the addition of 15 % Steel Slag when
compared with the untreated expansive soil.
3. From the laboratory studies, it was observed that the
plastic limit of the expansive soil has been increased by
24.46% with the addition of 15% Steel Slag when
compared with the untreated expansive soil.
110
4. It was observed that the CBR value of treated expansive

soil was increased by 687.91% on addition of 15% Steel
Slag when compared with untreated expansive soil.
5. It was observed from the laboratory cyclic plate test
results that the Cyclic Plate Load Test results of the
reinforced and treated expansive soil subgrade flexible
pavement has been improved by 480.64% when compared
with untreated expansive soil subgrade flexible pavement.
6. It was observed from the laboratory cyclic plate test
results that the defo rmation of the reinforced and treated
expansive soil subgrade flexible pavemen t has been
improved by 22.35% when compared with untreated
expansive soil subgrade flexible pavement.
Discussion:
Hence, from all the above observations, it was concluded that
the reinforced and treated expansive soil subgrade flexible
pavements when treated with 15% Steel Slag as optimum
exhibits better and satisfactory results than untreated
expansive soil IRC-37, 2001& 2012 Codes of practice
5.4 SCOPE FOR FURTHER WORK

The following areas are identified as the scope of further
research in this direction, based on the experience of the
present work.
 Further laboratory investigations can be carried out with
the addition of various chemicals with t he expansive soil
along with Steel Slag to improve strength characteristic.
 Field tests are to be conducted to confirm the laboratory
test results in the field.
 Further laboratory Cyclic Plate Load tests can be
conducted by using Geotextile as Reinforcement and
Separator.
******
111
CHAPTER-6
REFERENCES
1) A Gens, E EAlsono (1992), “A framework for the behavior

of unsaturated expansive soils, Canadian Geotechnical
Journal.
2) Agarwala,V.S and Khanna,J.S (1969),Construction

techniques for foundations of buildings on black cotton
soils
3) Akshaya Kumar Sabat, Stabilization of Expansive Soil

Using Waste Ceramic Dust
4) Al-khafaji, Wadi Amir and Orlando B. Andersland

“Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Testing”
5) Amu et al. (2005) “Cement and fly ash mixture for

stabilization of expansive soil.
6) Arrora, K. R. (2001), Soil Mechanics and Foundation

Engineering. R. D. Holtz and W.D. Kovacs, an
Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering. New York:
Prentice Hall, 1981,.
7) Bahler et al. (2007) “Stab ilization of expansive soils using

lime and class C fly ash.
8) Baser, O.(2009) “Stabilization of expansive soils using

waste marble dust, ” Master of Science thesis submitted
to Civil Engineering Department, Middle East, Technical
University.
9) Baytar (2005) “Stabilization of expansive soil using the fly

ash and desulpho gypsum obtained from thermal power
plant.
10) Bhasin et al. (1988) “A laboratory study on the

stabilization of black cotton soil as a pavement material
using RHA, Bagasse ash, fly ash, lime sludge and black
sulphite liquor.
11) Bolt G.H. (1956), “Physico-chemical analysis of the

compressibility of pure soils.
112
12) Casangrane, A. “The Structure of Soil and Its Importance

in Foundation Engineering,” Journal Bostan Society of
Civil Engineers, Vol. 19, 1932.
13) Chandrasekhar et al. (2001) “characteristics of black

cotton soil with stabilizing agents like calcium chloride
and sodium silicate in comparison with conventional RHA
lime stabilization.
14) Chen, F. H. (1988), “Foundations on expansive soils”,

Chen & Associates, Elsevier Publications, U.S.A.
15) Das, M. Braja, (1997) “Advanced soil mechanics”
16) Dayakar et al. (2003) “A laboratory investigation for

stabilizing the expansive soil using Silica fume and
tannery sludge with percentage variation of solid wastes.
17) El-Aziz et al. (2004) “The effect of the engineering

properties of soiley soils when blended with lime and
silica fume.
18) Gromko (1974) Study of Shrinking and Swelling soil.
19) Gupta et al. (2002) “Study on the stabilization of black

cotton soil using quarry dust.
20) I.S: 2720, Part VII, (1980), Determination of Water

Content Dry Density Relation Using Light Compaction.
21) I.S: 2720-Part III, Section I (1980), Determination Specific

Gravity.
22) I.S: 2720-Part IV, 1975, Determination of Grain Size

Distribution.
23) I.S: 2720-Part V, 1970, Determination of Liquid Limit and

Plastic Limit.
24) IRC: 37-2001, “Guidelines for the Design of Flexible

Pavements”.
25) Jain and Jain (2006) “Study on the effect of addition of

stone dust and nylon fiber on black cotton soil ”.
26) Jennings and Knight (1957), “ The additional settlement of

foundations due to a collapse of structure of sandy
subsoil on wetting”.
113
27) K.Ramus, R.D.Babu et al. “A study on the swelling

behavior of expansive soil treated with VPW and Lime ”,
IGC, Pune.
28) KoteswaraRao .D , A Laboratory Investi gation on the

Affect of Vitrified Polish Waste for Improving the
Properties of Marine Soil Koteswara Rao et.al (2011), Field
studies on the marine soil foundation soil beds treated
with lime, GBFS and reinforcement technique, IJEST,
Vol.3, No.4, April 2011.
29) Koteswara Rao et.al (2011), The affect of reinforcement on

GBFS and lime treated marine soil for foundation soil
beds, IJEST, Vol.3, No.3, March 2011 .
30) Koteswara Rao et.al (2012), A laboratory study in the

affect of rice husk ash & lime on the properties of marine
soil, IJEIT, ISO 9001:2008,ISSN :2277 -3754, Vol. 2, Issue
1, July 2012.
31) Koteswara Rao, D (2004), The performance studies on

Geo-grid as reinforcement in the flexible pavement
construction, IGC-2004, pp 457-460.
32) Koyuncu et al. (2004) “Stabilization of expansive soil

using three types of ceramic waste namely, ceramic mud
wastes (CMW), Crushed ceramic tile wastes(CCTW) and
ceramic tile dust wastes (CTDW)”.
33) Kumar et al. (2007) “The effect of polyester fiber

inclusions and lime stabilization on the geotechnical
characteristics of fly ash-expansive soil mixtures ”.
34) Mishra and Mathur (2004) “Stabilization of expansive soil

with phosphogypsum”.
35) Muntohar and Hantoro (2000) “Rice husk ask and lime for
stabilization of expansive soil by blending them together ”.
36) Pandian et al. (2001) “Stabilization of expansive soil with

a class F Fly ash”.
37) Phani Kumar and Rajesh (2006) “Experimental study of

expansive soil beds stabilized with fly ash columns and
fly ash-lime columns”.
114
38) Phani Kumar and Sharma (2007) “Studied the effect of fly
ash on swelling of a highly plastic expansive soil and
compressibility of another non-expansive high plasticity
soil”.
39) R.D Babuet al.(2015) “ Efficiency of calcium chloride and

vitrified tiles sludge on the strength characteristics of
Expansive soil”, IJARET, Vol-2, Issue 3 (July-Sept 2015).
40) Rajan and Subramanyam (1982) “Shear strength and

consolidation characteristics of expansive soil stabilized
with RHA and Lime”.
41) RajanGopal and Rao . A.S.R. “Basic and applied soil

mechanics”.
42) Ramaiah, B.K., et.al (1972), Stabilization of black cotton

soil with lime and Rice-Husk-Ash, Indian Geotechnical
Society, Proc. Tech. Sessions, Vol. 1, New Delhi, 1972.
43) Ramakrishna and Pradeep Kumar (2006) “Effect of rice

husk ash and cement on engineering properties of black
cotton soil.
44) Ranjan, Gopal and Rao, A.S.R. “Basic and Applied soil
mechanics”
45) Rogers, C.D.F. and Glendenning’s(2000), Lime

requirement for Stabilization, Transportation Research
Record, No. 1721, Transportation Research Board,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp 9 -
18.
46) Satyanarayana et al. (2004) “Combined effect of addition

of fly ash and lime on engineering properties of ex pansive
soil”.
47) Sharma et al. (1992) “Stabilization of expansive soil using

mixture of fly ash, gypsum and blast furnace slag ”.
48) Sharma et al. (2008) “Engineering behavior of a

remoulded expansive soil blended with lime, calcium
chloride and RHA”.
49) Srinivasulu and Rao (1995) “The effect of barite powder as

a soil stabilizer in expansive soil ”.
115
50) Srivastava et al. (1999) “Results of experiments carried

out to study the consolidation and swelling behavior of
expansive soil stabilized with lime sludge and fly ash ”.
51) Swami (2002) “The feasibility study for utilizing of marble

dust in highway sector”.
52) Turker and Cokca (2004) “Class C and Class F type fly
ash along with sand for stabilization of expansive soil ”.
53) Wagh (2006) “Stabilization of black cotton soil using fly

ash, rock floor and lime separately and in combination ”.
54) Wagh et al. (2004) “Improvement in soil properties of

expansive soil by adding sludges from three type of
industries.Textile industry, paper mill and sugar factory”.
55) Al-Rawas et al. (2002) "effectiveness of using cement by

pass dust, copper slag, granulated blast furnace slag, and
slag-cement in reducing the swelling potential and
plasticity of expansive soils ".
56) KalkanandAkbulect (2004) "effect of silica fume on the

permeability, swelling pre ssure and compressive strength
of natural soil liners ".
57) Srinivasulu and Rao (1995) "effect of baryte powder as a

soil stabilizer".
58) Mishra and Mathur (2004) "stabilization of expansive soil

with phosphor gypsum".
59) Amu et al. (2005) "effect of eggshell powder (ESP) on the

stabilizing potential of lime on an expansive soil".
60) Nalbantoglu and Iawfin (2006) "stabilizing effect of Olive

cake residue on expansive Soil".
61) Kalkan (2006) "utilization of red mud as a stabilization

material for the preparation of soil l iners".
62) Degirmenci et al. (2007) " phosphor gypsum when treated

with cement and fly ash for soil stabilization ".
63) Seda et al. (2007) "stabilization of highly expansive soils

by using waste tyre rubber".
116
64) Koteswara Rao. D et al.,(2012)"A laboratory study on the

influence of rubber strips on the improvement of CBR values of
Expansive soil".
65) Koteswara Rao. D et al.,(2012)"A laboratory study on the
stabilization of marine clay using saw dust and lime".
66) Koteswara Rao. D et al.,(2012)"Effect of ferric chloride and rice
husk ash in the stabilization of expansive soil for the pavement
sub grades ".
67) Z.A.Rahman, W.Z.W.Yaacob.S.A.Rahim, T.Lihan, W.M.R Idris and
W.N.F. MohdSani "Geotechnical Characterization of Marine Clay
as Potential Liner Material".
68) Chen, F.H(1988)" Foundation on Expansive soils, Elsevier Pub.
Co., Amsterdam".
69) Chew, S.H A. H.M. Kamruzzaman and F.H. Lee (2004)" Physico
chemical and engineering behaviour of cement treated Clay".
70) Can Buraksisan and Erhan Gezer(2011) "Effects of VPW on
characteristics of the briquette produced for masonry units".
71) Bjerrum.L, "Geotechnical Properties of Norwegian Expansive
Soils" .
72) Casangrane, A. "The structure of Clay and its Importance in
Foundation Engineering".
73) Kagawa T(1993)" Moduli and Damping Factors of Soft Expansive
Soils".
74) Koteswara Rao. D(2004) " the performance studies on Geo-Grid
as reinforcement in the flexible pavement construction".
75) Mateos Manual(1964) "SoilLime Research at Lowa State
University, U.S.A".
76) Nelson,D.j and Miller, D.J.(1992) "Expansive soils, Problems and
practice in foundation and pavement engineering".
77) P.VenkaraMuthyalu, K.Ramu and G.V.R Prasada Raju" Study on
Performance of chemically stabilized expansive soil".
78) R. M. Dobale "Disposal of solid waste for black cotton soil
stabilization".
117
79) Rajasekaran. G and NarasimhaRao. S(2002) "Compressibility

behaviour of lime treated Expansive soil".
80) Ranjan, Gopal and Rao, A.S.R. "Basic and Applied soil
Mechanics".
81) Sabat, A.K., and Nanda, R.P.(2011) "Effect of marble dust on
Strengthand durability of rice husk ash stabilized expansive soil".
82) Vinay Agarwal, Mohit Gupta "Expansive Soil Stabilization using
Marble Dust".
83) Raza, S.A. and Chandra. D. (1995) "Strength of soilmixtures with
geo-textile reinfoecement".
84) CIRIA Publication(2002); BS EN 15237(2007); TRL Projects
Reports PPR341(2008) "represented the advantages of using the
band drain in soft soils".
85) D.I. Boardman, S. Glendinning, and C.D.F. Rogers(2001)
"Development of Stabilization and Solidification in Lime-Clay
Mixes".
86) Ismaiel Hesham Ahmed Hussain(2006) "Treatment and
Improvement of the Geotechnical Properties of Different soft fine-
grained Soils using chemical Stabilization".
87) John N. Cernica, Geotechnical Engineering: Soil Mechanics, New
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1995.
88) Nelson, D.J., and Miller, D.J(1992) "Expansive Soils, Problems
and Practice in Foundation and Pavement Engineering".
89) Koteswara Rao. D(2004) "The performance studies on Geo-grid as
reinforcement in the flexible pavements construction".
90) Koteswara Rao. D et al.,(2011) "A laboratory study on the
influence of lime on fly ash treated marine clay".
91) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) "A study on the utilization of
GBFs and Fly ash to stabilize the expansive soil for sub grade
embankments".
92) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) "Consolidation characteristics of
treated marine clay for foundation soil beds".
118
93) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) " Field studies on the marine clay
foundation soil beds treated with lime, GBFS and reinforcement
technique".
94) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) "Laboratory studies on the
properties of stabilized marine clay from Kakinada sea coast,
India".
95) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) "Laboratory studies on the marine
clay stabilized with GBFS and ferric chloride using reinforcement
technique for foundation beds".
96) Koteswara Rao. D et al.,(2011) "Laboratory study on the efficiency
of GBFS ass an admixture for improving the strength
Characteristics of the Kakinada marine clay".
97) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) "Stabilization of expansive soil
with rice husk ash,lime and gypsum-an experimental study".
98) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011)"The effect of reinforcement on
GBFS and lime treated marine clay for foundation soil beds".
99) Koteswara Rao. D et al.,(2011) "The efficiency of reinforcement
technique on the fly ash stabilized expansive soil as sub grade
embankment for highways ".
100) Koteswara Rao. D et al., (2011) "The influence of potassium
chloride on the reinforced marine clay for foundation beds ".
******
119

Harsha Book

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Harsha Book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A LABORATORY STUDY ON THE EFFICIENCY OF STEEL

SLAG ON IMPROVING THE PROPERTIES OF AN EXPANSIVE

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

under the esteemed guidance of

Professor of Civil Engineering

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

This is to certify that dissertation entitled " A LABORATORY STUDY ON

Thesis Adviser Head of the Department

Dr. D. Koteswara Rao Dr. K. Ramu

I B. HARSHATH VARMA, hereby declare that the project entitled ''A

This work was not submitted earlier at any other University or

I wish to express my deep sense of gratitude and respect towards my

I am very much obliged to Dr. K. Ramu, Professor and Head,

I express my gratitude to Dr. K Purnanandham, Dr. G.V.R Prasada

I is my pleasure in expressing my gratitude to Dr. G.V.R Prasada

I am also thankful to all the Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff of

I am very thankful to my friends for their support during the entire

I am thankful to my parents for their continuous support and

Expansive Soil is one such problematic soil which is annoying

Construction of structures over weak or soft soils possesses

The present work describes a study carried out to check the

Chapter Page No.

2.8 Swell Pressures 18

S.No. DESCRIPTION Page No.

S.No. DESCRIPTION Page No.

2.2 Atomic Structure of Kaolinite 13

2.3 Atomic Structure of Montmorillonite 14

2.4 Atomic Structure of Illite 15

2.5 A rectangular slab with uniformly loaded 22

2.6 Damage to home supported on shallow piers 23

3.1 Experimental set up for conducting Cyclic plate

4.1 Liquid limit values of Expansive soil treated with

4.2 Plastic limit values of Expansive soil treated with

4.3 Plasticity Index values of Expansive soil treated

4.9 Composite graph of OMC and MDD values of

4.10 MDD of Expansive soil treated with Percentage

4.11 CBR values of untreated Expansive soil 77

4.12 CBR values of Expansive soil treated with 5%

4.20 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of

15% Steel Slag + Single Geotextile

as Reinforcement and Separator for treated

Expansive soil Flexible Pavement at OMC 90

4.21 Laboratory Cyclic Plate Load Test Results of

15% Steel Slag + Double Geotextile

as Reinforcement and Separator for treated

Expansive soil Flexible Pavement at OMC 91

S.No. DESCRIPTION Page No.

2.2 Polygonal pattern of surface cracks in the

2.3 Cracks in Expansive soil 21

2.4 Void created under concrete drainage

2.5 Cracks in the wall due to soil settlement 27

2.6 Stair-Steps corner crack 27

2.7 external wall damage due to shrinkage of soil 28

3.1 Pulverized Expansive soil 46

3.2 Steel Slag 48

3.3 Casagrande Apparatus 54

3.4 Plastic limit 55

3.5 Compaction Test Apparatus 56

3.6 Experimental set up for Cyclic plate load test 61

3.7 Author conducting the Cyclic plate load test 61

Expansive or swelling soils are soils that, because of their

The uncertainties related to the civil enginee ring structures