Road Materials and Pavement Design

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/trmp20

Compaction delay and its effect on the

geotechnical properties of lime treated semi-arid
soils

Arif Ali Baig Moghal , Mohammed Ashfaq , Ali Abdul Kareem Hamood Al-
Obaid , Mohammad Farid Abbas , Ahmed Mohammed Al-Mahbashi &
Abdullah Ali Shaker

To cite this article: Arif Ali Baig Moghal , Mohammed Ashfaq , Ali Abdul Kareem Hamood Al-
Obaid , Mohammad Farid Abbas , Ahmed Mohammed Al-Mahbashi & Abdullah Ali Shaker (2020):
Compaction delay and its effect on the geotechnical properties of lime treated semi-arid soils, Road
Materials and Pavement Design, DOI: 10.1080/14680629.2020.1784256

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2020.1784256

Published online: 02 Jul 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 112

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=trmp20
ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2020.1784256

Compaction delay and its effect on the geotechnical properties of

lime treated semi-arid soils
Arif Ali Baig Moghal a , Mohammed Ashfaq a , Ali Abdul Kareem Hamood Al-Obaidb ,
Mohammad Farid Abbasc,d , Ahmed Mohammed Al-Mahbashib and Abdullah Ali Shakerb
a Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Warangal, India; b Department of Civil
Engineering, College of Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; c Civil Engineering Department,
Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj, Saudi Arabia; d Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Research Institute,
Housing and Building National Research Center, Giza, Egypt

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Quality construction control requires ensuring that compacted fills are Received 6 September 2019
properly placed without any significant delay between mixing and com- Accepted 9 June 2020
paction of the wet soil mixture. When chemical treatment is resorted to KEYWORDS
meet the shortcomings in the use of locally available materials, the delay Delay; lime; compaction;
in compaction (time elapsed between mixing and compaction of the wet density; hydraulic
soil mixture) plays a significant role as it dictates the final in-site density conductivity; unconfined
values achieved. In this study, the effect of delay in compaction on the compression strength;
density and moisture content relationships was evaluated for the delay compressibility
periods of 1hr, 4hr, 24 hr and 7 days. The study was even extended to lime
treated soils (at 2% and 4% by dry weight of soil). The time lag which occurs
immediately after the onset of wet mixing and compaction often results
in variation in geotechnical properties. Accordingly, an attempt was also
made to study the effect of delay in compaction on the hydraulic conductiv-
ity, compressibility and unconfined compressive strength (UCS) behaviour
of plastic clays sourced from the semi-arid region. In order to understand
the variations in microstructure, MIP tests (Mercury Intrusion Porosime-
try) were conducted at higher delay periods when treated with lime. From
the results, it was observed that delay in compaction led to an increase in
the hydraulic conductivity and compressibility of both soils. Furthermore,
the UCS of both the soils showed a decreasing trend with the increase in
the delay period. The agglomeration of clay particles leads to the forma-
tion of clods at higher delay periods which resist the compaction energy
resulting in reduced density values which in-turn affect the geotechnical
properties.

1. Introduction
Expansive soils are prone to rapid volume changes due to their expanding lattice structures with sea-
sonal changes in moisture content. Stabilisation through chemical and mechanical techniques are
widely adopted to mitigate the problems posed by expansive soils. Soil compaction is the process by
which soil is mechanically compacted by pressing the soil particles together in a close state of contact
thereby enhancing the soil properties (Lai et al., 2011; Prashanth et al., 1998). Compaction decreases
compressibility, hydraulic conductivity and increases the strength properties of soil (Mitchell & Soga,

CONTACT Arif Ali Baig Moghal reach2arif@gmail.com, baig@nitw.ac.in

© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

2 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

2005). In chemical stabilisation, the problematic soils are treated with suitable chemicals to induce
mineralogical changes which enhance its geotechnical properties (Lees et al., 1982; Ola, 1978; Tonoz
et al., 2004). In attempting chemical stabilisation, the soil is mixed thoroughly with stabilisers prior
to compaction. Among the various additives, due to its ability to reduce the plasticity and the maxi-
mum dry density (MDD) of expansive soils, lime has been extensively used in various Civil Engineering
works like the construction of embankments, highways and buildings (Al-Mahbashi et al., 2020; Bell,
1998; Croft, 1964; Cuisinier et al., 2011; Efsahani, 2020; Hussain & Dash, 2016; Ismeik & Shaqour, 2020;
Lees et al., 1982; Moghal et al., 2018; Ola, 1978; Thompson, 1966; Tonoz et al., 2004).
For most of these geotechnical applications, lime treated soils are generally compacted to reap the
double benefits of chemical and mechanical stabilisation (Hussain & Dash, 2016; Sridharan & Nagaraj,
2005). Invariably in all these applications, there will be a delay between wet mixing and compaction
affecting its compaction characteristics. (Kézdi, 1979; Mitchell & Hooper, 1961; Uppal & Bhasin, 1971).
The delay period between mixing and compaction of the wet lime soil mixture occurs as a result of
one of the following reasons: insufficient workers, delaying of compaction equipment after mixing,
bad weather, delaying in transportations. During this delay period, the soil-lime reactions cause the
soil particles to flocculate altering the total soil gradation (Harichane et al., 2011; Moghal et al., 2020;
Prakash et al., 1989; Rao & Shivananda, 2005). The altered gradation will have a pronounced effect
on the final density characteristics achieved in the field. Thus, in the present work, an attempt has
been made to evaluate the practical consequences induced by the improper time management at the
construction site.
Mitchell and Hooper (1961) investigated the efficacy of 4% dolomitic hydrated lime for stabilis-
ing an organic expansive clay, and established that the delay in the mixing of soil-lime-mixture and
compaction has a profound effect on the behaviour of the soil. For the samples with a delay of 24
hrs, exhibited 8% and 30% decrease in density and cured strength values compared to the values
for samples compacted immediately after mixing. The samples compacted within 1 hr after mixing,
had higher strength than those compacted after 24 hrs. Osinubi (1998) investigated the influence of
compaction delays on characteristics of lime treated plastic soil. The experimental results indicated
that with the delay in compaction the maximum densities and the corresponding unconfined com-
pressive strength values of lime treated soil mixtures decreased. Similar observations were made
by Osinubi and Nwaiwu (2006) for lime stabilised lateritic soil. Ochepo and Osinubi (2013) investi-
gated the effect of compaction efforts and elapsed time on the strength of black cotton soil treated
with lime and bagasse ash. From the results, they concluded that the reduction in strength of spec-
imens was observed with elapsed time for all the parameters considered (compactive efforts, curing
time and lime-bagasse ash dosage). Sweeney et al. (1988) studied the effects of delay in compaction
(i.e. the time elapsed between lime mixing and compacting of the specimen) on the density char-
acteristics and stated that the initial reactions which happen prior to compaction will lead to the
aggregation of particles into a loose structure. The aggregation at the points of contact between
the edges and faces of adjacent clay particles enables the soil to offer greater resistance to com-
paction. Further, it was also noticed that with the delay period, dry unit weight of the soil decreased
further with no definable optimum water content and the compaction curves showed a flatter trajec-
tory. A wealth of earlier published literature deals with the effect of mellowing period on the density
characteristics and its effect on the unconfined compression strength behaviour. Most of these stud-
ies did not quantify the compaction delay effect on the hydraulic conductivity and compressibility
behaviour.
Therefore, compaction delay is an important factor that requires careful considerations in the
design and construction of embankments, highways and buildings. However, it has not been well doc-
umented for semi-arid soils. Hence in this study, an attempt is made to identify the effects of delay in
compaction on the density characteristics, unconfined compression strength, hydraulic conductivity
and compressibility characteristics of selected soils upon treatment with lime. The mechanism respon-
sible for the variations in geotechnical properties occurring due to delay in compaction has also been
corroborated relying on Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry (MIP) results.
 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 3

2. Materials and methodology

2.1. Materials
2.1.1. Soils
The two soils considered for the study were collected from two sites in towns of Al-Ghat and Al-Qatif
denoted as soil A and soil B respectively. The location represents a distinct behaviour of soils with
variation in swelling characteristics and mineralogy (Figure 1). In order to ascertain the variation in
mineralogy, X-ray diffraction study was carried out on both the soils and the distinct mineralogy of
respective soil is clearly manifested in their X-ray Diffractographs presented in Figure 1. From both the
locations sampling was carried out at a depth of 3 m below ground level. The physical properties of
both the soils A and B are presented in Table 1. As per the unified soil classification system, both the
soils fall in the category of highly plastic clays.

2.1.2. Lime
Hydrated lime Ca(OH)2 used in the study was procured from Winlab Chemicals, UK. Lime dosages were
kept at 2 and 4% (by dry weight of soil) taking into consideration the initial lime consumption values
and satisfying optimum lime content criteria (Sivapullaiah, Prashanth, et al., 2000; ASTM D7762 [2018]).

2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Compaction test
To study the impact of delay in compaction on the density behaviour of both untreated and lime
treated soils, each soil was mixed with appropriate amounts of distilled water. To simulate the delay

Figure 1. X-Ray Diffractographs.

4 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

Table 1. Geotechnical Properties of Tested Soils.

Property Test method Soil A Soil B
Liquid Limit (%) ASTM D4318-17e1 66 158
Plastic Limit (%) 32 54
Plasticity Index (%) 34 104
Shrinkage Limit (%) ASTM D943-18 15 14
% Finer than 0.075 mm ASTM C117-17 87.3 99.1
USCS Classification* ASTM D2487-17e1 CH CH
Specific Gravity ASTM D854-14 2.85 2.77
Natural Moisture Content (%) ASTM D2216-19 3.5 4.0
Specific Surface Area (SSA) (BET Method) (m2 /g) ASTM D5604-17 27.08 124.25
pH ASTM D4972-19 7.70 8.00
Organic Content (%) ASTM D2974-20e1 0.061 0.113
Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec) ASTM D8586-15 1 × 10−6 1 × 10−8
*USCS refers to the Unified Soil Classification System and CH refers to clay with high plasticity.

conditions, the mix was left in the loose state for a delay period of 1 hr, 24 hrs, 48 hrs, and 7 days in desic-
cators kept at a relative humidity of greater than 95% under controlled conditions (room temperature
∼ 23 ± 0.5°C). At the end of each delay period, the samples were compacted separately correspond-
ing to the respective moisture contents in specially fabricated moulds conforming to mini compaction
apparatus developed by Sridharan and Sivapullaiah (2005) to arrive at respective maximum dry density
values. The entire procedure was repeated for soils treated with different percentages of lime (2 and
4%). For Soils A and B, the maximum dry density values were kept at 1.64 and 1.21 g/cc respectively.
In order to nullify the effect of variation in density at different lime contents, the density pertaining
to optimum moisture content was considered for each testing condition. At least three tests were
conducted in each case to validate the results for reproducibility and repeatability.

2.2.2. Hydraulic conductivity test

Hydraulic conductivity (HC) of both soils was determined using rigid wall permeameter as described
in ASTM D8586 (2015). After dry mixing with lime (2% and 4%), both the samples were mixed with
deionised double distilled water corresponding to their MDD values. At the end of the intended delay
period (7 days), the samples were compacted by static compaction technique directly inside Perspex
hydraulic conductivity mould. At least three tests were conducted in each case to validate the results
for reproducibility and repeatability.

2.2.3. Compressibility test

The development of bonding for chemically treated soils can be effectively explained by one-
dimensional compression test compared to the triaxial compression test as the latter induces failure of
the specimen. At the end of induced delay period of 7 days, the samples were compacted by adopting
static compaction technique in a consolidation ring of 16 mm height and 75 mm diameter as per ASTM
D2435 (2020). All the samples were loaded from 6.25 kPa to 800 kPa at a constant load increment ratio
of unity. And, subsequently, the unloading of samples was done up to a load of 50 kPa at a constant
load decrement ratio of one – fourth. At each load increment, void ratio – log consolidation pressure
curves were plotted and the corresponding compression index values (Cc) were calculated. At least
three tests were conducted in each case to validate the results for reproducibility and repeatability.

2.2.4. Unconfined compression strength test

At the end of each delay period, the sample was compacted using static compaction technique (38 mm
diameter×76 mm height) and then loaded at a strain rate of 0.5 mm/min as per ASTM D2166 (2016).
The unconfined compressive strength values and corresponding shear strain values were recorded
from the stress–strain curves. At least three unconfined compression strength tests were conducted
in each case to validate the results for reproducibility and repeatability.
 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 5

2.2.5. Pore distribution studies

The measurement of internal pore structure of a mass is done using a combination of Mercury Intrusion
Porosimetry (MIP) and X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) techniques. MIP technique is established
on the principle that capillaries under particular pressure will only be intruded by a non-wetting liquid.
MIP tests were performed on both soil A and soil B for immediate and delayed conditions (7 days)
at prefixed MDD value and post compaction, specimens of 5 mm3 were trimmed for testing. These
specimens were exposed to freeze-drying prior to testing to avoid any possible volume changes during
MIP testing (Chittooti et al., 2017). The volume of mercury penetrated/pushed into the soil pores after
each pressure increment is recorded. Identical tests were performed on each soil sample to evaluate
the repeatability and reproducibility.

3. Results and discussions

3.1. Effect of delay in compaction on the density characteristics of untreated soils
Figure 2 shows the effect of delay in compaction on the maximum dry density values for untreated
soils. It can be seen that irrespective of the delay period employed, the shape of the compaction curves
remains unchanged for both the soils with a slight deviation in dry density for B soil. Further, the weak
bonds formed between clay particles under loose conditions due to capillary forces and electrostatic
forces are easily overcome upon the application of dynamic force induced in compacting the soil. As
such, the maximum dry density and corresponding moisture content values remain unaffected with
an increase in delay period even up to 7 days. The short term reaction like hydration and flocculation
of clay particles can occur when the negative charge of clay minerals are balanced by cations like Ca2+ ,
Mg2+ , Na+ and K+ . Since, both the soils in natural state do not have readily available cementing agent
to assist in these short term reactions, minimal variation in dry density was observed with delay period.
Further, Sweeney et al. (1988) and Daita et al. (2005) have noted that short term reactions before com-
paction result in cementation at the contact points between the edges and faces of clay particles. This

Figure 2. Effect of delay in compaction on the density characteristics for untreated case.
6 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

creates greater resistance to compaction causing a decrease in maximum dry density with the delay
period.

3.2. Effect of delay in compaction on the density characteristics of lime treated soils
Summary of the effect of delay in compaction and lime content on Optimum Moisture Content (OMC)
and Maximum Dry Density (MDD) of both the soils are presented in Table 2. Figure 3 depicts the varia-
tion in dry density and moisture content values for soil A and soil B at 2% lime addition. It was observed
that MDD decreased and the OMC increased with increase in the delay period. This decrease in MDD
is attributed to the fact that the clay particles in the presence of lime tend to exchange monovalent
cations from the surface of clay particles, leading to the flocculation and aggregation in a loose state,
which eventually disrupts the densification of the soil during compaction. As such during the intended
delay period, the free lime (lime which is not involved in the cation exchange reaction) reacts with
soil and produces primary cementitious compounds in gel form (Latifi et al., 2016; Rao & Shivananda,
2005). These gelatinous compounds bind the clay particles and form individual clods (aggregated par-
ticles) containing voids within themselves. These clods resist the compactive effort (corresponding
static pressure of 890 kN/m2 ) without undergoing significant deformations, contributing to reduced
maximum dry density values. These clods containing the voids need water to fill them up, resulting in
increased OMC values as seen from Figure 3. The behaviour of soil A with the response to the amount
of delay and moisture level is more varied than that of Soil B which is attributed to their basic differ-
ence in mineralogical compositions (Figure 1), which invariably affect the formation of clods during
the delay period. Similar observations have been noted by Sivapullaiah et al. (1998) and Rajasekaran
and Narasimha Rao (2002).
With the increase in lime dosage to 4%, there is a significant effect on the density characteristics
due to an increase in the delay in compaction periods. From Figure 4, it can be seen that when the
delay period increases to 7 days, the shape of the compaction curves become flatter. The increase in
compaction delay not only reduces maximum dry density values but also affects the shape of the com-
paction curve. Similar observations have been reported by Sweeney et al. (1988) and Sivapullaiah et al.
(1998). Irrespective of the type of soil, the addition of 4% lime resulted in similar MDD values to that of
the soils with 2% lime, which indicates that the addition of 4% lime has little effect on the MDD. Since
the soils with higher lime dosage require relatively more water for hydration, there is a slight increase
in the OMC when lime content increased from 2 to 4% (Figure 4). Further, it has been observed that for
Soil A, the lime addition can have a profound effect, especially in higher natural moisture content sce-
narios. With the increase in lime dosage to 4%, more number of cations are moved from the clay matrix
by calcium ions resulting in a dense flocculated structure with a higher concentration of crystallized

Table 2. Summary of the effect of delay in compaction and lime content on MDD and OMC.
Untreated 2% Lime 4% Lime
Delay period (hours (h) % Decrease % Increase % Decrease % Increase
/days (d)) MDD (g/cm3 ) OMC (%) in MDD in OMC in MDD in OMC
Soil A
0h 1.64 25 5 2 8 5
1h 1.64 25 10 5 10 8
4h 1.64 25 12 9 12 10
24 h 1.64 25 14 17 14 14
7d 1.64 25 18 34 21 36
Soil B
0h 1.21 42.2 4 1 5 7
1h 1.21 42.5 5 2 7 7
4h 1.20 42.8 4 0 7 6
24 h 1.21 42.7 7 2 8 6
7d 1.19 42.9 7 2 11 6
 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 7

Figure 3. Effect of delay in compaction on the density characteristics of lime treated soils (2%).

Figure 4. Effect of delay in compaction on the density characteristics for lime treated (4%) soils.

lime as seen in Figure 5. In the first phase, when the lime dosage is lower than the initial consumption
of lime (ICL; i.e. 2.5%), only flocculation reactions are prevalent as depicted in Figure 5. When the lime
dosage exceeds ICL, the additional lime releases the glassy (silica and alumina) phases from the clay
surfaces which binds the individual clay particles due to the development of strong pozzolanic bonds
8 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

Figure 5. Proposed Compaction Delay Mechanism.

(Figure 5). Similar observations for black cotton soils were made by Sivapullaiah, Sridharan, et al. (2000)
and Rao and Shivananda (2005). The increased delay period results in more curing time for the poz-
zolanic reactions to occur between clay matrix in the loose state and calcium ions. Subsequently, a
significant amount of cementitious compounds (clods) are formed with the delay periods. The clods
formed around the individual clay particles hold them intact resisting against any further compression
(Figure 5). Moreover, the effective porosity is increased with an increase in lime dosage, which facili-
tates the better release of built-up pore-water pressures upon application of surcharge loads. All these
contributing factors help increase the resistance to compression. This leads to the formation of larger
and stronger clods (aggregated particles), which resist the compactive effort undergoing negligible
deformation, resulting in relatively low dry density with flatter compaction curves.
Further, the alteration in the pore size distribution of both the soils with the delay in compaction
was evaluated using the MIP technique. It is evident from the intrusion curves presented in Figure 6,

Figure 6. MIP Intrusion curves for soil A and soil B.

 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 9

that at a given intrusion pressure, the delay in compaction has led to an increase in cumulative pore
volume for both the soils and this behaviour is more profound in soil B. The formation of weak bonds
between clay particles due to capillary and electrostatic forces contributed to the increase in pore
volumes with the delay period. Moreover, with the increase in delay period, the essential time required
for the formation of cementitious compounds is further facilitated. Further, the formation of larger
pores (voids) with an increase in lime content, results in increased water holding capacities within
these voids (Figure 5).
From Figures 3 and 4, it can be observed that the extent to which delay period affects density is
related to water content i.e. irrespective of lime percentage, at low water content, the variation in den-
sity with the delay periods is small. It is attributed to insufficient water which hinders the lime hydration
process. On the other hand, the effect of delay period becomes more pronounced if adequate water
is added to the lime to satisfy its initial chemical affinity (Sweeney et al., 1988). For the untreated case,
the delay in compaction does not have any significant effect on density characteristics for both soils
(Figure 2). However, in the presence of lime with an increase in delay period, it is noticed that MDD
decreased followed by a corresponding increase in OMC. Moreover, compaction curves appear to
become much flatter at higher delay period i.e. 7 days (Hussain & Dash, 2016; Sivapullaiah et al., 1998).
Thus, delay in compaction has a substantial effect on the density characteristics of the lime
treated soils. Further, the over estimation of density in case of lime treated soils particularly at higher
delay periods will adversely affect resultant mechanical properties such as hydraulic conductivity,
compressibility and shear strength.

3.3. Effect of delay in compaction on hydraulic conductivity characteristics

Hydraulic conductivity (HC) is one of the essential parameters in the design of hydraulic structures and
landfills. The effect of delay in compaction on the HC behaviour of both the soils (untreated and lime
treated) is presented in Figure 7. The delay period has been fixed at 7 days as the maximum decrease
in dry density was observed at this delay period. Further, due to brevity in the testing, intermediate
delay periods (1hour, 1 and 2 days) have not been considered for evaluating geotechnical parameters
(i.e. hydraulic conductivity, compressibility and shear strength). From Figure 7, it is seen that untreated
soils didn’t exhibit significant variations in HC values with increase in the delay period. However, upon
lime addition, both soil A and B exhibited a significant increase in HC values with the delay period
(i.e. 7 days). The rate of increase in HC values was found to be highest for soil A with 4% lime due to
the presence of hydration enhancing compounds like calcium sulfate hydrate and sodium aluminium
silicate (Figure 1). On the other hand, the rate of increase in HC was found to be lowest for soil B with
2% lime (Figure 7). As discussed in the earlier section (3.2) the addition of lime alters the soil structure
from dispersed to flocculated state due to exchange of Ca+2 ions with the prevailing anions on the
surface of clayey particles. These cation exchange reactions cause a reduction in the ionic layer of
respective soils (Prakash et al., 1989) followed by subsequent formation of cementitious compounds
which in turn increases the HC values of soil(s). The delay in compaction contributes to the formation
of stronger soil-lime aggregates making the mix more granular with open fabric resulting in higher
HC values (Figure 5) (Rao & Shivananda, 2005; Sivapullaiah et al., 1998). As seen from Figure 8, for 7
days’ delay period, 21% decrease in dry density of lime treated soil A (with 4% lime) has led to a 1400%
increase in HC values. Whereas, a 11% decrease in dry density has contributed to a 1250% increase in
HC values for soil B.

3.4. Effect of delay in compaction on compressibility characteristics

Compressibility behaviour of soils is one of the fundamental parameters essential in the design of
a structural backfill or embankment material as it expected and possess low compressibility and
considerable shear strength to minimise differential settlements between structures and adjacent
approaches. The compression of the soil mass leads to a decrease in the volume of the soil mass which
10 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

Figure 7. Effect of Delay in Compaction on the Hydraulic Conductivity Behavior of Lime Treated Soils.

Figure 8. Effect of Delay in Compaction on the Void Ratio (e) – Consolidation Pressure (P) Behavior of Lime Treated Soil A.

eventually results in the settlement of the structure. The effect of delay in compaction on compress-
ibility characteristics of both untreated and lime treated soils are presented in Figures 8 and 9. From
the results, it can be noticed that for the untreated case, up to consolidation pressure of 100 kPa, there
is no significant decrease in the void ratio for both the soils. This is due to minor axial strain levels
experienced up to this loading. From Figure 9, it can be inferred that the lime addition has led to
 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 11

Figure 9. Effect of Delay in Compaction on the Void Ratio (e) – Consolidation Pressure (P) Behavior of Lime Treated Soil B.

the reduction in compressibility behaviour of both soils. Due to the presence of secondary mineral
compounds like calcium sulphate hydrate and sodium aluminium silicate (Figure 1), soil A exhibited
contrasting behaviour to soil B. However, the effect of delay in compaction on the compressibility char-
acteristics of both the soils is clearly manifested with the increase in the void ratio for the delay periods.
The highest increment in the void ratio was recorded for soil A with 2% lime at a delay period of 7 days.
The flocculation and aggregation create a chemically induced pre-consolidation impact which causes
an increase in the vertical effective stress and thereby contributes to a reduction in the compressibility
characteristics.
Whilst, the lowest increment in void ratio values was noted for soil B treated with 4% lime. The vol-
ume change behaviour of soil B up on lime addition is attributed to the repulsive forces induced by
diffused double-layer of expanding lattice-type montmorillonite mineral. On the other hand, the vari-
ation in compressibility behaviour of soil A is controlled by shearing resistance at the inter-particulate
with the presence of kaolinite mineral as seen from Figure 1 (Sivapullaiah, Sridharan, et al., 2000). With
the increase in delay period, the essential time required for the formation of cementitious compounds
is facilitated. Such formation leads to an increase in pore volumes (Figure 6) eventually contributing to
the increase in the compressibility. At 7 days’ delay period, 18% decrease in dry density of lime treated
soil A (with 2% lime) has led to a 45% increase in void ratio values. In similar lines, for soil B, a 7%
decrease in dry density has contributed to 18% increase in void ratio values.

3.5. Effect of delay in compaction on strength characteristics

Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of lime treated soils is often considered a criterion, to assess
the rate at which pozzolanic reactions progress (Bell, 1996). Since the formation of pozzolanic com-
pounds are time-dependent, the delay in compaction assumes importance in the current study.
Figure 10 shows the variation in UCS values for both untreated and lime treated soils at 7 days’ delay
period. The maximum UCS value was exhibited by soil A with 4% lime at a fixed delay period of 7 days.
On the other hand, the lowest UCS value was recorded for soil B with 4% lime for immediate case
12 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

Figure 10. Effect of Delay in Compaction on the Unconfined Compressive Strength of Lime Treated Soil A and Soil B.

(Figure 10). It is further observed that the influence of compaction delay on UCS of both the soils is sig-
nificantly greater than that of lime content. This may be due to the fact that the initial bond between
soil particles established with the formation of the cementitious gel formed by the lime–soil reaction(s)
is disrupted during compaction at intended delay period. For the immediate case, a marginal decrease
in UCS is observed for both the soils upon lime treatment. However, with delay in compaction, the
UCS values of lime treated specimens exhibited higher values compared to immediate case and is
attributed to instant amelioration that takes place in soil-lime mixtures in a loose state. Similar obser-
vations have been reported by Herrin and Mitchell (1961). Subsequently, the strength gain is due to
the development of cementitious compounds during the intended delay period (0 h to 7 days). The
cementitious bonds developed to offer higher resistance to compression, which do not break during
the compaction. Similar observations have been made by Khattab et al. (2007). The effect of delay in
compaction is more profound in soil A due to the presence of hydration compounds (Figure 1). At
7 days delay period, 21% decrease in dry density of lime treated soil A (with 4% lime) has led to a
150% increase in UCS value. Whereas for soil B, a 11% decrease in dry density has contributed to a 70%
increase in UCS values.

4. Conclusions
In the current study, an attempt has been made to find the effect of delay in compaction on the density
characteristics, unconfined compression strength, hydraulic conductivity and compressibility charac-
teristics of semi-arid soils upon treatment with lime. The mechanism responsible for the variations in
geotechnical properties occurring due to delay in compaction has also been corroborated relying on
Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry test (MIP) results. The following conclusions are drawn from the study:

• For untreated soils, irrespective of the delay period employed, the shape of the compaction curves
remained unchanged. This is due to the absence of cementing agent in the natural state of soil to
assist in hydration reactions. The effect of delay in compaction is relatively more in soil A compared
to soil B which is attributed to their basic difference in mineralogical compositions.
 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 13

• For lime treated soils, it was observed that the MDD decreased and the OMC increased with delay
period. The formation of clods resisted compaction effort causing a reduction in MDD values. The
phenomena were more pronounced at higher lime contents.
• With increase in delay period, the cumulative pore volumes increased at a given intrusion pressure
which is due to the formation of a significant amount of cementitious compounds (clods) with the
delay periods.
• With the delay period (7 days), hydraulic conductivity and unconfined compression strength values
increased for both soils. The delay period has facilitated the formation of stronger lime aggregates
which exhibited higher resistance to compression.
• The effect of delay in compaction on compressibility characteristics was clearly manifested with the
increase in the void ratio for both the untreated and lime treated case. For lime treated case, the
increased delay period, results in more curing time for the pozzolanic reactions to occur between
clay matrix in the loose state and calcium ions.

Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to the Deanship of the Scientific Research, King Saud University, for funding through Vice
Deanship of Scientific Research Chairs. The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments
which helped the cause of the manuscript.

Funding
The authors are grateful to the Deanship of the Scientific Research, King Saud University, for funding through Vice
Deanship of Scientific Research Chairs.

ORCID
Arif Ali Baig Moghal http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8623-7102
Mohammed Ashfaq http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7027-8134

References
Al-Mahbashi, A. M., Al-Shamrani, M. A., & Moghal, A. A. B. (2020). Soil water characteristic curve response and one-
dimensional deformation characteristics of fiber reinforced lime blended expansive soil. Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, 32(6), 04020125-9. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003204.
ASTM C117-17. (2017). Standard test Methods for determining the amount of material finer than 75-µm (No. 200) sieve in soils
by washing. ASTM International.
ASTM D2166-16. (2016). Standard test method for unconfined compressive strength of cohesive soil. ASTM International.
ASTM D2216-19. (2019). Standard test methods for laboratory determination of water (moisture) content of soil and rock by
mass. ASTM International.
ASTM D2435-11. (2020). Standard test methods for one-dimensional consolidation properties of soils using incremental
loading. ASTM International.
ASTM D2487-17e1. (2017). Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purpose (United soil classification
system). ASTM International.
ASTM D 2974-20e1. (2020). Standard test methods for moisture, ash and organic matter of peat and other organic soils. ASTM
International.
ASTM D4318-17e1. (2017). Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils. ASTM International.
ASTM D943-18. (2018). Standard test methods for shrinkage factors of cohesive soils by the water submersion method. ASTM
International.
ASTM D4972-19. (2019). Standard test method for pH of soils. ASTM International.
ASTM D5604-96. (2017). Standard Ttest methods for precipitated silica – Surface area by multipoint BET nitrogen adsorption.
ASTM International.
ASTM D8586-15. (2015). Standard Test Method for measurement of hydraulic conductivity of porous material using a rigid-
wall, compaction-mold permeameter. ASTM International.
ASTM D7762-18. (2018). Standard practice for the design of stabilisation of soils and soil like materials with self-cementing fly
ash. ASTM International.
ASTM D854-14. (2014). Standard Test Methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. ASTM International.
14 A. A. B. MOGHAL ET AL.

Bell, F. G. (1996). Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils. Engineering Geology, 42(4), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0013-7952(96)00028-2
Bell, F. G. (1998). Stabilisation and treatment of clay soils with lime, Part 1 – Basic principles. Ground Engineering, 21, 10–15.
https://trid.trb.org/view/293790.
Chittooti, B. C. S., Moghal, A. A. B., Pedarla, A., & Al-Mahbashi, A. M. (2017). Effect of unit weight on porosity and consolida-
tion characteristics of expansive clays. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 45(1), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE2016
0451.
Croft, J. B. (1964). The processes involved in the lime stabilisation of clay soils. Proceedings of the Australian Road Research
Board, 2(2), 1169–1203. https://trid.trb.org/view/1209242.
Cuisinier, O., Auriol, J. C., Le Borgne, T., & Deneele, D. (2011). Microstructure and hydraulic conductivity of a compacted
lime-treated soil. Engineering Geology, 123(3), 187–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.07.010
Daita, R. K., Drnevich, V. P., & Kim, D. (2005). Family of compaction curves for chemically modified soils. (Joint Transportation
Research Program Technical Report no:2850).
Efsahani, M. A. (2020). Evaluating the feasibility, usability, and strength of recycled construction and demolition waste
in base and subbase courses. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 21(1), 156–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.
2018.1483259
Harichane, K., Ghrici, M., Kenai, S., & Grine, K. (2011). Use of natural pozzolana and lime for stabilization of cohesive soils.
Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 29(5), 759–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-011-9415-z
Herrin, M., & Mitchell, H. (1961). Lime-soil mixtures. Highway Research Board, 304, 99–138. https://trid.trb.org/view/122457.
Hussain, M., & Dash, S. K. (2016, December 16–18). Influence of lime on compaction behaviour of soils. Proceedings of Indian
Geotechnical Conference GEOtrendz, pp. 537–40.
Ismeik, M., & Shaqour, F. (2020). Effectiveness of lime in stabilising subgrade soils subjected to freeze–thaw cycles. Road
Materials and Pavement Design, 21(1), 42–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2018.1479289
Kézdi, Á. (1979). Stabilised Earth Roads. Elsevier.
Khattab, S. A. A., Al-Mukhtar, M., & Fleureau, J. M. (2007). Long-term stability characteristics of a lime-treated plastic soil.
Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 19(4), 358–366. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:4(358)
Lai, J., Wu, S., & Chiang, C. (2011). Evaluating the compaction quality of Bbackfills by stress wave velocities [Internet].
Contemporary topics on testing, modeling, and case studies of geomaterials, pavements, and tunnels. 2011. pp. 92–99.
(Proceedings).
Latifi, N., Marto, A., & Eisazadeh, A. (2016). Physicochemical behavior of tropical laterite soil stabilized with non-traditional
additive. Acta Geotechnica, 11(2), 433–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0370-3
Lees, G., Abdelkader, M. O., & Hamdani, S. K. (1982). Effect of the clay fraction on some mechanical properties of limesoil
mixtures. Journal of Institute of Highway Engineering, 29(11), 3–9. https://trid.trb.org/view/187772.
Mitchell, J. K., & Hooper, D. R. (1961). Influence of time between mixing and compaction on properties of a lime stabilised
expansiveclay. Highway Research Board Bulletin, 304, 14–31. https://trid.trb.org/view/122463.
Mitchell, J. K., & Soga, K. (2005). Fundamentals of soil behaviour (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Moghal, A. A. B., Chittoori, B. C. S., & Basha, B. M. (2018). Effect of fibre reinforcement on CBR behaviour
of lime-blended expansive soils: Reliability approach. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 19(3), 690–709.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2016.1272479
Moghal, A. A. B., Vydehi, K. V., Moghal, M. B., Almatrudi, R., Almajed, A., & Al-Shamrani, M. A. (2020). Effect of calcium based
derivatives on the consolidation, strength and lime leachability behavior of expansive soil. Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, 32(4), 04020048-7. https://doi.org/10.1061/.
Ochepo, J., & Osinubi, K. J. (2013). Effect of compactive effort and elapse time on the strength of lime-
bagasse ash stabilised expansive clay from Gombe. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 18, 219–233.
http://www.ejge.com/2013/Ppr2013.019alr.pdf.
Ola, S. A. (1978). Geotechnical properties and behaviour of some stabilized Nigerian lateritic soils. Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 11(2), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.QJEG.1978.011.02.04
Osinubi, K. J. (1998). Influence of compactive efforts and compaction delays on lime-treated soil. Journal of Transportation
Engineering, 124(2), 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1998)124:2(149)
Osinubi, K. J., & Nwaiwu, C. M. (2006). Compaction delay effects on properties of lime-treated soil. Journal of Materials in
Civil Engineering, 18(2), 250–258. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2006)18:2(250)
Prakash, K., Sridharan, A., & Rao, S. M. (1989). Lime addition and curing effects on the index and compaction characteristics
of a montmorillonitic soil. Geotechnical Engineering, 20, 39–47. https://trid.trb.org/view/353484.
Prashanth, J. P., Sivapullaiah, P. V., & Sridharan, A. (1998). Compaction curves on volume basis. Geotechnical Testing Journal,
21(1), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10426J
Rajasekaran, G., & Narasimha Rao, S. (2002). Compressibility behaviour of lime-treated marine clay. Ocean Engineering,
29(5), 545–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-8018(01)00010-5
Rao, S. M., & Shivananda, P. (2005). Compressibility behaviour of lime-stabilized clay. Geotechnical and Geological Engi-
neering, 23(3), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-004-1608-2
Sivapullaiah, P. V., Prashanth, J., & Sridharan, A. (2000). Optimum lime content for fly ashes and the role of the curing
period. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 28(6), 499–506. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE12141J
 ROAD MATERIALS AND PAVEMENT DESIGN 15

Sivapullaiah, P. V., Prashanth, J. P., & Sridharan, A. (1998). Delay in compaction and importance of the lime fixation
point on the strength and compaction characteristics of soil. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Ground
Improvement, 2(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.1680/gi.1998.020105
Sivapullaiah, P. V., Sridharan, A., & Bhaskar Raju, K. V. (2000). Role of amount and type of clay in the lime stabilization of soils.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Ground Improvement, 4(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1680/grim.2000.
4.1.37
Sridharan, A., & Nagaraj, H. B. (2005). Plastic limit and compaction characteristics of finegrained soils. Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers - Ground Improvement, 9(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1680/grim.2005.9.1.17
Sridharan, A., & Sivapullaiah, P. V. (2005). Mini compaction test apparatus for fine grained soils. Geotechnical Testing
Journal, 28(3), 240–246. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ12542.
Sweeney, D. A., Wong, D. K. H., & Fredluned, D. G. (1988). Effect of lime on highly plastic clay with special emphasis on
aging. Transportation Research Record, 1190, 13–23. https://trid.trb.org/view/301700.
Thompson, M. R. (1966). Lime reactivity of Illinois soils. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, 92, 67–92.
https://cedb.asce.org/CEDBsearch/record.jsp.
Tonoz, M. C., Ulusay, R., & Gokceoglu, C. (2004). Effects of lime stabilisation on engineering properties of expansive Ankara
Clay. Proccedings of Engineering Geology for Infrastructure Planning in Europe. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, Vol.
104. Springer.
Uppal, M. L., & Bhasin, N. K. (1971). A laboratory study on the effect of delayed compaction on the strength of soil–lime
mixes. Indian Roads Congress, Road Research Bulletin No. 15, (122), 1–17. https://trid.trb.org/view/125524.