Technical Note

Key Parameter for Swelling Control of Compacted

Expansive Fine-Grained Soil–Lime Blends
Carina Silvani 1; Lêda Christiane de Figueiredo Lopes Lucena 2; Eduardo Antônio Guimarães Tenorio 3;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Hugo Carlos Scheuermann Filho 4; and Nilo Cesar Consoli 5

Abstract: Fine-grained soils that expand when in contact with water can be a major issue in some geotechnical situations, but the soil can be
stabilized through chemical means by hydrated lime incorporation. However, there is not yet any rational dosage methodology that combines
the effects of both lime content and porosity of the treated soil specimen to predict its behavior regarding swelling. Thus, the present research
intends to assess the one-dimensional swelling response of an expansive fine-grained soil stabilized with lime. For this purpose, compacted
soil–lime blends were molded with three distinct amounts of lime (2%, 4%, and 6%), compacted to three different dry unit weights (14, 15,
and 16 kN=m3 ) and tested after 3 h of curing. The results show that lime content, porosity, and their interaction are statistically significant in
altering the swelling behavior of the compacted blends. Moreover, both can be combined through the adjusted porosity/lime index and related
to the one-dimensional swelling. As a result, a single unique relationship could be established between the swelling and the proposed index
with a coefficient of correlation (R2 ) of 96%. This approach was also successfully employed in other fine-grained soils treated with lime as
validation. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002335. © 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Swelling; Porosity; Lime; Expansive soils; Porosity/lime index.

Introduction
Expansive soils are a major concern in distinct geotechnical engi-
neering situations that may involve fine-grained soils, such as the
base of pavements, spread footings, road embankments, and exca-
vations (Puppala et al. 2013; Phanikumar and Singla 2016; Ferreira
et al. 2017). The expansive mechanism is linked to the soil’s capac-
ity to undergo volumetric changes when submitted to changes in
moisture content (Schanz and Elsawy 2017; Belchior et al. 2017).
In this sense, the expansive potential of such soils is intimately re-
lated to the clay fraction in terms of quantity, fabric, and mineralogy
(Pedarla et al. 2015). Minerals of the smectite group, for example,
are known to be highly expansive due to the high surface area and
weak bonds between the mineral sheets.
The issues related to soil heave are globally present and its treat-
ment may be split into chemical stabilization and/or substitution of
the naturally expansive material (Nelson and Miller 1997). Usually,
1
Lecturer, Graduate Program of Civil and Environmental Engineer-
ing, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Paraíba 58429-900, Brazil.
Email: carinasilvani@hotmail.com
2
Lecturer, Graduate Program of Civil and Environmental Engineer-
ing, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Paraíba 58429-900, Brazil.
Email: ledach@uol.com.br
3
Researcher, Graduate Program of Civil and Environmental Engineer-
ing, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Paraíba 58429-900, Brazil.
Email: eduardo_agt123@hotmail.com
4
Ph.D. Candidate, Graduate Program in Civil Engineering, Universi-
dade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul 90035-190, Brazil.
Email: hugocsf@gmail.com
5
Professor of Civil Engineering, Graduate Program in Civil Engineer-
ing, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul 90035-
190, Brazil (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002
-6408-451X. Email: consoli@ufrgs.br
Note. This manuscript was submitted on June 4, 2019; approved on
April 22, 2020; published online on June 23, 2020. Discussion period open
until November 23, 2020; separate discussions must be submitted for in-
dividual papers. This technical note is part of the Journal of Geotechnical
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, © ASCE, ISSN 1090-0241.
the first option tends to be more attractive due to economic and
environment-related reasons. Essentially, the addition of lime to
a fine-grained soil in the presence of water implies flocculation
and agglomeration of the clay particles in the short term. This out-
come is due to the increase in the electrolyte content of the pore
water and the cation exchange between the clay minerals and the
Ca2þ ions (Herzog and Mitchell 1963; TRB 1987). In the long term,
pozzolanic reactions may develop and cementitious compounds can
precipitate.
Earlier findings regarding the response of expansive fine-
grained soil stabilization with lime demonstrated that the soil–lime
blends’ behavior is complex and affected by many factors, such as
grain size distribution of the soil, lime type and content, molding
moisture content, material porosity, and curing conditions such as
time and temperature (Basma and Tuncer 1991; Gueddouda et al.
2011; Phanikumar et al. 2009). Thus, it is not simple to establish a
rational dosage procedure of chemically stabilized expansive soils.
In this context, Consoli et al. (2009) were the first to establish a
unique dosage methodology based on rational criteria where the
porosity/lime index plays a fundamental role in assessment of the
target unconfined compressive strength of artificially cemented
geomaterials. In these cases, the porosity that is measured is the
initial (molding) porosity. Moreover, Consoli et al. (2011) success-
fully applied the study about the use of the porosity/lime index
to assess the initial shear modulus of soil–lime blends. Recently,
Consoli et al. (2019) efficaciously established the influence of the
porosity, amount of lime, and their ratio (η=Liv ) on the accumulated
loss of mass of fine-grained soil–carbide lime blends due to suc-
cessive wetting–drying cycles (ASTM 2015).
As mentioned, many research studies have been dedicated to
evaluating the porosity/lime index as a soil behavior parameter. In
this sense, the present research aims to assess the feasibility of this
index as an alternative to predict or control the swelling of expan-
sive clay-hydrated lime blends based on a rational methodology.
Thus, several free swell tests were carried out in compacted clay–
lime blends, which were molded with distinct lime contents and
compacted to attain different porosities. Those procedures enable

© ASCE 06020012-1 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Soil X-ray diffraction.
the evaluation of the η=Liv ratio, enrich the specific literature, and
open up the scope of further exploration. Furthermore, from a prac-
tical viewpoint, this means that carrying out a limited number of
swelling tests on specimens of studied expansive clay molded with
lime should allow the prediction of the swelling for an entire range
of porosities and lime contents.
Experimental Program
The experimental program was carried out in two parts. First, prop-
erties of materials were characterized by geotechnical and chemical
means. Next, several one-dimensional swelling potential tests were
carried out for clay–lime blends to assess the vertical swelling (εs )
of the mixtures. Two controllable factors were assessed, namely,
amount of lime (L) and dry unit weight (γ d ). Both were tested at
three levels, that is, the lime contents were 2%, 4%, and 6% and the
dry unit weights were established as 14, 15, and 16 kN=m3 . A
unique molding moisture content equal to 19% was used (w) for
all the blends.
The curing period was fixed at 3 h and the specimens were cured
in a humid room at 23°C. Additionally, the swelling of the com-
pacted natural soil was assessed as a reference indicator.
Materials
Samples of the studied fine-grained soil were collected in a dis-
turbed state at a depth of 1.5 m near the city of Recife in northeastern
Brazil. According to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM
2017), this soil is classified as a high-plasticity clay (CH) (see Table
1 for details of physical properties of soil samples). X-ray fluores-
cence spectrometry (XRF) analysis highlighted the main chemical
constituents of the soil: SiO2 (54.9%), Al2 O3 (25.1%), Fe2 O3
(4.7%). In addition, Fig. 1 presents the X-ray diffraction of the stud-
ied soil. The diffractogram pattern indicated the presence of quartz,
muscovite, and smectite, the latter being an expansive clay mineral.
Through the methylene blue test (ASTM 2014a), it was possible
to estimate the cation exchange capacity (CTC) and the specific soil
surface. Table 1 gives the values obtained for the CTC and the spe-
cific surface. The high specific surface indicates that the soil is able
to react with lime in a short-term period.
Calcitic hydrated lime, with a specific gravity of 2.41, was used
as the agglomerating agent (ASTM 2018). Stoichiometrically, the
assessed lime has 82.0% CaðOHÞ2 and 8.7% CaCO3 . Distilled
water was used both for the characterization tests and for the fab-
rication of mechanical tests’ specimens.
© ASCE 06020012-2
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012
Table 1. Physical properties of the soil samples
Parameter Value
Liquid limit (%) 49
Plastic limit (%) 21
Plastic index (%) 28
Unit weight of the soil grains (kN=m3 ) 26.5
Coarse sand (0.6 mm < diameter < 2.0 mm) (%) 1.66
Medium sand (0.2 mm < diameter < 0.6 mm) (%) 2.96
Fine sand (0.06 mm < diameter < 0.2 mm) (%) 28.34
Silt (0.002 mm < diameter < 0.06 mm) (%) 21.58
Clay (diameter < 0.002 mm) (%) 45.46
Mean particle diameter, D50 (mm) 0.005
CEC (meq/10 g) (ASTM 2014a) 59.2
Soil specific surface (m2 =g) 462
USCS class (ASTM 2017) CH
Methods
Molding of the Specimens
For the one-dimensional swelling tests, cylindrical specimens
(50 mm in diameter and 20 mm high) were used. The amount of
lime for each blend was calculated based on the mass of dry fine-
grained soil. A target dry unit weight for a given specimen was then
established through the dry mass of fine-grained materials: lime di-
vided by the total volume of the specimen. As a general procedure,
to keep the dry unit weight of the specimen constant with increasing
lime content, an equivalent amount of the fine-grained material was
replaced by lime. Specimens were molded in triplicate.
The molding procedure started with the weighing and mixing
of the dry materials (soil and hydrated lime). Then, distilled water
was added (19%) and the materials were mixed until the blend
acquired a uniform consistency. Next, the specimen was statically
compacted in two layers inside a cylindrical mold, reaching the pre-
scribed dry unit weight. After molding, the specimen was immedi-
ately extracted from the mold and its weight, diameter, and height
measured with accuracies of 0.01 g and 0.02 mm, respectively. The
specimens were considered suitable for testing if they met the fol-
lowing tolerances:
1. Dry unit weight (γ d ): degree of compaction between 99% and
101% (the degree of compaction being defined as the value ob-
tained in the molding process divided by the target value of γ d );
and
2. Dimensions: diameter and height to within 0.02 mm.
Dry unit weight values were determined based on a Proctor
compaction test (Fig. 2) performed using the standard effort in
accordance to ASTM D698 (ASTM 2012). Based on those results,
a molding moisture content equal to 19% was chosen for all the
blends. This value corresponds to 80% of the optimum moisture
content (OMC) for the soil at the standard effort and was chosen
because it successfully permitted the molding of the soil–lime mix-
tures at the desired dry unit weight values. On the other hand, the
minimum amount of lime employed herein was equal to 2% and
was chosen based on the initial consumption of lime (ICL) method
proposed by Rogers et al. (1997), which relies on the pH of the
soil–lime mixtures. That is, the minimum lime content must imply
a pH of at least 12.40.
The initial porosity (η) was defined as the ratio of volume of
voids over the total volume of the specimen as shown by Eq. (1).
It is a function of dry unit weight (γ d ) of the blend, lime content (L),
and the unit weight of solids of host material (γsS ¼ 26.5 kN=m3 —
see Table 1) and lime (γsL ¼ 24.1 kN=m3 ) respectively
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 2. Proctor compaction curve of swelling clay and molded Fig. 3. One-dimensional swelling–time compacted clay–lime blend
specimens’ dry unit weight. curves.

   L 
γd 1 100
η ¼ 100 − 100 × þ ð1Þ
1 þ 100
L γss γsL

One-Dimensional Swelling Tests

One-dimensional swelling tests on compacted clay–lime blends
were carried out according to ASTM D4546 (ASTM 2014b), Test
Method A. Each specimen was fitted inside a consolidation ring
with top and bottom porous stones and loaded with a 10-kPa by
using a standard consolidation loading device. After compression
ceased, each specimen was inundated with distilled water, and
swell was monitored at time intervals of 0.5 min, 1 min, 2 min,
4 min, 8 min, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 8 h, and 24 h.

Results

Swelling–Time Curves Analyses

Fig. 3 presents vertical swelling–time compacted clay–lime blend
curves, illustrating a comparison between tests carried out with dis-
tinct lime additions (0%, 2%, 4%, and 6%), dry unit weight of
15.0 kN=m3 , and moisture content of 19.0. It can be verified that
except for the specimen without lime, the primary swell volume
change was about completed in 24 h for the tested specimens.
Effect of the Lime Content, Dry Unit Weight, and
Porosity/Lime Index on Swelling
Fig. 4 presents the one-dimensional swelling results as a function of
the blends’ porosity. Each curve in Fig. 4 is adjusted for specimens
molded with the same amount of lime. It is clear that swelling in-
creases as porosity diminishes. This trend is associated with the
soil’s fabric because more compaction (lower porosity) implies less
interparticle space, which in turn reduces the available volume for
particles rearrangement. Thus, upon internal swelling pressures,
more compacted specimens tend to present higher degrees of vol-
ume increase when the same lime content is considered.
Fig. 5 exhibits the one-dimensional swelling results according to
lime content (L). A linear trend may be adjusted when the same dry
Fig. 4. Effect of porosity in one-dimensional swelling.
unit weights are considered. However, those functions appear to
converge to the same εs value for a lime content equal to 6%. This
may be an indicative that, for such L, the swelling is independent of
γ d (considering the compaction ranges applied herein). Further-
more, an inverse effect between εs and L can be observed. This is
possibly due to the agglomeration effects exerted by the Ca2þ cat-
ions that are more available for higher amounts of hydrated lime.
Clearly, a convergent behavior occurs when the one-dimensional
swelling is separately assessed as a function of the porosity and
the amount of lime (Figs. 4 and 5). The combined effect of those
variables is shown in Fig. 6 through their ratio (η=Liv index).
From what is presented in Fig. 6, it is possible to observe three dis-
tinct parallel-adjusted curves, one for each lime content. Although
fair correlations were achieved for each L, a single unique relation-
ship could not be obtained when the nonadjusted η=Liv index is

© ASCE 06020012-3 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Effect of lime content (L) in one-dimensional swelling.

Fig. 7. Relation of adjusted porosity/lime index and one-dimensional

swelling.

Table 2. ANOVA for one-dimensional swelling of the expansive soil

stabilized with lime
Degrees of Sum of Mean
Source freedom squares squares p-value Significant
L (%) 2 37.21 18.60 0.00000 Yes
γ d (kN=m3 ) 2 5.87 2.94 0.00000 Yes
Interaction 4 1.19 0.30 0.00037 Yes
Residue 18 0.60 0.03 — —
Total 26 44.87 — — —

Statistical Analysis of Soil–Lime Swelling

Fig. 6. Relation of porosity/lime index and one-dimensional swelling.
employed due to the distinct rate of the effects exerted by L and η on
the response variable (εs ).
Therefore, to account for the distinct rate effects of L and η
on the response variable, an external exponent equal to −0.26 was
employed to adjust the η=Liv relationship. The negative sign is ex-
plained by both the positive effects exerted by L and η. That is, εs
tends to decrease as porosity and lime content tends to increase.
Thus, Fig. 7 presents the relation between the vertical swelling
and the adjusted porosity/lime index (η=L−0.26iv ). A single unique
−0.26
relationship could be established between εs and η=Liv with an
2
R equal to 96%. This relation is expressed by Eq. (2)
 −3.97
η
εs ð%Þ ¼ 14.66 × 106 −0.26 ð2Þ
Liv
To statistically assess the effects of the controllable factors (and
their interaction) in respect to the one-dimensional swelling, an
ANOVA test was performed. A significance level (α) equal to 5%
was adopted. The results of the ANOVA test are summarized in
Table 2. Through the results, it is possible to infer that the amount
of lime, the dry unit weight, and their interaction are statistically
significant because the resultant p-values are lower than 5%. More-
over, the significance of the interaction addresses any doubts about
the influence that one factor exerts on the other in the final result of
soil expansion. This can be noticed in the interaction plot presented
in Fig. 8.
Furthermore, to detect differences between the means of the
tested treatments, the Tukey test was employed with a confidence
interval equal to 95%. The test was performed in the statistical soft-
ware Minitab version 18. Table 3 summarizes the averages of each
treatment, which are the mean results of the test performed in trip-
licate, and the results of the Tukey test. Basically, the mean of a
treatment is equal to the mean of another treatment when they share
a reference letter. Thus, there is no statistical difference between
those treatments. For example, Treatments 5, 6, 7, and 8 are statisti-
cally the same. That is, there is no statistical difference between
employing 4% lime and compacting to 15 kN=m3 (Treatment 5)
or using 6% lime and a dry unit weight equal to 15 kN=m3

© ASCE 06020012-4 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 8. Interaction plot for one-dimensional swelling.

Fig. 9. Relation of adjusted porosity/lime index and one-dimensional

Table 3. Tukey test results
Treatment γ d (kN=m3 )
1 16
2 15
3 14
4 16
5 15
6 14
7 16
8 15
9 14
swelling for other research studies.
L (%) Mean, εs (%) Reference letter
2 4.97 A
2 4.04 B Filho’s (2020) results have shown that the expansive soil–lime
2 3.13 C blends molded at two distinct molding water contents kept the same
4 2.34 D
equation shape (εs ð%Þ ¼ scalar × ðη=L−0.26
iv Þ−4.0 ), but with a dif-
4 1.76 E
4 1.72 E ferent scalar in front of each equation (such scalar is a function
6 1.39 EF of the molding water content)
6 1.26 EF  −4.0
6 η
6 1.09 F εs ð%Þ ¼ 17.80 × 10 ð3Þ
L−0.26
iv

 −4.0
η
(Treatment 8). Higher specific dry weights imply higher expansion εs ð%Þ ¼ 30.49 × 106 ð4Þ
L−0.26
iv
due to expansive soil particles’ higher concentration in the sample.
The significance of the lime and specific dry weights interaction  −4.0
η
observed in the ANOVA (Table 2) reinforce this behavior. εs ð%Þ ¼ 10.73 × 106 ð5Þ
L−0.26
iv

General Model Establishing Swelling  −4.0

η
εs ð%Þ ¼ 11.09 × 106 ð6Þ
To verify if the approach employed herein (i.e., correlation between L−0.26
iv
−0.26
εs and η=Liv ) is applicable to other expansive clays treated with  −4.0
lime, seven distinct research studies were assessed. The results of η
εs ð%Þ ¼ 11.48 × 107 ð7Þ
these studies are depicted in Fig. 9 and the respective soil properties L−0.26
iv
are summarized in Table 4. Fine correlations were obtained be-
tween the vertical swelling potential (εs ) of the amended soils and  −4.0
η
the adjusted porosity/volumetric lime content quotient. This indi- εs ð%Þ ¼ 20.24 × 107 ð8Þ
L−0.26
iv
cates the usefulness of such an approach in predicting the swelling
of clay–lime blends. In general, the trend between εs and η=Liv −0.26  −4.0
η
was the same among those seven studies {Basma and Tuncer εs ð%Þ ¼ 11.33 × 106 ð9Þ
(1991) [Eq. (3)], Panjaitan (2014) [Eq. (4)], Belchior et al. (2017) L−0.26
iv
[Eq. (5)], Leite et al. (2016) [Eq. (6)], Paiva et al. (2016) [Eq. (7)],  −4.0
Abass (2013) [Eq. (8)], and Consoli and Scheuermann Filho (2020) η
εs ð%Þ ¼ 3.88 × 106 ð10Þ
[Eqs. (9) and (10)]} and the present research because the external L−0.26
iv
exponent was equal to −4.0. Eqs. (9) and (10) are related to
the investigation carried out by Consoli and Scheuermann Filho The coefficients of determination (R2 ) for these equations are
(2020), which analyzed an expansive soil treated with lime whose respectively 0.77, 0.91, 0.69, 0.92, 0.84, 0.80, 0.92, and 0.92.
specimens were molded at two distinct molding water contents A normalization procedure was carried out with the intention of
{22.5% [Eq. (9)] and 27.5% [Eq. (10)]}. Consoli and Scheuermann obtaining a generalized relationship between vertical swelling (εs )

© ASCE 06020012-5 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012

 Table 4. Properties of the researched soils
Consoli and
Basma and Panjaitan Belchior et al. Leite et al. Paiva et al. Abass Scheuermann Filho
Soil data Tuncer (1991) (2014) (2017) (2016) (2016) (2013) (2020)
Specific gravity 2.67 2.66 2.74 2.70 2.60 2.72 2.63
Plastic limit (%) 37.4 20.8 32.5 34 44 30 19
Liquid limit (%) 81.5 40.2 91.8 57 81 99 89
Plastic index (%) 44.1 19.4 59.3 23 37 69 70
Clay content (%) 70 52.3 75 37.80 48 67.5 71
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Preponderant minerals Kaolinite NI Montmorillonite NI Montmorillonite NI Montmorillonite

and illite and vermiculite and kaolinite
Note: NI = not informed.

• Soil swelling tends to reduce as lime content and porosity in-

crease; therefore both have influence in soil swelling.
• A unique correlation shape can express the one-dimensional
swelling in function of soil–lime volumetric parameters η and
Liv as shown in Eq. (2).
• The exponent −0.26 for Liv was selected according to soil
characteristics and works to compensate for the difference of
influence in soil swelling of porosity and lime content. The ex-
ponential is negative due to the inverse influence of dry specific
weight and lime content on soil swelling.
• The ANOVA analysis and the Tukey test confirmed factors in-
fluence swelling, and validated the hypotheses that interaction
among dry specific weight and lime content also influences soil
swelling.
• The approach applied herein was demonstrated to be employ-
able to assess the swelling potential of other fine-grained soils
treated with lime. This was corroborated by the results depicted
in Fig. 9. Moreover, the results could be normalized, yielding
a unique relationship (Fig. 10) relating the vertical swelling
of eight distinct soils treated with lime to the adjusted η=Liv
index.
• From a practical viewpoint, this means that carrying out a lim-
ited number of one-dimensional swelling tests with specimens
molded with specific dry unit weights and lime contents enabled
Fig. 10. Normalized relationship for one-dimensional swelling.
the creation of an equation that establishes swelling behavior as
a function of soil density and lime content.
• The engineer can choose the amount of lime and the compaction
and η=L−0.26
iv . Dividing the attained εs in each research by a par- effort appropriate to provide a mixture that meets the swell re-
ticular εs (corresponding to an η=L−0.26 iv ¼ Δ ¼ 55), the relation- quired by the project at the optimum cost.
ship presented in Eq. (11) and in Fig. 10 was obtained. The Δ
value equal to 55 was chosen because it is within the range of
all the studied cases. By analyzing the outcomes achieved herein, Data Availability Statement
it is possible to attest that this approach yields a unique relationship
between εs and η=L−0.26 iv despite the amended clayey soil nature Some or all data or models used during the study are available from
(the obtained R2 was equal to 0.94) the corresponding author by request.
 −4.0
εs η
¼ 96.61 × 105 −0.26 ð11Þ
εs; for η−0.26 ¼55 Liv Acknowledgments
ðLiv Þ

The authors wish to explicit their appreciation to Fundação de

Eq. (11) is independent of molding water content, whether
or not it is at the OMC. The molding water content only affects
εs; for η=ðLiv Þ−0.26 ¼55 which is specific for each soil, lime, and water
content studied.
Conclusions
From the data and analysis presented in this paper, the following
conclusions can be drawn:
Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (FAPERGS)/
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
(CNPq) – Programa de Apoio à Núcleos de Excelência (PRONEX),
Ministério de Ciência e Tecnologia (MCT)-Conselho Nacional de
Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) [Editais Insti-
tuto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia (INCT), Universal & Pro-
dutividade em Pesquisa] and Ministério da Educação e Cultura
(MEC)-Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível
Superior (CAPES) for the support to the research group.

© ASCE 06020012-6 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012

 Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
Liv = volumetric lime content;
γ d = dry unit weight;
γ s = unit weight of solids;
Δh = height change of the specimen after inundation;
εs = swell potential;
η = natural unit weight; and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul on 08/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
η=Liv = porosity/lime index.
References
Abass, I. K. 2013. “Lime stabilization of expansive soil.” J. Eng. Dev.
17 (1): 219–232.
ASTM. 2012. Standard test methods for laboratory compaction character-
istics of soil using standard effort. ASTM D698. West Conshohocken,
PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2014a. Standard test method for methylene blue index of clay.
ASTM C837. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2014b. Standard test methods for one-dimensional swell or col-
lapse of soils. ASTM D4546. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2015. Standard test methods for wetting and drying com-
pacted soil-cement mixtures. ASTM D559. West Conshohocken,
PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2017. Standard practice for classification of soils for engineer-
ing purposes (unified soil classification system). ASTM D2487. West
Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2018. Standard specification for quicklime and hydrated lime for
soil stabilization. ASTM C977. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Basma, A. A., and E. R. Tuncer. 1991. “Effect of lime on volume change
and compressibility of expansive clays.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1295:
52–61.
Belchior, I. M. R. M., M. D. T. Casagrande, and J. G. Zornberg. 2017.
“Swelling behavior evaluation of a lime-treated expansive soil through
centrifuge test.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 29 (12): 04017240. https://doi.org
/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002090.
Consoli, N. C., L. da Silva Lopes Jr., and K. S. Heineck. 2009. “Key
parameters for the strength control of lime stabilized soils.” J. Mater.
Civ. Eng. 21 (5): 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561
(2009)21:5(210).
Consoli, N. C., L. S. Lopes Jr., P. D. M. Prietto, L. Festugato, and
R. C. Cruz. 2011. “Variables controlling stiffness and strength of lime-
stabilized soils.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 137 (6): 628–632.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000470.
Consoli, N. C., R. B. Saldanha, and H. C. Scheuermann Filho. 2019. “Short
and long-term effect of sodium chloride on strength and durability of
coal fly ash stabilised with carbide lime.” Can. Geotech. J. 56 (12):
1929–1939. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2018-0696.
© ASCE 06020012-7
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2020, 146(9): 06020012
Consoli, N. C., and H. C. Scheuermann Filho. 2020. The effect of molding
water content on the swelling behavior of a lime-treated expansive soil.
[In Portuguese.] Rep. No. 01/2020 PPGEC-UFRGS. Porto Alegre,
Brazil: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.
Ferreira, S. R. M., S. C. Paiva, J. J. O. Morais, and R. B. Viana. 2017.
“Evaluation of the expansion of a soil improved with lime in the munici-
pality of Paulista-PE.” [In Portuguese.] Matéria 22 (1): e11930. https://
doi.org/10.1590/S1517-707620170005.0266.
Gueddouda, M. K., I. Goual, M. Lamara, A. Smaida, and B. Mekarta. 2011.
“Chemical stabilization of expansive clay from Algeria.” Global J. Res.
Eng. 11 (5): 1–7.
Herzog, A., and J. K. Mitchell. 1963. “Reactions accompanying stabiliza-
tion of clay with cement.” Highway Res. Rec. 36: 146–171.
Leite, R., R. Cardoso, C. Cardoso, E. Cavalcante, and O. Freitas. 2016.
“Lime stabilization of expansive soil from Sergipe–Brazil.” In Vol. 9
of Proc., Web Conf. Paris: EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051
/e3sconf/20160914005.
Nelson, J., and D. J. Miller. 1997. Expansive soils: Problems and practice
in foundation and pavement engineering. New York: Wiley.
Paiva, S. C., J. J. O. Morais, R. B. Viana, M. G. V. P. Pinto, and S. R. M.
Ferreira. 2016. Characterization of the expansiveness of a natural soil
and treated with lime from the city of Paulista-PE. [In Portuguese.]
COBRAMSEG 2016. Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Congresso Brasileiro
de Mecânica dos Solos e Engenharia Geotécnica.
Panjaitan, S. R. N. 2014. “The effect of lime content on the bearing capacity
and swelling potential of expansive soil.” J. Civ. Eng. Res. 4 (3A):
89–95.
Pedarla, A., A. J. Puppala, L. R. Hoyos, and B. Chittoori. 2015. “Evaluation
of swell behavior of expansive clays from internal specific surface
and pore size distribution.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 142 (2):
04015080. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001412.
Phanikumar, B. R., C. Amshumalini, and R. Karthika. 2009. “Effect of
lime engineering behaviour of expansive clay.” In Proc., Indian Geo-
technical Conf., 80–83. New Delhi, India: Indian Geotechnical Society.
Phanikumar, B. R., and R. Singla. 2016. “Swell-consolidation characteris-
tics of fibre-reinforced expansive soils.” Soils Found. 56 (1): 138–143.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2016.01.011.
Puppala, A. J., T. Manosuthikij, and B. C. S. Chittoori. 2013. “Swell and
shrinkage characterizations of unsaturated expansive clays from Texas.”
Eng. Geol. 164 (Sep): 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013
.07.001.
Rogers, C. D. F., S. Glendinning, and T. E. J. Roff. 1997. “Lime modifi-
cation of clay soils for construction expediency.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.
Geotech. Eng. 125 (4): 242–249. https://doi.org/10.1680/igeng.1997
.29660.
Schanz, T., and M. B. D. Elsawy. 2017. “Stabilization of highly swelling
clay using lime-sand mixtures.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv.
170 (4): 218–230. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgrim.15.00039.
TRB (Transportation Research Board). 1987. Soil stabilization: Reactions,
properties, design, and construction—State of the art report 5.
Washington, DC: National Research Council.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.