Engineering Behavior of a Remolded Expansive Clay

Blended with Lime, Calcium Chloride, and Rice-Husk Ash

Radhey S. Sharma1; B. R. Phanikumar2; and B. Varaprasada Rao3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: This paper presents experimental results obtained from tests conducted on remolded expansive soil specimens blended with
rice-husk ash 共RHA兲 and stabilized with lime and calcium chloride. The amounts of RHA, lime, and calcium chloride were varied from
0 to 16%, 0 to 5%, and 0 to 2%, respectively, by dry weight of the soil. The effect of additives on unconfined compressive strength 共UCS兲
and California bearing ratio 共CBR兲 is reported. It was found that the stress-strain behavior of expansive clay improved upon the addition
of up to 5% lime or up to 1% calcium chloride. A maximum improvement in failure stress of 225 and 328% was observed at 4% lime and
1% calcium chloride, respectively. A RHA content of 12% was found to be the optimum with regard to both UCS and 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 clay-RHA mixes.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0899-1561共2008兲20:8共509兲
CE Database subject headings: Clays; Expansive soils; Lime; Ash; Chlorides; Material properties.

Introduction
Expansive soils are highly problematic because of their innate
potential for undergoing detrimental volume changes consequent
upon changes in moisture content 共McKeen 1988; Walsh et al.
1993; Nevels 2001; Lu and Lykos 2004兲. Expansive soils swell or
increase in volume in monsoon seasons on imbibition of water,
and shrink or reduce in volume because of evaporation of water
in dry seasons 共Chen 1988; Fredlund and Rahardjo 1993; Briaud
et al. 2003; Aubeny and Lytton 2004兲. Moreover, during monsoon
upon wetting, an expansive soil can swell or exhibit collapse
compression depending upon stress and suction history of the soil
共Alonso et al. 1987; Gens and Alonso 1992; Sharma 1998;
Sharma and Wheeler 2000; Wheeler et al. 2003; Gallipoli et al.
2003兲. As a result of the alternate swelling and shrinkage of ex-
pansive soils, lightly loaded structures such as foundations, pave-
ments, canal beds, and linings and residential buildings founded
in them are severely damaged 共Chen 1988兲. Gourley et al. 共1993兲
estimated the annual cost of damage done to civil engineering
structures founded in expansive soils at $1000 million in the
USA, £150 million in the UK, and many billions of pounds
worldwide.
Many special and innovative foundation techniques such as
1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Louisiana State Univ., 3505 Patrick Taylor Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
共corresponding author兲. E-mail: rsharma@lsu.edu
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technol-
ogy, Vellore, Tamilnadu 632014, India.
3
Lecturer, Dept. of Architecture, Government Polytechnic for Women,
Kakinada 533 004, India.
Note. Associate Editor: Nemkumar Banthia. Discussion open until
January 1, 2009. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual
papers. To extend the closing date by one month, a written request must
be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper
was submitted for review and possible publication on June 2, 2004; ap-
proved on September 24, 2007. This paper is part of the Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 8, August 1, 2008. ©ASCE,
ISSN 0899-1561/2008/8-509–515/$25.00.
belled piers, drilled piers, friction piers, and moisture barriers
共Chen 1988兲, sand cushion technique 共Satyanarayana 1966兲,
cohesive nonswelling 共CNS兲 layer technique 共Katti 1978兲, under-
reamed piles 共Sharma et al. 1978兲, and granular pile anchors
共Phanikumar 1997; Phanikumar 2000; Phanikumar and Sharma
2004兲 were suggested as a remedy for the problems posed by
expansive soils. Apart from the special foundation techniques,
stabilization of expansive soils with various additives such as
lime, calcium chloride, and fly ash has also been a viable tech-
nique for mitigating the volume change problems 共Rao 1984;
Hunter 1988; Sankar 1989; Petry and Little 1992; Jyothi and
Sastry 1994; Kumar 1996; Rollings and Rollings 1996; Desai and
Oza 1997; Rollings et al. 1999; Phanikumar 2000; Cokca 2001;
Phanikumar et al. 2001; Phanikumar and Sharma 2003; Acosta
et al. 2003; Hoyos et al. 2004; Phanikumar and Sharma 2004兲.
Stabilization of expansive clays with various additives has also
been one of the viable techniques for remedying the problems
with expansive soils 共Hunter 1988; Petry and Little 1992; Roll-
ings et al. 1999; Acosta et al. 2003; Hoyos et al. 2004; Phaniku-
mar and Sharma 2004兲. Of the various additives used for
stabilizing expansive soils, lime 共Holtz 1969; Chen 1988; Rao
1984; Sankar 1989; Bhuyian et al. 1995; Evans 1998兲, fly ash
共Little 1997; Cokca 2001兲, and calcium chloride 共Desai and Oza
1997兲 have shown promise as they reduced the amount of heave
and improved the strength characteristics. Lambe and Kaplar
共1971兲 and Lambe et al. 共1971兲 reported that frost heave also
decreased with increasing lime content and fly ash content. Floc-
culation, cation exchange, and pozzolanic action are responsible
for the amelioration of lime-soil mixes. The lime content required
to improve the physical properties of soils is called lime fixation
point, which varies between 3 to 10%, depending on the soil
共Thompson 1969a,b; Brandl 1981; McLaughlin 1984兲. The
strength characteristics of lime-stabilized clays are measured by
means of unconfined compressive strength 共UCS兲 or California
bearing ratio 共CBR兲 value. The increase in compressive strength
is due to an increase in cohesion and angle of internal friction of
the lime-soil blend. Lime-soil blends were reported to have de-
veloped substantial tensile strength also 共Thompson 1969a,b;

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008 / 509

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515

 Table 1. Index Properties of the Expansive Soil Table 3. Chemical Composition of Rice-Husk Ash 共RHA兲
Specific gravity 2.66 Silica 共SiO2兲 90.00
Clay 共%兲 50 Alumina 共Al2O3兲 2.50
Silt 共%兲 37 Ferric oxide 共Fe2O3兲 0.80
Sand 共%兲 13 Calcium oxide 共CaO兲 4.50
Gravel 共%兲 0 Magnesium oxide 共MgO兲 1.00
Liquid limit 80
Plastic limit 30
Experimental Investigation
Plasticity index 50
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Shrinkage limit 10
Free swell index, FSI 共%兲 120
USCS classification of the soil CH
Degree of expansion based on FSI High
Miller et al. 1970; Tulloch et al. 1970兲. The efficacy of CaCl2 as
a stabilizing agent of expansive soils has been studied. CaCl2,
being a hygroscopic material, absorbs water from the atmosphere
and prevents shrinkage cracks in expansive soils during sum-
mer. Hence, it is preeminently suitable for stabilizing expansive
soils 共Desai and Oza 1997兲. It was reported that the free swell
index 共FSI兲 decreased by about 80% and swell potential by about
60% with the addition of 1% of CaCl2 共Phanikumar and Sastry
2001兲.
Rice-husk ash 共RHA兲 is obtained from the burning of rice
husk, which is the byproduct of rice milling. It was estimated that
1,000 kg of rice grain produced 200 kg of rice husk. On burning
the rice husk, about 20% or 40 kg would become RHA 共Mehta
1986兲. RHA contains a high amount of SiO2 in amorphous form
共Mehta 1986; Gambhir 1995兲, which makes it a pozzolanic ac-
cording to ASTM C 168 共ASTM 1997兲. Being a pozzolanic ma-
terial, RHA can be used in lime-pozzolana mixes and portland
cement replacement 共Payá et al. 2001兲. Pozzolana is a siliceous or
siliceous and aluminous material by composition 共ASTM C 168兲
共ASTM 1997兲, and has no cementing property by itself. However,
when pozzolana has high fineness, it can react with CaOH2 in the
presence of water to provide cementing property. Jaturapitakkul
and Roongreung 共2003兲 reported that RHA can be mixed with
CaOH2 to produce a cementing material. RHA can effectively
stabilize expansive soils either solely or mixed with lime 共Basha
et al. 2003兲.
This paper presents the efficacy of using a waste material as an
additive to expansive soil in the presence of chemical additives,
namely, lime and CaCl2. The effect of lime, CaCl2, and RHA on
the UCS and CBR of an expansive soil is presented. The effect of
lime and CaCl2 on UCS and CBR of RHA-soil mixes is also
presented.
Materials
Soil
The index properties of the expansive soil used in this investiga-
tion are shown in Table 1. The soil can be classified as a CH soil
according to USCS. Based on the high FSI of the soil, it can be
classified as having “high” degree of expansion. Table 2 shows
the chemical composition of the soil.
Lime
Hydrated lime was used in this investigation. It has 75–80% of
calcium hydroxide and 7% silica.
Calcium Chloride „CaCl2…
The commercial grade calcium chloride used in this investigation
contained 98% of CaCl2.
Rice-Husk Ash
Well-burnt RHA passing through 425 ␮m was used in this inves-
tigation for convenient mixing with clay and compaction. The
size of the RHA particles was limited to 425 ␮m as the light-
weight and highly porous RHA material with high external
surface area could lead to nonuniform mixing if particles finer
than 425 ␮m were allowed in the blend. Table 3 shows the chemi-
cal composition of RHA. The chemical analysis was done using
the X-ray fluorescence method. The RHA used showed high silica
content of 90%, which is an indication of a good pozzolanic
material.
Tests Conducted
Laboratory unconfined compressive strength 共UCC兲 and CBR
tests were conducted in three different series. In the first series,
UCC and CBR tests were conducted on the untreated expansive
soil. In the second series, UCC and CBR tests were conducted on
both clay-lime and clay-CaCl2 mixes to study the effect of lime
and CaCl2 on the values of UCS and CBR of the expansive soil
used. In the third series, UCC and CBR tests were conducted on
RHA-clay-lime mixes and RHA-clay-CaCl2 mixes to study the
effect of RHA on the values of UCC and CBR of clay-lime mixes
and clay-CaCl2 mixes.

Table 2. Chemical Composition of the Expansive Soil Variables Studied

Silica 共SiO2兲 56.00 All the tests performed for the determination of UCS and CBR
Alumina 共Al2O3兲 19.00 were conducted on samples prepared at the maximum dry unit
Ferric oxide 共Fe2O3兲 7.80 weight 共16 kN/ m3兲 and optimum water content 共24%兲 of the un-
Titanium 共TiO2兲 0.21 treated natural soil. The diam and length of the samples prepared
Potassium oxide 共K2O兲 1.48 for the UCS test were 40 and 80 mm, respectively. The samples
Sodium 共Na2O兲 5.20
were compacted in the Harvard miniature compaction mold at the
desired placement conditions. The diam and the length of the
Magnesium 共MgO兲 2.63
sample prepared for the CBR test were 152 and 126 mm, respec-
Calcium 共CaO兲 3.28
tively. The % contents of various additives by dry weight of the
Loss on ignition 10.40
soil were varied as below:

510 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515

 Table 4. Effect of RHA on UCS and CBR of Clay-Lime Mixes
Lime RHA UCS for 28 days Soaked CBR
共%兲 共%兲 共kPa兲 共%兲
2 0 400 3.2
2 4 500 6.5
2 8 600 8.5
2 12 700 8.8
2 16 650 8.0
3 0 500 5.0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

3 4 680 8.5
3 8 880 11.5
3 12 1,060 13.6
3 16 980 12.6
4 0 650 6
4 4 800 16
Fig. 1. Stress-strain behavior of clay-lime blends 4 8 1,000 21
4 12 1,180 23
4 16 1,060 20.5
• Lime: 0, 2, 3, 4, and 5%; 5 0 560 5.5
• RHA: 0, 4, 8, 12, and 16%; and 5 4 730 15.3
• CaCl2: 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2%. 5 8 930 20
The tests were conducted on samples prepared at various combi- 5 12 1,120 21.8
nations of the above variables. 5 16 1,010 19.5

Sample Preparation and Test Procedure

(a) UCS Test
Air-dried soil was powdered and passed through a 4.75 mm sieve.
The natural water content of the air-dried soil was found to be
8%. The required weight of the air-dried soil was determined
based on the placement dry unit weight, water content, and vol-
ume of the specimen. The tests were performed on samples
prepared such that the water content was 24%. As the natural
water content was already 8%, the remaining water content 共16%兲
was added to the air-dry soil so that final water content of the
samples was 24%. The weight of additive was also determined
based on the % content by dry weight of the soil. The required
amounts of water and additives were added to the dry soil and
thoroughly mixed. The blend was allowed to cure for 28 days
in an incubator. After curing, the blend was statically compacted
in four layers of 20 mm each in the Harvard miniature compac-
tion mold 共40 mm⫻ 80 mm兲. The prepared samples were failed
under increasing compressive loads in the unconfined compres-
sion test. The axial deformation and failure compressive load
were recorded.
(b) CBR Test
The required amount of the air-dried soil passing a 4.75 mm sieve
was measured and thoroughly mixed with the placement water
content and predetermined amount of the additives. The blend
was statically compacted by pressing in the spacer disk of 50 mm
thickness with the help of the testing machine. The penetration
test was done on the specimen in soaked condition. The load-
penetration curve was plotted and the CBR value obtained.
Test Results and Discussion
The effect of lime and calcium chloride 共CaCl2兲 on unconfined
compressive strength for a curing period of 28 days and soaked
CBR of expansive clay is presented. The influence of RHA on the
UCS and CBR of clay-lime mixes and clay-CaCl2 mixes is also
presented.
Effect of Lime on Stress-Strain Behavior of Expansive
Clays
Fig. 1 shows the effect of lime on the stress-strain behavior of the
expansive clay specimens in an unconfined compression test. The
figure shows the stress-strain behavior of the untreated expansive
clay specimen in comparison with that of lime-treated expansive
clay specimens with the lime content varying as 0, 2, 3, 4, and
5%. The untreated expansive clay specimen failed at a stress of
200 kPa and at a strain of 6%. However, upon addition of lime,
the failure stress and the failure strain increased. It was observed
that the failure stress and failure strain at 2% lime were 400 kPa
and 7%, respectively, showing an increase of 100% in stress and
16.7% in strain. At 4% lime, the failure stress and failure strain
were maximum at 650 kPa and 9%, respectively, showing a sig-
nificant increase of 225% in stress and 50% in strain. This means
that there was considerable improvement in the engineering be-
havior of lime-clay mixes when the lime content was 4%. How-
ever, the failure compressive strength decreased when the lime
content was increased to 5%, indicating that 4% lime content was
the optimum lime content. This is in agreement with previous
research 关see for example, Bhuyian et al. 共1995兲 and Evans
共1998兲兴.
Addition of lime to expansive clay results in chemical reac-
tions such as cation exchange, pozzolanic reaction, carbonation,
and cementation due to the pozzolanic reaction flocculation of
clay particles taking place, resulting in agglomeration into large-
sized particles, which resist the applied compressive load more
effectively than those of untreated clay. The role of cementation is
to produce cementitious materials, which also help in resisting the
load better. Hence, the stress-strain behavior improved, as shown
in Fig. 1. Table 4 shows the values of UCS 共kPa兲 for all the lime
contents.

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008 / 511

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 2. Effect of RHA on UCS of clay lime mixes
Effect of RHA on UCS and CBR of Clay-Lime Mixes
Fig. 2 shows the effect of RHA on UCS of expansive clay speci-
mens for varying lime contents. The unconfined compressive
strength increased with increasing lime content for given RHA
content. For example, the UCS was 520, 700, 1,060, 1,120, and
1,180 kPa, respectively, when the lime content was 0, 2, 3, 4, and
5% for a RHA content of 12%. The UCS increased by 127%
when the lime content was increased from 0 to 4% at a RHA
content of 12%. However, the UCS decreased when lime content
was further increased to 5% at all RHA contents. Hence, in RHA-
blended clay-lime mixes also, 4% lime gave the maximum value
of UCS for all RHA contents, as UCS decreased when lime was
increased to 5%. This indicates that 4% was the optimum content
for lime in RHA-blended clays also. For a given lime content,
UCS increased with increasing RHA content. However, a RHA
content of 12% gave the maximum value of UCS for all lime
contents. Unconfined compressive strength decreased when RHA
content was increased to 16% irrespective of lime content, thus,
indicating that 12% was the optimum RHA content for clay-lime
blends. For example, UCS was 650, 800, 1,000, 1,180, and
1,060 kPa, respectively, when the RHA content was 0, 4, 8, 12,
and 16% for a lime content of 4%. UCS increased by 127% when
the RHA content was increased from 0 to 12%. The presence of
high silica content 共90%兲 in RHA increases pozzolanic reaction
and increases the resistance to the applied compressive load of
the clay-RHA blend. The high pozzolanic reaction of RHA further
increases compressive strength of the blend in presence of
lime. This was in accordance with the previous research by
Sabuni et al. 共2003兲, which showed that high silica RHA im-
proved the compressive strength of lime. This improvement is
reflected in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3 shows the influence of RHA on CBR of clay-lime
blends. CBR increased with increasing lime content for a given
RHA content. For example, CBR was 7.5, 8.8, 13.6, 23, and
21.8%, respectively, when the lime content was 0, 2, 3, 4, and 5%
for a RHA content of 12%. The CBR increased by 207% when
the lime content was increased from 0 to 4% at a RHA content of
12%. However, the CBR decreased when lime content was fur-
ther increased to 5% at all RHA contents. Hence, 4% lime gave
the maximum value of CBR for all RHA contents in RHA-
blended clay-lime mixes. This indicates that 4% was the optimum
512 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515
Fig. 3. Influence of RHA on CBR of clay-lime blends
content for lime for CBR of RHA-blended clays. For a given lime
content, CBR increased with increasing RHA content. However, a
RHA content of 12% gave the maximum value of CBR for all
lime contents. California bearing ratio decreased when RHA con-
tent was increased to 16% irrespective of lime content, thus, in-
dicating that 12% was the optimum RHA content for CBR of
clay-lime blends. For example, CBR was 6, 16, 21, 23, and
20.5%, respectively, when the RHA content was 0, 4, 8, 12, and
16% for a lime content of 4%. CBR increased by 283% when the
RHA content was increased from 0 to 12%.
Rice-husk ash is rich in SiO2 共90%兲, which increases the
strength of the blend. Addition of RHA to clay-lime mixes gen-
erates cementing property and a cementitious material due to poz-
zolanic reaction between Ca共OH兲2 and SiO2. This is chiefly
responsible for higher compressive strengths in RHA-clay-lime
blends. Hence, the RHA-blended clay-lime mixes resist the com-
pressive load better. This is in agreement with previous research,
which reported an increase in compressive strength of mortar on
addition of RHA and Ca共OH兲2 共Jaturapitakkul and Roongreung
2003兲. Table 4 summarizes the set of UCS values and CBR values
of RHA-blended clay-lime mixes.
Effect of Calcium Chloride „CaCl2… on Stress-Strain
Behavior of Expansive Clays
Fig. 4 shows the effect of calcium chloride on stress-strain behav-
ior of expansive clay specimens in unconfined compression test.
The figure shows the stress-strain behavior of the untreated ex-
pansive clay specimen in comparison with that of calcium chlo-
ride 共CaCl2兲-treated expansive clay specimens with the CaCl2
content varying as 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2%. The untreated expansive
clay specimen failed at a stress of 200 kPa and at a strain of
6%. However, with the addition of calcium chloride, the failure
stress and the failure strain of the specimens increased initially.
It was observed that the failure stress and failure strain at 0.5%
calcium chloride were 725 kPa and 7%, respectively, showing
an increase of 263% in failure stress and 16.7% in failure strain.
At 1% calcium chloride, however, the failure stress and failure
strain were maximum at 856 kPa and 8%, respectively, showing a
significant increase of 328% in stress and 33% in strain. This
means that there was considerable improvement in the engineer-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 4. Stress-strain behavior of clay-CaCl2 blends
ing behavior of clay-calcium chloride mixes when the calcium
chloride content was 1%. However, the failure compressive
strength decreased considerably when the calcium chloride
content was increased to 1.5 and 2%, indicating that 1% was
the optimum calcium chloride content. This is in agreement with
previous research 关see for example, Desai and Oza 共1997兲 and
Phanikumar and Sastry 共2001兲兴.
Effect of RHA on UCS and CBR of Clay-Calcium
Chloride „CaCl2… Mixes
Fig. 5 shows the effect of RHA on UCS of expansive clay speci-
mens for varying calcium chloride content. The unconfined com-
pressive strength increased initially with increasing CaCl2 content
for given RHA content. For example, the UCS was 550, 725, 856,
224, and 123 kPa, respectively, when the calcium chloride con-
tent was 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2% for a RHA content of 12%. The
UCS increased by 56% when the calcium chloride content was
increased from 0 to 1% at a RHA content of 12%. However, the
UCS decreased when calcium chloride content was increased to
higher percentages 共to 1.5 and 2%兲 at all RHA contents. Hence, in
Fig. 5. Effect of RHA on UCS of clay-CaCl2 mixes
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008 / 513
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515
Fig. 6. Influence of RHA on CBR of clay-CaCl2 blends
RHA-blended clay-CaCl2 mixes, 1% CaCl2 gave the maximum
value of UCS for all RHA contents. This indicates that 1% was
the optimum CaCl2 content for UCS in RHA-blended clay
samples also. Calcium chloride is a hygroscopic material. It ab-
sorbs water from the atmosphere and renders the blends soft. This
effect is more pronounced at higher CaCl2 contents, hence, is the
decrease in UCS at higher CaCl2 contents. For a given CaCl2
content, UCS increased with increasing RHA content. However, a
RHA content of 12% gave the maximum value of UCS for all
CaCl2 contents. Unconfined compressive strength decreased when
RHA content was increased to 16% irrespective of CaCl2 content,
thus, indicating that 12% was the optimum RHA content for
clay-CaCl2 blends. For example, UCS was 415, 580, 750, 856,
and 706 kPa, respectively, when the RHA content was 0, 4, 8, 12,
and 16% for a CaCl2 content of 1%. Hence, UCS increased by
106% when the RHA content was increased from 0 to 12%.
Fig. 6 shows the influence of RHA on CBR of clay-CaCl2 blends.
CBR increased with increasing CaCl2 content for a given RHA
content. For example, CBR was 7.5, 8.75, 9.25, 6.55, and 5.8%,
respectively, when the CaCl2 content was 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2%
for a RHA content of 12%. The CBR increased by 23% when
CaCl2 content was increased from 0 to 1% at a RHA content of
12%. This is lower in comparison to the improvement achieved at
4% lime. However, the CBR decreased when CaCl2 content was
further increased to 1.5 and 2% at all RHA contents. Hence, 1%
CaCl2 gave the maximum value of CBR for all RHA contents in
RHA-blended clay-CaCl2 mixes. This indicates that 1% was the
optimum CaCl2 content for CBR of RHA-blended expansive
clays. For a given CaCl2 content, CBR increased with increasing
RHA content. However, a RHA content of 12% gave the maxi-
mum value of CBR for all CaCl2 contents. CBR decreased when
RHA content was increased to 16% irrespective of CaCl2 con-
tent, thus, indicating that 12% was the optimum RHA content
for CBR of clay-CaCl2 blends. For example, CBR was 4.6, 6.2,
7.92, 9.25, and 8.75%, respectively, when the RHA content was 0,
4, 8, 12, and 16% for a CaCl2 content of 1%. Hence, CBR in-
creased by 101% when the RHA content was increased from 0 to
12%. Table 5 summarizes the whole set of UCS and CBR values
of RHA-blended clay-CaCl2 mixes.
 Table 5. Effect of RHA on UCS and CBR of Clay-CaCl2 Mixes 3. Addition of RHA increased the UCS and CBR of clay-CaCl2
UCS for 28 days Soaked CBR mixes. UCS increased by 56% when the calcium chloride
CaCl2 RHA 共kPa兲 共%兲 content was increased from 0 to 1% at a RHA content of
12%. However, UCS decreased when the calcium chloride
0.5 0 250 4
content was increased to higher percentages at all RHA con-
0.5 4 430 5.4
tents. A RHA content of 12% was found to be the optimum
0.5 8 603 7.1
as UCS decreased at RHA content higher than 12% for any
0.5 12 725 8.75
calcium chloride content. CBR increased by 23% when
0.5 16 650 8.2
CaCl2 content was increased from 0 to 1% at a RHA content
1 0 415 4.6
of 12%. CBR decreased when CaCl2 content was further
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1 4 580 6.2
increased to 1.5% and 2% at all RHA contents. A RHA con-
1 8 750 7.92 tent of 12% was found to be the optimum with regard to
1 12 856 9.25 CBR irrespective of calcium chloride content.
1 16 706 8.75
1.5 0 50 2.5
1.5 4 90 3.7
References
1.5 8 160 5.2
1.5 12 224 6.55
Acosta, H., Edil, T., and Benson, C. 共2003兲. “Soil stabilization and drying
1.5 16 190 6.32 using fly ash.” Geo Engineering Rep. No. 03-03, Dept. Civil and
2 0 25 1.9 Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison,
2 4 65 3.0 Wis.
2 8 100 4.4 Alonso, E. E., Gens, A., and Hight, D. W. 共1987兲. “Special problem soils:
2 12 123 5.8 General report.” Proc., 9th European Conf. on Soil Mechanics, Vol. 3,
2 16 90 5.6 1087–1146.
Aubeny, C. P., and Lytton, R. L. 共2004兲. “Shallow slides in compacted
high plasticity clay slopes.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 130共7兲,
717–727.
Basha, A. M., Hashim, R., and Muntohar, A. S. 共2003兲. “Effect of the
Conclusions cement rice husk ash on the plasticity and compaction of soil.” Elec-
tron. J. Geotechnical Engineering, 8.
The efficacy of rice-husk ash 共RHA兲 on clay-lime mixes and Bhuyian, J. U., Little, J. N., and Graves, R. E. 共1995兲. “Evaluation of
clay-CaCl2 mixes has been explored. Stress-strain behavior, calcareous base course materials stabilized with low percentages of
unconfined compressive strength 共UCS兲 for a curing period of lime in South Texas.” Transportation Research Record. 1486, Trans-
28 days, and California Bearing Ratio 共CBR兲 of untreated ex- portation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
pansive clay and expansive clay blended with lime and calcium Brandl, H. 共1981兲. “Alteration of soil parameters by stabilization with
chloride 共CaCl2兲 were studied. The effect of RHA on clay-lime lime.” Proc., 10th Int. Conf. of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engi-
blends and clay-CaCl2 was studied. The following are the main neering, Vol. 3, 587–594.
conclusions: Briaud, J. L., Xiong, Z., and Moon, S. 共2003兲. “Shrink test-water content
1. The stress-strain behavior of expansive clay samples im- method for shrink and swell predictions.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng., 129共7兲, 590–600.
proved upon addition of lime. When the lime content was
increased from 0 to 4%, failure stress increased by 225% and Chen, F. H. 共1988兲. Foundations on expansive soils, 2nd Ed., Elsevier
failure strain by 50%. On similar lines it was found that the Scientific, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cokca, E. 共2001兲. “Use of class C fly ash for the stabilization of an
stress-strain behavior of expansive clay samples improved
expansive soil.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 127共7兲, 568–573.
with the addition of calcium chloride 共CaCl2兲. When calcium
Desai, I. D., and Oza, B. N. 共1997兲. “Influence of anhydrous calcium
chloride content was increased from 0 to 1%, failure stress
chloride on shear strength of expansive soils.” Proc., 1st Int. Symp. on
increased by 328% and failure strain by 33%. While 4% was
Expansive Soils, HBTI.
the optimum content in the case of lime, 1% was found to be
Evans, P. 共1998兲. “Lime stabilization of black clay soils in Queensland,
the optimum in the case of CaCl2 with reference to both UCS Australia.” Presentation to the National Lime Association Convention,
and CBR. San Diego, Calif.
2. Unconfined compressive strength 共UCS兲 and California Fredlund, D. G., and Rahardjo, H. 共1993兲. Soil mechanics for unsaturated
Bearing Ratio 共CBR兲 of clay-lime mixes increased on addi- soils, Wiley, New York.
tion of RHA. UCS increased by 127% when the lime con- Gallipoli, D., Gens, A., Sharma, R., and Vaunat, J. 共2003兲. “An elasto-
tent was increased from 0 to 4% at a RHA content of plastic model for unsaturated soil incorporating the effects of suction
12%. However, the UCS decreased when lime content was and degree of saturation on mechanical behavior.” Geotechnique,
further increased to 5% at all RHA contents. A RHA content 53共1兲, 123–135.
of 12% was found to be the optimum as UCS decreased at Gambhir, M. L. 共1995兲. Concrete technology, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill,
RHA content higher than 12% for any lime content. CBR New Delhi, India.
increased by 191% when lime content was increased from Gens, A., and Alonso, E. E. 共1992兲. “A framework for the behavior of
0 to 4% at a RHA content of 12%. However, CBR de- unsaturated expansive clays.” Can. Geotech. J., 29, 1013–1032.
creased when lime content was further increased to 5% at Gourley, C. S., Newill, D., and Shreiner, H. D. 共1993兲. “Expansive soils:
all RHA contents. With regard to CBR, 12% also was the TRL’s research strategy.” Proc., 1st Int. Symp. on Engineering Char-
optimum RHA content, as CBR decreased at higher RHA acteristics of Arid Soils.
contents. Holtz, W. G. 共1969兲. “Volume change in expansive clay soils and control

514 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515

 by lime treatment.” Proc., 2nd Int. Research and Engineering Conf.
on Expansive Clay Soils, Texas A&M Univ.
Hoyos, L. R., Puppala, A. J., and Chainuwat, P. 共2004兲. “Dynamic prop-
erties of chemically stabilized sulphate rich clay.” J. Geotech. Geoen-
viron. Eng., 130共2兲, 153–162.
Hunter, D. 共1988兲. “Lime-induced heave in sulfate-bearing clay soils.”
J. Geotech. Engrg., 114共2兲, 150–167.
Kumar, V. 共1996兲. “Fly ash utilization: A mission mode approach.” Ash
ponds and ash disposal systems, Narosa Publishing House, New
Delhi, India.
Lambe, T. W., and Kaplar, T. W. 共1971兲. “Additives for modifying the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology on 05/24/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
frost susceptibility of soils.” Technical Rep. No. 123, Part 1, USA
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.
Lambe, T. W., Kaplar, T. W., and Lambe, T. J. 共1971兲. “Additives for
modifying the frost susceptibility of soils.” Technical Rep. No. 123,
Part 2, USA Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.
Little, D. N. 共1997兲. “Reclamation of caliche base with lime and lime fly
ash structural evaluation.” Proc., Seminar on Reclamation and Recy-
cling, Asphalt Recycling Association.
Lu, N., and Lykos, W. 共2004兲. Unsaturated soil mechanics, Wiley, New
York.
McKeen, R. G. 共1988兲. “Soil characterization using suction measure-
ments.” Proc., 25th Paving and Transportation Conf., Univ. of New
Mexico.
McLaughlin, A. L. 共1984兲. “The performance of civil airport pavement
with lime-cement-fly ash base course.” Rep. No. DOT/FAA/PM-84/10,
Federal Aviation Administration.
Mehta, P. K. 共1986兲. Concrete structure, properties and materials,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Miller, S. P., Kennedy, T. W., and Hudson, W. R. 共1970兲. “Evaluation of
factors affecting the tensile properties of lime-treated materials.”
Research Rep. No. 98-4, Center for Highway Research, Univ. of Texas
at Austin.
Nevels, J. B., Jr. 共2001兲. “Longitudinal cracking of a bicycle trail due
to drying shrinkage.” Proc., 2001 Civil Engineering Conf., ASCE,
Reston, Va., 132–157.
Payá, J., Monzó, J., Borrachero, M. V., Mellado, A., and Ordoñez, L. M.
共2001兲. “Determination of amorphous silica in rice husk ash by rapid
analytical method.” Cem. Concr. Res., 31, 212–231.
Petry, M. T., and Little, N. D. 共1992兲. “Update on sulfate-induced heave
in treated clays: Problematic sulphate levels.” Transportation Re-
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / AUGUST 2008 / 515
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2008, 20(8): 509-515
search Record. 1362, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
51–55.
Phanikumar, B. R. 共2000兲. “Use of fly ash in treating problematic expan-
sive soils.” Proc., Workshop on Environmental Geotechnology, Indian
Geotechnical Society, Hyderabad Chapter, 36–39.
Phanikumar, B. R., and Sharma, R. S. 共2004兲. “Effect of fly ash on engi-
neering properties of expansive soils.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.,
130共7兲, 764–767.
Rao, A. S. 共1984兲. “A study of swelling characteristics and behavior of
expansive soils.” Ph.D. thesis, Kakatiya Univ., Warangal, India.
Rollings, M. P., and Rollings, R. S. 共1996兲. “Geotechnical materials in
construction.” McGraw-Hill, New York.
Rollings, R. S., Burkes, J. P., and Rollings, M. P. 共1999兲. “Sulfate attack
on cement-stabilized sand.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 125共5兲,
364–372.
Sabuni, B. W., Syagga, P. M., Dulo, S. O., and Kamau, G. N. 共2003兲.
“Rice husk ash cement—An alternative pozzolana cement for Kenyan
building industry.” J. Civ. Eng. JKUAT, 8, 13–26.
Sankar, N. B. 共1989兲. “Use of lime-soil piles for in-situ stabilization
of black cotton soils.” Proc., Indian Geotechnical Conf., Vol. 1,
149–153.
Sharma, R. S. 共1998兲. “Mechanical behavior of unsaturated highly expan-
sive clay.” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Oxford, Oxford, U.K.
Sharma, R. S., and Wheeler, S. J. 共2000兲. “Behavior of an unsaturated
highly expansive clay during cycles of wetting and drying.” Proc.,
Asian Conf. on Unsaturated Soils, 721–726.
Thompson, M. R. 共1969a兲. “Lime reactivity of Illinois soils.” J. Soil
Mech. and Found. Div., 92.
Thompson, M. R. 共1969b兲. “Lime-treated soils for pavement construc-
tion.” J. Highw. Div., 191–217.
Tulloch, W. S., II., Hudson, W. R., and Kennedy, T. W. 共1970兲. “Evalu-
ation and prediction of tensile properties of lime-treated materials.”
Research Rep. No. 98–5, Center for Highway Research, Univ. of
Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
Walsh, K. D., Houston, W. N., and Houston, S. L. 共1993兲. “Evaluation of
in-place wetting using soil suction measurements.” J. Geotech.
Engrg., 119共5兲, 862–873.
Wheeler, S. J., Sharma, R. S., and Buisson, M. S. R. 共2003兲. “Coupling of
hydraulic hysteresis and stress-strain behavior in unsaturated soils.”
Geotechnique, 53共1兲, 41–54.