African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and

Development

ISSN: 2042-1338 (Print) 2042-1346 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rajs20

Stabilization of lateritic soil with pulverized palm

kernel shell (PPKS) for road construction

Adeyemi Adeboje, Williams Kupolati, Emmanuel Sadiku, Julius Ndambuki,

Chewe Kambole & Oladapo Ogunleye

To cite this article: Adeyemi Adeboje, Williams Kupolati, Emmanuel Sadiku, Julius Ndambuki,
Chewe Kambole & Oladapo Ogunleye (2017) Stabilization of lateritic soil with pulverized palm
kernel shell (PPKS) for road construction, African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and
Development, 9:1, 55-60, DOI: 10.1080/20421338.2016.1262100

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2016.1262100

Published online: 14 Dec 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 24

View related articles

View Crossmark data

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

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rajs20

Download by: [The UC San Diego Library] Date: 18 May 2017, At: 04:40
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 2017
Vol. 9, No. 1, 55–60, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2016.1262100
© 2017 African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development

Stabilization of lateritic soil with pulverized palm kernel shell (PPKS) for road construction
Adeyemi Adeboje1*, Williams Kupolati1, Emmanuel Sadiku2, Julius Ndambuki1, Chewe Kambole 1
and
Oladapo Ogunleye3
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa
2
Department of Chemical, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa
3
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria
*Corresponding author email: AdebojeAo@tut.ac.za

This paper discusses the stabilization of lateritic soil with pulverized palm kernel shell (PPKS), an agricultural waste, for
road construction. Samples of lateritic soil with the addition of 5.00–12.50% PPKS at an increment of 2.50% were prepared
for index and strength tests. The lateritic soil had a liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index of 36.00, 26.18 and 9.82%
respectively. The control sample with 0% PPKS has low plasticity and may not be liable to shrinkage or cracking. The
specific gravity (SG) of the lateritic soil and PPKS are 2.67 and 2.84 respectively. Maximum dry density (MDD) of the
lateritic soil increased from 1.76–1.94 kN/m3 for 0–12.50% PPKS. There was a reduction in the optimum moisture
content (OMC) of the lateritic soil from 14.69–12.65% for 5–12.50% PPKS. Addition of 12.5% PPKS increased the
soaked California bearing ratio (CBR) of lateritic soil by 121% from 24–53%. The unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) value increased from 46.69–127.98 kN/m² by 174% for 0–12.50% PPKS. The strength properties of the lateritic
soil improved with the addition of PPKS.

Keywords: California bearing ratio, lateritic soil, pulverized palm kernel shell, specific gravity, stabilization, strength

Introduction aggregates for light and dense concretes for construction

The need for adequate provision of transportation infra-
structure and maintenance of the existing infrastructure
has increased with an increase in population. Highway
engineers are faced with the challenges of providing suit-
able materials for the construction of highways (Adeboje
et al. 2013a; Adedeji et al. 2014). Available soils may
not possess adequate engineering properties for highway
construction, this has prompted continuous research to
improve the engineering properties of soils for road
construction.
The need to utilize viable construction material that
is economically and readily available has informed the
use of lateritic soil for various construction purposes in
Nigeria and other African countries. Lateritic soils are
available in cheap and commercial quantities for con-
struction of road layers in Nigeria (Adeboje, Olutaiwo,
and Adedimila 2013b). Meaningful research is required
prior to the use of lateritic soil for constructing airfield
runways, roads and railway sleepers. Such investigations
include the determination of the classification and
strength properties of the lateritic soil in order to deter-
mine its suitability for road construction (Laa et al.
2003). The structure, moisture content, compaction and
permeability characteristics are important to determine
the suitability or usability of a soil for construction
work (Mallick, Bismal, and Patel 2009).
The effective use of agricultural waste products as
materials for improving the strength and other properties
of soil for road and structural construction purposes has
been well documented in the literature (Alhassan 2008;
Okafor and Okonkwo 2009; Agbede and Joel 2011;
Osinubi, Oyelakin, and Eberemu, 2011; Adama and
Jimoh 2012; Buari, Ademola, and Ayegbokiki 2013;
Uche and Ahmed 2013; Rahman et al. 2014). Research
has shown that palm kernel shell (PKS) can be used as
purposes and to improve poor soil for road construction
(Amu et al. 2008). However, the only perceptible use of
PKS is as a fuel source for villagers, in Nigeria and
other African countries (Adebayo 2012).
The hard endocarp surrounding the seeds of palm
kernel, usually known as PKS, is obtained from palm
kernel fruits. It is obtained as crushed or threshed pieces
after forceful removal of the seeds from the palm kernel
fruits for the purpose of palm wine production (Olutoge
2010). Palm Kernel Shell can be utilized as lightweight
aggregate in the production of lightweight concrete. It
can also be used as aggregates with sizes ranging from
2 mm to 5 mm after effective removal of dust and fibres
(Alengaram, Al Muhit, and Jumaat 2013).
The utilization of industrially manufactured soil-
improving additives has kept the cost of construction of
stabilized roads high. This has continued to deter develop-
ing and underdeveloped nations of the world from provid-
ing accessible roads to their rural dwellers who often
constitute the majority of the population and are mainly
dependent on agriculture (Alhassan and Mustapha 2007).
Soil stabilization is any treatment (including compaction)
applied to a soil to improve its strength and reduce its vul-
nerability to water. If the treated soil is able to withstand the
stresses imposed on it by traffic under all weather con-
ditions without excessive deformation, then it is generally
regarded as stable (O’Flaherty 2002).
Adebayo (2012) evaluated palm kernel shell (PKS) as
aggregate for the production of concrete and lateritic
blocks. The study revealed that lateritic blocks with PKS
and laterite proportions of 1:4 were 15% stronger than
laterite blocks without PKS. However, replacement of
coarse aggregates in concrete with PKS caused reduction
of the strength of the concrete by half its compressive
strength. The study concluded that though PKS cannot

African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development is co-published by Taylor & Francis and NISC (Pty) Ltd
56 Adeboje, Kupolati, Sadiku, Ndambuki, Kambole and Ogunleye
replace coarse aggregates for concrete production, its
partial replacement of lateritic soil improves the strength
of lateritic blocks.
A study by Mohammed, Afolabi, and Umoru (2014)
examined the effects of substitution of fine aggregates in
asphalt concrete with crushed shells of palm kernel
using bitumen content of 6%. The asphalt concrete con-
sisted 66% fine aggregates, 14% coarse aggregates not
more than 12 mm and 14% coarse aggregates not more
than 20 mm in size respectively. Fine aggregate was
replaced with crushed palm kernel shell in proportions
of 0, 10, 30, 50 and 70% by weight. The research revealed
that 10 and 50% additions of crushed palm kernel shell by
weight of fine aggregate can be used for the production of
asphalt concrete for road work.
Olutaiwo and Owolabi (2015) investigated the effects
of palm kernel shell (PKS) as a partial replacement for
coarse aggregates in the design and production of hot
mix asphalt (HMA). Palm kernel shell (PKS) was substi-
tuted for coarse aggregate at 0, 10, 30, 50, 70 and 100%
by weight of coarse aggregates with sizes ranging from
4–8 mm. The study revealed that 50% PKS with 5.7%
bitumen content produced viable and adequate HMA suit-
able for binder course for road construction. The study
demonstrated the suitability of using PKS for possible pro-
duction of HMA binder for low to medium travelled roads.
Adetoro and Adam (2015) evaluated the influence of
groundnut shell ash (GSA), palm kernel shell ash
(PKSA) and saw dust ash (SDA) on the engineering prop-
erties of Ido Ekiti soils. The soils were classified as slightly
plastic granular sandy or clayey material, A-2-4 in line
with AASHTO (1986) specifications. Addition of both
GSA and PKSA improved the engineering properties of
the soil while SDA did not.
Adetoro and Adekanmi (2015) examined the effects of
SDA and PKSA on the geotechnical properties of soils in
Gbonyin local government, Ekiti State. Though the soils
in their natural form were classified as excellent to good,
addition of SDA and PKSA reduced the MDD of the
soils. SDA and PKSA increased the fine contents of the
soils and thus the soils would not be suitable for construc-
tion with the addition of SDA and PPKS unless an
additional means of compacting the soil were devised.
Adetoro and Ayeni (2015) investigated the stabilization
potentials of PKSA and SDA on the engineering properties
of Ekiti State soils. The study revealed that though the soil
samples have high clay content, they can be stabilized with
both PKSA and SDA. It was observed that PKSA and SDA
showed potential as cheap stabilizers for the modification
of the soils in the study area. Utilization of PKSA and
SDA for soil stabilization can reduce haphazard disposal
of agricultural and industrial waste products.
The utilization of pulverized palm kernel shell
(PPKS), an agricultural waste, for highway construction
will considerably reduce the cost of construction. Further-
more, it will reduce environmental hazards attributed to
utilization of cement and other chemical materials for
road construction works. Though the production and util-
ization of Portland cement for construction works in large
quantities may produce high quantities of carbon dioxide
(CO2), the use of cementitious materials such as PPKS
may reduce the overall environmental impact of cement
and other processed or chemical materials on the environ-
ment. The aim of this research is to investigate the effects
of pulverized palm kernel shell on the stabilization of
lateritic soil for road construction.
Materials and methods
Lateritic soil
Disturbed samples of lateritic soil were collected from a
borrow pit near Jesus City, Shagamu, Ogun State,
Nigeria (latitude 6.833°N and longitude 3.650°E). It is
classified as A-2-6 reddish brown clayey soil in line
with American Association of State Highway and Trans-
portation Officials (AASHTO 2001). The location of the
source of the lateritic soil is shown on the map of the
study area (Figure 1).
Pulverized palm kernel shell (PPKS)
The palm kernel shell (PKS) used for this research was
obtained from Kuto market, Abeokuta, Ogun State,
Nigeria (latitude 7.136°N and longitude 3.351°E) as
shown on the map in Figure 1. Pulverized palm kernel
shell (PPKS) results from grinding or pulverization of
the PKS to fine particles. PPKS was added to lateritic
soil from 5–12.5% in increments of 2.5% to evaluate its
effects on the soil. An improvement in the strength of
the soil to above minimum specification qualified unsuita-
ble soil for use as road material. This is because the stabil-
ization of the soil due to the addition of PPKS guarantees
stability of the road and makes it resistant to failure due to
load application.
Lateritic soil index properties
Index and strength properties of the lateritic soil samples
and the corresponding effects of addition of PPKS
between 5 and 12.5% in increments of 2.5% were deter-
mined at the Soil Mechanics Laboratory of the Department
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria. Atterberg limits were determined
in line with BS 1377-2 (1990a), and the lateritic soil
samples were passed through a selected set of sieves to
obtain the particle size distribution. The values obtained
for the liquid limit (LL) and plastic limit (PL) gave the
plasticity index (PI). The LL, PL, PI and specific gravity
(SG) of the soil were used to classify the soil. The quantity
of soil passing through each of the selected set of sieves is
shown in Table 1 while Table 2 summarizes the index
properties of the lateritic soil.
Compaction
Air dried and lightly crushed soil passing through 19 mm
and retained on 4.75 mm BS sieves was prepared and
varying proportions of PPKS added from 5–12.5% in
increments of 2.5%. Compaction was done in five layers
with compactive effort of 25 blows of a 4.5 kg hammer
falling through a height of 450 mm in consonance with
BS 1377-4 (1990b).
California bearing ratio (CBR)
The CBR test was conducted to determine the strength of
the soil or the bearing capacity of the soil as a material for
 African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 57

Figure 1: Map of Nigeria showing Shagamu and Kuto, Abeokuta, Ogun State.

highway construction. Oven dried lateritic soil samples
were mixed with 5–12.5% PPKS in increments of 2.5%
and put in a CBR mould in three layers with each layer
compacted with 55 blows using the 4.5 kg hammer
falling through a height of 450 mm. The compacted soil
materials were soaked for four days. The compacted soil
and the mould were weighed and placed under a CBR
machine in order to obtain the values of the California
bearing ratio (CBR).
were used to prepare specimens of lateritic soil for the
test. Each sample was compacted based on the predeter-
mined optimum moisture contents and maximum dry den-
sities for soil samples mixed with 5–12.5% PPKS in
increments of 2.5%. Each soil sample was subjected to a
steadily increasing axial compressive force until failure
occurred using the load frame method, where an assem-
blage of triaxial compression machine uses uniaxial com-
pression, without applying lateral pressure.

Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) Results and discussion

The uncured unconfined compressive strength test was Index properties of the lateritic soil
conducted on stabilized lateritic soil samples. Cylindrical This study considered the index properties of lateritic soil
split moulds with 38 mm diameter and 76 mm height with the effect of pulverized palm kernel shell (at 0, 5, 7.5,

Table 1: Sieve analysis of lateritic soil.

Sieve sizes (mm) Weight retained (grams) % retained % passing

19 0 0 100
10 14.58 5.94 94.06
5 42.15 17.16 76.90
2.36 28.59 11.64 65.26
1.18 22.1 9.00 56.26
0.6 25.73 10.48 45.78
0.425 17.4 7.09 38.70
0.3 24.81 10.10 28.59
0.15 45.83 18.66 9.93
0.075 24.39 9.93 0.00
58 Adeboje, Kupolati, Sadiku, Ndambuki, Kambole and Ogunleye
Table 2: Index properties of lateritic soil.
% PPKS added to lateritic soil 0 5.0
LL (%) 36.0
PL (%) 26.18
PI (%) 9.82
SG of lateritic soil SG of PPKS
2.67 2.84
AASHTO classification:
A-2-6
Soil type:
silty or clayey gravel and sand
10 and 12.5% by weight of lateritic soil) as shown in
Table 2. It can be deduced from Figure 2 that the coeffi-
cient of curvature (Cc) of the lateritic soil sample is 0.35
which does not satisfy the range of 1and 3 specified for
well-graded gravel. In the same vein, the coefficient of
uniformity (Cu) is 10.63 which is greater than 6,
(maximum specified for well-graded sand). Therefore,
the soil is classified as poorly graded sand (A-2-6). Less
than 35% of the soil sample passed through sieve
0.0075 mm (as shown in Table 1); liquid limit (LL) is
less than 40% and plastic limit (PI) is greater than 11%
(Table 2). The SG of the lateritic soil is 2.67 which is con-
sidered good and satisfactory as it ranged between 2.0 and
3.0 specified for clayey soils (Amu, Bamisaye, and Komo-
lafe 2011). The lateritic soil in its natural form has LL of
36%. This increased to 38% upon addition of 5% PPKS
but reduced from 37.8% to 36.2% at 7.5–12.5% addition
of PPKS. Liquid limits above 35% show high plasticity
indicating that the soil is susceptible to shrinkage or crack-
ing. This soil may require treatment before being con-
sidered suitable for subgrade construction. The liquid
limit and plasticity index were adjudged satisfactory
according to AASHTO specifications. Though the test
reveals that addition of 5% PPKS increased the LL of
the soil, addition of PPKS from and above 7.5% reduced
the LL of the soil.
Effects of PPKS on the compaction characteristics of
lateritic soil
Table 3 shows the compaction characteristics of lateritic
soil with addition of PPKS at 2.5% increments from 5–
12.5%. The result shows that MDD increased with
Figure 2: The particle size distribution of lateritic soil.
7.5 10.0 12.5
38.0 37.8 36.5 36.2
26.52 25.94 24.75 24.21
11.48 11.86 11.75 11.99
corresponding increase in the PPKS content (0–12.5%)
from 1.76–1.94 kN/m3. The OMC on the other hand
increased from 14.35–14.69 at (0–5% PPKS) but
reduced consistently from 14.69–12.65% as PPKS was
added at 7.5–12.5%. Adeboje, Olutaiwo, and Adedimila
(2013b) classified laterite soil in line with specification
of O’flaherty (2002). From this, the laterite soil considered
in this research can be grouped as a sandy clay soil having
MDD values between 1.76 and 2.165 Mg/m3 and OMC
values ranging between 6 and 15%. The increment in
the value of maximum dry density (MDD) as the PPKS
contents increases can be traced to replacement of lateritic
soil with PPKS which has higher SG of 2.84 compared to
the lower SG of lateritic soil which is 2.67. The OMC
however decreased as the PPKS content increased owing
to the absorption of water by the PPKS particles which
led to gain in strength of the lateritic soil. Increase in
MDD and a corresponding decrease in OMC indicates
improvements in the engineering properties of the soil.
This implies that addition of PPKS increases the strength
of the lateritic soil.
Effects of PPKS on California bearing ratio (CBR) of
lateritic soil
The results of the soaked California bearing ratio (CBR)
tests on expansive soil treated with different percentages
of pulverized palm kernel shell (PPKS) are presented in
Table 4. The results show that an increase in the percen-
tage of PPKS increased the soaked CBR of the soil. The
soaked CBR increased from 24–53% at 0–12.5% PPKS.
The overall effect of the PPKS on the soaked CBR of
lateritic soil presents a substantial improvement in the
strength of the soil as a road material. The results show
that PPKS can be used to stabilize lateritic soil. The
minimum CBR specification for subgrade and subbase
layers of the highway surface is 5 and 30% respectively.
This research establishes that addition of PPKS as a
material for stabilization of lateritic soil for use as sub-
grade or subbase will be effective especially in areas that
are not susceptible to effects of groundwater or surface
water.
Effects of PPKS on unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) of lateritic soil
The results of unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of
lateritic soil stabilized with PPKS are presented in
Table 5. It shows consistent increase in the UCS of lateritic
soil with increase in PPKS contents of 0, 5, 7.5, 10 and
 African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 59
Table 3: Compaction properties of lateritic soil with addition of PPKS.
% PPKS added to lateritic soil 0 5.0
MDD (kN/m3) 1.76
OMC (%) 14.35
Table 4: CBR of lateritic soil with addition of PPKS.
% PPKS added to lateritic soil 0 5.0
Soaked CBR (%) 24
Table 5: Effects of PPKS on UCS of laterite soil.
% PHB added to lateritic soil 0 5.0
UCS (kN/m2) 46.69
12.5%. The desired improvement of the UCS of the lateri-
tic soil was achieved. The UCS values obtained were
46.69, 59.52, 74.26, 91.27 and 127.08 for PPKS at 0, 5,
7.5, 10 and 12.5% respectively.
The noticed increase in the UCS results owing to the
addition of PPKS may be due to proper blending of the
matrix interface between the lateritic soil and the PPKS
particles. This enhances strength development for the
lateritic soil and PPKS mixture. There is good adhesion
between the soil and PPKS thereby promoting an increase
in strength. There is better mixing, dispersion and likely
diffusion of the PPKS particles within the lateritic soil
aggregates thereby leading to the stabilization process.
Suitability of pulverized palm kernel shell for
stabilization of lateritic soil
The specific gravity (SG) of the pulverized palm kernel
shell (PPKS) is 2.84. The high SG value of the PPKS
impacts positively to improve the compaction and strength
characteristics of lateritic soil. This scenario differs from
the work Mohammed, Afolabi, and Umoru (2014) where
the SG of fine sand (4.34) is higher than that of crushed
palm kernel shell (CPKS) which is 2.25. The difference
in the values of the SG showed that the crushed palm
kernel shell is lighter than that of the sand.
Reduction in the PL of lateritic soil as the PPKS
content increased showed reduced susceptibility of the
soil to shrinkage. Increase in the MDD with a correspond-
ing decrease in OMC of the lateritic soil as the PPKS
content increased from 5–12.5% implied reduced suscep-
tibility to settlement and water penetration of the resulting
PPKS-lateritic soil mix.
Both the CBR and UCS of the lateritic soil increased
with an increase in PPKS content. This implies that the
addition of PPKS increases the strength of lateritic soil.
Generally, PPKS has positive effects on the engineer-
ing properties of lateritic soil, similar to the effects of fly
ash on lateritic soil as shown by Amadi (2010). This
research shows that the addition of 5–12.5% PPKS to
lateritic soil improved the strength and reduced deform-
ability as well as the susceptibility of water infiltration
into the resulting PPKS-lateritic soil blend. This further
implies that PPKS may be used to stabilize lateritic soils
meant for road construction.
7.5 10.0 12.5
1.82 1.83 1.85 1.94
14.69 14.53 13.78 12.65
7.5 10.0 12.5
25 31 48 53
7.5 10.0 12.5
59.52 74.26 91.27 127.08
Conclusions
The effects of pulverized palm kernel shell (PPKS) on the
stabilization of lateritic soil show that:
(1) The engineering properties of the lateritic soil used in
this study were enhanced.
(2) Addition of PPKS to the lateritic soil used in this study
resulted in a substantial increase in the values of MDD
from 1.76 to 1.94 kN/m3 with additions of 0–12.5%
PPKS. The OMC of the lateritic soil reduced from
14.69–12.65% for 5–12.5% addition of PPKS.
(3) The CBR values for the lateritic soil used in this study
increased remarkably with increase in PPKS. Addition
of 12.5% PPKS increased the soaked CBR of lateritic
soil by 121%.
(4) The strength of the lateritic soil used in this study
increased with a corresponding increase of the PPKS
contents. The UCS value increased by 174%.
(5) It is recommended that further investigation is conducted
on the effects of higher PPKS contents on lateritic soil.
(6) PPKS may be further evaluated with other additives to
determine their effects on lateritic soil as a material for
road construction.
Supplemental data
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at
doi:10.1080/20421338.2016.1262100.
Funding
The authors greatly acknowledge the financial support received
from the management of Tshwane University of Technology,
Pretoria, South Africa.
Notes on contributors
Adeyemi Adeboje. D.Tech. candidate of Transportation Engin-
eering in the Department of Civil Engineering, Tshwane Univer-
sity of Technology (TUT), Pretoria, South Africa. Research
interests: highway safety engineering, pavement design, pave-
ment material engineering and civil engineering materials.
Williams Kupolati. Dr. Senior lecturer in the Department of
Civil Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology (TUT),
Pretoria, South Africa. Research interests: sustainable and appro-
priate use of waste materials for civil engineering infrastructure,
intelligent transportation management, environmental and struc-
tural systems, application of artificial neural network, technopre-
neursip in civil engineering infrastructure.
60 Adeboje, Kupolati, Sadiku, Ndambuki, Kambole and Ogunleye
Rotimi Sadiku. Prof. at the Department of Chemical, Metallur-
gical and Materials Engineering, Tshwane University of Technol-
ogy (TUT), Pretoria, South Africa. Research interests: X-ray
physics and rheology of polymers and polymer composites.
Julius Ndambuki. Prof. at the Department of Civil Engineering,
Tshwane University of Technology (TUT), Pretoria, South Africa.
Research interests: water resources management, optimization,
multi-objective programming, decision support systems, stochas-
tic optimization, water quality and quantity modelling.
Oladapo Ogunleye. B.Sc. graduate of the Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, University of Lagos
(UNILAG), Lagos, Nigeria. Research interests: pavement
material engineering and civil engineering materials.
Chewe Kambole. D.Tech. candidate of Materials Engineering in
the Department of Civil Engineering, Tshwane University of
Technology (TUT), Pretoria, South Africa. Research interests:
civil engineering construction materials, pavement material
engineering and geotechnics.
ORCID
Chewe Kambole http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6795-6811
References
AASHTO. 1986. Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.
Washington, DC.: American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials.
AASHTO. 2001. Standard Specifications for Transportation
Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing. 21st ed.
Washington, DC.: American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials.
Adama, A. Y., and Y. A. Jimoh. 2012. “Effect of Locust Bean
Pod Ash on Strength Properties of Weak Soils.” AU J.T.
16 (1): 27–34.
Adebayo, O. 2012. “Assessment of Palm Kernel Shells as
Aggregate in Concrete and Laterite Blocks.” Journal of
Engineering Studies and Research 18 (2): 88–93.
Adeboje, A. O., O. S. Olaniyan, O. S. Oladeji, and O. M.
Osuolale. 2013. “Engineering Properties of Unused and
Cement Stabilized Used Laterite Soils.” USEP-RICE:
Journal of Research Information in Civil Engineering,
University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria 10 (1): 272–283.
Adeboje, A. O., A. O. Olutaiwo, and A. S. Adedimila. 2013.
“Assessment of Road Accidents in Nigeria (A Case Study
of Lagos-Ibadan Expressway).” NSE Technical Transaction
47 (2): 1–10. April–June.
Adedeji, O. A., E. M. Olafiaji, F. K. Omole, J. A. Olanibi, and
Yusuff Lukman. 2014. “An Assessment of the Impact of
Road Transport on Rural Development: A Case Study of
Obokun Local Government Area of Osun State, Nigeria.”
British Journal of Environmental Sciences 2 (1): 34–48.
Adetoro, A. E., and J. O. Adam. 2015. “Comparative Analyses of
Ekiti State Soil Stabilized with Different Additives.” Asian
Journal of Science and Technology 6 (12): 2054–2058.
Adetoro, A. E., and S. J. Adekanmi. 2015. “Potentials of Palm
Kernel Shell Ash and Sawdust Ashes for Stabilization of
Gbonyin Local Government Area Soil, Nigeria.” Journal
of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology
(JMEST) 2 (8): 2315–2319.
Adetoro, A. E., and I. S. Ayeni. 2015. “Effects of Locally
Available Additives on Geotechnical Properties of Ijero
Local Government Soil, Ekiti State, Nigeria.” Journal of
Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology
(JMEST) 2 (8): 2994–2997.
Agbede, I. O., and M. Joel. 2011. “Effect of Rice Husk Ash
(RHA) on the Properties of Ibaji Burnt Clay Bricks.”
American Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 2
(4): 274–277.
Alengaram, U. J., B. A. Al Muhit, and M. Z. Jumaat. 2013.
“Utilization of Oil Palm Kernel Shell as Lightweight
Aggregate in Concrete – A Review.” Construction and
Building Materials 38: 161–172.
Alhassan, M. 2008. “Potentials of Rice Husk Ash for Soil
Stabilization.” AU J.T 12 (2): 115–120.
Alhassan, M., and M. Mustapha. 2007. “Effect of Rice Husk Ash
on Cement Stabilized Laterite.” Leonardo Electronic journal
of Practice and Technologies 11: 47–58.
Amadi, A. 2010. “Evaluation of Changes in Index Properties of
Lateritic Soil Stabilized with Fly Ash.” Leonardo Electronic
Journal of Practices & Technologies (17): 69–78. Accessed
25 February 2016, http://lejpt.academicdirect.org/A17/069_
078.pdf
Amu, O. O., J. B. Adeyeri, E. W. Oduma, and O. A. Fayokun.
2008. “Stabilization Characteristics of Lime on Palm
Kernel Blended Lateritic Soil.” Trends in Applied Sciences
Research 3: 182–188.
Amu, O. O., O. F. Bamisaye, and I. A. Komolafe. 2011. “The
Suitability and Lime Stabilization Requirements of Some
Lateritic Soil Samples as Pavement Construction
Materials.” International Journal of Pure Applied Science
Technology 2 (1): 29–46.
British Standards Institute (BSI). 1990a. “BS 1377-2: 1990 Soils
for Civil Engineering Purposes – Part 2: Classification tests”,
1–23. London: BSI.
British Standards Institute (BSI). 1990b. “BS 1377-4: 1990 Soils
for Civil Engineering Purposes – Part 4: Compaction-related
tests”, 1–22. London: BSI.
Buari, T. A., S. A. Ademola, and S. T. Ayegbokiki. 2013.
“Characteristics Strength of Groundnut Shell ash (GSA)
and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) Blended Concrete in
Nigeria.” IOSR Journal of Engineering (IOSRJEN) 3 (7):
1–7.
Laa, W. Y., S. Surachai, C. Somwang, W. Pansak, H. Somyot,
and W. Ladda. 2003. “Engineering Properties of Lateritic
Soils From Khon Kaen and Its Vicinity, Thailand.” Journal
of Southeast Asian Earth Sciences 8 (1–4): 549–556.
Mallick, K., K. B. Bismal, and N. K. Patel. 2009. “Estimating
Volumetric Surface Moisture Content for Cropped Soils
using a Soil Wetness Index Based on Surface Temperature
and NDVI.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 149 (8):
1327–1342.
Mohammed, H., K. O. Afolabi, and L. E. Umoru. 2014.
“Crushed Palm Kernel Shell as a Partial Replacement of
Fine Aggregate in Asphaltic Concrete.” International
Journal of materials, Methods and Technologies 2 (1): 1–5.
O’flaherty, C. A. 2002. Highways: “The Location, Design,
Construction and Maintenance of Road Construction”,4th
ed). London: Butterworth – Heinemann.
Okafor, F. O., and U. N. Okonkwo. 2009. “Effects of Rice Husk
Ash on Some Geotechnical Properties of Lateritic Soil.”
Nigerian Journal of Technology 28 (1): 46–52.
Olutaiwo, A., and A. Owolabi. 2015. “Investigation of the Effects
of Partial Replacement of Coarse Aggregate with Graded
Palm Kernel Shell in Asphaltic Binder Course.” British
Journal of Applied Science & Technology 10 (3): 1–13.
Olutoge, F. A. 2010. “Investigation on Saw Dust and Palm
Kernel Shells as Aggregate Replacement.” ARPN Journal
of Engineering and Applied Sciences 5 (4): 7–13.
Osinubi, K. J., M. A. Oyelakin, and A. O. Eberemu,. 2011.
“Improvement of Black Cotton Soil with Ordinary
Portland Cement - Locust Bean Waste Ash Blend.” EJGE
16: 619–627.
Rahman, Z. A., H. Ashari, A. R. Sahibin, L. Tukimat, and W. M.
Razi. 2014. “Effect of Rice Husk Ash Addition on
Geotechnical Characteristics of Treated Residual Soil.”
American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural &
Environmental Sciences 14 (12): 1368–1377.
Uche, O. A. U., and J. A. Ahmed. 2013. “Effect of Millet Husk
Ash on Index Properties of Marginal Lateritic Soil.” Nigeria
Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences 2 (5):
365–369.