Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Integrating lignosulphonate and hydrated lime for the amelioration of

expansive soil: A sustainable waste solution
Nauman Ijaz a, *, Fuchu Dai a, Lingchao Meng b, Zia ur Rehman c, Hongqiu Zhang b
a
College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, 100124, China
b
College of Geosciences and Engineering, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou, 450011, China
c
State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A sustainable solution to utilize the paper/wood industry waste as a construction material is presented in
Received 21 May 2019 this article. A novel technique of coupling lignosulphonate (LS) with hydrated lime (LM) is adopted to
Received in revised form mitigate the short comings of lignosulphonate as an expansive soil stabilizer. A detailed experimental
23 September 2019
study was performed on the proposed composite binary admixture (CBA) to ameliorate the geotechnical
Accepted 3 January 2020
Available online 7 January 2020
properties of expansive soil. The optimum binary admixture (OBA) was determined on the basis of
plasticity index. For the better apprehension, and further verification of optimum binary admixture, the
Handling editor: Panos Seferlis performance of lignosulphonate was individually assessed at various percentages (0.4%, 0.875% and 2%)
and in combination with different percentages of lime (2.625%, 3.82%, 5%, 6.5% and 9%). Various
Keywords: geotechnical properties, such as plasticity, swelling, shrinkage, strength and hydraulic conductivity were
Sustainable waste solution analyzed based on the test results. Stabilization mechanism was assesed by X-ray diffraction (XRD) and
Lignosulphonate scanning electrone microscope (SEM). Results showed that using composite binary admixture as a sta-
Soil stabilization bilizer exhibits better amelioration of geotechnical properties of expansive soil than using lignosulph-
Composite binary admixture
onate alone. Whereas, the optimum value of the composite binary admixture was determined to be 3.5%
Mineralogical changes
to adequately stabilize the expansive soil. During the stabilization process, the intrinsic structure of clay
mineral was observed to be destructed and resulted in the formation of a more stable structure, owing to
the ability of the added admixture to trigger the intermolecular interaction and chemical reaction with
the clay minerals. Overall, lignosulphonate addition reduces the lime consumption in expansive soil
stabilization and also provides a sustainable solution in curtailing the industrial waste.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Expansive/swelling soils are considered to be the major prob-
lematic soil; which are mainly comprised of strong hydrophilic clay
mineral group i.e. smectite (montmorillonite), which is held
responsible for swelling-shrinkage behavior due to moisture vari-
ation. This swell-shrinkage behavior can cause considerable
distress and serious damages to the civil engineering structures
built on them or with them (Ackroyd and Husain, 1986; Mitchell
and Soga, 2005). As per literature, the houses destroyed by
expansive soil are on 10 million square meter land causing an
economic loss of one billion US dollar annually in China alone (Liao
* Corresponding author. College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Beijing
University of Technology, Beijing, China.
E-mail address: nauman_ijaz99@hotmail.com (N. Ijaz).
et al., 1990; Li et al., 1992; Shi et al., 2002). The peculiar behavior of
expansive soil make it unfit for the direct implication in pragmatic
soil-structure systems (Suhatril et al., 2019; Momenzadeh et al.,
2018). Either such kind of soils are needed to be excavated and
replaced or their soil properties should be altered to meet the
specific engineering requirements (Attoh-Okine, 1995; Vali et al.,
2019). However, the economical constraints restrict the geotech-
nical engineers to alter in-situ soil properties via stabilization in
comparison with soil replacement (Buhler and Cerato, 2007;
Hussey et al., 2010).
Number of typical stabilizers such as hydrated lime, Portland
cement, asphalt and petroleum sulfonate, etc. are generally used to
improve the physical and mechanical properties of expansive soils
(Nalbantoglu, 2004; Nguyen et al., 2014; Hataf et al., 2018; Cheng
et al., 2018a; Alrubaye et al., 2016; Al-TaieAsmaa et al., 2016).
Among these hydrated lime is most commonly used stabilizer all
around the globe, due to its better workability with clay minerals

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.119985
0959-6526/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985
(Holtz, 1969; Rao and Thyagaraj, 2003; Al-Mukhtar et al., 2010; Jha
and Sivapullaiah, 2015; Mallela et al., 2004). Different studies have
been conducted to understand the stabilization mechanism asso-
ciated with lime addition. Lime stabilized expansive soil undergoes
four basic reactions; first three reactions i.e. cation exchange,
flocculation/agglomeration, and carbonation are considered as
instantaneous reactions which are lead by fourth long term
pozzolanic reaction (Eades and Grim, 1960; Bell, 1996; Boardman
and GlendinningRogers, 2001). Lime in the presence of adequate
amount of water creates a high pH environment which break down
the clay particles; released SiO
2
2
3 and Al2O3 ions which react with
Caþ2 ions resulting in the formation of calcium silicate hydrate
(CSH) and calcium aluminium hydrate (CAH) which are cementi-
tious product and responsible for long term strength gain (Jha and
Sivapullaiah, 2015; Eades and Grim, 1960; Boardman and
GlendinningRogers, 2001). However, the excess usage of such sta-
bilizers considerably increase the construction cost (Seco et al.,
2011; Cheng et al., 2018b; Srikanth Reddy et al., 2018; Dang et al.,
2016). Therefore, there is a need to find a comprehensive and
low-cost stabilizer such as viable industrial waste material, which
could reduce the lime consumption (Seco et al., 2011; Cheng et al.,
2018b; Gandini. and Belgacem, 2008).
Lignosulphonate (LS) is a lignin-based organic polymer,
extracted as a waste by-product of wood/paper processing industry,
with an estimated global production around 50 Mt (Bajpai, 2016), it
could pose a serious issue on its disposal. Thus, it is always desirable
to find a viable and sustainable solution to dispose of such waste
product. Therefore, the authors are intending to find a more
effective and sustainable solution to use lignosulphonate as a sta-
bilizer in improving the geotechnical properties of the expansive
soils. Moreover, being a world largest paper producing country, LS
is abundantly available in China (Kong et al., 2017). As per literature,
China produces approximately 26% of total paper and board around
the world (Kong et al., 2017, 2014. Global Paper, 2014). Such a high
production of paper obviously lead to a high generation of paper/
wood industrial waste; thus, here it could be a cost-effective and
sustainable choice for stabilization of expansive soil.
Some of the past studies have documented the improvement of
various geotechnical properties of different soils via lignosulpho-
nate alone. However, these studies were mainly focused on silty
sand, silt clayey soil and low plastic clays (Puppala and
Hanchanloet, 1999; Zhang et al., 2017, 2018; Indraratna et al.,
2013; Athukorala et al., 2013; Chen and Indraratna, 2014). Only a
few studies on expansive soils were documented in the literature
(Alazigha et al., 2016). In a study conducted on expansive soils, 2%
LS addition reduced the swelling potential from 6% to 4.6%; while
swell pressure reduced from 105 kPa to 84 kPa (Alazigha et al.,
2016). However, the soil was still remained prone to potential
swelling, owing to the non-reactive nature of lignosulphonate with
soil minerals. Due to scarce of available literature, this area is
needed to be explored more in order to comprehend the engi-
neering behavior of expansive soils in the perspective of ligno-
sulphonate in combination with other potential admixtures. It is
envisaged by the authors that the lignosulphonate can perform well
in conjunction with hydrated lime, as lime could trigger the
chemical reaction with clay minerals and overcome shortcomings
of lignosulphonate as an expansive soil stabilizer. The research on
expansive soil stabilization using hydrated lime and lignosulpho-
nate as a composite stabilizer is not documented in literature, as
per authors best of knowledge.
Keeping in view the scarcity of literature, sustainable benefits,
and shortcomings attached with lignosulphonate as a lone stabi-
lizer, the current study is focused on a noval stabilization technique
to improve the basic geotechnical properties of Nanyang expansive
soil by the addition of composite binary admixture containing
lignosulphonate and hydrated lime. Thus, this paper aims to pro-
vide a sustainable and effective way to use the paper industry waste
in mitigating the geotechnical problems related to the expansive
soil in various civil engineering projects.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials and characterization
The expansive soil used in this research was procured from
Sheqi area, Nanyang, Henan Province, China (Fig. 1a). To increase
the swelling potential of expansive soil, 15% of bentonite (by dry
weight of soil) was added. Fig. 2 presents the XRD pattern of un-
treated expansive soil acquired by using D8 advance powder
diffractometer. Table 1 presents the detailed mineralogical and
chemical composition of expansive soil. The results showed that
the expansive soil comprises of average 51% of clay minerals i.e.
montmorillonite (47%), illite (4%) and other non-clay minerals such
as microcline (4%), albite (7%) and quartz (38%). Table 2 presents a
summary of the geotechnical properties of expansive soil and
bentonite used in the present study. The soil exhibited a high liquid
limit of 61.9% with a plasticity index of 39.6%. The free swell index of
soil was 85%; showing high soil activity of 1.82 (Skempton, 1953).
Based on mineralogical, chemical and physical properties, the
subjected soil was determined to be potentially expansive. Fig. 3
presents the XRD pattern of lignosulphonate showing its amor-
phous nature, whereas, the hydrated lime used in this study
comprised of 83% Ca(OH)2. The representative specimen of soil,
benotonite, lignosulphonate and lime is presented in Fig. 1.
2.2. Combination scheme
The optimum binary admixture (OBA) was assessed on the basis
of the plasticity index (PI). As plasticity index (PI) is a good indicator
of shrink/swell behavior of soil; lower the PI value, lower will be the
shrink/swell behavior and vice versa (Saride et al., 2013). To
determine the OBA, nineteen different combinations was proposed
by alternately varying the percentage of hydrated lime and ligno-
sulphonate together by going through a whole cycle as presented in
Table 3. The individual impact of admixture on PI value was also
assessed. Against each combination, the minimum PI value was
determined by varying the percentage admixture from 0 to 6%. A
comparison was drawn in the end, and the combination exhibiting
least PI value was selected as the optimum value. For better
apprehension of LS treated samples and additional verification of
OBA determined on the basis of PI, different mixes of admixtures i.e.
LS, LM, and CBA were selected for further testing as presented in
Table 4. Various geotechnical properties of treated soil e.g. plas-
ticity, swelling and shrinkage behavior, hydraulic conductivity and
strength characteristics were assessed.
2.3. Test methodology
The test scheme is comprised of carrying out tests related to
physical, mechanical, compaction and hydraulic characteristics of
the soil. Physical properties were determined under plasticity, free
swell index and linear shrinkage tests. Mechanical properties were
analyzed by unocfined compressive strength and direst shear tests.
Whereas, compaction and hydraulic conductivity were determined
using standard proctor and falling head permeability tests respec-
tively. Moreover, the stabilization mechanism were analyzed by
using XRD and SEM. A brief detail of these tests is described below.
Plasticity tests were performed to determine the plasticity index
(GB/T 50123, 1999) of untreated and treated soil using “Cone
Penetrometer”. Prior to plasticity tests, all the soil samples were
 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985
Fig. 1. Representative specimens a) soil; b) bentonite; c) lignosulphonate; d) hydrated lime.
Fig. 2. X-rays diffraction pattern of untreated expansive soil.
cured for 7 days.
The free swell index test was performed to assess the swelling
behavior of untreated and treated soils (GB 50112, 2013). The
samples were cured for 3, 7 and 28 days before testing.
The linear shrinkage tests were carried to assess the shrinkage
3
behavior of soil samples as per Australian Test Standard AS
1289e2001 (AS 1289, 2001). For this purpose, a semi-circular mold
of 250 mm length and 25 mm diameter was used (Fig. 4a). The
molds were filled with the portion of soil mass that falls under the
liquid limit range. The test samples were cured for 3, 7 and 28 days
before linear shrinkage tests.
The unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests were carried
out to assess the mechanical behavior of the soil samples (GB/T
50123, 1999). For UCS samples preparation, air-dried soil was
used; as oven-dried soil significantly over-estimate the test results
(Ciancio et al., 2014). All the soil samples were compacted at 95% of
maximum dry density (MDD) incorporating the field conditions as
most of the embankments construction accounts for 95% of MDD.
The soil samples were uniformly compacted in a circular mold
having 50 mm internal diameter and 100 mm height in three equal
layers using static compaction (Fig. 4b). The soil samples were
cured for 3, 7 and 28 days before the UCS test. The strain rate of 1
mm/min was employed for all samples.
The direct shear tests were carried out under consolidated
drained condition on untreated and treated expansive soil samples
with OBA (ASTM D3080 -11, 2011). All the soil samples were pre-
pared at 95% of maximum dry density (MDD). A circular soil sample
having a diameter of 6.35 cm and height of 2.54 cm was used
(Fig. 4c). The automated ShearTrac II-DSS system was used to
4 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985

Table 1 Table 3
Mineralogical and chemical composition of expansive Combination scheme.
soil.
Desg. Combination Desg. Combination
Properties Soil
LM 100% LM þ 0% LS CBA1 95% LM þ 5% LS
Mineralogical composition (%) CBA2 90% LM þ 10% LS CBA3 85% LM þ 15% LS
Montmorillonite 47 CBA4 80% LM þ 20% LS CBA5 75% LM þ 25% LS
Illite 4 CBA6 70% LM þ 30% LS CBA7 65% LM þ 35% LS
Microcline 4 CBA8 60% LM þ 40% LS CBA9 55% LM þ 45% LS
Albite 7 CBA10 50% LM þ 50% LS CBA11 45% LM þ 55% LS
Quartz 38 CBA12 40% LM þ 60% LS CBA13 35% LM þ 65% LS
Chemical composition (%) CBA14 30% LM þ 70% LS CBA15 25% LM þ 75% LS
SiO2 68.7 CBA16 20% LM þ 80% LS CBA17 15% LM þ 85% LS
Al2O3 16.6 CBA18 10% LM þ 90% LS CBA19 5% LM þ 95% LS
Fe2O3 6.48 LS 0% LM þ 100% LS
TiO2 0.869
MnO 0.229
MgO 1.65
SO3 0.0657
CaO 1.77 10.20 cm diameter and 11.57 cm height was used for the test
Na2O 0.826
(Fig. 4d). Against each compaction test, five to six samples were
CuO 0.0096
K2O 2.36
prepared at different moisture contents. The untreated soil samples
P2O5 0.0612 were cured for four days for water equilibration (Agus et al., 2010;
Vanapalli et al., 2003). Whereas, treated soil samples were cured for
an overnight time period to achieve water equilibration in order to
Table 2 avoid any unnecessary long term textural fabrication due to the
Summary of geotechnical properties of expansive soil. presence of lignosulphonate and lime.
Properties Soil Bentonite
Falling head permeability test was carried to assess the hy-
draulic conductivity of soil samples (SL237, 1999). A circular
Liquid Limit (%) 61.9 123
sampler of 6.18 cm diameter and 4.0 cm height was used. The tests
Plasticity Index (%) 39.6 77
Specific Gravity (Gs) 2.67 2.45 were carried out on untreated and treated expansive soil with
Max. Dry Density (g/cc) 1.62 e optimum lignosulphonate (OLS) content and CBA. The soil samples
Optimum Moisture Content (%) 22.2 e were cured for 3, 7 and 28 days.
Sand (%) 9 0 X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscope (SEM)
Silt (%) 70 67
Clay (%) (<0.002 mm) 21 34
tests were carried out to analyze mineralogical and microstructural
Free Swell Index (%) 85 350 changes of untreated and treated expansive soil with OBA and OLS
Linear Shrinkage (%) 15.2 e admixtures at different curing periods. X-ray diffraction (XRD) tests
Soil Activitya 1.82 2.26 were accomplished by using the Bruker D8 advance model
Saturated Permeability (cm/s) 6.48E-07 e
diffractometer to identify mineralogical changes. For SEM test,
a
Skempton (1953) (Skempton, 1953). Hitachi SU8020 was used to capture micrographs. While, chemical
compositions of samples were determined by using Rigaku ZSX
Primus, WDXRF spectrometer (Wavelength dispersive X-ray
fluorescence).
It is important to note that the different suitable curing times of
soil samples before each test were selected based on several trial
tests and previous literature. Curing was carried out by wrapping
the soil samples in a plastic bag and placing it in the dessciator jar
to avoid any unnecessary moisture loss as per previous literature
(Jahandari et al., 2019).

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Influence of stabilizer on physical properties of expansive soil

3.1.1. Influence of stabilizer on plasticity

Fig. 3. X-rays diffraction pattern of lignosulphonate.
perform these tests. The test was carried at different curing periods
i.e. 0, 3, 7, 14, 28, 56 and 90 days. The tests were carried out at 7
different normal loading i.e. 15 kPa, 30 kPa, 60 kPa, 100 kPa,
200 kPa, 300 kPa and 400 kPa. The strain rate of 0.01 mm/minute
was employed for all samples.
Standard proctor tests were carried to determine the moisture-
density relationship (GB/T 50123, 1999). A compaction mold of
Plasticity index is one of the prime physical property of soil that
gives the first hand idea about the volumetric change behavior of the
soil. Therefore, a crictical evaluation was carried out by proposing a
vast range of binary admixtures. Fig. 5 presents the results of the
plasticity index (PI) of untreated and treated expansive soil as per
combination scheme presented in Table 3. In general, the PI value of
all treated samples initially decreased, for all kind of admixtures i.e.
LM, LS, and CBA. Analysis of test results showed that 2% LS and 5% LM
could be regarded as optimum values (Fig. 5 a, b). Furthermore, the
expansive soil treated with CBA showed a significant reduction in PI
value in comparison with LM and LS alone. Among all the CBA
combinations, the least PI value was found to be achieved by CBA5 at
3.5%, yielding a decrease of 41%, as marked by red dotted line in
 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985 5

Table 4
Summary of selected mixes.

Sr. No Desg. Lignosulphonate (LS) (% by dry wt. of soil) Lime (LM) (% by dry wt. of soil)

1 LSa 0.40% 0%
2 LSb 0.875% 0%
3 OLS/LSc 2% 0%
4 LMa 0 2.625%
5 LMb 0 3.82%
6 OLM/LMc 0 5%
7 LMd 0 6.5%
8 LMe 0 9%
9 CBA5aa 0.40% 2.625%
10 OBA/CBA5ba 0.875% 2.625%
11 CBA5ca 2% 2.625%
12 CBA5ab 0.40% 3.82%
13 CBA5bb 0.875% 3.82%
14 CBA5cb 2% 3.82%
15 CBA5ac 0.40% 5%
16 CBA5bc 0.875% 5%
17 CBA5cc 2% 5%
18 CBA5ad 0.40% 6.5%
19 CBA5bd 0.875% 6.5%
20 CBA5cd 2% 6.5%
21 CBA5ae 0.40% 9%
22 CBA5be 0.875% 9%
23 CBA5ce 2% 9%

Fig. 5a (Table 3). Thus, this combination was regarded as optimum
binary admixture (OBA). Moreover, beyond CBA5, the effect on PI
value was less significant (Figs. 5 and 6). The decrease in PI value can
be explained on the basis of reduction in thickness of double diffused
layer and soil aggregation due to interaction and chemical reaction of
added admixture with clay minerals, which results in the reduction
of fine clay particles that contributes to the plasticity (Sarkanen and
Ludwig, 1971; Dash and Hussain, 2012).
3.1.2. Influence of stabilizer on the free swell index
Free swell index is an important and critical property that
governs the volume change behavior of expansive soil. Therefore a
critical evaluation on swelling index was carried out to analyze the
behavior of proposed binary admixture. Figs. 7 and 8 show the
effect of various percentages of admixtures on the free swell index
of expansive soil as per proposed mixes presented in Table 4. In
general, the free swell index of treated soil decreased initially, for all
kind of admixtures i.e. LM, LS, and CBA (Figs. 7 and 8). However, LM
treated soil showed marginal variation in free swell index beyond
5% LM; while LS treated samples remained almost constant beyond
2% LS content. Thus, these percentages can be regarded as optimum
values of LM and LS on the basis of swelling behavior and are in line
with the optimum values selected based on PI value (Figs. 7 and 8).
Moreover, the expansive soil treated with CBA showed a significant
reduction in the free swell index in comparison with LM and LS
alone. With an increase in LS percentage from 0% to 0.875% in LM-
expansive mixture, the free swell index was drastically reduced to a
lower value. Further, in CBA combinations, the threshold value of
LM portion and LS portion were found to be 5% and 0.875%
respectively, beyond which marginal variation was observed
(Fig. 7). Fig. 8 presents a clear picture of variation in free swell index
with an increase in LS content in 2.625% LM-expansive soil mixture
(i.e. combination CBA5aa to CBA5ca, Table 4). The results showed
that at OBA/CBA5ba (i.e. 0.875% LSþ2.625% LM) addition, the free
swell index of treated soil underwent a reduction of about 74%
which was approximately the same as soil treated with OLM (i.e. 5%
lime) (Fig. 7, Table 4). Also, OBA/CBA5ba treated soil exhibit 37%
more reduction in the free swell index as compared to OLS treated
samples. This implied that OBA/CBA5ba can be regarded as an
optimum value on the basis of swelling behavior and are in line
with plasticity test results. The decrease in the free swell index of
expansive soils with lime addition is in line with previous research
(Cheng et al., 2008). It is important to note that the free swell index
results of all treated samples i.e. LM, LS, and CBA, were remained
consistent after 7 days of curing.
In general, the proposed admixture reduced the swelling index
of expansive soil significantly and superiorly in comparison with LS
alone. Wherein, for a practical purpose the optimum value of OBA
can be selected as discussed above. The proposed admixture have a
potential of both intermolecular interaction and chemical reaction
with clay minerals due to lignosulphonate and lime respectively.
Thus, the decrease in free swell index (%) can be explained on the
basis of adsorption mechanism of LS admixture, along with
chemical reaction of lime particles with clay minerals resulting in
destruction of clay structure as well as agglomeration of soil par-
ticles with net decrease in specific area.
3.1.3. Influence of stabilizer on linear shrinkage
Linear shrinkage is an important characteristic of soil that de-
fines the dessication induced cracking, which majorly affects
various mechanical and hydraulic properties (i.e. shear strength,
permeability etc.) of the soil. Therefore, special attention was given
and the effect of the proposed admixture was critically evaluated
taking shrinkage behavior of soil into account.
Figs. 9 and 10 show variation in linear shrinkage with added
admixture accounting different curing periods as proposed in
Table 4. It was observed that the linear shrinkage of all the treated
expansive soil samples with various percentages of admixtures i.e.
LS, LM, and CBA initially decreased and tended to remain constant
after 7 days of curing (e.g. Fig. 9). At OLS content the linear
shrinkage was reduced by 12% (Fig. 9). Fig. 10 shows variation in
linear shrinkage of treated expansive soil with varying percentage
of LM and CBA. Fig. 10 shows that the linear shrinkage of treated
expansive soil decreased significantly with the addition of LS in LM-
expansive soil mixture. At OBA/CBA5ba (i.e. 0.875% LSþ2.625% LM)
the linear shrinkage underwent a reduction of about 31%; which is
nearly equal to the linear shrinkage at OLM/LMc, and exhibit
approximately 19% more reduction than OLS (i.e. 2% LS) treated
6 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985
Fig. 4. Representative samples a) linear shrinkage tests on untreated soil b) unconfined compressive strength test sample of OBA treated soil c) direct shear sample of untreated soil
after shear d) standard proctor test mold compacted with untreated soil during the test.
samples (Figs. 9 and 10, Table 4). Improvement in linear shrinkage
characteristics with lime and lignosulphonate addition as a lone
stabilizers are in conformity with earlier research (Dang et al., 2016;
Alazigha et al., 2018a). The propsed admixture demonstrated better
amoliration of expansive soil taking shrinkage behavior into ac-
count than LS alone. The superior results of OBA admixture can be
attributed to better flocculation/aggregation of soil particles due to
combined action of LS and LM.
3.2. Influence of stabilizer on mechanical properties of expansive
soil
3.2.1. Influence of stabilizer on unconfined compressive strength
Uncofined compressive strength test give a brief idea about
various mechanical aspects of the soil e.g., compressive strength
and stress-strain relationship under axial loading. Figs. 11 and 12
present the impact of LS and CBA on unconfined compressive
strength accounting different curing periods of 3, 7 and 28 days.
The unconfined compressive strength value of untreated soil was
213 kPa. With an increase in LS content from 0 to 2% the UCS value
gradually increased (Fig. 11). At 2% LS content the UCS value
increased by 15.5% at the 28th day of curing. Although, there was a
slight improvement with LS addition in UCS strength but it was not
substantial. The similar increasing trends were also reported by
(Alazigha et al., 2018a; Indraratna et al., 2012; Tanegonbadi and
Noorzad, 2018), which is in conformity with the early research.
Fig. 12 presents the impact of LS on UCS value of LM-expansive
soil mixture at various curing times. To analyze the impact of LS on
LM-expansive soil mixture; only 0.875% LS was added. The results
showed that the UCS value of CBA treated soil samples increased
with the increase in LM content regardless of curing time (Fig. 12).
At the 28th day of curing the UCS value was substantially increased
for all the treated samples. At OBA/CBA5ba, the UCS value increased
to 504 kPa, showing a tremendous improvement of about 237%. At
CBA5bc, the UCS value increased to 729 kPa; while at CBA5bd the
UCS value jumped to 786 kPa, which further slightly increased to
823 kPa at CBA5be (Fig. 12, Table 4). Thus, it can be inferred that
coupling LM with LS in soil stabilization can substantially enhance
the UCS value in comparison with LS alone. The proposed admix-
ture have more tendency to form more intact structure in the
 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985 7

Fig. 7. Free swell index of expansive soil treated with various percentages of LM and
CBA after 7 days of curing in terms of mean values and standard deviation.

Fig. 5. Effect of various percentages of binary admixtures on the PI value of expansive

soil a) as per combination scheme in Table 3 from LM to CBA10 b) as per the combi-
nation scheme in Table 3 from CBA11 to LS. Fig. 8. Free swell index of expansive soil treated with various percentages of LS and
LS þ 2.625% LM admixture after 7 days of curing in terms of mean values and standard
deviation.

Fig. 6. Comparison of variation in plasticity index (PI) values of CBA treated expansive Fig. 9. Linear shrinkage of expansive soil treated with various percentages of LS at
soil at 3.5% content of different combinations. different curing periods in terms of mean values and standard deviation.
8 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985
Fig. 10. Linear shrinkage of expansive soil treated with various percentages of LM and
CBA after 7 days of curing in terms of mean values and standard deviation.
Fig. 11. Effect of various percentages of LS on UCS values of treated expansive soil at
different curing periods in terms of mean values and standard deviation.
Fig. 12. Effect of 0.875% LS vs. different percentages of LM on UCS values of treated
expansive soil at different curing periods in terms of mean values and standard
deviation.
Fig. 13. Effect of 0.875% LS vs. different percentages of LM on the stress-strain rela-
tionship of expansive soil after 28 days of curing in terms of mean values and standard
deviation.
presence of lime in comparison with LS alone. The increase in the
UCS values with lime addition along with curing period in line with
the previous research (Jha and Sivapullaiah, 2015).
3.2.2. Influence of stabilizer on the stress-strain relationship
Fig. 13 presents the stress-strain relationship of soil treated with
CBA, tested after the 28th day of curing attained from UCS tests.
With the increase in lime percentage in CBA mixture, the peak
stresses tremendously increased and showing stiffness and relative
brittleness in comparison with untreated soil. The axial failure
strain of CBA treated soil ranges between 0.76% and 0.99% and
brittleness were observed to be increased with increase in LM
percentage in CBA mixes.
3.2.3. Influence of stabilizer on cohesion and friction angle
parameters
Cohesion and friction angle are considered to be the strength
parameters of the soil which are obviously criticial for the design of
various soil structure systems. Fig. 14 shows the failure envelope of
untreated and OBA/CBA5ba treated expansive soil at different
curing periods. The summary of the test results is tabulated in
Table 5. Addition of OBA showed a significant improvement in
cohesion value with some improvement in friction angle with
curing period. At 28th day of curing, a significant increase of about
65% in cosheion; and 25% in angle of internal friction were
accounted. However, later ages, i.e. 56 and 90 days, exhibited an
insignificant effect of curing on shear strength parameters. The
increase in strength with proposed mixture can mainly be attrib-
uted to better interlocking of soil grains due to presence of ligno-
sulphonate and lime.
3.3. Influence of stabilizer on moisture-density relationship and
permeability of expansive soil
3.3.1. Influence of stabilizer on moisture-density relationship
Compaction is an important physical aspect which quantify by
the moisture-density relationship of soil, considering which a soil
mass can be denisfied to attain better strength characteristics and
avoid unnecessary settlement. Whereas, in most of the treatement
methods (Al-TaieAsmaa et al., 2016; Jha and Sivapullaiah, 2015) the
added admixture often inferioriate the compaction characteristics.
Therefore, the compaction characteristics are analyzed using
 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985 9

Fig. 15. Effect of various percentages of LS on MDD and OMC.

Fig. 14. Failure envelope of untreated and OBA treated expansive soil at different
curing periods obtained from direct shear test.

proposed binary admixture treatement to check the practicality of

the proposed admixture. Figs. 15 and 16 present the variation in
MDD and optimum moisture content (OMC) of untreated and
treated expansive soil on different selected mixes of Table 4. In
general, both LS and CBA treated samples underwent a decrease in
MDD with some increase in OMC. Fig. 15 shows a slight variation in
MDD and OMC with LS addition. At OLS content, the MDD reduced
by 1%; with a slight increase in OMC of about 2.3%. The results of LS
treated samples were in agreement with other researchers such as
(Tanegonbadi and Noorzad, 2018).
In comparison, OBA treated samples showed a neggligible Fig. 16. Effect of 0.875% LS on MDD and OMC of LM-expansive soil mixture.
decrease in MDD around 0.6%; while OMC increased by 2.6%
(Fig. 16). Further, with an increase in lime percentage in 0.875% LS-
expansive soil mixture, the decreasing trend was more prominent.
The neggligible decrease in MDD of OBA treated soil can be ascribed water infiltration behavior in the soil. In past literature, most of the
to a lower specific gravity of LS admixture coupled with chemical chemical stabilization techniques have documented a detoriating
interaction of LM and clay minerals. The decrease in MDD of effect i.e. an increase in the permeability of the soil (Jha and
expansive soils with lime addition is in line with previous research Sivapullaiah, 2015; Garzon et al., 2016). Thus, to check the perfor-
(Al-TaieAsmaa et al., 2016; Jha and Sivapullaiah, 2015). Lower dry mance of proposed admixture, permeability of treated soil with
density can also be explained with increased pore volume due to binary admixture was examined. Fig. 17 shows the effect of OLS/LSc,
soil agglomeration with lime addition (Kinuthia et al., 1999). The OBA/CBA5ba and CBA5bc (Table 4) on the saturated permeability of
increase in OMC can be attributed to the flocculated structure with treated expansive soil accounting different curing periods of 3, 7
enhanced water holding capacity and extra water required for the and 28 days. At OLS content, the permeability of the treated soil
pozzolanic reaction. Thus, the proposed binary admixture treat- increased by 0.74 times at 28th day of curing in comparison with
ment demonstrates a negligible detoriation effect on compaction untreated soil. It can also be inferred from the graph that OLS-
characteristics of expansive soil. treated samples underwent a slight variation in permeability
with curing time (Fig. 17). The increase in permeability with LS
3.3.2. Influence of stabilizer on permeability addition is in conformity with earlier research (Alazigha et al.,
Permeability is a vital hydraulic property of soil that governs the 2018a). At OBA and CBA5bc, the permeability of treated samples

Table 5
Summary of cohesion and friction angle parameters of treated expansive soil with OBA at various curing period.

Description Days Phi (degree) Cohesion (kPa)


Untreated Soil 0 18 114

Treated Soil with the optimum binary admixture 0 26 117

3 27.1 127.0
7 23.6 163
14 23.6 172
28 22.5 188
56 22.4 192
90 22.2 193
10 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985

Fig. 17. Saturated permeability of expansive soil treated with OLS, OLM and OBA at
various curing periods of 3, 7 and 28 days in terms of mean values and standard
deviation.

have been increased by 0.70 times and 1.50 times at 28th day of
curing. It is pertinent to mention here, that OBA treated samples
underwent a very marginal increase of 0.70 times in comparison
with CBA5bc treated samples. This referes that the proposed
admixture demonstrates a negligible impact on the soil perme-
ability, verifying the effectivity of proposed admixture.

3.4. Stabilization mechanism

Under this section brief analysis is made to verify the mineral-

ogical and micro-structural changes with addition of proposed
admixture.

3.4.1. Influence of stabilizer on the X-ray diffraction pattern

Fig. 18 presents the X-ray diffraction pattern of treated expan-
sive soil with OLS and OBA at various curing periods. The dif-
fractogram of OLS treated samples after 28 days of curing showed a
reduction in montmorillonite peak intensities with a slight shift in
2q angle (i.e. at M-Peak). The angle 2q of untreated soil at M-peak
shifted from 5.70 to 5.74 with OLS treatment (Fig. 19). The
decrease in peak intensities can be attributed to a reduction in the
average size of crystallite in the reflecting minerals. This implied
that amorphicity of LS admixture played an important part in
crystallographic alteration of montmorillonite minerals. In addition
to this, absence of a new peak in diffractograms coupled with slight
variation in minerals ratio (e.g. Al:Si) as presented in Table 6 con-
cludes that there was mainly intermolecular interaction between
soil minerals and LS admixture instead of major chemical reactions
(Alazigha et al., 2018b).
Fig. 18 (b, c) shows diffractograms of treated expansive soil with
OBA at various curing periods of 7, 28, 56 and 90 days. The dif-
fractograms at various curing periods exhibit no significant peak of
cementitious compounds. However, the presence of aluminum (Al),
silica (Si) and (Ca) in OBA treated samples hints possible pozzolanic
reaction as presented in Table 6. Whereas, the peak allied with clay Fig. 18. X-rays diffraction pattern of treated expansive soil a) with 2% LS admixture at
minerals (i.e. M-peak at 2q ¼ 5.70 of untreated soil) underwent a curing period of 28 days b) with OBA at curing period of 7 and 28 days c) with OBA at
decrease along with curing time with slight variation in 2 theta curing period of 56 and 90 days.

angle (Fig. 19). However, after 28 days of curing there is no

measurable decrease in M-peak intensities, e.g. at 56 and 90 days of
formation of calcite at 2q ¼ 29.4 were observed at all curing period
curing. The decrease in clay mineral peaks can be attributed to
of OBA treated soil as can be seen in Fig. 18 (b, c).
amorphicity of lignosulphonate admixture coupled with lime re-
It can be inferred from the aforementioned discussion that the
action with these clay minerals resulting in the destruction of their
reduction in clay mineral peak intensities (i.e. montmorillonite
structures. However, a very insignificant peak showing the
 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985
Fig. 19. Reduction in M-peak intensity of expansive soil with addition of OLS and OBA
at various curing periods.
Table 6
Elemental analysis of untreated and treated expansive soil with OBA and OLS using
WDXRFa.
Description Al Si Ca Al:Si Al:Ca Ca:Si
Untreated Soil 6.52 22.1 0.74 0.295 … 0.033
Soil þ OBA 6.30 21.5 2.14 0.293 2.94 0.1
Soil þ 2% LS 6.57 21.0 0.674 0.312 … 0.03
a
Wavelength dispersive X-ray fluorescence.
peak), demonstrates a relative decrease in the clay minerals effec-
tivity, which is often referred by double diffuse layer. Such clay
minerals obviously contributes to plasticity, swelling and shrinkage
behavior of expansive soils. Thus, the decrease in plasticity, free
swell index, and linear shrinkage of CBA treated soil as observed
during the experimental investigation can be well explained by the
observed stabilization mechanism.
3.4.2. Influence of stabilizer on microstructure
A series of micrograph were captured by using Hitachi
SU8020 (scanning electron microscope) that permit us to
analyze the effect of OBA and OLS addition on microstructural
changes (observations at mm scale level) of treated expansive
soil at various curing periods (Fig. 20). SEM micrograph of un-
treated expansive soil at a magnification 10 mm showed clay
particles with inter and intra aggregates pores forming a clay
aggregate structure (Fig. 20 a). Fig. 20b shows SEM micrograph
of 2% LS treated soil sample after 28 days of curing showing
aggregation of soil particles exhibiting slight bigger size parti-
cles with larger voids. SEM micrographs of treated expansive
soil with OBA showed aggregation of soil particles resulting in
the formation of large clusters along with the curing time. These
clusters formed thick soil matrix with fewer larger voids
(Fig. 20c, d, e, and f). The increase in shear strength parameters
and UCS values with curing period is linked to the formation of
large aggregates which provide stable soil structure against
imposed stresses. The slight increase in permeability can be
attributed to the formation of slight bigger voids. The micro-
graphs at 28, 56 and 90 days of curing demonstrates almost
similar kind of structure (Fig. 20d, e, and f). Micrographs show
flocculation/aggregation of treated soil with LS and CBA addition
resulting in formation stable structure with coarser aggregates
and strong bond which provides better hindrance against the
11
imposed shear and compressive loads; improving the strength
characteristics of treated soils. Moreover, formation of fewer
voids were also observed during the stabilization mechanism
which contributes a slight increase in permeability. Thus, these
microstructural analysis provides better reasoning of above ac-
quired test results for the treated soils.
4. Conclusion
In this article, various geotechnical properties of expansive
soil treated with LS, LM, and CBA were investigated in the lab-
oratory. The mineralogical and microstructural analyses were
also carried out to understand the stabilization mechanism.
Based on the test results presented in this article following
conclusions are drawn:
(1) On the basis of plasticity index and swelling behavior of the
treated expansive soil, 2.625% lime in conjunction with
0.875% lignosulphonate content can be regarded as an opti-
mum value of CBA. The proposed OBA, demonstrates better
amelioriation of the plasticity, swelling behavior and linear
shrinkage of expansive soil in comparison with the individ-
ual effect of the optimum value of LS alone.
(2) The propsed admixture works well in improving the strength
characteristics of the expansive soil. Unconfined compressive
strength of treated expansive at various percentages of CBA
exhibits substantial improvement in the UCS value, along
with extended curing time as compared to LS treated sam-
ples. Cohesion and angle of internal friction of OBA treated
expansive soil exhibit a similar increasing trend.
(3) The moisture-density relationship and soil permeability of
treated expansive soil with OBA, demonstrates a negligible
detoriation effect, rendering the practically of the proposed
admixture.
(4) The mineralogical analyses of OBA treated expansive soil
show a reduction in clay mineral (i.e. montmorillonite) peak
intensities due to the amorphicity of lignosulphonate
admixture, while the pozzolanic reaction of lime with these
minerals results in the destruction of clay mineral structure.
SEM micrographs confirm that the behavior of added mate-
rial results in the formation of more stable aggregates and
strong bonding of soil aggregates. Thus, lignosulphonate
works well in conjunction with lime in improving the sta-
bilization mechanism of expansive soil.
(5) The proposed optimum binary admixture significantly im-
proves the geotechnical properties and shows substantial
improvement in eliminating the short comings of LS as a lone
stabilizer. Furthermore, lignosulphonate addition reduces
the lime consumption in expansive soil stabilization and
provides a viable and sustainable solution in curtailing the
industrial waste of wood/paper industry. Thus, practically, it
could be a substantial cost-effective way of expansive soil
stabilization.
Present study has constrainedly focused the amloriation of basic
physical and mechanical characteristics of expansive soils by pro-
posing a scheme to use lignosulphonate as a stabilizer. Wherein,
the effect of the proposed stabilizer on other vulnerable aspects
e.g., environmental changes (i.e. weting-drying cycles), bacterial
effect, algae thriving, or corrosion by pests and plagues etc., have
not been covered. Authors would cover some of these aspects in the
future studies. Morover, authors also recommends to investigate
the effect of the proposed binary admixture as the stabilizer for
some other problematic soils i.e. loess, soft, and collapsible soils
etc., in various civil engineering projects.
12 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985

Fig. 20. SEM micrographs of untreated and treated expansive soil at different curing periods a) Untreated Soil; b) 2% LS treated soil, 28 days; c) OBA treated soil, 7 days; d) OBA
treated soil, 28 days; e) OBA treated soil, 56 days; f) OBA treated soil, 90 days.

Acknowledgments
The study presented in this paper is a part of an ongoing model
study at the North China University of Water Conservation and
Electric Power, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China supported by
Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, China. The authors
acknowledge their support.
References
RISI, 2014. Global paper and board production hits record levels in 2013. Annual
Review of Pulp and PaperStatistics. Available from: www.risiinfo.com/../news/../
Global-paper-and-board-production-hits-re.
Ackroyd, L.W., Husain, R., 1986. Residual and lacustrine black cotton soils of
northeast Nigeria. Geotechnique 36 (1), 113e118.
Agus, S.S., Schanz, T., Fredlund, D.G., 2010. Measurements of suction versus water
content for bentonite-sand mixtures. Can. Geotech. J. 47 (5), 83e94.
Al-Mukhtar, M., Lasledj, A., Alcover, J.F., 2010. Behaviour and mineralogy changes in
lime-treated expansive soil at 20o C. Appl. Clay Sci. 50 (2), 191e198.
Al-Taie, Asmaa, M.D., Mahdi, Evans, R., Arulrajah, A., Horpibulsuk, S., 2016. Swell-
shrink cycles of lime stabilized expansive subgrade. Procedia Eng. 143 (Ictg),
615e622.
Alazigha, D.P., Indraratna, B., Vinod, J.S., Ezeajugh, L.M., 2016. The swelling behav-
iour of lignosulfonate-treated expansive soil. Gr. Improv. J. 169 (3), 182e193.
Alazigha, D.P., Indraratna, B., Vinod, J.S., Heitor, A., 2018a. Potential Use of Ligno-
sulphonate for Soil Stabilization Environmental Geotechnics. https://doi.org/
10.1680/jenge.17.00051.
 N. Ijaz et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 254 (2020) 119985
Alazigha, D.P., Indraratna, B., Vinod, J.S., Heitor, A., 2018b. Mechanism of stabiliza-
tion of expansive soil with lignosulphonate admixture. Transp. Geotech. 14,
81e92.
Alrubaye, A.J., Hasan, M., Fattah, M.Y., 2016. Improving geotechnical characteristics
of Kaolin Soil using silica fume and lime. Spec. Top. Rev. Porous Media Int. J. 7
(1), 77e85.
AS 1289, 2001. Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes. Standards
Australia, Sydney, Australia.
ASTM D3080 -11, 2011. Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under
consolidated drained conditions. Annual Book of. ASTM Standards, Philadel-
phia, PA, USA.
Athukorala, R., Indraratna, B., Vinod, J.S., 2013. Modeling the internal erosion
behavior of lignosulfonate treated soil. In: Meehan, C.L., Pradel, D., Pando, M.A.,
Labuz, J.F. (Eds.), ASCE, Geo-Congress, pp. 1872e1881.
Attoh-Okine, N.O., 1995. Lime treatment of laterite soils and gravels- revisited.
Constr. Build. Mater. 9 (5), 283e287.
Bajpai, P., 2016. Pulp and Paper Industry: Energy Conservation. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Bell, F.G., 1996. Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils. Eng. Geol. 42 (4),
223e237.
Boardman, D.I., Glendinning, S., Rogers, C.D.F., 2001. Development of stabilisation
and solidification in lime-clay mixes. Geotechnique 50 (6), 533e543.
Buhler, R.L., Cerato, A.B., 2007. Stabilization of Oklahoma expansive soils using lime
and class C fly ash. In: Geo-Denver: a New Peaks in Geotechnics, pp. 1e10. ASCE.
Chen, Q., Indraratna, B., 2014. Shear behaviour of sandy silt stabilized with ligno-
sulfonate. Can. Geotech. J. 52 (8), 1180e1185.
Cheng, Yu, Shi, Meng-lei, Zhou, Zheng-ming, 2008. Aggregation effect of slaked lime
on treated expansive soils. J. Rock Soil Mech. 29, 2209e2214.
Cheng, Y., Wang, S., Li, J., Huang, X., Li, C., Wu, J., 2018a. Engineering and mineral-
ogical properties of stabilized expansive soil compositing lime and natural
pozzolans. Constr. Build. Mater. 187, 1031-1-38.
Cheng, Y., Wang, S., Li, J., Huang, X., Li, C., Wu, J., 2018b. Engineering and mineral-
ogical properties of stabilized expansive soil compositing lime and natural
pozzolans. Constr. Build. Mater. 187, 1031-1-38.
Ciancio, D., Beckett, C.T.S., Carraro, J.A.H., 2014. Optimum lime content identification
for lime e stabilized rammed earth”. Constr. Build. Mater. 53, 59e65.
Dang, L.C., Fatahi, B., Khabbaz, H., 2016. Behaviour of expansive soils stabilized with
hydrated lime and bagasse fibres. Process Eng. 143, 658e665.
Dash, S.K., Hussain, M., 2012. Lime stabilization of soils: Reappraisal. J. Mater. Civ.
Eng. 24, 707e714.
Eades, J.L., Grim, R.E., 1960. Reaction of hydrated lime with pure clay minerals in soil
stabilization. Highway Res. Board Bull. 262, 51e53.
Gandini, A., Belgacem, M., 2008. Lignin as components of macromolecular mate-
rials. In: Monomers, Polymers, and Composites from Renewable Resources, vol.
243, p. 273.
Garzon, E., Cano, M., OKelly, B.C., S anchez-Soto, P.J., 2016. Effect of lime on stabili-
zation of phyllite clays. Appl. Clay Sci. 123, 329e334.
GB 50112, 2013. Technical Code for Buildings in Expansive Soil Regions. Chinese
Standard.
GB/T 50123, 1999. Standard for Soil Test Method, Chinese Standard.
Hataf, N., Ghadir, P., Ranjbar, N., 2018. Investigation of soil stabilization using chi-
tosan biopolymer. J. Clean. Prod. 170, 1493e1500.
Holtz, W., 1969. Volume Change in Expansive Clay Soils and Control by Lime
Treatment. Proceeding of 2nd International Research and Engineering Confer-
ence on Expansive Clay Soils, pp. 157e174.
Hussey, N.L., Cerato, A.B., Grasmick, J.G., Holderby, E.S., Miller, G.A., Tabet, W., 2010.
An assessment of soil parameters governing soil strength increases. In: Geo-
Florida: Advances in Analysis, Modeling & Design, pp. 2702e2711. ASCE.
Indraratna, B., Mahamud, M.A.A., Vinod, J.S., 2012. Chemical and mineralogical
behaviour of lignosulfonate treated soils. GeoCongress 1146e1155, 2012, ASCE.
Indraratna, B., Athukorala, R., Vinod, J.S., 2013. Estimating the rate of erosion of silty
sand treated with lignosulfonate. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 139 (5), 701e714.
Jahandari, S., Saberian, M., Zivari, F., Li, J., Ghasemi, M., Vali, R., 2019. Experimental
study of the effects of curing time on geotechnical properties of stabilized clay
13
with lime and geogrid. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 13 (2), 172e183.
Jha, A., Sivapullaiah, P., 2015. Mechanism of improvement in the strength and
volume change behavior of lime stabilized soil. Eng. Geol. 198, 53e64.
Kinuthia, J.M., Wild, S., Jones, G.I., 1999. Effects of monovalent and divalent metal
sulphates on consistency and compaction of lime stabilized kaolinite. Appl. Clay
Sci. 14 (1), 27e45.
Kong, L., Hasanbeigi, A., Price, L., Liu, H., 2017. Energy conservation and CO2 miti-
gation potentials in the Chinese pulp and paper industry. Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 117, 74e84.
Li, S.L., Qin, S.J., Bo, Z.Z., Shi, B., 1992. Studies on the Engineering Geology of
Expansive Soils in China. Jiangsu Science and Technology Publishing House,
Nanjing, p. 212.
Liao, S.W., Qu, Y.X., Zhu, Y.L., 1990. Proceedings of the First Symposium on Expansive
Soil in China. XinanJiaotong Univ. Press, p. 1.
Mallela, J., Harold, V.Q.P., Smith, K.L., Consultants, E., 2004. Consideration of Lime-
Stabilized Layers in Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design. The National Lime
Association, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Mitchell, J.K., Soga, K., 2005. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior.
Momenzadeh, M., Koopialipoor, M., Mansoori, M., 2018. Determination of the
racking reduction factor in a horseshoe shaped tunnel section considering the
soil-structure interaction. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 36 (6), 3903e3910.
Nalbantoglu, Z., 2004. Effectiveness of Class C fly ash as an expansive soil stabilizer.
Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (6), 377e381.
Nguyen, L.D., Fatahi, B., Khabbaz, H., 2014. A constitutive model for cemented clays
capturing cementation degradation. Int. J. Plast. 56, 1e18.
Puppala, A.J., Hanchanloet, S., 1999. Evaluation of a New Chemical Treatment
Method on Strength and Resilient Properties of a Cohesive Soil. Transportation
Research Board 78th annual meeting, Washington D.C. Jan 10-14: Paper No.
990389.
Rao, S.M., Thyagaraj, T., 2003. Lime slurry stabilization of an expansive soil. Geotech.
Eng. 156 (3), 139e146.
Saride, S., Puppala, A.J., Chikyala, S.R., 2013. Swell-shrink and strength behaviors of
lime and cement stabilized expansive organic clays. Appl. Clay Sci. 85, 39e45.
Sarkanen, K.V., Ludwig, C.H., 1971. Lignins Occurrence, Formation, Structure and
Reactions. Wiley-Interscience, New York, pp. 285e290.
Seco, A., Ramírez, F., Miqueleiz, L., García, B., 2011. Stabilization of expansive soils for
use in construction. Appl. Clay Sci. 51 (3), 348e352.
Shi, B., Jiang, H., Liu, Z., Fang, H.Y., 2002. Engineering geological characteristics of
expansive soils in China. Eng. Geol. 67 (1e2), 63e71.
Skempton, A.W., 1953. The colloidal activity of clays. Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Soil Mech. 1,
57e61.
SL237, 1999. Specification of Soil Test, Chinese Standard.
Srikanth Reddy, S., Prasad, A.C.S.V., Vamsi Krishna, N., 2018. Lime-Stabilized Black
Cotton Soil and Brick Powder Mixture as Subbase Material. Adv. Civ. Eng 2018,
1e5. Bhuvaneshwari, S., Robinson, R. G., & Gandhi, S. R., 2005. Stabilization of
expansive soils using fly ash. Fly Ash India, vol. 8, 1-10.
Suhatril, M., Osman, N., Sari, P.A., Shariati, M., Marto, A., 2019. Significance of surface
eco-protection techniques for cohesive soils slope in Selangor, Malaysia. Geo-
tech. Geol. Eng. 37 (3), 2007e2014.
Tanegonbadi, B., Noorzad, R., 2018. Physical and geotechnical long-term properties
of lignosulfonate-stabilized clay: an experimental investigation. Trans. Geotech.
17, 41e50.
Vali, R., Mehrinejad Khotbehsara, E., Saberian, M., Li, J., Mehrinejad, M., Jahandari, S.,
2019. A three-dimensional numerical comparison of bearing capacity and set-
tlement of tapered and under-reamed piles. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 13 (3),
236e248.
Vanapalli, S.K., Elgenbrod, K.D., Garven, E.A., 2003. Measurements of capillary stress
in three compacted granular soils. In: Proceedings of the 6th Can.Geotech.Conf.,
pp. 127e135. Winnipeg.
Zhang, T., Cai, G., Liu, S., 2017. Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty
soil in highway subgrade: a field investigation. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 4243e4257.
Zhang, T., Cai, G., Liu, S., 2018. Assessment of mechanical properties in recycled
lignin-stabilized silty soil as base fill material. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 1788e1799.