Study of Soil Properties With Silica Fume As Stablizer

www.final-yearproject.
com |
www.troubleshoot4free.com/fyp/
VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Belgaum-590 014
PROJECT REPORT
On
STUDY OF SOIL PROPERTIES WITH SILICA

FUME AS STABLIZER AND COMPARING THE
SAME WITH RBI-81 AND COST ESTIMATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
Post Graduate Diploma in Highway Technology

by
VENU GOPAL.N
USN: 1IR08CHT19
Under the Guidance of
Miss. G. KAVITHA
Lecturer,
RASTA Center for Road Technology,
Bangalore.
RASTA Center for Road Technology

VTU Extension Center
VOLVO Construction Equipment Road Machinery Campus
1
www.final-yearproject.com |
Peenya, Bangalore 560 058
RASTA Center for Road Technology

VTU Extension Center
VOLVO Construction Equipment Road Machinery Campus
Bangalore 560 058.
CERTIFICATE
Certified
that
the
Project
work
entitled
STUDY
OF
SOIL
STABLIZER
AND
PROPERTIES
WITH
SILICA
FUME
AS
COMPARING
THE
SAME
WITH
RBI-81
ESTIMATION
AND
COST
is a bonafied work carried out by, Mr. VENU GOPAL.N,
University Seat Number 1IR08CHT19 in partial fulfillment for the award of MTech degree in Highway Technology of the Visvesvaraya Technological
University,
Belgaum
during the year 2008-2009. It is certified that all
corrections/suggestions indicated for Internal Assessment have been incorporated

in the report. The Project report has been approved as it satisfies the academic
requirements in respect of Project work prescribed for the said Degree.
2
Signature of Guide
Head of PG Studies
Signature of
(Miss. G.Kavitha)
(Dr. Krishnamurthy)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Its indeed my immense pleasure to wish my deep sense of gratitude to our
teaching faculty who inexorably tried to get the best out of me. It is because of their
valuable guidance and continuous encouragement without which this milestone
would not have been a success.
I extend my sincere thanks to Dr.Krishna Murthy, for his valuable

guidance and suggestions during the course of study.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Miss. G.Kavitha and Mr.

Anjaneyappa faculties of IR Rasta for excellent guidance and encouragement
throughout the seminar.
Last but not the least, I also thankful to all my class mates, non-teaching
staff and friends, who have helped directly or indirectly for the successful
completion of this work.
SYNOPSIS
Soils exhibits high plasticity characteristics, low strength properties and high swell shrink
characteristics. The alternative swell- shrink seasons causes distress to the structures and the
pavements constructed on them. Maintenance and repair costs of the distressed structures and
pavements are quite high. It is, therefore, necessary either to bring suitable soils from far off
borrow areas or to stabilize locally available soils to improve their engineering properties.
In the present study, a soil sample was subjected to laboratory investigation to know the
grain size distribution pattern and to determine liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index,
optimum moisture content, maximum dry density and California bearing ratio values. The
laboratory investigations indicate the soil samples posses low strength. In order to improve the
strength of native soil, the soil samples were treated by varying Silica Fume and RBI-81 grade
content in the range of 1% to 4% by weight. The treated soil samples were subjected to triaxial
compression test to determine strength of soil.
The above obtained values such as CBR value, youngs Modulus etc were used for the
design of pavement based on IRC methods, thickness of pavement were calculated and
compared.
This involves replacing of base and sub-base course with stabilized locally available soil,
and comparing same with different stabilizer (RBI-81and Silica Fume). To evaluate the
difference in cost.
INDEX
Topics
Page No
Chapter.1 Introduction
4-6
1.1 General Studies
1.2 Desirable properties of soil
1.3 Objective of present study
1.4 Scope of Present Study
Chapter.2
Literature review
7-20
2.1 General Studies
2.2 Characteristics of soil
2.3 Index properties
2.4 Determination of Soil Properties
2.5 Subgrade soil Strength
2.6 Soil Stabilization Using Inorganic stabilizer
11
2.7 Stabilized Soil with RBI-81
12
2.8 Silica Fume
15
2.9 Chemical Properties of silica fume
17
2.10 Physical properties and contribution
17
2.11 Soil Stabilization method
19
2.12 Technique of Stabilization
20
2.13 Design and Cost estimation
20
Chapter.3 Present Investigation
21-25
3.1 General Studies
22
3.2 laboratory test conducted
22
Chapter.4 Analysis of Result
26-43
4.1 General Studies
26
4.2 Laboratory test result
26
4.3 Design of Pavement
36
4.4 Materials Quantity
39
4.5 Cost Estimation
40
Chapter.5 Discussion and conclusion
44-45
5.1 Discussion
44
5.2 Conclusion
45
5.3 Scope for future studies
45
References
46
Annexure 1
47-57
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
GENERAL
Soil - mineral matter formed by the disintegration of rocks due to action of water, frost,
temperature, pressure or by plant or animal life. Soil is the most abundantly available construction
material; the term soil has different connotations for scientists belonging to different disciplines. The
definition given to a soil by an agriculturist or a geologist is different from the one used by a civil
engineer. For a civil engineer, soils mean all naturally occurring, relatively unconsolidated earth
material- organic or inorganic in character that lies above the bed rock. Soils can be broken down into
their constituent particles relatively easily, such as by agitation in water.
Soil is the ultimate foundation material which supports the overlying structure. The proper
functioning of the above lying structure will therefore depend critically on the success of the
foundation element. Soil is the cheapest and the most widely used material in a highway system,
either in its natural form or in a processed form. All road pavement structures eventually rest on
soil foundation. However, soil is highly heterogeneous and anisotropic in nature and occurs in
unlimited varieties, with widely different engineering properties. Considering all these aspects, a
through study of the engineering properties of soil is of vital importance in working out an
7
appropriate design of the pavement structure which will yield an acceptable level of performance
of the road over the design life under the given traffic and climatic conditions. In any road
embankment, the bulk of the material used is soil and if properly designed, should possess stable
slopes and should not settle to any appreciable extent. Also, the embankments require a stable
foundation; if the foundation soil happens to be soft clay, unless properly designed; excessive
settlement or even ultimate failure can take place.
In developing countries like India the biggest handicap to provide a complete net work of road
system is the limited finances available to build road by the conventional methods. Therefore there is a
need to resort to one of the suitable methods of low cost road construction to meet the growing needs of
the road traffic. The construction cost can be considerably decreased by selecting local materials
including local soils for the construction of the lower layers of the pavement such as the sub-base
course. If the stability of the local soil is not adequate for supporting wheel loads, the properties are
improved by soil stabilization techniques. Thus the principle of soil stabilized road construction
involves the effective utilization of local soils and other suitable stabilizing agents.
Earthwork as an important part of road construction

In any highway engineering work the construction of the embankment or the sub
grade is a very important activity. The earthwork constitutes 30% of the cost of the road
project. The pavement directly rests on the artificially prepared soil sub grade and thus
derives considerable strength from it. The adequate design and construction of
embankments is therefore the key to the successful performance of the roads.
1.2 Desirable properties of Sub grade soil

Stability
Incompressibility
Permanency of strength
Minimum changes in volume and stability under adverse condition
Good drainage
Ease of compaction
The soil should possess adequate stability or resistance to permanent
deformation under loads and should possess resistance to weathering thus
retaining the desired subgrade support. Minimum variation in volume will ensure
minimum variation
drainage
in differential expansion and
is essential
to
avoid
differential
strength values. Good
excessive moisture retention and to reduce the
potential frost action. Ease of compaction ensures higher dry density and strength under
particular type and amount of compaction (1)
1.3 Objective of present study
To characterize the soil under investigation based on its index properties.
To classify the soil as per IRC Classification.
To compare the OMC of the given soil & to achieve Maximum Dry density by
Proctor compaction tests.
To determine the strength of soil by Triaxial method.
To study the effect of RBI-81 and Silica Fume on soil by varying percentage.
To determine the strength enhancement of the given soil with stabilizer.
To determine the thickness by conventional method and Annexure method.
To compare the variation in cost by above method.
1.4 Scope of present study

9
The present study deals with the testing of soil properties of soil sample. The
following tests were done on the soil:
Grain size analysis
Atterberg limits
Compaction
California bearing ratio
Triaxial test
The soil is stabilized with a commercially available stabilizer called Road
Building International -81 (RBI-81) and the strength enhancement of the soil is
studied. And also compared with replacing RBI-81 with Silica fume, strength
enhancement is studied. Economically low cost design studies are done.
CHAPTER-2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
General
Subgrade soil is an integral part of the road pavement structure as it provides
the support to the pavement from beneath. The main function of the subgrade is to give adequate
support to the pavement and for this the subgrade should posses sufficient stability under
adverse climatic and loading conditions .The formation of waves, corrugations, rutting and
shoving in black top pavements and the phenomenon of pumping, blowing and consequent
cracking of cement concrete pavements are generally attributed due to the poor subgrade
conditions.
When soil is used in embankment construction, in addition to stability
incompressibility is also important as differential settlement may cause failures. Compacted soil
10
and stabilized soil are often used in sub base or base course of highway pavements. The soil is
therefore considered as one of the principle highway materials. (1)
2.2 Characteristics of soil

Soil consists mainly of mineral matter formed by the disintegration of rocks, by the
action of water, frost, temperature, pressure or by plant or animal life. Based on the individual
grain size of soil particles, soils have been classified as gravel, sand, silt and clay. The
characteristics of soil grains depend on the size, shape, surface texture, chemical composition
and electrical surface charges. Moisture and dry density influence the engineering behavior of a
soil mass. (1,2,3)
2.3 Index properties of soil

The wide range of soil types available as highway construction materials have made it
obligatory on the part of the highway engineer to identify and classify the different soils. The soil
properties on which their identification and classification are based on are known as index
properties. The index properties which are generally used are grain size distribution, liquid limit,
plastic limit and plasticity index. (1,2,3)
Grain size analysis

The grain size distribution is found by mechanical analysis. The components of soils
which are coarse grained may be analyzed by sieve analysis and the soil fines by sedimentation
analysis. The grain size analysis or the mechanical analysis is hence carried out to determine the
percentage of individual grain size present in a soil sample. (1,2,3)
Consistency limits and indices

The physical properties of fine grained soils, especially of clays differ very much at
different water contents. Clay may be almost in a liquid state, or it may show plastic behavior or
may be stiff depending on the moisture content. Plasticity is a property of outstanding
importance for clayey soils, which may be explained as ability to undergo changes of shape
without rupture. Atterberg in 1911 proposed a series of tests, mostly empirical, for the
11
determination of the consistency and plastic properties of fine soils. These are known as
Atterberg limits and indices.
Liquid limit may be defined as the minimum water content at which the soil will flow
under the application of very small shearing force. It is determined usually in the laboratory
using a mechanical device.
Plastic limit may be defined as the minimum moisture content at which the soil remains
in a plastic state. The lower limit is arbitrarily defined and determined in the laboratory by a
prescribed test procedure.
Plasticity index is defined as the numerical difference between the liquid and the plastic
limits. Plasticity index thus indicates the range of moisture content over which the soil is in
plastic condition.(1,2,3)
2.4 Determination of soil properties

There are various tests that are carried out to determine the various properties of the soil
1. Liquid limit: The water content at which the soil has a small shear that it flows to close a
groove of standard width when jarred in a specified manner.
2. Plastic limit: The plastic limit is the water content at which the soil to crumble when rolled
into threads of specified size.
3. Plasticity index: The amount of water which must be added to change a soil from its
plastic limit to its liquid limit is an indication of the plasticity of the soil. The plasticity is
measured by the plasticity index which is equal to the liquid limit minus the plastic limit.
(5)
12
4. Grain size analysis: It is also known as mechanical analysis of soils is the determination of
the percentage of individual grain sizes present in the sample. The results of the test are of
great value in soil classification. There are two methods of sieve analysis :
(i)
wet sieving applicable to all soils and
(ii)
Dry sieving applicable to soils having negligible proportion

of clay and silt. (3)
5. Compaction test: This test is carried out to find out the optimum moisture content and the
maximum dry density of the given soil(2,3).
2.5 Sub-grade soil strength

The factors on which the strength characteristics of soil depend are:
(i)
Soil type
(ii)
Moisture content
(iii)
Dry density
(iv)
Internal structure of the soil and
(v)
The type and mode of stress application (1).
2.5.1 Evaluation of soil strength

The tests used to evaluate the strength properties of soils may be broadly divided into
three groups:
(i)
Shear test
(ii)
Bearing test and
(iii)
Penetration test.
The following tests were carried out in the present study to find the strength of the soil
1. CBR test: This test was developed by the Californian Division of highways as a method of
classifying and evaluating soil sub-grade and base course materials for flexible pavement. The
13
CBR is a measure of resistance of a material to penetration of standard plunger under
controlled density and moisture conditions.
2. Triaxial compression test: This test is carried to evaluate the in-situ
strength of the soil
sample under controlled loading.(2,3,)
Table: Density requirement of embankment and subgrade

Type of work
Maximum laboratory dry unit weight when

tested as per IS:2720(part 8)
Embankments up to 3 meters
Height, not subjected to expensive flooding.
Not less than 15.2kN/cu.m.
Embankments exceeding 3 meters height or
embankments of any height subject to long
periods of inundation
Subgrade and earthen Shoulders/ verges/
backfill
2.6 Soil stabilization using powder based inorganic stabilizer

The effectiveness of this stabilizer both plastic & non-plastic soils is studied by carrying
out a detailed laboratory study. Different types of soils that is gravelly, sandy, silty, clayey are
stabilized with inorganic stabilizer in the range of 2-12%. Apart from the study of geotechnical
properties of individual soils, strength in terms of UU & CBR of stabilized soils was evaluated.
The selected soils viz. gravelly, sandy & silty are observed to be non-plastic. Clayey soil
is observed to be highly compressible in nature.
The Triaxial strength of all the soils increases with the addition of stabilizer content for
different curing periods. The rate of increase is more in silty & gravelly soils as compared
to sandy & clayey soils.
14
The CBR value increases with stabilizer content for all soils. It is observed that the value
increases significantly after addition of 2% content. The rate of increase is more in
gravelly & silty soils as compared to sandy & clayey soils.
Gravelly soil with 6% & silty soil with 4% stabilizer content may be used as a sub-base
layer of pavement. Gravelly & silty soils with 8% stabilizer content may be used as a
base layer of pavement.
All the soils stabilized with 2% stabilizer content may be used for shoulder construction.
It can be concluded that powder based inorganic stabilizer has the potential for
stabilization of gravelly & silty soils to make it suitable for its use in improved sub
base/base layer/shoulder construction of a road pavement. Solution to a typical practical
problem indicated substantial reduction in the total pavement thickness which not only
reduces the total cost but also avoids the use of natural depleting conventional materials.
Test tracks of suitable length may be constructed & monitored over a period of time
before adopting such specifications for large scale field applications.
2.7 Stabilized road

If the stability of the local soil is not adequate for supporting the wheel loads, the
properties are improved by soil-stabilization techniques. Thus the principle of soil stabilized road
construction involves the effective utilization of local soils and other suitable stabilizing agents.
The term soil stabilization means the improvement of the stability or bearing power of
the soil by the use of controlled compaction, proportioning and or the addition of suitable
admixture or stabilizers. Soil stabilization deals with physical physico-chemical and chemical
methods to make the stabilized soil serve its purpose as a pavement component material. (1,4)
2.7.1 Advantages of stabilization
15
(i)
It improves the engineering properties of poor soils as well as enhancing that of good
soils to meet the specified requirements.
(ii)
It helps reduce the need of existing borrow pit materials and prospecting of new
borrow pit sources there by protecting environment.
(iii)
It eliminates the need for the landfill sites for dumping of poor materials and
environmental harmful materials as well as construction waste
(iv)
It allows faster construction because removal of substandard material and

transportation of good materials is not required.
(v)
Time saved also adds to cost saving of the project and allows more projects to be
undertaken and complete within the same time frame.
2.7.2 Properties of stabilization
Bonds soil particles together (increases strength & stiffness).
Reduces permeability (fills voids, forms membrane).
Improves compaction (lubrication, particle restructuring).
2.7.3 Features & Benefits
Higher resistance (R) values
Reduction in plasticity
Lower permeability
Reduction of pavement thickness
Elimination of excavation, material hauling and handling, and base importation
Aids compaction
16
Provides "all-weather access onto and within project sites.
The principles are:

Evaluating the properties of given soil
Deciding the method of supplementing the lacking property by the effective and economical
method of stabilization.
Designing the stabilized soil mix for intended stability and durability values.
RBI Grade 81 soil stabilizer is an advanced technological development with economic and
environmental benefits. It is a unique, environmentally friendly, comprehensive and irreversible

inorganic stabilizer for road construction. The technology was developed by scientists incorporating
natural materials with well proven efficacy and durability. It has undergone a rigorous development and
verification process internationally coordinated by Road Building International and has been granted an
international patent. Road Building International has engineered an inorganic product:
is extremely effective
whose action is irreversible
is produced from natural ingredients
is capable of providing rapid infrastructure development progress while preserving the

environment by using the in-situ natural soil.
Avoids the environmental burdens associated with conventional road construction.
RBI Grade 81 can be effectively applied to all soil types:

In-situ application with RBI Grade 81 causes no interruption to traffic.
Resultant cost savings of 60% (in comparison to conventional methods).
RBI Grade 81 avoids the otherwise necessary removal and dumping of asphalt (5).
17
2.7.4 Properties of RBI-81 stabilizer
Table 2.1: properties of RBI-81 stabilizer(5)
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION
POWDER
Properties
% by mass
Ca
CaO- 52-56
Si
SiO215-19
SO3 9-11
Al
Al2O3 5-7
Fe
Fe2O3 0-2
Mg
MgO 0-1
Mn, K, Cu, Zn
Mn+K+Cu+Zn 0,1-0,3
H2o
1-3
Fibers (polypropylene)
0-1
Additives
0-4
2.8 Silica fume

2.8.1 Definition for silica fume
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) defines silica fume as very fine nonCrystalline silica produced in electric arc furnaces as a by-product of the production of elemental
18
silicon or alloys containing silicon (ACI 116R). It is usually a gray colored powder, somewhat
similar to Portland cement or some fly ashes(6,7).
2.8.2 Pozzolanic will not gain strength when mixed with water. Examples include silica fume
meeting the requirements of ASTM C 1240, Standard Specification for Silica Fume Used in
Cementitious Mixtures, and low-calcium fly ash meeting the requirements of ASTM C 618,
Standard Specification for Coal Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolanic for Use in
Concrete, Class F.
2.8.3 Cementitious will gain strength when mixed with water. Examples include ground
granulated blast-furnace slag meeting the requirements of ASTMC989, Standard Specification
for Ground Granulated Blast-Furnace Slag for use
Concrete and Mortars, or high-calcium fly
ash meeting the requirements of ASTM C 618, Class C.
2.8.4 Production
Silica fume is a by-product of producing silicon metal or ferrosilicon alloys in
smelters using electric arc furnaces. These metals are used in many industrial applications to
include aluminum and steel production, computer chip fabrication, and production of silicones,
which are widely used in lubricants and sealants. While these are very valuable materials, the byproduct silica fume is of more importance to the concrete industry(7).
19
Fig shows production of Silica
Fig 1.2 EMISSION OF SILICA FUME

Figure 1.2 shows a smelter in the days before silica fume was being captured for use in concrete
and other applications. The smoke leaving the plant is actually silica fume. Today in the United
States, no silica fume is allowed to escape to the atmosphere. The silica fume is collected in very
large filters in the bag house and then made available for use in concrete
20
2.9 Chemical Properties
Amorphous. This term simply means that silica fume is not a crystalline material. A
crystalline material will not dissolve in concrete, which must occur before the material can react.
Dont forget that there is a crystalline material in concrete that is chemically similar to silica
fume. That material is sand. While sand is essentially silicon dioxide (SiO2), it does not react
because of its crystalline nature.
Trace elements. There may be additional materials in the silica fume based upon the metal
being produced in the smelter from which the fume was recovered. Usually, these materials have
no impact on the performance of silica fume in concrete.
2.10 Physical Properties

Particle size. Silica fume particles are extremely small, with more than 95%
of the particles being less than 1 m (one micrometer). Particle size is extremely important for
both the physical and chemical contributions (discussed below) of silica fume in concrete.
Bulk density. This is just another term for unit weight. The bulk density of the asproduced fume depends upon the metal being made in the furnace and upon how the furnace is
operated. Because the bulk density of the as-produced silica fume is usually very low, it is not
very economical to transport it for long distances.
Specific gravity. Specific gravity is a relative number that tells how silica fume compares
to water, which has a specific gravity of 1.00. Silica fume has a specific gravity of about 2.2,
which is somewhat lighter than portland cement, which has a specific gravity of 3.15.
21
PHYSICAL PORPERTIES OF SILICA FUME(7)
Specific surface.
Specific surface is the total surface area of a given mass of a material. Because the particles
of silica fume are very small, the surface area is very large. We know that water demand
increases for sand as the particles become smaller; the same happens for silica fume. This fact is
why it is necessary to use silica fume in combination with a water-reducing admixture or a super
plasticizer. A specialized test called the BET method or nitrogen adsorption method must be
used to measure the specific surface of silica fume. Specific surface determinations based on
sieve analysis or air-permeability testing are meaningless for silica fume.
22
Figure 2.1
Figure2.1. Photomicrograph of Portland cement grains (left) and silica-fume particles (right) at
the same magnification. The longer white bar in the silica fume side is 1 micrometer long. Note
that ACI 234R, Guide for the Use of Silica Fume in Concrete, estimates that for a 15 percent
silica-fume replacement of cement, there are approximately 2,000,000 particles of silica fume for
each grain of Portland cement.
Chemical contributions
Because of its very high amorphous silicon dioxide content, silica fume is a very reactive
pozzolanic material in concrete. As the Portland cement in concrete begins to react chemically, it
releases calcium hydroxide. The silica fume reacts with this calcium hydroxide to form
additional binder material called calcium silicate hydrate, which is very similar to the calcium
silicate hydrate formed from the portland cement.
Physical contributions
Adding silica fume brings millions and millions of very small particles to a concrete
mixture. Just like fine aggregate fills in the spaces between coarse aggregate particles, silica
fume fills in the spaces between cement grains. This phenomenon is frequently referred to as
particle packing or micro-filling. Even if silica fume did not react chemically, the micro-filler
effect would bring about significant improvements in the nature of the concrete. Below table
present a comparison of the size of silica-fume particles to other concrete ingredients to help
23
understand how small these particles actually are.
2.11 Soil stabilization methods

The methods of soil stabilization which are in common use are:
(i)
Chemical Stabilization
(ii)
Mechanical stabilization(1)
2.11.1 Effects of stabilization

Soil stabilization may result in any one or more of the following changes:
1. Increase in stability, change in properties like density or swelling, change in
physical characteristics.
2. Change in chemical properties.
3. Retaining and desired strength by water proofing(1)
2.12 Techniques of soil stabilization

Based on the above principles, the various technique of soil stabilization may be grouped
Proportioning technique
1. Cementing agents
2. Modifying agents
3. Water proofing agents
4. Water repelling agents
5. Water retaining agents
6. Heat treatment
7. Chemical stabilization
8. In all the above methods, adequate compaction of the stabilized layers is the most
essential requirement. (1)
2.13 Design and cost estimation.
24
As per IRC-37 the conventional methods was used to calculate the thickness of different
layer, which was further compared with IRC-37 Annexure method difference in thickness is
calculated. (8)
The cost which are involved for materials were taken from Schedule Rate (SR), and
calculated. (9)
CHAPTER-3
PRESENT INVESTIGATION
3.1 General Studies:
Soil is one of the principle materials of construction in soil embankments and in
stabilized soil base and sub-base courses.
Various types of soil have various properties at different stretch of the sub grade.
Thus, it is important to carry out basic soil tests at a stretch of 300mts.
In view of the wide diversity in soil type, it is desirable to classify the subgrade soil
into groups possessing similar physical properties.
In the present investigation the soil is classified on the basis of simple laboratory
tests such as grain size analysis and consistency limit tests.
Soil compaction is an important phenomenon in highway construction as compacted
subgrade improves the load supporting ability of the pavement; in turn resulting in pavement
thickness requirement. Compaction of earth embankments would result in decreased
settlement. Thus the behavior of soil subgrade material could be considerably improved by
adequate compaction under controlled conditions. The laboratory compaction tests are
conducted and the optimum moisture content at which the soil should be compacted and the
dry density that should be achieved at the construction site has been determined.
25
Soil for the present study was obtained from the project site. The basic tests like
Atterberg limits, compaction test, California bearing resistance & Triaxial test was done to
characterize the soil based on its properties.
The representative soils were stabilized using the stabilizers Road Building
International-81 and Silica Fume for different proportions i.e. 1%, 2% and 4% stabilizer to
assess their properties and the results were analyzed. Road Building International has
engineered as an inorganic product:
Is capable of providing rapid infrastructure development progress while preserving

the environment by using the in-situ natural soil.
Avoids the environmental burdens associated with conventional road construction . In
the present study, soil was subjected to basic tests like:
Grain size analysis
Atterberg limits
Compaction
California bearing ratio test
Triaxial test (at 0.7, 1.4 and 2.1 kg/sqcm confinement)
3.2 Laboratory test conducted on soil: (2,3)

3.2.1 Grain size analysis:
The percentage of various sizes of particle in a given dry soil sample is determined by
grain size analysis. Grain size analysis also knows as mechanical analysis of soils is the
determination of the percent of individual grain sizes present in the sample.
26
Fig 1: Indian standard grain size soil classification system
Fig-3.1 Sieve Analysis Apparatus
3.2.2 Atterberg limits:

By consistency is meant the relative ease with which soil can be deformed. This
term is mostly used for fine grained soils for which the consistency is related to a large
extent to water content. Consistency denotes degree of firmness of the soil which may be
termed as soft, firm, stiff or hard. In 1911 Atterberg divided the entire range from liquid to
27
solid state into four stages liquid state, plastic state, semi -solid state and solid state. He
set arbitrary limits known as consistency limits or Atterberg limits, for these divisions in
terms of water content. Thus the consistency limits are the water contents at which the soil
mass passes from one state to the next.
Liquid limit (WI): It is defined as the minimum water content at which the soil is
still in the liquid state, but has a small shearing strength against flowing which can be
measured by standard available means. With reference to the standard liquid limit device,
it is defined as the minimum water content at which a part of soil cut by a groove
of standard dimensions will flow together for a distance of 12mm under an impact of 25
blows in the device.
Plastic limit (WP): plastic limit is the water content corresponding to an arbitrary limit
between the plastic and the semi-solid states of consistency of a soil. It is defined as the
minimum water content at which a soil will just begin to crumble when rolled
into a thread approximately 3mm in dia.
3.2.3 Compaction test:

Compaction of soil is a process by which the soil particles are constrained to be packed
more closely together by reducing the air voids. It causes decrease in air voids and consequently
increases in dry density. This may result in increase in shearing strength. Degree of compaction
is usually measured quantitatively by dry density.
Compaction refers to a more or less rapid reduction mainly in the air voids under a loading of
short duration Increase in dry density of soil due to compaction mainly depends on two factors.
Compacting moisture content

The amount of compaction.
3.2.4 California bearing ratio test (CBR):

The CBR is a measure of resistance of a material to penetration of standard
plunger under controlled density and moisture conditions. CBR test is mainly utilized for
the design of pavement structure. The test is simple and has been extensively
28
investigated for field correlations of flexible pavement thickness requirement.
The test consists of causing a cylindrical plunger of 50mm diameter to penetrate a
pavement component material a 1.25mm/min. The load for 2.5mm and 5mm
are
recorded. This load is expressed as a percentage of standard load value at a respective

deformation level to obtain CBR value.
29
Fig-3.2 CBR mould preparation
Fig 3.3- CBR Testing Machine
3.2.5 Triaxial compression test:

The triaxial compression test in which the test specimen is compressed by
applying all the three principal stress. The cell pressure in the triaxial cell is also called
30
the confining pressure.
Fig-3.4 Triaxial testing machine
Fig-4.5 Mould Extractor
CHAPTER-4
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
4.1 General
31
The laboratory tests for the various properties of the soil were conducted and the results
thus obtained are tabulated and analyzed.
The test was conducted on locally available soil and the properties were compared with
and without the use of stabilizer.
4.2 Laboratory tests on soil material

4.2.1 Wet sieve analysis
Sample Calculation:
Sample: Native Red Soil
Wt of sample taken: 500gms
Table 4.1
shows the sample calculation
sample
Red Soil
sieve size
Wt of
sample
reained
cumulative Wt
retained
cum % wt
ret
%fine
passing
4.75
122.17
122.17
24.434
75.566
2.36
24.44
146.61
29.322
70.678
1.18
41.22
187.83
37.566
62.434
0.6
40.65
228.48
45.696
54.304
0.425
29.94
258.42
51.684
48.316
0.15
36
294.42
58.884
41.116
9.59
304.01
60.802
Fines
39.198
0.075
Gravel
Sand
24.434
24.434
24.434
32
80
70
60
50
40
30
Cu=23.54
20
Cc=3.1
10
0
Seive size
Graph of wet sieve analysis

Type of soil as per IS-Classification: Sandy Clayey (SC) Soil
4.2.2 Atterberg limit: Native Red Soil

Table 4.2
shows the liquid limit calculation
No of blows
10
13
24
29
M/C %
45.94
44.08
42.58
41.72
Table 4.2.1 shows Plastic limit

33
M/C container No
123
75
52
21
Wt of container gms (W1)

Wt of cont + wit soil (W2)
Wt of cont + dry soil %
(W3)
23.86
26.03
21.98
23.58
27.18
29.15
40.47
42.34
25.54
23.23
28.71
41.92
M/c %
29.17
28.00
28.76
28.97
28.72
Remarks
LL
"from graph"
PL
PI
42.4
28.72
13.68
Liquid limit and Plastic Index table
LL
Native(R
S)
42.4
RS+1%
RBI
42
RS+2%
RBI
41.61
RS+4%
RBI
40.01
RS+1%
SF
40
RS+2%
SF
39.57
PL
28.72
28.74
28.76
27.92
26.97
27.51
26.93
PI
13.68
13.24
12.87
12.09
13.03
12.06
11.63
soil
RS+4% SF
38.6
14
13.5
13
12.5
PI
12
RBI-81
% SF
11.5
11
10.5
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
% dosage
4.2.3 Compaction test

34
3.5
4.5
Sample Calculation:
Sample: Red Soil
Type of Compaction
Modified Proctor
Type of Soil
New
Type of Mould
Small
Type of Hammer
4.89
No. of Layers
No. of Blows
25
Table 4.2.2 shows the sample calculation
Moisture Content
(%)
9.07
11.33
12.91
14.73
16.41
Bulk Density
(g/cc)
1.90
1.96
2.11
2.12
2.08
Dry Density (g/cc)

1.74
1.76
1.86
1.85
1.79
1.90
1.85
OMC=13.54%
MDD=1.877gm/
1.80
cc
Dry Density(gm/cc)
1.75
1.70
1.65
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00
M/C (%)
35
Remarks: MDD and OMC for different % are of RBI-81 & Silica Fume.
Type of
Stabilizer
percentage
Compaction
OMC (%)
MDD (gm/cc)
4.2.4
Native(RS
)
0%
13.54
1.877
1%
RBI-81
2%
4%
1%
13.48
1.882
13.52
1.887
13.89
1.869
12.34
1.887
Silica fume
2%
13.16
1.893
California bearing ratio test
Sample Calculation:
Sample: Red Soil
Area of plunger = 19.64cm2
CBR = 8% (This has been assumed as per Guidelines) (1), the value is on lower side.
4.2.5 Triaxial Compression Test:

Sample Calculation: Red soil
Specimen details:
Diameter: 3.8cm
Height: 7.6cm
Volume, V = (d2/4) * h
= (*3.82/4) * 7.6
V = 86.19 cm3
Mass = volume * density
= 86.19 * 1.87
= 167.48gms
Water = 13.54% * 161.78
= 20.07gms
36
4%
13.1
1.94
RBI
Silica Fume
1.0% = 1.62 gms
1.63gms
2.0% = 3.52 gms
3.26gms
4.0% = 6.44 gms
6.69gms
The above calculated mass of soil, water and RBI according to varying percentages are
mixed together and put into the mould, mould is extracted and placed for moist curing for 3days.
Table 4.2.5 sample calculation at different confining pressure says 0.7, 1.4 and 2.1kg/cm2.
Native Red soil
cm
length of specimen
7.6
76
Dia of specimen
3.8
38
11.3
4
1133.
90
area of specimen(Ai)
dial
gauge
pressure( 31) kg/cm2

Load at Failure
(kg)
least count (dial
gauge), mm
least count
( proving ring),
mm
mm
noted
taken
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
110
120
130
140
0.11
0.12
0.13
0.14
150
0.15
0
3
4
1
1.2
1.2
2.2
4.3
9.2
13.1
17.4
1+2.
3
8.1
12.3
17.2
2+2.
3
0.001
0.002
0
3
4
5
7
7
12
23
47
66
89
0
0.66
0.88
1.1
1.54
1.54
2.64
5.06
10.34
14.52
19.58
0.00E+00
1.32E-04
2.63E-04
3.95E-04
5.26E-04
6.58E-04
7.89E-04
9.21E-04
1.05E-03
1.18E-03
1.32E-03
Correct
ed area
Ac=(Ai/
(1)cm2
11.339
11.338
11.336
11.335
11.333
11.332
11.330
11.329
11.327
11.326
11.324
113
141
163
187
24.86
31.02
35.86
41.14
1.45E-03
1.58E-03
1.71E-03
1.84E-03
11.323
11.321
11.320
11.318
2.20
2.74
3.17
3.63
213
46.86
1.97E-03
11.317
4.14
proving
(mm)
2.1
readin
gs
load(k
g)
37
Strain()
Stress
(kg/c
m2)
0.00
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.14
0.14
0.23
0.45
0.91
1.28
1.73
160
170
180
0.16
0.17
0.18
239
261
292
52.58
57.42
64.24
2.11E-03
2.24E-03
2.37E-03
11.315
11.314
11.312
4.65
5.08
5.68
0.19
0.20
0.21
0.22
0.23
0.24
7.4
12.1
18.2
3+3.
4
9
14.4
4+.2
-0.1
.4
190
200
210
220
230
240
319
345
374
402
401
398
2.50E-03
2.63E-03
2.76E-03
2.89E-03
3.03E-03
3.16E-03
11.311
11.309
11.308
11.306
11.305
11.303
6.20
6.71
7.28
7.81
7.80
7.78
250
0.25
1.3
394
3.29E-03
11.302
7.73
260
0.26 1.4
70.18
75.9
82.28
88.44
94.6
99.88
100.7
6
111.3
2
3.42E-03
11.300
Deviator
stress
(d=F/Ac)
Normal Stress
( 11)kg/cm2
391
1.294
3.394
Table 4.2.6 Shear Strength obtained for Native soil (RS)
38
7.64
31
(Kg/cm2)
0.7
1.4
2.1
ShearStren
gth
(kg/cm2)
0.213
0.287
0.311
%Dosage
Annexure 1: Shows Triaxial compression test Graphs with different %dosage at 0.7, 1.4 and
2.1kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
Table 4.2.7 Abstract of Triaxial Test Result.
Sample
sl no
Native Soil
area'Ac
load
'
Stress
(Kg/cm)
Atterberg
limits
LL
Kg
Sqcm
4.93
11.267
0.7
0.962
1.662
42.04
5.87
11.284
1.4
1.001
2.401
42.04
7.81
11.28
2.1
1.293
3.393
42.04
Sample
sl no
1
2
3
Sample
sl no
31
Native Soil +
1% RBI81
area'Ac
load
'
11
Stress
(Kg/cm)
Atterberg
limits
LL
Kg
Sqcm
7.59
10.3
5
11.3
3
11.289
0.7
0.437
1.137
42
11.312
1.4
0.519
1.919
42
11.29
2.1
0.692
2.792
42
Native Soil +
2% RBI81
load
Area
'Ac'
31
Stress
(Kg/cm)
39
E3 value
Kg/sqc
PI
m
Mpa
238.3
13.68
2430
0
253.0
13.68
2580
1
269.7
13.68
2751
8
11
E3 value
Kg/sqc
PI
m
Mpa
343.2
13.24
3500
3
355.2
13.24
3622
0
359.6
13.24 3667.67
8
Atterberg
limits
E3 value
1
2
3
Sample
sl no
1
2
3
Sampl
e
sl no
Kg
10.8
4
11.2
9
14.5
9
Sqcm
31
LL
11
PI
11.303
0.7
0.672
1.372
41.61
12.87
11.283
1.4
0.917
2.317
41.61
12.87
11.278
2.1
1.005
3.105
41.61
12.87
Native Soil +
4% RBI81
Area
load
'Ac'
Kg
14.5
8
15.4
7
20.5
8
Sqcm
Stress
(Kg/cm)
31
Mpa
353.0
3600
4
360.9
3681
8
392.2
4000
7
Atterberg
limits
LL
11
11.29
0.7
1.291
1.991
40.01
11.293
1.4
1.370
2.770
40.01
11.278
2.1
1.825
3.925
40.01
E3 value
Kg/sqc
PI
m
Mpa
366.0
12.09
3733
8
401.0
12.09
4090
9
451.1
12.09
4600
1
Native Soil +
1%Silica Fume
load
Area 'Ac'
Kg
Sqcm
Stress
(Kg/cm)
31
Atterberg
limits
11
LL
8.86
11.284
0.7
1.021
1.721
40.00
11.55
11.259
1.4
1.133
2.533
40.00
12.61
11.275
2.1
1.701
3.801
40.00
Sampl
e
sl no
Kg/sqc
m
Native Soil +
2%Silica Fume
load
Area 'Ac'
Stress
(Kg/cm)
40
E3 value
Kg/sq
PI
cm
Mpa
361.
12.96
3689
77
377.
12.96
3846
17
392.
12.96
4000
27
Atterberg
limits
E3 value
Kg
Sqcm
31
11
LL
PI
11.52
11.281
0.7
0.785
1.485
39.47
12.04
12.76
11.294
1.4
1.023
2.423
39.47
12.04
19.18
11.287
2.1
1.117
3.217
39.47
12.04
Sampl
e
sl no
Kg/sq
cm
Mpa
374.
3816
22
392.
4000
27
487.
4966
00
Native Soil +
4%Silica Fume
load
Area 'Ac'
Kg
Sqcm
Stress
(Kg/cm)
31
Atterberg
limits
LL
11
14.37
11.284
0.7
1.273
1.973
38.60
21.44
11.275
1.4
1.902
3.302
38.60
23.7
11.25
2.1
2.107
4.207
38.60
E3 value
Kg/sq
PI
cm
Mpa
424.
11.62 4333.3
95
490.
11.62
5000
34
502.
11.62
5125
59
Table 4.2.8 sample calculation at different confining pressure says 0.7, 1.4 and 2.1kg/cm2.
Sl Type of
No soil
.
Days
1)
Native
Confinement
pressure
(kg/cm2)
0.7
E3 in kg/cm2
0%
1%
2430
41
2%
-
4%
-
Soil(RS)
1)
3)
RS + %
RBI-81
RS +%
Silica
Fume
1.4
2580
2.1
2751
0.7
3500
3600
3743
1.4
3622
3681
4090
2.1
3733
4090
4600
0.7
3689
3816
4333
1.4
3846
4000
5000
2.1
4333
4966
5125
Table 4.2.10 Test result for %Dosage for 1.4 kg/cm2 confinements
Atterberg limits
Soil + %
Stabilizer
Native (RS)
LL
42.04
PI
13.68
Load
Shear parameter
Shear
d
31
strength
(Kg/cm2)
(Kg/cm2)
(Kg/cm2)
Kg
5.87
1.4
0.519
0.287
E3 value
Kg/cm2
2580
RS+1% RBI-81
42
13.24
10.35
1.4
0.917
0.361
3622
RS+2% RBI-81
41.61
12.87
11.29
1.4
1.001
0.507
3681
RS+4% RBI-81
40.01
12.09
15.47
1.4
1.370
0.674
4090
RS +1% SF
40
13.03
11.35
1.4
1.023
0.417
3846
RS +2% SF
39.57
12.06
12.76
1.4
1.133
0.571
4000
RS +4% SF
38.6
11.63
21.44
1.4
1.903
0.922
5000
42
Mpa
253.0
1
355.2
0
360.9
8
401.0
9
377.1
7
392.2
7
490.3
4
Table 4.2.11 Shear Strength obtained for Native soil (RS) with % Dosage
(Kg/cm2)
31
4.3.
Red soil
(RS)
RS+1%
RBI-81
Shear Strength kg/cm2

RS+2%
RS+4%
RS+1
RBI-81
RBI-81
% SF
RS+2
% SF
RS+4
% SF
0.7
0.213
0.308
0.434
0.557
0.337
0.534
0.811
1.4
0.287
0.361
0.507
0.674
0.417
0.571
0.922
2.1
0.311
0.422
0.581
0.791
0.454
0.652
1.032
Design of pavement:
Method 1: By IRC-37 CBR method,

Enter the Values For Design of Flexible Pavement as
per
IRC37 Guidelines
8
CBR value (%)
Length of road
40 km
Type of Road
4 Lane Dual carriage way
Design life 'n'
10
IRC 37 Guidelines
0.07
Growth factor 'r'

4.5
VDF value 'F'
Lane distribution
factor 'D'
0.75
Initial traffic in the

year of completion
(CVPD) 'A'
5000
Cumulative num of
standard axle 'N'
85.101
N= (365*((1+r) n -1)*A*D*F)/r
A=P (1+r) x
Table shows Thickness obtained for different layers by CBR method,

43
msa
As per CBR method obtained thickness (mm)
Indivial layer thickness
630
mt
unit
cm
mm
0.04
40
0.14
14
140
0.25
25
250
0.2
20
200
0.63
63
630
BM
DBM
Base
Sub-Base
total
Method 2: By IRC-37 Annexure1 method,

Moduls of Elasticity of Subgrade, Sub-base and Base layers
Step1
Input the data

Elastic Modulus of Subgrade 'E3' (Mpa)
Thickness of Granular Layer 'h' (mm) / H2

Composite Elastic Modulus of granular Sub-Base and base 'E2'
(Mpa)
254.5686
450
E2=E3*0.2*h0.45
795.76
Step2
Elastic Modulus of RBI81 'E1' (Mpa)
Thickness of Granular Layer H2 (mm)
Changed thickness using stabilizer 'H1' (mm)
((E1 (H1)3)/ 12(1-12))= ((E2 (H2)3)/12(1-22))

From the above formula we calculate H1, is the Poissons ratio.
44
505.68375
450
565
Table 4.2.12 shows the thickness variation with different %Dosage
Native(
RS)
soil
RS+1%
RBI
RS+2%
RBI
RS+4%
RBI
RS+1% SF
RS+2%
SF
RS+4
% SF
composite Elastic modulus of Granular Sub Base and Bas Layer(mm) E2

Kg/cm2
8114
8114
8114
8114
8114
8114
Mpa
795.76
795.76 795.76
795.76
795.76 795.76
Thickness
reqd
588
584
564
576
568
528
rounded
575
570
530
thickness
590
585
565
20
20
20
chip carpet
20
20
20
Total
595
590
550
thickness
610
605
585
Table 4.2.13 shows the thickness variation by different layers

soil + % RBI
Native
RS
RS+1 %
RBI
BC
40
DBM
140
chip carpet
BASE (WMM)
250
Thickness
(mm)
SUBBASE
(GSB)
total
Thickness
200
630
RS+2 %
RBI
RS+4
% RBI
RS+1 % SF
20
20
20
20
20
20
590
585
565
575
570
530
610
605
585
595
590
550
--
45
RS+2 %
SF
--
RS+4
% SF
-
4.4.
Materials Quantity
Considering 4-lane dual carriage way with 4mt wide median and 2mt paved shoulder on
either side.
Table 4.2.13 materials required per km stretch.
Materials required per Km in cum (as per IRC-37 CBR
method)
Native soil thickness (mm)
BC
DBM
BASE (WMM)
SUBBASE (GSB)
Qty (cum)
880
3080
5500
4400
Table 4.2.14 materials required per km stretch.

material Required per Km
Soil + %
Stabilizer
BM
DB
M
Chip carpet
Base
Sub-Base
m3
-
m2
22000
22000
22000
m3
RS+1% RBI-81
RS+2% RBI-81
RS+4% RBI-81
m3
-
m3
-
RS +1% SF
RS +2% SF
RS +4% SF
22000
22000
22000
Unit
46
B&SB
Replaced
Stabilizer
Required(m3)
Silica
m3
RBI-81
Fume
12980
130
12870
257
12430
497
12650
12540
11660
127
251
466
4.5.
Cost analysis,
Cost are estimated based on scheduled rates and are noted6.
Table 4.2.15 Cost involved per m3

Cost per m3 (in Rs.) as per SR PWD
BM
DBM
Base
Sub-Base
Chip carpet
B&SB
Replaced
Stabilizer per m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
m2
m3
RBI-81
6000
5500
1400
1100
280
350
37
Table 4.2.16 Cost involved per km of stretch as per CBR method design
Materials required(cum) and cost involved per Km as per IRC-37 CBR
method
native soil
BC
DBM
BASE (WMM)
SUBBASE (GSB)
qty
rate per cum
880
6500
3080
5500
5500
1450
4400
1100
Total cost(Rs).
47
Amount(Rs.)
57,20,000.00
1,69,40,000.00
79,75,000.00
48,40,000.00
3,54,75,000.00
Silica Fume
5
Table 4.2.17 Cost involved per km of stretch as per IRC-37 Annexure1 method.
Material required per Km and cost estimated as per IRC-37 annexure
method
rate( amount(R
rate( amount(R
qty
Rs.)
s.)
qty
Rs.)
s.)
RBI 1%
SF 1%
Chip
Chip
carpet( sq
2200
62,70,000.
carpet
2200
62,70,000.
m)
0
285 00
sqm
0
285 00
RBI in kgs
1170
00
42,12,000.
36 00
soil in cum
1298
0
45,43,000.
350 00
Total Cost
1,50,25,00
0.00
qty
rate(
Rs.)
2200
0
RBI in kgs
2313
00
soil in cum
1287
0
350 45,04,500
Total Cost
1,91,01,3
00
RBI 4%
Chip
carpet( sq
m)
2200
0
RBI in kgs
soil in cum
4473
00
1243
1905
00
11,43,000.
6 00
soil in
cum
1298
0
45,43,000.
350 00
Total Cost
1,19,56,0
00.00
amount(R
s.)
RBI 2%
Chip
carpet( sq
m)
qty
SF in kgs
qty
rate(
Rs.)
amount(R
s.)
285 62,70,000
SF 2%
Chip
carpet
sqm
2200
0
62,70,000.
285 00
36 83,26,800
SF in kgs
3765
00
22,59,000.
6 00
soil in
cum
1287
0
45,04,500.
350 00
Total Cost
1,30,33,5
00.00
rate(
Rs.)
amount(R
s.)
qty
rate(
Rs.)
amount(R
s.)
285 62,70,000
SF 4%
Chip
carpet
sqm
2200
0
62,70,000.
285 00
1,61,02,80
36 0
350
SF in kgs
soil in
6840
00
1243
41,04,000.
6 00
350
48
0
43,50,500
Total Cost
2,67,23,3
00
43,50,500.
00
Total Cost
1,47,24,5
00.00
cum
Table 4.2.18 Abstract of Modulus of sub grade, plastic index, thickness and cost with %
relationship at 1.4kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
soil +
Native RS+1 % RS+2 %
% RBI
RS
RBI
RBI
Dosag
0
1
2
e (%)
PI
13.68
13.24
12.87
Total
thickne
630
610
605
ss
(mm)
total
cost(Rs 3,54,75, 1,50,25, 1,91,01,
.)
000 000
300
Modulus of Sub-grade E3 (@
1.4kg/sqcm confinement pressure)
Kg/cm
2
2580
3622
3681
Mpa
253.01
355.2
360.98
%
Decrea
se in
thickne
ss
0
3.17
3.97
%
Saving
s
0
57.65
46.16
%
increas
e in E3
value
0.00
40.39
42.67
RS+4 %
RBI
RS+1 %
SF
RS+2 %
SF
RS+4 %
SF
12.09
13.03
12.06
11.63
585
595
590
550
2,67,23,
300
1,19,56,
000
1,30,33,
500
1,47,24,
500
4090
451.11
3846
377.17
4000
392.27
5000
490.34
7.14
5.56
6.35
12.70
24.67
66.30
63.26
58.49
58.53
49.07
55.04
93.80
49
14
12
10
8
% Decrease in thickness
6
4
2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
% Dosage
The above graph1 shows % decrease in Thickness verses % Dosage of stabilizer
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
% increase in E3
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
% Dosage
The above graph2 shows % increase in modulus value verses % Dosage of stabilizer
50
4.5
70
60
50
40
% Savings
30
20
10
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
% Dosage
The above graph3 shows % Savings in cost verses % Dosage of stabilizer
CHAPTER-5
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
5.1
Discussion
The study of soil characteristics and the analysis is very important aspect in the design
of the pavement which involves several complexities due to variable factors. This study is aimed
at evaluating the strength properties of the given soils by stabilization using the given stabilizers
and the results are compared.
Plastic index was reduced when % Stabilizer dosage increased. But % decrease was
greater when Silica Fume was used.
Shear strength was also increased when specimen was subjected to Triaxial test with
different confinement pressure with different dosage. But the specimen with 4% RBI-81
showed shear failure at a confinement pressure of 0.7kg/cm 2. But with same % of Silica
51
4.5
fume as stabilizer, bulging was observed .So from above point of view infra that with
increase in RBI dosage the stabilized layer shows rigid behavior.
Youngs modulus of stabilized soil also increased with increase in % stabilizer dosage to
about 60% and 90% with RBI-81 and Silica Fume as stabilizer.
All the above observations are based on 3days moist curing.
Design of pavement as per IRC-37 based on CBR showed required thickness of
630mm(BC=40mm,DBM=140mm,Base=250mm,Sub-Base=200mm), and cost involved
was around 3.6cr for 4-lane dual carriage way with 4mt median and 2mt paved shoulder
on either side, as per scheduled rate for materials.
When design was compared with IRC-37 Annexure method the thickness of pavement
was reduced by replacing all the layers with stabilized locally available soil, here the
Modulus of elasticity was taken at confining pressure of 1.4kg/sqcm.
From above design with different stabilizer shows that, when the Silica Fume as
stabilizer with 4% dosage at confining pressure of 1.4kg/ sqcm the thickness was
reduced by around49% with bulging . Similarly when RBI-81 as stabilizer the thickness
was reduced around 28% with shear failure.
Comparing with the cost estimated it showed around 46% and 62% savings with RBI-81
and Silica Fume as stabilizer with 2% dosage.
5.2
Conclusion
The conclusion given below are based on 3 days moist curing and testing for Sandy
clayey(SC) type of soil which was classified based on IS-Classification. And rates as
per scheduled rate6.
The above results when compared shows Silica Fume can be used as stabilizer.
When Silica fume as stabilizer comparing with RBI-81 with 2 and 4%dosage
shows around 15 and 30 % savings compared with conventional method design.
52
As test are need to be carried out for more soil samples and allowing for moist
curing for more number of days and observing the failure characteristic which
type stabilizer to use can be suggested .
As the above design method i.e. (IRC-37 Annexure) pavement thickness
obtained need be studied with trial stretch, observations are need to be made.
5.3
Scope for future studies

Since Silica fume is a byproduct it may be harmful for environment, using such
materials for construction in different forms at different level may reduce the harmful
effect in future.
Since Silica Fume as Cementitious property it can be used in highway construction.
Studies have be carried out for different types of pavement with waste materials like
Silica Fume, as stabilizer or partially replacing cement in rigid pavement or with
silica fume alone.
References
1. Highway Engineering by S.K.Khanna and C.E.G. Justo.
2. Highway materials and pavement testing by S.K.Khanna - C.E.G. JustoA.Veeraragavan.
3. Geotechnical Engineering by T.N.Ramamurthy and T.G. Sitharam.
4. Highway Engineering by Dr.L.R.Kadyali and Dr.N.B.Lal.
5. http://www.icjonline.com/views/2002_07_Singh.pdf,
http://greenbuildings.santa-monica.org/appendices/apamaterials.html
6. www.chronicindia.org suppliers in Silica Fumes.
7. Civil Engineering Materials by Handoo, Mahajan Kaila.
8. IRC-37 Guidelines for design of flexible pavements by Indian Road
Congress
53
Annexure 1
Shows Triaxial compression test (Stress verses Strain) Graphs with different %dosage at 0.7, 1.4
and 2.1kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
1. Triaxial test result Graphs for Native Red Soil (RS) at 0.7kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
12.00
10.00
8.00
Shear stress (kg/cm2)
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
Strain
54
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
2. Triaxial test result Graphs for Native Red Soil (RS) at 1.4 kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
12.00
10.00
8.00
Stress
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00 1.00E-03 2.00E-03 3.00E-03 4.00E-03 5.00E-03 6.00E-03 7.00E-03
3. Triaxial test result Graphs for RS +1% RBI-81 at 0.7 kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
55
6.00
5.00
4.00
Shear Stress(kg/sqcm)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
Strain
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
Shear stress (kg/sqcn)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00E+00
1.00E-03
2.00E-03
3.00E-03
4.00E-03
Strain
56
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00E+00
1.00E-03
2.00E-03
3.00E-03
4.00E-03
5.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
Shear Stress(Kg/sqcm)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00E+00 1.00E-03 2.00E-03 3.00E-03 4.00E-03 5.00E-03
Strain
57
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
Strain
12.00
10.00
8.00
Shear stress(Kg/sqcm)
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
Strain
58
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00 1.00E-03 2.00E-03 3.00E-03 4.00E-03 5.00E-03
Strain
18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00 1.00E-03 2.00E-03 3.00E-03 4.00E-03 5.00E-03
Strain
59
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
Strain
12. Triaxial test result Graphs for RS +1% SF at 0.7 kg/sqcm confinement pressure.
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
Strain
60
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
1.00E-02
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
Strain
61
10.00
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
Strain
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
Shear stress(kg/sqcm)
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1.08E-17 1.00E-03 2.00E-03 3.00E-03 4.00E-03 5.00E-03
-5.00E-04 5.00E-04 1.50E-03 2.50E-03 3.50E-03 4.50E-03
Strain
62
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
Strain
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
Strain
63
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
25.00
20.00
15.00
Shear stress(kg/sqcm)
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.00E+00
2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-03
Strain
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.00E+00 2.00E-03
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
Strain
64
8.00E-03
1.00E-02
65

Study of Soil Properties With Silica Fume As Stablizer

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Study of Soil Properties With Silica Fume As Stablizer

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

www.final-yearproject.

STUDY OF SOIL PROPERTIES WITH SILICA

Post Graduate Diploma in Highway Technology

RASTA Center for Road Technology

RASTA Center for Road Technology

Bangalore 560 058.

is a bonafied work carried out by, Mr. VENU GOPAL.N,

during the year 2008-2009. It is certified that all

corrections/suggestions indicated for Internal Assessment have been incorporated

I extend my sincere thanks to Dr.Krishna Murthy, for his valuable

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Miss. G.Kavitha and Mr.

1.1 General Studies

1.2 Desirable properties of soil

1.3 Objective of present study

1.4 Scope of Present Study

2.1 General Studies

2.2 Characteristics of soil

2.3 Index properties

2.4 Determination of Soil Properties

2.5 Subgrade soil Strength

2.6 Soil Stabilization Using Inorganic stabilizer

2.7 Stabilized Soil with RBI-81

2.8 Silica Fume

2.9 Chemical Properties of silica fume

2.10 Physical properties and contribution

2.12 Technique of Stabilization

2.13 Design and Cost estimation

Chapter.3 Present Investigation

3.1 General Studies

3.2 laboratory test conducted

Chapter.4 Analysis of Result

4.1 General Studies

4.2 Laboratory test result

4.3 Design of Pavement

4.4 Materials Quantity

4.5 Cost Estimation

Chapter.5 Discussion and conclusion

5.3 Scope for future studies

Earthwork as an important part of road construction

1.2 Desirable properties of Sub grade soil

in differential expansion and

strength values. Good

excessive moisture retention and to reduce the

1.3 Objective of present study

To characterize the soil under investigation based on its index properties.

To classify the soil as per IRC Classification.

To determine the strength of soil by Triaxial method.

To determine the strength enhancement of the given soil with stabilizer.

To determine the thickness by conventional method and Annexure method.

To compare the variation in cost by above method.

1.4 Scope of present study

Grain size analysis

California bearing ratio

2.2 Characteristics of soil

2.3 Index properties of soil

Grain size analysis

Consistency limits and indices

2.4 Determination of soil properties

wet sieving applicable to all soils and

Dry sieving applicable to soils having negligible proportion

2.5 Sub-grade soil strength

Internal structure of the soil and