GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF DISPERSIVE SOIL STABILIZED WITH LIME AND POFA
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes157 views
The document presents a study on geotechnical characterization of dispersive soil stabilized with lime and palm oil fuel ash (POFA) to enhance construction practices in India. The research aimed to determine the effects of varying proportions of lime and POFA on the strength properties of dispersive soil, leading to improved unconfined compressive strength. Results indicate significant increases in soil strength using 3% lime and 12% POFA, highlighting the potential of utilizing agro waste in soil stabilization.
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF DISPERSIVE SOIL STABILIZED WITH LIME AND POFA
- 1. GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF DISPERSIVE SOIL STABILIZED WITH LIME AND POFA Presented By: Shoib B Wani NIT Srinagar
- 2. INTRODUCTION In Developing countries like India the effective use of supplementary materials in the field of construction is increasing to reduce the cost of construction and environmental effects. Soil stabilization is one of the methods of recycling the waste and to improve the properties of problematic soils and to make feasible on such soils. The waste material used in this study is an agro waste, namely Palm Oil Fuel Ash (POFA) The problematic soil used in this investigation is Dispersive soil.
- 3. Failures due to dispersion of soil Failures at the Tumkur canal region
- 4. OBJECTIVE • To improve the properties of dispersive soil by stabilization. • To study the effect of various percentages of lime and palm oil fuel ash alone and with lime – palm oil fuel ash combination on strength properties (unconfined compressive strength ) with varying curing period.
- 5. NEED FOR THE STUDY • To promote safe uses of solid waste material such as Palm Oil Fuel Ash in infrastructure development projects such as roads, embankments, etc. • To decrease the cost of stabilization by using POFA in lime stabilization.
- 6. MATERIALS USED Materials used: • Soil sample • Lime • Palm Oil Fuel Ash Tests performed on soil sample: • Specific gravity test • Grain size analysis • Atterberg's limits Liquid limit Plastic limit Shrinkage limit • Standard Proctor test • Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCC) • Double Hydrometer test.
- 7. SOIL PROPERTIES Sl.No Parameters Symbol Value 1 Grain size distribution Sand (s) 61.5 Slit(M) (%) 25.5 Clay(C) (%) 13 2 Liquid limit % Wl 41 3 Plastic limit% Wp 23.80 4 Plasticity Index% Ip 17.20 5 Shrinkage Limit % Ws 22 6 Specific Gravity G 2.63 7 Optimum Moisture Content OMC 14 8 Maximum Dry Density ϒd max 1.78g/cc 9 Unconfined Compressive Strength qu 1.71 kg/cm2 10 Percentage dispersion 42.10% 11 Soil classification Silty Sand (SM) Properties of untreated soil
- 8. Soil properties 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 5 25 Water content (%) Number of blows Wl =41 Grain size analysis of untreated soil Liquid limit graph for untreated soil Standard Proctor graph for untreated soil Γd max =1.78 OMC=14 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Percentage finer (%) Particle size(mm) 1.64 1.66 1.68 1.7 1.72 1.74 1.76 1.78 1.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 Dry density(g/cc) Water content (%) Stress - strain characteristics for untreated soil 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0 0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.09 Stress (kg/cm 2 ) Strain
- 9. Soil properties 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.001 0.01 0.1 Percentagefiner (%) Particle size (mm) with out dispersing agent with dispersing agent Double hydrometer curve for untreated soil
- 10. SOIL CLASSIFICATION Percent dispersion = % passing 5μm (without dispersant agent) / % passing 5μm (Standard) * 100 = 8/19 *100 = 42.10 % The soil is classified as “ Intermediate dispersive” Authors Percent dispersion (%) Dispersion property ASTM D - 4221 Near 100 Completely dispersive Near 0 Soil no dispersive Decker et Dunnigan (1977) <35 No dispersivity problem 35 – 50 Probable dispersivity >50 Problem of dispersivity Knodel (1991) <30 No dispersive 30 – 50 Intermediate dispersive >50 Dispersive
- 11. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Unconfined compressive strength • The test samples were prepared by varying lime content (2, 3, 4, 5%), POFA content (8, 10, 12, 14%) and lime – POFA proportions with the respective MDD and OMC obtain from standard proctor test. • The specimens were cured for 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days.
- 12. Experimental results Curing period = 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days 3% Lime Stress-Strain characteristics of treaded soil with 3% Lime for varying curing periods 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Stress (kg/cm 2 ) Strain 1 Day 3 Days 7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
- 13. Experimental results Curing period = 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days 8% POFA Stress-Strain characteristics of treaded soil with 8% POFA for varying curing periods 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Stress (kg/cm 2 ) Strain 1 Day 3 Days 7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
- 14. Experimental results Curing period = 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days 3% Lime & 12% POFA Stress-Strain characteristics of treaded soil with 3% lime & 12% POFA for varying curing periods 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Stress (kg/cm 2 ) Strain 1 Day 3 Days 7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
- 15. Experimental results % of Admixtures Unconfined compressive strength Curing Period in days Lime POFA 1 Day 3 Days 7 days 14 days 28 Days 2 0 2.91 3.8 5 8.2 11 3 3.35 4.8 5.35 10.3 13 4 4.35 5.15 5.5 10.4 13.4 5 4.45 5.4 5.9 10.45 13.45 0 8 2.52 2.65 2.75 3.9 5.1 10 2.2 2.28 2.5 3.45 4.39 12 1.83 1.92 2.44 2.72 3.25 14 1.61 1.72 2.17 2.6 2.9 3 8 2.25 3.72 6.4 9.9 15.1 10 2.4 4 7 12 16 12 2.65 4.2 7.2 12.25 17.3 14 2.6 3.11 6.8 8.6 12.9 Unconfined compressive strength with varying curing period of treated soil
- 16. Experimental results % of Admixtures % increase in Unconfined compressive strength Curing Period in days Lime POFA 1 3 7 14 28 2 0 70.18 122.22 192.40 379.53 543.27 3 95.91 180.70 212.87 502.34 660.23 4 154.39 201.17 221.64 508.19 683.63 5 160.23 215.79 245.03 511.11 686.55 0 8 47.37 54.97 60.82 128.07 198.25 10 28.65 33.33 46.20 101.75 156.73 12 7.02 12.28 42.69 59.06 90.06 14 -5.85 0.58 26.90 52.05 69.59 3 8 31.58 117.54 274.27 478.95 783.04 10 40.35 133.92 309.36 601.75 835.67 12 54.97 145.61 321.05 616.37 911.70 14 52.05 81.87 297.66 402.92 654.39 Percentage increase in unconfined compressive strength of treated soil
- 17. Unconfined compressive strength variation 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Unconfined compressive strength(kg/cm 2 ) Lime (%) 1 Day curing 3 Days Curing 7 Days Curing 14 Days Curing 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 8 10 12 14 Unconfined Compressive Strength (kg/cm 2 ) POFA (%) 1 Day curing 3 Days Curing 7 Days Curing 14 Days Curing Unconfined compressive strength of dispersive soil treated with Lime Unconfined compressive strength of dispersive soil treated with palm oil fuel ash (POFA)
- 18. Unconfined compressive strength variation 0 5 10 15 20 6 8 10 12 14 16 Unconfined compressive strength (kg/cm 2 ) POFA (%) 1 Day Curing 3 Days Curing 7 Days Curing 14 Days Curing 28 Days Curing Unconfined compressive strength of dispersive soil treated with 3% Lime and variation of palm oil fuel ash (POFA) percent
- 19. Effect of curing period on Unconfined compressive strength 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Unconfined compressive strength (kg/cm 2 ) Curing period in days 2% Lime 3% Lime 4% Lime 5% Lime 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 10 20 30 Unconfined compressive strength (kg/cm 2 ) Curing period in days 8% POFA 10% POFA 12% POFA 14% POFA Effect of curing period on unconfined compressive strength of dispersive soil treated with Lime. Effect of curing period on unconfined compressive strength of dispersive soil treated with Palm oil fuel ash (POFA)
- 20. Effect of curing period on Unconfined compressive strength 0 5 10 15 20 0 10 20 30 Unconfined compressive strength (kg/cm 2 ) Curing period in days 3% Lime & 8% POFA 3% Lime & 10% POFA 3% Lime & 12% POFA 3% Lime & 14% POFA Effect of curing period on unconfined compressive strength of dispersive soil treated with 3% Lime and varying Palm oil fuel ash (POFA) percent
- 21. CONCLUSION • The agro waste (Palm oil fuel ash) used in in this study is giving good results and improving the properties of dispersive soil. • Using 3% lime alone the unconfined compressive strength of the soil is increased by 7.6 times for a curing period of 28 days. • Using 8% POFA as soil stabilizer increases the unconfined compressive strength by 2.98 times for a curing period of 28 days. • Using 3% lime and 12% POFA the unconfined compressive strength is increased by 10.11 times for a curing period of 28 days. • Use of palm oil fuel ash as stabilizer decreases the cost of stabilization and is effective for long term stabilization of soil.
- 22. REFERENCES • ASTM D 4221 (1999) “Standard Test Method for Dispersive Characteristics of Clay Soil by Double Hydrometer” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 04.08. • Decker, R. S. and Dunnigan, L. P. (1977) “Development and Use of the SCS Dispersion, Test” Dispersive Clays, Related Piping, and Erosion in Geotechnical Engineering Projects, ASTM Special Technical Publication No. 623, American Society for Testing and Materials, pp 94-109. • Knodel, P. C. (1991) “Characteristics and problems of dispersive clay soils” United States Department of the Interior, Colorado. • Mahabir D. and Gupta S.L., (2011), “Problems in characterization and Identification of dispersive soils - a case study”, International J. of Earth Science And Engineering, ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.4, No.6 Spl, pp.143-146. • Oyeleke R.B., Yusof M.B.B.M., Razman M.B.S. and Ahmed k. (2011), “ Compaction parameters of kaolin clay modified with palm oil fuel ash as landfill liner” , IEEE First Conference on Clean Energy and Technology CET, pp 199-204
- 23. • Rahmat M.N., Raffe M.R.and Ismail M. (2014), “Utilization of agricultural wastes in stabilization of land fill soil”, MATEC web of conference 1,pp 1-8. • Vakili A.H., Selamat M.R., and Moayedi H. (2013), “Effects of using Pozzolan and Portland cement in the treatment of dispersive clay”, The Scientific World Journal, pp 1-10. • Vinod J.S., Indraratna B., and Mahamud M.AA. (2010), “Stabilisation of an erodible soil using a chemical admixture”, Institution of Civil Engineers. Proceedings, Ground Improvement, vol. 163 (1), pp 43-52. • Vakili A.H., Selamat M.R. and Moayedi H. (2013), “An assessment of physical and mechanical properties of dispersive clay treated with lime”, Caspian Journal of Applied Science Research, vol. 2, pp 197- 204. • Lashkaripour G.R., Khamehchiyan M., Soloki H.R., and Rahimi E. (2007), “The characteristics of dispersive soils in sistan plain, eastern Iran’, J. of Applied Geology, Vol. 3, No.1, pp 75 – 80. • Bhuvaneshwari S., and Soundara B. (2007), “Stabilization and microstructural modification of dispersive clayey soils”, 1st International coference on soil and Rock Engineering, Srilankan Geotechnical Socity, columbo, srilanka. pp 1-7 • Juhaizad A., Rahman A. S. A., Ali M. R. M., and Khif F. R. (2011), “Peat Soil Treatment Using POFA”, IEEE Colloquium on Humanities, Science and Engineering Research.
- 24. Thank you