1) INTRODUCTION

The term `soil` has a different meaning in different scientific fields. It has
originated from Latin word Solum. To an agricultural scientist, it means `The loose
material on the earths crust consisting of disintegrated rock material which has been
transported from the place of origin. But, to a civil engineer , the term `soil` means,
the loose unconsolidated inorganic material on the earths crust produced by the
disintegration of rocks, overlaying hard rock with or without organic matter.
Foundation of all structures has to be placed on or in such soil, which is the primary
reason for our interest as civil engineers in is engineering behavior.
Soil may remain all the place of its origin or it may be transported by
various natural agencies. It is said to be residual in the earlier situation and
transported in the latter.
1.1 FORMATION OF SOIL:
Soil is formed by the process of weathering of rocks, that is, disintegration
and decomposition of rocks and minerals at or near the earths surface through the
actions of natural or mechanical and chemical agents into smaller and smaller grains.
The factor of weathering may be atmospheric, such as change in temperature
and pressure; erosion and transportation by wind, water and glaciers; chemical action
such as crystal growth, oxidation, hydration, carbonation and leaching by water,
especially rain water, with time.
Obviously, soils formed by mechanical weathering (that is, disintegration
of rocks by the action of wind, water and glaciers) bear a similarly in certain

properties to the minerals in the parent rock. Since chemical in the parent rock since
chemical changes which could destroy their identify do not take place.
It is to be noted that 95% of the earths crust consists of igneous rocks and
only they are present on 80% of the earths surface area. Feldspar is the minerals
abundantly present (60%) in igneous rocks, amphiboles and pyroxenes, Quartz and
micas come next in the order.
Rocks are altered more by the process of chemical weathering than by
mechanical weathering. In chemical weathering some minerals disappear partially or
fully, and new compounds are formed. The intensity of weathering depends upon the
presence of water and temperature and the dissolved materials in the water.
Carbonic acid and oxygen are the most effective dissolved materials found in water
which cause the weathering of rocks. Chemical weathering has the maximum
intensity in humid and tropical climates.
Leaching is the process whereby water-soluble parts in the soil such as
calcium carbonate are dissolved and washed out from the soil by rainfall or
percolating subsurface water.Laterite soil, in which certain areas of Kerala
abound, is formed by leaching.
Harder minerals will be more resistant to the weathering action, for example,
Quartz present in igneous rocks. But, prolonged chemical action may affect even
such relatively stable minerals, resulting in the formation of secondary products of
weathering, such as clay minerals illite, kaolnite and montmorillonite. clay
mineralogy has grown into a very complicated and broad subject.

1.2 MAJOR SOIL DEPOSITS OF INDIA:

The soil deposits of India can be broadly classified into the following:
1.2.1 BLACK COTTON SOILS:
These soils occur in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, parts
of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. These are expansive in nature. On account of
high swelling and shrinkage potential these are difficult soils to deal with in
foundation design.
1.2.2 MARINE SOILS:
These occur in a narrow belt all along the coast, especially in the rann of
Kutch. These are very soft and some times contain organic matter, possess low
strength and high compressibility.
1.2.3 DESERT SOILS:
These occur in Rajasthan.

These are deposited by wind and are

uniformly graded.
1.2.4 LATERITIC SOILS:
These occur in Kerala, South Maharashtra, Karnataka, Orissa and West
Bengal.

Black cotton soil is an expansive soil, which swells or shrinks excessively

due to change in moisture content. When black cotton soil is associated with an
engineering structure, it experiences either settlement or heavy depending on stress
level and the soil swelling pressure. Design and construction of civil engineering
structures and with expansive soils a challenging task for geotechnical engineers.
Soil stabilization is needed to counter the shrinkage and swelling
characteristics which are posing challenges to the engineers. Considerable work has
been done to identify the numbers of methods to sterilize such type of fender soils.
This process of improvisation to the engineering properties of soils and thus making
it more stable is called STABILISATION.
In other words soil stabilization is an expression which has been adopted
to describe the number of processes where by the properties of inferior soils are
sufficiently modified to permit their usage in civil engineering constructions. In one
way it is required when the soil is available for construction and is not suitable for
the intended purposes. In its broadest sense, stabilization includes compaction,
grouting, injection techniques and many other such processes.
However, the term stabilization is generally restricted to the processes after
the soil material itself for improvement of its properties many procedures have been
developed to improve physical behavior of soils in which a wide range of
stabilization agents additives, conditioners have developed and incorporated with
the soils. Undoubtedly the most widely applied methods involve the use of inorganic
cementive agents which really for the effectiveness of the formation of cementive
bonds between particles in the soil system.

Soil stabilization is required to increase the bearing capacity of foundation

soils. However the use of stabilization techniques is used to improve the natural soils
for any construction purpose. The principles of soils stabilization are used for
controlling the grading of soils and aggregates in the construction of bases and subbases of the construction works.
Various methods of stabilization are mechanical stabilization, cement
stabilization, lime stabilization, bituminous stabilization, chemical stabilization,
thermal stabilization, electrical stabilization by grouting, by geotextiles and fabrics,
reinforced earth etc.,
To make the best use of B.C. SOILS, its engineering properties are needed to
modify to modify in order to suit the requirement by means of stabilization. It is
necessary to properly choose the method of the stabilization through careful
investigation to improve effectively, the strength, compressibility and permeability
characteristics and at the same time, the economics of the process of stabilization
should also be considered.

In the present work the soil stabilization is done by using 5% lime and ricehusk ash
in varying percentages and the strength is determined.

1.3 STABILIZATION:
Stabilization, in a broad sense, incorporates the various methods
employed for modifying the properties of a soil to improve its engineering
performance. Stabilization is being used for a variety of engineering works, the most
common application being in the construction of road and air-field pavements, where
the main objective is to increase the strength or stability of soil and to reduce the
construction cost by making best use of locally available materials.
Almost all civil engineering structures such as buildings, dams, airports
etc., must rest on soils. As more engineering structures are built, it is becoming
increasingly difficult to find site having suitable soil properties. A soil suitable under
normal conditions may pose problems when exposed to external conditions like
wetting, thawing etc., various methods are used to deal with unsatisfactory soils. The
properties of soils can be improved by the use of some form of static or dynamic
loading, grouting and drainage or by the use of admixture.
Soil stabilization is employed to improve certain properties of natural
soils to make it serve adequately as intended for engineering purpose. The different
uses of soil pose the requirements of mechanical strength and of resistance to
environmental forces.
Stabilized soils are subjected not only to mechanical stresses incidental to
their use but also to dynamic interactions with their environment. Consequently soil
stabilization involves more than a mere increase in compressive strength or shear
resistance and improvement of any physical property of soil, it must supply a
defensive mechanism against the wetting and drying.

DEFINITION:
The method of improving engineering properties of natural soil us known as
oil stabilization
1.3.1 NEED FOR STABILIZATION:
Soil stabilization is aimed basically to
1. Increase bearing pressure, decrease permeability of deep foundation soils or
other large soil masses to be used for engineering purpose.
2. Improve locally available soils for the construction of shallow foundations.
1.3.2 METHODS OF STABILIZATION:
There are different methods of stabilization they are
1. Mechanical stabilization,
2. Cement stabilization,
3. Lime stabilization,
4. Bitumen stabilization,
5. Chemical stabilization,
6. Stabilization by heating and
7. Electrical stabilization.
The above can be explained as follows
Methods of stabilization may be grouped under two main types: (1)
Modification or improvement of a soil property of the existing soil without any
admixture for example compaction and drainage, which improve the inherent shear
strength of soil, and (2) modification of the properties with the help of admixtures for

example mechanical stabilization, stabilization with cement, lime, fly ash, bitumen,
chemical stabilization by heating and electrical stabilization etc.,
1.3.3 MECHANICAL STABILIZATION:
By using the mechanical method is also usually used. There are three
mechanical methods commonly use to stabilize the soil; Vibroflotation technique,
Vertical drain and Geotextile.
1.3.3.1 VIBROFLOTATION:
The Vibroflotation technique employs mechanical vibration together with
simultaneous saturation with water to rearrange loose sand and gravel particles into a
denser state. Vibration in loose saturated deposits can cause liquefaction followed by
densification and settlement acm3ompanying dissipation of pore water pressure. In
this technique, a cylindrical probe is lowered into the soil layer by a combination of
vibration and jetting high pressure water through the orifices at the base of the probe.
When the required depth is achieved, the water flow is reduced and diverted to asset
of jets at the top of the probe. The resulting upward flow of water maintains a
channel around the probe allowing coarse fill fed from the surface as the filling
continued. When the feeding channels collapse, the probe is raised and lowered until
the system is restored. Vibroflotation process can be done using either wet or dry
process where the wet method uses high-pressure water jets and the dry method
utilized compressed air.
1.3.3.2 VERTIICAL DRAIN:
The vertical drains are installing in order to acm3elerate the consolidation
settlement and shorten consolidation time. This vertical drain is normally installed
together with preloading. The principle of this method is easy. When the vertical

drain is installed, the pore water squeezed out vertically during consolidation
process. It can reduce the length of drainage paths and thereby reducing the time to
complete the consolidation process. There are three general types of vertical drains
namely: sand drains, fabric encased sand drains and prefabricated vertical drains.
1.3.3.3 GEOTEXTILE:
Geotextile is also the popular method to stabilize the soil. The method is very
easy, lay the fabric into the soil layer and then put the soil on the top of the fabric.
The function of the fabric is to strengthen the soil layer.
1.3.4 CHEMICAL STABILIZATION:
In this method of stabilization, the soil is mixed with hygroscopic materials
2

like calcium chloride, sodium chloride etc., at the rate of 1kg/5m road surfaces. The
mixing is done thoroughly and it is well compacted. The presence of hygroscopic
materials helps in retaining proper amount of moisture in the soil and also adds to its
stability. The dampness in the surface reduces shrinkage and prevents formation of
cracks ocm3urring due to drying of soil.
1.3.4.1 CALCIUM CHLORIDE STABILIZATION:
Calcium chloride is used as a water retentive additive in mechanical
stabilized bases and surfacing. Being hydroscopic and deliquescent, the salt absorbs
moisture from the atmosphere and retains it.

It makes alterations in the

characteristics of pure water. The vapour pressure get lowered and the surface
tension increases, and thereby the rate of evaporation or reduction of frost heave. By
depressing the electric double layer (or reducing the water deficiency), the salt
reduces water pick-up, and thus the loss of strength of fine-grained soils.

Calcium chloride acts as soil flocm3ulent.

It facilitates compaction and

usually causes a slight increase in the compacted density.

The salt may be spread on the surface, or incorporated into the soil by mix-inplace and plant-mix methods. The chief advantage is that the beneficial effects are
lost if the salt is leached out. Frequent applications depending upon the climatic
conditions are therefore necessary, which increase the cost. The relative humidity of
the atmosphere should be above 30% for the salt to be effective.
1.3.5 LIME STABILIZATION:
Hydrated (or slaked) lime is very effective in treating heavy, plastic clayey
soils. Lime may be used alone, or in combination with cement, bitumen or fly ash.
Sandy soils can also be stabilized with these combinations. Lime has been mainly
used for stabilizing the road bases and sub-grades.
On addition of lime to soil, two main types of chemical reactions ocm3ur:
(i) alteration in the nature of the absorbed layer through Base Exchange
phenomenon, and
(ii) cementing or pozzolanic action. Lime reduces the plasticity index of highly
plastic soils making them more friable and easy to be handled and pulverized. The
plasticity index of soils low plasticity generally increases. There is generally an
increase in the optimum water content and a decrease in the maximum compacted
density, but the strength and durability increase.
The amount of lime required may be used on the unconfined compressive
strength or the CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO test criteria. Normally 2 or 8% of
lime may be required for coarse grained soils, and 5 to 10% for plastic soils. The

10

amount of fly ash as admixture may vary from 8 to 20% of the soil weight (Lambe,
1962).
1.3.6 MOLASSES STABILIZATION:
Molasses used for highway soil stabilization is a waste residue known as
black strap molasses which is obtained as a by-product of the manufacture of sugar
from sugarcane. It is a very thick syrupy liquid which contains resinous and some
organic constituents which render it unfit for human consumption.
Black strap molasses is a hygroscopic material and this enables it to take
up moisture from the air and to control the evaporation of water from the soilaggregate pavement as it is being compacted. Molasses is also a cementing agent,
unfortunately the cement formed is water soluble, but if water can be kept away the
binding action is very strong indeed.
1.3.7 LIGNIN STABILIZATION:
Wood consists of cellulose and several cementing materials which bind the
cellulose fibres together. In the sulphite paper making industry, the paper mill
retains the fibres and the cellulose, while the cementing materials are wasted from
the process in a water solution called spent sulphite liquor, which is actually
calcium lingo-sulphonic acid. The constituents of this liquor which are used to
further stabilize mechanically stabilized roads are salts which are referred to as
calcium lingo-sulphates or lignin sulphates or simply sulphonates. A representative
analysis of lignin will normally average about 6% carbon, 28% oxygen, 6%
hydrogen, 2% Sulphur and 3% calcium.

11

Although it is widely used as a stabilizing agent in Sweden, Canada and

certain parts of USA, not too much is known of the exact mechanism by which lignin
stabilizes soils. Work that has been done, however, indicates that the addition of
lignin to soils results in higher dry unit weights and decreased permeabilities. As
regards the latter, sulphonates are excellent clay-dispersing agent and thus, when it
rains on to a lignin-stabilized surface course, the dispersed clay particles well and
plug the pores, thereby reducing water penetration. After the lignin has cured, it
becomes cementitious and binds the soil particles together, unfortunately, the cement
is water soluble and, if not protected, may disappear with the onset of wet weather.
Frost action problems are also reduced by having lignin present in a soil; this is due
to a slight lowering of the freezing point of the soil moisture and to the increased
impermeability of the lignin-stabilized road base.

Lignin also has hygroscopic

properties due to the sugars which are present. However, the moisture retention
properties are limited as bacteria will attack these sugars.
1.3.8 VINSOL RESIN STABILIZATION:
Vinson resin is a powdered substance which is obtained by the steam
distillation of pine stumps. It is a water repellent material, and when mixed with
certain soils it serves to improve their quality by its water proofing action. In the
construction process, the Vinson resin is incorporated in small amounts as
determined by laboratory tests and mixed dry with the soil to be stabilized. An
alkaline solution is then added and the materials wet mixed. The stabilized mixture
is then compacted and allowed to cure before a wearing surface is placed on the base.
nd

This material was used to some extent during 2 world war when more conventional
materials were in short supply.

12

1.3.9 SODIUM CHLORIDE STABILIZATION:

The stabilizing action of sodium chloride is somewhat similar to that of
calcium chloride, but it has not been so widely used. It attracts and retains moisture
and reduces the rate of evaporation.

Another beneficial phenomenon is the

crystallization of the salt in the soil pores near the surface, which retards further
evaporation and also reduces the formation of shrinkage cracks. The salt is not
applied on the surface, but it is mixed into the soil by mix-in place or plant-mix
methods.
1.3.10 SODIUM SILICATE STABILIZATION:
The sodium silicate solution in water, known das water glass, in
combination with other chemicals, such as calcium chloride, is used as an injection
for stabilizing deep deposits of soil. The two chemicals react and precipitate in the
form of an insoluble silica-gel within the soil pores making the soil impervious to
water and increasing its shearing strength. These injections are found to be most
sucm3essful in fine and medium sands. The two chemicals can be injected either
separately or as a single mixture.
1.3.11 THERMAL STABILIZATION:
It is difficult to achieve stabilization of clayey soils in the field by
conventional methods of pulverizing, mixing and laying the soil with stabilizer
because of the high activity of the clay and its consequent poor susceptibility to
pulverization and its tendency to soften on immediate contact with water. For
successful stabilization with black cotton soils, the pulverization characteristics
should be improved. This can be achieved by heat treatment. The heat imparted to
the soil changes its physical characteristics and not only converts it into a non-plastic

13

material but renders it more susceptible to pulverization. The pulverized soil can
further be stabilized with a relatively small percentage of stabilizers as cement.
In the heat treatment of soil it is very essential to know both the duration
of heating and the optimum temperature for getting best results. In addition to the
strength in dry state it is very essential that the material should also be resistant to the
softening effect of water, thereby maintaining its strength even under saturated
conditions. Black cotton soil clods when heated develop a fair amount of strength
which they maintain even under adverse moisture conditions. Previous studies show
that the burnt soil attains a CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO value of 110% to
120% as against a CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO value of 2% to 3% for unborn
soil clods.
The heat treatment process has been used with success for five years in
Queensland and New South Wales, Australia and the roads made by this method
have proved capable of carrying fast and heavy traffic under all weather conditions.
The hardening effect is due to partial fusion of certain constituents of soil. The soil
is treated in its natural state without the addition of any extraneous material.
The machine which consists of a chassis on wheels carrying a furnace of
special design, applies the heat directly to the soil on the road, the process is
continuous. After the passage of the machine, the treated material is lift loose on the
surface of the road. It is then consolidated after mixing thoroughly with a certain
percentage of raw soil. In Rumania a method of thermal treatment by burning fluid
fuel in borings was tested and applied in order to strengthen soaked loose soils and to
stop slides in fat clays.

14

Generally, greater the heat input per mass of soil treated, the greater is the
improvement effected. Even a slight increase in temperature can cause a
corresponding strengthening in clay by reducing the electric repulsion between clay
particles, a flow of pore water because of the imposed thermal gradient and a
reduction in water content because of the increased evaporation rate.
One of the installations developed by Soviet Engineers for thermal treatment
of soils by burning gas fuel in borings, uses compressed air which is heated at a
0

temperature of 600 C in an air furnace. The heated air is introduced under pressure
into the borings and owing to its high temperature, the oil is burnt around the boring
walls. The great dissipation of caloric energy is one of the chief shortcomings of this
thermal treatment method.
The thermal treatment gave good results for stabilizing slips. The slipping
earth masses consisting of plastic fat clays were moving on a surface slopping
towards the sea, caused by the existence of soaked clay level just above the lower
limits of the slipping soil. In this case stabilization measures were completed with
the control and removal of water in the water bearing strata. In order to prevent the
loosened masses from slipping and to obtain an adequate coefficient of safety,
burning in borings in zone of soaked soil which was responsible for slide was
undertaken. The thermal treatment has resulted in obtaining in the zone, volumes of
insensitive stiff sol which are acting as wedges thus preventing the progress of the
slide. Apart from that the whole soil mass in the neighbouring zones has been dried.
1.3.12 ELECTRICAL STABILIZATION:
The stability or shear strength of fine-grained soils can be increased by
draining them with the passage of direct current through them. The process is also

15

known as Electro-Osmosis. Electrical drainage is accompanied by electro-chemical

composition of the electrodes and the deposition of the metal salts in the soil pores.
There may also be some changes in the structure of soil. The resulting cementing of
soil due to all these reactions, is also known as electro-chemical hardening and for
this purpose the use of aluminum anodes is recommended.
Reinforced soil technique is one of the physical methods of ground
improvement, the concept which was given by Vidal of France in 1996.

The

function of the reinforcements in soil is to increase the strength and reduce the
deformations.

Soil mass reinforced with randomly distributed discrete fibres

resembles the conventional earth reinforcement in many of its properties. The

preparation is similar to that of admixture stabilization. One of the main advantages
of randomly distributed fibres is the maintenance of strength isotropy and absence of
potential failure plane that can develop parallel to the oriented reinforcement. It is
well known that reinforced soil normally utilizes granular soil as its backfill material.

16

2.1) REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Stabilization of soils is one of the oldest branches of technology. Good
amount of work has been carried out in stabilization of soils using many admixtures,
organic and inorganic and chemicals, cement, lime etc.,
The soil stabilization means the improvement of stability or bearing power
of the soil by the use of controlled compaction, proportioning and/or the addition of
suitable admixture or stabilizers. Basic Principles of Soil Stabilization are evaluating
the properties of given soil; deciding the lacking property of soil and choose effective
and economical method of soil stabilization Designing the Stabilized soil mix for
intended stability and durability values.
There are different methods of stabilization Mechanical stabilization;
Cement Stabilization; Lime stabilization; Bituminous Stabilization; Chemical
stabilization; Thermal stabilization; Electrical stabilization; Stabilization by grouting;
Stabilization by Geo textile and Fabrics etc.
Stabilization of Black cotton soils have been carried out in laboratory by
many research workers by using organic chemicals like chlorides and hydroxides of
calcium, potassium, sodium etc.,
Apart from inorganic chemicals, laboratory investigation has been carried
out for stabilization of soils using lime and cement. Analysis of investigation has led
to conclude that lime is the cheapest admixture for stabilization of soils.
Investigation carried out in the country and abroad has shown that economy as well
as better stabilizer can be achieves by using basic admixtures like cement and lime in
combination or cement with other cheap materials.
In the third world countries, the need for locally manufactures
construction materials is increasing due to greater demands for new roads and

17

housing units created by growing population, The development of locally

manufactured materials had advantage in increasing the engineering activity and
affecting the cost considerably.

Stabilization techniques can be adopted on large scale when the treatment is low cost and
durable. Rice husk ash is one of the major wastes found abundantly. The annual production of
paddy is one of the major wastes found abundantly. In India, the annual production of paddy is
about 100 million tones. The burning of rice husk generates about 20% of its weight as ash.

There by generating more than 4 million tons of rice husk ash. Hence research work is done on
utilization of rice husk ash in improvement of geotechnical characteristics of black cotton soil.
In this contest of, study, different works done by various research workers
have been presented.
B.H. Rajan, N. Subramanyam and S. Sampath Kumar in their work on
stone dust for stabilizing black cotton soil has concluded that, rice husk ash, to
certain extent contributes to the development of strength when used as a stabilizing
additive and they also found that improvement in consolidation property to some
extent.
M.R. Yoganna and K.S. Jagadish on their research on pozzolanic
properties in rice husk ash has got enough pozzolanic property because if high silica
content present in it.

Because of these pozzolanic natures they found that the

compressive strength if mortar forming rice husk ash was improvised.

18

Partial

replacement of burnt red mud by rice husk ash greatly improves the compressive
strength of lime-burnt clay and lime-red mud mortar.
M.D. Anisur Rahman (1986, 1987) stabilized lateritic soil with various
percentages of rice husk ash and lime and cement. He concluded that the potential of
rice husk ash in the stabilization of lateritic soil is considerably when compared to
lime and cement stabilization. He recommended a mix proportion of 6% rice husk
ash and 13% cement or 18% rice husk ash + 7% cement air base material while the
liquid limit and plastic limit of cohesive soil increased linearly with rice husk ash
content, the plasticity index decreased linearly the maximum dry density of both
cohesive and non-cohesive soil decreased with increase in rice husk ash content. But
optimum content of cohesion-less soil linearly increased upto 12% rice husk ash and
that of cohesive upto 20%.
R.C. Lazaro after his considerable work concluded that rice husk ash in
combination with lime, can be used with reasonable success to clayey soils. While
the addition of rice husk ash and lime to clayey soils reduces the plasticity and
maximum dry density, and it also increases the optimum water content and
compressive strength. The effectiveness of lime and rice husk ash in stabilizing soil
depends upon the admixture content then they gas show attitudes id rice husk ash as
good soil stabilizer.
Dr. M.V.B.R. Sastry and Dr. A.S. Rao has worked on cinder ash as soil
stabilizer in which they concluded that, addition of cinder ash to soil results in
improvising the strength in terms of unconfined compressive strength and C.B.R.
value.
Faisal Hai Ali has concluded after a long time work on stabilization of
residual soils with high percentage of siliceous material with ash materials of

19

agricultural waste like rice husk has potential pozzolanic properties and can be an
excellent material in enhancement of other stabilization methods like using lime or
cement.
Sivanna investigated the role of rice husk ash as secondary additive to the
black cotton soil along with lime. It was shown that rice husk ash, together with
lime, accelerates the settlement and also it improves the consolidation characteristics
to a certain extent.
Another material that is used as an additive in soil stabilization is fly ash, a
work product from thermal plants. Research in India and abroad over the last three
decades has established that this waste product can be converted into meaningful
wealth as new construction material by taking advantage of its pozzolanic properties.
From the above literature review it is felt that waste product such as cinder
ash, fly ash, and rice husk ash, when used as additives in soil stabilization have been
formed to some extent. In the same way the present study was taken into investigate
the use of Rice husk ash which is one of the cheapest material. Stone dust is obtained as
a waste from disintegrated rocks of quarries, after the crushing id rocks which is
resulted from quarry, This will be available in large quantities of or near quarries.
Hence the present investigation is intended to study the effectiveness of
stone dust in stabilizing the soil properties.

20

2.2) SCOPE OF THE WORK

Scope of the present investigation is to explore the possibility by using lime and
rice husk as a stabilizing agent in improvising the properties of expansive soils.
Study of various engineering properties with 5% of lime and varying percentage
of Rice husk ash content was done.

21

MATERIALS
Material used in this study were
1. Expansive Soil
2. Lime
3. Rice husk ash

EXPANSIVE SOIL:
Type of soil used in this investigation is of having high clay content, Black
cotton soil. The soil was brought from the site near Jameelapet village,
Bibinagar(Mandal), Nalgonda(Dist). The soil was air dried pulverized and passing
through IS: 424 micron sieve was taken for the study of properties.
Different Engineering properties are soil initially can be find by conducting
corresponding the experiments according to IS code specification.
LIME:
Lime is a general term for calcium-containing inorganic materials in which
carbonates, oxides and hydroxides predominate. Strictly speaking, lime is calcium
oxide or calcium hydroxide. It is the name of the natural mineral (native lime) CaO
occurs as a product of coal seam fires and in altered lime stone xenoliths in volcanic
ejection. The word lime originates with its earliest use as building mortar and has
a sense of sticking and or adhering. Burning converts them into the highly
caustic material quicklime (calcium oxide, Cao) and through subsequent addition of
water, into less caustic (but still strongly alkaline) slaked lime or hydrated lime
(calcium hydroxide, CA (OH)2 =74.10), the process of which is called slaking of lime

22

METHODOLOGY
4.1 PLASTIC LIMIT:
Definition:
Plastic limit denotes the boundary between plastic and semi solid state of a
soil, at which its capacity to retain shape is minimum specially, this is defined
as the water content at which the soil tends to crumble when rolled into
threads of 3 mm dia.
Procedure:
(i)

Mix thoroughly about 40 to 50g of moist soil.

(ii)

Make three or four convenient parts of the soil.

(iii)

Roll the soil on a glass plate with the hand until a thread 3 mm is
obtained.

(iv)

Put the crumble pieces of thread in an evaporating dish and obtain the
water content which gives the plastic limit.

Result:
Plastic limit of the taken soil = 23.2%

23

4.2 DETERMINATION OF SHRINKAGE LIMIT OF SOIL:

Procedure:
(i)

Preparation of soil paste: Take about 100g soil sample from a thoroughly
mixed portion of the material passing 425 IS sieve.

(ii)

Place about 30g of the above sample in evaporation dish and mix it
thoroughly with distilled water. Water added should be sufficient to fill
the voids in the soil completely make the soil past enough to readily
worked into the shrinkage dish without entrapping air bubbles. In the case
of plastic soils, the water content of the paste may exceed its liquid limit
by as much as 10% while for finable soils the amount of water required to
obtain the desired consistency may be equal to or slightly more than
liquid limit.

(iii)

Clean the shrinkage dish and determine its Weight acm3urately. To

determine its volume place the dish on a evaporating dish and fill the
shrinkage dish with mercury till it over flows. Then remove the dish and
wish off any mercury adhering to the outside of the shrinkage dish.
Transfer the mercury into another evaporating dish and weight it coat the
inner side of the shrinkage dish with a thin layer of Vaseline in the center
of the dish, place the soil paste about one third the volume of the dish,
with the help of spatula. Repeat top the dish gently on rubber sheet and
allow the paste to flow towards the edge. Repeat the process till the dish
is completely filled and excess soil over flows. Strike off the excess soil
past with a straight edge wipe off the soil adhering to the outside of the
dish.

24

Weight the shrinkage dish and keep it open to air until the colour of pat turns
0

dark to light keep the dish into the oven and dry the pat to constant weight at 105 c to
0

110 c and place the dish in a desicm3ators and weight it immediately. Keep the glass
up in a china dish. Fill the cup to overflowing with mercury. Remove the excess
mercury by passing the glass plate with the three prongs firmly over the top of the
cup transfer the cup transfer the cup to another evaporating dish, wipe off any
mercury which may be adhering to the cup. Place the oven dried soil put on the
surface of mercury in the cup and carefully face the pat into the mercury by pressing
it by the glass plate containing three metal passing prongs. Collect the displaced
mercury and weight it. The volume of the dry soil pat is then determined by dividing
by dividing this weight by the unit weight of mercury.
RESULT:
Shrinkage limit of the taken soil=14.11%
Shrinkage ratio=1.91
Volumetric shrinkage=0.63%

25

4.3 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF SOIL:

Procedure:
1) Arrange the sieve of size 4.75mm, 2.00mm, 1.00mm, 600 micron, 425
micron, 300 micron, 150 micron and 75 micron, in order of decreasing
aperture size, after ensuring that all of them are clean the receive is placed at
the bottom.
2) Weight 100gms of the give sample of soil and pour it into the top-most sieve.
The lid is kept in position.
0

3) Shake the sieve of 15 min holding the sieve inclined at an angle of 15 to the
vertical. The shaking is done in a circular motion.
4) Determine the weight of soil particles retained on each sieve and tabulated
the results.
5) Draw the grain-size distribution curve with the logarithm of the aperture size
on x-axis and percentage passing through the sieve on y-axis. Fit in a
smooth curve and determine the value of D10, D30 and D60.
6) Calculate the value of uniformity co-efficient (Cu) and the co-efficient of
curvature (Cc).
Results:
Cu=2.5
Cc =1.02

4.4 Specific Gravity of Soil:

Procedure:
1. Weight the clean dry density bottle with the cap acm3urate to 0.01gm(W1).
2. Place oven dry soil passing 4.75mm IS sieve into the density bottle and
weights it (W2), Take 200gms in case into fine grained soil and 400gms in
case of medium to coarse grained soil.
3. Fill the density bottle to half of its height with distilled water and mix it
thoroughly with glass rod. Replace the screw top and fill the density bottle
from outside and weight it (W2).
4. Remove contents, wash the density bottle, poor distilled water flush with the
hole of the conical cap and weight if (W4)
5. Repeat steps 2 to 4 for two more determination of SG.
Calculation:

G=

(
(

)
) (

GT =Specific gravity of water attempt of the test

The specific gravity of soil normally ranges from 2.65 to 2.85. Organic soils may
have very low specific gravity.
RESULT:
The specific gravity of taken black cotton soil= 2.5

27

4.5 LIQUID LIMIT OF SOIL:

Procedure:1) Weight 120g of soil passing through IS 425 S micron sieve and transfer into a
china dish.
2) Mix the soil thoroughly with some distilled water in a dish to form a uniform
paste.
3) Place a portion of the paste in the cup of the liquid limit device and smoothen
the surface to the maximum depth 10mm, with the help of grooving tool
(casagrade or ASTM tool). The paste in the cup is divided along the cup
diameter (Through the centre line of the foller), by holding the normal to the
surface of the cup and drawing it firmly across. Thus a v-shaped cup 2mm
wide at the bottom and 11 mm at the top and 8 mm deep will formed. Then
the use of sandy soil casgrade tool does not form a neat groove and hence
ASTM is used.
4) Take approximately 10gms of soil in a clean, evaporating disk for moisture
content determination preferable from the closed portion of groove.
5) Rotate the handle at a uniform rate about two revolumeutions per second and
count. The no of rate about two revolumeutions per sec till the gap between
the halves of the soils dose through a distance of 10mm. The groove should
be closed by the flow in the soil itself but not by slippage between the soil
and the cup.
6) By changing the water content suitability, repeat the experiment to obtain at
least sieve sets of value such that no of blows the between 10 and 40.
Result:
Liquid limit of soil =69.05%

28

4.6 FREE SWELL INDEX OF SOILS

Procedure:
1) Take 10gms of oven dry soil passing through 425 sieve and pour into a
100ml graduated jar. Similarly prepare another cylinder with same Weight of
soil.
2) Fill one cylinder with Kerosene oil and the other cylinder with distilled water
upto the 100 ml.
3) Remove the entrapped air from both the cylinders by striking with glass rod.
4) Allow the sediments in both cylinders to settle down for 24 hours.
5) Read the volume of soil in the Kerosene filled graduated jar (Vk.) Kerosene
being a non-polar liquid does not cause swelling of the soil.
6) Read the volume of soil in the distilled water filled graduated jar (Vd)
Observation:1. Volume of the soil in Kerosene filled graduated cylinder (Vk)=9m
2. Volume of the soil in distilled water filled cylinder (Vd)=17ml
3. Calculations:
Free swell index =V=

*100 =88.89%

Result:Free swell index of given soil= 88.89%

29

4.7 STANDARD PROCTOR TEST

Procedure:
1. Determine the weight of their empty assemble the base and collar and apply
thin coat of oil to the inside.
2. Weight about 2.5kg of soil passing through the IS Sieve No. 4.75mm into a
mixing pen and sieved it.
3. Add sufficient water to given water content of about 8% will the soil
thoroughly.
4. Place the moist soil in the mould in five layers compact each layer with 25
blows should be uniformly spread over the entire surface of the soil. The
final compacted soil should extend slightly beyond the top of the mould into
the collar.
5. Release the screws holding the collar and would together rotate the collar
slight and then removed it by pulling it upwards.
6. Trim the soil with a sledge and level the top of the mould remove the mould
from base and weight it.
7. Take representative sample of soil from this cake for water content
determination preface the centre.
8. Increase the water content by increment of above 2% depending upon the rate
of increase in the soil until the weights reduce considerably.

30

RESULT:
OPTIMUM
MIX
PROPORTIONS

MAXIMUM DRY
3

DENSITY(g/ cm )

Black Cotton Soil

(100%)
Lime (5%) and
Rice husk Ash (5%)

CONTENT (%)
44

1.68 g/ cm

15.73%

45

1.69 g/ cm

13.88%

46

1.59 g/ cm

22.94 %

47

1.64 g/ cm

19.61%

48

Stone dust (20%) and

soil (80%)

PAGE NO.

24.21%

Stone dust (15%) and

soil (85%)

MOISTURE

1.50 g/ cm

Stone dust (10%) and

soil (90%)

REFER TO

31

4.8 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

PROCEDURE:
1) Apply oil thinly to the mould, collar and base plate.
2) Take 2.5kg of the given clayey sample and mix up the soil thoroughly
with the water at the optimum moisture content.
3) Compact the sample in the mould in three layers with 25 blows on each
layer with the standard rammer.
4) Remove the collar, cut the sample to the top of the mould with knife
edge.
5) Extract the sample from the mould and place it in the loading unit.
6) Apply the load at the rate of 1.25mm/min.
7) Measure the load at regular intervals of strain in the specimen.
8) Tabulate the reading and draw a graph between load and deformation.
9) Calculate average area of cross section using A=Ao /(1-)
Where A=corrected area of cross section
Ao =Initial area of cross section
=h/ho
10) Shear strength = P/2A
Where P=Ultimate load

32

RESULT:
UNCONFINED

SHEAR

REFER TO

MIX

COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH

PAGE NO.

PROPORTIONS

STRENGTH

(Kg/ Cm )

(Kg/ Cm )
Black Cotton
0.2561

0.1281

49

0.2458

0.1229

50

0.4012

0.2006

51

3.05

1.525

52

0.629

0.3145

53

Soil (100%)
Stone dust (5%)
and
soil (95%)
Stone dust (10%)
and
soil (90%)
Stone dust (15%)
and
soil (85%)
Stone dust (20%)
and
soil (80%)

33

4.9 CALIFORINA BEARING RATIO TEST

PROCEDURE:
1) Arrange the mould on the base plate with the spacer disc and assemble the
extension collar a top.
2) Weigh about 6kg of soil, sieve it passing through 4.75mm IS sieve.
3) Mix the soil thoroughly with a required percentage of water and compact
the soil in three layers, each being compacted by 56 blows by 2.50kg
rammer falling through 31cm,the blows being distributed uniformly all over
the surface.
4) Remove the extension piece, trim the soil and remove the base plate and
spacer disc and assemble the base plate.
5) Keep a minimum of 4.5kg of surcharge on the sample in the shape of disc
weights. The surcharge load usually corresponds to the weights of the
pavement above.
6) Keep the entire mould under a loading frame and seat the penetration piston
on the soil and adjust the proving ring dial and the penetration dial to read
zero.
7) Rotate the loading handle at a steady rate of 1.25mm/min and note the
proving dial readings corresponding to penetrations of 0.64mm, 1.27mm,
1.91mm, 2.54mm, 5.08mm and 7.62mm.

34

STANDARD LOADS FOR CRUSHED STONE

Penetration

2.50

5.00

7.50

10.00

12.50

1370

2055

2630

3180

3600

in mm
Standard
load in Kg

RESULT:

CALIFORNIA BEARING
REFER
MIX PROPORTIONS

RATIO VALUES
PAGE NO.

Black Cotton Soil (100%)

@2.5mm

@5mm

MAX

0.98%

1.09%

1.09%

54

1.80%

1.85%

1.85%

55

1.54%

1.95%

1.95%

56

0.56%

1.02%

1.02%

57

0.89%

0.85%

0.89%

58

Stone dust (5%) and soil

(95%)
Stone dust (10%) and soil
(90%)
Stone dust (15%) and soil
(85%)
Stone dust (20%) and soil
(80%)

35

5) EXPERIMENTAL VALUES
5.1) GENERAL PROPERTIES FOR BLACK COTTON SOIL
DRY SIEVE ANALYSIS
Seri al
no.

IS
SIEVE

Apparat
us size

% Weight
retained

4.75

Weight of
soil
retained
52.5

% passed
through

5.25

Cumulative
% weight
retained
5.25

4.75mm

2mm

255

25.5

30.75

69.25

1mm

277

27.7

58.45

45.55

600

0.6

148

14.8

73.25

26.75

300

0.3

141

14.1

87.35

12.65

150

0.15

80

95.35

4.65

75

0.075

44

4.4

99.75

0.25

pan

pan

2.5

0.25

100

RESULT:
D10 = 0.25mm
D30 =0.64mm
D60 =1.6mm
Cu =

Cc =

=2.5

=1.02

36

94.75

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF BLACK COTTON SOIL

WEIGHTS

Trail 1

Trail 2

Empty weight of bottle

(W1)

33.43

33.39

Empty weight of bottle + soil

(W2)

53.46

53.35

Empty weight of bottle + soil + water (W3)

94.77

95.28

Empty weight of bottle +water

83.0

83.02

2.42

2.59

(W4)

Specific gravity (G)

FORMULA:

G=

(
(

)
) (

The average specific gravity of taken black cotton soil = 2.5

37

LIQUID LIMIT OF BLACK COTTON SOIL

Serial
Description

no.
1

Number of blows

47

35

20

26

Container number

2/8

7/c

5/c

Weight of container

8.23

8.00

7.73

9.30

25.43

17.50

16.43

17.92

18.63

13.55

12.89

14.34

65.38

71.17

68.60

71.03

(W1)
4

Weight of container +
soil (W2)

Weight of container +
dry soil (W3)

Water content

The average liquid limit of the soil =69.05%

10

94.75

0
90

69.25

80
70
60

45.55

50
40

26.75

30

12.65

20
10
0
0.01

0.25
0.1

4.65

10

38

PLASTIC LIMIT
Serial no.

Description

Container number

47/11

20

Weight of container (W1)

33.06

33.36

Weight of container + soil

50

50

47.19

46.51

19.88%

26.5%

(W2)
4

Weight of container + dry

soil (W3)

Water content

The average plastic limit of soil =23.2%

Plasticity index = Liquid limit plastic limit
= 69.05 -23.2
= 45.85%

39

SHRINKAGE LIMIT
DESCRIPTION
A)WATER CONTENT OF WET SOIL PAT
1)Shrinkage dish number

2)Weight of shrinkage dish

115.72

3) Weight of shrinkage dish + wet soil pat

161.80

4) Weight of shrinkage dish + dry soil pat

147.05

5) Weight of dry soil pat wd

31.33

6)Weight of water

14.75

7)Water Content of soil pat

47.08%

B)VOLUME OF WET SOIL PAT

8)Evaporation dish number

A7

9)Weight of mercury filling shrinkage dish +

713.5

evaporation dish
10)Weight of evaporation dish

350

11)Weight of mercury filling shrinkage dish

363.5

12)Volume of wet soil pat

26.73

C)VOLUME OF DRY SOIL PAT

13)Evaporation dish number

A7

14)Weight of mercury displaced by dry soil +

573

evaporation dish

40

15) weight of evaporating dish

350

16) Weight of mercury displaced by dry soil

223

17) volume of dry soil pat

16.40

RESULT:
SHRINKAGE LIMIT

(Ws) =14.11%

SHRINKAGE RATIO

(SR) =1.91

VOLUMETRIC SHRINKAGE (VS) =0.63%

41

5.2) STONE DUST PROPERTIES

DRY SIEVE ANALYSIS
IS SIEVE

Weight of
soil
retained
5.5

% Weight
retained

4.75mm

Apparatu
s
size
4.75

% passed
through

0.55

Cumulative
% weight
retained
0.55

2mm

18.5

1.85

2.4

97.6

1mm

332.5

33.25

13.65

64.35

600

0.6

107.5

10.75

46.4

53.6

300

0.3

293

29.3

75.7

24.3

150

0.15

176

17.6

93.3

6.7

75

0.075

39.5

3.95

97.25

2.75

pan

pan

28.5

2.85

100

RESULT:
D10 = 0.18mm
D30 = 0.35mm
D60 =0.84mm
Cu =
Cc =

=4.72
=0.81

42

99.45

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF STONE DUST

WEIGHTS

In gms

Empty weight of bottle

(W1)

273

Empty weight of bottle + soil

(W2)

473

Empty weight of bottle + soil + water (W3)

1051

Empty weight of bottle +water

923

(W4)

Specific gravity (G)

2.77

FORMULA:

G=

(
(

)
) (

The average specific gravity of stone dust = 2.77

43

Stone dust (0%)

Black cotton Soil (100%)

Mould weight(W1gms)=2275gm
Serial.no.
1

Description

Volume of mould=997.45cm3
1

Weight of mould+Wet 3936.5

4083

4127.5

4139

4100

1661.5

1808

1852.5

1864

1825

soil (W2 gms)

2

Weight of wet soil

(W2-W1)gms

Container No.

44/6

204

216

30

Weight of container

30.79

18.35

17.87

30.48

32.80

Weight of

54.13

44.59

45.32

67.10

65.00

50.81

39.97

39.97

59.16

57.43

4.62

5.35

7.94

7.57

21.62

22.1

28.68

24.63

21.37%

24.21%

27.68%

30.73%

1.81

1.86

1.87

1.83

1.49

1.50

1.46

1.40

container+Wet soil
6

Weight of
container+dry soil

Weight of water (5-6) in 3.32

gms

Weight of dry soil (6-4) 20.02

in gms

Water content

16.58%

W =(7)*100/(8) in %
10

Wet density =(2)/V in 1.66

g/cm3

11

Dry density

1.42

d =(10)/(1+(w/100))
Table no.1: Optimum moisture content for black cotton soil

44

Stone dust (5%)

Black cotton Soil (95%)

Mould weight(W1gms)=2275gm
Serial.no.
1

Volume of mould=997.45cm3

Description
Weight of mould+Wet soil

4146

4213.5

4167.0

4149

1871

1938.5

1892

1874

(W2 gms)
2

Weight of wet soil

(W2-W1)gms

Container No.

B2

108

110

205

Weight of container

24.36

15.41

14.69

17.30

Weight of container+Wet 46.49

65.43

51.23

44.25

58.63

45.76

39.46

6.80

5.47

4.79

43.22

31.07

22.16

15.73%

17.61%

21.62%

1.94

1.90

1.88

1.68

1.62

1.65

soil
6

Weight of container+dry 43.65

soil

Weight of water(5-6) in 2.84

gms

Weight of dry soil(6-4) in 19.29

gms

Water content

14.72%

w=(7)*100/(8) in %
10

Wet density =(2)/V in 1.88

g/cm3

11

Dry density

1.64

d=(10)/(1+(w/100))
Table no.2: Optimum moisture content @ stone dust 5%

45

Stone dust (10%)

Black cotton Soil (90%)

Mould weight(W1gms)=2275gm
Serial.no.
1

Description
Weight

of

mould+Wet

Volume of mould=997.45cm3
1

4098.5

4192.5

4194

4121

4102.5

1823.5

1917.5

1919

1846

1827.5

soil (W2 gms)

2

Weight of wet soil

(W2-W1)gms

Container No.

47/11

216

106

224

Weight of container

33.06

17.92

16.67

19.18

14.64

Weight of container+Wet

53.15

39.58

40.76

36.85

34.12

50.96

36.94

37.35

33.20

30.77

2.19

2.64

3.41

3.65

3.35

17.9

19.02

20.68

19.02

16.13

12.23%

13.88%

16.49%

19.19%

20.77%

1.83

1.922

1.923

1.85

1.83

1.63

1.69

1.65

1.55

1.52

soil
6

Weight of container+dry
soil

Weight of water(5-6) in
gms

Weight of dry soil(6-4) in

gms

Water content
w=(7)*100/(8) in %

10

Wet density =(2)/V in

g/cm3

11

Dry density
d=(10)/(1+(w/100))

Table no. 3: Optimum moisture content @ stone dust 10%

46

Stone dust (15%)

Black cotton Soil (85%)

Mould weight(W1gms)=2275gm
Serial.no.
1

Volume of mould=997.45cm3

Description
Weight of mould+Wet soil

4148

4218

4196

4132

1873

1943

1921

1857

(W2 gms)
2

Weight of wet soil

(W2-W1)gms

Container No.

47/11

49/26

27/50

Weight of container

33.08

32.80

34.41

34.89

Weight of container+Wet

62.46

72.72

65.93

71.58

57.70

65.27

59.28

62.74

4.76

7.45

6.65

8.84

24.62

32.47

24.87

27.85

19.33%

22.94%

26.74%

31.74%

1.88

1.95

1.93

1.86

1.58

1.59

1.52

1.41

soil
6

Weight of container+dry
soil

Weight of water(5-6) in
gms

Weight of dry soil(6-4) in

gms

Water content
w=(7)*100/(8) in %

10

Wet density =(2)/V in

g/cm3

11

Dry density
d=(10)/(1+(w/100))

Table no. 4: Optimum moisture content @ stone dust 15%

47

Stone dust (20%)

Black cotton Soil (80%)

Mould weight(W1gms)=2351.5gm
Serial.no.
1

Volume of mould=997.45cm3

Description
Weight

of

mould+Wet

4070

4098.5

4257

4308

4300

1718.5

1747

1905.5

1956.5

1948.5

soil
(W2 gms)
2

Weight of wet soil

(W2-W1)gms

Container No.

47/11

11

7/12

20

Weight of container

33.07

25.09

31.55

18.60

32.77

Weight of container+Wet

54.75

44.85

80.61

44.77

63.01

52.27

42.40

56.40

40.48

57.16

2.48

2.45

4.21

4.29

5.85

19.2

17.31

24.85

21.88

24.39

12.92%

14.15%

16.94%

19.61%

23.99%

1.72

1.75

1.91

1.96

1.95

1.52

1.53

1.63

1.64

1.57

soil
6

Weight of container+dry
soil

Weight of water(5-6) in
gms

Weight of dry soil(6-4) in

gms

Water content
w=(7)*100/(8) in %

10

Wet density =(2)/V in

g/cm3

11

Dry density
d=(10)/(1+(w/100))

Table no. 5: Optimum moisture content @ stone dust 20%

48

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST VALUES OF BLACK COTTON SOIL

Strain dial guage
reading

Deformation
In mm

strain

Proving
ring
reading

Load
kg

20

0.02

0.00027

1.2

40

0.04

0.000533

60

0.06

80

Corrected
area

Stress in
kg/cm2

0.144

11.341

0.0127

2.2

0.264

11.346

0.0232

0.0008

2.5

0.3

11.349

0.0264

0.08

0.001067

4.9

0.588

11.35

0.0518

100

0.10

0.001333

6.8

0.816

11.355

0.0718

120

0.12

0.0016

8.6

1.032

11.358

0.0908

140

0.14

0.001867

10.4

1.248

11.361

0.1098

160

0.16

0.002133

12.1

1.402

11.364

0.1233

180

0.18

0.0024

13.4

1.608

11.367

0.1414

200

0.20

0.002667

14.9

1.788

11.370

0.1571

250

0.25

0.003333

17.4

2.088

11.378

0.1835

300

0.30

0.0040

19.6

2.354

11.386

0.2065

350

0.35

0.004667

21.2

2.544

11.393

0.2232

400

0.40

0.005333

22.5

2.7

11.401

0.2368

450

0.45

0.0060

23.4

2.808

11.408

0.2461

500

0.50

0.006667

23.9

2.868

11.416

0.2512

550

0.55

0.007333

24.2

2.9

11.423

0.2542

600

0.60

0.0080

24.4

2.928

11.431

0.2561

650

0.65

0.008667

24

2.88

11.439

0.2517

700

0.70

0.009333

23

2.76

11.446

0.2411

750

0.75

0.01

21.1

2.54

11.455

0.222

Table no. 6:

in

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST values for soil

49

Unconfined Compression Test of stone dust @5%

Strain dial guage
reading

Deformation
In mm

strain

Proving
ring
reading

Load
kg

20

0.02

0.00027

2.6

40

0.04

0.000533

60

0.06

80

Corrected
area

Stress in
kg/cm2

0.312

11.341

0.0275

5.2

0.624

11.346

0.0550

0.0008

7.0

0.84

11.349

0.0740

0.08

0.001067

8.9

1.07

11.35

0.0945

100

0.10

0.001333

10.4

1.25

11.355

0.1101

120

0.12

0.0016

11.8

1.42

11.358

0.1250

140

0.14

0.001867

13.3

1.60

11.361

0.1408

160

0.16

0.002133

14.4

1.73

11.364

0.1522

180

0.18

0.0024

15.8

1.90

11.367

0.1672

200

0.20

0.002667

16.9

2.03

11.370

0.1785

250

0.25

0.003333

19.4

2.33

11.378

0.2048

300

0.30

0.0040

21.2

2.54

11.386

0.2231

350

0.35

0.004667

22.5

2.7

11.393

0.2310

400

0.40

0.005333

23.3

2.80

11.401

0.2456

450

0.45

0.0060

23.8

2.86

11.408

0.2507

500

0.50

0.006667

23.9

2.87

11.416

0.2514

550

0.55

0.007333

23.7

2.84

11.423

0.2436

600

0.60

0.0080

23.4

2.81

11.431

0.2458

650

0.65

0.008667

22.9

2.75

11.439

0.2404

700

0.70

0.009333

22.4

2.69

11.446

0.2350

Table no. 7:

in

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST values for stone dust 5%

50

Unconfined Compression Test for stone dust @10%

Strain dial guage
reading

Deformation
In mm

strain

Proving
ring
reading

Load in kg

Corrected
area

Stress
kg/cm2

20

0.02

0.00027

1.6

0.192

11.341

0.0169

40

0.04

0.000533

3.4

0.408

11.346

0.0359

60

0.06

0.0008

5.2

0.624

11.349

0.0549

80

0.08

0.001067

7.4

0.888

11.35

0.0782

100

0.10

0.001333

10.2

1.224

11.355

0.1077

120

0.12

0.0016

12.6

1.512

11.358

0.1331

140

0.14

0.001867

14.7

1.776

11.361

0.1563

160

0.16

0.002133

17.1

2.052

11.364

0.1804

180

0.18

0.0024

18.8

2.256

11.367

0.1984

200

0.20

0.002667

21.2

2.554

11.370

0.2246

250

0.25

0.003333

26.8

3.216

11.378

0.2826

300

0.30

0.0040

30.2

3.624

11.386

0.3182

350

0.35

0.004667

33.3

3.996

11.393

0.3569

400

0.40

0.005333

35.7

4.284

11.401

0.3737

450

0.45

0.0060

37.2

4.464

11.408

0.3913

500

0.50

0.006667

37.9

4.548

11.416

0.3983

550

0.55

0.007333

38.2

4584

11.423

0.4012

600

0.60

0.0080

38.1

4.572

11.431

0.3999

650

0.65

0.008667

37.8

4.536

11.439

0.3965

700

0.70

0.009333

36.6

4.392

11.446

0.3837

750

0.75

0.01

34.8

4.176

11.455

0.3645

Table no. 8:

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST values for stone dust 10%

51

in

Table no.9: Unconfined Compression Test for stone dust @ 15%

Strain dial
guage reading

Deformation
In mm

strain

Proving
ring
reading

Load
kg

20

0.02

0.00027

10

40

0.04

0.000533

60

0.06

80

Corrected
area

Stress in
kg/cm2

1.2

11.341

0.106

19

2.28

11.346

0.2

0.0008

37

4.44

11.349

0.388

0.08

0.001067

54

6.48

11.35

0.565

100

0.10

0.001333

73

8.76

11.355

0.76

120

0.12

0.0016

91

10.92

11.358

0.946

140

0.14

0.001867

106

12.72

11.361

1.098

160

0.16

0.002133

111

13.32

11.364

1.146

180

0.18

0.0024

113

13.36

11.367

1.165

200

0.20

0.002667

149

17.88

11.370

1.526

250

0.25

0.003333

164

19.68

11.378

1.677

300

0.30

0.0040

199

23.88

11.386

2.010

350

0.35

0.004667

207

24.84

11.393

2.075

400

0.40

0.005333

247

29.64

11.401

2.457

450

0.45

0.0060

274

32.88

11.408

2.708

500

0.50

0.006667

291

34.92

11.416

2.855

550

0.55

0.007333

309

37.08

11.423

3.009

600

0.60

0.0080

315

37.8

11.431

3.048

650

0.65

0.008667

310

37.2

11.439

2.976

700

0.70

0.009333

289

34.68

11.446

2.752

750

0.75

0.01

259

31.08

11.455

2.448

52

in

Unconfined Compression Test for stone dust @20%

Strain dial
guage reading

Deformation
In mm

strain

Proving
ring
reading

Load
kg

20

0.02

0.00027

40

0.04

0.000533

60

0.06

80

in

Corrected
area

Stress in
kg/cm2

0.48

11.341

0.042

8.9

1.068

11.346

0.094

0.0008

12.2

1.464

11.349

0.128

0.08

0.001067

16.2

1.944

11.35

0.171

100

0.10

0.001333

20.4

2.448

11.355

0.215

120

0.12

0.0016

24.8

2.976

11.358

0.262

140

0.14

0.001867

27.4

3.288

11.361

0.289

160

0.16

0.002133

30.4

3.648

11.364

0.321

180

0.18

0.0024

33.4

4.008

11.367

0.352

200

0.20

0.002667

36

4.320

11.370

0.379

250

0.25

0.003333

40.6

4.872

11.378

0.428

300

0.30

0.0040

48

5.76

11.386

0.505

350

0.35

0.004667

54.1

6.452

11.393

0.569

400

0.40

0.005333

58

6.96

11.401

0.610

450

0.45

0.0060

59.8

7.176

11.408

0.629

500

0.50

0.006667

58.3

6.996

11.416

0.612

550

0.55

0.007333

53

6.360

11.423

0.556

600

0.60

0.0080

45.4

5.448

11.431

0.476

650

0.65

0.008667

36.8

4.416

11.439

0.386

Table no.10: Unconfined Compression Test for stone dust @20%

53

California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ Black cotton soil

Least count of proving ring dial guage= 1 division =0.2469 kg
s.no.

Penetration dial
reading

Penetration
In mm

Proving ring
dial reading
in divisions

Load in kg

50

0.5

16.8

4.148

100

27.6

6.814

150

1.5

36

8.888

200

45.8

11.308

250

2.5

54.2

13.382

300

61.4

15.160

350

3.5

75.2

18.567

400

82

20.246

10

450

4.5

86.4

21.332

11

500

90.6

22.369

12

550

5.5

94.2

23.258

13

600

96.8

23.900

14

650

6.5

99

24.443

15

700

102

25.184

16

750

7.5

105

25.925

Table no. 11: California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ Black cotton soil

54

California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ stone dust 5% Least count of

proving ring dial guage= 1 division =0.2469 kg
s.no.

Penetration dial
reading

Penetration
In mm

Proving ring
dial reading in
divisions

50

0.5

12

2.963

100

28

6.913

150

1.5

55.5

13.703

200

77

19.011

250

2.5

100

24.69

300

116.5

28.764

350

3.5

135

33.332

400

143

35.307

10

450

4.5

145.5

35.924

11

500

154

38.023

12

550

5.5

160

40.245

13

600

173

42.714

14

650

6.5

179

44.195

Table no. 12: California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ Stone dust 5%

55

Load in kg

California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ stone dust 10% Least count

of proving ring dial guage= 1 division =0.2469 kg
s.no.

Penetration dial
reading

Penetration
In mm

Proving ring
dial reading
in divisions

50

0.5

6.4

1.580

100

20.02

4.987

150

1.5

39.4

9.728

200

42.8

10.567

250

2.5

85.8

21.184

300

107.2

26.468

350

3.5

122.4

30.221

400

137

33.825

10

450

4.5

151.8

37.479

11

500

162.6

40.146

12

550

5.5

175

43.208

13

600

188.2

46.467

14

650

6.5

198.8

49.084

15

700

208.2

51.842

Table no. 13: California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ Stone dust 10%

56

Load in kg

California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ stone dust 15% Least count

of proving ring dial guage= 1 division =0.2469 kg
s.no.

Penetration dial
reading

Penetration
In mm

Proving ring
dial reading in
divisions
0

50

0.5

7.9

1.876

100

8.6

1.951

150

1.5

21

2.123

200

31.4

5.185

250

2.5

43.8

7.753

300

52.2

10.814

350

3.5

62

12.986

400

70.6

15.308

10

450

4.5

85

20.986

11

500

102.2

22.764

12

550

5.5

95.2

23.505

Table no. 14: California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ Stone dust 15%

57

Load in kg
0

California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ stone dust 20% Least count

of proving ring dial guage= 1 division =0.2469 kg
s.no.

Penetration dial
reading

Penetration
In mm

50

0.5

100

Proving ring
dial reading in
divisions

Load in kg

1.8

0.444

10.6

2.617

150

1.5

21.8

5.382

200

36.6

9.037

250

2.5

49.6

12.246

300

57.2

14.123

350

3.5

62

15.308

400

64.4

15.9

10

450

4.5

66.8

16.493

11

500

71

17.538

12

550

5.5

76.2

18.814

13

600

77

19.011

14

650

6.5

78.1

19.283

15

700

78.7

19.431

Table no. 15: California Bearing Ratio VALUES @ Stone dust 20%

58

Optimum Moisture Content for BLACK COTTON SOIL

1.55

1.5

1.5
1.49
1.46

Dr 1.45
y
d
e
ns 1.4
it
y
g/
cc 1.35

1.42
1.4

1.32
1.3
0.00%

10.00% 15.00%

20.00% 25.00%

30.00% 35.00%

5.00%
Optimum Moisture content %

Graph No. 1: Optimum moisture content values for soil

40.00%

59

OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT FOR STONE DUST (5%)

1.7
1.68

1.68

1.66
Dr 1.64
y
d 1.62
e
ns 1.6
it
y 1.58
g/
cc 1.56
1.54
0.00%

64
1.62

1.55
10.00%

15.00%

5.00%
Optimum Moisture content %

Graph No. 2: Optimum moisture content values for Stone dust 5%

20.00%

25.00%

60

OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT FOR STONE DUST (10%)

1.691.7

1.68
1.66
1.64
1.62
Dr
1.6
y
d 1.58
e
1.56
ns 1.54
it
y 1.52
g/ 1.5
cc
0.00%

1.6

1.65

1.55
1.52
5.00%

10.00%
15.00%
Optimum Moisture content %

Graph No. 3: Optimum moisture content values for stone dust 10%

61

20.00%

25.00%

OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT FOR STONE DUST (15%)

1.65
1.6

1.59
1.58

Dr 1.55
y
d
e 1.5
ns
it
y 1.45
g/
cc
1.4
0.00%

1.52

1.41
10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

5.00%
Optimum Moisture content %

Graph No. 4: Optimum moisture content values for stone dust 15%

30.00%

35.00%

62

OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT FOR STONE DUST (20%)

1.66
1.64
1.63

1.64

1.62
1.61

Dr 1.6
y
d 1.58
e
ns 1.56
it
y 1.54
g/
cc 1.52
1.5
0.00%

1.57

1.53
1.52
5.00%

10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
Optimum Moisture content %

Graph No. 5: Optimum moisture content values for stone dust 20%

63

25.00%

30.00%

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST (Black cotton soil)

0.3

0.2661
42
0.2517
0.
0 2512
2
0.2411
0.2461
.
0.2368
0.222
0.2232

0.25

0.2065

0.2

0.1835

0.1571

S
0.15
T
R
E
S
S

0.1414
0.1233
0.1098

0.1
0.0908
0.0718
0.0518

0.05

0.0264
0.0232
0.0127
0
0

0.002

0.006
STRAIN

0.004

Graph No. 6: Unconfined compression test values for soil

64

0.008

0.01

0.012

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST (stone dust 5%)

0.3

0.2507

0.25

0.2456

0.20.2458

0.2514

48
6

0.007

0.008

0.2404
0.235

0.231
0.2231
0.2048

0.2

0.1785
0.1672
S
T 0.15
R
E
S
S

0.1522
0.1408
0.125
0.1101

0.1

0.0943
0.074
0.055

0.05

0.0275

0
0

0.001

0.003

0.004

0.002

0.005 0.006
STRAIN

Graph No. 7: Unconfined compression test values for stone dust 5%

65

0.009

0.01

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST (stone dust 10%)

0.45

0.3983
0.4

0.4012

0.3999

0.3913
0.3965
0.3837

0.3757

0.3645

0.3
5

0.3509

0.3182
0.3
0.2826

0.25
S
T
R
E
S
S

0.2246
0.2

0.1984
0.1805
0.1563

0.15

0.1331
0.1077

0.1

0.0782
0.0549

0.05

0.0359
0.0169
0
0

0.004

0.006
STRAIN

0.008

0.002

Graph No. 8: Unconfined compression test values for stone dust 10%

0.01

0.012

66

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST (stone dust 15%)

3.5

3.05
3.009

2.976

2.855
2.752

2.708
2.5

2.457

2.449

2.075
2.014

2
S
T
R
E
1.5
S
S

1.677
1.526
1.165
1.146
1.098

0.946
0.76
0.565

0.5

0.388
0.2
0.106
0
0

0.002

0.004

0.006
STRAIN

0.008

Graph No. 9: Unconfined compression test values for stone dust 15%

67

0.01

0.012

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST (stone dust 20%)

0.7

0.629
0.612

0.6

0.6
0.569

0.556

0.505

0.5

0.476
0.428
0.4

0.386

0.379

S
T
R
E
0.3
S
S

0.352
0.321
0.289
0.262
0.215

0.2

0.171
0.128
0.1

0.094

0.042
0
0

0.001

0.004
0.002

0.003

0.005 0.006
STRAIN

0.007

Graph No. 10: Unconfined compression test values for stone dust 20%

68

0.008

0.009

0.01

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUES @ BLACK COTTON SOIL

30

25.925
25.184

25
23.9
23.258
22.369

24.443

21 32
20.246

20
18.56

L
O 15
A
D
in
K
g

15.16
13.382
11. 08

10
8.888
6.814
5
4.148

0
0

4
5
penetration in mm

Graph No. 11: California bearing ratio for soil

69

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUES @ Stone dust 5%

50

45

44.195
42.794
40.245

40
38.023
35.307

35

35.9 4

33.332
30
28.764
L
O 25
A
D
in
K
20
g

24.69

19.0 1

15
13.703

10
6.913
5
2.963
0

0
0

3
4
penetration in mm

Graph No. 12: California bearing ratio for stone dust 5%

70

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUES @ Stone dust 10%

60

51.842
50

49.084
46.467
43.208
40.146

40

37 79
33.825
L
O 30
A
D
in
K
g

30.221
26.468

21.184

20

1 567
10

9.728

4.987
1.58
0

0
0

4
5
penetration in mm

Graph No. 13: California bearing ratio for stone dust 10%

71

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUES @ Stone dust 15%

25
23.505
22.764

20.986
20

17.4 1

15.308

15

L
O
A
D
in
K
g 10

12.986

10.814

7.753

5.18

1.951
1.876

2.123

0
0

3
4
penetration in mm

Graph No. 14: California bearing ratio for stone dust 15%

72

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUES @ Stone dust 20%

25

20

19.2831
18.81419.011
9.431
17.538
15.9
15.308

15

16 93

14.123
L
O
A
D
in
K 10
g

12.246

9.0 7

5.382

2.617

0
0

0.444
1

4
5
Penetration in mm

Graph No. 15: California bearing ratio for stone dust 20%

73

CONCLUSION
From the standard proctor test is inferred that the optimum moisture content
is decreasing and moisture dry density is increasing. The increase in the maximum
dry density of the treated soil reflects of the decreased resistance offered by
flocculated soil structure. This can be further more improved by using cementic
binders like lime or cement in further investigation.
From the results of unconfined compression tests, it was observed that the
shear strength increases with the varying stone dust percentage.
By the addition of stone dust the differential pressure of the soil decreases.
The study of stabilization using stone dust is primary and some negative
characteristics of results are studied and can be improved by using other additive and
can be further investigated, from which it is probable that cohesive property, MDD
can also be improved.
The study of stone dust recommends good and cheap secondary additive
which can be used in lime stabilization this report forms the basis for further
investigation with binder additive this brings economy as well as better stabilization.

74

REFERENCES
1. A Text book on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering K.R.ARORA
2. Geotechnical Engineering by C.VENKATARAMAIAH
3. Soil Mechanics and Foundations by B.C.PUNMIA.
4. IS codes 2720 part 2, part 5, part 6, part 26, part 7, part 9.
5. A Text book on Soil Mechanics Engineering Pratice TERZAGHI, K &
R.B.PECK, JOHNWELLY & SONS, NEWYORK.

75