MERU UNIVERSITY OF SCIENSCE AND TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHTECTURE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
INVESTIGATION OF THE PROPERTIES OF STABILIZED EARTH BLOCKS USING FLY ASH
AND QUARRY DUST
BY
EG204/104432/20
SERAH WANZA MUNYETI
PROJECT SUPERVISORS
A proposal submitted in partial fulfillment for the Award of Degree of Bachelor of Technology
In Civil Engineering in Meru University of Science and Technology

December 2023
 DECLARATION
I Serah Wanza hereby declare that this project proposal is my original work and has not been
presented for the award of any degree in any university or institution of higher learning.
Signed………………………………………………. Date……………………………………………………
Serah Wanza
Supervisors
Signed………………………………………………. Date…………………………………………………….
 ABSTRACT
Buildings made of earth material are an attempt for sustainable development to overcome
threats of rapid pollution rate caused by huge application of cement in construction industry.
In this project proposal, fly ash and quarry dust will be compared to find out the most suited
stabilization material for compressed stabilized earth blocks providing efficiency as well as
suitability as a substitute material for cement. In this project compressed stabilized earth blocks
prepared using a percentage of cement will be compared with specimen in-which cement is
replaced with fly ash and quarry dust.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First, I would like to thank the Almighty God for this far I have come in developing this proposal.
I would also like to thank my family and friends who have supported and believed in me in this
journey. I would like to pass my sincere gratitude to the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering for permitting me to proceed in this proposal writing.
DEDICATION
I honorably dedicate this piece of work first to the Almighty God and my family members who
have supported me financially throughout my education empowerment. It is also a dedication
to the school, department and more so to the supervisors who heartily gave assistance and
guidance in the accomplishment process of this work and to my friends who have supported
me through the entire process.
TABLE OF FIGURES
DECLARATION..............................................................................................................................................2
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................................................................4
DEDICATION................................................................................................................................................5
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................7
1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY...................................................................................................................7
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM..........................................................................................................8
1.3 OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................................8
1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS.....................................................................................................................9
1.5 JUSTIFICATIONS.................................................................................................................................9
1.6SCOPE.................................................................................................................................................9
CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................................9
LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................................................................................9
CHAPTER 3.................................................................................................................................................12
MATERIALS AND METHODS.......................................................................................................................12
3.1DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA...................................................................................................12
3.2RESEARCH DESIGN............................................................................................................................13
3.3MATERIALS.......................................................................................................................................13
3.4METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................13
3.5 DATA ANALYSIS................................................................................................................................16
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................17
APPENDIX..................................................................................................................................................18
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY
In progress to develop the construction industry all over the world many attempts have been
made by various researchers to reduce the cost of construction by investigating and
ascertaining the waste materials which could be classified as local materials such as fly ash,
quarry dust, sawdust among others.
CEBs can be cast in any desired shapes and sizes based on requirement and its application. The
application of earth blocks includes various advantages. The CSEBs finds its effective application
in low cost housing projects. Construction using earth materials develops harmony of building
with nature. The effective utilization of locally available earth materials is more economical. The
cost breakthrough for CSEBs production is very low when compared to conventional concrete
blocks and fired blocks.
With the increase in population and high demand for dwelling houses the price of such houses
has increased. This is compounded by the fact that the available land for this development is
becoming scares, especially in the urban areas. Many people especially the lower and middle
income groups can no longer afford them. One of the factors which contribute to the problem
is high cost of building materials which at the present time use the conventional materials and
methods of construction. One of the ways to alleviate the problem is to use cheap building
materials available locally. This can be done either by using re-cycled or sustainable raw
materials for houses which are comparable level of quality and comfort.
Concrete plays an important role in construction of structures. The global demand of
construction blocks is significantly increasing due to infrastructure growth worldwide.
Therefore, using alternative sources as replacement for cement appears to be a challenging
task. Industrial waste materials can be used as alternative sources as they can assist in solving
environmental concerns as they diminish the problem of waste disposal and reduce the
intensive use of energy and natural resources. In addition, the amounts of emissions of gases
get reduced. There are many potential industrial waste products that have the potential to
replace cement in CSEBs however fly ash and quarry dust are the waste materials that will be
discussed in this particular research proposal.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The cost of CSEBs is high making construction expensive. Despite the widespread use CSEBs,
there is a limited understanding of the factors that contribute to its performance in
construction of buildings. Furthermore, there is lack of consistency in manufacture and
processing of CSEBs which may result in variations in strength of the buildings. This project aims
to address this gap in knowledge and contribute to the existing body of research on CSEBs in
construction of buildings.

1.3 OBJECTIVES
1.3.1 MAIN OBJECTIVE
The aim of this project is to investigate the compressive strength of CSEBs.
1.3. THE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES ARE TO;
1. Investigate the compressive strength of CSEBSs.
2. Identify a better stabilization material for CSEBs between fly ash and quarry dust.
3. To conduct experimental test on fly ash and quarry dust CSEBs and assess their performance
in building construction.

1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What is the compressive strength of CSEBs?
2. What is the better stabilization material between fly ash and quarry dust?
3. What are the major influences of fly ash on concrete properties?

1.5 JUSTIFICATIONS
Due to the adverse effects caused by release of gases in manufacture of cement to the
environment, this study of investigating the strength of fly ash and quarry dust CSEBs will help
reduce the chances of diseases and improve environmental quality.
This study will also save on cost of construction since the waste materials used are readily
available by nature.

1.6SCOPE
This proposal is meant for project preparations that will be submitted at the end of the
academic year. The following activities will be involved in the implementation of this project
proposal.
(a)Sampling-samples will be collected for the analysis of the results
(b)Laboratory testing-compressive strength test
-water absorption test and block density
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW
Soil stabilization is widely known as an effective alternative for improving soil properties.
Stabilization can chemical or mechanical. Mechanical stabilization is the densification of soil by
application of mechanical energy (T.S. Thandavamoorthy, 2017). Chemical stabilization involves
mixing soil with chemically active compounds such as cement, lime, fly ash or calcium chloride.
These additives are most frequently associated with improving the strength and reducing the
swelling properties of expansive soils.
In 2014 A. Muthadhi studied the stabilization of soil using solid wastes including fly ash and
quarry dust and found that soil stabilization using solid wastes involves incorporating various
waste materials into the soil to improve its engineering properties and make it suitable for
construction purposes. This technique aimed to address environmental concerns by recycling
waste materials which enhance the soil characteristics. Materials like fly ash and quarry dust
contain fine particles that can fill the voids between soil particles, improving compaction and
reducing permeability. Additionally these materials often contain cement properties that
contribute to binding the soil strength and stability. He also found that utilization of solid
wastes in soil stabilization offers sustainable approach to waste management. By repurposing
industrial by-products that would otherwise be disposed of in landfills, this technique minimizes
environmental impact and reduces the need for virgin materials in construction. This approach
aligns with the principles of sustainable development by promoting resource efficiency and
reducing the depletion of natural resources. Soil stabilization using these waste materials as
additives in soil stabilization reduces the overall expenses associated with sourcing traditional
construction materials. It also provides an opportunity to create innovative, eco-friendly
construction practices that adhere to environmental regulations and promote the circular
economy concept by transforming waste into valuable resources for infrastructure
development.
Cement is the oldest binding agent since the invention of soil stabilization technology in 1960s.
It may be considered as primary stabilization agent because it can be used alone to bring about
the stabilizing action required. The choice of the type of cement to use depends on the type of
soil and desired final strength. Normally the amount of cement used is small but sufficient to
improve the engineering properties of the soil and further improve caution exchange of clay.
Cement can be used to modify and improve the quality of the soil and transform it into a
cemented mass with increased strength and durability (K. Arun Kumar, 2013).
Fly ash has been used in concrete and soil stabilization. It’s a by- product material from burning
coal during power generation. The properties of fly ash can vary significantly depending on the
source of the coal burning process. These by products can broadly be classified into class C (self-
cementing) and class F (non-self- cementing) fly ash based on AASHTO (17) and ASTM (7). Class
C fly ash contains a substantial amount of lime, CaO, but almost all of it is combined with glassy
silicates and aluminates (R.K Dhir, 2018).
Therefore, mixing with water a hydration reaction similar to that which occurs in hydration of
Portland cement occurs. Class F ash, contains very little lime and the glassy silica or alumina
exists almost exclusively as pozzolanas. Therefore, activation of these pozzolans requires
additives such as Portland cement or lime which provide a ready source of free lime.
Quarry dust is considered as one of the well accepted improvement techniques for weak soils.
They improve the strength and deformation characteristics of weak soils deposits. Sridharan et
al (2006) conducted studies on the shear strength of soil-quarry dust mixtures. The results
showed that the quarry dust proved to be a promising substitute for cement and can be used to
improve the engineering properties of soils. The dry density increased with the addition of
quarry dust with attendant decrease in the optimum moisture content.
Abundant use of steel, concrete and fired clay have added to the carbon footprint, causing
severe environmental pollution along with consumption of resources (Rachel Carson 1012). Co2
emissions from concrete block and fired clay blocks are reported to be 200kg/ton and
143kg/ton respectively which is high. As such, researchers have been compelled to look for
alternative materials that are sustainable and eco-friendly. In this regard, use of earth has
become popular nowadays. The main advantage of utilizing such materials as fly ash and quarry
dust are; lower carbon emission, lower consumption of energy, decreased transportation cost
and easy affordability (M. Maruthi Sai 2015). CSEBs using fly ash and quarry dust can be pressed
from damp site and the suitable soils are often available at or near the construction site. They
can be manufactured to a predictable size as well as the presses allow blocks to be consistently
made of uniform size, while also obtaining strengths that exceed. ASTM standard for concrete
blocks (1900 psi). These blocks are sound resistant and fire resistant and insect resistant in that
the wall are solid and very dense and have no food value for insects. CSEBs houses stay cool in
the summer and warm in the winter. CSEBs are not suitable for high rise buildings and wide
spans. Proper soil identification is required where the soil characteristics are suitable for use in
manufacture of CSEBs. Skilled labour is required and requires quality check at every stage of
manufacturing to avoid low-quality products.
Literature review shows that studies have been carried out regarding the different suitable
combination of stabilizers for making CSEBs with desired properties. Fly ash is deemed as a
problematic solid because of its disposal process and if dumped improperly, it degrades the
arable land. Moreover, its improper disposal possess serious environmental issues like air
pollution as well as respiratory diseases in human beings. As such, if it can be used in making
CSEBs it would reduce the risk of environmental issues associated with it and would also pave
the way for sustainable use of this waste. Elahi et al (2013) examined the combination 0f
cement fly ash and quarry dust as stabilizers for producing CSEBs and studied the compressive
strength of its relationship with curing age, water absorption capacity and pore pressure
response of the blocks under loading. However, lateral loading due to wind, earth quake and
communication openings raises the necessity of evaluating tensile strength and flexural
strength. Shear strength is another important property of stabilized earth, especially in case of
rammed earth construction, which has not received widespread attention of the researchers in
past years. The stabilized rammed earth ultimately fails in shear when subjected to axial
loading, demonstrating the importance of determining shear strength of stabilized earth.
Moreover, for establishing the failure envelops and in modeling the failures due to different
loading conditions, determination of shear strength of stabilized earth is essential and very
limited studies are available in this regard specially for cement fly ash and quarry dust stabilized
earth. Furthermore, this failure envelops and shear strength are required in analyzing the
behavior of rammed earth subjected to different loading schemes.
M. Muruthi in 2015 in a study published in the International Journal of Earth Sciences and
Engineering investigated the utilization of quarry dust and fly ash to improve the properties of
expansive soil and found that they fill in the voids between soil particles leading to better
packing and increased stability reducing the tendency of expansive soils to swell and shrink with
changes in moisture content as well as they alter the soils microstructure to create a more
stable matrix increasing the soils load-bearing capacity and resistance to deformation. Overall,
the addition of fly ash and quarry dust alters the soils characteristics enhancing its suitability for
construction while also providing environmental and sustainability benefits through the reuse
of industrial waste materials.
In summary, utilizing fly ash and quarry dust in making CSEBs and earthen construction can be a
suitable solution for disposal of fly ash and quarry dust. To warrant the use of fly ash stabilized
CSEBs tensile-flexural strength of the blocks along with durability need to be ascertained.
Moreover, shear strength of cement fly ash stabilized earth blocks needs to be understood in
relation to the rammed earth construction processes. To address these, locally available soil will
be collected and CSEBs will be fabricated considering different ratios of cement, fly ash and
quarry dust. The percentage of cement fly ash and quarry dust will be added with respect to the
dry mass of the soil taken. Influence of compaction energy on the density and compressive
strength will be studied. Compressive strength will be determined based on unconfined
compressive strength test.
 CHAPTER 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA
The proposal study will be carried out at Meru University of Science and Technology in Tigania
east constituency in Meru County. This is a region characterized by dry seasons with short
rainfall. Months with highest humidity are November and December.

3.2RESEARCH DESIGN
In this research proposal the type of research design to be used is the descriptive type of
research design which uses both qualitative data (although quantitative research is the primary
research method) to gather information to make accurate predictions about the properties of
compressed stabilized earth blocks using fly ash and quarry dust.

3.3MATERIALS
Soil is a natural concrete comprising of gravel, sand, silt and clay in definite proportions. In this
research work laterite soil has been selected and its properties studied for its suitability in
application for CSEBs. Fine aggregates are basically sands won from the land or the marine
environment. These particles passing through 4.75mm sieve and predominantly retained on
number200 sieve are called fine aggregates. For increased workability economy has reflected
by use of less cement, the fine aggregate should have a rounded shape.
Ordinary Portland cement (grade 53) will be used. Cement plays an important role in strength
development with time. Cement and lime are the conventional stabilization materials for earth
construction. Cement can be defined as the bonding material having cohesive and adhesive
properties which make it capable to unite the different construction materials and form the
compacted assembly.
Fly ash is one of the residues generated during combustion of coal. Fly ash added CEB exhibits
excellent physiochemical and mechanical properties including low density, negligible shrinkage,
thermal stability, fire and chemical resistance than conventional clay bricks.
Quarry dust is generally used as one of the best alternatives for fine aggregate. Quarry dust is
waste which is generated from rock. In quarrying activities, the rock has been crushed into
various sizes; during the process, the dust generated is called quarry dust and is formed as
waste. The amount of industrial waste is increasing year by year. Quarry dust waste is also a
waste material that is generated from the stone crushing industry which is abundantly available
to the extent of 200 million tons per annum. This will lead to landfill disposal problems, health
and environmental pollution. This quarry dust is considered as solid waste material and will be
provided from a nearby quarry within the Area of study.
Water free from impurities and acids is the best to use in preparing CSEBs. Water used for
mixing and curing should be clean and free from injurious amount of oils, acids, acids, alkalis,
salts, sugar and organic materials. Portable water is generally considered satisfactory for mixing
concrete. The pH value should not be less than 6 and the water to use during this project will be
from the Institution.

3.4METHODOLOGY
The investigation will be carried out on CSEBs containing laterite soil, cement, fly ash and
quarry dust. This investigation will be done to know whether the partial replacement of cement
with fly ash and quarry dust brings about enhanced properties.
The process of manufacture of stabilized earth blocks involves the following steps;
Soil preparation. Any planning of construction must be preceded by a selection of the location
where the soil has to be obtained. It is often argued that the top 15 to 20cm layer of soil must
be rejected due to presence of organic matter. From studies and experience, however, most of
the soils in dry land contain very little matter to be of concern in soil block production.
Sometimes, there is a tendency to create a pit and continuously obtain soil from the pit. This
may be right if the pit is to be used for a basement construction or as a water tank. If the soil
obtained does not have the right constituents, it may be modified by the addition of lumps. If
there are too many clay lumps, the soil may be spread in a thick layer on a level ground and
about 15% moisture sprinkled on the lumpy soil. The soil may be left in that condition for a day
and then the lumps may be broken on softening of the soil.
Mixing stabilizer and moisture. The soil and cement will be mixed till the presence of cement
cannot be detected visually. The different proportion of fly ash and quarry dust will then be
added accordingly. This mixing will be done preferably when the soil is dry. The soil-cement
mixture is mixed with water and the proportion of water is approximately close to the field
optimum moisture content. After all the water is added test if the water content is optimum.
This can be determined by making a ball of the moist soil in the palm of your hand. The soil
should not stick to the hand in the process.
Block pressing. The soil has to be prepared in batches for block pressing. When cement is used
as one of the stabilizers, the quantum of moist soil prepared at a time must be less than or
equal to about 25 scoops. Larger batch size results in the last few blocks being pressed after the
initial setting of cement. This can lead to poor strength gain. In case a larger volume of soil is to
be taken for dry cleaning all the soiled parts and by tightening the mould box bolts. The
following steps are to be followed in a sequence for pressing stabilized earth blocks in mardini
machine; anchoring the machine, weighing the soil, compaction, ejecting the block and finally
the block is removed along with the thin base plate and taken for stacking, the machine is now
ready for the next block.
Curing of blocks. The blocks have to be stacked on a level ground preferably in a shaded area.
The blocks may be stacked one above the other up to six layers. The blocks will then be cured
for 28 days by gentle sprinkling of water and by using a garden rose can. The top of the blocks
shall be covered with gunny cloth to prevent water evaporation.
The following laboratory experiments will be conducted;
Compressive strength test
A total of six different samples of the mixture proportions and compaction pressures will be
taken into account. As a reference, the compressive strength value is referred to in BS3921,
which states that the minimum compressive strength of earth blocks is 5 N/mm 2. To obtain
accurate results of compressive strength of the surface layer of CSEBs, metal plates lining will
be placed on both at its top and bottom sides so that force from the compressive strength
machine could be uniformly applied. Before testing this samples should be cured under specific
conditions, typically in a controlled environment with regulated temperature and humidity, to
stimulate the conditions they will be face in real-world. This curing period is crucial as it allows
the blocks to gain strength and stability over time.
Once the curing process is complete the prepared samples are then placed in a compression
testing machine. The machine applies a gradually increasing force at a constant rate to the
sample until the block fractures. During the test, data is collected continuously, recording the
applied force and corresponding deformation or strain. The maximum force the sample
withstands before failure is recorded as the compressive strength of the CSEBs. This process
adheres to standardized testing procedures and provides essential information regarding the
load bearing capacity and structural integrity of the CSEBs for construction purposes.
Water absorption
Water absorption rate for blocks is of great concern as it will determine the materials
workability due to the effect of weather. The samples will be tested at 7 and 28 days and water
absorption rate taken after 3 days curing period. Based on MS 76, water absorption rate test
which involves the cooling method where each sample is weighed before the test to establish
their initial dry weight and dried in an oven for 48 hours at a temperature of 105 degrees. It is
then soaked in water for 24 hours at room temperature. In order to get the percentage rate of
water absorption, the weight of the sample after immersion is divided by the weight of dry
sample and then multiplied by 100%. This calculation helps quantify the amount of water the
CSEBs have absorbed relative to their initial dry weight. This test assists in evaluating the blocks
capacity to absorb moisture, which is crucial for understanding its durability, susceptibility to
weathering and performance in different environmental conditions, guiding their use in
construction applications accordingly. The results of the test will be recorded in table 2.
Block density test
The block density test for compressed stabilized earth blocks is crucial to access their quality
and durability. To conduct this test, several blocks are randomly selected from a batch. The
initial step involves measuring the dimensions of the chosen blocks precisely. Then, their dry
weight is recorded accurately. Subsequently, the blocks are submerged in water for a specific
period, typically 24 hours, allowing them to absorb water. After the soaking period, the blocks
are removed, excess water on the surface is gently wiped off and their wet weight is measured
immediately. The difference between the dry weight and wet weight along with the volume
calculated from dimension enables the calculation of the block density. The formula for density
(mass divided by volume) provides the crucial density value, aiding in determining the blocks
strength and quality.
The block density test for CSEBs helps in evaluating their quality by assessing their ability to
resist water absorption. Blocks with lower density tend to absorb more water, leading to
decreased strength and durability. A higher density indicates better quality, as it signifies a
lower water absorption capacity, making the blocks more resilient to weathering effects. This
test is integral in ensuring the suitability of CSEBs for construction purposes, allowing builders
and engineers to select blocks with optimal density, enhancing the overall quality and longevity
of the structures built with them.

3.5 DATA ANALYSIS

A. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST
The average test results will be calculated for the specimen cast for various mix proportions (3
no of blocks for each mix proportion) with partial replacement of cement using fly ash and
quarry dust.
TABLE 1: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

S. No 1 Average compressive
strength (N/mm2)
Laterite soil (%) Cement (%) Fly ash (%)

1 70 30 0

2 70 20 10

3 70 10 20

S. No 2 Average compressive
strength (N/mm2)
Laterite soil (%) Cement (%) Quarry dust (%)

1 70 30 0
2 70 20 10

3 70 10 20

TABLE 2: WATER ABSORPTION TEST

S No Description Weight of Water

specimen (kg) absorption
(%)
Dry wet

1 70%LS + 30%C

2 70%LS + 20%C + 10%FA

3 70%LS + 10%C + 10%QD

TABLE 3: BLOCK DENSITY TEST

S no Description Block dimension Weight of Block

specimen(kg) density(kg/m3)
L(m) B(m) D(m)

1 70%LS + 30%C

2 70%LS +20%C + 10%FA

3 70%LS + 10%C + 20%FA

4 70%LS + 20%C + 10% QD

5 70%LS + 10%C + 20% QD

REFERENCES
Ankati Singh Nege (2013) “Soil Stabilization Using Lime”, International Journal of Innovative
Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, Volume 2, Issue 2, PP 448-453.
Aparna Roy (2014) “Soil Stabilization Using Rice Husk Ash and Cement”, InternationalJournal of
Civil Engineering Research, Volume 5, Number 1, PP 49-54.
Asma Muhmed And Dariusz Wanatowski (May-June 2013) “Effect of Lime Stabilisation on the
Strength and Microstructure of Clay”, IOSR Journal Of Mechanical And Civil Engineering (IOSR-
JMCE), Volume 6, Issue 3, PP Ankit Singh Negi et.al(February 2013) “Soil Stabilization Using
Lime”, International Journal of Innovative 87-94.
B.V. Venkatarama Reddy (2013), Embodied energy of common and alternative building
materials and technologies, Energy and Buildings, pp129-137
B.Suneel Kumar &T.V.Preethi(May 2014) “Behaviour of Clayey Soil Stabilized with Rice Husk
Ash & Lime, International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology(IJETT), Volume 11,
Number 1, PP44-48.
C.Cherianet.al (November 2016) “Reappraisal of Optimum Lime Content Determination for
Lime Stabilization of Fine-Grained Soils”, 6th Asian Regional Conference on Geosynthetics-
Geosynthetics for Infrastructure Development, 8-11, PP260-275.
Dr.D.KoteswaraRao, G.V.V.Rameswara Rao, P.R.T.Pranav(July 2012) “A Laboratory Study on the
Effect of Rice Husk Ash & Lime on The Properties of Marine Clay”, International Journal of
Engineering and Innovative Technology, Volume 2, Issue1, PP345-353.
Galetakis M, Alevizos and Leventakis K,(2012) Evaluation of fine Limestone Quarry dust for
production of Building Elements, pp122-130.
KavishS.Mehta Et.Al(May 2014) “Analysis of Engineering Properties of Black Cotton Soil &
Stabilization Using By Lime”, International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications,
Vol.4, Issue 5, PP 25-32.
M.Harikumar et.al(April 2016) “Experimental Investigation on the Suitability of Using Rice Husk
Ash and Lime for Soil Stabilization”, International Journal of Scientific &Engineering Research,
Vol.7, Issue 4, pp58-61.
Musa Alhassan (April 2008) “Potentials of Rice Husk Ash for Soil Stabilization, AU J.T
11(4) ,PP246-250.
Parimal Jha and Nisheet Tiwari (April 2016) “Effect of Lime and Rice Husk Ash on Engineering
Properties of Black Cotton Soil”, International Journal of Innovative Technology and Research,
Vol.4, Issue 3, PP2924-2926.
APPENDIX
BUDGET

ITEM DESCRIPTION QUA NTITY RATE TOTAL

(Ksh) (Ksh)

Cement 53 grade ordinary Portland 1 800 800

cement

Laterite soil Fine particles 1 500 500

wheelbarrow

Fly ash Fine particles 1 600 600

wheelbarrow

Quarry dust Fine particles 1 500 500

wheelbarrow

Sand Coarse aggregate 1wheelbarrow 200 200

Transportation 1000
fee

Grand total 3600

WORK PLAN

Activity/ SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
time 2023 2024

Topic

Preliminary
pages

Introduction

Literature review

Methodology

Proposal
submission
Material
collection

Lab tests

Data collection

Data analysis

Conclusion &
recommendation

Final
presentation