Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Presented By
Guided by
INTRODUCTION
Stabilization, in a broad sense, incorporates the various methods employed for modifying the properties of a soil to improve its engineering performance. Mechanical stabilisation Chemical stabilisation Standard Non standard
Enzyme
Role of Enzyme;
Catalyze the reaction between the clay and the organic cations and reduces the adsorbed layer thickness. Replaces adsorbed water with organic cations, thus neutralizing the negative charge on a clay particle.
Promotes the development of cementatious compounds using the following, general reaction:
H2O + clay Enzyme Calcium Silicate Hydrates
OBJECTIVES
To study the quantitative changes in geotechnical properties of soil with different dosage of enzyme. To find out the optimum dosage of enzyme. To evaluate the influence of curing period, on properties of soil
MATERIALS USED
Soil sample obtained from Karamana river bank Bio enzyme extracted from Neem
Bio Enzyme
Soil sample 9
LITERATURE REVIEW
Andrew et al USA Conducted laboratory CBR value is a poor indicator (2003) experiment for of direct soil strength effectiveness in sub grade. Isaac et al (2003) Manoj et al (2003) Roger Bergmann (2000) India Conducted test on lateritic Significant increase in CBR as soil and clay type soil in curing period increases Kerala India Six different types of soil CBR and UCS increased with varying clay content considerably for soils with high clay content USA Practical roads application for Minimum 2% clay content is required for successful stabilisation
10
METHODOLOGY
Chemical analysis of bio-enzyme. Chemical analysis of Soil. Particle size analysis of soil. Atterberg limits of soil. Proctor compaction test for untreated soil.
Proctor compaction test for soil treated with bio enzyme. CBR test for untreated soils in dry and soaked conditions CBR test for soils treated with bio enzyme in soaked conditions and after curing period.
11
TEST RESULTS
Geotechnical Properties of soil;
Sl. No. 1 2 Property Specific gravity Particle size Gravel Sand Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.25 2.90 57.98 38.87 Nil Nil 4 5 6 7 Value 2.61 Sl. No. Cu Cc IS Classification Liquid limit Max. Dry density, g/cc Opt. moisture content CBR Unsoaked Soaked 9.74 6.21 Property Value 12.22 3.64 SM 32.0 1.708 18.69
12
TEST RESULTS
Particle size distribution curve;
Sand Clay Silt Fine Medium
Contd
Coarse
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.001
96.85
91.78
99.56 99.75
100
Percentage finer %
75.02
0.010
1.000
10.000
13
TEST RESULTS
Liquid limit curve;
280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100
20
273
Contd
Penetration
212
160
117
25
30 Water content in %
35
40
14
TEST RESULTS
Chemical composition; a. Soil
Location Mankattu Kadavu (Top Layer) Mankattu Kadavu (Bottom Layer)
Contd
Chemical Constituents Sulphate Chloride Organic matter (mg/100gm of soil) (mg/100gm of soil)
1320 1100
35 30
19 11
b. Enzyme
Sl No Chemical Constituents Percentage
1 2 3 4
N C H S
15
TEST RESULTS
Compaction curve;
1.75
Contd
Untreated soil Soil+0.5% Enzyme Soil+0.6% Enzyme Soil+0.7% Enzyme Soil+8% Enzyme Soil+9% Enzyme Soil+10% Enzyme Soil+11% Enzyme
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
Water content in %
16
TEST RESULTS
Variation of MDD;
1.75 Dry Density in gm/cc 1.70
1.701 1.708 1.717
1.705
Contd
1.65
1.588
1.60 1.55 1.50 1.45 1.40 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
0.0
0.1
7.0
8.0
Enzyme in %
12.0
17
TEST RESULTS
Variation of OMC;
25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 0.0
Contd
22.5
22.32
22.87 22.34
OMC in %
18.69
18.79
19.22 19.8
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.1
0.2
7.0
8.0
Enzyme in %
11.0
12.0
18
TEST RESULTS
Variation of MDD;
1.50
Contd
1.35
1.30 1.25
1.20
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 Enzyme dosage in %
19
TEST RESULTS
Variation of CBR (Soaked);
12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 10.00
Contd
11.25
CBR in %
6.21
1 Period in weeks
20
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Untreated soil; The soil contains 0.25% coarse, 2.90% medium, 57.98% Fine sand and 38.87% silt & clay. IS classification is SM (silty sand) The liquid limit of the soil is 32.00%. For light compaction test, the MDD and OMC are 1.708 gm/cc and 18.69% respectively.
CBR values for unsoaked and soaked condition for light compaction are 9.74% and 6.21%.
21
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Contd
Soil treated with enzyme; The seven different enzyme dosages are used to stabilize the soil for finding the optimum dosage. Effect on Light Compaction; There is no significant variation in MDD for dosage up to 0.70% and further increase in dosage, MDD values are decreasing. Effect on CBR; CBR test is conducted with 19% Enzyme dosage for curing period of one and two weeks under soaked condition. Soaked CBR value after two weeks curing increased by 81% 22
CONCLUSION
MDD of the soil sample has been reduced considerably after increasing the dosage of bioenzyme. This may be due to the soil sample is being sandy soil are less reactive with enzyme. Reasonable amount of clay content (min. 2%) is essential for better result. The CBR value under soaked condition has increased by 81% on addition of enzyme and after a curing period of two weeks. The recommendation of bioenzymes for field use has to be done only after conducting independent laboratory testing. 23
REFERENCES
1. Andrew, R.T., Fadi, M.S., Nicholos, E.H. and Elahe, M., (2003), An Evaluation of Strength change on Sub grade soils stabilized with an Enzyme Catalyst solution using CBR and SSG comparisons, Geomatrics, Inc. Columbia, Sc 29210, USA. 2. Bergmann, R., (2000), Soil Stabilizers on Universally Accessible Trials, Federal Highway Administration, Unites States Department of Transportation. 3. Brazetti, R. and Murphy, S.R., (2000), General usage of Bio-Enzyme stabilizers in Road Construction in Brazil, 32nd annual meeting on paving Brazil 4. Hitam, A. and Yusof, A., (1998), Soil stabilizers for plantation road, National seminar on Mechanisation in Oil Palm Plantation, Selangor, Malaysia. 5. Isaac, K.P., Biju, P.B. and Veerararagavan, A., (2003), Soil stabilization using BioEnzyme for Rural Roads, Presented at the IRC Seminar: integrated Development of Rural an Arterial Road Networks for Socio- Economic development, New Delhi. 6. Lacuoture, A. and Gonzalez, H., (1995), Usage of Organic Enzymes for the stabilization of Natural base soils and sub bases in Bagota, Pontificia Universidad Jevariana, Faculty of Engineering.
24
REFERENCES
Contd
7. Manoj Shukla, Sunil Bose and Sikdar, P.K., (2003), Bio-Enzyme for stabilization of soil in Road construction a cost effective approach, Presented at the IRC Seminar: Integrated Development of Rural and Arterial Road Networks for SocioEconomic development, New Delhi. 8. Mohd Raihan Taha, Tanveer A Khan, Ibtehaj Taha Jawad, Ali Akbar Firoozi and Ali Asghar Foroozi,(2013), Recent Experimental Studies in Soil Stabilisation with Bio-Enzyme-A Review, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineer-ing, Vol.18,Bund.R.,pp 3881-3894. 9. Ravi Shankar, A.U., Harsha Kumar, Rai and Ramesha Mithanthaya, I.,(2009), Bioenzyme stabilized lateritic soil as a highway material. Journal of Indian Road Congress, 553, pp 143-151. 10. Shirsavkar,S.S. and Karanne,S.S.,(2010),Innovation in road construction using natural polymer, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineer-ing, Vol.15,Bund.O.,pp 1614-1624.
25
THANK YOU