International Journal of Civil Engineering OF and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 AND 6308 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL CIVIL ENGINEERING

G (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)

ISSN 0976 6308 (Print) ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), pp. 393-401 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.asp Journal Impact Factor (2013): 5.3277 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com

IJCIET
IAEME

MATURITY PERIOD AND CURING AS IMPORTANT QUALITY CONTROL PARAMETERS FOR LIME STABILIZED CLAY SUBGRADES
Dr. K.V.Krishna Reddy1, Mr.K.P.Reddy2
1

Professor & Principal, Chilkur Balaji Institute of Technology, Hyderabad-75, AP, India 2 Maintenance Engineer, Vasavi College of Engineering, Hyderabad-75, AP, India

ABSTRACT With rapid industrialization and the need for rural road development, it has become imperative to use poor subgrades for road formation. Poor subgrades, especially clayey soils need stabilization for effective performance. Though undesirable, most of the times insitu conditions does not go in hand with the strict quality control measures with regard to the delay in compaction (maturity period) and curing in road formation works. The object of the present study is to determine the effect of delayed compaction on California bearing strength and curing period on the California bearing strength (CBR) and unconfined compressive strength (UCC) of clay-lime mixes. The results highlight the importance of the maturity period and curing as important quality control parameters. Key Words: Maturity Period, Delay in compaction, Curing of lime stabilized subgrades, Lime stabilization. 1. INTRODUCTION

Rural Road Connectivity is not only a key component of Rural Development by promoting access to economic and social services and thereby generating increased agricultural incomes and productive employment opportunities in India, It is well known that even where connectivity has been provided, the roads constructed are of such quality (due to poor construction or maintenance techniques) that they cannot always be categorized as Allweather roads. In the process of connecting various parts of the country, it has become necessary to use all the types of subgrades for highway formation and clayey soils are no exception.
393

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME

Clayey subgrades stabilized with lime, cement or chemicals have come to stay as a standard engineering material for high way construction. During recent years, there has been an extensive use or lime for the stabilization or clayey soils, which have many advantages over the other types of stabilization, however due to minor negligence in parameters like maturity period and curing of the stabilized mixes a lot of strength loss occurs which is irreparable and need a lot of maintenance after construction 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Dumblet observed that the delay in wet mixing and subsequent compaction has little significance. Mitchell working with an organic expansive clay mixed with 4 percent dolomite hydrated lime gathered that a delay of 24 hours between wet mixing and compaction can result in loss in maximum dry density and a loss the compressive strength. To investigate the effect of elapsed time between mixing and compaction of a dune sand and montmorillonitic clay with flyash and a high Calcium hydrated lime, Davidson, inferred that a delay of 24 hours had negligible effect on the density and strength in case of dune sand, but in case of clay, the delay in mixing and compaction caused appreciable decrease in dry density and strength or the mixes. An evaluation of the effect of delay between mixing was investigated upon by cocka et al. Samples of soil mixed with lime and cement were compacted at different delay periods. Results indicated that the dry density or the samples showed a slight decrease irrespective of the addition of lime to the soil. Strength values also showed a decrease, though the decrease was minimized by the addition or lime. Fly ash is one of the most plentiful and versatile of the industrial by-products (Collins, 1992). It is classified into two classes based on the chemical composition of the flyash. Class F flyash is produced from burning anthracite and bituminous coals and contains small amount of lime (CaO). (Cockrell, 1970; Chu and Kao 1993) This flyash has siliceous and aluminous material (pozzolans), which itself possesses little or no cementitious value but in the presence of moisture, chemically reacts with lime at ordinary temperature to form cementitious compounds. Class C flyash is produced from lignite and sub-bituminous coals and usually contain significant amount of lime along with pozzolanic materials. The pozzolanic reactivity of the flyash is not represented by any chemical or physical property of the flyash. Cementious calcium silicate and calcium aluminosilicate hydrates are formed when flyash reacts with water and lime, (Hausmann, 1990). Fly ash produced in the combustion of sub bituminous coals exhibits self-cementing characteristics that can be adapted to a wide range of stabilisation applications. Ash treatment can effectively reduce the swell potential of fat clay soils and increase subgrade support capacity of pavement subgrades. Ash hydration occurs rapidly and must be addressed by the construction procedures to obtain maximum potential benefit from the ash treatment. This can be accomplished by limiting the delay between incorporation of the ash and final compaction to less than 2 hours. Hydration chemistry can differ significantly between specific sources and design mixes must be based on the specific ash to be used. Compressive strengths of ash treated materials are dependent upon moisture content at time of compaction and strict moisture control is required during construction (Katti, 1970; Churchill, 1999; Ferguson, 1993 and Thomas, 2002). An optimum content of 15% of flyash and lime in ratio of 1:4 could be used to obtain best stabilizing effect on alluvial soil (Ghosh, 1973). Addition of lime

394

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME

to the soil-flyash mixture results in increased friction angle, cohesive intercept, and average modulus (Consoli, 2001). 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The percentage of lime to be added to low plastic clay soils for stabilization has been varied from 0 to 4 % as literature review shows that the same has no effect beyond 4%. The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of the soil and the soil lime mixes is determined to find the OMC and MDD values at which the samples have to be compacted for strength tests, namely California bearing Ratio (CBR) and Unconfined compressive strength (UCC) of the clay and clay lime mixes. Delay in compaction is studied on California bearing ratio of clay lime mixes at 0, 2 and 4% of lime at respective OMC and MDD for compaction after maturity period of 30 minutes, 12 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours respectively. The California bearing ratio is determined for all the clay lime mixes with varying the curing period on maturity of 30 minutes and after 7days, 28 days and 40 days followed by 4 day soaking in all the cases. Unconfined compressive test of the clay lime mixes is done with varying curing periods of 7 days, 28 days and 40 days. Results have been analyzed to determine the effect of delay in compaction and curing period. 4. DATA ANALYSIS

The experimental results are tabulated from the plots drawn for the respective laboratory experiments. Table I shows the properties of clay and lime used for experimentation. Table 2 represent the optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of the clay lime mixes at various percentages of lime. Table 3 represent the effect of delayed compaction on optimum moisture content, maximum dry density and the California bearing ratio value (CBR) of the clay lime mixes. Table 4 and 5 depict the effect of curing on the CBR value and unconfined compression strength (UCC) of the clay lime mixes respectively. Table 1 Properties of clay and lime used for experimentation S. No. Property 1 Grain Size Distribution 1.18mm 75 micron 2 Atterberg Limits Liquid Limit (%) Plastic Limit (%) Plasticity Index 3 Compaction properties Optimum moisture content (%) Maximum Dry Density (g/cc) 4 Soaked CBR (%) Value % 99 83 29 18 11 14.6 1.84 6.0 S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Property Calcium hydroxide Chloride Sulphate Aluminium Iron and insoluble matter Arsonic Lead Clay 95% 0.01% 0.2% 1.0% 0.0004% 0.001%

395

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME

S.no 1 2 3 4 5

Table 2 Compaction test results Mix OMC (%) MDD( g/cc) Clay +0% lime Clay +1% lime Clay +2% lime Clay +3% lime Clay +4% lime 14.6 14.7 15.0 15.0 15.2 1.84 1.85 1.88 1.88 1.91

Table 3 Properties for delay in compaction on clay -lime mixes Clay +0% lime S.no Property On Maturity 12 hours 24hours 48 hours 1 OMC(%) 14.6 13.6 12.8 12.0 2 MDD (g/cc) 1.84 1.82 1.78 1.72 3 CBR (%) 6 5.2 4.8 4 Clay +1% lime S.no Property On Maturity 12 hours 24hours 48 hours 1 OMC(%) 14.7 13.9 13.4 12.6 2 MDD (g/cc) 1.85 1.83 1.76 1.73 3 CBR (%) 6.5 5.7 4.5 4.2 Clay +2% lime S.no 1 2 3 S.no 1 2 3 S.no 1 2 3 Property OMC (%) MDD(g/cc) CBR (%) Property OMC (%) MDD(g/cc) CBR (%) Property OMC (%) MDD (g/cc) CBR (%) On Maturity 12 hours 24hours 14.2 1.78 11 24hours 14.4 1.79 11.1 24hours 14.6 1.84 17 48 hours 14.0 1.74 11 48 hours 14.1 1.73 10.8 48 hours 14.2 1.78 16

14.8 14.6 1.86 1.84 15 12 Clay +3% lime On Maturity 12 hours

15.0 14.6 1.88 1.86 15.6 13 Clay +4% lime On Maturity 12 hours 15.2 14.8 1.91 1.87 20 18

396

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME

Table 4 CBR values on clay- lime mixes soil with curing and soaking S.no Mix CBR 4D soaking 12% 15% 18% 20% CBR CBR CBR 7Dcuring & 28D curing & 40D curing & 4D soaking 4D soaking 4D soaking 25% 30% 31% 27% 30% 32% 34% 36% 32% 35% 38% 40%

1 2 3 4

Clay +1% lime Clay +2% lime Clay +3% lime Clay +4% lime

Table 5 UCC values on clay- lime mixes depicting effect of curing S.no Mix UCC UCC UCC 7D Curing 28D Curing 40DCuring (Kg/cm2) (Kg/cm2) (Kg/cm2) 1 2 3 4 5 Clay +0% lime Clay +1% lime Clay +2% lime Clay +3% lime Clay +4% lime 1.3 2 4 4.1 3.8 3.8 5.2 5.15 6 3.9 6 6.3 8

5.

RESULTS The results and plots thereof are interpreted to observe the effect of delay in compaction on CBR of the clay lime mixes and that of curing on UCC and CBR strength of clay lime mixes. The same are depicted vide plots 1 to 3. Plot 1 shows the effect of delay in compaction on the clay lime mixes and Plots 2 and 3 show the effect of curing on CBR and UCC of the clay lime mixes respectively

397

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME
20.00

Clay + 4% Lime

C a lifo rn iaB e a rin gR a tio%

16.00

Clay + 3% Lime

12.00

Clay + 2% Lime

8.00

Clay + 1% Lime Clay + 0% Lime

4.00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00

No of hours of dealy in Compaction

Plot 1 Effect of Delay in compaction on CBR of clay lime Mixes

40.00
40 Days Curing + 4 Day Soaking 28 Days Curing + 4 Day Soaking

C a lif o r n ia B e a r in g R a t io %

7Days Curing + 4 Day Soaking

30.00

0 Days Curing + 4 Day Soaking

20.00

10.00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00

No of Days of Curing

Plot 2 Effect of curing period on CBR of clay lime Mixes

398

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME
8.00
Clay + 4% Lime

U u c o n fin e dC o m p r e s s iv eS tr e n g t hk g /s q c m

Clay + 3% Lime

6.00
Clay + 2% Lime

4.00

Clay + 1% Lime

2.00

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

No. of Days of Curing

Plot 3 Effect of curing period on UCC of clay lime Mixes 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At the outset the authors would thank the Head, CED at Vasavi Engineering College and Head Transportation Division and professors at JNTUH for their valuable guidance and encouragement during experimentation. 7. CONCLUSION

1. The OMC and MDD values decreased with delay in compaction. The decrease was significant with OMC decreasing from 15.2% to 14.2% and MDD decreasing from 1.91 g/cc to 1.78 g/cc. for 4% lime mixed clay soil. 2. The CBR values decreased from 20% to 16% as the delay in compaction increased to 48 hours for 4% lime mixed clay soil. This has a lot of effect on the strength of the subgrades. 3. The CBR and UCC values increased significantly for 7 day cured and 28 day cured samples. Curing up to 7 days showed increase in the CBR and UCC values, which increased till 28 day strength and further the effect was insignificant. 4. The CBR strength achieved with 2% of lime was almost achieved with 1% lime mixed clay soil with 7 days curing. 5. UCC value with 2% lime mixing with no curing is found to be 4 kg/cm2 and the same for 1% lime mixed soils with 7 days curing is found to be 3.8 kg/cm2 6. Clay- Lime mixes should be compacted immediately after maturity of 30 minutes. There should not be any delay in compaction after mixing clay with lime and water. Delay in compaction leads to substantial decrease in the CBR values. 7. It is recommended that all the clay lime mixes should be cured at least for 7 days and for a maximum of 28 days.

399

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME

8 1. 2.

REFERENCES Bhasin N.K., Dhawan, P.K., and Mehta, H.S. (1978), Lime requirement in soil stabilisation, Road Research Papers, Rep. no.149, CRRI, India. Bhasin, N.K., Dhawan, P.K., Mishra, A.K., Ashwin Kumar and Lal, N.B. (1983), A study on The Distribution of Stabilizer Content using different Mixing Techniques in Stabilized Soil Road Constructions, Indian Roads Congress Journal. Blight, G.E., and Wet, J.A. (1995), Acceleration of Heave of Structures on Expansive Clay, Proc. Symposium on Moisture Equilibria and Moisture Changes in the Soils Beneath Covered Areas, Butterworths, Australia, Vol.1, pp.89-92. Bulman, J.N. (1972), Soil Stabilisation in Africa, Rep.No.476, TRRL, UK. Chopra, S.K., Reshi, S.S., and Garg, S.K. (1964), Use of Fly Ash as a Pozzolana, Proc. Symposium on Pozzolan, their survey, Manufacture and Utilization, CRRI, India, p.18. Chu, S. C., and Kao, H. S. (1993), A Study of Engineering Properties of a Clay Modified by Flyash and Slag, Flyash for Soil Improvement Geotechnical Special Publication, Vol. 36, pp 89-99. Chu, T.Y. (1955), Soil Stabilisation with Lime Fly Ash mixture, Preliminary studies with Silty and Clayey Soils, HRB, No.108, p.102. Churchill, E.V., and Amirkhanian, S.N. (1999), Coal Ash Utilization in Asphalt Concrete Mixtures, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering Vol. 11, pp. 295-301. Cockrell, C. F. and Leonard, J. W., (1970), Characterization and Utilization Studies of Limestone Modified Flyash, Coal Research Bureau, Vol. 60. Consoli, N.C., Prietto, P.D.M., Carraro, J.A.H., and Heineck, K.S. (2001), Behaviour of Compacted Soil-Fly Ash-Carbide Lime Mixtures, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 9, pp 774-782. Cokca, E. (2001), Use of Class C Fly Ashes for the Stabilisation of an Expansive Soil, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No.7, pp 568-573. Consoli, N.C., Prietto, P.D.M., Carraro, J.A.H., and Heineck, K.S. (2001), Behaviour of Compacted Soil-Fly Ash-Carbide Lime Mixtures, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 9, pp 774-782. Collins, R. J., and Ciesielski, S. K. (1992), Highway Construction use of wastes and By-products Utilization of Waste Materials in Civil Engineering Construction, Published by ASCE, New York, pp.140-152 Croft, J.B. (1967), The Influence of Soil Mineralogical Composition on Cement Stabilisation, Geotechnique, London, England, Vol. 17. Davidson, L.K., Demirel, T., and Handy, R.L. (1965), Soil Pulverization and Lime Migration in Soil-Lime Stabilisation, Highway Research Record, No.92, pp 103-125. Deshpande, M.D., Pandya, P.C., Shall, J.D., and Vanjara, S.Y. (1990), Performance Study of Road Section Constructed with Local Expansive Clay Stabilized with Lime as Sub Base Material, Indian Highways, Vol. 18, No.6, pp 29-38. Ferguson, G. (1993), Use of self-cementing fly ash as a soil stabilizing agent Proc. Geotechnical special publication, No. 36, ASCE, New York. FHWA, (1995), Fly ash Facts for the Highway Engineers FHNA SA 44 081, December 1995, pp. 70.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7. 8. 9. 10.

11.

12.

13.

14. 15. 16.

17. 18.

400

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), IAEME

19.

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

28. 29.

30.

31.

Frydman, S., Ravina, I., and Ehrenreich, T, (1977), Stabilisation of Heavy Clay with Potassium Chloride, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, South East Asian Geotechnical Society, Vol.8, pp 95-108. Ghosh, R.K., Chadda, L.R., Pant, C.S., and Sharma, R.K. (1973), Stabilisation of Alluvial Soils with both Lime and F1yash, Journal of Indian Roads Congress. Hausmann, M. R. (1990), Engineering Principles of Ground Modification, Mc. Graw Hill Publishing Co., New York. Holtz, W.G and Gibbs, H.J (1956), Engineering Properties of Expansive Clays, Transactions of ASCE, Vol. 121, pp 641-647. IRC 37 - 2001: Guidelines for Design of Flexible Pavements. IRC : SP : 53 - 2002: Guidelines on Use of Polymer and Rubber Modified Bitumen in Road Construction. IS 2720 (part 16) - 1979, Methods of Test for Soils; Laboratory Determination of CBR, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi. Katti, R.K. (1970), Use of Fly Ash in Road Construction Get together and Field Demonstration on the Use of Fly Ash in Civil Engineering Works, Madras, India. Mitchell, J. X., and Radd, L. (1973), Control of Volume Changes in Expansive Earth Materials, Proc. Workshop on Expansive Clays and Shales in Highway Design and Construction, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., pp 200-257. Thomas, Z. (2002), Engineering Properties of Soil- Fly Ash Subgrade Mixtures, Proc. Transportation Scholars Conference, Iowa State University. P.A. Ganeshwaran, Suji and S. Deepashri, Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Self Compacting Concrete with Manufactured Sand and Fly Ash, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 60 - 69, ISSN Print: 0976 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 6316. Thulaseedharan V and Narayanan S.P, The Effect of Soil Improvement on Foundation & Super Structure Design, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 4, Issue 2, 2013, pp. 258 - 269, ISSN Print: 0976 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 6316. P.S.Joanna, Jessy Rooby, Angeline Prabhavathy, R.Preetha and C.Sivathanu Pillai, Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Beams with 50 Percentage Fly Ash, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 4, Issue 2, 2013, pp. 36 - 48, ISSN Print: 0976 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 6316.

401