Introduction

stabilization is the improvement of the

engineering soil qualities without the addition
Education is one of the primary
of agents or other particle binding energy.
concerns of the Philippine Government. The
Some examples of mechanical stabilization
Philippine Government, through the
are compaction, vibroflotation, blasting,
Department of Education, have been exerting
dynamic compaction, preloading and sand
efforts and implementing several programs to
drains. Meanwhile, chemical stabilization
make education available to everyone. But
involves the application of chemical
with the sudden increase in population,
admixtures to improve the behaviour of soil.
classrooms are becoming crowded and not
Depending on the chemical admixture,
conducive to learning. In order to adapt to the
chemical stabilization can improve the soil
increasing population of the students, nation-
workability and other soil properties. Some
wide construction projects of additional
examples of the chemical stabilizing agents
school buildings are being planned and
are lime, cement and fly ash.
implemented. One of these constructions will
be happening in West Bauan Central School. The objective of this study is to know
whether jet grouting with cement is more
Department of Education, in
economical than jet grouting with lime. The
partnership with the Department of Public
relevance of this study with regards to
Works and Highways and other agencies, is
engineering is its capability to aid engineers in
planning to construct a four-storey building
cutting down cost without sacrificing the
with 20 classrooms in West Bauan Central
quality of the structure.
School which is located in Aplaya, Bauan,
Batangas. The site, however, is located near a Project Description
large body of water that has a high ground
Based on the three soil borings conducted at
water table level and therefore indicates that
the site, the soil primarily composed of sand
the native soil has low bearing capacity due to
deposits with intervening sandy silt and
the presence of excess water. In addition, the
fractional clay. Samples of the soil were
site is influenced by the Seismic zone 4, which
obtained from the three soil boring tests. The
indicates that the occurrence of earthquakes
selected soil samples were subject to the Soil
is frequent and has Seismic source type A
Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D-422), the
meaning that the earthquakes are caused by
Atterberg limits (ASTM D-4318), Moisture
faults that are capable of producing large
Contents of Soils (ASTM 2216), Standard
magnitude earthquakes with a high rate of
Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
seismic activity.
(ASTM-D2487). During the soil boring, a
In the presence of unstable soils, Standard penetration test (SPT) was
several methods of ground improvement can simultaneously conducted. The following
be use to improve its engineering soil tables presents the soil condition, SPT N-
properties. Ground improvement may be by values of each soil layer and also the level of
means of mechanical stabilization or by the ground water table with respect to the
chemical stabilization. Mechanical ground surface.

Depth (m) Soil Condition SPT N-value Ground Water Level
(m)
0 to 1 Loose clayey sand 3 Was not observed due
1 to 6 Sandy silt 2 to 3 to collapse of borehole
6 to 7.5 Stiff condition 12 lining
7.5 to 12 Medium dense silty 17 to 27
sand
12 to 15 Sandy silt (hard 30 to 56
formation)
After 15 Very dense silty sand 54
Table 1.1: Subsoil Condition of Borehole no. 1

Depth (m) Soil Condition SPT N-value Ground Water Level

(m)
2 to 6 Very loose sand 2 to 5 -1.28
6 to 10.5 Medium dense to 17 to 35
dense
After 10.5 Very sand >50
Table 1.2: Subsoil Condition of Borehole no. 2

Depth (m) Soil Condition SPT N-value Ground Water Level

(m)
1 to 6 Very loose to loose 2 to 5 -0.64
sand
6 to 12 Medium dense to very 25 to 59
dense
After 12 Very dense sand >50
Table 1.3: Subsoil Condition of Borehole no. 3

According to the geotechnical report of upper 6m to 8m depth along the area. In

prepared by N-Precision Construction order to achieve the desired rigidity of the
Materials Testing Center, excessive foundation, the use of pile foundation is
settlement under the foundation loads of the required. Shallow foundation may be used but
building structure is to be expected due to the ground improvement should be done prior to
relatively weaker soils compromising the the construction of the foundation.
removal of the soil in the location that is to
be grouted. The quantity of lime (10% of
Evaluation the volume to be treated) and quantity of
Cost Analysis cement (12% of the volume to be treated)
was based on Chapter 11: Ground
The cost analysis shows the respective Improvement of Fundamentals of
prices of the grouting with cement and Geotechnical Engineering by Braja M.
grouting with lime. The theoretical volume Das. The price of lime, cement and sand
to be treated was assumed to be a are the results of canvassing.
cylinder because it is the closest
geometrical figure that is produce after the
Volume to be treated using cement jet grouting method (assumed to be a cylinder)
!
! = !
!

= 0.6 ! (10)
4
= 2.827433388 !

Volume of 12% cement

!"#"$% = 2.827433388 ! (0.12)

= 0.339292 !

Volume of soil

!"!" = ! - !"#"$%

= 2.827433388 ! - 0.339292 !

= 2.488141388 !

Price of soil Price of cement:

1166.67 !"#$
m3 !!

Total cost of grouting method using 12% cement

= cost of soil + cost of cement

= (Price of soil * Volume of soil) + (Price of cement * Volume of 12% cement)

!!"".!" !"#$
= (2.488141388 ! ) + (. 339292 ! )
!! !!
= 2902.839913 + 2565

= 5467.839913

Volume to be treated using lime jet grouting method (assumed to be a cylinder)

!
! = !
!
!
= 0.6 ! (10)
!

= 2.827433388 !
Volume of 10% lime

!"#$ = 2.827433388 ! (.10)

= 0.2827433388 !

Volume of soil

= ! - !"#$

= 2.827433388 ! - . 2827433388 !

= 2.544690049 !

Price of soil Price of lime:

1166.67 !"###
m3 !!

Total cost of grouting method using 10% lime

= cost of soil + cost of lime

= (Price of soil * Volume of soil) + (Price of cement * Volume of 10% cement)
1166.67 !"###
= (2.544690049 ! ) + (. 2827433388 ! )
m3 !!
= 2968.8013539 + 9047.780842

= 12016.59438

Properties of Materials

ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Very high strength Impermeable
Quick set time No flexibility
Sets Underwater Very high strength
Table 2.1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Cement

Source: http://stonehengemasonry.ca/lime-vs-portland-cement-which-is-better/

 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Flexibility Low strength
Autogenous Healing Slow set time
Permeability
Workability
Cleaner manufacturing process
Table 2.2: Advantages and Disadvantages of Lime

Source: http://stonehengemasonry.ca/lime-vs-portland-cement-which-is-better/

Sample 7 Days 14 Days 28 Days 56 Days

1 18.9 21.70 24.33 28.74
2 18.24 22.56 26.59 26.86
3 18.42 23.05 25.65 28.92
Average 18.52 22.44 25.52 28.17
Table 3.1: Compressive splitting test ordinary Portland cement mortar cubes
Source: http://www.telling.co.uk/telling-lime/technical-information/comparison-lime-vs-
cement/

Sample 7 Days 14 Days 28 Days 56 Days

1 1.82 2.78 3.45 4.85
2 1.93 2.95 3,65 5.10
3 1.79 2.80 3.50 4.77
Average 1.85 2.84 3.53 4.91
Table 3.2: Compressive splitting test lime mortar cubes

Source: http://www.telling.co.uk/telling-lime/technical-information/comparison-lime-vs-
cement/
The tables 2.1 and 2.2 above
present the properties of the cement and
The tables 3.1 and 3.2 present the
lime. Though impermeable and very
compressive splitting strength of ordinary
high strength is in the column of
Portland cement and lime with there
disadvantages in the table representing
the properties of cement, it is a desirable respective number of curing days.
property for the current situation of the
site.
 Graphical Comparison of the Compressive
Splibng Strength of Cement and Lime
28.17
30 25.52
Compressive Strength

22.44
25
18.52
20
15
10
5
0
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56
Curing of Sample

Cement Lime

Figure 1: Graphical Comparison of the
Compressive Splitting Strength of Cement
and LIme
Figure 1 shows the comparison of
the compressive splitting strength of
cement and lime and there respective
days of curing, It can be observed from
the graph, that cement is stronger than
lime.
Implication
In most cases, the cost is directly
proportional to the quality of the product.
As the cost of the construction increase so
does the quality of the structure that will
be constructed. But for this case, the
suitable material to be used is cement,
which cost less than the lime. Lime may
be flexible and self-healing but it is costly,
has low strength, slow setting time and is
permeable to water, which may cause
problem due to the presence of high
groundwater table in the site. Meanwhile,
grouting with cement will be more suitable
because of its high strength, quick setting
time, ability to set underwater and is
impermeable to water. Furthermore,
grouting with cement will absorb the
excess moisture in the soil and in the long
run will make the treated soil stronger
making the grouting with cement more
suitable to locations near large bodies of
water and to soils with excess water
content like marshes and swampy areas.
Summary
Soils with high ground water table
level are more prone to settlement and
foundations problems because of the excess
moisture present in the soil. In cases where
the soil is unstable, several ground
improvement methods may be used to
improve the soil quality but adequate about
of time and focus should be exerted to in
order to find the most suitable method to be
used because not all methods are appropriate
every cases and situations. For instance, this
study was able to determine that cement is
more suitable to be used because of the
situation of the site.
Conclusion
Based on the situation of the soil in
the site, using cement is more suitable and is
more economical than using lime. Cement has
very high strength, quick setting time, sets
underwater and is impermeable to water
therefore making it more suitable than lime researchers can recommend an alternative.
which has low strength, slow setting time, and Instead of constructing a four-storey building
is permeable to water. Due to the lack of time in the area, constructing a two two-storey
and resources, the researchers based the building will be safer. An existing two-storey
result of this study solely on the properties of building in the area proves that a two-storey
the material used and the resulting cost building in the area is more feasible than a
computation. A clear recommendation four-storey building. Planting of trees prior to
regarding the topic can not be made due to the construction will also lessen the possibility
the lack of data regarding the resulting of foundation failures.
bearing capacity of the stabilized soil but the