1

SYNOPSIS
MAJOR PROJECT ON
IMPROVEMENT OF SUBGRADE BY USING FLY ASH

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL REQUIREMENT OF

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
IN

CIVIL ENGINEERING
(TRANSPORTAION)

Under the esteemed guidance of

ASST.PROF JAGDEEP SINGH

Department of Civil Engineering

CHANDIGARH UNIVERESITY
GHARUAN(MOHALI) ,PUNJAB -140413

SUBMITTED BY:-
Name UID Contact:-
Arjun Kumar 15BCE1092 8264777257
Mugais Chalkoo 15BCE1032 8825083594

BATCH: 2015-2019

1
 2

CIRTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project authorized “IMPROVEMENT OF SUBGRADE USING

FLY-ASH”,which is consentedby ARJUN KUMAR,MUGAIS CHALKO in partial
fulfillment for the award of Bachelor of Engineering is a documentation of work which is
being done by him under my guidanceduring the Educational year 2019.This is to
guarantee that the statement made by me is correct to best of my knowledge.

Project Guide:- Head of Department:-

MR. JAGDEEP SINGH MR. SANDEEP SALHOTRA

2
 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of counscel and aid from
many people and I am exceedingly favored and blessed to have got this all along the
completion of my project. Whichever, work I have performed is only due to such guidance
and assistance I would not forget to thank them.

I owe my profound gratitude to our mentor Asst.Prof.JagdeepSinghwho have taken

much of the interest and helped me all the time during my project is ongoing by providing
all the essential information for making a good report.

I am very pleased and grateful enough to get repetitive support, motivation and
counselling from all teaching and lab assistants of civil engineering department and also I
would like to thank all the lab- assistants who helped me timely and are very helpful for
completing this project.

I gratitude our departmental headMr. Sandeep Salhotrafor her admiration between all of
the project.Last but not the least we are very thankful to the management system of our
university for modeling this project a triumphant venue by giving essential resources as
when and where it is been required by us.

THANKING YOU ALL

Project submitted by:-

Mugais chalko-15BCE1032

Arjun kumar-15BCE1092

3
 4

ABSTRACT

In the present world we are all aware of this thing that commercial-vehicles and the
private vehicles are in the rate of increment day by day and with the vehicle’s increment
the load of bearing on the soil will grow more.

So, when the typical wheel load on the soil of sub-grade will grow more the conditions of
the stresses will also grow more. So, if this sub-grade has low capacity of bearing the
loads it will fail in that case and if we have to make this type of soil well suited for sub-
grade construction we will have to stabilize that soil with the help of materials like
Bagasse Ash(Sugarcane ash). After adding these materials in the soil there is change in
soil’s physical and chemical properties.

We will see the result and analyze that there is change in the geo-technical properties of
the soil. We will find out that the liquid limit and the plastic index of soil will decrease
but the value of C.B.R will have some increment.

In this research paper we are using Bagasse ash (Sugar-cane ash) from Wahid industries,
Phagwara, and after performing tests till now we have observed that the value of M.D.D
decreases from 1.86 to 1.825gm/cm3, as we have increased the amount of Bagasse ash in
our soil samples. We have done the stabilization by using different concentrations of
Bagasse ash i.e. 4%, 8%, 12%&16%. While performing the sieve analysis of the soil
sample it was seen that soil is poorly graded soil and the liquid limit will decrease from
24% to 21% after addition of Bagasse ash in it and our main purpose is to see that with the
usage of Bagasse ash as admixtures in the sub-grade soil will decrease the thickness of the
pavement and decrease the overall cost. The test of C.B.R was being done and the result
was being analyzed by me and was seen that total thickness of the pavement will decrease
from 809 mm to 550 mm and the value of C.B.R is coming maximum at 7.5% replacement
of Bagasse ash.

Key words: Local soil available, Bagasse ash, Stabilization

4
 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO.
TITLE PAGE…………………………………………………………………….1
CERTIFICATE………………………………………………………………......2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………3
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………….………..4
TABLE OFCONTENT…………………………………………………………5

CHAPTER 1:-Introduction………………………………………….6-10
1.1 Soil…………………………………………………………………………...6
1.1.1 Characteristics of soil …………………………………………….7
1.1.2 Soil-Sub grade ………………………………………………….....7
1.2 Desirable Properties of sub-grade…………………………………………7-8
1.3 Soil Stabilization……………………………………………………………8
1.4 Stabilization’s purpose…………………………………………………….8-9
1.5 Bagasse-ash…………………. …………………………………………....9-10
1.6 Production process………………………………………………………...10
1.6.1 Properties of Bagasse ash…………………………………………….10-12
1.7 Objective of study………………………………………………………….12

CHAPTER-2:-Literature Review………………………….………..13-14

CHAPTER-3:-Experimental Programme and Methodology………15-44

3.1 General……………………………………………………………………….15
3.2 Experimental Procedure………………………………………………….....15
3.3 Methodology…………………………………………………………………15
3.3.1 Standard Proctor Test…………………………………………………15
3.3.1.1 Sample Preparation……………………………………………..........15
3.3.1.2 Procedure……………………………………………………………..16
3.3.1.3 Calculations…………………………………………………………..17-22
3.3.2 CBR Test………………………………………………………………....23
3.3.2.2 CBR Test under soaked condition…………………………………..23
3.3.2.3 Equipments..............................................................................................23-24
3.3.2.4 Preparation of test specimen………………………………………...24
3.3.2.5 Observation and Recording…………………………………………25-30

CHAPTER -4:-Analysis Of Test Results And Discussion………….31-33

4.1 General………………………………………………………………………..31
4.2 Moisture Density Relationship………………………………………………31-32
4.3 California Bearing Ratio…………………………………………………......32-33

CHAPTER -5:-Conclusion…………………………………………….34

References……………………………………………………………..35

5
 6
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 SOIL:-

The term i.e (soil) is obtained from a ancient word ‘Solium’ which according to dictionary of
Webster will mean that the top most layer of earth that may be dug or cultivated, specifically,
that surface which is loose and on which the growth of plants takes place.

But, in soil engineering the term ‘Soil’ is stated as unconsolidated material, which comprises
of solid particles that are fabricated by rock’s disintegration. The void space between the
particles of soil may be comprised of air, water orboth.

Fig 1.1 (a). Nomenclature in soil engineering.

Fig 1.1 (b). Nomenclature in Geology

6
 7
.A natural aggregate of mineral particles which are stick together by permanent and strong force
of cohesion is called as ‘rock’. Fig 1.1(a) & fig(b) shows the earth surface’s cross section,
pointing the nomenclature that is used in geology and in soil engineering .so we should note that
the material which is called mantle (regolith) in geology is called as soil in soil engineering.

1.1.1:- CHARACTERSTICS OF SOIL:-

As soil subsists mainly of mineral matter which are formed by rock’s disintegration, by
water’s action, temperature, frost, pressure or by plant’s life. Soil is being classified as gravel,
sand, silt and clay entrenched on the individual grain size of soil particles. The soil grains’
characteristics are based upon the shape, size, surface texture, electrical surface charges and
its chemical composition. The two properties i.e. (Dry density and Moisture content) affects
the engineering behavior of mass of soil.

1.1.2:-SUB-GRADE SOIL:-

We all know that in highways engineering there are much significances of subgrade soil. As
sub-grade soil is comprehensive part of the road pavement because it gives underneath
support to the pavement and so the sub-grade should have adequate stability under
unfavorable loading conditions and weather conditions.

Formation of crescent shaped cracks (slippage), rutting, corrugation, shoving or settlement

and up heal in black top pavements all these are arised due to penurious sub grade condition

Fig 1.3 Rutting Fig 1.4 cracks due to poor subgrade soil

7
 Table 1: Engineering properties of Soil
Sr.No. Properties Typical Value
1 IS Classification CI
2 Plastic Limit 22
3 Liquid Limit 47
4 Plasticity Index 25
5 MOD,(gm/cc) 17
6 OMC% 25.31
7 Specific Gravity,G 2.56
8 CBR 2.237

1.2 DESIRABLE PROPERTIES OFSUB-GRADE:-

As a highway material the soil should possess following desirable properties:-

1.Strength should be of permanent nature.

2.Stability.
3.Incompressibility.
4.Good drainage.
5.Should be compacted easily.
6.Should have less change in volume and stability under harsh ground water and weather
conditions.
As the soil sub-grade should have enough strength, stability to permanent deformations under
loads and should have weathering resistance. Essential moisture retention can be avoided by
proper drainage. Ease of compaction can make it sure about dry density and strength under
specific type of compaction. And when that much strength is not attained after compaction of
sub-grade soil then we do stabilization of soil.

1.3 SOIL-STAILIZATION:-

As soil stabilization is a process of the treatment of the soil in a way for improving, change in
character and maintaining the soil’s performance. In the countries which are still developing
like India its main challenge to provide completion of matrix of road system because of the
finite financing available for the building of roads. Now it’s our duty to find suitable methods
of low cost road construction. The cost of construction of roads can be decreased by selection
of local materials including local soils which can be used for the construction of lower layer of
the pavement or roads. So if the soil that is used for lower layer of construction does not have
adequacy for supporting loads of different wheels and axles, then that soil’s property can be
improved by techniques of the soil stabilization i.e. the bearing capacity of that soil can be
increases by using these types of techniques.

1.4 PURPOSE OF STABILIZATION OFSOIL:-

Following are the objectives of stabilization of soil:-
1.The strength of sub grade, sub-base and base-course can be improved.

8
2. To bring economy in cost of road.
3. To use the locally available soil which are inferior in nature.
4. For control of dust.
5. Reduction of frost susceptibility.
6. Reduction of settlements and compressibility.
7. Improvement of characteristics of permeability.
8. Improvement of undesirable properties of soil like excessive swelling or shrinkage, high
plasticity and compaction difficulty.So we do soil stabilization by two types that are by:-
I. Stabilization by mechanical means
II. Stabilization by using some accompaniments like (lime, Bagasse sugarcane ash, cement-
cement-Bagasse ash, sodium silicate, calcium chloride and some sticky mmaterial.
But as in my research work i shall be working on addition of Bagasse ash as additives for
stabilization of soil sub-grade. As Bagasse ash is being successfully used in many projects in
India and other countries to improve the strength properties.
It is known that many plastic soils or clayey soil with the changing moisture content there are
much change in volume .these change in volume can justify structuremovements and untimely
failure.

As the Bagasse ash will lower the plastic soil’s potential to experience volumetric expansion
by a sticking mechanism.
Now, Bagasse ash is very helpful in controlling the shrink and swell index by sticking the grains
of soil at the same time .Therefore if the grains of the soil are stacked together ,we can put a
limit on the movements of soil particles .A Bagasse ash have very less compressibility and
therefore it shows negligible settlements after post constructions.

Fig 1.5 Compaction of Bagasse ash Fig 1.6 Spreading of Bagasse ash

1.5 BAGASSE ASH:-

As we talk about Bagasse ash, it is the type of remained material whose nature is fibrous and
which is being synthesized when the juice from sugar-cane is being extracted and after that the
waste material left behind, is disposed and is very harmful for the environment.
In some cases this remain is used as a fuel for the generation of stream, after the burning of
remains of sugar-cane , it will result in the formation of Bagasse ash.
After the synthesis of the Bagasse ash, it will get thrown in the land which are of waste nature.
It will result in the problems related to the environment. As this Bagasse ash can be harmful for
the human life as when the bagasse ash is left in the open environment it willgetfermented and
will start decaying , and if this ash is inhaled in large content it will cause serious disease of

9
 respiration which can be called as ‘BAGASSIOSIS’

Fig. 1.7: Bagasse Ash

1.6- PROCESS OF PRODUCTION OFBAGASSE-ASH:-

Fig1.8:- Production of Bagasse ash.

1.6.1 PROPERTIES OF BAGASSE ASH:-

When we talk about properties of Bagasse ash, it has been seen that bagasse ash is of
pozzolanic nature or material.
 It has been seen that when the soil is mixed with the Bagasse ash there is a change in
the CBR value of that soil and the value of CBR will increase up to the87%.
 It has been seen that if we uses Bagasse ash in the upper layers i.e. up to 10-20% by
weight, it will be cost effective and will improve the performance of top layers of
pavement.The Chamical composition of Bagasse Ash is given in table 1.1.

10
 Table 1.1:Chemical Properties of Bagasse Ash

Sr.No Chemicla Element %By Weight

1. Silica (SiO2) 64.43
2. Iron Oxide (Fe2O3) 6.98
3. Loss Of Ignition (LOI) 4.73
4. Aluminium Oxide (Al2O5) 4.38
5. Potassium Oxide (K2O) 3.53
6. Calcium Oxide (CaO) 2.51
7. Sulphur Trioxide (SO3) 1.48
8. Manganese (Mn) 0.5
9. Zinc (Zn) 0.3
10. Copper Cu) 0.1

So the mechanism for the soil –Bagasse ash stabilization should be done as per following
methods:-
 Clearing and grubbing:- In this process we clear the top layer of the soil up to certain
depth and we can remove the bushes, herbs , shrubs, trees ,and roots and after that it is
pulverized.
 Bagasse –ash spreading:- As the Bagasse ash is brought to the site of construction by
distributor tank , and then the Bagasse ash is spreaded on the soil bed.
 Initial mixing and watering: - Mixing and watering is very necessary in this stage
because just to initiate the reactions for stabilizations.
 Final mixing and compaction: - In this stage the final mixing is being done and the
compaction is being done with the help of sheep’s foot roller or vibratory roller.
 Final curing: - final curing is being done just to gain that much strength.
Following tests are being done before stabilizing the soil bed, after performing all the tests only
we can design the thickness of the pavements depending upon their CBR value.
 Atterberg’s limits and indices.
 Proctor’s compaction test (standard proctor test or modified proctortests).
 California bearing ratio test (CBR).
 Unconfined compressive strength (UCC) test.
 Grain size distribution of soil.
As I have explained about these tests mainly we use the CBR test to design the thickness of
flexible pavements as per IRC37-2012.

Fig1.8:- Typical cross section of fly- ash road embankments.

11
Following are the process of construction of Bagasse-ash embankments:-

 Clearing and grubbing: -In this process all the trees that comes in the way of the making
embankment is cut up to 500 mm below the ground level. All the bushes, herbs, shrubs
and trees are cleared.
 Plundering and storing of top soil: - when the Bagasse ash is being used in the
construction of embankments, the soil which is on the top is being removed from all the
areas and be plundered to depth which shouldn’t exceed 150mm.
 Setting out: - After the stage of plundering and clearing the embankment’s limit should
be marked by fixing the pegs of batter on both sides at regular interval.
 Dewatering:-The embankment’s foundation should be kept dry and the water which is to
be drained off should be given special care so that it could not damage works on
property.
 Handling and transportation of fly ash: - The Bagasse ash is being transported to the site
of construction with the help of dumper truck.
 Spreading and Compaction: - the soil cover’s side of the wanted width should be
provided along with the core and are mechanically compacted as the embankment
progresses upwards.

1.7- SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES OFSTUDY:-

 Minimization of plasticity index.
 Minimization of shrinkage factor.
 Minimization of water sensitivity.
 Increment in water impermeability.
 Increment in load bearing capacity of soil.
 Increment in durability.
 And have a construction which is very eco-friendly.

12
 CHAPTER-2
LITERATURE REVIEW

(GANDI2012){1}:
In this journal, the researcher used the Bagasse ash for the improvement of soil which is of
expansive nature. There is one of the most important property of Bagasse ash which is that it
will dry the wet soil and will give strength and stability at initial stage. This formula can be used
in the conditions for wet construction. When we add some amount of bagasse ash in the soil of
expansive nature, its swell potential will decrease.
Now after that several tests were conducted eg. Limits of liquid, plastic limit, limits of
shrinkage, free swell index etc. as increment in the various percentages of bagasse ash at
0%,2%,5%,7%,10%. After that the results were analyzed and discussed it was observed that as
we add the more percentages of bagasse ash the Atterberg’s limit will decrease.

(KERAN.R.G, KERAN N2013){2}:

These researchers have appended different percentages of Bagasse ash at 0%,4%,8% and 12%.
Several tests were conducted and performed like C.B.R test and U.C.B test.
After the analysis of result it was seen that there is lot of change in the properties of soil when
they blended bagasse ash with some amount of cement in it. There should be change in the
density, values of cbr test and unified compression test.
It was seen that at 8% cement and 4 % of Bagasse ash, the values of the cbr test have an
increment from 2.32 to 5.5 % and the values of unified test of compression have an increment
from 85kN/m2 to 175kN/m2.

(M.CHITTRANGEN, M.VIJAY, D.KEERTHI 2011){3}:

They have discussed the researches about the waste of agriculture as the stabilizers of soil.
In this type of research, there are several types of waste of agriculture like Bagasse ash, husk
ash and ground nut shell ash. These types of ashes are used for the stabilization of soil which
are of weak nature.
Various percentages of these ashes were used at 0%,3%,6%,9%,12%and 15%. Aftethat tests
like CBR were conducted and was analyzed that when different percentages of these ashes were
used the values of CBR also have an increment.

(KHARADE ET ALL2014){4}:
This researcher have researched on the expansive soil and were seen that Bagasse ash can be
used for the stabilization of expansive soil.
Now after that various types of the tests were being performed and done at different percentages
of bagasse ash and the results were being analyzed. After the analysis, it was seen the value of
CBR and the strength of compression increases about 40%. It was also analyzed that when 6%
of Bagasse ash can be used as a better material for the economic basis.
Now, suppose none of the cementing agent is added and if we add the cementing agent in the ash
of bagasse the properties of soil of the expansive nature will get increase.

(KEN .C.ONYELOWE1998){6}:
In this research paper the researcher has researched about cement used in the bagasse ash and
was being collected from the depth up to 1.5m to get avoided the top layer of soil. The
13
stabilization of soil was being done by using 4% and 6% for the cement which will have its
variations of bagasse ash about 0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, and 10% by dry weight of the soil. After
that several tests on moisture content, dry density and values of C.B.R were being calculated
from these ranging variations of bagasse ash. It we analyses the results of these values of
moisture content, dry density and value of California ratio for 4% and 6% of the cement content
at varying percentage of bagasse ash at 4% cement content, with the help of using bagasse ash
as an mixture, we will analyze that there is reduction in M.D.D value and there is an
augmentation in the maximum dry density with an increment in the content of bagasse ash at
6% cement content. The O.M.C will also have an increment with the variation in percentages of
bagasse ash. And when we talk about the value of California ratio its value of C.B.R value will
also have increment with the increment of Bagasse ash percentages.
(MOSES.G.K.G.OSNIBUI2004) {7}:
This researcher has done the research on the combination of bagasse ash and cement as an
admixtures used in the black cotton soil. For the study of this research the grey soil is being
used and is being obtained from Gombe-Biu road in Yalata-Deba which is an area of a local
government of Gumbo State by using sampling disturbance method. The various atterberg’s
limits and the index properties were being determined using such percentages cement
combination at (i.e., 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8%) were used with 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8% of bagasse ash with the
soil’s dry weight. Various tests like moisture content, U.C.S and C.B.R were being done by
using equipment’s like standard Proctor apparatus, standard test of West Africa and the test of
modified proctor. Finally it was being analysed that when 8% OPC/4% BA is being used as an
admixture it is well suited for the construction of the sub-grade soil of the ppavemnent.

14
 CHAPTER-3

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 GENERAL
It is most important part of the whole process. Different samples are prepared with varying
proportion of soil and bagasse ash. Efforts have been to find out the optimum value for the
mixed samples by conducting a series of tests. The field test would be an ideal method for
simulation of any experimental study. It has been generally averted because it is expensive as
well as time consuming. So as the substitute, carefully conducted modal test can be employed
advantageously in order to obtain useful qualitative and sometimes quantitative results. With
modem technique measuring instruments and other facilities it is now possible to conduct a
testing in near field conditions. Moreover, the laboratory testing has the advantage of better
control over various parameters which may influence the problem under consideration. For
example, it is possible in a model to undertake parametric study by keeping all other the
variables as constant while the effect of one particular parameter is being studied.

3.2 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Following are the tests whibeen carried out in laboratory:
A .Characterisations Tests
1. Moisture Content Determination
2. Atterberg's Limits Determination
3. Specific Gravity Test by Pycnometer
B. Strength Tests
1. Standard Proctor Test
2. California Bearing Ratio.
3.3 METHODOLOGY

3.3.1 STANDARD PROCTOR TEST

This phase of study involved a detailed investigation of the compaction characteristics of the
parent soil and the blended sample containing different percentage of bagasse ash, in order to
obtain the optimum moisture contents and maximum dry densities.
The Standard Proctor Test was invented by R. R. Proctor (1933) for the construction of earth fill
dams in the state of California. The Standard Proctor Test apparatus consists of the following.
1. Cylindrical metal mould, having an internal diameter of 100 mm, and internal effective
height and volume of 127.3 mm, 1000 ml respectively.
2. Removable base plate.
3. Collar 50 mm in effective height.
4. Rammer 2.6 kg in mass falling from an elevation of 310 mm.
This test confirms to IS: 2720 (Part 7)-1980.

3.3.1.1 Sample Preparation

For parent soil 3 kg of oven dried soil sample is taken on tray and thoroughly mixed with water.
For the blended mixtures the quantity of soil depends upon the ratio at which it is desired to be

15
mixed with other additives. The amount of water mixed at first trial may vary according to the
soil sample composition.
1) The stabilization of clayey soil with bagasse ash is carried out by blending the soil with
different percentage of bagasse ash (0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, &16%).
2) The strength tests are carried out on each percentage of blends. By getting the result of all
these blends the comparison of the best suitable additive mix will be carried out.

Fig 3.1. Compaction Testing Arrangement

3.3.1.2 Procedure
The compaction testing arrangement is shown in Figure 3. The test consists in compacting soil
at a range of water contents in the mould, in three equal layers, each layer being given 25 blows
of the 2.6 kg rammer dropped from a height of 310 mm.
The dry density obtained in each test is determined by knowing the mass of the compacted soil
and its water content. About 3 kg of oven dried soil passing through
425 micron sieve is then taken and thoroughly mixed with water. The amount of water to be
added originally depends upon the probable optimum water content of the soil. The empty
mould attached with the base plate is weighted without collar. The collar is then attached to the
mould. The mixed and saturated soil is then placed in the mould and compacted by giving 25
blows of rammer homogeneously distributed over the surface, such that the compacted height of
soil is about 1/3 the height of the mould. The second and the third layers are similarly
compacted, each layer being given 25 blows. The last layer should not project extra than 6 mm
into the collar. The collar is separate and the top layer is trimmed off to make it level with the
top of mould. The bulk density and the corresponding dry density for the compacted soil can be
calculated.

16
3.3.1.3 Calculation
Bulk density of soil, y = MA^ gm/cc Dry density of soil. Yd = —^
Where, y = Bulk density of soil (gm/cc)
Yd = Dry density of soil (gm/cc)
M = mass of wet compacted mould
V = volume of the mould (1000 cc)
CO = moisture content present in soil
The Standard Proctor Tests were conducted on various compositions, which are given below.

Table 3.1: Composition of Sample for Standard Proctor Test

S a m p l e N o . 1 CS – 100%(3000gm )+S CBA -0 %

S a m p l e N o . 2 CS -96%(2880GN)+SCBA-4%(120gm)

S a m p l e N o . 3 CS-92%(2760GM)+SCBA-8%(240gm)

S a m p l e N o . 4 CS-88%(2640gm)+SCBA-12%(360gm)

S a m p l e N o . 5 CS-84%(2520gm)+SCBA-16%(480gm)

The various tables (Table 4 - Table 11) and Figures (Figure 4 - Figure 11) showing
experimental results for the above Standard Proctor Test are as under;

Table 3.2: Sample No.1(CS-100%+SCBA-0%)

S r . N o . 1 2 3 4 5 6

Water Added 1 5 1 8 2 1 2 4 2 7 3 0

Wt. of Mould (gm) 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4340 4 3 4 0

Wt of Soil +Mould (gm) 6 0 9 0 6 1 6 0 6 2 9 0 6 4 1 0 6470 6 4 3 0

Wt of Soil ,W (gm) 1 7 5 0 1 8 2 0 1 9 5 0 2 0 8 0 2130 2 0 9 0

Volume of Mould,V(cc) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1000 1 0 0 0

Bulk Density (gm/cc)
Y = W / V 1 . 7 5 1 . 8 2 1 . 9 5 2 . 0 8 2 . 1 3 2 . 0 9

Container No. 5 1 3 1 8 3 8 1 5 3 2 8 8 4

Wt. of Can (gm) 1 0 . 5 1 9 . 5 8 10.48 9 . 6 8 8 . 7 8 10.56

17
Wt of Wet Soil +Can(gm) 3 0 . 5 9 34.3 7 37.04 43.8 5 39.47 56.74

Wt of Dry Soil +Can(gm) 2 8 . 0 8 3 0 . 8 32.72 37.5 6 33.27 4 6 . 5

Dry Density(gm/cc) 1 . 5 3 1 1.55 8 1.633 1.69 7 1 . 7 1.627

Water Content (%) 14.285 16.823 19.424 22.560 25.316 28.491

18
 Table 3.3: Sample No.2(CS-96%+SCBA-4%)

S r . N o . 1 2 3 4 5 6

W a t e r A d d e d 1 5 1 8 2 1 2 4 2 7 3 0

Wt. of Mould (gm) 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0

Wt of Soil +Mould (gm) 6 1 5 0 6 2 3 0 6 3 6 0 6 4 2 0 6 3 9 0 6 4 3 0

W t o f S o i l ,W ( g m ) 1 8 1 0 1 8 9 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 8 0 2 0 5 0 2 0 9 0

Volume of Mould,V(cc) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Bulk Density (gm/cc)
Y = W / V 1 . 8 1 1 . 8 9 2 . 0 2 2 . 0 8 2 . 0 5 2 . 0 9

Container No. 1 5 8 4 2 1 4 7 3 8 4

Wt. of Can (gm) 9 . 0 7 1 0 . 5 5 8 . 7 6 1 0 . 5 6 10.06 1 0 . 5 6

Wt of Wet Soil +Can(gm) 3 2 . 1 4 3 2 . 9 9 3 7 . 7 9 5 3 . 6 54.68 5 6 . 7 4

Wt of Dry Soil +Can(gm) 2 8 . 9 2 2 9 . 4 6 3 2 . 4 6 4 4 . 7 7 45.02 4 6 . 5

Dry Density(gm/cc ) 1 . 5 5 0 1 . 5 9 2 1 . 6 4 9 1 . 6 5 3 1 . 6 1 . 6 2 7

Water Content (%) 1 6 . 7 5 3 18.667 22.489 25.811 28.065 28.491

19
 Table 3.4: Sample No.3(CS-92%+SCBA-8%

S r . N o . 1 2 3 4 5 6

W a t e r A d d e d 1 5 1 8 2 1 2 4 2 7 3 0

Wt. of Mould (gm) 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0

Wt of Soil +Mould (gm) 5 8 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 2 1 0 6 3 4 0 6 3 7 0 6 3 3 0

Wt of Soil ,W (gm) 1 5 2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 7 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 1 9 9 0

Volume of Mould,V(cc) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
B ulk Dens it y ( g m/cc )
Y = W / V 1 . 5 2 1 . 7 2 1 . 8 7 2 . 0 2 . 0 3 1 . 9 9

Container No. 4 7 5 1 8 4 1 5 4 7 3 0 7

Wt. of Can (gm) 1 0 . 5 5 1 0 . 5 6 1 0 . 5 5 9 . 7 1 0 . 5 3 8 . 7 4

Wt of Wet Soil +Can(gm) 4 6 . 4 6 3 5 . 3 8 3 9 . 6 7 4 1 . 5 1 4 5 . 0 2 4 7 . 6

Wt of Dry Soil +Can(gm) 4 1 . 3 6 3 1 . 4 1 3 4 . 5 6 3 5 . 2 4 3 7 . 8 3 3 9 . 0 1

Water Content (%) 1 6 . 5 5 3 1 9 . 0 4 0 21.282 2 4 . 5 4 9 26.337 2 8 . 3 7 7

Dry Density(gm/cc) 1 . 3 0 4 1 . 4 4 4 2 . 5 4 1 1 . 6 0 5 1 . 6 0 6 1 . 5 5 0

20
 Table 3.5: Sample No. 4(CS-88%+SCBA-12%)

S r . N o . 1 2 3 4 5 6

W a t e r A d d e d 1 5 1 8 2 1 2 4 2 7 3 0

Wt. of Mould (gm) 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0

Wt of Soil +Mould (gm) 5 9 4 0 6 0 6 0 6 1 8 0 6 2 9 0 6 3 5 0 6 2 8 0

Wt of Soil ,W (gm) 1 6 0 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 4 0 1 9 5 0 2 0 1 0 1 9 4 0

Volume of Mould,V(cc) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
B ulk Dens it y ( g m/cc )
Y = W / V 1 . 6 1 . 7 2 1 . 8 4 1 . 9 5 2 . 0 1 1 . 9 4

Container No. 1 5 3 8 7 8 4 9 3 2 8 1 0

Wt. of Can (gm) 9 . . 6 9 1 0 . 0 5 1 0 . 3 5 1 0 . 3 6 8 . 8 1 1 0 . 6 7

Wt of Wet Soil +Can(gm) 2 7 . 5 2 3 7 . 5 3 4 . 8 8 3 5 . 9 4 5 2 4 2 . 5 1

Wt of Dry Soil +Can(gm) 2 4 . 9 3 3 . 2 9 3 0 . 6 2 3 1 . 0 5 4 2 . 8 7 3 5 . 3 3

Water Content (%) 1 7 . 2 2 5 1 8 . 4 7 3 21.016 2 3 . 6 3 4 26.805 2 9 . 1 1 5

Dry Density(gm/cc) 1 . 3 6 4 1 . 4 5 1 1 . 5 2 0 1 . 5 7 7 1 . 5 8 5 1 . 5 0 2

21
 Table 3.6: Sample No.5(CS-84%+SCBA-16%)

S r . N o . 1 2 3 4 5 6

W a t e r A d d e d 1 5 1 8 2 1 2 4 2 7 3 0

Wt. of Mould (gm) 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0 4 3 4 0

Wt of Soil +Mould (gm) 5 8 6 0 5 9 4 0 6 0 5 0 6 1 6 0 6 2 9 0 6 2 4 0

Wt of Soil ,W (gm) 1 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 1 7 1 0 1 8 2 0 1 9 5 0 1 9 0 0

Volume of Mould,V(cc) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
B ulk Dens it y ( g m/cc )
Y = W / V 1 . 5 2 1 . 6 1 . 7 1 1 . 8 2 1 . 9 5 1 . 9

Container No. 3 0 7 5 1 3 1 8 3 8 7 8 4

Wt. of Can (gm) 8 . 7 5 1 0 . 5 6 9 . 6 1 0 . 4 8 1 0 . 5 5 1 0 . 5 4

Wt of Wet Soil +Can(gm) 2 9 . 1 1 4 0 . 3 3 8 . 3 7 5 1 . 3 6 6 6 . 3 8 6 4 . 5 1

Wt of Dry Soil +Can(gm) 2 6 . 2 5 3 5 . 8 3 3 . 1 5 4 3 . 8 8 5 4 . 7 2 5 2 . 0 3

Water Content (%) 1 6 . 3 4 2 1 7 . 8 2 8 19.635 2 2 . 3 9 5 26.398 3 0 . 0 7 9

Dry Density(gm/cc) 1 . 3 0 6 1 . 3 5 7 1 . 4 2 9 1 . 4 8 6 1 . 5 4 2 1 . 4 6 0

22
3.3.2 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST
The California Bearing Ratio (CBR), expressed as the percentage of force per unit area is
required to penetrate a soil mass with a circular plunger of 50 mm diameter at the rate of 1.25
mm/min to that required for corresponding penetration in a standard material. This is the most
widely used method for the design of flexible pavements.
CBR= - I^i^xlOO standard load
According to O Flaherty (1988), the CBR test is empirical test and depends upon the condition
of the soil at the time of testing. This requires that the soil must be tested in a condition that is
critical to the designer.
3.3.2.1 CBR Test under Soaked Condition
The soaked CBR values of soil stabilized with sugar cane bagasse ash with clayey soil at
different dosage level (0%, 4%, 8%, 12%,and 16) are find out in the study Results of the soaked
CBR are shown in (Table 14 - Table 20) and (Figure 12-Figure 18).
According to IS:2720 (Part-16) the CBR value at 2.5 mm penetration will be greater than that at
5.0 mm penetration and in such a case the former shall be taken as the CBR value for design
purpose. If the CBR value corresponding to the penetration of
34
5.0 mm exceeds than that for 2.5 mm, the test shall be repeated. If identical results follow the
CBR corresponding to 5.0 mm penetration shall be taken for design.
In this study, some of the soaked CBR values are greater at 5.0 mm penetration at the
CBR value corresponding to 2.5 mm. CBR test of greater value at 5.0 mm penetration shall be
repeated in the laboratory but due to time constraint in the dissertation work, tests could not be
repeated and as such higher CBR value corresponding to 5.0 mm penetration is considered.
3.3.2.2 Equipments
1) Cylindrical mould with inside diameter 150 mm and height 175 mm, provided with a
detachable extension collar 50 mm height and a detachable perforated base plate 10 mm thick.
2) Spacer Disc 148 mm in diameter and 47.7 mm in height along with handle.
3) Metal rammer: Weight 2.6 kg with a drop of 31 mm weight 4.89 kg a drop 450 mm.
4) Weights: One aimular metal weight and several slotted weights 2.5 kg each, 147 mm in
diameter, with a central hole of 53 mm in diameter.
5) Loading Machine: With a capacity of at least 5000 kg and equipped with a movable head or
base that travels at a uniform rate of 1.25 mm/min. Complete with load indicating device.
6) Metal penetration piston 50 mm diameter and minimum of 100 mm in length.
7) Two dial gauge with least count of 0.01 mm.
8) Sieves 4.75 mm and 20 mm IS sieves.
9) Miscellaneous apparatus such as mixing bowl, straight edge, scales soaking tank or pan,
drying oven, filter paper and containers.
The test may be performed on undisturbed specimens and on remolded specimens which may
be compacted either statically or dynamically. Table 12 gives the standard loads adopted for
different penetrations for the standard material with a CBR value of
100%.
35

Table 3.10: Standard Loads for different Penetration

Penetration of Plunger(mm) S t andard Load(kg )

2.5 1370
23
 5.0 2055
7.5 2630
10.0 3180
12.5 3600

3.3.2.4 Preparation of Test Specimen

1) Dynamic Compaction
Take the required amount of soil with required water and mix thoroughly. Fix the extension
collar and the base plate to the mould. Insert the spacer disc over the base plate, place the filter
paper on the top of spacer disc. Compact the mix soil in the mould using Light compaction,
compact the soil in 3 equal layers, each layer beinggiven 55 blows by the 2.6 kg rammer.
a) Remove the collar and trim off soil.
b) Turn the mould upside down and remove the base plate and the displacer disc.
c) Weight the mould with compacted soil and determine the bulk density and dry density.
d) Put filter paper on the top of the compacted soil and clamp the perforated base plate on to it.
2) Static Compaction
Calculate the weight of the wet soil at the required water content, to give the desired density,
when occupying the standard specimen volume in the mould from the expression.
W = desired dry density x (1+ co) V
Where W = Weight of the wet soil
(0 = desire water content
-sc
V = volume of the specimen in the mould
a) Take the weight W of the mixed soil and place it in the mould.
b) Place a filter paper and the displacer disc on top of the soil.
c) Keep the mould assembly in static loading frame and compact by pressing the displacer disc
till the level of disc reaches the top of the mould.
d) Keep the load for some time and then release the load. Remove the displacer disc.
e) The test may be conducted for both soaked as well as un-soaked conditions.
f) If the sample is to be soaked, in cases of compaction, put a filter paper on top of the soil and
place the adjustable stem and perforated plate on top of filter paper.
g) Put annular weights to produce a surcharge equal to weight of base material and pavement
expected in actual construction.
h) Immerse the mould assembly and weights in a tank of water and soak it for 96 hours.
Remove themould form tank.
i) Seat the penetration piston at the centre of the specimen with the smallest possible load, but in
no case in excess of 4 kg so that full contact of the piston of the sample is established.
j) Set the stress and strain dial gauge to read zero. Apply the load on the piston so that the
penetration rate is about 1.25 mm/min.
k) Record the load readings at penetration of 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3, 4, 5 and 7
mm. Note the maximum load and corresponding maximum penetration.
1) Detach the mould from the load in equipment. Take about 20 to 50 g of soil from the top 3
cm layer and determine the moisture content.
ITT

24
3.3.2.5 Observation and Recording
Optimum water content (%)
Weight of mould + compacted specimen (gm)
Weight of empty mould (gm)
Weight of compacted specimen (gm)
Volume of specimen (cc)
Bulk density (gm/cc)
Dry density (gm/cc)
Find and record the correct load reading corresponding to each penetration. The CBR values are
usually calculated for penetration of 2.5 mm and 5.0 mm. Generally the
CBR values at 2.5 mm will be greater that at 5.0 mm and in such a case the former shall be
taken as CBR for design purpose. If CBR for 5.0 mm exceeds that for 5.0 mm, the test should
be repeated. If identical results follow, the CBR corresponding to
5.0 mm penetration should for taken for design.
38
The California Bearing Ratio Tests were conducted on various compositions, which are given
below.

Table 3.11: Composition of sample for California Bearing Ratio Test

Sample No.9 CS-100%(3285gm) +SCBA-0%

Sample No.10 CS-96%(3570gm) +SCBA-4%

Sample No.11 CS-92%(3325gm) +SCBA-8%

Sample No.12 CS-88%(3318gm) +SCBA-12%

Sample No.13 CS-84%(2915gm) +SCBA-16%

The various tables (Table 14 - Table 21) and Figures (Figure 12 - Figure 19) showing
experimental results for the above California Bearing Ratio Tests are as under

25
 Table 3.12: Sample No.9 (CS-100%.SCBA -0%)

Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.7

Compacting Moisture Contact (%) 25.31
Proving ring calibration factor 6.57

Sr.No. Penetration (mm) P roving Ri ng Di a l Load on Plunger

Reading (kg)
1 0 0 0
2 0 . 5 1 6.57
3 1 1 6.57
4 1 . 5 2 13.14
5 2 3 19.71
6 2 . 5 4 26.28
7 3 5 32.85
8 4 6 39.42
9 5 7 45.99
1 0 7 9 59.13

FROM LOAD V/s PENETRATION CURVE

Load carried by soil sample at 2.5 mm penetration 26.28 kg
Load carried by soil sample at 5 mm penetration 45.99 kg

CBR2.5 1.918%
CBR5.0 2.237%
Design value of CBR (Soaked) 2.237%

26
 Table 3.13: Sample No. 10(CS-98%,SCBA – 4%)

Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.653

Compacting Moisture Content (%) 25.81
Proving Ring Calibration Factor 6.57

Sr.No. Penetration (mm) P roving Ri ng Di a l Load on Plunger

Reading (kg)
1 0 0 0
2 0 . 5 1 6.57
3 1 2 13.14
4 1 . 5 3 19.71
5 2 5 32.85
6 2 . 5 6 39.42
7 3 7 45.99
8 4 9 59.13
9 5 10 65.7
1 0 7 12 78.84
FROM LOAD V/s PENETRATION CURVE

Load carried by soil sample at 2.5 mm penetration 39.42

Load carried by soil sample at 5 mm penetration 65.7

CBR2.5 2.877%
CBR5.0 3.197%
Design value of CBR (Soaked) 3.197%

27
 Table 3.14: Sample No. 11 (CS - 92%, SCBA - 8%)

Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.606

Compacting Moisture Content (%) 26.337
Proving ring calibration factor 6.57

Sr.No. Penetration (mm ) Proving Ring Dial Load on Plunger

Reading (kg)
1 0 0 0
2 0.5 2 13.14
3 1 3 19.71
4 1.5 5 32.85
5 2 7 45.99
6 2.5 9 59.13
7 3 10 65.7
8 4 12 78.84
9 5 14 91.98
1 0 7 16 105.12
FROM LOAD V/s PENETRATION CURVE
Load carried by soil sample at 2.5 mm penetration 59.13 kg
Load carried by soil sample at 5.0 mm penetration 91.98 kg

CBR2.5 4.316%
CBR5.0 4.475%
Design value of CBR (Soaked) 4.475%

28
 Table 3.15: Sample No.12 (CS - 88%, SCBA -12%)

Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.585

Compacting Moisture Content (%) 26.805
Proving ring calibration factor 6.57

Sr.No. Penetration (mm) P roving Ri ng Di a l Load on Plunger

Reading (kg)
1 0 0 0
2 0 . 5 2 13.14
3 1 5 32.85
4 1 . 5 7 45.99
5 2 9 59.13
6 2 . 5 11 72.27
7 3 13 85.41
8 4 15 98.55
9 5 18 118.26
1 0 7 19 124.83

FROM LOAD V/s PENETRATION CURVE

Load carried by soil sample at 2.5 mm penetration 72.27 kg

Load carried by soil sample at 5.0 mm penetration 118.26 kg

CBR2.5 5.275%
CBR5.0 5.754%
Design value of CBR (Soaked) 5.754%

29
 Tablet 3.16: Sample No.13 (CS - 84%, SCBA-16%)

Dry Density (gm/cc) 1.542

Compacting Moisture Content (%) 26.398
Proving ring calibration factor 6.57

Sr.No. Penetration (mm) P roving Ri ng Di a l Load on Plunger

Reading (kg)
1 0 0 0
2 0 . 5 3 19.71
3 1 6 39.42
4 1 . 5 9 59.13
5 2 11 72.27
6 2 . 5 13 85.41
7 3 16 105.12
8 4 19 1 2 4 . 8 3
9 5 21 137.97
1 0 7 23 151.11

FROM LOAD V/s PENETRATION CURVE

Load carried by soil sample at 2.5 mm penetration 85.41kg

Load carried by soil sample at 5.0 mm penetration 137.97kg

CBR 6.234%
CBR 6.713%
Design value of CBR (Soaked) 6.713%

30
 CHAPTER-4
ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 GENERAL
The objective of the present study is to investigate the compaction characteristics and strength
characteristics of clayey soil treated with 0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, 20%, 24% and 28% of
sugarcane bagasse ash. This has been done to make the soil suitable for construction of structure
on it or acting as suitable subgrade for construction of roads.
Firstly, a series of Standard Proctor Tests has been done to determine the optimum moisture
content and maximum dry density of untreated clayey soil and the clayey soil treated with 4%,
8%, 12%, 16%, 20%, 24% and 28% of sugarcane bagasse ash.
Then, a series of California Bearing Ratio tests has been conducted to determine the
CBR value of untreated clayey soil and the clayey soil treated with 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, 20%,
24% and 28% of sugarcane bagasse ash. The results of these tests have been analyzed under the
following headings.

4.2 MOISTURE - DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Standard Proctor Test has been conducted to determine optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density of soil stabilized with 0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, 20%, 24% and 28% of
sugarcane bagasse ash. Figure 20 and Figure 21 shows comparison of optimum moisture
content and maximum dry density for clayey soil stabilized with 0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, 20%,
24% and 28% of sugarcane bagasse ash.
For parent soil, optimum moisture content and maximum dry density have been observed as
25.31% and 1.7 gm/cc respectively. Figure 22 and Table 22 shows the results of Standard
Proctor Test, which clearly shows that the soil stabilized with 4% sugarcane bagasse ash the
optimum moisture content increases up to a value of
25.81% and maximum dry density decreases up to 1.65 gm/cc. With increase in the value of
sugarcane bagasse ash from 4% to 8% it has been observed that optimum moisture content
increases up to 26.33% and maximum dry density decreases up to 1.60 gm/cc. With
replacement of 12% sugarcane bagasse ash optimum moisture content again increases and gets
value of 26.8% as well as maximum dry density decreases up to 1.58 gm/cc.

Table 4.1: OMC and MDD with Different Percentage of SCB

Sr.No. %SCBA OMC MOD

1 0 25.31 1.7

2 4 25.81 1.653

3 8 26.33 1.606

4 12 26.8 1.585

31
 5 16 26.39 1.542

6 20 28.08 1.506

7 24 30.68 1.423

8 28 29.44 1.405

With 4% more replacement of sugarcane bagasse ash it has been observed that optimum
moisture content again increases up to 26.39%, and maximum dry density decreases up to 1.542
gm/cc. With replacement of 20% sugarcane bagasse ash optimum moisture content increases up
to 28.08% and maximum dry density decreases up to 1.50 gm/cc. With replacement of 24%
sugarcane bagasse ash optimum moisture content again increases up to 30.68%) and maximum
dry density again decreases up to 1.42 gm/cc. But with further increase of sugarcane bagasse ash
in soil (28%)) optimum moisture content decreases and get a value of 29.44%o and maximum
dry density decreases in the same manner and get a least value of 1.45 gm/cc.
It has been observed that there is an increase in optimum moisture content up to 24%> but after
that it decreases on the other hand maximum dry density maximum dry density decreases
continuously with increase in the percentage of sugarcane bagasse ash. The presence of
sugarcane bagasse ash having a low specific gravity is the main reason for reduction in density.

4.3 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO

California Bearing Ratio test has been conducted to determine the CBR values of soil stabilized
with 0%, 4%, 8%, 12%,& 16% of sugarcane bagasse ash. Table 4.2 show the results of
California Bearing Ratio Test.

Table 4.2: CBR value with Different Percentage of SCBA

Sr. No. Percentage of SCBA CBR Percentage

1 0% 2.237

2 4% 3.197

3 8% 4.475

4 12% 5.754

5 16% 6.713

For parent soil CBR value has been observed as 2.237% and with replacement of 4% sugarcane
bagasse ash it is 3.197%. With increase in the value of sugarcane bagasse ash from 4% to 8% it
has been observed that the CBR value increases up to
4.475%.With replacement of 12% sugarcane bagasse ash the CBR value increases up to

32
5.754%. With 4% more replacement of bagasse ash it has been observed that CBR value
increases up to 6.713%. With further replacement of sugarcane bagasse ash i.e.20% the CBR
Value increases and get a value of 8.632%. But with further increase in percentage of sugarcane
bagasse ash (24%) the CBR value decreases up to 7.353% and with replacement of
28%sugarcane bagasse ash CBR value decreases up to
6.393%.

It is clear from the Figure: 23 that there is an increase in CBR value up to 20% replacement of
sugarcane bagasse ash, with further replacement the CBR value starts decreasing and get a
value 6.393% for 28% replacement of sugarcane bagasse ash.
-

33
 CHAPTER-5
CONCLUSION

The present experimental studies were carried out to find out the stabilization of clayey soil by
using sugarcane bagasse ash. The following conclusions have been drawn based on the
laboratory investigations carried out in this study.
1. Consumption of sugarcane bagasse ash in bulk quantity in construction of road project can be
made with reducing the accumulation hazard and environmental pollution of this waste.
2. Maximum dry density of treated soil is decreased with the increasing percentage of sugarcane
bagasse ash and the optimum moisture content is increasing up to an optimum value of
sugarcane bagasse ash and then decreases.
3. It has been observed that the CBR value increased vwth increasing percentage of sugarcane
bagasse ash up to an optimum percentage i.e. 20%.
4. Use of sugarcane bagasseash as a stabilizer for improving soil characteristics is an
economical and effective solution for the region having large number of sugar mills and other
related industries.
The proposed method of soil stabilization can be used mainly in the field of stabilization and
application for roads etc. The present method is more economical and environmental friendly as
well, and is an alternate to other expensive techniques.

34
 REFERENCES

[1] D. H. Gray, J. Schlocker (1969) "Electrochemical Alteration of Clayey Soil",

Clays and Clay Minerals, 1969, Vol. 17, pp. 309-322.
[2] Dr. Suhail A. A Khattab, Khawla A.K. Al-Juari, Ibrahim M. A. Al-Kiki (2006),
"Strength, Durability and Hydraulic Properties of Clayey Soil Stabilized With Lime
and Industrial Waste Lime", A L Rafdain Engineering Journal, ISSN: 18130526,
Vol. 16, Issue: 1, Page 102-116.
[3] Okagbe, Celestine (2007), "Stabilization of Clay using Woodash", Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, 19: 14-18.
[4] S.Chandran. Rajani, G. P. Padmakumar (2009), "Stabilization of Clayey Soil
Using Lime Solution" 10th National Conference on Technological Trends (NCTT09).
[5] A. Seco, F. Ramirez, L. Miqueleiz, B. Garcia (2010), "Stabilization of Expansive
soils for use in Construction", Applied Clay Science 51 (2011) 348-352.
[6] Purbi Sen, Mukesh and Mahabir Dixit (2011), "Evaluation of strength
characteristics of clayey soil by adding soil stabilizing additives". International
Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, 4,1060-1061.
[7] Syed Abolhassan Naeini, Bahman Naderinia (2012), "Unconfined Compressive
Strength of Clayey Soils Stabilized with Waterbrone Polymer", KSCE Journal of
Civil Engineering 16 (6): 943-949.
[8] Olaniyan, O. S., Olaoye, R. A, Okeyinka, O. M. and Olaniyan, D. B. (2012), "Soil
Stabilization Techniques using Sodium Hydroxide Additives", IJCEE-IJENS, Vol.11,
No.06.
[9] Mehdi Gharib, Hamidraza Saba (2012), "Experimental Investigation of Impact of
adding Lime on Atterberg's Limit in Golestan Province Soils", IRJABS, Vol.3 (4),
796-800.
63
[10] Y. L. Murthy (2012), "Stabilization of Expansive Soil using Mill Scale", IJEST,
ISSN: 0975-5462, Vol. 4, No.02.
[11] M. Chittaranjan, M. Vijay (2011), "Agriculture waste as soil stabilizers",
International Journal of Earth Science and Engineering, ISSN 0974-5904, Vol. 04, No
06 SPL, pp. 50-51.
[12] K.S. Gandhi (2012), "Expansive Soil Stabilization Using Bagasse Ash", IJERT,
ISSN: 2278-0181, Vol. 1 (ISSUE 5)

35