1

1
Clay Minerals and Soil
Stabilization
Dr. M.HAFEZ
Soil88@gmail.com

Details of Lecturer
Course Lecturer: Dr. Mohd Hafez
Room Number: T1-A13-A11Tower
1.0, Faculty of Civil Engineering
Email: Soil88@gmail.com
Tel. No. : 55 43 64 15
office Hours: 8.30 a.m. to 5.0 p.m
(Monday to Friday)

Courseoutcomes:
At theend of thecourse, thestudent should beableto:-

a.Understand theobjectives of ground improvement

b.Proposetypes of ground improvement for different ground condition

c.Design ground improvement techniques for agiven sitecondition

d.Proposeasuitablemethod and economical stabilization techniques

e. Understanding theconcept of ground contamination fromthegeotechnical point of
view.

f. Acquiremethods of identification, classification and interpretation of ground
contamination types.

g. Proposesuitableand economical remediation for different typeof ground
contamination materials.

h. Describethecontamination process cycleand acquirethemethods of testing of the
level of ground contamination.
2
1.0 Introduction to Ground Improvement Techniques
1.1 Ground modification methods
1.2 Choice of method and suitability to ground condition
1.3 limitations, advantages and disadvantages
2.0 Mechanical Methods - design and analysis
2.1 Static and dynamic compaction
2.2 Vibro-compaction and vibro- repJ acement
2.3 Blasting
2.4 Dynamic Consolidation
2.5 Stone columns
2.4 Dynamic Consolidation
2.5 Stone columns
SYLLABUS CONTENT
3.0 Hydraulic Methods - design and analysis
3.1 Ground water control
3.2 Preloading
3.3 Vertical Drains
3.4 Dewatering
3.5 Electro~osmosis
4.0 Chemical and Physical Methods - design and analysis
4.1 Lime stabilization - surface and deep mixing
4.2 Lime-slurry injection
4.3 Application of lime piles
4.4 Grouting and its engineering application..
5.0 Soil Reinforcement Method - design and analysis
5.1 Types of soil reinforcement
5.2 Soil nailing designa and application
5.3 Lightweight material and its application
6.0





7.0
Geotextile as Soil Improvement Material- design and analysis
6.1Application as a reinforcement, separator, filter and drainage
material
6.2 Application for embankment, slope stability and retaining
structure
6.3 Application for highway construction

Prediction of Subsidence
7.1 Method of predicting subsidence
7.2 Soil subsidence due to tunneling, excavation, groundwater and
liquefaction
7.3 Sinkhole due to underground cavities
3
8.0 Geoenvironmental Problems and Regulations
8.1 Geoenvironmental and contaminated land
8.2 Soil contamination
8.3 The problem and its investigation
8.4 Geoenvironmental and contamination problems in Malaysia
8.5 Risk assessment and management
8.6 Remediation standards and regulation

9.0 Environmental Geology
9.1 Brief review of geological fundamentals
9.2 Rock and soil classification in engineering geology and geotechnics
9.3 Mapping, site investigation and logging
9.4 Environmental geohazards
9.5 Environmental geochemistry

10.0 Groundwater Flow and Contaminant Transport
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Groundwater motion
10.3 Groundwater flow modeling
10.4 Groundwater quality
11.0 Waste Containment Systems and Development of Landfill Sites
11.1 Characterization of urban wastes and its engineering properties
11.2 Review on engineering properties of soil
11.3 Soil-waste interactions
11.4 Waste containment systems (sanitary landfills)
11.5 Engineering problems associated with landfill


12.0 Remediation of Contaminated Land
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Site characterization
12.3 Geostatistics
ASSESSMENT
-Assignment (2)
- Tests (2)
30%
30%
Final Test 40%
Total : 100 %
RECOMMENDED TEXTBOOK
1- Hansbo, S. (2003). 'Ground Improvement', GEO Forum Nil
4
REFERENCES
1.Bell, F.G. (1 993),'Engineering Treatment of Soils', E & F N Span.
2.British Standard Institution (1995), 'Codeof Practicefor Strengthened f Reinforced
Soil and Other Fills', BS 8006, HMSO.
3.Koerner, RM. (1985), 'Construction and Geotechnical Methods in Foundation
ENGINEERING', McGraw Hill.
4.Miura, N. and Bergado, DT (1998), 'Improvement of Soft Ground:
Design, Analysis and Current Researchers', Asian Center for Soil Improvement and
Geosynthetics, Asian Instituteof Technology, Bangkok, Thailand.
1.National Coal Board (1975), ' SubsidenceEngineers Handbook', Mining
Department'
2.U.S. Department of Transportation, 'GeotextileEngineering Manual'.
Manfred, R.H. (1998), 'Engineering Principles of Ground Modification, McGraw
Hill.
1.J ournal of Ground Engineering.
2. International Conf. On Ground Improvement Techniques
Geosynthethics International J ournal
9.0 Daniel, D.E. Geotechnical practicefor wastedisposal , Chapman and Hall,
London .
Objectives
-1- Increase strength, reduce erodibility
-2-Reduce distortion
-3-Reduce compressibility
-4-Control shrinkage/ swelling
-5-Control permeability
-6-Reduce liquifaction
Application
-1-Improvesub gradeor sub base reducepavement thickness
-2-Improvetraffic ability on construction sites
-3-Prepareground for shallow foundations
-4-Stabilizeslopes
-5-Reduceerosion internal seepage
-6-Construct embankments
-7-Formload bearing column (in situ) (grouted auger piles)
-8-Reducetraffic dust
-9-Contain hazardous wastes
-10-Rehabilitatepolluted ground
Chapter 1.0
Chemical ground improvement techniques

5
BACKGROUND








More than 70% of the 5000 kmof Malaysia coastal line is made of a
layer of soft soil, with thickness ranged between 20 to 40 meters.
The WEAK nature of the soft clay has been a deterrent towards
economic and tourismdevelopment.
Resorting to deep concrete pile systemin order to build a medium
size structure ( 2-3 stories) is considered a very expensive alternative.
Where the foundation costs much more than superstructure.
Newly sand reclamation on the soft soil generates negative skin
friction, which almost doubles the length of the concrete pile as well as
costs.

Such soil must be improved in order to take the loads frombuilding,
roads and other objects.
Deep Mixing Method ( DMM) includes the Dry J et Mixing ( DJ M)
and Wet method (slurry) is quite new techniques, first time was reported
in1957








- The main processes were developed in 1970s simultaneously in
Sweden and J apan
-DMM is technique where soil is mixed with one or two stabilizing
agents often cement or lime.
-The two main ways of transporting the stabilizer down to the depth to
be treated can be identified as Wet or Dry.

Purpose of deep stabilization
Reduction of settlement
Increase of stability
Increase of bearing capacity
Prevention of sliding failure
Protection of structures close to excavation
Reduction of vibration
Liquefaction mitigation
Remediation of contamination ground

6
APPLICATION Of Lime- Cement
columns
Outline
1. Clay Minerals - Background
2. Identification of Clay Minerals
3. Specific Surface (S
s
)
4. Interaction of Water and Clay Minerals
5. Interaction of Clay Particles
6. Soil Structure and Fabric
7. Soil Fabric-Natural Soil
8. Soil Fabric-Clay Soils
9. Soil Fabrics-Granular Soils
10.Loess
11.Suggested Homework
12.References
17
18
Background
The termclay refers to a number of earthy materials that are composed
of minerals rich in alumina, silica and water. Clay is not a single mineral,
but a number of minerals. When most clays are wet, they become
"plastic" meaning they can be formed and molded into shapes. When
they are "fired" (exposed to very high temperatures), the water is driven
off and they become as hard as stone. Clay is easily found all over the
world. As a result, nearly all civilizations have used some formof clay
for everything frombricks to pottery to tablets for recording business
transactions. The minerals that make up clay are so fine that until the
invention of X-ray diffraction ( XRD) analysis, these minerals were not
specifically known. Under extremely high magnification, one can see
that clay minerals can be shaped like flakes, fibers, and even hollow
tubes. Clays can also contain other materials such as iron oxide (rust),
silica, and rock fragments. These impurities can change the
characteristics of the clay. For example, iron oxide colors clay red. The
presence of silica increases the plasticity of the clay (that is, makes it
easier to mold and forminto shapes).
7
19
Clay
The termclay is used in 3 different ways: to designate a diverse group
of fine-grained minerals, as a rock or sediment term, and as a particle-
size term. Clay is generally defined as any very fine grained, natural,
earthy material, which is generally plastic at appropriate water contents
and hardens when dried or fired. Despite the lack of a standard
definition for clay among geologists, agronomists, engineers, and soil
scientists, the termclay is generally understood by all who use it. As
industrial minerals, clays are a complex group, encompassing diverse
mineral commodities, each having somewhat different mineralogy,
geologic occurrence, manufacturing technology, and uses.
20
18APRIL 2007 LIME STABILIZE CLAY 21

Flaky
shape
Plate like
structure
8
Elements of Earth
22
12500 kmdia
8-35 kmcrust
% by weight in crust
O =49.2
Si =25.7
Al =7.5
Fe =4.7
Ca =3.4
Na =2.6
K =2.4
Mg =1.9
other =2.6
82.4%
Soil Formation
23
Parent Rock
Residual soil
Transported soil
~ in situ weathering (by
physical & chemical
agents) of parent rock
~ weathered and
transported far away
by wind, water and ice.
Parent Rock
~ formed by one of these three different processes
igneous
sedimentary
metamorphic
formed by cooling of
molten magma (lava)
formed by gradual
deposition, and in layers
formed by alteration
of igneous &
sedimentary rocks by
pressure/temperature
e.g., limestone, shale
e.g., marble
e.g., granite
9
Residual Soils
25
Formed by in situ weathering of parent rock
Transported Soils
26
Transported by: Special name:
wind Aeolian
sea (salt water) Marine
lake (fresh water) Lacustrine
river Alluvial
ice Glacial
27
10
Basic Structural Units
Clay minerals are made of two distinct
structural units.
28
0.26nm
oxygen
silicon
0.29nm
aluminiumor
magnesium
hydroxyl or
oxygen
Silicon tetrahedron Aluminium Octahedron
Tetrahedral Sheet
29
Several tetrahedrons joined together forma
tetrahedral sheet.
tetrahedron
hexagonal
hole
30
11
31
Tetrahedral & Octahedral
Sheets
32
For simplicity, lets represent silica tetrahedral sheet by:
Si
and alumina octahedral sheet by:
Al
Kaolinite
Si
Al
Si
Al
Si
Al
Si
Al
joined by strong H-bond
no easy separation
0.72 nm
Typically
70-100
layers
joined by oxygen
sharing
12
Montmorillonite
34
Si
Al
Si
Si
Al
Si
Si
Al
Si
0.96 nm
joined by weak
van der Waals bond
easily separated
by water
also called smectite; expands on contact with water
Montmorillonite
35
A highly reactive (expansive) clay
montmorillonite family
used as drilling mud, in slurry trench walls,
stopping leaks
(OH)
4
Al
4
Si
8
O
20
.nH
2
O
high affinity to water
Bentonite
swells on contact with water
Illite
36
Si
Al
Si
Si
Al
Si
Si
Al
Si
0.96 nm
joined by K
+
ions
fit into the hexagonal
holes in Si-sheet
13
37
Summary - Montmorillonite
Montmorillonites have very high specific surface,
cation exchange capacity, and affinity to water.
They formreactive clays.
Bentonite (a formof Montmorillonite) is frequently used as
drilling mud.
Montmorillonites have very high liquid limit (100+),
plasticity index and activity (1-7).
A Clay Particle
38
Plate-like or Flaky Shape
39
14
40
41
42
15
43
44
Soil Structure and
Fabric
Clay Fabric
45
Flocculated
Dispersed
edge-to-face contact
face-to-face contact
16
Clay Fabric
46
Electrochemical environment (i.e., pH, acidity, temperature,
cations present in the water) during the time of
sedimentation influence clay fabric significantly.
Clay particles tend to align perpendicular to the load applied on them.
47
Specific Surface
48
surface area per unit mass (m
2
/g)
smaller the grain, higher the specific surface
e.g., soil grain with specific gravity of 2.7
10 mmcube
1 mmcube
spec. surface = 222.2 mm
2
/g spec. surface = 2222.2 mm
2
/g
17
49
force l Gravationa
force related Surface
mass / surface surface Specific
volume / surface surface Specific
=
=
g / m 3 . 2
cm / g 65 . 2 m 1
m 1 6
S
cm / g 65 . 2 , cube m 1 1 1
g / m 10 3 . 2
cm / g 65 . 2 cm 1
cm 1 6
S
cm / g 65 . 2 , cube cm 1 1 1
2
3 3
2
s
3
2 4
3 3
2
s
3
=


=
=
=

=
=

Example:
Surfacerelated forces: van der
Waals forces, capillary forces, etc.
S
s
is inversely
proportional to
theparticlesize
Preferred
50
Typical Values
Montmorillonite
Illite
Kaolinite
50-120 m
2
/gm(external surface)
700-840 m
2
/gm(includingtheinterlayer surface)
65-100 m
2
/gm
10-20 m
2
/gm
Interlayer surface
Iso-morphous Substitution
51
substitution of Si
4+
and Al
3+
by other lower valence
(e.g., Mg
2+
) cations
results in charge imbalance (net negative)
+
+
+
+ +
+
+
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
positively charged edges
negatively charged faces
Clay Particle with Net negative Charge
18
Cation Exchange Capacity
(c.e.c)
52
capacity to attract cations fromthe water (i.e., measure of
the net negative charge of the clay particle)
measured in meq/100g (net negative charge per 100 g of clay)
milliequivalents
known as exchangeable cations
The replacement power is greater for higher valence and
larger cations.
Al
3+
>Ca
2+
>Mg
2+
>>NH
4
+
>K
+
>H
+
>Na
+
>Li
+

Cation Concentration in
Water
53
+
+ +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
cations
cation concentration drops with distance fromclay particle
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
clay particle
doublelayer freewater
Adsorbed Water
54
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
A thin layer of water tightly held to particle; like a skin
1-4 molecules of water (1 nm) thick
more viscous than free water
adsorbed water
19
Clay Particle in Water
55
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
freewater
doublelayer
water
adsorbed water
50nm
1nm
56
2.
Identification
of Clay
Minerals
57
Scanning Electron
Microscope
common technique to see clay particles
plate-like
structure
qualitative
20
58
2.1 X-ray diffraction








59
Thedistanceof atomic planes d can bedetermined based on theBraggs
equation.
BC+CD =n, n =2dsinu, d =n/2 sinu
wheren is an integer and is thewavelength.
Different clays minerals havevarious basal spacing (atomic planes). For
example, thebasing spacing of kaoliniteis 7.2 .
Mitchell, 1993
2.2 Differential Thermal
Analysis (DTA)
60
For example:
Quartz changes fromtheo to | format 573 C
and an endothermic peak can beobserved.
Differential thermal analysis
(DTA) consists of simultaneously
heating a test sample and a
thermally inert substance at
constant rate (usually about 10
C/min) to over 1000 C and
continuously measuringdifferences
in temperature and the inert
material AT.
Endothermic (take up heat) or
exothermic (liberateheat) reactions
can take place at different heating
temperatures. The mineral types
can becharacterized based on those
signatures shown in theleft figure.
(fromMitchell, 1993)
AT
Temperature(100C)
21
61
Casagrandes PI-LL Chart
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquid Limit
P
l
a
s
t
i
c
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x
A-line
U-line
montmorillonite
illite
kaolinite
chlorite
halloysite
62
2.3 Other Methods
1.Electron microscopy
2.Specific surface (S
s
)
3.Cation exchange capacity (cec)
4.Plasticity chart

63
4. Interaction
of Water and
Clay Minerals
22
4.5 Clay-Water Interaction
64
Adsorbedlayers
3 monolayers
1. Hydrogen bond
Kaolinite
Oxygen
Hydroxyl
C
l
a
y

S
u
r
f
a
c
e
s

Freewater
Bulk water
Thewater moleculelocked intheadsorbed
layers has different properties compared to
that of the bulk water due to the strong
attractionfromthesurface.
O
OH
H
O
H
O
H
O
H
H
4.5 Clay-Water Interaction
(Cont.)
65
Thewater molecules
wedgeinto theinterlayer
after addingwater
2. Ion hydration
Dry condition
(Interlayer)
Clay
layers
cation
Thecations arefully hydrated,
which results in repulsiveforces
and expandingclay layers
(hydration energy).
Na
+
crystal radius: 0.095nm
radiusof hydratedion: 0.358nm
4.5 Clay-Water Interaction
(Cont.)
66
Theconcentration of cations is higher in theinterlayers (A) compared with that
in the solution (B) due to negatively charged surfaces. Because of this
concentration difference, water molecules tend to diffusetoward theinterlayer
in an attempt to equalizeconcentration.
3. Osmotic pressure
FromOxtobyet
al., 1994
A
B
23
4.5 Clay-Water Interaction
(Cont.)
67
Relativesizes of adsorbed water layers on sodiummontmorilloniteand
sodiumkaolinite
Holtz andKovacs, 1981
5.8 Swelling Potential
68
Practically speaking, the three ingredients generally necessary for
potentially damaging swelling to occur are (1) presence of
montmorillonitein thesoil, (2) thenatural water content must bearound
the PL, and (3) there must be a source of water for the potentially
swelling clay (Gromko, 1974, fromHoltz andKovacs, 1981)
Holtz andKovacs, 1981
U.S. Bureauof
Reclamation
69
Outline:
1- Chemical Method
2-Lime
3- Lime Stabilization
4- Mechanismof Lime Stabilization
5- Hydration
6- Ion Exchange and Flocculation
7- Pozzolanic Reaction
8- Carbonation
9-Effect of Lime on The Physical Properties of The Soil

M.HAFEZ
Soil88@gmail.com

Lime Stabilization
24
The Dry Mix Methods or Deep Stabilization has been
employed for the following specific purposes:
-Reduction settlements
-Increase of stability
-Increase of bearing capacity
-Prevention of sliding failure
-Protection of structures close to excavation sites
-Reduction of vibration
-Liquefaction mitigation
-Remediation of contaminated ground
Methods of Mixing
25
Installation technique of lime
or cement clay column
Differences between concrete pile and lime or cement clay
columns in termof load transferring
75
Chemical Stabilization
The main objective of chemical soil stabilization is to favorably change the soil-water
interactions. Chemical soil stabilization is intended to modify the interaction between
water and soil by surface reactions in such manner as to make the behavior of the
soil with respect to water effects most favorable for the given purpose. There are
many types of chemical soil stabilization such as cement stabilization, bitumen
stabilization, sodium silicate stabilization and calcium acryl ate stabilization.

The transitional nature of chemically modified clay is both physical and chemical.
Physically, the modified clay is transitional between natural saturated soft clay and
composite material, and therefore exhibit properties of both the chemical additives
and natural soft clay. In the chemically modified clay, it is the physicochemical
phenomena that influence its engineering properties. The interatomic and
intermolecular bonding forces hold matter together and the unbalanced forces exist
at phase boundaries. The nature and magnitude of all these forces influence the
engineering properties of chemically modified clay. Long term particle interaction
due to physicochemical changes in the modified clay specimen generates many types
of bonds within the specimen
26
76
When limeadded to clay, reacts with wet soil, it alters thenatureof theabsorbed
layer by baseexchange. Calciumions replacethesodiumor hydrogen ions. The
doublelayer is usually depressed dueto an increasing in thecation concentration .
However, sometimes thedoublelayer may expand dueto high pH valueof lime.
Lime reacts chemically with available silica and alumina in the clay. A natural
cement composed of calciumalumino silicatecomplex is formed which causes a
cementing action. The reaction depends upon the effective concentration of the
reactants.
LIME Stabilization
Lime in the formof quicklime (calciumoxide - CaO), hydrated lime (calcium
hydroxide Ca [OH]2, or lime slurry can be used to treat soils. Quicklime is
manufactured by chemically transforming calciumcarbonate(limestone- CaC03)
into calciumoxide. Hydrated lime is created when quicklime chemically reacts
with water. It is hydrated lime that reacts with clay particles and permanently
transforms them into a strong cementitious matrix. Most lime used for soil
treatment is "high calcium" lime, which contains no more than 5 percent
magnesiumoxideor hydroxide. On someoccasions, however, "dolomitic" limeis
used. Dolomitic lime contains 35 to 46 percent magnesiumoxide or hydroxide.
Dolomitic lime can performwell in soil stabilization, although the magnesium
fraction reacts moreslowly than thecalciumfraction.
77
Soil stabilization by lime means the admixture of this material in the formof
calcium oxide (CaO) or calcium hydroxide (Ca(OHh) to the soil, and the
compaction of the mixture at the optimumwater content. Lime treatment is
commonly resorted to in order to improvethestrength and stiffness properties of
road foundations, reduce the swell-shrink potential of expansive soils and
improve soft clay properties by surface mixing of lime and soil. Deep mixing
techniques may also beused such as creation of limecolumns and limepiles or
in situ stabilization of soil by limeslurry injection. Morerecently limehas also
been used to treat chemically contaminated soils. Lime-clay reactions occur via
two distinct processes:
(i) Rapid ion exchange reactions known as soil improvement or modification
and
(ii) slower soil-lime pozzolanic reactions known as stabilisationl-solidification.
Limemodification reactions occur fromreplacement of exchangeableions of the
soil with calciumions released by lime. Theincreased exchangeablecalciumion
concentration increases the flocculation of clay particles and transforms the
plastic soil to a granular and less plastic material. Lime stabilization
solidification occurs at lime additions in excess of the Lime Modification
Optimumor Initial Consumption of Limevalue. According to BS 1924 (1990)
78
the Initial Consumption of Lime gives an indication of the minimum
quantity of lime that must be added to a material to achieve a
significant change in properties. During lime stabilisationl-
solidification reactions the highly alkaline soil pH (soil pH =12.4)
promotes dissolution of siliceous and aluminous compounds fromthe
clay mineral lattice. The compounds dissolved fromthe clay mineral
lattice react with calciumions in pore water to formcalciumsilicate
hydrate and calciumaluminates hydrate gels, which coat the soil
particles and subsequently crystallize to bond them.
Mechanism of Lime Stabilization
The major strength gain of lime treated clay is mainly derived from
three reactions; dehydration of soil, ion exchange and pozzolanic
reaction. Short-termreactions include hydration (for quicklime) and
flocculation (ion exchange). Longerterm reactions are cementation
and carbonation.
27
79
Hydration
A large amount of heat is released when quicklime (CaO) is mixed
with clay. This is due to hydration of quicklime with the pore
water of the soil. An immediate reduction of water contents occurs
when quicklime is mixed with cohesive soil, as water is consumed
in the hydration process. If a reduction of the natural water content
in a cohesive is desirable, quicklime instead of calciumhydroxide
is used. It is important that the water content of the base clay must
be sufficient for the complete slackening of the quicklime.
CaO +H
2
0 Ca(OH)2 +HEAT (280 Cal /gm of CaO)
The calciumhydroxide fromthe hydration of quicklime or when
using calciumhydroxide as a stabilizer, dissociates in the water,
increasing the electrolytic concentration and the pH of the pore
water, and dissolving the Si0
2
and AlO3 fromthe clay particles.
This process will result in ion exchange, flocculation, and
pozzolanic reactions Ca(OH)2 Ca ++ + 2(OH)
80
Ion Exchange and Flocculation
When lime is mixed with clay, sodiumand other cations adsorbed to
the clay mineral surfaces are exchanged with calcium. This change in
cation complex affects the structural components of the clay mineral.
Within a period of a couple of minutes up to some hours after mixing,
the calciumhydroxide is transformed again due to the presence of
carbonic acid in the soil. The presence of carbonic acid in the soil is
due to the reaction of carbon dioxide of the air in the soil and the free
water. The reaction results in the dissociation of the lime into Ca++
(or Mg++) and (OH)- which modifies the electrical surfaces forces of
the clay minerals. A transformation of the soil structure begins, i.e
flocculation and coagulation of soil particles into larger sizes
aggregates and an associated increase in plastic limit. Lime causes the
clay to coagulate, aggregate or flocculate. These reactions tend to
decrease the liquid limit, increase the plastic limit, decrease the
plasticity index, increase the shrinkage limit, increase the workability,
and improve the strength and deformation properties of a soil.
Plate 2.4 the cation exchange process
between minerals and additives
Plate 2.5 shows the effect of ion exchange
Plate 2.6 The mechanism of load
Transformation in the stabilized soil
28
Lime Reacts Chemically
with Clays
to Alter Molecular
Interactions
Untreated clays have a
molecular structure similar to
some polymers, and give plastic
properties. The structure can
trap water between its molecular
layers, causing volume and
density changes.
In treated clays Calcium atoms (from
Lime) have replaced Sodium and
Hydrogen atoms producing a soil with
very friable characteristics

On-going reaction with available Silica
and Alumina in the soil forms complex
cementatious materials (the
POZZALONIC effect.
Flocculation/ Agglomeration
Unstabilized Clay Particles
Flocculation/ Agglomeration
Clay after flocculation / Agglomeration
Lime Reacts Chemically
with Flyash
to provide Cementatious
Result
Reactions between lime and
the Silica and Alumina in
flyash form complex
cementitious materials

Lime and Flyash provide a
filler for larger particles of
sand or gravel based soils
Essential to the treatment of non-clay soils and aggregates
Pozzolanic Reaction
CalciumHydroxide
Fromlime or cement
Cementitious
Material from
pozzolonic reactions
[CSH and CAH]
Clay Particle

Ca(OH ) 2
Ca(OH ) 2
Ca(OH ) 2
Ca(OH ) 2
Microscopic View
29
18APRIL 2007 LIME STABILIZE CLAY 85
Pozzolonic Reaction
The formation of cementing materials
Calcium Silicate Hydrate & Calcium
Aluminates Hydrate (C-S-H and C-A-H) to
strengthen the soil.
Ca(OH)2 + SiO2 C-S-H
Ca(OH)2 + Al2O3 C-A-H

Hydrated gel
fromsoil fromlime
Plate 2.7 the forming of CSH matrix gel
In order to haveadditional bonding forces produced in the cement-clay mixture,
thesilicates and aluminates in thematerial must besoluble. That will beassociated
with dropping of pH during pozzolanic reaction and a drop in the pH tends to
promotethehydrolysis of C3S2Hx, to formCSH. Thecement hydration and the
pozzolanic reaction can last for months, or even years, after themixing, and so the
strength of cement treated clay is expected to increasewith time.
87
The gel of calcium silicate cements the soil particles in a
manner similar to the effect produced by the hydration of
Portland cement, but the lime cementing is a much slower
reaction, which requires considerably longer time than the
hydration of cement. The solubility of the pozzolans and
thus their inclination to react with lime is depends on the
pH of the soil water. The rate of reaction also increases
with increased soil temperature.
Carbonation
Lime reacts with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere or in the soil to
formrelatively weak cementing agent, such as calciumcarbonate
or magnesiumcarbonate. The strength of calciumcarbonate, which
is formed by this process, can be discounted. The carbonation is
probably a deleterious rather than helpful phenomenon in the soil
stabilization.
30
88
3- Effect of Lime on The Physical Properties of The Soil
Considering theprocess described above, onecan concludethat limeaddition affects
all physical properties of thesoil. Owing to thecoagulation, thegrain-sizedistribution
curve will obviously change and, a number of other characteristics will undergo
similar changes duemainly to this cause. Changes in thegrain-sizedistribution curve
however, arerather difficult to determine, as theusual hydrometric method does not
render atruepicture, so thesechanges should beexpressed numerically on thebasis of
another characteristic property. Figures below illustrates thetimedependent process of
plasticity index (PI) reduction, which incidentally is also characteristic of the
development rateexhibited by theprocess described in thesection above. Generally,
quick limewill bring about afaster reaction. Theeffect of calciumtreatment on the
volumechangeof thevarious soils is similarly significant, as swelling will bealmost
completely eliminated, and the volume change greatly reduced. It shows a typical
reduction in liquid limit as aresult of lime treated. As more lime was added to the
natural clay the liquid limit (LL) decreased while the plastic limit (PL)
increased. This can also beseen as areduction in theplasticity index (PI). When the
PI of the soil is at a minimumthe soil is said to be fully modified. This trend
continued fromL6 to L18% , whileadding morelimeabove18%. Thetrend reversed
between 18 to 24% . the reverse trend can be as result of excessive lime in the
mixture, the extra lime works as inoperative element stimulates the de-bonding
phenomenain themixture.
89
Effect of lime on Atterberg limits
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 6 12 18 24 30
Li me %
W
c

%

LL PL PI
The effect of Mixture of lime on Atterberg limits
90
The effect of Additi ve on MDD and OMC
OMC and MDD of Li me group
O
M
C
O
M
C
O
M
C
O
M
C
O
M
C
M
D
D
M
D
D
M
D
D
M
D
D
M
D
D
23
23.5
24
24.5
25
25.5
26
26.5
27
27.5
28
0 6 12 18 24 30
Li me Content %
O
M
C

%
13
13.2
13.4
13.6
13.8
14
14.2
14.4
14.6
14.8
15
M
D
D

(

K
N
)
The relation between OMC & MDD for Lime group
31
91
Optimum Moisture Content was increased with increasing lime
contents from0.0 to 12% and reached to its peak around 14%. Than the
trend was reversed after 14% to 24% indicating that most of water
content in the mixture have been utilized fully in creating bonds
between lime and clay particles. While, the extra lime particles in the
mixture were not used in any modification process. And it might act as
inoperative element in the modification process. However, it can be
suggested here to look to the Proctor standard compaction test results
as primary method to determine the optimumlime content for each
type of clay soil. In this analysis, the 14% lime is considered the
optimum lime content for this type of clay. However, The value of the
maximumdry density was falling greatly once lime was added, the
more lime added to the clay the less MDD could obtained. This is
result of replacing clay by lime particles which is slightly larger and
lighter than clay particles.
92
Predominant Factors That Control Hardning Characterstices of Lime Modifed Clay
-Type of Lime
The efficiency of lime stabilization depends in part on the type
of lime material used. Quicklime is generally more effective
than hydrated lime (Kezdi, 1979), but generally it needs care
in handling for soils with high moisture contents. Unslaked
lime or quicklime is more effective since water will be
absorbed from the soil and more importantly, the hydration will
cause an increase in temperature which is favorable to
strength gain (Brams, 1984).
TEST RESULTS
Part A: Clay soil with no blending of Lime-Rice Husk Ash (LRHA)
PhysicalProperties
Natural moisture content, w
N

Moisture content (disturbed)
Specific Gravity, Gs
Liquid Limit, LL
Plastic Limit, PL
Shrinkage Limit, SL
Plasticity Index, PI
Maximum Dry Density,
d

Optimum Moisture Content
Grain size distribution:
- Coarse particles
- Fine particles
- Clay
- Silt
71.38
18.32
2.60
83.59
37.34
15.82
55.25
1.32 gr/cm
3

34
9.24
5.00
30.50
80.76
70.50
Chen (1975) classified
soil with PI > 35%,
having very high swell
potential
32
Properties Lime Cement
Finesses ( cm
2
/g ) 2975.00
Specific gravity 3.12
Chemical Properties
Silica (SiO2) 1.25% 20.44
Alumina ( AlO3 ) 5.50
MgO 1.59
Iron Oxide ( Fe2O3)
Calcium Oxide ( CaO) 73.7 64.86
3CaO.SiO2 66.48
2Ca.SiO2 10.12
3CaO.Al2O3 8.06
4CaO.Al2O3.FeO3 9.43
Potassium Oxide (K2O)
Magnesium Oxide ( MgO) 1.59
Sodium Oxide (Na2O)
pH 12.06
SO
3
1.96
Loss on Ignition 23.15
Physical Properties
Colour White
Density 3.345
Hardness 3 5 Copper Penny
Composition of RHA
minerals (Wen-Hwei, 1986)
Mineral Composition (%)
SiO
2
86.90 - 97.30
K
2
O 0.58 - 2.50
Na
2
O 0.00 - 1.75
CaO 0.20 - 1.50
MgO 0.12 - 1.96
Fe
2
O
3
~ 0.54
P
2
O
5
0.2 2.85
SO
3
0.1 1.13
Cl ~ 0.42
95
-Lime Content
The strength of lime soil mixtures, provided they are properly cured,
increases as the lime content is increased. There appears to be no
optimumlime content which produces a maximumstrength in a lime
stabilized soil under all conditions. However, it can be stated that for
a particular condition of curing time and soil type, there is a
corresponding optimumlime content which causes the maximum
strength increase (Herrin and Mitchell, 1961).
- Lime Fixation Point
The lime fixation point is defined as the point at which the percentage of
lime is such that additional increments of lime produce no appreciable
increase in the plastic limit. Handy et a!. (1965) referred to this point as the
"lime retention point". Based on extensive investigations at Iowa State
University, the concept of the lime fixation point was suggested. Lime
contents equal to the lime fixation point for a soil will generally contribute to
the improvement in soil workability, but may not result in sufficient strength
increases (Hilt and Davidson, 1960),
96
* OptimumLimeContent
Methods of determining theoptimumlimerequirement for limestabilization havebeen
proposed. Eades and Grim(1966) suggested that theamount of limeconsumed by asoil
after onehour affords aquick method of determining thepercentageof limerequired
for stabilization, i.e., thelowest percentageof limerequired to maintain apH of 12.6 is
thepercentagerequired to stabilizethesoil. However, astrength test is still necessary to
show thepercentageof strength increase. McDowell (1959) pointed out that short-time
or quick tests probably will not identify optimumlime contents, but are essential in
checking against theuseof non-reactivesoils for treatment of lime. On theother hand,
whilelong-termtests would do abetter job of identifying optimumlimecontents, they
may be impractical fromthe standpoint of time, and may even suggest the use of
insufficient amounts of limedueto theideal conditions under which they arerun. Hilt
and Davidson (1960) gaveacorrelation which showed that theamount of limefixation
is in proportion to the type and amount of clay present and is independent of the
absorbed cation present in theclays. Therelationship is given as:
Optimum Lime Content = % of clay / 35 + 1.25
33
97
* Curing Time
Broms (1984) reported that theshear strength of stabilized clays will normally
behigher than that of untreated clay after mixing. Figure6.4 shows atypical
plot of theincreaseof shear strength with timefor various types of soils. The
shear strength of clay stabilized with limewill normally behigher than that of
undisturbed clay about oneto two hours after mixing even when thesensitivity
of theclay is relatively high (Broms, 1984). Theundrained final shear strength
of stabilized clay can be, under favorableconditions, as high as 10 to 50 times
the initial shear strength (Assarson et al. 1974). The shear strength of the
stabilized soil gradually increases with timethrough pozzolanic reactions when
thelimereacts with thesilicates and aluminatesAn thesoil (Broms, 1984). The
rateof increaseis generally rapid at theearly stageof curing time; thereafter,
therateof increasein strength decreases with time. Limehas an initial reaction
with soil taking placeduring thefirst 48-72 hours after mixing, and asecondary
reaction which starts after this period and continues indefinitely (Taylor and
Arman, 1960). Several attempts havebeen madeto express thestrength of lime
stabilized soils as afunction of curing time.
98
Lime 12% - 100 mm
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Strain %
C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
iv
e
S
tr
e
n
g
th
K
g
/c
m
2
L12-1d L12-7d L12-14d L12-28d L12-56d Clay-O-100mm
the strength development over curing time - 12% lime
Broms (1984) found that the shear strength of stabilized soils as determined by
unconfined compression tests increased linearly with time when plotted in loglog
scale (log Cu. log t). Brandl (1981) and Okamura and Terashi (1975), however.
found that the time- dependent increase in shear strength was approximately
linear with the logarithmof time.
99
- Type of Soil ( Clay Content )
For lime treatment to be successful, the clay content of the soil should
not be less than 20% and the sumof the silt and clay fractions should
preferably exceed 35%, which is normally the case when the plasticity
index of the soil is larger than 10 (Brams, 1984). The shear strength
increase of the stabilized soil is highly dependent on pozzolanic
reactions, i.e., the reactions of lime with the silicates and aluminates in
the soil.

The following graph shows the relationship between clay
content of soils and 28-day unconfined compressive
strength of soils treated with 5% portland cement or 5%
lime, and (( compacted immediately.)) Adapted from
Christensen, 1969

34
100
101
102
Relationship between clay content of soils and 28-day
unconfined compressive strength of soils treated with 5%
portland cement or 5% lime, and (( compacted after a 24-
hour delay.)) Adapted from Christensen, 1969.
35
103
Linear relationship between cation exchange capacity and clay
content of untreated soil. The deviation of soil No. 10 with 75% clay
content was attributed to the presence of calcite and quartz.
Adapted from Christensen, 1969.
104
Linear relationship between plasticity index and clay content of
untreated soil. Adapted from Christensen, 1969.
Laboratory testing
36
pH test
Standard Proctor Test
Curing Specimen
Unconfined Compressive Strength Test
107
Grain Size Distribution
The increase in strength with time is in general highest for
normally consolidated silty clays, with low plasticity index and a
low water content. The strength increase in lime treated organic
soils is often very low; even a relatively small amount of organic
material can have a large effect on the strength increase (Brams,
1984). Gypsumhas often been used together with unslaked lime
to stabilize organic soils when lime alone is not effective (Broms
and Anttikoski, 1983). Generally, the effect of lime decreases with
increasing water content (Holmet al. 1983; Miura et al. 1987).

The particle size and shape also influence the properties of soils.
As the ion exchange in illite and kaolinite takes place primarily at
the interface and edges, the cation exchange capacity of soils in
their presence may be different as particle size and shape are
changed.

108
* Clay Minerals
Eades and Grim(1966) reported that the quantity of lime needed
to effectively treat a clay is dependent on the type of clay mineral
present. Eades and Grim (1966) observed that although
kaolinites, illites~ montmorillonites and other mixed-layered
clays all react with lime to give greater strength "; the quantity
of lime needed to treat a clay is dependent on the type of mineral
present. Hilt and Davidson (1960) found that fromthe unconfined
compression test results, kaolinitic and montmorillonitic clayey
soils are effectively stabilized with lime alone. Whereas illitic
clays require addition of fly-ash to obtain a significant strength
gain. Lee et at. (1982) found that in terms of strength increase,
lime treatment has a greater effect in montmorillonites than
kaolinitic soils.
37
109
* Soil pH
Lime addition will increase the pH of the water content in the soil,
and give rise to increased solubility. The base exchange is low when
the pH-value is less than 7. The long-termchemical reactions in
lime stabilized soils are favored by a high pH-value (PH>12) since
the reactions are accelerated due to the increased solubility of the
silicates and aluminates (pozwlans) present in the clays (Broms.
1984), Davidson et al. (1965) suggested that a minimumpH of
approximately to.5 is necessary for pozzolanic reaction to take
place, while Eades and Grim (1966) suggested that the lowest
percentage of lime required to maintain a pH of 12.40 is the
percentage required to stabilize a soil. Broms (1984) pointed out
that the pH of the treated soil will normally exceed 12 even when
only a few percent of lime has been added to the soil.
110
pH vs Lime Content
From the graph, it shows the optimum lime content to
change the pH value of soil is 6%.
38
112
Solubility of Ca(OH)2 in water at 25C and the resulting pH of
the solution. Adapted from Boynton, 1980.
pH vs Lime Content
113
Curing Temperature
The chemical reactions in the soil are favored by a high temperature
(Broms, 1984). For lime-soil mixture at the same age, the effect of
increasing the curing temperature is to increase strength (Ruff and Ho,
1966). The curing temperature has been found to affect the long term
reactions between lime and clay. Broms (1984) attributed the favorable
effects of high curing temperature to the increased solubility of the
silicates and aluminates (pozzolans) in the clay at high temperatures. For
lime stabilized clays, Metcalf (1964) found that the curves (UC strength
versus temperature) were different for different clays, and that there was
an abrupt change in the slope in the vicinity of 45C. Ruff and Ho (1966)
extended the work of Metcalf (1964), and suggested that different reaction
products are formed at different curing temperatures and that the cut-off
temperature is from 23C to 40C. Furthermore, it was found that there
was increase of strength with time at all temperatures, with greater rate of
increase at the higher temperature. Chaudry (1966) reported that the
compacted lime stabilized Bangkok clay cured at lOOF had higher
strength values than those cured at 70F.
114
FACTORS AFFECTING THE STABILIZED PROPERTIES
Only limited information is available regarding how various
factors influence the engineering properties of a stabilized soil.
While the contributory parameters are many (Felt, 1955), some
of the more important ones are listed below.
1. Stabilizer dosage
2. Mixing conditions
3. Compaction method and effort
4. Gradation and pulverization
5. Curing period and conditions
6. Delayed compaction
7. Climatic conditions
39
Stabilization additive
The selection additive is depending on;
The type of soil to be stabilized.
The purposed which the stabilized layer
will be used.
The type of soil improvement desired.
The required strength and durability of
the stabilized layer.
Cost and Environmental Condition.
116
Stabilizer Dosage
The amount of stabilizer determines the supply of calcium, the
most necessary component for clay soil stabilization, and calcium
may be supplied fromvarious sources. The presence of
a stabilizer may not only supply calciumto the system, but its
other characteristics may also contribute to the overall properties
of a stabilized soil. This is true particularly in the case of Portland
cement or lime stabilization of clayey soils.
In the case of time-dependent effects, some of the improvement
may occur too late to be of interest or to be applied in design
considerations. In addition to the supply potential, there is also a
lower limit of the stabilizer dosage below which the necessary
mixing uniformity cannot be achieved in normal construction
operations in the field as opposed to the laboratory.
117
Procedures for Designing Soil-Lime Mixes.
In order to determine the necessary lime dosage, a number of mixture
design procedures are available for lime. These procedures, listed in the
State of the Art Report on Lime Stabilization (State of Art Report, 1976,
1987), are given below with the properties these tests are based upon.
California Procedure: Optimummoisture content and unconfined
compressive strength of lime-soil mixes with various lime content.
1- Eades and Grim Procedure:
This measures pH to determine the design lime dosage. The amount of
lime necessary to achieve a pH of 12.4, the saturation pH of Ca(OH)2, is
considered to be adequate.
2- Illinois Procedure:
This procedure is designed for two stabilization objectives: base or sub
base stabilization, and sub grade modification. The criterion used for the
former is based upon the unconfined compressive strength and that for
the latter is based upon the reduction in Plasticity Index (PI).

40
118
3- Oklahoma Procedure:
This is based upon the Eades and Grimprocedure. However, a PI
reduction criterion is also used as an alternative.
4- South Dakota Procedure:
Initial lime requirements are determined using the pH procedure of
Eades and Grim. Supplemental strength data are generated through
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and unconfined strength
measurements.
5- Texas Procedure:
Unconfined compressive strength is used as the criterion (AASHTO T-
220).
6- Thompson Procedure:
This procedure is more elaborate than the others and separate criteria
are used for subgrade modification and for base and subbase materials.
It combines a number of properties, such as maximumdry density,
unconfined compressive strength, PI reduction, etc.
119
7- Virginia Procedure:
This is based upon the compressive strength measurements of cured
mixtures of soil and various dosages of lime. It will be noted that
strength is usually a secondary criterion, and that durability criteria are
notably absent. Where CBR is used as a strength criterion, clearly the
advantage of stabilized clay soils resides in their lesser loss of bearing
strength after saturation, as the CBR in "dry conditions can be
extremely high for clays but is almost entirely lost upon soaking.
120
The pH limitations:
The pH method suffers froma few limitations. It takes no account of
any interaction between lime and soil that may result in a strength
increase. In fact, recognizing this limitation, Eades and Grim(1996)
stated explicitly: "The 1 hr pH or 'Quick Test' can be used only to
determine the lime requirements of a soil for stabilization. Since
strength gains are related to the formation of C-S-H, and as their
formation varies with the mineralogical components of the soil, a
strength test is necessary to show the percentage of strength increase.
Another limitation is that the stabilizer amount determined in this
method is only applicable to lime, and it may lead to a wrong estimate
if the stabilizer (such as Portland cement) contains compounds such as
alkali sulfates or chlorides that are highly soluble in water. the pH of a
fresh cement paste reaches values of 12 to 13 within a few minutes and
before the systembecomes saturated with respect to calciumhydroxide.
Thus, when used to determine the amount of Portland cement required
for soil stabilization, the Eades and Grimmethod can be misleading.

41
121
While the above procedures help to identify the lime content that
will provide the greatest strength, many factors influence the strength
of soil-lime mixtures. The variability of these factors makes it
practically impossible to pinpoint the strength that may be achieved
for lime stabilization of a particular soil. Therefore, strengths of soil-
lime mixtures must be verified through strength tests such as CBR,
unconfined compressive strength, or resilient modulus.
Lime contents between 2 to 10 percent are typically capable of
producing significant strength gains (Little, 1995). While there is no
universal definition of significant strength gain, most design
procedures implement a requirement for a compressive strength
increase of 50 psi for lime stabilization to be a viable option (Chou,
1987).
122
Cement Stabilization
Stabilization Mechanism
Strength gain in soils using cement stabilization occurs through the
same type of pozzolanic reactions found using lime stabilization.
Both lime and cement contain the calciumrequired for
the pozzolanic reactions to occur; however, the origin of the silica
required for the pozzolanic reactions to occur differs. With lime
stabilization, the silica is provided when the clay particle is
broken down. With cement stabilization, the cement already
contains the silica without needing to break down the clay mineral.
Thus, unlike lime stabilization, cement stabilization is fairly
independent of the soil properties; the only requirement is that the
soil contains some water for the hydration process to begin.

123
Similar to lime stabilization, carbonation can also occur when using
cement stabilization. When cement is exposed to air, the cement will
react with carbon dioxide fromthe atmosphere to produce a
relatively insoluble calciumcarbonate. Thus, similar to lime, proper
handling methods and expedited construction procedures should be
employed to avoid premature carbonation of cement through
exposure to air.
42
124
Cement Stabilization mechanism
The formation of calcium-silicate-hydrate (C-S-H), upon hydration of
Portland cement, is attributed to the development of its strength.
Therefore, the formation of C-S-H may further strengthen a soil that is
stabilized with the Ca(OH)2 produced as the by-product of cement
hydration. The formation of C-S-H upon hydration is an inherent
characteristic of Portland cement, but not of lime. Additional C-S-H
can formin both the Portland cement-soil and lime soil systems due to
the reaction between Ca(OH)2 supplied by either cement or lime and
the silica supplied by soil. This process is known as a pozzolanic
reaction. Calciummay also react with alumina and produce C-A-H that
is cementitious in nature.
The reactions are as follows:
Ca(OH)2 +SiO2 >C-S-H
Ca(OH)2 +Al2O3 >C-A-H
125
Soil Type Cement Usage UCS Permeability
Sludge
240 to 400 kg/m
3

(400 to 700 lbs/cy)
70-350 kPa
(10-50 psi)
1x10
-6
cm/sec
Organic silts and
clays
150 to 260 kg/m
3

(260 to 450 lbs/cy)
350-1400 kPa
(50-200 psi)
5x10
-7
cm/sec
Cohesivesilts & clay
120 to 240 kg/m
3

(200 to 400 lbs/cy)
700-2100 kPa
(100-300 psi)
5x10
-7
cm/sec
Silty sands and sands
120 to 240 kg/m
3

(200 to 400 lbs/cy)
1400-3500 kPa
(200-500 psi)
5x10
-6
cm/sec
Sands and gravels
120 to 240 kg/m
3

(200 to 400 lbs/cy)
3000-7000 kPa
(400-1000 psi)
1x10
-5
cm/sec
Typical strength and permeability characteristics of treated soils.
126
Unconfined
CompressiveStrength,
Standard Compaction
Energy, kPa
Unconfined CompressiveStrength, Modified
Compaction Energy, kPa
Clay
Types
Optimum
OMC
1% Above
Optimum
Optimum
Moisture
Content
1% Below
Optimum
with
lime
withou
t lime
with
lime
withou
t lime
with
lime
withou
t lime
with
lime
Without
lime
Clay1 1,395 124 2,235 120 2,980 280 2,725 225
Clay2 1,293 105 1,935 70 2,765 145 2,458 140
Clay3 1,195 50 1,820 85 2,275 160 2,150 155
The Relation between Unconfined Compressive Strength, Modified Compaction Energy,
kPa
Effect of Compaction Energy and Molding Moisture Content on
Unconfined Compressive Strength
43
127
FACTORS AFFECTING THE STABILIZED PROPERTIES
In general, most clay soils can be successfully stabilized with portland
cement or lime. However, the achieved engineering properties of a
stabilized soil are dependent upon a number of parameters as discussed
in the following sections. Besides all the engineering properties, the
clay mineral composition of a soil is one of the most dominant factors
determining the chemical and physical properties of a soil. The
presence of a small amount of montmorillonite, with the highest cation
exchange capacity, can greatly influence the physical properties of
soils.
Christensen (1969) investigated a total of 11 soils and observed a linear
relationship (see Figure 7) between the clay content of soils and cation
exchange capacity. The characteristics of these soils are shown in Table
1. A linear relationship (see Figure 8) was also observed between the
clay content and the plasticity indices.
128
A combination of these two linearities indicates that there 12 should be
a linear relationship between cation exchange capacity and the
plasticity index (PI). The particle size and shape also influence the
properties of soils. As the ion exchange in illite and kaolinite takes
place primarily at the interface and edges, the cation exchange
capacity of soils in their presence may be different as particle size and
shape are changed. Only limited information is available regarding
how various factors influence the engineering properties of a stabilized
soil. While the contributory parameters are many (Felt,1955), some of
the more important ones are listed below.
1. Stabilizer dosage
2. Mixing conditions
3. Compaction method and effort
4. Gradation and pulverization
5. Curing period and conditions
6. Delayed compaction
7. Climatic conditions
129
The 28-day unconfined compressive strength of pulverized soils treated with
various amounts of lime. Size designations: Fine-100% passing No.2.0mm
sieve; Medium-80% passing No. 2.0mm; Coarse-60% passing No. 2.0mm
sieve. Adapted from Petry and Wohlgemuth, 1988.
44
130
The 28-day unconfined compressive strength of pulverized soils treated with
various amounts of Cement Size designations: Fine-100% passing No.2.0mm
sieve; Medium-80% passing No. 2.0mm; Coarse-60% passing No. 2.0mm
sieve. Adapted from Petry and Wohlgemuth, 1988.
131
Variation of unconfined compressive strength, normalized by the
differences in dry unit weights, with gradation of soil stabilized with
either 10% lime or cement. Adapted from Petry and Wohlgemuth, 1988.
132
Conductivity Test Analysis
Electrical conductivity test is atest used to study the electrochemical properties of
modified clay and to predict theinteraction between theadditiveand clay. Although the
concept of ion migration fromfine-grained modified soils is easy to understand, the
associated physicochemical reactions of the modified clay is complex. The
experimental results show that the approach is a valid step towards a better
understanding the physics and chemistry involved during the treatment of soft clay.
Strong electrolytes are substances that are fully ionised in the modified clay sample
solution. As a result, the concentration of ions in the solution is proportional to the
concentration of theelectrolyteadded. They includeionic solids and strong acids, for
example Ca(O)2. Solutions of strong electrolytes conduct electricity because the
positiveand negativeions can migrateindependently largely under theinfluenceof an
electric field. Weak electrolytes aresubstances that arenot fully ionised in thesolution.
Ionic mobilities of H+and OH- areconsiderably higher than that of other ions dueto
bonding and debonding between theions and water molecules (Alberty 1983).
45
3.15. How is conductivity measured?
Conductivity may be measured by applying an alternating electrical
current (I) to two electrodes immersed in a solution and measuring the
resulting voltage (V). During this process, the cations migrate to the
negative electrode, the anions to the positive electrode and the solution
acts as an electrical conductor
Plate 3.28 Migration of ions in solution
Plate 3.29 Accumulation of ionic species at
electrode surface
134
Unsaturated Lime
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
6% 5.6 8.9 11.2
12% 15.4 30.1 38.5
18% 47.3 51.5 56.3
24% 57.9 63.8 65.1
7 days 56 days 100 days
Conductivity of Unsaturated Lime samples
135
Saturated Lime
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
6% 11.5 8.4 6.5
12% 19.2 15.6 11.9
18% 31 24.2 15.8
24% 41.9 37.6 45.4
7 days 56 days 100 days
Conductivity Values of Saturated Lime samples
46
136
Conductivity reading of small, mediumand high unsaturated lime content dosages
had shown increasing ionic ability to transfer current by thetime. Therearemorefree
ions in thesampleat day 100 than day 7. This can beattributed to incompleteongoing
reactions; thus allowing morefreeions. Thefreeions areproduced in thedebonding
process dueto thelack of water to completethereaction . Thehigh conductivity
reading of thehigh limecontent of theunsaturated samples (L18 +L24) was dueto the
concentration of ions fromelectrolytecontributed by theCa(O)2 in thesolutions as
result of uncompleted or broken bond.

Theconductivity readings of all saturated limesamples exhibited reversetrend
compared to thetrend of unsaturated limesamples. All unsaturated limesample
readings increased by curing time, contrary to thetrend of its saturated counterpart.
Theseindicatethat, thesaturated samples aremorechemically stablethan the
unsaturated ones. Theconductivity reading of L12 saturated at 7 days had dropped
gradually by 38% within 100 days, indicating aslow ongoing ionic activity within the
sample, and thestrong possibility of being reduced by over timeto alesser valueand
morestablebonding.
137
Unsaturated Cement
0
5
10
15
20
25
6% 5.1 6.3 6.9
12% 8.4 11.2 12.8
18% 9.9 11.8 12.5
24% 17.1 19.9 22.4
7 days 56 days 100 days
Conductivity Values of Unsaturated Cement Samples
138
Saturated Cement
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6% 3.1 3.3 3.6
12% 3.9 4.4 4.1
18% 2.8 3.4 3.3
24% 5.5 6.3 5.8
7 days 56 days 100 days
Conductivity Values of Saturated Cement Samples
47
139
The range difference in conductivity reading of the unsaturated cement
samples are much less than range of lime samples, which can be
interpreted as less free ions able to conduct electricity; meaning that the
unsaturated cement samples are chemically more stable than its lime
counterpart. The general trend indicates slow chemical reaction over
time. Samples with small dosages of cement are chemically more stable
than samples with high dosages. C12 and C18 show degrees of
similarities where the difference between 100 days and 7 days
conductivity reading is almost steady.
Saturated cement samples have shown great ionic stability fromthe
early stage where the range of conductivity reading for the all saturated
cement samples was between (3.1) and (6.3). The range of reading
differences was very small compared to any other samples. Even the
general trend was not really clear as the saturated lime, but the
inconsistency can be attributed to the narrow reading range. In lime
samples where the high difference in reading of 7 days and 100 days can
be easily detected by the device, it is not the same when it comes to
detecting a difference less than 1 s in saturated cement samples.
140
Determine the effective moisture content (EMC).
Water content of all chemically modified clay samples
were predetermined in the laboratory through the
mechanical standard proctor compaction test, where the
OMC (Optimum Moisture Content) and the MDD
(MaximumDry Density) were calculated for each additive
dosage. The reverse conductivity trend between the
unsaturated and saturated sample shows a relation between
conductivity and water content where the conductivity
reading is indicative of the existence of an effective zone
between the two reverse trends, where chemical additive
would have an effective aqueous environment to maximize
its reaction with the clay.

.
141
Effective Water Content
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
OMC=28% 15.4 30.1 38.5
Wc=35% 12.1 19.9 27.4
Wc=40% 9.8 11.2 12.5
Wc=45 10.2 12.9 15.7
Wc=50% 12.4 12.8 14.4
Saturated 19.2 15.6 11.9
7 56 100
Conductivity values of L12 with different water contents
48
142
In brief, it can be concluded that the mechanically predetermine
moisture content (OMC) value for chemically modified clay, was
not the effective amount of water to maximize the creation of
bonding matrix between the chemical additive and the clay. The
conductivity test is a supporting test to determine the effective
amount of water for chemically modified clay and better
compressive strength.
THE FLOW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT
INPUT
Existinggroundconditions(i.e., stratadepth, thicknessand
geotechnical properties andgroundwater conditions)
Expectedfoundationloadsandallowablesettlement
Isweakstratum
stressedby
foundationload?
Iscalculatedbearing
capacity, stability&
settlement acceptable?
Treatment not
necessary
NO
NO
YES
YES
Heavy
loading?
Largearea
treatment ?
Cansoil above
competent layer be
improvedwithin
time/budget constraint ?
ConsiderGROUNDIMPROVEMENT
YES
YES
NO

Consider piledfoundation
YES
NO
NO
49

CASE STUDY

of Lime in
Road Construction
The Uses and Value
Lime in Soil Modification
Lime Based Mix Designs
for
Different Soil Types
A A S H T O
G r o u p
C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
S o i l
T y p e
U n i f i e d
G r o u p S y m b o l
R e c o m m e n d e d
A d d i t i v e s
G W G P G M G C S W S P S M S C M L C L O L M H C H O H P T
A-1-a A-1-a A-1-b A-1-b A-1-b
A-1-b
or
A-3
A-2-4
or
A-2-5
A-2-6
or
A-2-7
A-4 A-6 A-4 A-5 A-7-6 A-7-5 A-8
P
o
o
rly
g
ra
d
e
d
g
ra
v
e
ls
a
n
d
g
ra
v
e
l
s
a
n
d
m
ix
tu
re
s
, little
o
r n
o
fin
e
s

LIME (Stabilization & Modification)
LIME PLUS TYPE F Coal Fly Ash (Stabilization)
W
e
ll g
ra
d
e
d
g
ra
v
e
ls
a
n
d
g
ra
v
e
l s
a
n
d

m
ix
tu
re
s
, little
o
r n
o
fin
e
s

S
ilty
g
ra
v
e
ls
, g
ra
v
e
l-s
a
n
d
-s
ilt m
ix
tu
re
s

C
la
y
e
y
g
ra
v
e
ls
, g
ra
v
e
l-s
a
n
d
-c
la
y
m
ix
tu
re
s

W
e
ll-g
ra
d
e
d
s
a
n
d
s
a
n
d
g
ra
v
e
lly
s
a
n
d
s
,
little
o
r n
o
fin
e
s

P
o
o
rly
g
ra
d
e
d
s
a
n
d
s
a
n
d
g
ra
v
e
lly

s
a
n
d
s
, little
o
r n
o
fin
e
s

S
ilty
s
a
n
d
s
, s
a
n
d
-s
ilt m
ix
tu
re
s

C
la
y
e
y
, s
a
n
d
s
, s
a
n
d
-c
la
y
m
ix
tu
re
s

In
o
rg
a
n
ic
s
ilts
, v
e
ry
fin
e
s
a
n
d
s
, ro
c
k

flo
u
r, s
ilty
o
r c
la
y
e
y
fin
e
s
a
n
d
s

In
o
rg
a
n
ic
c
la
y
s
o
f lo
w
to
m
e
d
iu
m

p
la
s
tic
ity
, g
ra
v
e
lly
c
la
y
s
, s
a
n
d
y
c
la
y
s
,
s
ilty
c
la
y
s
, le
a
n
c
la
y
s

O
rg
a
n
ic
s
ilts
a
n
d
o
rg
a
n
ic
s
ilty
c
la
y
s
o
f
lo
w
p
la
s
tic
ity

In
o
rg
a
n
ic
s
ilts
, m
ic
a
c
e
o
u
s
o
r
d
ia
to
m
a
c
e
o
u
s
fin
e
s
a
n
d
s
o
r s
ilts
,
e
la
s
tic
s
ilts

In
o
rg
a
n
ic
c
la
y
s
o
f h
ig
h
p
la
s
tic
ity
, fa
t c
la
y
s

O
rg
a
n
ic
c
la
y
s
o
f m
e
d
iu
m
to
h
ig
h
p
la
s
tic
ity

P
e
a
t, m
u
c
k
, a
n
d
o
th
e
r h
ig
h
ly
o
rg
a
n
ic
s
o
ils

Lime (or Lime-Flyash)
in asphalt FDR (Full Depth
Reclamation)
Easy to apply in
FDR process
Provides Pozzolanic
effect to provide
strength to the
reclaimed base
material
Water resistance
Strength gain over
time

Old
road
surface
New base
mixture
ready for
compaction
Lime
added
Variable mixing
chamber with milling
and mixing rotor
Working
Direction
50
Summary Areas of Application
for Lime Stabilization
Base Stabilization
Roads (all grades)
Parking lots / Public areas
Upgrades marginal base material
making it usable
Asphalt FDR
Structural Fills and
Embankments
Site Preparation


Scarification before lime application
Soil windrow used to contain
lime before mixing
Example of lime slurry application
Scarification after lime spreading
51
Dry lime application with mechanical spreader4
Example of lime slurry application
Scarification after lime spreading
Adding water after dry lime
application
Rotary mixer used for initial mixing
52
Rotary mixer with water truck attached
Mixing and pulverization
Sheepsfoot (above) & padfoot
(below) rollers

Steel roller
MIXING TOOL
The function of the tool is to remold the clay
at the drilling phase downwards and to mix
the binder and the soil as well as to compact
the mixed soil during the uplift.
The blade have an angle towards the
rotation, like a boot propeller.
By using a rotation speed high enough and
a restricted lifting speed, it is possible to
compact the mix soil as well as provide the
mixing. Usually 100 to 200 rotations per
minute (rpm) are used, with a lifting speed
equal to 15 to 25 mm per revolution.
53
The binders are injected through hollow, rotated
mixing shafts tipped with some type of cutting tool.
The shaft above the tool may be further equipped
with discontinuous auger lights and/or mixing blades
or paddles.
These shafts a remounted vertically on a crawler-
mounted, and range in number from one to eight
(typically two to four) per carrier, depending on the
nature of the project, the particular variant of the
method, and the contractor.
Column diameters typically range from 0.6 to 1.5 m,
and may extend to 40 m in depth.
In some methods, the mixing action is enhanced by
simultaneously injecting fluid grout at high pressure
through nozzles in the mixing or cutting tools.
The mixing level is expressed by the number of
mixing per meter in depth against the amount of the
stabilizer injected into the ground
SKECTHES FOR PRAPARATION
OF INSTRUCTION DRAWING
Sketches of Representative
Mixing Mechanism


Example of Augers
54
Schematic showing mixing operation in dry DSM process
Rate of rotation ranges between 120 and 150rpm
Rate of withdrawal ranges between 15 and 30mm per revolution
Dry deep soil mixing construction
sequences
The Soil mixing
tool is rotated
into the ground at
a predetermined
location
Once the tools has
reached the required
depth cementitious
powder begins to be
jetted into the disturbed
soil from a nozzle located
above the blade
The tool is rotated at
high speed during its
withdrawal to blend the
dry mix materials with
the soil
Sketches of Drilling Pattern Completed
overlapping and complete treatment or known
as Wall Type Treatment Pattern in Marine
Conditions (Yang, 1997)
55
Description
- Rotation of multiple axis shafts
create relatively movement and
shear in soil for soil reagent mixing.
Number of mixing shafts
- 4 shafts
Major additives
- Lime and cement

MATERIAL SPECIFICATION
Lime cement are widely referred to as binders
and can be introduced in dry or slurry form.


Table: Chemical Composition
CONSTRUCTION / INSTALLATION
METHODOLOGY
56
Bearing capacity of the Lime
clay column
Ultimate bearing capacity
H
Proposed
Three storey
house
Proposed Column
( )
2
,
2.25
ult soil col u
Q dH d C t t = +
B = Width cf column group
L = Length of column group
H = Height of column group
d= Diameter of Column
Cu= Ave. undrained shear strength of the
surrounding soft clay
( )
2
,
2.25
ult soil col u
Q dH d C t t = +
( )
2
,
2.25
ult soil col u
Q dH d C t t = +
Lime as a column (cont.)
Assumption:
Cu= 20 Kpa
H col = 12 m
d = 0.3 m

57
a = relative column area (NA col/BL)
N= Total number of column
q= applied unit load
M col = confined modulus of
column material
M soil = confined modulus of
untreated soil.
1
(1 )
col soil
qH
h
aM a M
A =
+
Settlement of the column;
Lime as a column (cont.)
Schematic of plate load test
Typical Result of plate load test